Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
05/20/2002 - Advisory Parks & Recreation Commission
Monday, May 20, 2002 7:00 PM Eagan Municipal Center City Council Chambers AGENDA ADVISORY PARKS COMMISSION EAGAN, MINNESOTA A. Call to Order and Pledge of Allegiance B. Approval of Agenda C. Approval of Minutes of Regular Meeting of March 18 and April 15, 2002 D. Visitors to be Heard E. Superintendent's Update and Department Happenings F. Consent Agenda G. Development Agenda (1) Covington Townoffice Park - Davern, Inc. (2) Gift of Mary Children's Home H. Old Business (1) Fish Lake Clean Water Partnership (2) Bike Park Update 1. New Business (1) Dakota County Park Replacement Plan J. Water Resources Update K. Other Business and Report (1) Tobacco Free Presentation Follow-up (2) Subcommittee Updates (3) Community Center Update (4) Communications (5) Agenda Format L Round Table M. Adjournment Tour of : • Community Center • Gift of Mary Site .......................... Meet at City Hall, upper level parking lot at 6:00 pm 7:00 pm 7:02 pm 7:04pm. 7:05 pm Pages 1-3 7:06 pm 7:15 pm Pages 4-7 7:16 pm Pages 8-13 7:45 pm Pages 14-15 8:15 pm Pages 16-22 8:45 pm Page 23 9:00 pm 9:15 pm 9:20 pm 9:25 pm 9:30 pm 9:35 pm 9:40 pm 9:45 pm 9:50 pm The City ofEagan is committed to the policy that all persons have equal access to its programs, services, activities, facilities, and employment without regard to race, color, creed religion, national origin, sex, disability, age, marital status, sexual orientation, or status with regard to public assistance. Auxiliary aids for disabled persons wishing to participate are available upon request at least 96 hours in advance of the event. Y a notice of less than 96 hours is received, the City will attempt to provide the aids. Next Advisory Parks Commission Meeting: June 17, 2002 41bp TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: MEMO city of eagan ADVISORY PARKS COMMISSION KEN VRAA, DIRECTOR OF PARKS AND RECREATION MAY 17, 2002 MAY 20 COMMISSION MEETING At 6:00 pm members of the Advisory Parks Commission are invited to tour the construction activity at Central Park to see how building construction, roads and site improvements are progressing. The tour will continue with a stop to see the site of the proposed Gift of Mary Children's Home, which is a proposed development for review at the meeting. The May meeting will convene at 7:00 pm in the City Council chambers of the Municipal Center. Item G: Two items are on the development agenda. One is for Covington Townoffice Park and the other is the Gift of Mary Children's Home. Memos for each development proposal are included in the packet. Item H: 1. Water Resources Coordinator Macbeth will provide background and the mm wit status of the Fish Lake Clean Water Partnership Grant. 2. The Commission will be given an update on research done relative to the feasibility of a bike park. Item I: 1. Coordinator Macbeth will review the Dakota County Park replacement plan and its impact to water resources. Item K: 1. A letter from Daniel Ehrke, Tobacco-Free Youth Recreation and Lynn Dernl of CAFE is enclosed as a follow up to the Tobacco Free presentation to the Commission in April. 2. The Commission is being asked to consider a slight change in the format of future agendas. 3. Verbal updates will be provided on the community center and subcommittees, if appropriate. Respectfully Submitted, Ken Vraa ADVISORY PARKS COMMISSION 2002 MEETING SCHEDULE NAME Feb 11 Mar 18 Apr 15 May 20 Jun 17 Jul 16 Aug 19 Sep 16 Oct 14 Nov 18 Dec 16 Jan ? Joseph Bari x X X Phil Beltiori (alternate) X X X Margo Danner x x x Terry Davis (Vice Chair) X X 0* N. Mark Filipi x X X Elizabeth Perry x X X Dorothy Peterson (Secretary) 0* X X Richard Pletcher x X X John Rudolph (Chair) X X X Melvin Williams x X 0* L_j I X =present O = absent O* = notified staff of absence prior to meeting Recreation Sub-Committee Natural Resources Sub-Committee AtmuisitionlDevelooment Sub-orrrriittee John Rudolph N. Mark Fiiipi Dorothy Peterson Melvin Williams Phil Belfion Joseph Bari Elizabeth Perry Terry Davis Richard Pletcher Margo Danner UPCOMING MEETINGS: I OPEN ISSUES 1. Review revenue sources in lieu of park dedication 2. Review impact of future trends on facilities and services meeting wi #A6 4. Tobacco free policy at youth fields 5. Review renewal and replacement funding options ADVISORY PARKS COMMISSION 2002 MEMBERS NAME AND ADDRESS Release TERM TELEPHONE TERM F Phone # START EXPIRES JOSEPH BART 1999 651-454-8442 (H) 1/2005 3033 Timberwood Trail (3 n• 1999) Eagan, MN 55121 (yr 2002) PHIL BELFIORI 2002 651-905-0293 (H) 1/2003 3671 Canary Way (1 n• 2002) 651-297-8026 (W) Eagan, MN 55123 (Aftemate) MARGO DANNER 2001 651/454-5688 (H) 1/2004 2037 Flint Lane (3 yr. 2001) Eagan, MN 55122 TERRY DAVIS 1997 651-452-2635 (H) 1/2003 4895 Safari Pass (3 n• 1997) 651-310-8941 (W) Eagan, MN 55122-2690 (3 2000) 452-2152 (Home fax) ten.dayiseepaul-com N. MARK FILIPI May, 1997 651-602-1725 (W) 1/2004 836 Overlook Place (3 yr. 1998) marlc.filipigtmetc.state.mn.us Eagan, MN 55123 (3 yr. 2001) ELIZABETH PERRY (LIZA) 2002 651-452-3201 (H) 1/2005 3298 Rolling Hills Drive (3 n• 2002) 651-994-8808 (W) Eagan, MN 55121 Iperry64Qhotrna11.com DOROTHY PETERSON 2000 651-454-6532 (H) 1/2003 4337 Sequoia Drive 2000) (3 yr. Eagan, MN 55122 RICHARD PLETCHER 2001 651-687-9177 (H) 1/2005 1074 Northview Park (1 yr. 2001) Eagan, MN 55123 (3 n. 2002) JOHN RUDOLPH 1993 651-454-8761 (H) 1/2003 1644 Norwood Court (3 yr. 1995) 651-454-6904 (fax) Eagan, MN 55122 (3 K.1 ) irudolphea"hotma0.cxlm MELVIN WILLIAMS 2001 651-994-6727 (H) 1/2004 823 Wescott Square (3yr.'2001) Eagan, MN 55123 Eagan City Staff E-Mail: kvraa@ci.eagan.mn.us cmesko@ci.eaaan.mn.us aolson@ci.eagan.mn.us iasfahl@ci.eagan.mn.us shove@ci.eagan.mn.us emacbeth@ci.eagan.mn.us bwielde@ci.eagan.mn.us Phone #651-681-4661 (Cherryl's # after 4:30 p.m.) Eagan Parks and Recreation Staff E-Mail Administration: Ken Vraa Cherryl Mesko Paul Olson Jeff Asfahl Beth Wielde Forestry: Gregg Hove kvraa@ci. eagan. mn. us cmesko@ci. eagan. mn. us polson@ci. eagan. mn. us jasfahl@ci.eagan.mn.us bwieIde@)ci.eagan.mn.us ghove@ci.eagan.mn.us Water Resources: Eric Macbeth emacbeth@ci.eagan.mn.us Recreation Staff Paula Nowariak poowariak@ci. eagan. mn. us Sonya Rippe srippe@ci. eagan. mn. us Cathy Bolduc cbolduc@ci.eagan.mn.us Holly Champlin hchamplin@ci.eagan.mn.us Colleen Callahan ccalahan@ci.eagan.mn.us Cascade Bay: Aaron Hunter Civic Arena: Mark Vaughan shunter@ci. eaggan. mn. us mvaughan@ci. eagan. mn. us Department Happenings May 20, 2002 RECREATION DIVISION • Spring Preschool Programs will be coming to an end on May 23. All Preschoolers and their Families will be attending a Year end Picnic at Blackhawk Park. Approximately 200 families will attend • The classes will have an annual Track and Field Event on May 22 and 23 at Goat Hill Park and Bridle Ridge Park. Running jumping, face painting water balloons are all part of the plans. The Eagan Civic arena is reserved as a back up site in the event of inclement weather. • Summer preschool classes are filling up fast! Parents on interested in registering their children may still do so by calling our Parks and Recreation Department or registering online at w ww.cirivofeagan. . Registrations will be accepted through June 12. • Registration for our Fall preschool programs will being May 20`x • Summer is in full swing for the adult sports programs and concessions. Mother nature is not cooperating very well. Softball has been cancelled for snow and rain thus far. • The next focus for adult sports is getting the fall information put together and out to teams by June 10 for softball and soccer and July 1 for basketball, volleyball and touch football. • Friends of the Farm had one their most successful clean-up days ever on May 4. • Friends of the Farm will host their anneal Spring Festival on Sunday May 19 from Noon - 4:00 pm. Admission is free. This event will feature an exciting new "Virtual Cow" that will simulate cow milking by hand. • Youth athletic programs and are underway. Thus far, 14 weekend athletic events are scheduled to take place over a 12 weekends. • The summer /fall edition of the "Discover" activities brochure was delivered to all Eagan residences during the first week in May. Additionally, a brochure specifically intended for teens has been developed in partnership with Dist. 196 Comm. Ed, the YMCA and other Park and Recreation programs. It turned out great! • Seniors in Eagan have been very busy lately. In late April several took the day to go to Red Wing for tours of the Red Wing Pottery Company, the Hobgoblin Music Company, shop downtown and enjoy a luxurious lunch at the St. James Hotel. This month the Golden Gaitors Walking Club began, in coordination with several other senior programs in Dakota and Washington Counties. The goal is to offer monthly group walking opportunities as well as encourage people to walk independently. Incentive items will be given to participants as they accumulate walking hours. • The Eagan Fun Rim was held on Saturday, May 4 with more than 280 runners in participation. The 2- mile, 5 -mile and Ducky Dash were all a success and the morning ran smoothly. Children participating in the'/z Mile Ducky Dash particularly enjoyed the ribbons and water-squirting ducks they received for their involvement. • Teen programming - Two Teen Rec. Leaders were hired. The summer is filled with lots of great summer activities, clinics and trips. • Youth Development - Wescott Center is closing May 31. Programs end May 16. On may 9, the center held a very successful teen - family pizza farewell party. On May 15, Youth Development is hosting a Luau at Quarry Park to introduce families to the facility and summer program options. Summer programs registration is underway. Preparations are being made for new programs this fall. LCTS funds have been received for an after school program at Pilot Knob Elementary for 2002-2003 school year. PARKS DIVISION • The Park and Recreation Department was recently nominated for the Lifeworks Services "Employer of the Year". Lifeworks provides work opportunities for handicapped and disabled adults. The award is presented annually to the employer who best exemplifies the goal of providing opportunities for the disabled to build skills, increase their independence and work as part of a team. The Department has contracted with Lifeworks for over 10 years to assist with the cleaning of park buildings. The award was presented to the Star Tribune Company. • The City and the Park and Recreation Department have been recognized as Mutual of America "Merit Finalists" for its work with summer youth employment and training, specifically the partnership that has been developed with the Twin Cities Tree Trust. The City has a utilized Tree trust youth work crews for many years to complete a variety of park improvement projects. • Despite the weather the annual tree sale was again a success. Nearly all of the plant materials were picked up that morning. Any unsold materials will be planted in park areas. • Despite the weather (is there a theme here?) the Arbor Day celebration at Rahn park attracted a number of hardy volunteers and anxious 3d graders to participate in the planting project and poster award ceremony. The new landscape plantings have greatly enhanced the area around the building and will also provided needed shade for spectators. Staff wishes to extend a sincere "thank you" to Commission member Liz Perry who did everything from planting shrubs to flipping bratwurst and finally participating in the award presentation. She even convinced here own kids to spend the entire morning helping out ! ! Thanks • After meeting with Al Singer of the DNR Metro Greenway program, staff has submitted an amended grant application seeking technical assistance funds for the phase 1 analysis of Eagans central greenway corridor, including Patrick Eagan Park. Mr. Singer had suggested that a less technical approach than that suggested in the original application, made in early May, may be more appropriate at this time and more in line with the actual amount of funding he has available. The amended project would include a general review of land cover and the identification of sensitive and significant areas in and around the corridor. Ground work and a technical analysis would be included in a phase 2 project application in 2003. • The maintenance staff is attempting to move ahead on the spring maintenance programs. The cold wet weather has hampered efforts to prepare infields, line soccer fields, mow and apply fertilizer to turf areas. Staff has been working evenings and weekends in an effort to take advantage of any break in the weather, even an hour or two. • Proposals for the provision of play ground equipment for Slaters Acres and Lexington Parks were due on May 17. Staff will be installing the equipment in mid-summer. The projects will include the installation of new amenities, and in the case of Lexington, reconfiguration of the play areas. The purchase of the equipment is part of the approved 2002 CIP. Through a cooperative agreement, staff will also be installing a new piece of equipment at Woodland Elementary School. Playgrounds at the schools are considered to be a community amenity. • A new batting tunnel, funded by the youth baseball program is being installed by park staff near the Little Goat ball field. The cage will be more appropriate in size for players in the younger age groups. • Progress continues on the new pavilion on the east side of Central Park Much of the foundation block work and installation of utilities have been completed. The project was delayed due to unforeseen conditions when the adjoining City well was installed. • Staff has been participating in the design review process for the "streetscape" projects being finalized for the Cedar Grove area and Central Parkway. The projects, being coordinate by the Engineering Department, will include landscaped center medians, ornamental fencing, signage and monumentation, trails and lighting. The selection of landscape materials and the incorporation of maintenance efficient elements have been of particular interest. • Superintendent of Parks Olson recently attended a League of Cities Loss Control Workshop. There appears to be shift back to a more `liberal" view, especially of the new, more extreme, activities being proposed for park areas. These include bike and skate parks (within reason) and elevated play features in play grounds. This seems to be the result of recognizing that kids enjoy a challenge and excitement and that these activities may be here for some time to come and in some instances are more used than play equipment • The Minnesota Environmental Initiative (MEd) recognized the Dakota County Wetland Health Evaluation Project (WHEP) as one of 15 finalists from a field of over 130 applicants for their 2002 Environmental Initiative Awards at a dinner party held at the International Market Square on Wednesday, May 8, 2002. One award is given for each of five categories (Energy Efficiency, Land Use, Environmental Education, Environmental Policy, and Environmental Management). The WHEP program was recognized as one of three finalists in the Environmental Education category . The City of Eagan has been an active participant in -Z- the WHEP program since 1997. Water Resources Technician Jim Storland was responsible for writing a portion of the application for the award and represented the City at the awards dinner. Water Resources Coordinator Eric Macbeth represented the City at the Minnesota Water 2002 & Minnesota Lakes and Rivers Conference in St. Cloud on April 20 and made a presentation "Eagan Water Resources Program: Fish Lake Inflow Alum Treatment" For the third year in a row, the Corps of Engineers research team from Texas is studying the effects of the herbicide Aquathol K ® on curlyleaf pondweed populations in Blackhawk and Schwanz lakes. On May 1 and 2, the lakes were treated with the chemical. City staff will be helping the research team again this summer by collecting regular water quality data and through overall support of field activities. -3- City of Eagan Parks and Recreation MEMO Date: May 20, 2002 Agenda Item: 0-1; Covington Townoffice Park Davcm, Inc. Action X Information Atiacbments X 1. Location Map 2. Site Plan 3. Preliminary Plat 4. LandscapePlan 5. Tree Preservation Plan AGENDA ITEM: G-1; COVINGTON TOWNOFFICE PARK - DAVERN, INC. TO: ADVISORY PARKS COMMISSION PREPARED BY: KEN VRAA, DIRECTOR OF PARKS AND RECREATION ITEM OVERVIEW: Review the parks dedication, trails dedication, tree preservation, water quality and wetlands issues that pertain to the Covington Townoffice Park development. BACKGROUND/HISTORY: Davern, Inc. is requesting Preliminary Planned Development approval for an office development and Preliminary Subdivision approval to create nine lots on 2.82 acres located on property legally described as Outlot A, Prairie Oaks and south of Cliff Road on Slater Road in the NW t/. of Section 31. The applicant proposes to develop the site with an office use. The offices would be housed in units that have the appearance of attached residential townhomes. Four, two unit groupings are proposed for a total of eight units. According to the applicant's narrative, "Townoffices are `residential friendly' in nature, being rambler style with full basements, gabled-shingle roofs, and exterior finishes of siding and brick." The proposal exceeds the allowed percentage of tree removal and alters the existing wetland. The site plan indicates that required building and parking setbacks from TH 77 (Cedar Avenue) would not be met. Also, the proposal is deficient in the number of parking stalls proposed. The property was originally part of the Winkler-Jackson Planned Development, which was approved in 1982. The property east of Slater Road, south of Cliff Road, and west of TH 77 (Cedar Avenue) was to be developed with LB (Limited Business) uses. In 1998, the subject site was platted as Outlot A, Prairie Oaks. Office buildings occupy Lot I and 2 of Prairie Oaks to the north. A 30,000 square foot building was proposed on the property, however, plans were not approved and it was platted as an outlot due to the proposed amount of tree loss. The development of the site was to be addressed at a later date. The site is currently vacant. Significant trees cover the property. A Type II wetland extends north and south along west property line, which abuts Slater Road. The parking lot on the property to the north (Lot 2, Block 1, Prairie Oaks) was extended to the property line to provide access to the subject site. -4' Topography ranges from a high of 958 feet at the southeast portion of the property to a low of 940 feet near the existing wetland on the west. PARKS AND TRAILS DEDICATION: This development would be subject to a cash parks dedication and cash trails dedication TREE PRESERVATION: A tree inventory submitted with this application indicates that there are eighty-five (85) significant trees in the inventory. Individual tree size and species break down is as follows: Species Avg Diameter Dia. Range Count Percent of Total Bur Oak 20" 6"-29.5" 57 67% Black Cherry 10" 6"-12.5" 13 15% Cottonwood 14" 12"-15.5" 8 1% The balance of the tree inventory is comprised of willow, smaller red oak and box elder trees with average diameters of 10". The development as proposed will result in the removal of seventy-one (71) significant trees (83.5 % of the total). According to the City of Eagan Tree Preservation Ordinance allowable tree removal for this type of development proposal (single-lot, commercial) is set at 30.0% of the total significant trees. With a proposed removal more than the allowable amount, there will be required tree mitigation for this proposal. This required tree mitigation calculates to one hundred sixteen (116) Category B trees. The applicant has submitted a Tree Mitigation Plan that shows fulfillment of Tree Preservation requirements through the installation of 87 Category B trees and the balance of required tree mitigation through cash payment of $8,700.00. Staff has reviewed the proposed tree mitigation plan and has the following comments: 1. Mitigation trees are spaced too closely, (i.e. spruce trees 10 feet apart, red oaks 12 feet apart). 2. Mitigation trees are situated too close to parking lot curbs (i.e. 5 feet from curb). 3. Mitigation trees situated in critical root zone areas (i.e. under the canopy of large, preserved oak trees). 4. Mitigation trees are located in Slater Road right-of-way. All of these situations need to be corrected, and a revised Tree Mitigation Plan submitted. WATER QUALITY/WETLANDS: Water Ouality Issues This 2.8-acre development would be located in the City's A-watershed, in the southwest corner of Eagan, near to the boundary with Burnsville. The development proposes to meet the City's water quality requirement to treat stormwater runoff from the site by directing stormwater to a treatment basin to be constructed in a wetland on the parcel. Requirements for volume and area of water quality treatment ponds are based on the impervious proportion of proposed developments (i.e., land covered by buildings, parking -5- lots, driveways, and walks). Therefore, a minimum wet-pond volume of 0.22 acre-feet covering an area of 0.15 acres would be needed to treat the stormwater generated by this development. A wetland delineation report indicates that there is 1 wetland totaling 0.4 acres on this development parcel. Under the classification system of the Fish and Wildlife Service, this is a Type 2 wetland, which is an inland fresh meadow vegetated primarily by reed canary grass, with some lake sedge and river bulrush an inland shallow fresh marsh in which the soils are usually covered with six inches of more of water during the growing season. Vegetation may include grasses, bulrushes, and other marsh plants. This is not designated as a public water wetland by the Minnesota DNR The wetland is under jurisdiction of the Minnesota Wetland Conservation Act (WCA), which regulates draining and filling of all natural wetlands and excavation of certain types of natural wetlands. This program is administered by the City of Eagan, which acts as local government unit for WCA issues. It is highly probable that federal jurisdiction via Section 404 of the Clean Water Act-administered by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers-does not apply to impacts to this wetland due to the wetland's isolation from federal navigable waters. The applicant has submitted an application for exemption from WCA replacement for impacts to the wetland. Up to 2,000 square feet of fill is allowed within the so-called de minimus exemption for Type 2 wetlands. Also, excavation of Type 2 wetlands is not subject to replacement provisions of the WCA. Under authorization by the City Council, the water resources coordinator has been granted LGU decision making authority over such matters as wetland exemption requests. Erosion Control Proper installation and effective maintenance of erosion control practices is needed to prevent and minimize soil loss and impacts to down-gradient resources and water quality. This development is subject to the City's recently codified land disturbance and erosion control regulations. ALTERNATIVES FOR COMMISSION CONSIDERATION: 1. This proposal would be subject to a cash parks dedication. 2. This proposal would be subject to a cash trails dedication. 3. The applicant will be required to fulfill tree preservation mitigation through the installation of one hundred sixteen (116) category B trees (or an equivalent combination of category A and/or category C trees and cash payment). 4. The applicant will be required to revise the Tree Mitigation Plan with appropriate tree spacing and locations, and submit a revised Tree Mitigation Plan. Tree Protective measures (i.e. orange colored silt fence or 4 foot polyethylene laminate safety netting) shall be required to be installed at the Drip Line or at the perimeter of the Critical Root Zone, whichever is greater, of significant trees/woodlands to be preserved on-site. I,- 6. The applicant shall be required to contact the City Forestry Division and set up a pre- construction site inspection at least five days prior to the issuance of the grading permit to ensure compliance with the approved Tree Preservation Plan and placement of the Tree Protection Fencing. 7. This development should meet the City's water quality requirements by creating stormwater treatment capacity through a minimum wet-pond volume of 0.22 acre-feet covering an area of 0.15 acres. The stormwater treatment pond should be constructed according to NURP standards with a maximum depth of 10 feet, a 10:1 aquatic bench, and an outlet skimmer according to City design standards. 8. To the extent practicable, a minimum 30-foot wide buffer of natural, undisturbed vegetation outside the boundary of the wetland should be maintained before, during, and after construction. 9. Erosion control practices should be properly installed and effectively maintained throughout the development process to prevent and minimize soil loss and negative impacts to down-gradient resources and water quality. Location Map Item:6-// C;OViy hn T wno{fice. All* Attachment # I - "c4fj,0,, Mile W d •1} ice.... 3! ? ......, yr ?:7 ?? .. ! A J wiz: p V Sub'ect Site 3 ®00® ® - ??° ?a 41-1 4 00® C__ 0 am gj 4p* .?r• fem.// 22 R3 1000 0 1000 2000 Feet Development/Developer: Covington Townoffice Park Application: Preliminary Subdivision/PD Case No.: 31-PS-03-03-02 and 31-PD-01-03-02 Map Prapar.d using ERSI AreVNw 31. Pargi bas. map data provided N by Dakota County Land Survey Daparsnant and is Currant as of Mirth 2002. R' { E City. of Eagan THIS MAP IS INTENDED FOR REFERENCE USE ONLY ;> c The City of Eagan and Dakota County do not guarantee the accuracy of this Information and are s Com.mudty D.vdopment Department not responsible for errors or omissions. A _, . ILA,I 4Jnn 77,i nvU item:LA-Ij irk Attachment #,Z - 5' l P 17 Loose W Z . U ? t Fy I ?<? sa a ? ?u?v n n I r <^=n 8 a fro _ h U F N_ ' v r L - L V ?? < N n Nj g Nmwa$ b V I Q r ^ ?°. ? ? n p ? Q 1 ASI O x a ut < °1 « ego<? ?t>r? aN dE i?3 T ? u aurrsw ,;a W G ?,`? ° g a f€ O 3-' // ' / //iii ?'/' ? ? ? ? } / ? // 1 wig jmr % 4, y ' 7rrrr ?? ?- . ?' T % ls: SITE PLAN /art n A a T item: L*-I; COO ' ton low Attachment #3 _ prelim:, Q d. z W Z` LL LO 0 LLJ LLJ W Bpi o >< 3 g i38 o Q / k of 0 St ATER READ q "N .... ? i s? J 3i PRELIMINARY PLAT Asti l.G ,,1 P14f 1 1 ' i i it ? ?3 y j U HI Iljl rs.?I r l l V l? 1 Item: a.4; Covir,*n Towns f five. Part Attachment # ¢ . Land sc*? Plan 'II r?S it ! ' I O.O 3d 4? ' 4.4 V, `UL O LANDSCAPE: PLAN Fin DaVern Inc. <<....1...:.,. ,,,., . a t e r r s Coving? TOWn Offie p? ; R H 1 E C T i .?sm ! e'?__ Cr cr.r Il. ff:]f ?e.uu.m... ,.x.... w..+v. o -> Af1?6-x702 Ttem a +?l • (•iu.: r%a%4An T ld"U GG Park Attachment *5 _ Te` nn Q Y Y _ Y D Y n L Y 7 7 7 7 d .6' O 9 Q 1 _Y :A 'f. LIJ UWi. Y M ? m O hg _ O _ Yf VJ¦ , O O 9 9 ^ 7 O O ?. q Y i Q ah?? W 2 V? C C Q z ?, g le 11 LL LIJ Z (j) W E e: ? g ,//// // // i'??////ii/iii ' (_•??\'^ ,/ // j / 14 so I TREE PRESERVATION PLAN Pen Ps City of Eagan Packs and Recreation MEMO Dade: May 20, 2002 Agenda Item: 0-2• Gib of Mary Children-,s Home Acdon X Information AttacLmmts X 1. Location Map 2. Concept Site Plan 3. Concept Grading Plan 4. Tree Preservation Plan 5. Concept Welland Plan 6. Concept Building Plans AGENDA ITEM: G-2; GIFT OF MARY CHILDREN'S HOME TO: ADVISORY PARKS COMMISSION PREPARED BY: KEN VRAA, DIRECTOR OF PARKS AND RECREATION I ITEM OVERVIEW: Review the parks dedication, trails dedication, tree preservation, water quality and wetlands issues that pertain to the Gift of Mary Children's Home development. BACKGROUND/HISTORY: Gift of Mary is requesting approval of a rezoning from A, Agricultural to PD, Planned Development and a Preliminary Planned Development of approximately 35.5 acres on property located south of Lone Oak Road and north of Hwy. 55 bordering on Inver Grove Heights in the NE t/4 of Section 12. The proposed development is a residential/school development. Twenty two-story residential units of housing up to ten children and 2-3 adults each are planned for the site. In addition, a 95,000 sq. ft. school is also planned on site. Several playgrounds and sports fields are also incorporated into the plan and a pedestrian walkway system is planned throughout the site. The site currently has a zoning designation of A, Agricultural, and a land use designation of SA, Special Area. The applicant is proposing a rezoning to PD, Planned Development and a Preliminary Planned Development to accommodate the mixed use and multiple buildings. The subject site consists of five parcels. Three single-family homes and associated accessory buildings are located on the four westerly parcels of the subject site; the easterly 26-acre parcel is undeveloped. Two of the existing homes are proposed to be incorporated into the site design and used as staff and guest residences; the third will be removed from the site. Existing wells and septic systems will need to be abandoned and connections to municipal utilities provided. The land is wooded with gently rolling topography with areas of steep slopes, and contains some wetland areas. The site has a topographical change of over 90 feet. The northern one- third of the site generally slopes to the north and the southern two-thirds slopes to the south. A gas pipeline runs though the property northwest and southeast. Access to the site is afforded from both Lone Oak Road and Hwy. 55. PARKS AND TRAILS DEDICATION: This development is located within Park Service District number one, which consists primary of large, single family lots and commercial / office development. Consequently, the park system plan does not reflect a need for a neighborhood park within this identified service area. This service district is also the location of a pending development proposal from DR Horton. There is no proposal from them at this time, although staff has been apprised of the fact that they are looking at mixed use with some residential. Consequently, there may be a need for a future park, which could be done in conjunction with the City of Inver Grove Heights. This development is proposed as a Planned Unit Development and calculation as to parks dedication is difficult to assign, given the nature of the use: is this residential or is similar to other intuitional uses such as church/school? The Commission will need to make a finding on this designation. If the Commission determines that this is similar to a school, then an acreage dedication would be used (35 acres x $4,508 = $157,780). The development includes a proposed softball field, tennis courts, play ground, internal walking paths, community center and athletic field with over flow event parking. Provisions in the park dedication policy provide the Commission the latitude of providing credit against the cash park dedication when significant park amenities are provided by the developer. Given the nature of this proposal and the recreational elements to be provided, this should certainly be given consideration by the Commission. The rational for this is that park dedications are intended to provide and support the recreational needs of resident to the degree that they need and use these services. When the services are provide privately, it's assumed that they are not impacting the public park facilities in the community and therefore need not participate to the full extent in making a park dedication as those who provide no private amenities. Options regarding parks dedication also include the provision that private facility might be made available to the public for use. Such was the case with Faithful Shepherd School. In that instance the required parks dedication was fulfilled with a joint use agreement for the utilization of the softball, baseball and soccer field built by the school for use by the community. After hours and summer use by sports organization can serve the community well. The Gift of Mary's Children development might be able to provide something similar, however, given the nature of continuous use and need, it would appear unlikely such an arrangement could be worked out. And finally, there is potentially, another option for consideration. Given the amenities provided and use proposed, a full cash dedication could be calculated and applied against the property, but deferred. The deferment would be collected only if the land use were to change to another use at some point in the future. In regards to trails, there have not been any development that have not paid a trails dedication, including churches. Consequently, this development should be responsible for a trails dedication at time. TREE PRESERVATION: A tree inventory submitted with this application indicates that there are five hundred three (503) significant trees in the inventory. The site has scattered areas of trees with a relatively even -9- distribution of box elder, aspen, birch, black cherry, oak, ash, spruce, and cottonwood Tree diameters range from 6" to 30", with an average diameter of about 12". The development as proposed will result in the removal of two-hundred twenty-six (226) significant trees (44.9 % of the total). According to the City of Eagan Tree Preservation Ordinance allowable tree removal for this type of development proposal (single-lot, commercial) is set at 30.0% of the total significant trees. With a proposed removal more than the allowable amount, there will be required tree mitigation for this proposal. This required tree mitigation calculates to one hundred seventy-six (176) Category B trees. The applicant's Tree Mitigation Plan is short eighteen (18) Category B trees. A revised Tree Mitigation Plan should be submitted indicating fill mitigation. WATER QUALITY/WETLANDS: Water Ouality Issues This 35.5-acre development would be located in the City's G-watershed, which is in the northeast comer of Eagan, alongside the boundary with Inver Grove Heights. The development proposes to meet the City's water quality requirement to treat stormwater runoff from the site by directing stormwater to a treatment basin to be constructed alongside a wetland at the southeast comer of the site. Requirements for volume and area of water quality treatment ponds are based on the impervious proportion of proposed developments (i.e., land covered by buildings, parking lots, driveways, and walks). Of the 35.5 acres of the site, 25.2 acres is proposed to be developed, and the remaining 10.3 acres (located to the west and southwest) is proposed to remain undeveloped. Of the 25.2 acres proposed for development, 31 percent would have impervious cover. Therefore, a minimum wet-pond volume of 1.9 acre-feet covering an area of 0.6 acres would be needed to treat the stormwater generated by this development. Wetland Issues A preliminary wetland delineation report filed by the applicant indicates that there are 5 wetlands totaling 2.86 acres on this development parcel. Because this delineation was conducted during a non-growing season, field verification of the delineation is required to be done before final approval. The first wetland (Wetland 1) spans .98 acre (42,803 square feet) and is located alongside Lone Oak Road. Under the classification system of the Fish and Wildlife Service, this is a Type 3 wetland, which is an inland shallow fresh marsh in which the soils are usually covered with six inches of more of water during the growing season. Vegetation may include grasses, bulrushes, and other marsh plants. Although the first wetland is not specifically designated as a public water wetland by the Minnesota DNR, a small portion of such a public water is located in the northeast portion of the site, according to the Protected Waters Inventory map for Dakota County. Due to its proximity, therefore, the first wetland appears to be hydrologically connected to the public water wetland. The second wetland (Wetland 2) spans.005 acre (225 square feet) and is located in a •10- depression south of the first wetland. This wetland is classified as Type 1, a seasonally flooded basin, and its vegetation is dominated by hummock sedge. The third wetland (Wetland 3) spans.24 acre (10,636 square feet) and is located in the southwestern portion of the site between 2 residential homes. This wetland is classified as Type 3. The fourth wetland (Wetland 4) spans.05 acre (2,210 square feet) and is located in the south- central portion of the site at the base of a slope. This wetland is classified as Type 1. The fifth wetland (Wetland 5) spans 1.6 acres (68,817 square feet) and is located along the southeast boundary of the site and includes some of the ditch alongside Highway 55. This wetland is classified as Type 2, an inland fresh meadow vegetated primarily by reed canary grass, with some lake sedge and river bulrush. With exception of the small portion of the public water wetland as indicated above, all wetland areas of this parcel are under jurisdiction of the Minnesota Wetland Conservation Act (WCA), which regulates draining and filling of all natural wetlands and excavation of certain types of natural wetlands. This program is administered by the City of Eagan, which acts as local government unit for WCA issues. It is highly probable that federal jurisdiction via Section 404 of the Clean Water Act-administered by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers-does not apply to impacts to these wetlands due to the wetlands' isolation from federal navigable waters. The applicant has submitted a WCA wetland replacement plan application to the city for the following proposed impacts: 1) fill 28.4 percent (.28 acre or 12,159 square feet) of Wetland 1; 2) fill 2.5 percent (.006 acre or 277 square feet) of Wetland 3; 3) fill 100 percent (.05 acre or 2,210 square feet) of Wetland 4; and 4) fill 15 percent (.24 acre or 10,311 square feet) of Wetland 5. In total, 20 percent (.57 acre or 24,957 square feet) of the wetland area is proposed to be filled by this development. No draining or filling is proposed. Because of the proposed fill impacts to wetlands, therefore, this development is subject to replacement plan provisions of the WCA. This means that wetland restoration or creation is required on a 2:1 basis, with at least 1:1 of that basis being replacement of 24,957 square feet of new wetland credit and no more than 1:1 of that basis being 33,276 square feet of public value credit (buffer areas, stormwater treatment basins, etc.). Public value credit is factored on a .75 basis. The proposed wetland replacement plan is subject to appropriate public noticing, review, and final approval by the City. Erosion Control In several areas of this development, the topography of the site requires proper installation and effective maintenance of erosion control practices to prevent and minimize soil loss and -11- impacts to down-gradient resources and water quality. This development is subject to the City's recently codified land disturbance and erosion control regulations. ALTERNATIVES FOR COMMISSION CONSIDERATION: 1. The applicant shall be required to fulfill tree preservation mitigation through the installation of one hundred seventy-six (176) category B trees (or an equivalent combination of category A and/or category C trees and/or cash payment). 2. Tree Protective measures (i.e. orange colored silt fence or 4 foot polyethylene laminate safety netting) shall be required to be installed at the Drip Line or at the perimeter of the Critical Root Zone, whichever is greater, of significant trees/woodlands to be preserved on-site. 3. The applicant shall be required to contact the City Forestry Division and set up a pre- construction site inspection at least five days prior to the issuance of the grading permit to ensure compliance with the approved Tree Preservation Plan and placement of the Tree Protection Fencing. 4. This development shall meet the City's water quality requirements by creating stormwater treatment capacity through a minimum wet-pond volume of 1.9 acre-feet covering an area of 0.6 acres. The stormwater treatment pond should be constructed according to NURP standards with a maximum depth of 6 feet, a 10:1 aquatic bench, and an outlet skimmer according to City design standards. 5. Field verification of wetland delineations shall be conducted in May or June, before final acceptance of the delineation report. 6. The wetland replacement plan application should be accepted and submitted, per WCA requirements, for a 30-day public review and scheduled for City Council decision no sooner than June 18. 7. With the exception of the area adjacent to the constructed stormwater treatment pond, a minimum 30-foot wide buffer of natural, undisturbed vegetation outside the boundary of the wetland shall be maintained before, during, and after construction. 8. Erosion control practices shall be properly installed and effectively maintained throughout the development process to prevent and minimize soil loss and negative impacts to down-gradient resources and water quality. (Cont.) -IZ- 9. Parks dedication shall be met by one of the following options: a. Designate dedication similar to that of a institutional use (example: church or school), 35 acres x $4,508 = $157,780. b. Require no park dedication, but enter into a joint use agreement with the Developer for use of their recreational/ park area. c. Developer provides credit against the cash park dedication, due to the significant amount of park amenities provided by the developer and the lack of impact by residents on existing park facilities. d. Full cash park dedication, deferred. This would only be collected if the land use were to change in the future. 10. The developer shall be responsible for trail dedication as stated in the 2002 Trail Dedication Policy. -1110- Item:6-2 4; of N(rryy Chi 1dri n'o 110.E a Location Map Attachment # [.oca+lon MA.p Item:G-2; C;ff of Mary - eAi ld ren H. n c Attachment #Z I llowcp-t -9;& Rap agAQ Ei Eta Fi ... .11 8813 ! C. S. wo. gill A.M. NO. 26 - - I - ifs 1011 Rb-; If I I I ?p? !I if 9 11 ;"Z+ r----------- ` II ------------------- I -_-; Tye '41 li o ^j q( } EM 6E5 qVg 1??? Q It? YYi;gq?ll ?'a8 y !IP? _ ?$ ??? y ?? a.•ece? p s e r a 4 s ?..- . •.- ,.111 3 ? s YA ? - 3/14 T MARY SHARING AND CARING HANDS F A MINNESOTA NON-PROF1T ORGANZATION 525 NORTH 7TH STREET ?•`?' • CONCEPT SITE MINNEAPOUS• MN 55405 w._ .c .a-ate .•?•.. -?• FUN CONCEPT SITE PLAN -` Item: (a-Z; Cuff of Marty :.s?ISiE{?• till l I I11 I. .o . ne off MINI oil 1 xxi'115 F141 alp 6$9€ a a?j r g3 l' 6 ? Rim YR . eM7? R#.# ppgp I II - I !EE F ?xl A r t I¢.: 1 xy is 50 r?l ay ?85P gal 0 -[ l t 4 i? GIFTT Or. MARISNARING AND CARING NANDS F-1 ..?. ???....?.::: fi !jjLEfi.Aq?E ' A MINNESOTA NdhPROFIT ORGANIZATION ?- xrcx?i 525 NORTH 7TH STREET IN--- ..a ND MINNFAPOUS, MN 55405 ?-J CONCEPT GRADING/DRAINAGE PLAN Item: G_z • 0,; f f • f Aia r - c:nuattn? ?a Attachment # 4 Trae ?exrraf?on pl CYw S? ' l 1 p Y! ? ? •:. "? ,rte i aR s'' ee, J a fO O( r a ? `I rob 0 *or ?® a il. m c * ?:.. fit!! ?' ! 1 1; 1> rpr ? ? ? :::z? ? ?; .,? ? as ?^ • ? rep COD r a? z so a m Nm!• m a t f Can pr on C. A n 9/14 GIFT OF MARY SHARING AND CARING HANDS ? -, :& ?MR,OW A MINNESOTA NON-PROFIT ORGANIZATION ..? ?? xoor,..,, 'C Ct C 55545 -•_ °• ?T?+?----- -?, 525 NORTH 7TH 1REE PRESERVATION PLAN MINNEEAPOLIS M MAPOU N 554005 MIN TREE PRESERVATION PLAN R 7 - -4 IL 's a -A... AL Item: 6-2; £W of Mart' Attachment #5 Concept- Wef14rd Plats p y) ?ttnn ? Egg D ? i k A I ?n la la °q FL RI RS'° g „FT _ eR$ ?a F?N a? ?AZZ? q? wK? E 'P aE RF S $$ R ER Eqq X? 6F ! € S ° i ^ A E F E 2 ^ , S l X 1 1 7: -A K R A E :t^ Sri :1 GIFT Of MARY SHARING AND CARING HANDS - A 1111 CC LAN A MINNESOTA NON-PpQFIi ORGANIZA710N 525 NORTH 71H STREET NVCENTORY AN00 MINNEAPOLIS. MN 52A05 :nro? REPLACEMENT PLAN Item:G-Zj ??/dr?'* ?An+e?- Attachment # 5o- -1%rmu f Afamef+vei (SI4es) Permit Narrative Combined Permit Application Gift of Mary Children's Home Eagan, Minnesota Part 1 Section 8 Project Purpose: Sharing and Caring Hands, a Minnesota non-profit organization, is proposing to develop a 35.5-acre parcel (Site) from fallow land to a children's care facility comprised of a community center, school, twenty-one children's homes, and their associated play fields and athletic courts. This project is needed to provide homes and education to the children who have slipped through the cracks of Minnesota's foster care system. The goal of the project is to provide stable, family-type residences for siblings and troubled children whose needs are not met by the current foster care facilities. Section 10 Project Description: This project proposes developing the Site with heavy equipment, such as bulldozers, backhoes, and scrapers and includes filling Wetland 4 entirely and portions of Wetlands 1, 3 and 5. The proposed driveway in the northern portion of the Site will extend south from Lone Oak Road to provide access to the facility. This driveway will be constructed on a fill area (Wetland 1). The area identified as Wetland 2 in the wetland delineation report (see Appendix B) was flagged as a wetland because the area met the criteria of vegetation, hydrology and soils. However, when this basin was surveyed it was found to be only 225 square feet in size. This is below the minimum size (400 square feet) criteria for a wetland as listed in the ACOE wetland delineation manual. This area (Wetland 2) will also be filled in order to construct a baseball diamond. In addition, portions of the proposed parking lot for the community center and school will be constructed on a fill area (Wetland 4). On-Site, in-kind compensatory wetland mitigation will occur to replace the lost functions and values of the impacted wetlands. The mitigation is discussed in further detail in the sequencing portion of this.permit application. A 30-foot buffer will also be retained around the existing wetlands. Section 14 Sequencing Considerations: When designing a project of this type, a balance must be struck between lot design, building size, building locations, roadways, safety issues, utility constraints and wetland impact, while still maintaining the viability of the project. I Alternative sites/land search Sharing and Caring Hands has been engaged in an extensive and prolonged land search for a suitable building site. The land search has included pursuing sites in Chaska, Maple Grove, Brooklyn Park, and Victoria, Minnesota; however, the alternative sites were discouraged at public hearings due to the nature of the project (See enclosed map of alternative sites). In addition, the following criteria were used to evaluate and eventually rank potential land development sites: 1. 30 to 40 acres of contiguous land; 2. Willing sellers; 3. Immediate and easy access to city water, sanitary sewer, and stormwater facilities; 4. Land use regulations and zoning in place to allow for a residential campus; 5. Immediate and easy access to the Site; 6. Minimal environmental impacts Alternative analysis A. No build alternative Under the no build alternative the Gift of Mary Children's Home would not be constructed. The no build alternative is not consistent with Sharing and Caring Hand's desire to have a children's home facility in the Minneapolis area, nor is it consistent with the City of Eagan's plans to develop the Site as a residential development, as evidenced by the zoning of the Site: B. Alternative 1 As previously mentioned above, Sharing and Caring Hands has evaluated at least four sites at various locations in Chaska, Maple Grove, Brooklyn Park, and Victoria, Minnesota. The alternative sites were abandoned after receiving negative feedback at public hearings. 2 C. Preferred Alternative The preferred alternative is located at the Eagan site and is depicted in the enclosed preliminary plans. This layout consists of developing a 35.5-acre parcel of fallow land to a children's home comprised of a community center, school, twenty-one children s homes, and their associated play fields and athletic courts. This layout proposes impacting 0.57 acres of the on-Site wetlands with compensatory mitigation occurring 1 on-Site and in-kind. I Sequencing Avoidance: Efforts were made to avoid wetland impacts at the Site. Of the 2.86 acres of existing on-Site wetland, 0.57 acres are anticipated to be impacted. The majority of the wetland impact will stem from the proposed access road on the north side of the ¦ development and from the construction of a storm water detention pond in the ¦ southeastern portion. These are unavoidable impacts due to the linear shape and location of Wetland 1, topography of the Site, an underground gas line that bisects the Site, and a considerable number of significant trees at the Site. Access to the Site from Lone Oak Road would be unfeasible without impacting a portion of Wetland 1. The twenty-one children s homes could not be shifted south because of the number of I significant trees, topography, and the gas line. The proposed impacts in the southeastern portion of the Site (Wetland 5) will occur from the construction of a stormwater detention pond, which could not be shifted north due to the steep topography at the Site. Shifting the stormwater detention pond to the north would require excessive excavation into the slope and construction of a large retaining wall. The central portion of the Site will be the most heavily developed with the majority of the wetland acreage and significant trees being avoided. I Minimization: Impacts to wetlands and the natural features of the Site will be minimized. This will be accomplished by crossing Wetland 1 with access roads in the I narrowest location or in areas of the lowest quality. Wetland impacts were also minimized in the southern portion of the Site by utilizing and upgrading an existing driveway rather than constructing a new access, which would impact Wetland 5. Mitigation: Due to the wetland impacts that are projected to occur at the Site, on-Site, in-kind wetland replacement will occur at a 2:1 ratio. The proposed on-site mitigation will consist of constructing 0.57 acres of NWC with an additional 0.57 acres of PVC comprised of upland buffer and a stormwater detention pond. Mitigation areas have been selected to replace the functions and values of the impacted wetlands. Stormwater pond rate control structures and locations will be designed to assure that existing wetlands retain or enhance their current functions and values. 3 Part 2 Section 23 Description of Replacement Wetland Construction In order to comply with the no net loss of wetlands in Minnesota, on-Site, in-kind wetland replacement will occur. The replacement will be accomplished through the creation of 0.57 acres (24,957 sq. ft.) of new wetland credit (NWC) with an additional 0.57 acres (24,922 square feet) of associated public value credit (PVC). The NWC will be constructed by excavating an irregular shaped basin three feet below the existing elevation of the upland area adjacent to Wetland 3. The excavated area will be backfilled with approximately 6-18 inches of organic topsoil, leaving a gently undulating bottom. The mitigation wetland will then be seeded with an appropriate wet meadow seed mix. The NWC will have a 10:1 slope (max) from the upland buffer to the undulating bottom of the basin. Creation of the mitigated wetlands will involve excavation using bulldozers, backhoes, and other heavy and small equipment. Best management practices, such as silt fence and hay bales, will be in place until native ground cover establishes itself. Hydrology to the mitigation wetland will be supplied by overland flow from the surrounding watershed and interaction with the existing hydrology of Wetland 3. Soils in the mitigation area consist of Quam silt loam, surrounded by Otterholt silt loam, 1 to 6% slopes. Excavation and additional hydrology should allow hydrophytic vegetation to prosper in these soil types. In addition to the NWC, the preferred layout proposes to construct 0.42 acres (18,388 square feet) of storm water detention pond. The pond will be created in the southeast corner of the Site along the northern periphery and within portions of Wetland 5. This pond will serve as 0.42 acre of PVC and is designed for stormwater treatment. In the occasion of large rainfall events, this pond will overflow to aid in hydrating Wetland 5. 0.15 acre (6,534 square feet) of upland buffer will be constructed in the southwest portion of the Site along the southwestern periphery of the replacement wetland. The buffer area will be 25 feet wide and have a maximum slope of 4:1. The buffer will also serve as 0.15 acre of PVC for a mitigation total of 1.14 acres (49,658 square feet). Construction of the NWC and PVC will occur prior to or concurrent with the anticipated wetland impacts. Best management practices, such as straw bales and silt fence, will be utilized around the mitigation wetland - and existing wetlands until permanent vegetation establishes itself. 4 Mitigation Area Monitoring The mitigation area will be monitored for up to five years to ensure the success of the created wetlands. Monitoring will include: • Visiting the mitigation area during the spring, summer, and fall of the year. • Determining hydrology in the soils located at the fixed photograph locations during each site visit. • Documenting dominant vegetation that exceeds 20% layer coverage. • Documenting mitigation area with color photographs from the fixed photograph locations. • Preparing annual reports to the LGU describing the progress of the success of the mitigation area and, if necessary, any changes to the mitigation plan. • Discussing success of mitigation plan with LGU Annual reports will be presented to the LGU discussing the success of the mitigation. 5 r Item : 6 Z; (S; o f • f /?%itrtf CAi/dten'9 AMC' Attachment #4 n ep pf. )%I / i n' r/stns 2. Ayes 4. tI t 1 ? ? ?? N .I°?1 I I ? I I I{ ski 1i CONCEPT BUILDING PLAN (SCHOOL) r 3 S. Z c 0 A m n 0 O A '0 r AZ rp m A F- O O A r 1> zZ m in A O A in n x I IIIIIIII 'r to 0 s .. ii rr 2 m A -I U 0 r 2 m r a y U m U O r 2 N m m r m z A m W z N N T 1 1112 " t ? = ! rA N tl t ? :+ t e t V I I I I i . .t Y CONCEPT BUILDING PLAN (HOUSE) City of Eagan Parks and Recreation MEMO Date: May 20, 2002 Agenda Item: H-1; Fish Lake Clean Water Paetne+ship Actloa X Ia,[orm don Attachments X 1. ProjectImplementation Final Report AGENDA ITEM: H-1; FISH LAKE CLEAN WATER PARTNERSHIP TO: ADVISORY PARKS COMMISSION PREPARED BY: ERIC MACBETH, WATER RESOURCES COORDINATOR ITEM OVERVIEW: Recommend City Council to: 1) accept the Fish Lake Clean Water Partnership Project final report and 2) officially authorize completion of the grant project. Furthermore, acknowledge that water quality challenges of Fish Lake remain and that priority management of the lake needs to continue indefinitely into the future. BACKGROUND/HISTORY: In 1995, the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency awarded the City of Eagan financial support for a Clean Water Partnership Project, with a grant of $48,985 and a no-interest loan of $51,250 to implement a $252,795 project on Fish Lake. The purpose of the project was to improve lake water quality through a collection of best management practices and capital improvement projects. The effective time span of the project extended from July 1995 through August 2000. ANALYSIS: See Attachment for initial pages of the report, including executive summary. DISCUSSION/EVALUATION: Specific recommendations of the final report include: 1. Additional strategies to reduce internal phosphorus loading and to improve water quality (i.e., in-lake iron and alum treatments, and curlyleaf pondweed control) should be explored and tested. 2. Public education activities, primarily within the direct drainage but also the entire watershed, should continue via assistance from volunteers and other methods. Regardless of its relative success, a watershed education program needs increased emphases on changing lawn care practices. 3. A feasibility study to determine the best way to improve the function of JP-15 and Hurley Lake to treat stormwater should be considered. _11A_ 4. The City should continue to manage Fish Lake as a bass-panfish lake, to operate winter aeration as needed, and to promote catch-and-release fishing. Consideration should be given to providing canoes at the access. This would support and further develop two of the lake's targeted recreational uses: canoeing and fishing. 5. Because of the large phosphorus loads to Fish Lake from the I-1 trunk sewer and the small size of Fish Lake (30 acres), the continued operation of the Fish Lake alum treatment facility is needed to achieve and maintain good water quality in Fish Lake. Future operation of the alum treatment system needs to be focused on helping to achieve lake water quality objectives while minimizing the use of alum and the production of alum floc. The future performance of the system needs to be evaluated through continued monitoring of inflows and outflows of the system and through monitoring of Fish Lake. Future operation of the system should be optimized through periodic evaluation of the alum dose and improvements to JP-47 for efficient alum floc capture and disposal. ALTERNATIVES FOR COMMISSION CONSIDERATION: Recommend City Council to: 1) accept the Fish Lake Clean Water Partnership Project final report and 2) officially authorize completion of the grant project. Furthermore, acknowledge that water quality challenges of Fish Lake remain and that priority management of the lake needs to continue indefinitely into the future. - Ij - Project Implementation Final Report Fish Lake Clean Water Partnership Grant City of Eagan, Dakota County, Minnesota by Eric Macbeth and Jim Storland Water Resources Division Department of Parks and Recreation 3501 Coachman Point Eagan, Minnesota 55122-1897 for Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Item://j Wa ? ?, ?Ce C? P Attachment #1 - Ovierf ImPkft4". Final k roar* May 2002 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Fish Lake is a 28.4-acre waterbody in Eagan, Minnesota, a suburb of about 65,000 people located south of the Minneapolis/St. Paul metropolitan area. The lake is an important local and regional water resource, serving the public as a popular recreational amenity and as a component of the Eagan stormwater drainage system. Fish Lake is one of only six Class-I (Direct Contact) waterbodies, according to the Eagan water quality management plan. However, the lake fell short of the water quality management criteria of that class when the plan was completed in 1990. A diagnostic/feasibility study in 1993 found Fish Lake to be among the highest 20 percent of lakes in Minnesota's Central Hardwoods Ecoregion, in terms of chlorophyll a concentrations and blue-green algae dominant summer blooms. The study also concluded that over half of the loading of phosphorus to the lake is from the main branch of the City stormwater system. The lake's direct drainage contributes a high load of phosphorus per unit area, but a relatively small proportion of the overall phosphorus load. About 80 percent of the phosphorus loading occurs during the spring-summer period from March through August. An ambitious, long-term management goal to reduce growing-season mean total phosphorus concentrations from approximately 85 µg(L to about 35 pg/L was established. The study concluded that meeting this goal would restore Fish Lake to a condition with partially supported swimming, improved aesthetics and fishing opportunities, and reduced severe algal blooms and excessive macrophyte growth. Subsequently, an evaluation of alternatives was conducted to assess, for each alternative, ability to improve water quality, cost of implementation, operation and maintenance issues, technical feasibility, and social acceptability. In 1995, the City of Eagan was awarded a Clean Water Partnership grant to implement selected alternative actions. The effective time span of the 4-year grant extended from July 5, 1995 through July 4, 1999, with loan support extending through August 19,2000. The implementation plan of the project included 10 main elements: 1) public information and education, 2) street sweeping, 3) alum injection system, 4) aquatic plant management, 5) bypass of Pond JP-15, 6) sediment sealing, 7) evaluation of lawn chemical regulations, 8) shoreland management/aquascaping, 9) detention basin management, and 10) monitoring. The public information and education program focused on recognition of the direct connection between the storm drainage system and the lake; the importance of keeping vegetative materials, fertilizers, and chemical wastes away from streets and driveways; and proper application of and reduction in the use of fertilizers containing phosphorus. Public information and education activities included: lawn soil testing; sales of no-phosphorus fertilizer; newsletter articles and local cable public service announcements; lake information kiosks; elementary school performances of a play on human impacts to waterbodies; storm drain stenciling; fishing clinics; distribution of a fishing guide; watershed signs; and program effectiveness surveys. For the other implemented work plan elements, street sweeping removed debris from selected streets in the watershed each spring and fall. The alum injection system treated stormwater inflows to the lake from a large portion of the watershed. Aquatic plants were managed by temporarily lowering the lake in the winter and by harvesting of curlyleaf pondweed and other excessive nuisance macrophytes. The City of Eagan codified an ordinance regulating commercial applications of turf fertilizer. Detention basins were iii incorporated into new developments. Lake water quality, macrophyte distribution and abundance, and stormwater quality were monitored to evaluate the effectiveness of project best management practices and capital improvement activities. Three work plan elements were not implemented: 1) bypass of JP-15, 2) sediment sealing, and 3) shoreland management/aquascaping. It appeared to be premature to implement these elements when data collection and analysis of results of the alum injection system were underway up till the end of the project. However, all three remain in the City's water quality capital improvements plan, to be implemented in the future as deemed timely and appropriate by the City. Analysis of land use changes from 1993 to 2001 indicates the effective watershed of Fish Lake to have increased about 3 percent, primarily as single-family residences, public facilities, and associated impervious streets, parking lots, driveways, etc.. A comparison of actual expanded stormwater treatment capacity and additional stormwater treatment according to a detention basin model indicated that 138 percent more ponding area and 34 percent more ponding volume was created during this expansion than was minimally needed. Annual phosphorus load model outputs for the 1993-2001 period indicate a positive correlation between precipitation and modeled external phosphorus loads, but no correlation with measured summer mean in-lake total phosphorus concentrations. Modeled external phosphorus loads exhibited and measured summer mean in-lake total phosphorus concentrations both exhibited a downward trend. Generally, during the 1991-2001 period, measures of Secchi depth, total phosphorus, and chlorophyll a indicated lake water quality was not correlated to precipitation. During the 1991- 2001 period, the established target for mean Secchi depth was exceeded seven times, the total phosphorus target mean was never exceeded, and the target mean for chlorophyll a was met only once. Seasonally from spring to late summer, Secchi depths tended to decrease while total phosphorus and chlorophyll a concentrations tended to increase. Overall, the summer mean trophic state index for Fish Lake in both 2000 and 2001 was lower than the target index established for the lake. From 1991 to 2001, only once (1994) were hypereutrophic conditions indicated. Otherwise, summer mean indices from 1991 to 2001 did not exceed 60, which is the transition value between eutrophic and hypereutrophic (also between City Class I and Class II waterbodies). Macrophyte diversity and distribution increased from 1993 to 2001. An analysis and comparison of stormwater inflows to Fish Lake from the main trunk indicated improved water quality conditions between 1993 and 2001. The increase in stormwater storage volume in the watershed and the alum treatment is the most plausible explanation for this improvement. The diagnostic feasibility study concluded that the 1-1 trunk sewer contributes half of the phosphorus load to Fish Lake. An estimated summer average total phosphorus concentration of 150 .tg/L enters the lake from the trunk sewer. To reduce this load, an alum treatment facility was constructed adjacent to the Hurley lift station and was operated on an experimental basis from 1998 to 2000. Alum treatment of water in the trunk sewer significantly reduced the concentration of phosphorus discharging to Fish Lake via City Pond JP-47. Average summer total phosphorus concentrations discharging from JP-47 to Fish Lake in 1998, 1999, and 2000 iv were 126, 93, and 54 pg/L, corresponding to approximately 16, 38, and 64 percent total phosphorus removal, respectively. Alum was dosed at 1 mg/L from late July through September in 1998, at 1 mg/L from May through September 1999, and at 8 mg/L from May to September 2000. However, from mid-July to early August 2000, the dose was likely reduced to 4 mg/L because of an unusually high amount of precipitation. Effectively, the treatment system also reduced the concentration of total organic carbon and chlorophyll a discharging from JP-47 to Fish Lake. Decreased discharges of phosphorus from JP-47 also led to decreased total phosphorus, increased Secchi disk depth, but only marginally lower chlorophyll a concentrations in Fish Lake. During operation of the alum facility, the average total phosphorus concentration in the west bay of Fish Lake declined from 64 µg/L in 1998 to 51 gg/L in 1999 to 45 µg/L in 2000. The average Secchi disk depth in the west bay of Fish Lake improved from 5 feet in 1998 and 1999 to 7 feet in 2000. However, there was little improvement in the average chlorophyll a concentration from 1998 (28 gg/L) to 2000 (27 gg/L). There probably would have been a greater improvement in Fish Lake water quality in 2000 but a large rainstorm in July led to large phosphorus loads from untreated sub-watersheds. The storm also may have caused mixing of phosphorus-rich bottom water with the epilimnion. Before the July rainstorm, the total phosphorus concentration in the west bay of Fish Lake was 23 gg/L. This potentially represents the lowest levels of phosphorus achievable by the alum treatment system. The potential adverse effects of the alum treatment system were also evaluated and some unintended benefits were encountered. An evaluation of the potential adverse effect of alum treatment concluded that the levels of aluminum in Fish Lake (70 gg/L in 1999 and 152 tg/L in 2000) would not be toxic to aquatic organisms. Monitoring of the JP-47 outlet in 2000 showed that alum treatment did not cause unacceptable declines in pH. However, alum treatment significantly reduced benthic invertebrates in JP-47, and it is recognized that a properly functioning settling pond is needed to protect benthic invertebrates in Fish Lake. The unintended benefit of removing organic carbon from stormwater inflows protected Fish Lake from large declines in dissolved oxygen by removing biological oxygen demand during above normal storm events, such as the ones in July 2000. The deposition of aluminum on Fish Lake sediments also inhibited phosphorus release. Internal loading potential in Fish Lake appeared to decrease from 1993 to 2001, despite the rapid increase in curlyleaf pondweed populations in the early 1990s. Most likely, this improvement was the result of the alum dosing from 1998 to 2000 and the annual harvesting of senescing curlyleaf. A comparison of pre- and post-project surveys suggests that public education in the Fish Lake watershed was considerably effective between 1994 and 1997. Significantly more respondents knew pertinent information and reported following suggestions for reducing nonpoint source pollution. However, hardly any respondents indicated they had changed specific lawn care practices to reduce pollution further. v TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................ iii TABLE OF CONTENTS ............................................................................................... vi LIST OF FIGURES ..................................................................................................... viii LIST OF TABLES .......................................................................................................... x PREFACE .................................................... ............................................................. xi INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND .................................................................... 1 Phase I-Diasmostic Studv ..................................................................................... 3 Phase II-Feasibility Study/Implementation Plan ................................................... 4 BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES AND CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT ACTIVITIES IN FISH LAKE BASIN, 1995-2001 ............................................. . 4 Public information and education ....................................................................... . 5 Lawn soil testing .................................................................................... . 5 Sales of no-phosphorus fertilizer .............................................................. 5 Newsletter/Local Cable PSAs .................................................................. 6 Lake information kiosks ............................................................................ 6 Performances of Toadilly Turtle in elementary schools ............................ 6 Storm drain stenciling .............................................................................. 6 MinnAqua Fishing Clinic ......................................................................... 8 Eagan Fishing Guide ................................................................................ 8 Watershed signs ....................................................................................... 8 Pre- and post-project surveys ................................................................... 8 Street sweeping ................................................................................................... 8 .................................. Alum injection system ..................................................... 10 Aquatic plant management ................................................................................ 12 Implemented strategies .......................................................................... 12 Potential future strategies ....................................................................... 12 Bypass of basin JP-15 ........................................................................................ 13 Sediment sealing ................................................................................................ 13 Evaluation of lawn chemical regulations ............................................................ 13 Shoreland management/aquascaping ................................................................. 14 Detention basin management ............................................................................. 15 Monitoring ........................................................................................................ 15 Lake monitoring ................................................................................... 15 Macrophyte survey ................................................................................ 16 Stormwater monitoring .......................................................................... 16 Fish stocking ..................................................................................................... 16 SUMMARY OF PROJECT BUDGET .......................................................................... 17 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION .................................................................................... 19 Changes in land use ....................................................................................... 19 Alum treatment system ...................................................................................... 26 Initial system operation .................... System performance from 1998 to 2000 ................................................. 28 Lake response ........................................................................................ 29 Evaluation of alum floc settling and floc accumulation in JP-47 ............. 29 vi Evaluation of potential adverse effects ................................................... 30 Additional benefits of the treatment system ............................................ 30 Future operation ..................................................................................... 30 Lake water quality ............................................................................................. 31 Macrophyte composition and distribution .......................................................... 53 Changes in internal loading potential ................................................................. 54 Lake level fluctuations ...................................................................................... 55 Effectiveness of public participation and education ........................................... 55 Fisheries management ....................................................................................... 57 CONCLUSIONS .......................................................................................................... 57 RECOMMENDATIONS .............................................................................................. 58 REFERENCES ............................................................................................................. 59 APPENDIX A: FISH LAKE CLEAN WATER PARTNERSHIP ANNUAL EXPENDITURE REPORT ............................................................................. A-1 APPENDIX B: DETAILED PONDNET OUTPUTS OF FISH LAKE WATERSHED, 1991-1997 ..............................................................................B-1 vii LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1. Fish Lake Watershed ........................................................................................ 2 Figure 2. Lake Information Kiosk ................................................................................... 7 Figure 3. Storm Drain Stenciling and Curb Marking ....................................................... 7 Figure 4. Priority Street Sweeping in the Fish Lake Watershed ....................................... 9 Figure 5. Fish Lake Alum Treatment Facility ................................................................ 11 Figure 6. Annual Expansion of Fish Lake Watershed, 1994 to 1999 .............................. 20 Figure 7. Precipitation vs. External Load and Summer Mean TP Concentration, 1993-2001 ..................................................................................................................... 25 Figure 8. TP Removal by Fish Lake Treatment Facility with I mg/L Alum Dose, 1998 .............................................................................................................................. 26 Figure 9. Jar Tests of Phosphorus and Turbidity Removal from a Range of Alum Doses ............................................................................................................................ 27 Figure 10. Average Monthly Total Phosphorus at JP-47 Outlet, 1998-2000 ................... 28 Figure 11. TP Concentrations in West Bay of Fish Lake during Operation of Alum Treatment Facility, 1998-2000 ...................................................................................... 29 Figure 12. Fish Lake Secchi Depths, 1976-2001 ............................................................ 39 Figure 13. Fish Lake Total Phosphorus Concentrations, 1973-2001 .............................. 40 Figure 14. Fish Lake Bottom Total Phosphorus Concentrations, 1992-2001 .................. 41 Figure 15. Fish Lake Chlorophyll a Concentrations, 1982-2001 .................................... 42 Figure 16. Precipitation vs. Mean Secchi Depth, 1989-2001 .......................................... 43 Figure 17. Precipitation vs. Mean Total Phosphorus Concentration, 1991-2001 ............ 44 Figure 18. Precipitation vs. Mean Chlorophyll a Concentration, 1991-2001 .................. 45 Figure 19. Precipitation vs. Mean Total Phosphorus and Chlorophyll a Concentration, 1991-2001 ............................................................................................. 46 Figure 20. Fish Lake Water Clarity, 1989-1995 ............................................................. 47 viii Figure 21. Fish Lake Water Clarity, 1996-2001 ............................................................. 48 Figure 22. Fish Lake Seasonal Total Phosphorus Concentration, 1991-2001 ................. 49 Figure 23. Fish Lake Seasonal Bottom Total Phosphorus Concentration, 1992-2001..... 50 Figure 24. Fish Lake Seasonal Chlorophyll a Concentration, 1992-2001 ....................... 51 Figure 25. Precipitation vs. Trophic State Index, 1989-2001 ......................................... 52 Figure 26. Water Level vs. Precipitation, 1991-2001 ..................................................... 56 ix LIST OF TABLES Table 1. Characteristics of Fish Lake and Its Watershed .................................................. I Table 2. Summary of Project Revenues and Expenditures, 1995-2000 .......................... 17 Table 3. Fish Lake Watershed Land Use, 1993, 2001, and Future ................................. 19 Table 4. PONDSIZE Output of 346-acre Increase in Single-family Residences, Fish Lake Watershed, 1993-2001 .................................................................................. 21 Table 5. PONDSIZE Output of 64-acre Increase in Multi-family Residences, Fish Lake Watershed, 1993-2001 .......................................................................................... 22 Table 6. Modeled Phosphorus Loads to Fish Lake and Flow-weighted Mean Total Phosphorus Concentrations, 1993 and 2001, Using 100-year Mean Precipitation ........ 23 Table 7. Modeled Phosphorus Loads to Fish Lake and Flow-weighted Mean Total Phosphorus Concentrations, 1993 and 2001, Using Annual Mean Precipitation ............. 23 Table 8. Fish Lake Water Quality Data, 1991-1999 ....................................................... 27 Table 9. Macrophyte Composition in Fish Lake, 1993 and 1999 ................................... 53 x City of Eagan MEMO Packs and Recreation AGENDA ITEM: H-2; BIKE PARK TO: ADVISORY PARKS COMMISSION Date: May 20,2002 Ageada Item: H-2; Bike Pads Acdm X Istonnadon Attarbmeab X 1. Letters Received 2. Jones Petition PREPARED BY: BETH A. WIELDE, RESEARCH AND SPECIAL PROJECTS j ITEM DESCRIPTION: Initial investigation into feasibility of a bike park for the City of Eagan BACKGROUND The Eagan Skate Park opened in August of 2001 to a positive response. The use level was high, and it filled a community need; recreational opportunities for youth who have outgrown playgrounds but prefer the sport of skateboarding to the traditional sports offered in Eagan. When the skate park opened, there was a rule against using bikes in the facility. However, bikers, seeing no other options, risked being kicked out of the skate park in order to practice their sport. Bikers have often had to work covertly in this manner; building their own ramps in the back reaches of parks, riding trails and doing tricks on park equipment, and using parking lots and other areas that would conflict with pedestrian use. PUBLIC NEED The impetus of the bike park study is fourfold. First came the contact from youth and parents of the community. The City of Eagan Parks and Recreation Department received letters from Eagan youth in the Spring of 2001 ( Attachment 1). Upon the opening of the Eagan Skate Park, more calls came in about the `No Bikes" rule, whether a park for bikes could be built, and at least one angry mother who called in September of 2001 who said, "You can't build something for the skaters and not for the bikers." As mentioned previously, bikers were frequently building their own jumps in the back reaches of parks. These jumps would be created by digging dirt from park grounds and creating mounds, or using materials brought from home. However; when park staff finds out about these unsanctioned jumps, they are required to knock them down, much to the chagrin of the "architects." The most recent known case of this came in the Fall of 2001, when an area of Patrick Eagan Park was reconstructed into an unsanctioned `bike park.' Then, upon its opening, observations of Eagan Skate Park use: Upon opening in August of 2001, staff frequently visited the park to observe its use. One important observation was the prevalence of bikes in the park, despite the "No Bikes" rule. Bikers weren't causing any more or less trouble than the skateboarders, they were just repeatedly asked to bike elsewhere. Most bikers were aware that they were not supposed to be using the skate park ramps, but were willing to risk being chased out in order to trick bike for a while. -Ito w Most recently, a petition from area youth was submitted to the City. The petition was organized by youth resident Jonathan Jones, who had been in contact with staff several times inquiring about a bike park. The petition contained 271 signatures from Eagan residents and those in surrounding communities. The petition can be seen in Attachment 2. ANALYSIS Bike parks come in a variety of styles and course setups. They can be constructed of dirt with molded jumps, or skate-park style with solid ramps on a paved surface. Bike parks essentially fulfill the same needs as skate parks; providing space to those with off-road bikes to practice jumps and other tricks common to the sport. It also serves a need, getting kids to stop building unapproved, unsupervised jumps on trails and in hidden corners of existing parks and bring them to a more visible area without hazards such as trees or downed foliage. A bike park, as defined by this study, is for off-road, non-motorized BMX-style bikes. Street bikes and motorized dirt bikes are not considered in this case; street bikes have access to regular trails and motorized dirt bikes may create a great deal of use conflict and risk when mixed with non-motorized bikes. Heidi Lemmon of Skatepark Association USA strongly recommends that bikes be limited to wheels of 20" diameter or under in the BMX design, because mountain bikes and street bikes are not designed for the ramps and tricks done in a "skate park/bike park" atmosphere. TYPES OF COURSES: DIRT & PAVED DIRT COURSES Dirt courses are simply large piles of dirt formed into ramps and small jumps. These jumps are formed on-site either by parks workers or by the park users. They usually take about a day and a half to set up each year, using dump trucks, a skid loader, and sometimes a packer, and can be done by City staff Dirt removal takes approximately the same amount of time. The cost for a dirt course is usually minimal: In-kind park staff time and equipment, signage, and associated fencing if necessary. The dirt can come from sources such as public works projects or City construction projects, if it is not contaminated. Investment risk is also minimal; the park can be eliminated if use decreases and there are not significant fiscal losses. The inexpensive nature of this type of park makes it low-risk; if use declines, simply discontinue creating the park. The in-kind services for installation and removal is valued at approximately $450 for each operation. Signage would cost approximately $300. Dirt (BMX-style) Course Options 1. Hockey Rink: The City of Buffalo has mentioned some of the problems associated with an enclosed dirt course, such as damage to the hockey boards, and the hockey rink trapping water after a rainfall. -1?- 2. Stand-Alone Enclosed Park: An enclosed course can also be a dirt course with just informal boards to delineate the boundaries of the park. Split-rail fencing, two by fours, or chain link could accomplish this and allow water to seep out at a greater pace than a hockey rink. 3. Open Wooded Area: A open wooded area basically amounts to a pile of dirt amongst the woods, re-creating conditions that the Bike Park users have frequently built themselves. One of the greatest problems with this type of park is the trees. Both damage to the trees, scraping and bark chips on the track, and damage to the bike/biker should they run into a tree without a helmet. 4. Open Area, No Enclosure: This open area is similar to the style of track found in a hockey rink or a stand-alone enclosed, except there is no fencing. Paved Pad Courses Paved pad courses resemble skate parks in most ways; a paved pad area with fabricated ramps. Paved pad courses cost about the same as a skate park; initial investment can run about $25,000 to $75,000. Difference from Skate Park Bike park ramps are not altogether different than skate park equipment. Top platforms are slightly larger (usually around 6'), but the rest of the ramp is the same. In fact, bikes and boards frequently share equipment in the parks that allow both uses. Bikes as part of Skate Park Communities such as Shoreview and Superior, Wisconsin allow bikes into their skate parks. Shoreview, who staffs their park, has a designated time set aside for bikes and does not allow concurrent use. Superior, Wisconsin allows bikes in as a regular park of their park function, and has stated that the skaters and bikers have an unwritten understanding as to whose turn it is on a ramp. The Superior skate park is not staffed. The privately-owned skate parks G-Shock (Burnsville, off of Cliff Road) and Third Lair (Minneapolis) allow bikes in their staffed skate park. G-Shock allows bikes in during all operational hours to use ramps concurrently with skateboarders. Third Lair takes a different approach-and designates days and times for BMX bikes. Staff asked the operators of G-Shock about use conflicts between the bikers and skaters. The operators indicated that thus far it hasn't been a problem during its early months of operation. INSURANCE ISSUES- LEAGUE OF MINNESOTA CITIES/ BERKLEY RISK The League of Minnesota Cities held a Safety and Loss Control seminar on BMX-style parks during their spring workshop series. In their Information and Loss Control Guidelines regarding Bicycle Motorcross (BMX) Facilities; "LMCIT covers member cities for general liability when they operate BMX tracks for purely recreational use, at no additional premium." -III- Standards such as Tier I and Tier II do not apply to bike facilities. LMC looks at the use of the park rather than the height of the jumps. The guidelines provided at the seminar, however, do not mention other types of freestyle or trick biking. On May 7, 2002, staff met with Ed Lucz of LMCIT. Lucz stated insurance requirements for bike parks are not all that different than skate parks or playgrounds. Dirt courses, when used for recreational purposes only, do not require additional insurance. Additional insurance would only be required if tournaments are held on the track. There are no height restrictions on the dirt courses. Solid ramps would also be covered under the City's existing general liability insurance, unless the ramp height exceeds 3. For the purposes of this study, all ramps have been assumed to be no higher than 3'. Lucz recommended that LMCIT representatives take a look at any park configuration. Lucz stated, "There are a lot of things we didn't know about this (bike and skate parks) that have turned out good." He noted that the injury reports have thus far been minimal, that most park users have accepted the risk and have not faulted cities for injuries sustained at the park. QUESTIONS AND CONCERNS' 1. Who would design the Bike Park? This depends fully on whether the course is dirt or a solid ramp construction. A dirt course could be shaped and molded by Parks staff or community youth. A solid ramp should be designed by a qualified skate park/ bike park designer with guidance from staff to check for safety and product placement. 2. 3. Where will it be? This also depends on what type of park is favored. A dirt park could be put in any existing hockey rink or open park area without any significant need to alter the site. A solid ramp park would require a paved hockey rink or paving a portion of land, or perhaps fording an underused tennis court or parking lot area. Staff has not identified any potential locations at this time. Who will pay for maintenance and repairs? A Bike Park could be operated in the same manner as any park, maintained by the Parks Maintenance department. Other cities with dirt courses have reported minimal maintenance needs on the dirt. Litter and waste pick up appear to be the greatest time expended on the park. 4. What about vandalism? Vandalism is a danger in any park. However, with dirt mounds, any vandalism that may take place can easily be covered by shifting the dirt around or ' Some information provided by the City of Superior, Wisconsin. Superior operates their bike park as part of their skate park raking. Solid ramp courses may require vandalism similar to that expected for the Skate Park. Vandalism of equipment has not yet been a problem at the Eagan Skate Park. 5. What is the environmental impact of a Bike Park? This depends on whether the park is solid ramp or dirt construction, and if dirt, what type of dirt park. • Solid Ramp- would require impervious surface. This could be done on an existing paved hockey rink, thus not adding impervious surface. • Dirt Course- Wooded Area- This may have a negative impact on trees within the park. Bikes scraping up against the trees could strip the tree base of bark. The dirt course may compact with use, and may become muddy after a rainfall. Wooded areas may also be difficult to casually monitor. • Dirt Course- Hockey link- This option would have little direct environmental impact, aside from covering a 60'X100' area with more dirt. The dirt may compact with use and become muddy after a rainfall. • Dirt Course- Non- Wooded Area, Enclosed- Aside from temporarily covering existing grasses with more dirt for 4-6 months out of the year, this would have little long-term impact on the environment. Fencing may require holes in the ground for post installation. The dirt may compact with use and get muddy after a rainfall. • Dirt Course- Non-Wooded Area, Non-Enclosed- This would have approximately the same impact as an enclosed course, without the holes required for fencing. Some environmental impacts inherent to bike parks may include: • Litter • Dirt spreading beyond the original park boundaries • Foot traffic/ pounding down or scraping up grasses 6. Who can use the park? Any resident, guest, visitor, or person with a bike who is willing to adhere to the rules of the park may use the Bike Park. Ed Lucz of LMCIT noted that rules for bike parks need not be different than those of skate parks. 7. Concern: BMX bikers are troublemakers. This stereotype was also attached to skateboarders. While there are always some "bad apples," most park users are serious about their sport, students who choose to bike rather than play football or soccer. Bikers are as diverse and well-rounded as any other person. Every sport has a cross*section of participants. Experience with the Eagan Skate Park has shown that problems will be reported to the City without hesitation. Parks and Recreation staff or the Eagan Police then take the appropriate action. However, the success of the skate park has shown that incidents have not been bad enough to deter the serious skaters from using the park. 8. A Bike Park will cause more injuries. The first operational season of the Eagan Skate Park has shown that park users understand that they participate in the sport at their own risk. There were no injuries reported by skaters or their parents in 2001, however, field visits have shown that skaters do, indeed, fall down. It appears that* skaters are willing to assume the responsibility for themselves, even use it as a mark of courage. In the same fashion, parents did not contact the City about injuries. There is no reason to believe this would be any different with bikers. -2.+0- As reported previously, bikers are currently building their own ramps in the isolated areas of City parks. This has the potential for greater injury than a specifically constructed, maintained, and casually monitored park. Trees and loose foliage could prove quite dangerous for the bikers. 9. What about helmets? Both park options could have low-rise jumps in the manner of a Tier I facility, and could be operated accordingly (unstaffed, `Use at your own risk'). Of course, the recommendation for helmet use should be prominently displayed on the rules signage. Again with the Eagan Skate Park, it was shown that many park users do not wear helmets despite recommendation by the City. However, it is important to note that parents are very much aware that their child is not wearing a helmet. Parents drop their child off at the park without helmets. 10. Will the Bike Park become a hangout where kids will congregate and cause trouble? As stated in the Superior, Wisconsin Skate Park study, "Kids will congregate no matter what, but providing an established, centralized location will make it easier for police to patrol." According to the study, locating the park in a well-trafficked area will "lessen the ease of inappropriate behaviors compared to locating the park in a more isolated location." 11. What will it cost? A dirt park would primarily be constructed with materials already found in Eagan; an existing hockey rink or suitable land space, dirt, a day and a half of manpower using existing equipment. Start-up costs may include signage (approximately $300), and any extra amenities that may be added such as picnic tables or garbage cans, although these may be recycled from other sites in the City. Solid ramp construction could have approximately the same cost as a skate park- anywhere from $25,000 to $75,000 for a modest park, depending on the scope of the project, i.e. how much equipment would be purchased and whether a new pad would need to be constructed. SUMMARY In response to the number of inquiries, requests, and the petition, staff has prepared this report. A bike park will provide a facility for a group of kids who have none, in the same manner as the skate park. It may even prevent them from building their own jumps in City parks or practicing tricks in inappropriate places, creating a hazard for both biker and pedestrian. Bike parks come in a wide range of styles, shapes, and sizes. The two primary types are dirt and solid ramp construction, both of which, if constructed properly and used only for recreational purposes, would fall under the City's general liability policy. A dirt track is installed seasonally at minimal cost. Solid ramps would require a paved pad and startup costs can range anywhere from $26,000 to $75,000, depending on equipment and whether a pad needs to be paved. Safety and operational aspects of a bike park are anticipated to be similar to those exhibited at the Eagan Skate Park. The City did not receive any injury claims from the Skate Park, apparently park users, if they do take a tumble, skaters accept this as part of their sport. -V- ALTERNATIVES FOR COMMISSION CONSIDERATION 1. Determine type of park the APrC prefers; dirt (enclosed, wooded, or within a hockey rink) or paved pad (hockey rink or permanent site). Also determine sites to be investigated for potential location. 2. Direct staff to pursue study based specifically on park type, i.e., hard costs and signage. 3. Discontinue study or any fiuther work on the issue. 4. Other. .,?Z_ Item: P-2; 8i& 4r# Attachment # / - L e er.5 /ece i red Attachment 1: Letters Received re Bike Park 1. April 23, 2001- Jonathan Jones 2. (Undated) Nick Frey 3. November 29, 2001- Ben Ewald 4. January 13, 2002- Jonathan Jones Beth Eagan Park and Recreation 3930 Pilot Knob Rd. Eagan, Minnesota 55122 April 23, 2001 Dear Beth: -701 Lo c\,o4A 4?.;?syt?.-l S RO Why aren't there any dirt jumping or BMX racing parks in the city of Eagan? From my surveys, I have taken at school and out of school I have figured out that there aren't any because there isn't enough money, or nobody has brought this problem fourth. I have also found out that buildings are cheaper and more profitable, but I think that a bike park would profit the community had would make money if you sold concessions and charged $5.00 to get in. There are bike parks where admittance is free but those bike parks are at least an hour away, why spend an hour driving when you could spend minuets on your bike? I have brain stormed solutions for this problem. The first solution is to build a dirt jumping or BMX racing park. The second is to charge the bikers for admission, and insert concession stands. The third is to have numerous fund raisers if there isn't enough money. For the fund raisers you could have famous dirt jumpers or BMX racers come ride in the new park and maybe they could make a donation. The bike park would keep more kids out of trouble instead of in trouble. If you decide to charge admission after a little while you would start making some money. In conclusion my friends and I would appreciate a dirt jumping or BMX racing park because then we wouldn't have to spend endless hours looking for a place to build jumps. Most of the time after we finally find a place to build jumps, it's on someone's property that they never use but they always kick us off their property, first we have to level out the jumps before leaving forever. That is an example of how a Bmx racing or dirt jumping park would keep kids out of trouble. I hope you can see the need for a dirt jumping or BMX racing park in the city of Eagan for the many kids in the community do. I hope a park is built where me, my friends and the community will be able to jump safely. I would appreciate it if you would keep me informed of any progress(success or failure) on this issue. you can write to me at: Jonathan Jones 2920 Pilot Knob Rd.Eagan, Minnesota 55121 Sincerely, /rr? Jonathan Jones 17 >I C, 7?1- 9w /7r-l Page 1 of 1 Beth Wielde From: BEN EWALD [ben_ewald@hotmail.com] Sent: Thursday, November 29, 2001 8:27 PM To: bwielde©ci.eagan.mn.us Cc: ben_ewald©hotmail.com Subject: bike park Dear Beth, This is one of Jonathon Jonse's friends, Ben Ewald and we were the ones that came up with this whole bike park. It was once an actual dream of ours but now it's happening and we're going till the end. We just want to thank you for all your time and support. People said things like nobodies going to listen to two kids like you and your idea. There's much more important things they have to worrie about. Well to us this is very important and it could be for the community as well. It would be a god place for kids to meet other kids and make friends and a big new attraction to the community and make Eagan more well noticed than it already is. And with the Eagan community center comming in, if the bike park works out, we were thinking that that would be the perfect location for the bike park. So again thank you for your time that you've put into this and thank you for listening to us. Sincerly, Ben Ewald Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com 5/2/2002 Page 1 of 2 Beth Wielde From: Teresa Pojman Sent: Monday, January 14, 2002 9:09 AM To: Beth Wielde Subject: FW: bike park Teresa Pojman I.T. Department 651-681-4610 ---Original Message From: UlBuddy2222@aol.com [mailto:lilBuddy2222@aol.com] Sent: Sunday, January 13, 2002 3:48 PM To: webmaster@ci.eagan.mn.us; forrestd@isd197.k12.mn.us Subject: bike park Beth Eagan Park and Recreation 1/13/02 Beth I have to write a political letter for my government class and since we've already talked about a bike park i just figured why not keep writting to you. Hows the park coming along? I have started a petiton and so for i have gotten around 300 signatures. I have also been telling people to e-mail you but I'm not sure if they have or not. My friend Ben said that you knew his Aunt (Joanna), And she told Bens Mom that you guys were looking for a location to build the bike park. I have done some looking my self and have found three possible locations that are in Eagan, easy to find and have plenty of extra space. First and easyist to find is right on Pilot Knob rd north of Lone Oak, They are building a city park bye Unisis And i think they could spare some space for a bike park. The other two are parks with lots of open space, they are both off of Pilot knob rd. Theres one on Skyline and another on Eagn ave. I really think a bike park would Profit our community and keep kids out of trouble. If the city doesn't have enough money my friends and i wouldn't mind doing a couple of fund raisers. The city could also take out a loan or something of that sort in order to get the money to build a skate park. I have done some research as well on bike parks and I looked into who could build it. I went to www.trueride.com and found that they have been making high quality skate parks for quite a while. I also called them up to see what they think i should in order to get a skate park built and they said to get in touch with the city, and first see if they'll build a bike park then if yes find out the citys budget then call them back up. I found them to be very helpful, and they also sent me an informantional packet. I suggest visiting their web site and possibly 5/2/2002 Page 2 of 2 giving them a call. I hope you are progressing with this issue and the city of Eagan is closer to getting a bike park. I hope that you will be able to keep in touch with me monthly and tell me how its all coming along and what you think I should do in order to reach this goal. Thanks for your time Sincerly Jonathan Jones 5/2/2002 Item: H Z j 8; ke Par k Attachment #z _ Jo,K:5 Pe.hWon Attachment 2: Petition Submitted by Jonathan Jones Jon Jones Beth These are the petitions I have gathered I hope they help you out. If you need more tell me and I'll try my best to get more. If you need any more help or assistance e-mail me and tell me what you would like me to do and I'll try my best to get it done. Please keep me updated as to what is happening, I would appreciate it very much. Thank you. Sincerely Jon (lilbuddy2222@aol.com) puottc area. r few \r1 I < ;s NAME ADDRESS PHONE IGNATURE Print Include Zip Code Include Area Code \ IBC r(a S l 1 + ?-r r SS aw X153- olo? !QQ o 45?.C:??e?oKe.? Pte: E. U) Y3\01 r a6 i U ?' N 'C'fl? Y . I t F 5 107 a ' 5-11' 3i6 <hwjv&oaA)-Q, ( riS t2 N ' is 6.?.! C . ? . ' ? WSQ, ?.i?1J 4 55 ?15d L?5' 3 c-1? r Y'WAVR Sh Y'h n BCD- 22y- LA(o 5 l l?dll?l Tina 'M-LYorCf 05 ?- S+. 9 M14 SX-Z\ 1.2 los O uss - k41 to V G,A . (-S l) 5t T sg ??- e9 3a?n Olt*' CSI) ?ro?- i _._. aryo ??e N CIY\e GC-,L-kC%d -\ ,Ji155(2 L -W2 w-.. SE RL? ?' ?` ? c t- I v'C }-o" to 5?- 51-b rJ NN ^ j S. f f i 6 , . - . -qr Petition to Build a BMX Park in Eagan We the undersigned, as residents of Eagan and/or the surrounding area, support the development of a legal area for BMX freestyle riding (also known as bicycle stunt riding) in our City. We believe that there are countless benefits to having a safe, legal area for young people and adults to engage in the art and sport of BMX freestyle. We recognize the need for and benefits of having a safe, legal area for BMX freestyle in Eagan. We believe that our city should at the very least aid us by parceling a portion of public land for this use. At most we believe our city should aid in the building and maintenance of the BMX freestyle facility as it would a tennis court, basketball court, playground, baseball diamond, or other general use public area. -? ?'1 NAME ADDRESS PHONE SIGNATURE Print Include Zip Code Include Area Code ordun "ti 553?a - F kU 3 ? JQ Jos h 423 i-hi iside r. 301-CC -1 1-11 5535a 35 o? ')?, Z rnpr j (h -Q , c, 33d More I?.+?d C,r• ?jJc Gtr P` Srr? 4 R bS L Cam ' ? / ' 7 6f?_ I5s /III J? i i % f.% t J' ltd'^'. ?.• \':' : f r . f t ` Fl 'l Pr k E haw-- (?nnin '?- ' ah V 0- S S- /7b -- /r r 17 19b'1 r b$b 5Ln.1 ?okor:2t hy. d?` _F 'P_ m vt s a 10-r 35?FG Petition to Build a BMX Park in Eagan We the undersigned, as residents of Eagan and/or the surrounding area, support the development of a legal area for BMX freestyle riding (also known as bicycle stunt riding) in our City. We believe that there are countless benefits to having a safe, legal area for young people and adults to engage in the art and sport of BMX freestyle. We recognize the need for and benefits of having a safe, legal area for BMX freestyle in Eagan. We believe that our city should at the very least aid us by parceling a portion of public land for this use. At most we believe our city should aid in the building and maintenance of the BMX freestyle facility as it would a tennis court, basketball court, playground, baseball diamond, or other general use public area. NAME ADDRESS PHONE SIGNATURE Print Include Zip Code Include Area Code n ldtiv va.n Y YS e yt . q69 C S - ? G -7 j- C A ?, e - 3e56 Mazy r v . l ? ??,?{ S{ .po,,, A-k SSf?8 (6s t) 306 O2 C . ?'4 N Was IV e"JOv I C,_ . E - C' c,.}` fJ u u SOACIYn Sm?t1?1 2- Cca (,60-rtlon 2-), i 0. <e, S?? n rff nip, L-+57o- !??? ' Gt M e S ylletsG?l l w t S. t^g -M it V-r' 'S"1 ?y-l f7Y Q/ ow /01 - h Die PA-A- <10 1-, -1', 1, ro T ?t A&C r 4 3 aSr-j u 75 'rmM public area. 7Z 7o 7r I NAME ADDRESS PHONE SIGNATURE Print Include Zip Code Include Area Code 1` 551 1"15 q ®6• cX W ?Cm51 5 11 50-,. o`i $Y6 Ctttri Vsf-70( Y C?? NlcIuJa tk K NI p, r Cafe k - t' 1(9 N Jv?}? r ?511? (CcS1) 9rs4 - (,1% v`? 1_n• n Zc CA55?1? 1,,,,AYZSE?.? 3248 ?vE?C-t`K???,a Qv _ O livt? ?/ ?? r ! ^ ` j / C j i! r. C.G 4. MaS r `z k.A M 4 S3 -71(x' 7 Q&Jlljo?yl?o 947 Z- !CA qAiQ V S C'" a r?u` ?CL(E' t --' - ? ' 0 V l Petition to Build a BMX Park in Eagan We the undersigned, as residents of Eagan and/or the surrounding area, support the development of a legal area for BMX freestyle riding (also known as bicycle stunt riding) in our City. We believe that there are countless benefits to having a safe, legal area for young people and adults to engage in the art and sport of BMX freestyle. We recognize the need for and benefits of having a safe, legal area for BMX freestyle in Eagan. We believe that our city should at the very least aid us by parceling a portion of public land for this use. At most we believe our city should aid in the building and maintenance of the BMX freestyle facility as it would a tennis court, basketball court, playground, baseball diamond, or other general use public area. l !? NAME Print ADDRESS Include Zip Code PHONE Include Area Code SIGNATURE ??M?\???' 3??,??c? c, c>n N C???) ?? 911' l? _. ? ?S?fr?y K{aejer 34? F Flcrs?e() S{_. wef4 q- Rq BSI cjs/717 1 ?, 10 L\ VIL 51 ? r _ Aw I I C"j wl/ Aow '44?? C7 r / . 4 L/ V; C-1- C95 1 C9 O vfl n 113+ \eR Aq e u nl'? ske-? efvvvwr-?' \Z) +j ?1 c L! ?GrC? 1437 c. vi e,v Jr. ??) ???5- Sal - NA4 &qpi, L-t-5q-'Kq 16- ??y C- Petition to Build a BMX Park in Eagan 1a We the undersigned, as residents of Eagan and/or the surrounding area, support the development of a legal area for BMX freestyle riding (also known as bicycle stunt riding) in our City. We believe that there are countless benefits to having a safe, legal area for young people and adults to engage in the art and sport of BMX freestyle. We recognize the need for and benefits of having a safe, legal area for BMX freestyle in Eagan. We believe that our city should at the very least aid us by parceling a portion of public land for this use. At most we believe our city should aid in the building and maintenance of the BMX freestyle facility as it would a tennis court, basketball court, playground, baseball diamond, or other general use public area. NAME ADDRESS PHONE SIGNATURE Print Include Zip Code Include Area Code . II e6-7 cu I Iqct,n IaPLL ll? e nn N 5 c. ,? to-AS D,c? S Su (oSS a \Q\a 'Ms Lc? c (Y1kxw &o-c t JAS ?s? ?q / 5?- ??i- L32? ws( , r?-?-SS ?t? 1 g91 42 :rc,L)//- 3' 'd'if(4r 0 6s36 8O 8 ,?1c5 --2--? a e c? r?o-?ndcX" C9S? - 66-6 ply C Lakr? c 31 Z j LUC-k? ct tJ T?LA -I a V1 ?A w 551dA 66 6'-C, 6 rnoo i? P,?'? M a r ?1, 5520 (G St)?1 J ' 1OS G c?. -? Iri0. ???n?C?•, ?t?at?v?, ?5??.? (oQ,'v?1 ? lUii V16 Petition to Build a BMX Park in Eagan We the undersigned, as residents of Eagan and/or the surrounding area, support the development of a legal area for BMX freestyle riding (also known as bicycle stunt riding) in our City. We believe that there are countless benefits to having a safe, legal area for young people and adults to engage in the art and sport of BMX freestyle. We recognize the need for and benefits of having a safe, legal area for BMX freestyle in Eagan. We believe that our city should at the very least aid us by parceling a portion of public land for this use. At most we believe our city should aid in the building and maintenance of the BMX freestyle facility as it would a tennis court, basketball court, playground, baseball diamond, or other general use public area. R' qr .1 ` p-r 1G7 l03 got' Ie% NAME ADDRESS PHONE SIGNATURE Print Include Zip Code Include Area Code Tarn'-- %u Duch t"'v? fir. (BSI Fp;cG,> :c n W's .P MN SSl1 S" t.5 -O?35 O• j?ol vrc ?t?ln V i (nn Lf . (a c) - luc? N .S. I 11 ?I SG -q b S 72 q c il10 -e Ml (.r'l J?) (?S l - $7 i 1 1JU?? ?? d a 2O t-Qqao-?a _ ` G 5-I - U?j Z ° , - ?v! /,til?'ILC C G? r-? f?1'I/V 1 7 7 (1 . ?D i o m o6C (--)fan (0* ' Sa 1 ! c N 52- 2 ceo -1 V? ".1?JV.J?? UJ p Petition to Build a BMX Park in Eagan We the undersigned, as residents of Eagan and/or the surrounding area, support the development of a legal area for BMX freestyle riding (also known as bicycle stunt riding) in our City. We believe that there are countless benefits to having a safe, legal area for young people and adults to engage in the art and sport of BMX freestyle. We recognize the need for and benefits of having a safe, legal area for BMX freestyle in Eagan. We believe that our city should at the very least aid us by parceling a portion of public land for this use. At most we believe our city should aid in the building and maintenance of the BMX freestyle facility as it would a tennis court, basketball court, playground, baseball diamond, or other general use public area. uT Zb az? NAME ADDRESS PHONE SIGNATURE Print Include Zip Code Include Area Code 1ca'E?? X Cam\`oe? dc. etch ?CQ51?- . t1u (Icrman Ave- c -t e G 3b Co n ve ? AUe d5 7 - Tblk )t&W _m ? c11--del ?a?u. CC Sys Jck el oo Ne 4 7 - q4 o f lee A es? cc` dal CuHtC-E'_Si-- w 5,n?;N ?,,??? ? -a?a-7c?i 11 Yk e-(4/ `( Dawn (5I) + 301" 717 /'1 7 V Petition to Build a BMX Park in Eagan We the undersigned, as residents of Eagan and/or the surrounding area, support the development of a legal area for BMX freestyle riding (also known as bicycle stunt riding) in our City. We believe that there are countless benefits to having a safe, legal area for young people and adults to engage in the art and sport of BMX freestyle. We recognize the need for and benefits of having a safe, legal area for BMX freestyle in Eagan. We believe that our city should at the very least aid us by parceling a portion of public land for this use. At most we believe our city should aid in the building and maintenance of the BMX freestyle facility as it would a tennis court, basketball court, playground, baseball diamond, or other general use public area. qt 113 Dk 1?y 173 t ?4. •t NAME ADDRESS PHONE SIGNATURE Print Include Zip Code Include Area Code 1 4 (ESI) L+SGGt /`n`om{p1\ q01 ??c_l 1 S c ; r•? IC C1Z qum?,eAc+ Ave YL?r -sr 7bZ- 1- h I ?/ Eaoj?, y)n G t12- ,?'1 ?? 11 uh? n /SS} 18' SSa - I ? ? ?? -fi4?C? Ce Q qtr ?cec -- F\ j ?i18 vwSP m?? ?C? ? ? , , ys? -a3 ?I?FUh L-ex?r h Ave 2'? - ?6 Petition to Build a BMX Park in Eagan We the undersigned, as residents of Eagan and/or the surrounding area, support the development of a legal area for BMX freestyle riding (also known as bicycle stunt riding) in our City. We believe that there are countless benefits to having a safe, legal area for young people and adults to engage in the art and sport of BMX freestyle. We recognize the need for and benefits of having a safe, legal area for BMX freestyle in Eagan. We believe that our city should at the very least aid us by parceling a portion of public land for this use. At most we believe our city should aid in the building and maintenance of the BMX freestyle facility as it would a tennis court, basketball court, playground, baseball diamond, or other general use public area. {38 \.{t {u I't ?50 151 NAME ADDRESS PHONE SIGNATURE Print Include Tip Code Include Area Code Ok. Orr `' cam, L-?, - t dbb r7 0 (.1 Lav. Kni h ?g qgy -0Y I/ V? 00 LICA 133 Irk y59- gy5o A?akiNi ue 46q IQ e-7 1 Csss 1-(oSs ?- l5? /? L 611 U(qe- ( 4-ecc, 6S1- -52.-kcc ?` Rq-7( h:5r s;?? -?Sd Petition to Build a BMX Park in Eagan We the undersigned, as residents of Eagan and/or the surrounding area, support the development of a legal area for BMX freestyle riding (also known as bicycle stunt riding) in our City. We believe that there are countless benefits to having a safe, legal area for young people and adults to engage in the art and sport of BMX freestyle. We recognize the need for and benefits of having a safe, legal area for BMX freestyle in Eagan. We believe that our city should at the very least aid us by parceling a portion of public land for this use. At most we believe our city should aid in the building and maintenance of the BMX freestyle facility as it would a tennis court, basketball court, playground, baseball diamond, or other general use public area. 17 L X73 05 I ltt2 l ?a is NAME ADDRESS, PHONE SIGNATURE Print Include Zip Code Include Area Code J 4C?J(S) 6H 5YY Pee" IV - ?51-0 5 57? ?--O 0 J J P4 (d& f sz0 A -4T , " ? f ( - ? -q 6 5 '14 IV 1 _f {y C 362`- ?G?? }rte ( 1, J! r / j/7L -/ r Ct" -JZ k -flo 1 y r `? Q ? - 0CO C' (??,v<< C ` ( r InS-(- ?Gc • (FI °1 Petition to Build a BMX Park in Eagan We the undersigned, as residents of Eagan and/or the surrounding area, support the development of a legal area for BMX freestyle riding (also known as bicycle stunt riding) in our City. We believe that there are countless benefits to having a safe, legal area for young people and adults to engage in the art and sport of BMX freestyle. We recognize the need for and benefits of having a safe, legal area for BMX freestyle in Eagan. We believe that our city should at the very least aid us by parceling a portion of public land for this use. At most we believe our city should aid in the building and maintenance of the BMX freestyle facility as it would a tennis court, basketball court, playground, baseball diamond, or other general use public area. 1t,7 I LA ip \1 X71 NAME ADDRESS PHONE SIGNATURE Print Include Zip Code Include Area Code 3Z?3 t_c? n? bs 1- ?1pb-?fil? r stn\?\\ G\\? C? w 9S\2\ 1D7G CA Rv ?* i L H tl IS I?- (rJ1 -U??3? , r?? 1, 17 y52 ?3iuc,hccwtc ?;a MN SS» (?51-?t5?c-8??? Yn n hs Z Z o ' , 3L"4 ,Kay.G? Lt GS i - a SH- a? $-l. 9 -"-v 5112.1- 2 'A 1 - ? j b1A I h1' n E V\ -Nl? Hb q OA ?J?§ ; ?vn f3 51 GL Li ere? -U ?, 4(A1 5 Id- r Cs1 C X 3 W5 F ? k ?? ??n c I 0 1 1 S z- W ro nC- pal) (6S a) 227-<;o7 ? arc ? calel4oyl -5f t-? ?5 l?o.nZ? ?-Z ao IJ % 5 3 i b; 4 c.. -e s., V l? aav?S wwr 5 f, Puti i r1 6 C'pke.r c-a 0r\7Ci c 1C,Ac7-d? H ?5• `' dnh(-E ,St i v Petition to Build a BMX Park in Eagan We the undersigned, as residents of Eagan and/or the surrounding area, support the development of a legal area for BMX freestyle riding (also known as bicycle stunt riding) in our City. We believe that there are countless benefits to having a safe, legal area for young people and adults to engage in the art and sport of BMX freestyle. We recognize the need for and benefits of having a safe, legal area for BMX freestyle in Eagan. We believe that our city should at the very least aid us by parceling a portion of public land for this use. At most we believe our city should aid in the building and maintenance of the BMX freestyle facility as it would a tennis court, basketball court, playground, baseball diamond, or other general use public area. 185 it }f1 ., \k \RV IQ' NAME ADDRESS PHONE SIGNATURE Print Include Zip Code Include Area Code .._.. ? r ?1V J f o d? .. ? FF? ? CAL ? ?S? Cne?? ? i o l?5\ -?ES? S?l?\ 3" S1c? ( L?xz C , L5 7 -&A, S 69(0- ?0 0 4 C __ "yr,I III Viftj ?S-/ - ? 5-?- C4qq 7 Ape? ?,c? ???? C SI r _ I n Evov co31 c i . Kevin ?J. 1 /J? LEAS AA ciJot/ A AnW 6Sl-y5-2 5I " [ N ??1 w• mc?c??-otti 65t-?2y-?33 _ C k Aca lot Petition to Build a BMX Park in Eagan We the undersigned, as residents of Eagan and/or the surrounding area, support the development of a legal area for MAX freestyle riding (also known as bicycle stunt riding) in our City. We believe that there are countless benefits to having a safe, legal area for young people and adults to engage in the art and sport of BMX freestyle. We recognize the need for and benefits of having a safe, legal area for BMX freestyle in Eagan. We believe that our city should at the very least aid us by parceling a portion of public land for this use. At most we believe our city should aid in the building and maintenance of the BMX freestyle facility as it would a tennis court, basketball court, playground, baseball diamond, or other general use public area. ?a1 2.t)\ 1U? NAME ADDRESS PHONE SIGNATURE Print Include Zip Code Include Area Code r 1 ,.Jp L ! ! f t 3 ? t? a .ti c,? j ?? L CA-4-'. Ig 51 (45 ? ? ??S B I Sr (- u ;,) c c rt 1M u s O spa-? ?--?? 13 2 4 -1 }S ?, t UZW °s Cev"i I! 3 I Try"u i4?5trd?uccl(C Gs'1-Ks?f-5'? 104C. Lnoel? ?,J- I- 1?? t`? 1?1) n J?, (.k ?u /_ rJ -i X50 -4 ?+--- icvel A / ?I 1 I- %66 v ? ? M v, D CHuit W. VY(M* &5I -y5j-1 7631 M'V SS IZa e 7 Petition to Build a BMX Park in Eagan We the undersigned, as residents of Eagan and/or the surrounding area, support the development of a legal area for BMX freestyle riding (also known as bicycle stunt riding) in our City. We believe that there are countless benefits to having a safe, legal area for young people and adults to engage in the art and sport of BMX freestyle. We recognize the need for and benefits of having a safe, legal area for BMX freestyle in Eagan. We believe that our city should at the very least aid us by parceling a portion of public land for this use. At most we believe our city should aid in the building and maintenance of the BMX freestyle facility as it would a tennis court, basketball court, playground, baseball diamond, or other general use public area. v12 2\J 3 nv VF „ 3 NAME Print ADDRESS Include Zip Code PHONE Include Area Code SIGNATURE /1( f? rr?«. oa ?5?18 ?51CG 21-63$y C) -7 5s Ic7 Goer- oP 42JO 1AWY 990c WSP jb6 )I F. ?s? aY,',? st WsP 5 C7D 11 '13 y5? - q?? +1? ;fir Petition to Build a BMX Park in Eagan X" Zffi Vk 230 v' 25'? Z?y IN AF{? We the undersigned, as residents of Eagan and/or the surrounding area, support the development of a legal area for BMX freestyle riding (also known as bicycle stunt riding) in our City. We believe that there are countless benefits to having a safe, legal area for young people and adults to engage in the art and sport of BMX freestyle. We recognize the need for and benefits of having a safe, legal area for BMX freestyle in Eagan. We believe that our city should at the very least aid us by parceling a portion of public land for this use. At most we believe our city should aid in the building and maintenance of the BMX freestyle facility as it would a tennis court, basketball court, playground, baseball diamond, or other general use public area. NAME ADDRESS PHONE SIGNATURE Print Include Zip Code Include Area Code 11?, t?`r aw ?? _ /C- ??' 1 r? S ?iCG? ` ic(C1 2 ? 'l hICz)l v 51 551IS' x,3)5 .Y X15 D S ll '45 -- I1? ?r ICKSofI e9i MenaoKc fa Cz-. Mencio-fcl tfTS. SS r20 (;S 17 ?9`/ - /085 qG 17 Ca,Afi-11401 ce rc ! G / ?t Ga: ., 4,ve r h a - I n` : 24 7 lac ;n?{a,n A'ie I 6 `? 7-0v?" O ,p J-t!Tn?t, a4?t? i $ 3(b ft (J51) Y 5.2 -0772 Cos1) JL57f-?30 Jackie L135 a cb vcf- In C(a5 )bg3-QIa3 J IVRk Grub ??? ; C.(- ecA C 1 C65r)6?9? 5??h 4 ec,`A '- ?' ?'ae Q 4`4????? AA a PA A WI-1 - L'?C'? '0- ?:?() 'U C.L VD Ro n LkS c2- Petition to Build a BMX Park in Eagan We the undersigned, as residents of Eagan and/or the surrounding area, support the development of a legal area for BMX freestyle riding (also known as bicycle stunt riding) in our City. We believe that there are countless benefits to having a safe, legal area for young people and adults to engage in the art and sport of BMX freestyle. We recognize the need for and benefits of having a safe, legal area for BMX freestyle in Eagan. We believe that our city should at the very least aid us by parceling a portion of public land for this use. At most we believe our city should aid in the building and maintenance of the BMX freestyle facility as it would a tennis court, basketball court, playground, baseball diamond, or other general use public area. r i &$P? Z?y Z?17 2 ?aq 2yl .2 z X53 NAME ADDRESS PHONE SIGNATURE Print Include Zip Code Include Area Code J eE 5icc 1"w ?? t1 ,kec? 5` vsl OL '4 L C M1 4?9 cL ,a k? (4 0 1o51-u?5'?L?? 651--4-0 5i 4(7-c?/ 32ti?' ot2?v6 "'154 - U -;?-4 1 C?A Si: ?? w;h? X445 (c'?cllaas ?f. 55? C51 -451-32 1?53 V? IcAnt C 950212, ff -TG- U v 3o 115 `? ?? ? q I r- 7( t ? '[11 e 'a5 Wf'Sk w ? nc. (' b5 1 ? 2t Z -I - : ' ` -'. ?. 100 fall Ave s (650- ? OUQ?CSh?S fi S t pp-" / 56110 we 1/' 53 ?e?? Sv l IJC .?, west Sf. Pail ?,? Petition to Build a BMX Park in Eagan 944 Zw 1 ., 'Al r,. We the undersigned, as residents of Eagan and/or the surrounding area, support the development of a legal area for BMX freestyle riding (also known as bicycle stunt riding) in our City. We believe that there are countless benefits to having a safe, legal area for young people and adults to engage in the art and sport of BMX freestyle. We recognize the need for and benefits of having a safe, legal area for BMX freestyle in Eagan. We believe that our city should at the very least aid us by parceling a portion of public land for this use. At most we believe our city should aid in the building and maintenance of the BMX freestyle facility as it would a tennis court, basketball court, playground, baseball diamond, or other general use public area. NAME ADDRESS PHONE SIGNATURE Print Include Zip Code Include Area Code Co:W5 Oavr`N ,5,5V ,c2 -Dc . mH ll 9J? 3%C..D RULL?nt7?N???? drive Pik EQ an,)-O M21 ji ]Q1.0 55) (Oro 600 Q2ltti rQ AV_e ''c (1 , Pain 5516 C?51-?s3-c>a34 ib\3 mu *t Cc1) iuJf/,/ r. ?-Slou :5 C L r. S t ?vLj I U liri trg e Or ss ?a-•a j cc (-e l a Est' nn?t?--liS c??c - 1 1 5 S6g-S&B DI, a '"-? 0 City of Eagan Parks and Recreation MEMO Dots: May 20, 2002 Agenda item: 1-1; Dakota County Parks Wetlands Replacement Plan Ad[an X informatIon Attachments X I. Welland Permit AGENDA ITEM: I-1; DAKOTA COUNTY PARKS WETLANDS REPLACEMENT PLAN TO: ADVISORY PARKS COMMISSION PREPARED BY: ERIC MACBETH, WATER RESOURCES COORDINATOR ITEM OVERVIEW: Recommend City Council to approve wetlands replacement plan of Dakota County Parks for Lebanon Hills Regional Park. BACKGROUND/HISTORY: Dakota County Parks is developing a new entrance road and improving parking lots to support a new visitor-interpretive center and trailhead facility. The project is also intended to address inadequacies of the existing entrance drive, which has reoccurring flooding problems, conflicts with long-term water resource planning and ecological restoration in the park, and is poorly located for safe, full-movement access to this area of the park. ANALYSIS: Development project is proposed to include 6,000 square-foot visitor/interpretive center and trailhead facility accessed by a new meandering entrance road. Total wetland impacts are 20,305 square feet (0.46 acre) of fill among six wetlands directly adjacent to proposed facility and road. Proposed replacement plan includes 21,297 square feet (0.51 acre) of on- site public value credit and 20,305 square feet of off-site replacement wetland through withdrawal from applicant's wetland banking account. DISCUSSION/EVALUATION: This issue is under decision authority of the City of Eagan, which is the local government unit implementing the Minnesota Wetland Conservation Act. Reasonable efforts have been made to avoid and minimize impacts to the wetlands in the design of the road and facility. A technical evaluation panel of agency representatives from Dakota County Soil and Water Conservation District, Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, Board of Water and Soil Resources, and the City of Eagan have reviewed and approved this proposal at the technical staff level. This is a consent item on the May 21, 2002 City Council meeting. ALTERNATIVES FOR COMMISSION CONSIDERATION: Recommend City Council to approve, at its May 21, 2002 meeting, the wetlands replacement plan of Dakota County Parks for Lebanon Hills Regional Park. -Z3- Item: T/- kofa- Coon*, Park WETLAND PERMIT ATTACHMENT - Replate",nt plan PROJECT DESCRIPTION, SEQUENCING CONSI Attachment' l _ Waflarvil Ain, SPECIAL PROVISIONS FOR MNDNR, Ai-4u DESCRIPTION OF WETLAND CONSTRUCTION PROTECT DESCRIPTION: The attached map (Exhibit A) provides an overview of the entire project and illustrates areas where wetlands will be disturbed as well as areas for public value credit/ wetland replacement. As shown on Exhibit A, the key components of the development project include: ? Visitor/interpretive Center and Trailhead Facility: This is a 6,000 square foot facility that will serve several important public functions: - Visitor contact center for the entire 2,600 acre park. - Natural resource/ecological/cultural interpretive center - featuring extensive interpretive exhibits and active programming focusing on a wide range of interests and activities in keeping with the County's mission for the regional park. - Major trailhead where first-time and repeat visitors can orient themselves to the park, gain information on the park's offerings, and enter the trail system. ? New entrance road development to service the new visitor center, trailhead, and existing beach facility. The new road is being proposed for three primary reasons: The existing entrance drive traverses through Wetland 121 area, which is a critical component of the Water Resources Management Plan that the County is currently completing for the 2,600 acre park. By removing the road from this critical area (literally the low point of the entire park), the County will be better positioned to maximize the functional value of this wetland complex in terms of its capacity to store and infiltrate stormwater runoff from the larger park area. This in turn will also significantly contribute to the prevention of downstream flooding that has been of considerable concern to local residents for many years. The entrance drive is also subject to fairly routine flooding due to the fact that it traverses through several low areas between Schulze and McDonough Lakes. This condition has forced the periodic closing of the beach area, which in some cases has been for well over a month at a time. With the addition of the new Visitor Center and related development, assuring year-round access to the site is of paramount importance to the County Parks Department. The existing entrance is not well positioned for full-movement access to the park facility given the geometrics of the existing intersections along Cliff Road. When Cliff Road is upgraded in the future, it is anticipated that a right turn in and out would only be allowed at the current entrance, which is an unacceptable condition given that much of the to-and-from traffic to the site will be from the west. The entrance location as proposed solves these issues. It is also the only one found to be acceptable to servicing the overall need of the park. In addition, the new entrance location will also service a proposed maintenance facility as defined in the master plan to be located in the northeast corner of the park. With the new entrance, traffic movements associated with this end of the park would be limited to one location. Enhanced user experience was also considered as part of the entrance drive relocation. The objective is to exhibit the character of the park and create a sense of place for the visitor as they enter and approach the new Visitor Center and trailhead facilities. This is of considerable importance for setting the stage for the visitor experience and to serving the experiential needs of populations with limited ambulatory ability who are not capable to get out into the park by any other means. Since all of the other trailheads are directly adjacent to the adjoining roads, the new entrance road is the only opportunity to create this experience within the park. With respect to wetland impacts, every attempt was made to minimize direct impacts to wetland systems. In designing the roadway alignment, judgements were made as to what alignment would pose the least disruption to the ecological systems that were encountered, especially wetland and lake edges. The alignment as proposed is thought to represent the best good- faith effort in this regard. The following Sequencing Considerations Statement covers the impacts and mitigation approach related to each of the wetlands encountered. Note also that the entire project focused on using ecologically-based stormwater management approaches to be consistent with vision for the park as defined in the new master plan. This includes using infiltration techniques, rain gardens, sediment traps, created wetlands and related design approaches to maximize water quality benefits and reduce flow rates of stormwater entering the lakes or leaving the site. The areas defined as Public Value Credits are instrumental to this overall approach. 1 of 3 SEQUENCING CONSIDERATIONS: The following table lists each of the wetlands encountered as defined on the accompanying plan (Exhibit A) for the site. The table also defines the impact to a given wetland and alternatives considered to avoid any unnecessary impacts. Note that from an overall persspective a "no build" alternative was considered. Given th e reasons as defined above, the no build approach was found not to be an acceptable solution in that it would not solve the inherent problems associated with the existing entrance drive. Wetland Impacts Rationale/Alternatives Considered Mitigation Approach A 3,305 SF The road was pushed as far to the south as possible to avoid Public value credits achieved on-site, encroachment into the wetland. An alternative considered was plus borrowing from the County's pushing it further to the south. However, doing so would have wetland bank to offset impacts. (Note: resulted in substantially more impact to existing mature trees and Also refer to Special Provisions for considerably more site grading given that the existing grades MNDNR below.) steepen as one progresses further to the south in this area. B 986 SF Crossing the existing drainageway between Marsh and Public value credits achieved on-site, McDonough Lakes was unavoidable no matter where the road plus borrowing from County's wetland would be located. As such, there are no other alternatives to bank to offset impacts. consider. C 725 SF The road was pushed as far to the north as possible to avoid Public value credits achieved on-site, encroachment into the wetland. Alternative considered was plus borrowing from County's wetland pushing it further to the north. However, doing so would have bank to offset impacts. required extensive regrading of a stable, naturally-vegetated side slope that is already at 3:1 slope. D 425 SF Overflow parking lot grading resulted in some encroachment into Public value credits achieved on-site, the wetland edge. Alternative considered was pushing the plus borrowing from County's wetland parking lot and road further north. However, the same rationale bank to offset impacts. Note also that as Wetland C comes into play here as well. In addition, the road in the spirit to reduce impacts and curve geometry is the minimum desired to create a safe drive reduce extent of impervious surfacing experience given the grades and sight lines. within the park, the County decided to use stabilized, naturalized surfacing (prairie, with gravel-topsoil substrate and growing medium) in lieu of asphalt E 10,864 SF Although moving the new entrance further to the east was Public value credits achieved on-site, considered as an alternative, the County Engineering office found plus borrowing from the County's the geometrics relative to other intersections unacceptable. As wetland bank to offset impacts. shown, the entrance is shown directly across from an existing residential street, which is a safer and acceptable alternative from a traffic engineering perspective. (Note that this wetland will likely be further impacted in the future as Cliff Road is upgraded. As such, the impacts now being incurred would likely occur at some point in the future anyway.) F 4,000 SF A variety of alignments were considered through this Public value credits achieved on-site, wetland/forest area. The alignment as shown was thought to plus borrowing from the County's balance impacts to wetlands and mature oak trees to the highest wetland bank to offset impacts. degree possible. Although moving the road further east was considered, the impacts to significant specimen-quality oak trees was found to be too extensive to be a justifiable tradeoff. Public input also expressed a strong desire to preserve the mature oaks to the degree possible. G OSF , Total wetlands impacted: 20,305 SF / 0.46 acres. Total wetland mitigation achieved on-site (public value credit): 21,297 SF / 0.51 acres. (1:1 + ratio sought) Total and through borrowing from Dakota County Wetland Bank: 20,305 SF / 0.46 acres (1:1 ratio sought) 2 of 3 SPECIAL PROVISIONS FOR THE MNDNR: In concert with discussions related to wetland impacts, the MNDNR also expressed concern about any filling below the ordinary high water mark (OHW) in Schulze and McDonough Lakes. In as much as feasible, filling below the OHW was avoided during the projects design phase. However, in two instances encroachment below the OHW was unavoidable. Exhibit B defines these two areas in question. As Exhibit B illustrates, there is an area of filling below the OHW totaling 1,186 SF mark near the proposed 48" culvert location as defined in the last table under Wetland A. To compensate for this, an area directly adjacent to this area will be regraded to recapture the floodplain area lost by building the road. Note that this floodplain mitigation area is currently wetland and will remain wetland once the grading is completed. It will be restored to wetland species as part of the landscape and restoration plan. Note also that since the area is already wetland, public value credits are not sought for this area. As Exhibit B also illustrates, there is an area of filling along the existing shoreline of Schulze Lake totaling 1,130 SF. This was required in order to make the adjoining trail and pathway grades handicap accessible in this critical use area. To compensate for this, a new wetland will be created below the proposed spillway from the lake totaling 1,215 SF. The spillway elevation matches the existing lake overflow elevation of 884.5. The newly created wetland will be below the OHW mark and recapture the floodplain volume lost along the shoreline. Exhibit C illustrates a cross-section of the spillway for reference. DESCRIPTION OF WETLAND CONSTRUCTION: With respect to the areas of work that are below the OHW on both lakes, wetland mitigation is on-site as near as possible to the occurrence as defined under Exhibit B. In each case, the work relates to excavating adjacent areas to offset any loss to floodplain volume capacity. In each case, the areas will be restored using selected native planting and seeding as part of an overall restoration plan for disturbed areas within the construction zone. Public value credits will also be obtained on-site as defined previously and as per Exhibit A plan. In each case, the rain gardens and wetlands under the public value credits will be created through excavation or land shaping of a fill area. Here too, native planting and seeding will be used as appropriate for wetland systems as part of the overall landscape design. Note also that these created wetlands in many cases will be used as part of the interpretive program for the site, with the intent being to show the public how these land features are important aspects of urban stormwater control and maintaining higher water quality in our lakes and streams. Finally, note that the Best Management Practices for erosion control and site degradation as defined by the MNDOT will be used throughout the construction period. In addition, fiber blankets will be laid in all roadside ditches and swales prone to erosion and on all slopes greater than 3:1. 3 of 3 iv :IA@@AN i?IT p II ° I -n o ;n O ? A F . N T? ? a a I u Ini / $Yt?o I i 9? F **V `y i 1 01111 1 ? r1 i 1n? A E D Z II m {ffptp; ? ?yP YY ° ?r Lebanon Hills Regional Park - Visitor Center ! " I '1 R Dakota County, Minnesota ' ? ^' ?!t''• . .: R BRAVE Al ?:5. . EXHIBIT 'A' • DISTURBED WETLANDS / MITIGATION PLAN WETLAND CONSERVATION ACT TECHNICAL EVALUATION PANEL (TEP) FINDINGS OF FACT Date: April 10, 2002 LGU: City of Eagan County: Dakota LGU Contact: Eric Macbeth (651) 681-4300 Project Name/#: Lebanon Hills Regional Park Applicant: Dakota County Location of Project: 27 North 23 West NE 1/a 35. NW t/ 36 Eagan Dakota Township, Range, Section, Qtr. Section, Lat/Block, City, County TEP Members (and others) who reviewed project: (Check if viewed project site) (X) SWCD: Brian Watson/David Holmen (X) BWSR: Tom Mines (X) LOU: Eric Macbeth (X) DNR: Peter Leete Other Wetland Experts present Doug Mensine. Applied Ecological Services Others Present: Jeff Schoenbaurer. Brauer and Associates Johnny Forest. Dakota County Parks TEP requested by: Brian Watson. Dakota SWCD (Pre-application Coordination Type of TEP determination requested (check those that apply): Delineation - -C? Exemption Determination No-Loss Determination X Replacement Plan 2. Description of wetland with proposed impact: a. Wetland Type (Circular 39) Type 2/3/5/6 (Multiple Basins) b. Size of Proposed Impact (tenths of acre) 0.44 (approximate) 3. Have sequencing requirements been addressed? X yes - no 4. Is the project consistent with the intent of the comprehensive local water plan and/or the watershed district plan, the metropolitan surface water management plan and metropolitan groundwater management plan, and local comprehensive plan and zoning ordinance? Yes (X) No ( ) 5. The project will affect the following wetland functions: Not Applicable Functions !=act No Impact Improve Floodwater Storage x (ultimately) Nutrient Assimilation x Sediment Entrapment x Groundwater Recharge X Low Flow Augmentation X . Aesthetics/Recreation X Shoreland Anchoring X Wildlife Habitat X Fisheries Habitat X Rare Plant/Animal Habitat X Commercial Uses X For replacement plan or no-loss determinations, are wetland functions maintained at an equal or greater level? Yes (X) No ( ) 7. Does Technical Evaluation Panel recommend approval of the activity proposed in item 1.? Yes (X) See attached comments No ( ) If.no, why? S. SIGNATURES (if TEP decision is not a co is, note with an risk and explain on the back of this)ge :A j7 .ice av G W Representative S CD (Date) B 5R Representaaf (Date) lq6 entative (Date) N#tRepr?n Drafted by Brian Watson, Dakota SWCD Comments The Technical Evaluation Panel (TEP) met to review the proposed Wetland Replacement Plan for the Dakota County Parks Department for the purpose of establishing a new access road to Schulze Beach, constructing a new visitor center, establishing an outlet on Schulze Lake, and conducting shoreline work associated with a canoe launch. Both Schulze Lake and McDonough Lake are DNR Protected Waters; therefore the DNR was represented on the Technical Evaluation Panel (TEP). Jeff Schoenbauer, Doug Mensing, and Johnny Forest lead the group through the proposed construction plans and each proposed impact site was field identified. The topography of the site and associated upland habitat involved with this park setting does not make complete avoidance of wetlands feasible. In addition, the largest impact to any specific wetland is the result of the proposed entrance from Cliff Road. • Due to the need to meet safe roadway design standards and future County transportation needs, this wetland was not considered avoidable. The DNR permitting process will be conducted independent of the WCA process. Eric Macbeth, water resource coordinator for the City of Eagan, is responsible for administering the WCA on behalf of the Local Governmental Unit, which is the City of Eagan. The City of Eagan accepted WCA responsibilities by resolution dated March 15, 1994. The Corps of Engineers did not attend this wetland coordination meeting due to their verbal indication that Section 404 is not applicable to the impacted wetlands. A summary of the TEP meeting and follow-up requirements were agreed to as follows: 1. Wetland delineation approved as flagged - wetland delineation report to be submitted with application 2. Wetland sequencing requirements satisfied with final details needed on impact per basin and total wetland replacement needed. 3. Sedimentation and infiltration areas can be used as Public Value Credit under WCA 4. Wetland replacement will occur through an established Dakota County wetland bank 5. Construction notes should indicate, "Where sediment deposits in waters of the State, the material must be removed in 7 days 6. DNR requested more detailed information about grading occurring below OHW level of Schulze Lake 7. City of Eagan indicated that a local grading permit may be required and that this should be coordinated with City staff (John Gorder) 8. City of Eagan indicated that a new land disturbance and erosion control ordinance will likely be adopted in two weeks and this should be coordinated with City staff (John Gorder) 9. Issues relating to the shoreland overlay district and a variance request for construction of visitor center within the shoreland overlay district will need to be coordinated with City of Eagan. 10. Joint Project Notification Form (wetland application) should be used for all three wetland-permitting organizations. Brian Watson to provide electronic version of application. I]. Wetland application will likely be submitted the week of April 22nd. Eagan will submit Notice of Wetland Application for review and comments as required under WCA. Best-case scenario would be WCA approval at May 215"Eagan City Council meeting. Drafted by Brian Watson, Dakota SWCD MtE e 1 ? . ea c Zvi ?ai ?49d PO Box 22002 • Eagan, MN 55122 • wwwcafeagan.org April 19, 2002 Dear Eagan Park & Recreation Commission: Thank you for giving us the opportunity to discuss youth tobacco use and the role your organization can play in helping reduce the number of youth who use tobacco. As you may know, every day over 3,000 young Americans decide to start smoking. Consequently, over 34% of high school seniors and over 18% of ninth graders in Minnesota are current smokers. The decision to remain tobacco free may seem obvious, but it is often a very difficult choice for many of the youth involved with your programs. To help make this decision easier, we hope that you will consider adopting a tobacco-free policy for your outdoor youth recreational facilities at your upcoming workshop. Creating a tobacco-free environment is the first step in helping recreational organizations implement a recreation-based prevention strategy. Tobacco policies have been proven to be a very effective method in minimizing the opportunity for teens to use tobacco products. Furthermore, youth learn by example from their role models, who are often their favorite coaches, parents and peers. To see a parent smoking a cigarette near the dugout, or a coach using chewing tobacco during team events sends the wrong message to the community's youth. Youth are very impressionable, and when they see adults using tobacco products, they begin to believe that tobacco use is an acceptable behavior. By supporting tobacco-free policies and explaining to our children why this is important, we display to them our concern for their health and our desire to see them make healthy lifestyle decisions. We are excited to work together to promote positive, tobacco-free messages to youth participating in Eagan's recreational programs. If you have any questions or would like to discuss this information in further detail, please contact Dan at 651-646-3005 or ddeaa.ansrmn.org or Lynn at 651-686-4679. Thank you very much for supporting healthy lifestyles! Sincerely, Daniel Ehrke Lynn Deml, Eagan resident Tobacco-Free Youth Recreation CAFE (Clean Air For Eagan) Subject to a al ADVISORY PARKS COMML EAGAN, MINNESOTA MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING OF APRIL 15, 2002 A regular meeting of the Advisory Parks Commission was called to order at 7:00 p.m. on April 15, 2002 with the following Commission Members present: Joseph Bari, Phil Belfiori, Margo Danner, N. Mark Filipi, Elizabeth Perry, Dorothy Peterson, Richard Pletcher, and John Rudolph. Commission Members Davis and Williams were not present. Staff present included Ken Vraa, Director of Parks and Recreation; Paul Olson, Parks Superintendent; Gregg Hove, Forestry Supervisor, Erick Macbeth, Water Resources Coordinator, Paula Nowariak, Recreation Supervisor; CJ Lilly, Landscape Architect/Parks Planner, Russ Matthys, City Engineer, and Cheryl Mesko, Recording Secretary. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Items added to the agenda included K (4) Historic Trail Committee Update and K (5) Acquisition Site Analysis Update. Dorothy Peterson moved, Joseph Bari seconded with all members voting in favor to accept the agenda as amended. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF MARCH 18, 2002 The March minutes were inadvertently omitted from the packet and were deferred to the May 20 meeting for review. VISITORS TO BE HEARD PATRICK EAGAL PARK PRESERVATION COMMITTEE Bea Blomquist addressed the Commission noting that a group of citizens had banded together to preserve Patrick Eagan Park when they became aware that a golf course was being considered for a part, or all, of the park When the City Council determined that this location would not be a viable option, the citizens group talked with representatives of the DNR to see what options might be available to preserve Patrick Eagan Park in its natural state. Blomquist explained that after talking to Al Singer and Bill Pennington at the DNR they were made aware of some grant opportunities. They decided to nominate both the Bergin and Langstraat parcels for a Metro Greenways grant to provide more of a link around Patrick Eagan Park. She then reviewed the grant proposal submitted on behalf of Patrick Eagan Park. Blomquist added that perhaps the Anderson parcel could be looked at for future acquisition to continue the link around the park. She noted that this grant was being done in partnership with the DNR and City of Eagan. Member Peterson asked what the City's match would need to be with this grant request. Blomquist responded that if the grant was successfully funded the DNR would designate an amount they would fund and the balance would need to be funded through other means. Blomquist also noted that the DNR was sending representatives to visit the site in the very near future and was hopeful that that would bring a positive response to the application. Member Rudolph thanked Blomquist and others who had helped with the grant application and expressed the Commission's appreciation for the energy and work that had gone into it. TOBACCO FREE YOUTH RECREATION PROGRAM Lynn Deml, representing CAFE (Clean Air For Eagan), addressed the Commission and provided a brief background of the organization and their efforts toward educating the public on smoking and the effects of second hand smoke. She then introduced Dan Ehrke who made a presentation on tobacco-Free youth recreation. Advisory Parks Commission Minutes of Regular Meeting of April 15, 2002 Page 2 Mr. Ehrke reviewed the organization's efforts to work with local youth recreation organizations to share ways to communicate no-smoking policies at youth recreation activities. He shared how the City of Eagan might incorporate a city-wide policy that covers youth recreational facilities and playground. He then reviewed why the policies are effective, why they are important and other cities with a current no-smddng policy He then concluded by reviewing prevention resources that are available. Lynn Deml noted that they have met with EAA, who support a no-tobacco policy and they are hopeful that the APrC will also support it Member Belfiori asked what the current City policy is. Director Vraa stated that Cascade Bay and the Civic Arena are currently smoke-free. Member Peterson added that seasonal staff also has a smoke-free policy. Mr. Ehrke was asked who enforces the tobacco-flee policies. He responded that it is typically handled through signage but sometimes compliance checks need to be done by staff. Ms Deml added that often a non- smoking parent doesn't feel comfortable asking someone to stop smoking and opined that the City should then set guidelines for people to follow. Member Rudolph thanked Ms Deml and Mr. Ehrke for their information and presentation. Member Danner asked where the Commission was to go from this point Member Rudolph suggested that it be brought back to a workshop for further discussion. SUPERINTENDENT'S UPDATE AND DEPARTMENT HAPPENINGS Items highlighted by Recreation Supervisor Nowariak included a seniors trip to Red Wing, the upcoming Fun Run, the annual spring clean-up day at Holz Farm, the summer/fall Discover brochure to be distributed in early May, the sponsorship program for Evening in the Park that has raised $2,650, the successful Home and Leisure Show at the Civic Arena, and the new seasonal employee manual jointly developed by recreation staff. Items highlighted by Superintendent of Parks Olson included the wet conditions of athletic fields, the successful tree sale, bids for the access roadway to Moonshine Park, update on the Central Park pavilion, the annual Arbor Day celebration at Rahn Athletic Park and all tennis nets are up for residents to enjoy the courts. CONSENT AGENDA CLIFF LAKE CENTRE 3'd ADDITION - CLIFF RD PROPERTIES Dorothy Peterson moved, John Rudolph seconded with all members voting in favor to make the following recommendations to the City Council: 1. This development shall be required to install Tree Protective measures (i.e. orange colored silt fence or 4 foot polyethylene laminate safety netting) at the Drip Line or at the perimeter of the Critical Root Zone, whichever is greater, of significant trees/woodlands to be preserved on-site. 2. This development shall be required to contact the City Forestry Division and set up a pre-construction site inspection at least five days prior to the issuance of the grading permit to ensure compliance with the approved Tree Preservation Plan and placement of the Tree Protection Fencing. DEVELOPMENT PROPOSALS There were no development proposals for the Commission to review. Advisory Parks Commission Minutes of Regular Meeting of April 15, 2002 Page 3 OLD BUSINESS LAND DISTURBANCE AND EROSION CONTROL REGULATIONS Water Resources Coordinator introduced this item noting that the City of Eagan's Erosion Control Task Force has met since November 1999 to improve the ability of the City to control and limit the negative impacts of soil erosion at construction sites. The group is comprised of staffs from engineering, inspections, forestry and water quality . Occasionally, staffs from the Dakota County Soil and Water Conservation District and the Minnesota Erosion Control Association also participate. In these meetings, concerns are shared about the impacts of soil erosion and sedimentation from specific construction projects on City infrastructure and resources. The City has been moving diligently on a formal set of policies and requirements to guide and manage land-disturbing activities to preserve and enhance natural resources and maintain an effective stormwater conveyance system. Macbeth reviewed the proposed Land Disturbance and Erosion Control Regulations. He noted that they would apply to any excavating, grading, clearing, filling, or other earth change that might result in 1) the movement of more than 10,000 square feet of earth; 2) any alteration of land by more than 5 feet from the existing contour of the ground or on any contiguous 1,000 square feet of ground; or 3) any other activity that changes the existing or natural contour of the land which changes drainage. He added that a Land Disturbance Permit (LDP) would be required before any such land disturbing activity occurs in connection with new development, new building construction, and many building permits. Macbeth then reviewed the requirements for obtaining a Land Disturbance Permit. Member Belfiori commended the Erosion Control Task Force for a thorough and implementable ordinance for the City. N.Mark Filipi expressed concern that the City is exempt from the policy and opined that it should follow the same policy. He suggested that the City could exempt itself from fees and security but should hold itself to the same standard it is asking others to follow. Coordinator Macbeth responded that the exemption reflects the City's inability to fine or monitor itself. He suggested that the City follow the guidelines but be exempt from the fees. Member Rudolph agreed that the City should adhere to the policy. After further brief discussion, John Rudolph moved, N. Mark Filipi seconded with all members voting in favor to recommend that the City Council accept the Land Disturbance and Erosion Control Regulations identified by Water Resources Coordinator Macbeth. They also suggested that the City Council consider not having the City of Eagan exempt from these regulations. LANGSTRAAT PARCEL - PATRICK EAGAN PARK Director Vraa introduced this item and provided a brief background of the Langstraat property adjacent to Patrick Eagan Park. He noted that the Langstraats have approached the City about selling the south approximately 2 acres of their property, which would complete a linear segment on the western portion of Patrick Eagan Park. This parcel would abut the 2-acre Bergin parcel recently acquired by the City. Director Vraa continued that the City may or may not receive grant funding for this parcel of land. Member Bari asked what would happen if the Langstraat property was acquired and the City was awarded a grant for the Bergin and Langstraat parcels. Member Perry stated it was her understanding that the City would be reimbursed if grant dollars were awarded for these properties. Member Belfiori stated that DNR funding is very limited and suggested that the City proceed with the acquisition of the Langstraat parcel without the expectation of grant funding. After further brief discussion, Joseph Ban moved, Dorothy Peterson seconded with all members voting in favor to recommend that the City Council authorize staff to eater into negotiations with the Langstraats to purchase the southerly 2 acres of the Langstraat property adjacent to Patrick Eagan Park. Member Danner confirmed that the purchase price would not exceed $58,000, which was the purchase price of the adjacent Bergin parcel. Advisory Parks Commission Minutes of Regular Meeting of April 15, 2002 Page 4 NEW BUSINESS ARBOR DAY PROCLAMATION Forestry Supervisor Hove invited the Advisory Commission and audience to participate in the annual Arbor Day event on May 4 at Rahn Athletic Park. He reviewed the events surrounding Arbor Day and invited the Commission to select the 2002 poster contest winner after the meeting was adjourned. John Rudolph moved, N. Mark Filipi seconded with all members voting in favor to acknowledge the resolution setting May 4 as Arbor Day and May as Arbor Month in the City of Eagan. WATER RESOURCES UPDATE Water Resources Coordinator Macbeth noted that the frogs are out at Thomas Lake Park, that he will speak to a group about the alum dosing at Fish Lake and the upcoming visit by the Commission to the Nicols fen. Member Rudolph asked about the matting on Holz Lake. Macbeth responded that it was primarily due to the warm weather and that not much could be done about it. OTHER BUSINESS AND REPORTS COMMUNITY CENTER UPDATE Director Vraa stated that construction is moving along very well and that the footings and foundations are likely to be completed later this week and structural steel is scheduled to be on site shortly. Several reservations have been made for the banquet room and although staff is not booking meeting rooms yet, several calls have been received to do so. Vraa concluded by inviting Commission Members to the Bandshell Ground Breaking on May 1 at 1:00 p.m. MOONSHINE PARK UPDATE Parks Planner Lilly reviewed this project noting that the engineer's estimate to complete the road access was $1 12,8W. The low bid received was $93,874 and the high bid was $ 150,435. Work is scheduled to be completed in September. Member Danner asked when the retreat center would be ready to be rented. Planner Lilly responded that late fall is the anticipated time frame. COUNCIL ACTION REGARDING OAK CHASE AND QUARRY PARK ISSUES Director Vraa noted that the Commission reviewed a road improvement project that would impact Quarry Park and recommended that it not move forward at this time. The City Council concurred. Relative to the road access to a lift station in Oak Chase Park, Director Vraa noted that although the Commission recommended that it not bisect the park, the City Council voted to proceed with the trail access as identified by Public Works. Director Vraa also noted that during the review of the Parks and Recreation CIP the City Council approved only the 2002 proposed expenditures noting that North Park and Holz Farm Master Plan would be shown as pending projects. The Council has asked the Advisory Commission to look at funding mechanisms to sustain the renewal and replacement of park elements. Member Rudolph suggested a workshop session to begin looking at funding alternatives. Advisory Parks Commission Minutes of Regular Meeting of April 15, 2002 Page 5 HISTORIC TRAIL COMMITTEE UPDATE Member Peterson stated that the committee reviewed maps from 1874, 1879 and 1896 to compare how the area's trails and roads have evolved. She noted that Dodd, Highway 13 and Pilot Knob Roads were the north/south links at that time. The committee will be following up with the City Council to determine which map might be used for identification purposes. They will also be searching for the appropriate signage that might be used for these historic corridors. ACQUISITION SITE ANALYSIS Following the workshop earlier in the evening, Member Rudolph stated that the consensus of the Commission Members in attendance was to have a smaller subcommittee look at the identified parcels in workable pieces to allow site visits. It was felt that a better evaluation could be done by site visits followed by a thorough evaluation by the same group of individuals to maintain consistency. Member Peterson opined that the criteria currently established appears to weigh heavily on natural resources but that there should be some flexibility to talk about sites "at risk". An example cited was the potential acquisition of land adjacent to Quarry Park to mitigate the potential road improvement project that would affect the south end of the park After further brief discussion, Dorothy Peterson moved, John Rudolph seconded with all members voting in favor to designate a smaller group of Commission Members to continue the review of potential acquisition sites through site visits and criteria evaluation. Members Joseph Bari, Dorothy Peterson, Elizabeth Perry and Margo Danner volunteered to continue the site analysis review. ROUND TABLE Member Peterson asked if the 1984 Bond Referendum was paid. Director Vraa thought that 1-2 years of repayment remained on the bond but would clarify. Member Peterson thanked Lyn-Mar Printing for their donation of printing. They have generously printed the softball manager's handbook for the last several years at no cost to the City. ADJOURNMENT With no further business to conduct Joseph Bari moved, Margo Danner seconded with all members voting in favor to adjourn the meeting. The meeting was adjourned at 8:55 p.m Date nments on Applicalon, of Mary Idren's Home, Ian Minnesota rt 1of3) Parks Advisory Commission May 20, 2002 Don Elsenheimer, PI 3912 Westbury Way Eagan, MN 55123 Wetland Delineation • Wetland alteration based on preliminary wetland delineation; plan sheets 5/1/02; • Pinnacle Wetland Determination Report dated 5/3/02; • No discussion on water table depth; and, • Pinnacle wetland location map poorly matches plan sheets. Wetland Alterations • 125,000 square feet excavated. • 25,000 square feet filled. • 2 wetland areas completely destroyed. • I natural wetland expanded with mitigated constructed wetland. Wetland Location Map Wetland Determination and ( - -„--- _ Delineation Report Pinnacle Engineering May 3, 2002 'Wetland 1' and 'Wetland S shown as extending across the entire northern and southern site boundaries + . Plan sheets show wetlands ending 170 feet east of th b d d er, an nor ern or more than 500 feet east of the southern border. I BOUNDARY SURVEY ?( GIFT OF Mr,RY / ES. fGUJ SITE ROOM Precipitation / jj 915 ('?\ Surface Water Runoff Perched Wetland 840 835 825? Storm Water Collection System • Collects surface water runoff from most of the site; • Prevents surface water runoff from reaching both existing and constructed wetland; • Perched wetlands will likely be water- starved and destroyed by site development; • Wetland mitigation area won't be wet. 2 Other Wetland Issues • Corps of Engineers has yet to waive jurisdiction; • Wetlands application has not yet been released to the public; and, • No demonstration of sequencing; this alone obligates the City Council to follow state law and reject the application. Tree Preservation Plan d` Major stands of trees f cut down to build: ? -Connecting road between Af homes and school •Event parking •Stormwater Pond -Wetland Mitigation Area Wetland Mitigation Area In order to mitigate the me adverse effects of ++++i71ii11! L • wetland impacts in other s : ?lw portions of the site, the Applicant proposes to clear cut a significant woodland and more than 35 significant trees •' '< in order to make space for an on-she wetland mitigation area (that may not be wet). 3 Tree Preservation Plan • Extent of significant woodland not identified • Tree replacement area not identified • Proposed sledding hill is tree covered and has roadway at base of hill • No demonstration of "practical difficulties or hardships (that) result from strict compliance." Can it be done in Eagan? • Faithful Shepherd Catholic School developed a 27 acre parcel of land in Eagan in 1998. • 100 significant trees were lost; only 11 were hardwood and none were oaks. • Significant wetland areas preserved. • Joint powers use of playing fields. Recommendations • Approve Application • Approve Application with Conditions A Reject - Wetland impacts not completely identified - Wetland mitigation plan won't work - No effort to mitigate tree loss - Creates one environmental insult to mitigate another Conclusions • The Applicant's proposed land use is completely inappropriate for the natural conditions found at the site. • Environmental issues can not play second fiddle to the desire to avoid the potential concerns of adjacent residential areas. 4 ADVISORY PARKS COMMISSION EAGAN, MINNESOTA MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING OF APRIL 15, 2002 A regular meeting of the Advisory Parks Commission was called to order at 7:00 p.m. on April 15, 2002 with the following Commission Members present: Joseph Ban, Phil Belfiori, Margo Danner, N. Mark Filipi, Elizabeth Perry, Dorothy Peterson, Richard Pletcher, and John Rudolph. Commission Members Davis and Williams were not present. Staff present included Ken Vraa, Director of Parks and Recreation; Paul Olson, Parks Superintendent; Gregg Hove, Forestry Supervisor; Erick Macbeth, Water Resources Coordinator; Paula Nowariak, Recreation Supervisor; CJ Lilly, Landscape Architect/Parks Planner; Russ Matthys, City Engineer; and Cherryl Mesko, Recording Secretary. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Items added to the agenda included K (4) Historic Trail Committee Update and K (5) Acquisition Site Analysis Update. Dorothy Peterson moved, Joseph Ban seconded with all members voting in favor to accept the agenda as amended. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF MARCH 18, 2002 The March minutes were inadvertently omitted from the packet and were deferred to the May 20 meeting for review. VISITORS TO BE HEARD PATRICK EAGAN PARK PRESERVATION COMMITTEE Bea Blomquist addressed the Commission noting that a group of citizens had banded together to preserve Patrick Eagan Park when they became aware that a golf course was being considered for a part, or all, of the park. When the City Council determined that this location would not be a viable option, the citizens group talked with representatives of the DNR to see what options might be available to preserve Patrick Eagan Park in its natural state. Blomquist explained that after talking to Al Singer and Bill Pennington at the DNR they were made aware of some grant opportunities. They decided to nominate both the Bergin and Langstraat parcels for a Metro Greenways grant to provide more of a link around Patrick Eagan Park. She then reviewed the grant proposal submitted on behalf of Patrick Eagan Park. Blomquist added that perhaps the Anderson parcel could be looked at for future acquisition to continue the link around the park. She noted that this grant was being done in partnership with the DNR and City of Eagan. Member Peterson asked what the City's match would need to be with this grant request. Blomquist responded that if the grant was successfully funded the DNR would designate an amount they would fund and the balance would need to be funded through other means. Blomquist also noted that the DNR was sending representatives to visit the site in the very near future and was hopeful that that would bring a positive response to the application. Member Rudolph thanked Blomquist and others who had helped with the grant application and expressed the Commission's appreciation for the energy and work that had gone into it. TOBACCO FREE YOUTH RECREATION PROGRAM Lynn Deml, representing CAFE (Clean Air For Eagan), addressed the Commission and provided a brief background of the organization and their efforts toward educating the public on smoking and the effects of second hand smoke. She then introduced Dan Ehrke who made a presentation on tobacco-free youth recreation. Advisory Parks Commission Minutes of Regular Meeting of April 15, 2002 Page 2 Mr. Ehrke reviewed the organization's efforts to work with local youth recreation organizations to share ways to communicate no-smoking policies at youth recreation activities. He shared how the City of Eagan might incorporate a city-wide policy that covers youth recreational facilities and playground. He then reviewed why the policies are effective, why they are important and other cities with a current no-smoking policy He then concluded by reviewing prevention resources that are available. Lynn Deml noted that they have met with EAA, who support a no-tobacco policy and they are hopeful that the APrC will also support it. Member Belfiori asked what the current City policy is. Director Vraa stated that Cascade Bay and the Civic Arena are currently smoke-free. Member Peterson added that seasonal staff also has a smoke-free policy. Mr. Ehrke was asked who enforces the tobacco-free policies. He responded that it is typically handled through signage but sometimes compliance checks need to be done by staff. Ms Deml added that often a non- smoking parent doesn't feel comfortable asking someone to stop smoking and opined that the City should then set guidelines for people to follow. Member Rudolph thanked Ms Deml and Mr. Ehrke for their information and presentation. Member Danner asked where the Commission was to go from this point. Member Rudolph suggested that it be brought back to a workshop for further discussion. SUPERINTENDENT'S UPDATE AND DEPARTMENT HAPPENINGS Items highlighted by Recreation Supervisor Nowariak included a seniors trip to Red Wing, the upcoming Fun Run, the annual spring clean-up day at Holz Farm, the summer/fall Discover brochure to be distributed in early May, the sponsorship program for Evening in the Park that has raised $2,650, the successful Home and Leisure Show at the Civic Arena, and the new seasonal employee manual jointly developed by recreation staff. Items highlighted by Superintendent of Parks Olson included the wet conditions of athletic fields, the successful tree sale, bids for the access roadway to Moonshine Park, update on the Central Park pavilion, the annual Arbor Day celebration at Rahn Athletic Park and all tennis nets are up for residents to enjoy the courts. CONSENT AGENDA CLIFF LAKE CENTRE 3rd ADDITION - CLIFF RD PROPERTIES Dorothy Peterson moved, John Rudolph seconded with all members voting in favor to make the following recommendations to the City Council: This development shall be required to install Tree Protective measures (i.e. orange colored silt fence or 4 foot polyethylene laminate safety netting) at the Drip Line or at the perimeter of the Critical Root Zone, whichever is greater, of significant trees/woodlands to be preserved on-site. This development shall be required to contact the City Forestry Division and set up a pre-construction site inspection at least five days prior to the issuance of the grading permit to ensure compliance with the approved Tree Preservation Plan and placement of the Tree Protection Fencing. DEVELOPMENT PROPOSALS There were no development proposals for the Commission to review. Advisory Parks Commission Minutes of Regular Meeting of April 15, 2002 Page 3 OLD BUSINESS LAND DISTURBANCE AND EROSION CONTROL REGULATIONS Water Resources Coordinator introduced this item noting that the City of Eagan's Erosion Control Task Force has met since November 1999 to improve the ability of the City to control and limit the negative impacts of soil erosion at construction sites. The group is comprised of staffs from engineering, inspections, forestry and water quality. Occasionally, staffs from the Dakota County Soil and Water Conservation District and the Minnesota Erosion Control Association also participate. In these meetings, concerns are shared about the impacts of soil erosion and sedimentation from specific construction projects on City infrastructure and resources. The City has been moving diligently on a formal set of policies and requirements to guide and manage land-disturbing activities to preserve and enhance natural resources and maintain an effective stormwater conveyance system. Macbeth reviewed the proposed Land Disturbance and Erosiion Control Regulations. He noted that they would apply to any excavating, grading, clearing, filling, or other earth change that might result in 1) the movement of more than 10,000 square feet of earth; 2) any alteration of land by more than 5 feet from the existing contour of the ground or on any contiguous 1,000 square feet of ground; or 3) any other activity that changes the existing or natural contour of the land which changes drainage. He added that a Land Disturbance Permit (LDP) would be required before any such land disturbing activity occurs in connection with new development, new building construction, and many building permits. Macbeth then reviewed the requirements for obtaining a Land Disturbance Permit. Member Belfiori commended the Erosion Control Task Force for a thorough and implementable ordinance for the City. N.Mark Filipi expressed concern that the City is exempt from the policy and opined that it should follow the same policy. He suggested that the City could exempt itself from fees and security but should hold itself to the same standard it is asking others to follow. Coordinator Macbeth responded that the exemption reflects the City's inability to fine or monitor itself. He suggested that the City follow the guidelines but be exempt from the fees. Member Rudolph agreed that the City should adhere to the policy. After further brief discussion, John Rudolph moved, N. Mark Filipi seconded with all members voting in favor to recommend that the City Council accept the Land Disturbance and Erosion Control Regulations identified by Water Resources Coordinator Macbeth. They also suggested that the City Council consider not having the City of Eagan exempt from these regulations. LANGSTRAAT PARCEL - PATRICK EAGAN PARK Director Vraa introduced this item and provided a brief background of the Langstraat property adjacent to Patrick Eagan Park. He noted that the Langstraats have approached the City about selling the south approximately 2 acres of their property, which would complete a linear segment on the western portion of Patrick Eagan Park. This parcel would abut the 2-acre Bergin parcel recently acquired by the City. Director Vraa continued that the City may or may not receive grant funding for this parcel of land. Member Bari asked what would happen if the Langstraat property was acquired and the City was awarded a grant for the Bergin and Langstraat parcels. Member Perry stated it was her understanding that the City would be reimbursed if grant dollars were awarded for these properties. Member Belfiori stated that DNR funding is very limited and suggested that the City proceed with the acquisition of the Langstraat parcel without the expectation of grant funding. After further brief discussion, Joseph Bari moved, Dorothy Peterson seconded with all members voting in favor to recommend that the City Council authorize staff to enter into negotiations with the Langstraats to purchase the southerly 2 acres of the Langstraat property adjacent to Patrick Eagan Park. Member Danner confirmed that the purchase price would not exceed $58,000, which was the purchase price of the adjacent Bergin parcel. Advisory Parks Commission Minutes of Regular Meeting of April 15, 2002 Page 4 NEW BUSINESS ARBOR DAY PROCLAMATION Forestry Supervisor Hove invited the Advisory Commission and audience to participate in the annual Arbor Day event on May 4 at Rahn Athletic Park. He reviewed the events surrounding Arbor Day and invited the Commission to select the 2002 poster contest winner after the meeting was adjourned. John Rudolph moved, N. Mark Filipi seconded with all members voting in favor to acknowledge the resolution setting May 4 as Arbor Day and May as Arbor Month in the City of Eagan. WATER RESOURCES UPDATE Water Resources Coordinator Macbeth noted that the frogs are out at Thomas Lake Park, that he will speak to a group about the alum dosing at Fish Lake and the upcoming visit by the Commission to the Nicols fen. Member Rudolph asked about the matting on Holz Lake. Macbeth responded that it was primarily due to the warm weather and that not much could be done about it. OTHER BUSINESS AND REPORTS COMMUNITY CENTER UPDATE Director Vraa stated that construction is moving along very well and that the footings and foundations are likely to be completed later this week and structural steel is scheduled to be on site shortly. Several reservations have been made for the banquet room and although staff is not booking meeting rooms yet, several calls have been received to do so. Vraa concluded by inviting Commission Members to the Bandshell Ground Breaking on May 1 at 1:00 p.m. MOONSHINE PARK UPDATE Parks Planner Lilly reviewed this project noting that the engineer's estimate to complete the road access was $112,806. The low bid received was $93,874 and the high bid was $150,435. Work is scheduled to be completed in September. Member Danner asked when the retreat center would be ready to be rented. Planner Lilly responded that late fall is the anticipated time frame. COUNCIL ACTION REGARDING OAK CHASE AND QUARRY PARK ISSUES Director Vraa noted that the Commission reviewed a road improvement project that would impact Quarry Park and recommended that it not move forward at this time. The City Council concurred. Relative to the road access to a lift station in Oak Chase Park, Director Vraa noted that although the Commission recommended that it not bisect the park, the City Council voted to proceed with the trail access as identified by Public Works. Director Vraa also noted that during the review of the Parks and Recreation CIP the City Council approved only the 2002 proposed expenditures noting that North Park and Holz Farm Master Plan would be shown as pending projects. The Council has asked the Advisory Commission to look at funding mechanisms to sustain the renewal and replacement of park elements. Member Rudolph suggested a workshop session to begin looking at funding alternatives. Advisory Parks Commission Minutes of Regular Meeting of April 15, 2002 Page 5 HISTORIC TRAIL COMMITTEE UPDATE Member Peterson stated that the committee reviewed maps from 1874, 1879 and 1896 to compare how the area's trails and roads have evolved. She noted that Dodd, Highway 13 and Pilot Knob Roads were the north/south links at that time. The committee will be following up with the City Council to determine which map might be used for identification purposes. They will also be searching for the appropriate signage that might be used for these historic corridors. ACQUISITION SITE ANALYSIS Following the workshop earlier in the evening, Member Rudolph stated that the consensus of the Commission Members in attendance was to have a smaller sub-committee look at the identified parcels in workable pieces to allow site visits. It was felt that a better evaluation could be done by site visits followed by a thorough evaluation by the same group of individuals to maintain consistency. Member Peterson opined that the criteria currently established appears to weigh heavily on natural resources but that there should be some flexibility to talk about sites "at risk". An example cited was the potential acquisition of land adjacent to Quarry Park to mitigate the potential road improvement project that would affect the south end of the park. After further brief discussion, Dorothy Peterson moved, John Rudolph seconded with all members voting in favor to designate a smaller group of Commission Members to continue the review of potential acquisition sites through site visits and criteria evaluation. Members Joseph Bari, Dorothy Peterson, Elizabeth Perry and Margo Danner volunteered to continue the site analysis review. ROUND TABLE Member Peterson asked if the 1984 Bond Referendum was paid. Director Vraa thought that 1-2 years of repayment remained on the bond but would clarify. Member Peterson thanked Lyn-Mar Printing for their donation of printing. They have generously printed the softball manager's handbook for the last several years at no cost to the City. ADJOURNMENT With no further business to conduct Joseph Ban moved, Margo Danner seconded with all members voting in favor to adjourn the meeting. The meeting was adjourned at 8:55 p.m. Secretary Date