Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout09-03 CITY OF LAKgVILLS PARKS AND RBCRSATION ADVISORY COMMITTBF SEPTBMBFR 3, 19$6 The meeting was called to order by Vice Chairman Grenz at 7:05 PM. Members present were Grenz, Messinger, McDonald, Lovelace, Gramstad and Olmsted. Member Anderson was on vacation and unable to attend the meeting. Also present were Park Director Steve Michaud, Larry Lulf representing the Lakeville Athletic Association, Steve Grittman of Northwest Associated Consultants and several Lakeville residents. The next order of business was the approval of the Park and Recreation Ca~mmittee minutes of August 20, 1986. 86-53 Motion was made by Messinger, seconded by McDonald, to approve the minutes as read. There was no discussion. Motion passed. At this time Chair Grenz called the public hearing to order on proposed revised bike and pedestrian trail system and attested to the fact that :the proper legal notices had been published. Staff explained the necessity of changing some of the trails from cross country trails due to high water in the area where the bike trail was planned, making construction considerably difficult, if not impossible. Because of this the trail needs to be moved to Cherrywood Estates, going on streets through this develo~ent and on sidewalks thraugh the Keller property. Grenz stated he feels sidewalks are • not acceptable as bike trails because of cars parked across people's driveways and pedestrian traffic. The crossing at 170th Street is the only point the county will allay a crossing since it will be a signaled crossing in the future. The basic trai layout still exists, although the question has been raised as to state statute and if bike traffic is allowed to flow in two directions on a paved shoulder trail:. Where shoulders have been proposed far trails, the question remains. as to how far off the roadway a trail must be to be classified "off road". These questions are being checked with the city attorney and staff will have answers by the next meeting. Staff asked the committee and the citizens-in attendance to keep several items in mind. The city is attempting to bring safety to biking; these trails are not the final product, but only the first phase of many planned trails; given the available resources, the maximum amount of trails will be installed by economizing where feasibly possible; there is a shortage of funds in all areas of the referendum but plans are being made in future developments to have the developers set aside easements for bike trail connections. Ray Hamel, 19705 Jersey Avenue, made comments on before and after cost estimates on bike trails. Brad Ring, 8340 Lower 208th Street W., asked about class three clarification and dangers of bike traffic flowing different directions on the same side of the street. Another citizens voiced concerns about have a striped trail along 185th Street and problems with parked cars in the bike trail. lane. Park and Recreation Committee minutes • September 3, 1986 -2- Staff explained the city is encouraging the developer in this area to move ahead in order to connect 188th Street. He also explained the future 8 foot concrete corridor which will eventually go from .County Road 5 at 35W to downtown. John Schweich, 9960 199th Street, asked about the trail connection from Antlers Park to the High School and whether 199th Street will be paved to accommodate that trail. Staff proposed that if the residents along 199th 5t. are interested in having the entire road paved rather than only four feet an each side, a petition should be circulated requesting a feasibility study be done to determine the costs of bringing this stretch of gravel road to city standards. Donna Hanley, 16960 Glenwood Avenue, is concerned about trails in her Foxborough neighborhood. Grenz stated he feels sidewalks are not acceptable as bike trails because of cars parked across people's driveways and pedestrian traffic. Staff suggested enforcement of ordinances which would not allow cars to block sidewalk traffic. Also by use of signage and parking tickets the public would become more ware of the bike trail end the ordinances. Steve Michaud stated he had met with Dan Mehleis of ISD #194 to determine the appropriate route through the Lakeville High School property. • Member McDonald asked to what extent trails were planned in the future. Staff explained that the goal is to require the developers of new plats to put in their own trails and the city would supplement where the trail connections are not available. The question of a time line was brought up. Staff explained that the city. is .doing much of the trail work in house and several sections of trail are expected to be completed this year. 86-54 Motion was made by Olmsted, seconded by Gramstad, to close the public hearing and delay making a decision on the bike trail striping until the legalities are clarified on two-way traffic on a bike trail. Motion gassed. The next order of business was a discussion of the concept plans of Caspersan Park. Staff explained that the minutes of the previous meeting may have been misleading as they were only suggestions and not necessarily the total of the facilities which at some point would be available at Casperson's. Steve Grittman of Northwest Associated Consultants showed his new concept plan which had combined same ideas of the other two. The parking area for trailers had been cut down to 40 spaces, picnic shelters are shown along the lake with the basic trails the same as in previous concept plans. There is a potential- of excavation toward the south end of the park for gravel far other city projects if necessary. The new layout of the road was explained and how • it would tie into the frontage road. September 3, 1986 -3- • Chris Olson, 10527 202nd St. W., stated there has been an extreme amount of vandalism and thefts in the area and feels the larger parking lot would be an invitation to increase this type of activity. The boat launch report was discussed. Staff says survey may not be accurate since it does not include all months of the year nor all times of the day. In regard to the car/trailer parking, committee member Grenz said no actual number was legally stated in the referendum. A letter from Committee Chairperson Deb Anderson was included in the Park and Recreation packets stating her. wishes to have parking remain at 40. Her letter will become an addendum to these minutes. Committee member Messinger states that th lake belongs to everyone and because the parking area would be on a first come first serve basis, not everyone would always have access to the lake. Staff brought up the issue of law enforcement being the root of the major problems on the lake. Member Olmsted suggested the committee retain the option to put a larger parking area to a vote at a future date. Member Messinger suggested a compromise of 55 spaces. She also wants better and more patrol and enforcement on Lake Marion. Staff would like to issue resident parking stickers for a certain percentage of spaces to insure more residents the ability to use the lake. • Ray Haines stated he and others have felt the Park and Recreation Committee may loose credibility for any future referendum and feels they should stand by their word on what was sold and what the people voted on. Messinger again stated she felt 40 spaces was not enough. John Ost, 19099 Orchard Trail, feels he was not intentionally lied to. Chris Olson doesn't feel committee should randomly change what the city has voted on. Steve Michaud stated fear of loss of DNR management program, including stocking of the lake with fish, if boat launch was closed to any but Lakeville residents. Fanforcement of parking would be by signs and traffic flaw and a Park Ranger, who could at some point have more authority to issue tickets, etc. Marion is a metro-wide known lake and people come from all aver the area to use the lake. Brad King stated his feelings that the launch should be built as presented, with no compromises. Another Lake Marion resident stated she can understand Messinger's point of view but at the same time does not want traffic to get out of control. McDonald would like to keep the option open to expand the parking spaces in the future if 40 spaces does not work out. In that case, this issue can be resurrected at any point in the future.. Jahn Ost, a lake resident, agreed to this proposal. The committee suggested that if the residents have problems on the lake, they let their problems be heard by the police, city council, city administrator or mayor in order for their wishes to be heard. Member Messinger explained how a concept plan differed from a master plan and • that no deceit was intended. September 3, 1986 -4- ~6-55 A motion was made by Grenz to grade the parking lot for 72 spots but only allow for 40 spaces at this time unless .council wishes to utilize the entire 72 space area. There was no second to the motion. 86-56 Motion was made by Olmsted to stay with 40 car parking lot as specified in the bond referendum with a study to be made by the city of Lakeville to possibly determine at a future public hearing whether the parking places be increased. Any increase in parking should be gradual in order to study the impact of such expansion. Motion was seconded by McDonald. Aye: Messinger, McDonald, Gramstad, Olmsted and Lovelace. Nay: Grenz, because he thinks bulldozers will have to be brought in twice, resulting in added expense in grading. Grenz instructed staff to get regulation in writing from Dept. of Natural Resources concerning regulation of resident parking places vs. non-resident. The committee further discussed the concept plan, how parking could be enforced to make maximum use and if the other spaces were ever required, what grading would need to be accomplished. Staff suggests reforestation around amphitheater to create passive family picnic area, stockpiling gravel and dirt for future city use, and strategically located playground equipment. The amphitheater will be graded in tiers and a softball backstop will be included if finances allay. ~6-57 Motion was made by Messinger, seconded by Olmsted to accept the concept plan of Casperson Park as presented. Motion passed. Item five was a review of Valley Lake Park and Parkview Park concept plans. Steve Grittman showed the Park and Recreation committee two concept plena of Valley Lake Park. He pointed out advantages of each, the parking configurations., group picnic areas, possible accesses, etc. The committee would like the DNR to stock the lake. The city plans to install boundary fencing to attempt to restrict access by motorized vehicles. In order to maintain water clarity, aeration is recommended year round. Year round aeration could be dangerous and a liability to the city, even if the area was fenced. The cost of aeration is $3,000.00 for the additional unit, but the committee feels it would be worth the cost to have good quality water. 86-58 Motion was made by McDonald to recommend to city council to accept the concept plan of Valley Lake Park with additions of plantings for screenings and the reduction of the western parking lot to 50 spaces, maximizing berms as much as possible. Motion was seconded by Messinger. Motion passed. The next concept plans shown were of Parkview Park. Steve Grittman showed two basic plans. The. BMX track was discussed. This could be completed at a later date. The concept plans show open skating, hockey rink and a softball • diamond. The committee felt no playground equipment would be necessary due September 3, 1986 -5- • to the close proximity to Parkview School. The committee discussed the alternatives in each of two concept plans and was in favor of a basketball court and other amenities that would compliment the Parkview School facilities. Staff will investigate local BMX tracks to get ideas for Parkview's. Steve Grittman will redraw the plans combining the highlights of each of these concept plans. The next order of business was an update on the bond referendum projects which was tabled until the next meeting. Staff reported bids had been opened on the Dakota Heights Park grading project and he will be meeting with the developer on Monday. The LCMR grant for North Park was reported on. Lakeville is fourth in line to receive grant monies but because of the delay it would cause in development and the small amount of funds which would ultimately be available staff has decided it may not be beneficial to pursue this grant. The minimum development will be planned far North Park, Visibly Phase I and only a portion of Phase II. Bids will be put out on this project to get a more specific idea of funds needed for fill, grading, etc. Staff reported that Friedges Landscaping is doing the Lakeridge and Foxborough projects anal seeding will be done soon, possibly this week. Staff showed the committee a plat of Jewel Acres, .south of Crystal Lake. 86-59 Due to the lateness of the hour, it was moved by Messinger, seconded by Olmsted, to table this plat until September 17, 1986 meeting. Motion passed. $6-60 Motion was made by Messinger, seconded by Olmsted, to adjourn. Motion passed. Meeting adjourned at 11:40 PM. Respectfully submitted, Pat Messinger, ecretary ATTBST: Gerald Grenz, Vice irperson jr • 8-25-86 Park and Rec Gommittee: I am sorry I am unable to attend the Septa ~ meeting, We are on vacation. I wanted my opinion on Gasperson' s boat-trailer parking to be heard and recorded. I serve on ,this c committee-as a representative of Lakeville.. The bond. issue was v©ted on with the knowledge of limited boat-trailer parking at Gasperson's park. This. was an important issue because. it showed that. the committee was concerned about the congested boat traffic on the lake. I feel it would be an injustice to Lakeville citizens to change this without 'trying the parking.. as listed on the proposal. Have a good. meeting. See you in two weeks. ; ~ Deb Anderson