Loading...
02/05/1987 - Advisory Parks & Recreation Commission MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE ADVISORY PARKS & RECREATION COMMISSION EAGAN, MINNESOTA FEBRUARY 5, 1987 A regular meeting of the Advisory Parks & Recreation Commission was called to order by Chairman Martin at 7:00 P.M. Members present were Porter, Masin, Alt, Martin, Thurston, Bertz, Carroll, Kubik, Caponi and Sames. Staff present were the Director of Parks & Recreation, Cen Vraa; Parks Planner/Landscape Architect, Stephen Sullivan; John VonDeLinde, Superintendent of Parks; and City Administrator, Tom Hedges. Other visitors were present for specific agenda items. NEW COMMISSION MEMBER Mr. Wayne Sames was introduced as the newest member of the Advisory Parks & Recreation Commission, replacing Mr. Ketcham. AGENDA On a motion by Thurston, seconded by Bertz, with all members voting in favor, the agenda was approved. MINUTES OF JANUARY 8, 1987 It was noted on page two 'of the minutes, fourth paragraph, the word "may" should replace the word "will". There being no other corrections, on a motion by Alt, seconded by Bertz, with all members in favor, the minutes of January 8, 1987 were approved as amended. Mr. Martin asked the Commission to accept the data collected from the tour on January 10 as included in the packet. COMMISSION ORGANIZATION The Director of Parks & Recreation explained the Commission's organizational process. By ballot, the Advisory Parks & Recreation Commission selected Mr. Martin as its Chair for 1987. By unanimous consent, the Commission selected Carolyn Thurston and Dick Carroll as Vice-Chair and Secretary, respectively. Roger Martin assumed Chairmanship of the meeting and requested volunteers for the various committees. Committees were established as in previous years with Mr Sames replacing Mr. Ketcham on the Special Issues & Development Committees. Chairmanships of the committees include Mr. Carroll as the Parks Naming Committee, Mr. Kubik chairing the Recreation Committee, Mr. Martin - the Special Issues Committee and Joanne Alt, the Development /Finance Committee. CITY COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS City Administrator, Tom Hedges, explained in detail the memorandum dated January 21, 1987 concerning organizational business. He explained that Commission members who wished to abstain from issues must state their reasons for the abstention in the official minutes. He further delineated the distribution of City funds for special studies, conference attendance or capital expenditures, as well as a notification of each and every special commission or committee meeting through the office of the City Administrator. Several members had inquires which Mr. Hedges clarified. DEVELOPMENT PROPOSALS 1. BOULDER RIDGE The Director of Parks & Recreation noted that the Commission had reviewed this proposal at its January meeting, with six recommendations to the developer. The Development Committee has subsequently met with the developer to review these issues, along with his revised site plan. At the development meeting, a second revision was suggested by the developer, Mr. Gastler, which further shortened the cul-de-sac to a length of approximately 200', which would be a public street. A private road to six residential units would also be provided from the Cul-de-Sac. Landscape Architect, Stephen Sullivan, then reviewed for the Advisory Commission, the preliminary site plan for the park and it's grading plan. It was noted that the developer would provide the grading for the park in conjunction with construction of the cul-de-sac. After presentation of the concept plan, Commission members expressed a general preference for plan #2 which depicted the short cul-de-sac and private drive. Mr. Gastler questioned the City's regulations regarding park parking so as to avoid overnight vehicles. The Director of Parks & Recreation explained that park hours conclude at 11:00 P.M. It was noted that signage and a planting plan could help delineate the difference between the private parking area and parking lot area for the park. Discussion relative to erosion control was answered by Mr. Gastler who indicated that he would provide snow fence and filter fabric to insure there would be no erosion. Further, he stated his commitment to correcting a'current erosion problem. Mr. Sullivan stated that another issue for the Commission was relative to saving, or preservation, of the pine trees. The developer has consented to a conservation easement over this area. After further discussion, there was a motion by Mr. Kubik to: 1) accept the parkland dedication as shown in park plan alternative #2 (short cul-de-sac). 2) For the developer to provide a conservation easement in the area shown for the pine trees. 3) For the developer to provide grading associated with the park and cul-de-sac. 4) For erosion control measures. 5) Provisions for a pathway to Thomas Lake Road. The motion was seconded by Bertz, with all members voting in favor. Mr. Kubik wished the minutes to reflect the fine cooperation of Mr. Gastler and Boulder Ridge Development in resolving the issues and concerns of the Parks & Recreation Commission. 2. EAGAN HILLS FARM Chairman Martin asked the Commission to next take up Eagan Hills Farm, noting that Mr. Hardy and Mr. Uban were present for this item. The Director of Parks & Recreation referenced a memorandum in the packet concerning the recent history of this develpment, and a meeting earlier in the day between City staff and the developers regarding the timing and phasing of this project. He asked Mr. Uban to update the Commission regarding these discussions and how the P.U.D. and first phase plats would be processed. Planner Jim Sturm commented on the phasing of the project and the levels at which E.I.S. statements needed to be completed. Mr. Uban was present and stated he wished to again review the overall development project, including parks. He noted there were lesser densities than originally proposed in the P.U.D. and said he would like to at least have an agreement concerning the parks at this time in order that the project could move forward. He stated he felt the Development Committee, meeting earlier, had the major issues of the central park area resolved to everyone's satisfaction. He noted that this central park area would be dedicated with the first phase plats. Other park areas would be dedicated at the time these plats were completed. He stated it appears that at least 2/3 of the total area proposed for park would be dedicated with the first phases. Mr. Uban then went on to describe the lineal park system and the preservation of ponding areas, shelter tree areas and the inclusion of a trail system. At his conclusion, he presented the original concept plan for the central park area and an alternative plan prepared by Mr. Sullivan. It was noted that the roadway adjacent to this park, Elrene, would have to be moved further south in order to accommodate the fields shown. Mr. Uban commented that at the meeting earlier in the day, it appeared this can be done. Mr. Sullivan noted that in order to develop the parks as shown, there would be a need for fill material. Mr. Uban acknowledged this and said, that grading with the roads could be done quite easily. After further explanation by Mr. Sullivan, Mr. Caponi said that the Development Committee was very much in approval of the park plan that the adjustments in the roadway have apparently been made, the grading issue resolved, and this was the direction of the Committee. He said he was prepared to make a motion to accept this park area. Mr. Kubik questioned the area north of the central park area and its suitability for parks development. Mr. Sullivan stated a portion of this area was a relatively flat area between two ridge lines. He stated that staff had done a preliminary review, stating that this could be suitable for additional active development. Mr. Martin said the plan has been very much improved from what the Commission had originally seen in terms of providing for a neighborhood park. However the Commission needs to talk about the entire concept of the parkland within the 400 acres. He stated the City needed more active park space, rather than the passive area that was being proposed. While it was a great amenity for the residential development, it wasn't necessarily good for the entire City. He continued surveying, giving full credit for the entire 40 acres would seem unfair to the the City, because the City need is for athletic space and the current problems are that we need a 40-acre site for future athletic space. Mr. Uban responded that the developer was trying to provide a variety of parkland opportunities from the athletic to the more passive and preserved space. He felt this encouraged a higher quality of home 3 construction. There was additional discussion between the developer and Commission regarding the desirability and suitability of the open space area. Member Kubik questioned what the City's parks regulations were relative to the acceptance and credits for a ponding area in the parks dedication formula. Mr. Caponi stated he appreciated where members of the Commission were coming from, but that the Commission- had at least begun to isolate the central park area as being acceptable and the developer had been responsive to the Commission. The Commission should look at each of the other park areas in further detail to determine if they were acceptable or not, and then what credits might be given. Chairman Martin commented on the open space and trailway in relationship to the proposed high water elevation. He further stated he didn't feel there was much use in a trailway and open space area as there is already a trailway on Northview Park Road. Commission and the developer discussed several aspects of the City's parks dedication responsibilities, the Comp. Guide Plan designation for park area, and the obligations of the developer to provide park dedications within this development and the community as a whole. Commission members commented on the desirability and need for community athletic fields. Mr. Caponi and Mr. Kubik stated that while they liked the centralparkarea, the Commission has not had sufficient time to discuss the proposed open space. Further review was necessary before the Commission could make headway on this issue. Mr. Caponi stated he felt the Commission was adlibing in, that we are not ready to fully discuss this. After an hour's discussion, the Commission and developer set Wednesday, February 11, to review the issue of open space and parks credit. In the interim, the developer and staff were to provide a breakdown of each of the park areas as to ponding, steep slopes by acreage amounts. Further, the developer is to provide first phase plats to further delineate park boundaries. 3. CHAPEL HILLS BAPTIST CHURCH Planner Jim Sturm reviewed the proposed platting of Chapel Hills Baptist Church, which had already been approved by the City Council subject to the Park Commission recommendations. On a motion by Kubik, seconded by Bertz, with all members voting in favor, that this plat be subject to a trailway on Pilot Knob Road and a cash dedication which shall be abated until such time as the church property reverts to any other use. 4. LEXINGTON PARKVIEW ADDITION Planner Sturm reviewed the Lexington Parkview Addition which is adjacent to the recently acquired property at Northview Park. He noted that this is part of the Lexington South P.U.D. whose parks dedication has been fulfilled. Members questioned an adjacent roadway and proposed sharing cost agreement. Staff indicated they had just received a letter that day and had been unable to complete its review and investigation of the grades and its impact upon the park. After brief discussion, a motion by Kubik that the Commission defer this item until the next Commission meeting and for staff to request the developer to provide additional information relative to road grades and for staff to complete its analysis of the site, it was seconded by Carroll, with all members voting in favor. u 5. PATRICK ADDITION The Commission reviewed the proposed Patrick Addition for single family homes adjacent to Hay Lake. After discussion, a motion by Kubik, seconded by Carroll, with all members voting in favor, the Commission recommends to the City Council that a cash dedication requirement be a condition of plat approval. Members also cautioned on erosion control measures. 6. B.B.D. ADDITION Planner Sturm reviewed the proposed B.B.D. Addition adjacent to Yankee Doodle and Coachman Roads. It was stated the developer had originally proposed a single lot with two outlots which he is now revising to three lots. The plat was reviewed for the Commission, noting it was adjacent to Quarry Park. After review, Commission member Carroll motioned, that the Commission recommend to the City Council that this plat be subject to a cash dedication requirement for its commercial/industrial rate and fora trailway on Coachman Road extending the length of the plat. It was seconded by Sandy Bertz, with all members voting in favor. 7. TOWN CENTRE 70 - 8TH ADDITION Planner Sturm reviewed the proposed Town Centre 70 - 8th Addition for extension of the existing mall area. He indicated there would be approximately 450,000 sq. ft. in this area. Members commented on the lack of green space shown in the proposed parking lot. Mr. Sturm continued, indicating that there was staff concern, not knowing who the users really were, concluding issues relative to access, entrances to the building, etc. After staff review of this project, the developer has subsequently hired a new architect to design this facility and a redesigned site plan. After further discussion, the Commission asked to see this plat at a later time. 8. TOWN CENTRE 100 - 4TH ADDITION Planner Sturm reviewed the site plan for this proposed preliminary plat. It was noted this was part of the Town Centre P.U.D. whose parks dedication had been spelled out in the P.U.D. agreement. 9. NORWEST - 3RD ADDITION Planner Sturm noted that the building proposed within this development was approximately a 40,000 sq. ft. office/medical building as was originally proposed in the P.U.D. After a motion by Kubik, seconded by Bertz, with all members voting in favor, that the Advisory Commission recommend to the City Council, a cash dedication consistent with the City's commercial /industrial requirements. 10. DIFFLEY CENTER ADDITION Jim Sturm reviewed action by the City Council and Planning Commission, denying the proposed Diffley Center Addition. c 11. PONDVIEW Planner Sturm reviewed the proposed Pondview Addition, noting that this item had again been continued as a result of significant changes by the developers. In addition to the changes, Meritor Mortgage had subsequently purchased the property by Mr. Dunn and was now an active role and participant in this development. OLD BUSINESS 1. PARK DEDICATION POLICY The Director of Parks & Recreation referenced pages 89-93 in the packet regarding the City Attorney's opinion relative to the need to codification of the City's parks dedication policy. The Commission questioned the requirements for a public hearing process and notification with codification. In response to a question, the Director of Parks & Recreation commented that he felt the City should at least enlarge upon the subdivision regulations by adding a separate paragraph, noting that the parks dedication policy is set by resolution each year. A separate paragraph would have the effect of notifying the developer that a separate policy exists which the developer must be aware of. Member Kubik commented that there should not be any question relative to this issue, to insure there can be no legal challenges. On a motion by Carroll, seconded by Kubik, it was a recommendation by the Advisory Parks & Recreation Commission to the City Council, that the City's Subdivision Ordinance reflect in paragraph form, the City's parks dedication policy which is established by resolution and annually reviewed for revision. All members voted in favor. 2. COMMUNITY CENTER STUDY COMMITTEE The Director of Parks & Recreation asked for direction from the Advisory Commission on what it felt its next step was in the study process of the community center. It was noted that several Commission members wished to visit other facilities, while other members felt it was not. necessary at this time. There was additional discussion by the Advisory Commission relative to the tour on January 10. Member Bertz questioned the recent article appearing in the Eagan Chronicle which voiced the need for ice time for the Eagan and Rosemount Area Hockey Associations. Commission member Caponi stated he did not feel it was any value to visit additional sites, and whether -we visited 4 or 8 did not make a significant difference at this time. He felt the Commission had learned enough from its first visit to come together and develop a consensus of opinion as to what the community center might be. Chairman Martin stated he felt it was appropriate for the Commission to come together again, perhaps at a special meeting just to deal with this issue and perhaps it would be good to bring in some people to comment on the needs for a community center. After clarification, a special meeting of the Advisory Commission will be called to deal with this issue. Member Kubik stated he would like a better handle on what the needs are and exactly who is supporting it and what their objective is. He stated that a single article in the Eagan 6 newspaper should not determine the needs of the community. Commission member Carroll agreed and that another factor involvedi ie upcoming school bond referendum. Member Thurston stated she feels the time is rather poor if we were to present a survey to the community questioning their needs at this time. Commission member Caponi stated that a survey just questioning whether they need a community center is not appropriate, but that they need to be able to react to something. After a great deal of discussion, the Commission decided to set a tentative meeting date of the Advisory Commission for March 18, 1987 to further discuss this item. NEW BUSINESS 1. MUELLER PARK/SCHOOL SITE The Director of Parks & Recreation reviewed the preliminary site plan for the Mueller park/school site. He stated that the school building would be very similar to that of the Deerwood School site. He noted access roads off Wescott, playground facilities, two ball fields and a soccer area. He continued by saying that school district and City staff have developed a draft agreement for development and maintenance.of the site. As contained in the packet, he outlined the requirements of the school district for development. He noted that the district would be primarily responsible for development and the City would be primarily responsible for maintenance. There were several questions regarding the status of this development agreement and the site plan by Commission members. The Director pointed out also that a possible land trade would be made with the property to the east. It was stated the developer was preparing a preliminary plat for this area and a land trade would be beneficial to both the developer and the school/park site. In response to a question, the Director stated that the school district was prepared to advance on a very aggressive schedule for the development of this site, if the referendum is successful. The City will have to finance it's share from the park site fund. Member Kubik questioned the term "sole jurisdiction" during school hours, intimating that this might preclude the casual user from using the park amenities.' He felt that some paragraph should be added to clarify this. Under the same section, Point A referenced the district's evening activities and jurisdiction over grounds. He noted that this should also be clarified. Article #11 pertaining to the sale of property at first option should also be clarified. He stated this could mean the entire site, including the school building. Would the City have an option to purchase the building and the site, or just the site, and/or just a portion of the site? Would the City be able to purchase sufficient property just to insure access to the park amenities? The Director was questioned on the division of the property relative to assessments and the ten acres that the City might own. He stated that only a preliminary line had been discussed and the actual line has not been concluded at this time. There was additional discussion regarding summer school, impacts upon the park, access to the park in relationship to the parking lot, responsibility for maintenance and vandalism repair. Member Kubik also questioned if there was any agreement pertaining to additions or changes to the site and a process by which these changes would be reviewed. The Director of Parks & Recreation noted that staff had discussed this and it would be appropriate for inclusion into the development agreement. Mr. Kubik suggested that perhaps an introductory-or preface statement could be prepared. While this may not have a formal process spelled out, it might note that the City and school district wish to continue the cooperation shown in the acquisition and development through continued use. /recomnendat bn cf A motion by Mr. Kubik, for approval of the draft agreement, with amendments as suspected by the Commission, subject to review by the City's attorney. Staff continue to finalize this draft agreement and recommendation to the City Council. A motion seconded by Mr. Carroll, with all members voting in favor. 2. SHELTER BUILDING REVISION AND USE PROPOSAL - BLUE CROSS PARK The Director of Parks & Recreation reviewed the revisions to the shelter building at Blue Cross/Blue Shield Park. He referenced the memorandum contained in the packet concerning the a -dition of the locker rooms at an estimated cost range of $15,500 to $22,500. He stated that Mr. Storbakken had not yet approached his board regarding these addition, but would do so after approvals by the Advisory Commission. There was considerable discussion by the Advisory Commission concerning the use of this facility and the appropriateness for use by employees of Blue Cross/Blue Shield. Member Thurston questioned uses the City would have for the additions. Mr. Caponi expressed concern regarding the locker room and shower room facilities in that this may be something the City should not be involved in. He questioned if there were similar facilities in the City or other communities, or other experience which-might be helpful in assessing this. He also questioned whether an attendant would be on duty at all times. The Director responded that an attendant would not be on duty other than for normal programming events. Access to the shower rooms would be controlled by users who had been given the combination code to the door lock system. The Director explained that rather than a key system, they would use a changeable touch pad code lock system to provide some control over the user - groups. Member Kubik expressed the City should have some type of an agreement covering the use of this building at Blue Cross/Blue Shield. Such an agreement might cover liability and maintenance. After considerable discussion and comments regarding the proposal and its use, Member Kubik stated that he felt there may be some sentiment not to proceed with this idea amongst the Commission. He felt the Commission should look for opportunities to explore and try something different and this looked like a suitable opportunity. Most, if not all, of the costs would be borne by Blue Cross/Blue Shield and if the venture failed, the City would not be out a substantial amount of money. Dick Carroll commented that Blue Cross/Blue Shield has been agreeable with the City and participatory in the use of their property for athletic fields and the early parks dedication. Member Bertz wished to clarify that these facilities would not be exclusively Blue Cross/Blue Shield's and the City would have some rights to use it. This was 8 affirmed by the Director of Parks & Recreation. On a motion by Kubik, seconded by Carroll, that the City proceed with the inclusion of shower room facilities at Blue Cross/Blue Shield Park with the provision that an agreement be developed covering the use of this facility. Further, that Blue Cross will pay for the majority of the construction of these additional rooms and the City have use of them as described by the Director. This motion carried. 3. GARDEN PLOTS The Director of Parks & Recreation referenced a memorandum contained within the packet as to the desirability of garden plots. Member Kubik stated that he wished to go on record that he was very supportive of having a garden plot program, and that the City should attempt to find a suitable site. He noted that many people were disappointed over the fact the program was not offered in 1986. Other members expressed their support for this program. There followed a site by site review of suggestions of other sites. Member Kubik stated he favored the site adjacent to City Hall. It was suggested that this site was too small and soils may be inadequate to support the garden program. Members questioned if staff had reviewed possibilities other than park sites. After further discussion, it was noted that there existed certain limitations on several of the park sites suggested. Staff was requested to review the possibility of leasing of privately-held properties for development as garden plots. Staff was requested to bring this item back to the March agenda meeting. it. TRAPP FARM PARK - PICNIC RESERVATIONS, BEVERAGE CONSUMPTION Due to the lateness of the hour, this item was deferred to the March Commission meeting. PARKS DEVELOPMENT The Director of Parks & Recreation and Landscape Architect stated they had done a very conceptual athletic field layout. They noted that this was very preliminary and in fact, work had not been finished and it would be difficult to answer most questions. Staff reviewed the property owned by Opus Corporation north of Carriage Hills Golf Course and a second site within the proposed Eagan Hills Farm Addition. There followed considerable discussion and review by the Advisory Commission who rejected the concept of the Opus site as too difficult. They asked staff to pursue a more refined site plan for Eagan Hills Farm Addition to see if this would not be suitable for an athletic site. Chairman Martin noted the Commission would be meeting on Wednesday to review the Eagan Hills Farm and it would be absolutely essential for the Commission to have a site plan at that time. Staff responded that it would complete this study by that meeting for review by the Commission. PROGRESS REPORT The Director of Parks & Recreation stated that little progress had been made on the '87 construction program. Staff is approximately 3-4 weeks behind as a result of the heavy workload associated with the Eagan Hills Farm, Boulder Ridge and other projects. He expressed concern for staff's ability to get this work completed and asked for Commission's patience and recognition that some work may now have be deferred until 1988. 9 OTHER BUSINESS & REPORTS The Director of Parks & Recreation offered information regarding the year end building permits for 1986, noting that this was the heaviest construction year in the City. He further reminded the Commission of the winter weekend upcoming and the Carnelian Park neighborhood meeting scheduled for Tuesday. He informed the Commission that Northwestern Bell buildings may be available for use and that staff was reviewing the cost for removing these structures. He went on to state that the Rahn Park grant had now been closed out and all funding from the state paid to the City. He next reviewed a significant change order at Blue Cross/Blue Shield Park. ADJOURNMENT There being no other business, the Commission adjourned at 11:45 P.M. Date Ad isory Parks Rec tion Secretary 10