Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout01-18 CITY OF LAKEVILLE PARKS AND RECREATION ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING JANUARY 18, 1995 ITEM # 1 Call to order. The meeting was called to order in the Lakeville Council Chambers by Chairperson Illa at 6:00 PM. ITEM #2 Roll call. Present were L. Lulf, C. Wanless-Sobel, K. Illa, J. Larson, A. Raymond and P. Messinger. H. Lovelace arrived later. Also present were Park Director Steve Michaud, City Administrator Bob Erickson, Environmental Engineer Todd Blomstrom, City Attorney Tom Scott, Consulting Engineer Jim Norton of SEH, and recording secretary Judi Ryan. ITEM #3 Minutes of January 4, 1995. The minutes of the January 4, 1995 Parks and Recreation Advisory Committee .meeting were discussed. There were no additions or corrections and the minutes were approved as printed. ITEM #4 Citizen comments. There were no citizens present for items not on the agenda. Chair Illa suggested that Item # 5 be delayed to accommodate citizens present at the meeting. ITEM #6 Consider request from Southern Cruzars Car Club to hold. Classic Car Show at Antlers Park on July 8, 1995. Gene and Mary Hokenson were present representing the Southern Cruzars Car Club. Committee members had received a request from the car club to hold an event similar to the one held last year in conjunction with Pan-O- Prog. Committee also received a memo from Recreation Supervisor Renee Brekken which stated considerations for approval of the request which would minimize any conflicts with the Pan-O-Prog Run which is scheduled for earlier the same day. Mr. Hokenson stated the Car Show would be similar to last year, with possibly one more category. The show drew 180 cars last year; the group is hoping for 200 this year. They would like to start setting up their registration tent earlier this year, possibly at 8:00 AM, to eliminate the delays. they experienced last year. Mary Hokenson stated they will work with Pan-O- Prog to line up food vendors. The cars will again be required to use protective • pads under them to prevent turf damage. Parks and Recreation Advisory Committee meeting January 18, 1995 • Page #2 Staff will review last year's event evaluations to determine if any changes need to be made and develop a list of requirements similar to last year's. 95.03 Motion was made by Messinger, seconded by Lulf, to recommend City Council authorize the Southern Cruzars to hold a Classic Car Show at Antlers Park on July 8, 1995. The event sponsors will work with Parks and Recreation Department staff on logistics so that both scheduled events will run as smoothly as possible. Motion passed. ITEM #8. Review North Park water tower relocation proposal. Jim Norton from the engineering firm SEH was present to introduce alternative Sites #4 and # 5 for the water tower to the Parks and Recreation Advisory Committee. He began by giving a brief synopsis of what has taken place to date with the siting of a water tower for this area. On November 2, 1994 Mr. Norton came to the Parks and Recreation Committee meeting and identified Site #2 at the southwest end of the parking lot at North Park as their recommended location for the water tower. At that time the tower was • planned to be a 1-million gallon hydropillar with storage space in the tank for park maintenance equipment. The proposal included improvements to the parking lot including blacktopping, striping, curb and gutter and some landscaping. On December 7, 1994 the Parks and Recreation committee was shown a second alternative, known as Site # 3, which was located closer to the center of the parking lot at North Park. This alternative involved a pedestal spheroid tower which also has a 1-million gallon capacity. This proposal was developed due to some concerns about the design impacts of Site #2. At that time, committee members recommended approval of Site #3 to the City Council. A neighborhood meeting was held on January 5, 1995 following an informational letter from the City to residents. Residents requested alternative sites be considered. Following this meeting, SEH identified Site #4 northeast of the existing park building and Site #5 near the proposed water treatment plant. Laurie Giesenhagen, 17252 Idlewood Way, expressed her disappointment to the committee over the proposed placement of the water tower at any location • within the park. She feels it goes against the mission statement of the committee and there are many areas which are undeveloped where the water Parks and Recreation Advisory Committee meeting January 18, 1995 • Page #3 tower could be located so that park land would not be taken. She stated that many citizens worked on the Land of Amazement and she felt the addition of a water tower would detract from the park's amenities and beauty. Chuck Ryan, 16837 Ivywood Court, stated he lives northeast of North Park in the Crystal Lake area. He feels the addition of a water tower would adversely impact property values and tarnish the park. He questioned whether land cost was an issue and whether there were some other locations that could be considered. Jim Norton displayed acolor-coded map depicting various elevations in the area and stated that the tower would be most beneficial if located on the highest ground possible. He explained that Site # 1 was located west of the substation on Ipava Avenue. After review of the soil conditions and other factors, this alternative was discarded as unfeasible. Site #5 is located near the water treatment plant on Ipava Avenue and 185th Street. Mr. Norton explained that the City is in need of 3.1 million gallons of additional storage. With the construction of a 1-million gallon elevated tank, the remaining 2.1 • million gallons will need to be in ground storage. The elevation is necessary to create adequate water pressure in the North Park area. Site #5 would not provide desired water pressure and is not an acceptable location. Mr. Norton stated that from an engineering viewpoint North Park is the best place for the tank. Mr. Norton displayed shadow drawings for all sites within the park. Chair Illa stated that the Parks and Recreation Advisory Committee's mission statement goes beyond the boundaries of parks. Site # 1 would eliminate 30 specimen oak trees as well as create the need for a very large retaining wall. Shadow drawings indicate that many more homes would be affected if the tower were placed in that location. This, added to site access and foundation problems due to soil conditions, diminished this site's feasibility. From a hydraulic standpoint, if the tower were located on Site #5 water pressure improvements would not be realized by the neighborhoods which need it most. Linda Ryan stated that according to the reports from the engineering company, the cost was lower to place the tower on Site # 1. Chuck Albrecht, 16707 Interlachen Blvd., stated he is a new resident .who moved to the area because of all the amenities parks, schools, etc. He feels that there must be an option to putting the tower in the park which the City has not considered. Parks and Recreation Advisory Committee meeting January 18, 1995 Page #4 Colleen Blume, 16848 Ivywood Court, stated their family recently moved to Lakeville for the beauty of the area and feels that the City should have more pride in their parks than to place a water tower in them. She thinks there should be a better place and suggested the City look at more options. City Administrator Bob Erickson stated staff had talked to about 30 concerned residents by phone. He stated he was challenged with completion of a comprehensive water plan which he worked on for three years with one of the best consulting firms in the United States. From that research, it was determined where wells would be placed for the entire City. A water treatment plant is also currently being planned to remove iron/manganese from the city water supply. In addition, the Well Head Protection Act mandates wells be placed as far away as possible from any potential source of groundwater contamination. It has been recommended by many experts that the location of the tower be kept as close to the road as possible. Ipava Avenue will become a major north/south parkway with increasing traffic levels. The most beneficial location of the tower has been verified to be between 165th Street and 172nd Street along Ipava Avenue. An analysis of the shadow lines shows the North Park sites to be the least offensive and problematic. A survey of metro area cities shows that many water towers are built in parks and indicates that more often they are placed on public property rather than private. Mr. Erickson also had looked into the diminished property value issue and had been informed that in the City of Woodbury an appraisal was done before and after the siting of a water tower nearby and no diminution of value was found. Mr. Erickson stated that City staff is proud of the work which is done with community planning and that citizen concerns are always part of the planning process. Committee member Messinger stated that when the water tower proposal was first presented, she was somewhat disappointed that it would be placed in the park but later realized it would best meet the needs of the neighborhood and community. She feels that Site #4 which was presented this evening is a poor site. Site #3 which they had recommended approval of at their December 7, 1994 meeting was acceptable. She feels Site #4 would impact park users more adversely and may possibly create a safety hazard due to shadow impacts during sports events as people move in and out of shadows during play. Parks and Recreation Advisory Committee meeting January 18, 1995 • Page #5 Committee member Raymond stated that no existing park amenities would be lost by placing the tower at Site # 3 in the parking area. There is also no threat to wildlife or natural areas at that site. Members Larson and Wanless-Sobel agreed that Site #3 is less obtrusive to North Park users than Site #4. Member Lulf stated that he feels Site #3 is the best for the park. Chair Illa stated that Site #4 would utilize valuable park space and with constant activity in the park the site may be more hazardous with public works vehicles entering further into the park. These issues do not seem as apparent with Site # 3 and he feels North Park will still be a great park. Bob Erickson stated that a light blue color with no lettering is being considered. 95.04 Motion was made by Lulf, seconded by Lovelace, that after review of proposed optional Site #4 and information presented at this meeting, the Parks and Recreation Advisory Committee stands by their original recommendation for City Council to approve the location of a water tower on Site #3 at North Park. Motion passed unanimously. • Chair Illa thanked the citizens for attending and for their input. ITEM #5 Staff reports. Staff reported that the skating rinks are once again in good condition. This has been a winter of intervals of warm and cold weather which has made it difficult to maintain good skatable ice. Staff is working on several grants which, if successful, will use matching funds from the bond referendum to enhance development.. Grants will be written for Ritter Farm Park, Juno Trail Parkway, the Youth Athletic Complex and the Northeast Sector Community Park. Authorization to submit preliminary applications will be considered at the next City Council meeting. At the last City Council meeting, the update of the Ritter Farm Park master plan was approved. Staff reported that the signed Schenke property purchase agreement had been received at the attorney's office. This will be the first bond referendum acquisition to be completed and is part of the property necessary for construction of the Juno Trail Parkway. • As a result of the youth forum a survey of 400 youth is scheduled to be conducted by Decision Resources in the near future. This survey is being Parks and Recreation Advisory Committee meeting January 18, 1995 • Page #6 funded by the City of Lakeville and the Dakota Alliance for Prevention grant which was received in 1994. ITEM #7. Review Park and Trail Dedication fee requirements. A park dedication fee poll of various metro communities was recently conducted by the City of Plymouth. As a result of that survey there was a realization that Lakeville is falling toward the lower end of requirements. Several cities have raised total fees to over $1,000 per lot. Fees in Lakeville were last increased in 1992 to $650 for parks and $150 for trails. Parks and Recreation Committee members suggested considering raising the residential park and trail fees, but leaving industrial/commercial fees at their current level. Chair Illa stated that Lakeville is most comparable to cities such as Woodbury and Eden Prairie in growth and development. Committee member Messinger felt that a total park and trail dedication fee of $1,100 would be reasonable. Staff will do some further research and place this item on the agenda for the first meeting in February for consideration.. ITEM #9. Unfinished business. • Staff informed the committee that Barton-Aschman will be working on design concepts for a park proposed to be located on the south side of County Road. 64 near Fairfield Business Park. The area is in a search area for a neighborhood park. The property consists of eight to ten acres and some wetlands. Staff will keep committee informed as this issue progresses. Staff continues to work with a neighbor of Wayside Park concerning street vacations and easements which will be beneficial to both the City and the adjoining property owner. This effort is in conjunction with the 168th Street at-grade improvement project. Staff will keep committee informed of this project. ITEM # 10. New business. Committee received a copy of correspondence from a resident of the Meadows who lives along the trail. The citizen is requesting the City provide a fence and some landscaping to keep his property separated from the trail. A mutually agreeable resolution will be worked out in the spring. ITEM # 11. Announcements. The next meeting of the Parks and Recreation Advisory Committee is scheduled for February 1, 1995 at 6:00 PM. Parks and Recreation Advisory Committee meeting January 18, 1995 Page #7 ITEM # 12. Adjournment. The meeting adjourned at 8:30 PM. Respectfully submitted, ud' h A. Ryan, Reco ing Secretary ATTEST: • Kevin P. Illa, Chairperson