07/10/1980 - Advisory Parks & Recreation Commission
AGENDA
ADVISORY PARK COMMITTEE
REGULAR MEETING
EAGAN, MINNESOTA
CITY HALL
JULY 10, 1980
7:00 P.M.
1. 7:00 - CALL MEETING TO ORDER AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
II. 7:05 - APPROVAL OF MINUTES
ESTABLISH AGENDA
III. 7:10 - DEVELOPMENT PROPOSALS
A. Richard Strom
B. Reuben & Joyce Meissner~
IV. OLD BUSINESS
t r
A. Rahn Park Acquisition - LAWCON
B. Thomas Highline Trail (Shale Lane)r •l 1~ ~~'f`~`+
C. Naming of Parks - Criteria and Process /,#4~O/Ipvs~
D. Park Signs ~P~•~.
V. NEW BUSINESS
A. Tree Removal Policy/Procedure
B. C.I.P. - Parks and Recreation
VI. OTHER BUSINESS
A. Comments by Staff
VII. VISITORS TO BE HEARD (For those persons not on the Agenda) N b Ns.
VIII. ADJOURNMENT
S ~
1<1
00 Kx
- lr%s 4
~
MEMO TO: ADVISORY PARK COMMITTEE
FROM: KEN VRAA, DIRECTOR OF PARKS AND RECREATION
SUBJECT: JULY 10th ADVISORY PARK COMMITTEE AGENDA ITEMS
Attached is the July 10th Agenda and informational material.
Item IV-B concerns Thomas-Highline Trail (Project 80-23) from Blackhawk
Road to Cedar. This item has been directed to the Committee by the City
Council at its July 1st meeting. Staff will be assembling background
information, as well as material from the Consulting Engineer, in regards
to this issue. This material will be available at the time of the meeting.
Council will take action on this item at its July 15th meeting.
In regards to the proposed C.I.P. for parks, a draft has been submitted
to the City Finance Director for computation. This draft will be distributed
to the Committee at the meeting. Staff will provide additional comment
at that time. The Committee will want to review the proposed C.I.P. and
make a recommendation to the City Council. Tentatively, the Council will
take action on the C.I.P. at its August 19th meeting. Consequently, the
Committee has until its August 7th meeting to take action.
If you have any questions in regards to any of the Agenda items, please
call me at the office prior to the meeting.
s/Ken Vraa
Director o Parks an Recreation
AGENDA
ADVISORY PARK COMMITTEE
REGULAR MEETING
EAGAN, MINNESOTA
CITY HALL
JULY 10, 1980
7:00 P.M.
1. 7:00 - CALL MEETING TO ORDER AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
II. 7:05 - APPROVAL OF MINUTES
ESTABLISH AGENDA
III. 7:10 - DEVELOPMENT PROPOSALS
A. Richard Strom
B. Reuben & Joyce Meissner
IV. OLD BUSINESS
A. Rahn Park Acquisition - LAWCON
B. Thomas-Highline Trail (Shale Lane)
C. Naming of Parks - Criteria and Process
D. Park Signs
j
V. NEW BUSINESS
A. Tree Removal Policy/Procedure
B. C.I.P. - Parksand Recreation
C- L-A Owl- fL, -),#,r.
VI. OTHER BUSINESS r4/nom
A. Comments by Staff
zo Yt.. cw~VII. VISITORS TO BE HEARD (For those persons not on the Agenda)
VIII. ADJOURNMENT a"!C i9 PI.~~°.~•
CITY OF EAGAN
SUBJECT: PRELIMINARY PLAT
APPLICANT: RICHARD STROM -
LOCATION: LOTS 1 THROUGH 6 and LOTS 10 THROUGH 16, BLOCK 4
TWIN VIEW MANOR IN THE NE-11. OF SECTION 33
EXISTING ZONING: R-1 (RESIDENTIAL SINGLE DISTRICT)
DATE OF PUBLIC HEARING: MARCH 25, 1980
DATE OF REPORT: MARCH 20, 1980
REPORTED BY: DALE C.RUNKLE - CITY PLANNER
APPLICATION SUBMITTED:
An application has been submitted for a preliminary plat, Twin View Manor
2nd Addition.
CO"ENT:
1. Mr. Strom is proposing to replat lot 1 through 6 and lot 10 through 16
block 4, Twin View Manor into Twin View Manor 2nd Addition. As presently
platted Richard Lane is unfeasible to construct and the proposed plat would '
resolve this problem.
2. The replat would consist of approximately 16 acres and would contain
11 single family lots.
3. Lots 1 through 9 would have access from the proposed stub street in
Walden Heights preliminary plat. Lots 10 and 11 would gain access from
Eriks Boulevard in the Twin View Manor plat. Staff is suggesting that
lots 10 and 11 be combined into one lot because lot 10 would only have a
15 foot frontage on a public street. This area could be replatted in the
future when the property owners are in agreement as to how this land should
be subdivided.
4. Mr. Strom's home would be located on lot 11 of Twin View Manor 2nd
Addition.
5. Lots 4 and 6 would require a variance from the 85 foot width requirement
and a 30 foot setback line.
If approved, the plat should be subject to the following conditions:
1. The plat should only be approved, subject to the Walden Heights final
plat being recorded, because access to Twin View Manor 2nd Addition is pro-
vided from a stub street from the Walden Heights Addition.
v
CITY OF EAGAN
RICHARD STROM-TWIN VIEW MANOR
MARCH 20, 1980
PAGE TWO
2. Lots 10 and 11 should be conbined into one lot, because lot 10 does
not have proper access to a public street.
3. Lot lines for lot 4 and lot 6 should be readjusted to provide and 85
foot width at the 30 foot setback line.
4. The plat should be subject to the Dakota County Plat Commissions com-
ments, because the plat does abut a County Road.
5. No park dedication would be required for this proposed plat, because
this replat is less lots than what was originally platted.
ENGINEERING RECOMMENDATIONS:
1. A revised grading and drainage plan must be submitted indicating
house bench elevations for each individual lot and how access is to be
provided to lot 5.
2. Minimum frontage for lot 10 onto Eriks Boulevard must be 50 feet.
3. A 20 foot utility easement shall be dedicated to provide for the
utilities to the Twin View Manor Addition as determined by the City.
r
MEMO TO: ADVISORY PLANNING COL1MISSION
c/o DALE C. RUNKLE - CITY PLANNER
FROM: THOMAS A. COLBERT - DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS
DATE: MARCH 20, 1980
RE: PRELIMINARY PLAT - TWIN VIEW MANOR 2nd ADDITION
The Engineering Division has the following comments to offer in regards
to the above referenced proposed plat:
UTILITIES:
Sanitary sewer and water main of sufficient size and depth to handle this
proposed development will be provided with the construction of the utilities
in the adjacent plat, Walden Heights, and/or the recently ordered improvements
to the Twin View Manor Addition.
STREETS:
Access to this proposed plat will be provided by way of proposed,Walden
Heights plat, providing connection to Cliff Road. The cul-de-sac
created by this plat is necessary due to the rugged topography and terrain
in this vacinity. Proposed street grades indicate a maximum 10% grade for
a distance of approximately 100 feet. The total length of this cul-de-sac
is 570 feet.
GRADING AND DRAINAGE:
This plat is being proposed on the west side of a steep hill. All natural
drainage is directed to the west and will be handled by a storm sewer system
constructed with the Walden Heights plat. Because of the existing topography,
it is questionable whether adequate access can be provided to lot 5. Pro-
posed grade indicate an 18 foot rise in 60 feet (30%). It is recommended
that a developer submit a proposed bench elevation for the existing houses
to determine greater accuracy, the developability of each lot.
SITE PLAN:
The site plan indicates that lot 10 will only have a 15 foot frontage off of
Eriks Boulevard. This access should be increased to a 50 foot frontage.
EASEMENTS:
In -addition to the standard drainage and utility easements adjacent to property
lines, additional sanitary sewer and water main easements will be required to
provide service to the Twin View Manor Addition. The proposed 75 foot half
right of way for Cliff Road is shown on the preliminary plat.
I will be available to answer any further questions regarding this development
at the Planning Commission meeting of March 25, 1980.
Respectf ly submit ~ , /~'Z
thom s A= C eT P.E~
%
v%O
V-3 cv,
01 . •c - - - -y \
4 l ' . uD OC a._ - - 1.9
_ Ica N ` t
363 5k,.
' ' - 1
Ir I III .,I.
X-X~
CO FJ`T.~ ,31 .Pi LOT rr;y} f 1~• ;r-_.
> - - - ice" r~nc - 'rl _ , _ . ♦ Z
O
rVI
y b ^ J • C L
1 _
Q ,
7
T ,
Apts... ~
ti
S.. A. H. # 3Q
77
FASFhAENT
4'•':• UTILITY
I i.1'j ~9 a. _ y
INA.
4
cQ J( s:
32 rte rte, • r
r~
- -
YN,
ar,
MA
CITY OF EAGAN
SUBJECT: REZONING AND PRELDAINARY PLAT
APPLICANT: REUBEN AND JOYCE MEISSNER
LOCATION: PART OF LOTS 8, 10 and 11 AUDITORS SUBDIVISION #38
IN THE NWw OF SECTION 12.
EXISTING ZONING: GB (GENERAL BUSINESS DISTRICT) & R1 (RESIDENTIAL SINGLE)
DATE OF PUBLIC HEARING: JUNE 24, 1980
DATE OF REPORT: JUNE 18, 1980 -
REPORTED BY: DALE C. RUNKLE, CITY PLANNER
APPLICATION SUBMITTED:
The first application submitted is a request to rezone lots 4 and 5 to GB
(General Business District), lots 6 through 13 to R2 (Residential Double District)
and lots 1 through 3 and 14 through 17 to R1 (Residential Single District). The
second application submitted is a request for a preliminary plat,Joyce Addition,
which consists of approximately 8.3 acres and contains two commercial lots, eight
duplex lots, four buildings and seven single family lots.
COMMENTS:
In reviewing the land uses surrounding the property it appears most of the land
surrounding the proposed plat is developed. To the north and east of the pro-
posed plat are existing single family homes, to the south is an existing building
and Selmark Addition, which is a townhouse development. Lot 5 is the present
location of a TV repair shop and north of lot 4 is the Skelly Station.
The applicant has done a good job in providing land use continuity with the
proposed Joyce Addition. All proposed zonings are compatible with the existing
land uses. The proposed commercial would have access to State Highway 49 and
all residential lots would have access through the proposed cul-de-sac street.
Staff has looked at the possibility of providing a stub street but the development
which already has occurred in this area eliminates the possibility for any future
connections.
Presently their are existing building on lots 1, 3, 4, and 5 so the plat has been
designed around the existing buildings.
All lots meet square footage and width requirements for the proposed uses. The
proposed cul-de-sac would require a 250 foot variance because it exceeds the
500 foot length for a cul-de-sac street. -
CITY OF EAGAN
REUBEN & JOYCE MEISSNER/JOYCE ADDITION
JUNE 18, 1980
PAGE TWO
IF APPROVED, the plat should be subject to the following conditions:
1. The existing house on lot 4 would become a non-conforming use and should
be required to conform to the proposed zoning within five
'j(5) years.
2. Variance should be granted for the length of the cul-de-sac street.
3. Lots 4 and 5 abut State Highway right of way and should be subject to
Minnesota Department of Transportations recommendations and comments.
4. Grading, drainage and erosion control plans shall be approved by City
Staff prior to the approval of the final plat.
5. All easements shall be dedicated as requested by the City Staff.
ENGINEERING RECONAENDATIONS:
1. Fifteen (15) foot street right of way be dedicated along the northerly
portion of lot 1.
2. Final plat not be approved until storm sewer outlet for T.H.55 has been
installed and the outlet for the Burr Oak Pond has been ordered for Improvement.
3. Lots 6 through 14 shall have a garage floor elevation a minimum of 12
Inches above street grade.
i
MEMO TO: ADVISORY PLANNING COMMISSION
C/O DALE C. RUNKLE, CITY PLANNER
FROM: THOMAS A. COLBERT, DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS
DATE: JUNE 19, 1980
RE: PRELIMINARY PLAT - JOYCE ADDITION (REVEREND REUBEN MEISSNER)
The Engineering Division has the following comments to make in reference
to the above proposal:
UTILITIES:
Sanitary sewer and watermain of sufficient size and depth is available
to serve this proposed plat and is located along Trunk Highway 149 and
Trunk Highway 55.
STREETS:
Access for this proposed plat is provided by way of inplace T.H. 149 and
the inplace frontage road along the south side of T.H.55. This plat must
be reviewed by MnDOT, due to access being provided from their right of
way. Due to the extent of development surrounding this plat, there is
no feasible alternative to the proposed configuration of the cul-de-sac
street.
EASEMENTS AND RIGHTS OF WAY:
Typical lot line easements will be required with this plat. In addition,
there is a sanitary sewer lateral that crosses lot 4 and 5 in a north/south
direction which will require a twenty (20) foot easement centered over this
utility line. The plat shows the additional right of way being dedicated
to provide for a seventy-five (75) foot half right of way along T.H.149.
Sufficient right of way has been dedicated for T.H. 55.Because T.H. 55 has
a frontage road along the south alignment, there presently exists insufficient
boulevard width along the south side of this frontage road. Therefore, an
additional fifteen (15) feet should be dedicated from lot 1.
GRADING AND DRAINAGE:
Proposed grading and drainage plan for this plat indicates that the majority
of the drainage will be directed onto the new street. This will then be
surface drained along the street to the north towards T.H.55. The rear yard
drainage of lots 6 through 14 will drain easterly through the existing
Selmark Addition to the catch basin located on Random Road. Future building
permits for these lots should ensure that at least the front half of these
structures drain to the street so that only rear yard drainage will be direct-
ed to the east through the Selmark Addition, thereby minimizing drainage to the
adjacent development.
The overall drainage generated from this proposed plat will be directed to
T.H. 55 right of way and then easterly to the low point. The City of Eagan
and Mn DOT have been experiencing flooding of T.H.55 during the past several
years due to no storm sewer outlet being available from the low point in
CITY OF EAGAN
JOYCE ADDITION-REUBEN '.2=SNER
NNE 19, 1980
PAGE TWO
Highway 55. Therefore, it is Staffs feeling that this final plat not be
approved until the storm sewer outlet is provided from the T.H.55 right
of way to Burr Oak Pond. The storm sewer outlet from Burr Oak Pond is
proposed to be directed westerly across T.H. 149 into the Industrial Park.
This outlet is proposed to be constructed as a requirement of the South
Delaware Hills plat. This outlet will also be necessary to handle the
drainage from T.H.55.
I will be available to discuss any of these items in further detail at the
Planning Commission meeting of June 24, 1980.
Respectfully submitted,
Thomas A. Colbert, P.E.
Director of Public Works
TAC/jlr
' I
i
a
y
~yd 4``~ c4'/ I
p0, a I/ ,
40
6p\ - I I
o I
cn m
_ I
~zz 00 M L___,as-_-J 3+2.77
232.2 ~ _
- +so - its - - ~
i I w 1 Z
i -I 1 ~ i ~ I v
226 - ID _,c
n S V " p
+
I
J _ aasodoad rn
222.2 r ;r
Z CD C) rn
p + O ]O 30 L ----I ,n
CD -n
T . Of S 1'
c
m
Ip
_ ~ ---ass---I ( Z
i - g Zi Ip 3
• / O. - g
- , m C/) 0
C CL
to
o II °
+ n
==n
s e ^ I 370
e 7 w f
r V 0
■ 7s > k ~ 1 • ~
o ~ ~ r <v
E c•~ ■c C~ + o c
1.20
o?
s
• • e4c- aaO ~e a e•~ 71 Is
Z'~
00.
•'t A O.■ R~ 'nom f1, r~
US 40,
~7•°f lw 00 y7 OrY OSr0 Cµ.~
C^ y~ f1 f,i 4 O M ° !
-C CL
7Q O S Ord. OG~ '+~3 N• O~j S
7•w 'CCO T• N• ■e.
~.o~ ~t. .3.i=^a ■ o I
10~
°e n
ro
•,o sir VQ- g
:4. 1. , = R
,4.f NA W '
PLAT-c FO 'ENORAOIly6'T~=
j7j7 to ~ 'Y .l i~
..,mss;- ~ :s~r, l • is -
f„ r-"yam _ P~ • .L
- - r+ ~ ` -T ~►r..~ t.~ ~~~i•~-~~, _-:tom .1--+~~~_:_.2
• ~ - : : ~.rR~o,.ri i►w~ ewwy , - a • LM i.,~.rwsl~ .
IV*
IT TOWL
zip
Z' le
NZ:
UDITOR'S-
HImf
ra~.f•r,.}-~ '•:i•' r:, 'r Irv •,~r.'r. •.m•~.•.• 1
D -A
• ;tit: • ,r ~/.'y~ •.{•;J,•.•:•. :
• ,ft,•,t. ,Sti•}!ti.'.•.•, ti:,ii`~~ri J'r.' '`.V~.• • .r f.:'•'ffr/, _ •f . f . : f'~r. ;rr• ,,,,1~'
S. r ;`f ..S}rffri•"•r 'f.... OS
;f •
.•r
J
:
.
•'r
'•r
r f " "-'fir:,, R. • S% ' ' J':
"rte.. •e~
WE COTT
GAR Ely
t, :fit .r lti;a ti •'cL: • i i•,.,~,..; • r::•:;.;::•;:.
~ 'S} s} f~;r:;/~i ti•: f.., < .,:..;ice t: ~,t\1 i/~-R::•:
~';{ti to . •,ti , r?.: S-. !•r ;'~,1.'•'
r. • r ~I•'V~ ~,.t/. r?~~,l~'•'`F~ ~ '/\S'•Y.r':;1~: i ; "•r~''i ~%''f::1 t
JULY 1980
ITEM IV-A
MEMO TO: ADVISORY PARK COMMITTEE
FROM: KEN VRAA, DIRECTOR OF PARKS AND RECREATION
SUBJECT: RAHN PARK - ACQUISITION - LAWCON FUNDING
BACKGROUND: The City has previously submitted a preliminary at application
in the amount of $200,000 for the purchase of 20 acres of land from the St.
Paul Land Resources, Inc., for expansion of Rahn Park. (See May Agenda Infor-
mation.)
In mid-June, the City received word that the preliminary application had been
tentitively ranked fourth and consequently, likely to be funded.
On Monday, July 7th, staff received the revised recommended LAWCON/LCMR ranking.
This revised ranking had dropped the City's application to fifth. This new
placement would make funding in totality questionable. In as much as the Metro
Parks and Open Space Commission was to review/approve the revised ranking at
a meeting on Monday, a hurried trip to the meeting was made. City staff
appealed the new ranking. Consequently, the Commission's staff was directed
to meet with City staff to re-review the grant application. This was done on
late Monday. Word is not expected until next week in response to any changes
as a result of this last meeting.
ISSUES TO CONSIDER:If the City receives a favorable recommendation and is placed
higher in the final, approved rankings, the City must still submit a "final"
application for funding. This application deadline has not been set, but will
probably be in late summer. Approval might not be expected until summer, 1981.
A letter from the St. Paul Land Resources, Inc., was recently received
questioning if the City intended to excercise its option to purchase the 20
acres of land. This option continues until January 15, 1981, at which time,
if the option is not exercised, the St. Paul Companies may submit an application
for rezoning.
The City's share of the grant application, assuming full funding levels, is
25% or $50,000. This amount may increase, if funding from Federal and State
agencies is reduced.
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: Staff is seeking direction in regards to this issue.
The Committee should discuss and reaffirm its desire to purchase the 20 acre
parcel or Further, the Committee should review the
various funding alternatives needed for the local match and the time frame for
exercising the option to purchase.
Staff will provide additional information at the July 10th meeting.
i
Naming of Parks Memo
July 1980
Page Two
The naming or re-naming of parks after an individual should not be done
in an emotional or sentimental rush, but reviewed in a timely and proper
manner.
16. Parks' and recreation facilities' names should not be changed without good
cause. They should be named carefully and with permanent intent.
SUGGESTED PROCESS:
1. Recommendation that a park/facility should be named by the Committee to
the City Council.
2. Notification that the Parks and Recreation Committee is accepting sug-
gestions for the naming of the parks be sent to the Historical Society,
the neighborhood residents in the area and others. The guidelines should
also be sent at the time name suggestions are.
3. Review and evaluation of suggested names with a reduction to a list of
three names. A balance between parks named after sub-divisions, individuals
and features is desirable.
4. Further research, review and evluation as to the acceptance of each name;
and final recommendation to the City Council
This process would take from three to four months to complete.
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: Review of the suggested guidelines for: 1. adoption,
2. modification, or 3.
JULY 1980
MEMO TO: ADVISORY PARK COMMITTEE
FROM: KEN VRAA, DIRECTOR OF PARKS AND RECREATION
SUBJECT: NAMING OF PARKS; SUGGESTED GUIDELINES: PROCESS: 2ND DRAFT
BACKGROUND: At the June meeting of the Committee, a draft for the naming of
parks was submitted. This item was then referred to the Sub-Committee for
further review. On Tuesday evening, July 1, two members of the Sub-Committee
and the Director again reviewed the criteria with some changes made.
SUGGESTED GUIDELINES:
1. The name of the subdivision associated with the park.
2. The neighborhood name in which the park is located.
3. The school name if adjacent to or closely identified with the park.
4. The street name adjacent to or closely identified with the park.
5. The name of a local interest point or local focal point near the park.
6. The name of a stream or creek adjacent to or near the park.
7. The name of a water body adjacent to or near the park.
8. The name of some topographic feature associated with the park.
9. The name of an historical occurrence associated with the area indigenous
to Eagan.
10. A creative name based on some impressions of the site.
11. A name based on the vegetation present or the ecology of the area.
12. A name based on the dominant feature of the site.
13. The name by which most of the neighborhood children refer to the park.
14. A creative name which has identity for the particular use or people
associated with the park.
15. The naming of a park after an individual.
This should normally be done in memoriam. Careful evaluation is necessary
before proceeding with the use of a person's name.
Parks may be named for the living if they have been the major contributors
or the property or of the land cost. (Previous criteria used by the Com-
mittee have established a 75% factor.)
t y !
Naming of Parks Memo
July 1980
Page Two
The naming or re-naming of parks after an individual should not be done
in an emotional or sentimental rush, but reviewed in a timely and proper
manner.
16. Parks' and recreation facilities' names should not be changed without good
cause. They should be named carefully and with permanent intent.
SUGGESTED PROCESS:
1. Recommendation that a park/facility should be named by the Committee to
the City Council.
2. Notification that the Parks and Recreation Committee is accepting sug-
gestions for the naming of the parks be sent to the Historical Society,
the neighborhood residents in the area and others. The guidelines should
also be sent at the time name suggestions are.
3. Review and evaluation of suggested names with a reduction to a list of
three names. A balance between parks named after sub-divisions, individuals
and features is desirable.
4. Further research, review and evluation as to the acceptance of each name;
and final recommendation to the City Council
This process would take from three to four months to complete.
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: Review of the suggested guidelines for: 1. adoption,
2. modification, or 3.
JULY 1980
MEMO TO: ADVISORY PARK COMMITTEE
FROM: KEN VRAA, DIRECTOR OF PARKS AND RECREATION
SUBJECT: SIGNS
BACKGROUND: The Committee has been in the process of reivewing park identifi-
cation signs for several months. A "model" sign was selected by the Park Com-
mittee in the spring of 1980, but several concerns remain unresolved. At the
June Committee meeting, this item was referred again to the sub-committee which
met on July 1 for further study and recommendation.
SUB-COMMITTEE: Two members were present at the sub-committee meeting on July
1. Members developed the "Sign Criteria" list which included:
1. The sign must be easy to read and aesthetically pleasing.
2. Well build, sturdy and long lasting.
3. Inexpensive to maintain.
4. Some degree of originality in the sign.
5. Sign should blend into the park, becoming an element of the total park
design.
6. The sign should be natural and avoid a "mix of materials" in the con-
struction.
7. The introduction to the City's logo on the sign as a means of identi-
- fication with the City of Eagan and as a park in the Eagan Park System.
The Committee concluded its effort with a discussion on the significance of
a park sign and the importance of developing/building a sign that will reflect
the role of parks in the community.
I
In addition to the "Sign Criteria", the sub-committee looked at some suggested
sign designs. These will be at the July 10th meeting for Committee review and
recommendation.
~lo~r
i~ N r
toy- &
r~
JULY 1980
Item V-A
MEMO TO: ADVISORY PARK COMMITTEE
FROM: KEN VRAA, DIRECTOR OF PARKS AND RECREATION
SUBJECT: TREE REMOVAL, POLICY/PROCEDURE
BACKGROUND: Staff has received requests from residents for permission to remove
dead trees from City park land for fire wood. A policy and procedure needs
to be developed to handle these requests if it is determined that the public
should be allowed this privilege. Currentl Y, the cutting and removing of any
standing or fallen tree on park land or public property is to be handled by City
staff.
PROCEDURAL OUTLINE: If the Advisory Park Committee and City Council are in
agreement that the removal of dead trees by residents for firewood or other
proper use is allowable, the following procedural outline would be developed
further:
1. Request for a specific tree(s) is reported or is noticed by staff.
2. City Forester to make inspection and determination for cause, as well as
to insure that tree is on park property.
3. Forester & Director of Parks and Recreation to make determination if tree
should be removed.
4. Tree marked for removal, notification that tree will be made available for
firewood.
5. Permits issued, at office, for designated tree(s). A $5.00 permit fee is
required.
6. City crews to drop tree(s). (This will be done on a monthly or seasonal
basis to avoid City crews' normal work routine from becoming disrupted.)
7. Resident is allowed seven days to cut up and remove tree.
8. City staff inspection to insure clean-up and removal has been completed.
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: The Advisory Park Committee should review and make
a determination if it wishes to allow the removal of dead trees from park land.
If a policy is recommended to allow the public to remove trees for firewood,
or other purpose, staff would proceed with developing a standardized procedure
along the suggested outline
Staff will provide additional information at the July 10th meeting.
EAGAN TRAIL PLAN - PRELIMINARY WORKSHEET
The following is a projected time sequence for the development of a trail plan.
DATE ACTIVITY
July Survey & Analysis
August - 1st week Preliminary Meeting with Parks & Recreation
Committee
j
3rd week Second Meeting with Parks & Recreation Committee
to develop goals and policies of trail plan.
August -
September - 3rd week Development of trail plan by staff
3rd & 4th wks. Reviewed by Parks & Recreation Committee,
Planning Commission and City Council.
October - 1st week Completed for printer
2nd week Completed report
3rd week Presented to City Council
TRAIL USES
Typical trail uses which could be incorporated into the City trail plan would
include:
1. Hiking
2. Cross-country skiing
3. Biking
4. Snowmobiling
5. Horseback riding
others:
1. Snow shoeing
2. Mopeds (1-2 h.p. motorized bicycles)
Common trailways could be used for different uses on a seasonal basis. For ex-
ample, snowmobiling/horseback riding on the same trailway, or hiking/cross-country
skiing. Uses which are thought of as incompatible e.g. horseback riding and
bking, should be separate but can be located in the same trail corridor.
SURFACE MATERIAIS/MAINTENANCE
To illustrate the allocation of costs involved in trail construction, this is an
approximate breakdown of costs for an off-road bike path.
r
PAGE TWO
ITEM $ OF TOTAL COST
Right of way Acquisition 30.03
Leveling and grading 16.1
Materials 38.8
Construction Costs 28.7
Labor Costs 28.1
Signing, Lighting, Landscaping 9.9
Almost all sources recommended asphalt material as the ideal bikeway trail ma-
terial because of its high.durability and low cost when compared to concrete.
Other uses such as snowmobiling, horseback riding, hiking and cross-country
skiing can use low-cost, low:-maintenance trail material such as woodchips,
gravel or natural surface.
SURFACE MATERIAL APPLICATION APPROX. COST MAINTENANCE
(81WTDTH) - ' CONCERNS USE
Asphalt 2" asphalt surface $35-50,000/mi Seal Coating Biking
4" aggregate base After 1 year Pedestrian
compacted subgrade
Concrete 4" concrete surface $52-67,000/mi - Pedestrian
4" aggregate base Bing
Limestone 3-611 stabilized $9-15,000/mi High.annual Preliminary
aggregate patching and Bicycle
compacted sub- grading costs Pedestrian
grade
Woodchip ~•3 years of high Equestrian
maintenance & Snowmobile
reapplication Cross-Cntry
before trail is Skiing
established Hiking
Cleared Natural surface Annual brush Equestrian
Trail removal Snowmobile
Cross-Cntry
Skiing
Hiking
DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION
The design and construction of a City trail system should meet various safety
standards applicable to the particular trail use. For example, biking requires
many safety considerations in regard to traffic interaction, sight distances,
and grades while hiking is an activity which is usually isolated and can cover
virtually any terrain. Any trail development should be undertaken with a minimum
disruption to the environment.
P, AGE THREE
BIKE ORDINANCES
1. Provides the City with regulations regarding the operation of bicycles.
2. Provides for a licensing requirement which:
A. Acts as a registration of ownership to prevent theft and facili-
tates the recovery of lost or stolen bicycles.
B. Provides a source of revenue which can be used.to fund trail
development.
3. Provides for the disposal of unclaimed bicycles.
State Legislation Chapter 169 Minnesota Highway Traffic Regulation Act
Regulates the use and operation of bicycles. Generally addresses major
safety concerns regarding the use and operation of bicycles on roads and
bike paths.. Traffic laws which apply to motor vehicles also apply to bi-
cycles.
SOURCES OF FUNDING
Local sources of funding which can be used for trails include:
1. Capital and operating budgets for support of programming, new
development and general community improvements.
2. Park budget for a one-time capital expenditure .
3. Federal revenues sharing funds.
4. General Obligation Bonds.
5. Special Funds (e.g. municipal enterprise)
6. Local user fee (e.g. bicycle license)
7. Subdivision dedicated fund.
8. Private donations of land, money, and/or time.
Other sources of funding are listed on the following two pages. These sources
are for bikeways only but some may apply to other trail types.
c LF
s.LF 3 co_ g'oc 2 -.3
0 CL
0 Lo cc G
o W
LLOO c c+ : d »'n 5F c o g v Lo
V gycc QQ~ O MN~ Z iOE Cm 0•C
CL ca E
„ O C m E m m A `
a S., ~~a aCw oa ac fo c ~
« A m m m„ O map O p
NV aN7'N Oi-Qd:N OG7C7~N U O G7
W o ` pm w
Q f W m c C
O C 7 G7 mE O O
_ m ~p O 'O C E a
J A Nc m=osc c m
Q M a W E 'V O .7 m a Q M. M N W Q
Q v a3'3c ° ` ac 3 0~ c ~a c
= 71
N t c m„ m A'a w~ .8 o caw' a
x Z~ Q c ~ 3 % A c. CL ~ u~r ~ o
c~ c o„
aac c a I a
O OQ ~ _ 3~
O N
V ~ N Lo M
Q^ I I -
Co
CO) Lo
J c m ~ G
.C J
° w
Q *rm j _ m
.Z
z Q d CO d pzp d'cZ0 Z Z 'c Zd C
Z N~O~c.~ N~OOS O CJO ON~
Q w C
F o pc
z cQ .~OOj O JO 30
W
r
C a
N
A
r
E
Q } } } } } c
yQ a~
Q c o
V
d 3 c g c o c
O
W6
' con xM ~E
I S E
o
U. m 0 M U. D 1i
0
20
is
! TABLE 11: POTENTIAL FUNDING SOURCES - REVENUE GENERATING, PROGRAM SUSTAINING
Funding Source Program Recommended Funding Source Program Recommended
Bicyclist Sale of MN State Yes Motorist Motor vehicle Yes
Bicycle License license funds and f
gasoline tax .
Bicyclist Sales tax on Yes i.
! Bicycles and Bike MN Legislature General Revenue Yes
equipment Appropriation
i Bicyclist Bikeway Yes
Publication sales Other Safety program Yes
Departmental Bikeway
Bicyclist Sale of Poster Yes Budgets Facilities
and Patches
MN Legislature Legislative Yes
Bicyclist Bicycle operator No Commission on
licensing
i Minnesota
Bicyclist Trail user fee No Resources
LCMR- (d)
MN Legislature Bonding Yes
i
dChapter 86.10 M.S. 1976, cites the purpose of the Legislative Commission on Minnesota Resources 1. The commission shall
obtain and appraise all information available through private organizations and groups, utilizing to the fullest extent possible
studies, data and reports previously prepared or currently in progress, by public agencies, private organizations, groups, and
others concerning trends in population, leisure, transportation, and all other pertinent factors and shall determine the amount,
kind, quality and location of such outdoor recreation resources and opportunities as will be required by the year 2000. 86.03.
This Legislature anticipates the tax hereinafter provided will be adequate to insure funds for carrying out the program herein
contemplated for the period of years necessary for its accomplishment.
i
July 31, 1980
i
MEMO TO: PARK ADVISORY COMMITTEE
FROM: KEN VRAA, DIRECTOR OF PARKS & RECREATION
REASON: RAHN TENNIS COURTS
Background: At the time the new tennis courts at Rahn Park were con-
structed, an asphalt pad immediately to the south of the newly constructed
courts was added. The purpose of this asphalt area was to serve as a
return space for a proposed "bang board" for tennis players. Fence post
along the south boundary of the new courts was increased to 3" diameter
piping to withstand the additional weight for the boards which would be
constructed. These bang boards were not part of the construction project,
but to be built by the Department of Parks & Recreation.
Issues/Analysis: Recently, staff has briefly reviewed design $ materials
in which to complete the bang board. Concern has arisen as to the
desirability of proceeding with the construction of the bang board. If
construction proceeds, the return board will present a problem of noise
and distraction to tennis court players if both court and return board
are used simultaneously. Further, it is anticipated that vibration
along the fence structure will cause additional distraction. Staff is
concerned that, despite the increase in fence post size, the structure
will not provide a sturdy foundation to withstand normal spring/summer
wind storms.
Alternatives: The tennis bang board could be constructed as originally
intended utilizing 4 x 8 sheets of plyboard or tongue & groove wood or
similar type of wood planking. However, sufficient gaps would be left
both at the bottom, sides, and perhaps in the middle to allow for wind
to pass around the structure. This would minimize possible damage that
might be caused by high wind storms, etc. Because the support posts are
part of the fence screening, noise levels caused by the pounding of
tennis balls against the return board and vibrations set up in fencing
would have to be minimized, but cannot be eliminated. This would
accomplish what had been originally intended, but gaps in surface wall
reduces its usefulness.
A second alternative would call for the construction of the tennis bang
board to the south edge of the asphalt path. This location would remove
itself from the back of the tennis fence and would not produce the noise
or the distraction to the players utilizing the new courts. Further,
the design of the bang board would be such that a slight angle of approxi-
mately 5 degrees could be built into the bang board for proper return and
playability of the ball. In addition, construction posts would utilize
steel support columns spaced at closer intervals which could withstand
higher force velocity winds. However, construction cost would be at least
double in cost over the originally proposed board.
Alternative three would be to use the asphalt area for a basketball court.
Two basketball standards could be erected on the east and west edge of
the asphalt area which would provide for open and informal use for those
who wish to participate in this type of activity. This use function is
somewhat incompatible with the tennis court function, although some
measures might be taken to minimize the effects of distraction to the
tennis players when the basketball court is in use. This might include
Rahn Tennis Court - Memo
July 31, 1980
Page 2
the erection of a six (6) foot wide tennis screen on the south fence
to help obscure the basketball players from the tennis players.
Issues To Be Considered: The committee should discuss the problems
involved with proceeding of the tennis bang board; further, it should
review any potential alternative uses for the asphalt pad and provide
direction to staff.
The Park and Recreation Director will be providing additional information
at the Thursday night meeting for the Committee.