04/04/1991 - Advisory Parks & Recreation CommissionMEMORANDUM
TO: ADVISORY PARK, RECREATION & NATURAL RESOURCE
COMMISSION
FROM: KEN VRAA, DIRECTOR OF PARKS & RECREATION
DATE: APRIL 2, 1991
RE: APRIL 4TH COMMISSION MEETING
The first item of business for the Advisory Commission on April 4th, concerns the Park
Center - 2nd Addition. This proposal is for a Senior Citizens housing project which is being
sponsored by Dakota County H.R.A.N. and the City of Eagan. Staff has prepared a
memorandum concerning this particular item and is included in the packet.
OLD BUSINESS:
The first item under "Old Business" is that of Blackhawk Park. Enclosed with the packet
is an issue sheet that contains staff's responses from the special meeting of the Advisory
Commission on March 14th. Staff believes that this issue sheet addresses many of the
questions that were raised at that special meeting. Commission members have also received
copy of the fax communication to Mayor Egan dated February 27th. Also, attached are the
requested revisions and the original preferred plan from the citizens for a better Blackhawk
Park. Staff has recently met with Jerry Rhodes to review those items and attempt to gain
a better understanding of other concerns and respond to the requests.
The Commission should be aware that the Attorney representing the residents on the west
side of the park on Riverton Avenue has contacted staff requesting various background
information pertaining to the park, including past minutes of the Commission and Council,
as well as study plans. Staff anticipates that residents from this area will also be present at
the Commission meeting on Thursday evening.
The Highline grading is also on the Commission Agenda under "Old Business". This will be
a verbal presentation by staff.
Enclosed within the packet is information concerning signs for City Hall. The Commission
members will recall that this was requested at a previous meeting and staff has prepared a
preliminary report for the Commission.
ADVISORY PARK, RECREATION & NATURAL RESOURCE COMMISSION
APRIL 2, 1991
PAGE TWO
NEW BUSINESS
There are two (2) items under "New Business".
The first is the Arbor Day Resolution. It would be appropriate for the Commission to make
a motion to accept this resolution that will appear on the April 16th City Council meeting.
The second item is Park Service Section #21 located west of Pilot Knob, east of 35-E and
north of Diffley (County Road 30). Staff has prepared a report for the Commission on this
item.
PARK DEVELOPMENT
There are no items under "Park Development".
WATER QUALITY
There is one item under "Water Quality".
Staff has revised that petition process
Commission at the last meeting.
This is a second discussion of the petition process.
by incorporating the suggestions of the Advisory
OTHER BUSINESS AND REPORTS
This will include Department Happenings.
If members of the Advisory Commission have any questions pertaining to the packet, and
would like further clarification; please feel free to contact the department.
Respectfully submitted,
K n Vraa, Director of Parks & Recreation
KV/bls
Z.
AGENDA
ADVISORY PARKS, RECREATION AND NATURAL RESOURCES COMMISSION
EAGAN, MINNESOTA
Thursday, April 4, 1991
7:00 P.M.
Eagan Municipal Center
A. 7:00 P.M. Regular Meeting - Eagan Municipal Center
B. Call to Order and Pledge of Allegiance
C. Approval of Agenda
D. Approval of Minutes of Regular Meeting of March 7, 1991
E. Consent Agenda
F. Development Proposals
(1) Park Center 2nd Addition - City of Eagan
G. Old Business
(1) Blackhawk Park
(2) Highline Trail Grading
(3) Signage at City Hall
H. New Business
(1) Arbor Day Resolution
(2) Park Service Area 21
1. Parks Development
J. Water Quality
(1) Second Discussion of Petition Process
K. Other Business and Reports
(1) Happenings
(2) April 18th Long Range Planning Meeting
(3) April 25th Joint Commissions Meeting in Lakeville
(4) Winter Program Report (deferred to May)
(5) Maintenance Report (deferred to May)
L. Round Table
M. Visitors to be Heard
N. Adjournment
3.
Subject to approval
MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF
THE ADVISORY PARKS, RECREATION AND NATURAL RESOURCES COMMISSION
EAGAN, MINNESOTA
MARCH 7, 1991
A regular meeting of the Advisory Parks and Recreation Commission was called to order at 7:00
P.M. on Thursday, March 7, 1991 with the following Commission Members present: George Kubik, John
Griggs, Shawn Hunter, Ted Billy, Michael Vogel, Lee Markell, Deborah Johnson and Dick Carroll.
Commission Member Jack Johnson was not present. Staff present included Ken Vraa, Director of Parks
and Recreation; Stephen Sullivan, Landscape Architect/Parks Planner; Dorothy Peterson, Superintendent
of Recreation; John VonDeLinde, Parks Superintendent; Rich Brasch, Water Quality Coordinator; Mike
Ridley, Project Planner; John Wingard, Development/Design Engineer and Cherryl Mesko, Secretary.
AGENDA
Ken Vraa asked 'Joint Community Commission Meeting' be added to the agenda. John Griggs
moved, Shawn Hunter seconded with all members voting in favor to accept the agenda as amended.
MINUTES
Page 2, Paragraph 4, Sentence 3 should read, "John Griggs asked if Eagan has a historical
society.' Page 5, last paragraph, Sentence 2 should be followed by, 'The Community Event Committee
should continue as an Ad-Hoc committee rather than a standing committee.' Ted Billy moved, Michael
Vogel seconded with all members voting in favor to accept the minutes as amended.
CONSENT AGENDA
Shawn Hunter moved, Ted Billy seconded with all members voting in favor to recommend the
following to the City Council:
WEST PUBLISHING 5TH ADDITION - WEST PUBLISHING CO. This plat has previously
fulfilled its parks dedication obligation according to the Gopher Eagan Planned
Development. The plat would be subject to a cash trails dedication.
2. WILLBROOK ADDITION - JIM WILLIAMS & TOM WESTBROOK. This plat will be subject
to a cash parks dedication and a cash trails dedication.
BURRVIEW POND ADDITION
Mike Ridley, Project Planner explained that a preliminary plat known as Crystal Ponds Addition
was previously approved for this site on 6/7/88. The original proposal had a 15 building configuration with
a total of 137 units. The current Burrview Pond Addition preliminary plat configuration shows a total of
132 units with a building coverage of 8.1 % and a paved area coverage of 10.7%. The net density is 11.66
units per acre which falls within the R-4 density requirement of this site. Mike continued that this
application had been continued from the October 23,1990 meeting because of concerns raised regarding
the placement of the building on site and the visual ramifications to nearby single family homes. Since
that time the applicant has redesigned the layout so the impact on adjacent property is reduced. It is
anticipated that this proposal will be brought before the Advisory Planning Commission before it proceeds
to the City Council.
Stephen Sullivan explained that the four items for the Commission to review included 1) What the
parks dedication requirement would be; 2) What the trails dedication requirement would be; 3) Should
parks dedication credit be provided for the proposed recreation facilities within this development; and 4)
Does the development meet the recreation open space requirement. Steve reminded the Commission
ADVISORY PARKS, RECREATION AND NATURAL RESOURCES COMMISSION
MINUTES OF MARCH 7, 1991 MEETING
PAGE 2
that they had previously reviewed this proposal and had made the following recommendations: 1) The
development be subject to a cash parks dedication; 2) The development be subject to a cash trails
dedication; 3) the development layout be revised to include 22,200 square feet of recreation area; 4) The
development plan be revised to include a tot lot play area and the Commission would consider parks
dedication credit for a tot lot improvement.
Steve continued that staff estimated the complex could support up to 100 children however they
would be isolated from the nearby Bur Oaks Park and would be reliant on on-site recreation facilities. The
developer is proposing to include a tot lot play area, basketball court, sand volleyball court, bituminous
loop trail with 4 fitness stations and benches as part of their recreation facilities. Staff calculated the value
of the developers proposed recreation facilities to be approximately $16,550. Based on the 1991 parks
dedication fees the total cash parks dedication would be $73,788.00. The range of credit the Commission
may want to consider ranges from zero to $16,550. Steve reminded the Commission that the evaluation
should be based on the perceived benefit to the park system, park service area and park user group and
whether the facility serves a parks system need or reduces the demand on other public recreation
facilities. George Kubik added that traditionally the Commission did not provide for full dollar credit for
recreation facilities within a development.
John Griggs asked if all the parking would be outside the building and Mike Ridley responded
that there would be 132 underground parking spaces with an additional 137 spaces provided outside the
building. Shawn Hunter asked if the run-off went directly into the park pond. Rich Brasch responded that
the pond was sized to accommodate the run-off for this property. He continued that if the developer
provides an easement to the pond it will accommodate the maintenance that will be required. John
Wingard added that this easement was a condition of the developer's agreement.
Shawn Hunter asked if there was a preliminary location for the tot lot. Steve Sullivan responded
that the placement is planned on the east side of the site central to the building. John Griggs stated that
he would prefer, if a credit is given, that it be a percentage rather than a dollar amount since the
developer should be required to provide these types of amenities as a standard part of the development.
George Kubik explained that in general the Commission has taken the position that it would
provide a credit of up to 50% of the tot lot. Mike Vogel asked what was typically in a tot lot to which Steve
responded it typically included elements such as a slide, climbing apparatus and swings. Mike Vogel
asked how far the proposed tot lot is from the pond. Mike Ridley responded that the tot lot will be fenced
since there are significant slopes to the pond.
John Bell representing Kludt, Inc. addressed the Commission stating that they agree completely
with staff's written report and they wished to withdraw their request for recreation facility credits. He
continued that they would rather not be committed to specific recreation facilities since there has been
some concern expressed by neighbors regarding some of the proposed amenities. They also anticipate
there will be a trail but they would prefer not building one at this time.
After further discussion, Ted Billy moved to make the following recommendations regarding
Burrview Pond Addition:
1. The development be subject to a cash parks dedication.
2. The development be subject to a cash trails dedication.
3. The development not receive parks dedication credit for recreation facilities.
4. The developer submit a tot lot design for staff to review before installation with a minimum
cost of the tot lot to be $5,000.
5. The development meets the recreation open space requirement.
Shawn Hunter seconded the motion with all members voting in favor.
ADVISORY PARKS, RECREATION AND NATURAL RESOURCES COMMISSION
MINUTES OF MARCH 7, 1991 MEETING
PAGE 3
CUFF LAKE CENTRE 3RD ADDrIION
Mike Ridley explained that this proposal is for a preliminary plat consisting of 208 rental apartment
units on approximately 22.9 acres of previously zoned PD R-4 land. This site is located north of Cliff Lake
road and south of Meadowland Park/Highline Trail. The plan proposes a total of 13 buildings consisting
of 16 units each. The developer is proposing to dedicate ponding and park areas totaling approximately
5.7 acres for a net site area of 18.92 acres. The net building coverage of this proposal is 14% which is
less than City Code allowed. The net density of 10.9 units per acre meet the density allowed in the R-4
zoning district. This proposal was continued from the February Advisory Planning Commission meeting
and will appear again in March.
Jim Stirton, Vice President of Ventana Development Corporation was present to further describe
the proposal and answer specific questions from the Commission. He continued that the project was a
208 unit rental housing complex, 13 buildings with 16 units each with tuck under garages. The intent of
this proposal was to tie together the concerns of the neighborhood, ponding, density and Parks and
Recreation Commission. Mr. Stirton stated the intention was to have the site and PUD interact with the
developed retail and residential area nearby. After the neighborhood meeting the primary concern
appeared to be the buffering of the residential neighborhood from the buildings. In dealing with the park
dedication issue the development proposed to dedicate Outlots A, B and C, however after staff had
reviewed the dedication proposals they determined that Outlot C (Pond AP-24) would not be accepted
as a dedicated parcel.
Ken Tyler, 4346 Fox Ridge Court noted that he lived north of the proposed development and had
attended the neighborhood meeting. He stated the plan looks like a reasonable proposal but expressed
concern regarding the water level of Pond A which is south of the Highline Trail corridor and directly south
of his property.
Rich Brasch explained that originally Ponds A and B were tied together but the primary change
that is proposed is to tie the ponds together slightly differently so as to expand the wet volume of all
ponds. He continued that the object of routing storm water through Pond A first was to keep water in it
more frequently. John Griggs asked why it was necessary to tie Pond A into the storm water system.
John Wingard explained that due to the watershed area there has been some consideration given to
excavating Pond A to increase it's holding volume. Ken noted that there is a storage issue at hand and
the existing ponds have a significant bounce therefor some alternatives are being investigated. John
Wingard stated that some of the ponds may change in size, depth and location. Lee Markel[ asked how
the vegetation would be impacted around Pond A. Rich Brasch responded that this pond would be the
first pond for water to enter after coming from the freeway, however, he was unfamiliar at this time as to
the specific vegetation around that pond and the impact of the run-off. John Wingard stated that there
are some trees on the south side of the pond and they will try to save them, however depending on the
total run-off into this pond the pond may expand to the open grassy area.
Steve Sullivan outlined the issues for the Commission to review. Those included 1) What is the
proposals obligation for parks dedication; 2) Should the development receive park dedication credit for
on-site recreation facilities; 3) What is the proposals obligation for trails dedication; 4) What is the
proposals obligation for compliance with the Water Quality Policy; 5) What are the impacts of the
proposed pond improvements within the Highline Corridor; and 6) Does the proposal meet the open
recreation space requirement.
Mr. Sullivan continued that Outlot A contained a total acreage of .90 acres with .26 acres
designated as steep slopes, .04 acres designated as pond acreage and .60 acres designated as area
above H.W.L. and below 12% slopes. Outlot B contained total acreage of 2.20 acres with 1.00 acre
designated as steep slopes, .69 acres as pond acreage and .51 acres designated above H.W.L. and
below 12% slopes. Outlot C contained total acreage of 3.70 acres with .39 acres designated as steep
slopes, 3.20 acres designated as pond acreage and .11 acres designated as area above H.W.L. and
below 12%
ADVISORY PARKS, RECREATION AND NATURAL RESOURCES COMMISSION
MINUTES OF MARCH 7,1991 MEETING
PAGE 4
slopes. Based on no credit for ponding areas, 100% dedication of areas above the H.W.L and below 12%
slopes along with 20% credit for steep slope area the total parkland dedication would be 2.51 acres; short
of the 5.67 acres required according the Planned Development Agreement. The shortfall of 3.16 acres
could be fulfilled by using a land to cash equivalent.
Steve reviewed the parks dedication policy regarding credit for recreation facilities within a
development and shared estimated costs of improvements that are proposed within the development.
Estimated costs for 2 swimming pools was $50,000; 1900 lin. ft. of turf trails was $3,800 and 200 lin. ft.
of bituminous trail was $1,600. Options were provided regarding various levels of credit for the
Commission to consider if they chose to provide credit for recreational facilities. The development is
subject to the implementation of trailway in lieu of a cash trails dedication. Staff has also recommended
that the developer construct an eight foot wide bituminous trail from cliff Lake Drive to the northern
property line along with a 15 foot wide trail easement for pedestrian corridor. The water quality issue had
not been completely analyzed for the Commission to review. It is anticipated that a more comprehensive
report will be available at the April 4th meeting. In reference to the impact of the proposed pond
improvements within the Highline Corridor, Steve stated that during a 100 year storm Pond AP22 would
be at a level to flood the trail. He noted that either the trail should be elevated or the pond elevation be
lowered. Steve indicated that the developer is requesting a variance to the 45,800 square feet
requirement for open recreation space based on the fact that the site is consumed with predominant
areas required for ponding, it would not be economically feasible to remove an apartment building to
provide the required space, the developer is providing direct pedestrian access from development to the
abutting parkland property and the Highline Corridor and Meadowlands Park provide a diversity of
recreation opportunities that could not be accomplished within the square footage requirement.
Shawn Hunter expressed concern over the southeast corner being zoned commercial and
questioned how people would gain access to Meadowlands Park. He also suggested that consideration
be given to requesting, as part of the recreational open space, a 'grove of trees' located on the west side
of Pond AP-23. Further discussion indicated that this site could be developed to a total of 370 units,
however the developer has downsized the development to include a total of 208 units. Mr. Stirton
indicated that in order to provide this grove of trees as part of the open recreational space would require
the elimination of one of the buildings which would be financially prohibitive from a development point of
view.
George Kubik noted that the Commission has not provided credit for swimming pools in the past
since they were not an amenity to the community as a whole even though the provided recreational
opportunities within a development.
After further discussion, George Kubik moved, Shawn Hunter seconded with all members voting
in favor to recommend the following:
1. The developer receive 3.1 acres credit for Outlot A and B to be dedicated to the City for
parks purposes.
2. Proposed Outlot C - Pond AP-24,will not be accepted for parks dedication.
3. Eagan Hills West planned development be required to pay a cash to land dedication for
the difference between the 5.67 acres required and the 3.1 acre dedication.
4. The developer construct an 8 foot wide bituminous trail from Cliff Lake Drive to the south
property line of the Highline Trail Corridor.
5. The developer shall provide a 15 foot wide trail easement for this pedestrian corridor.
8
ADVISORY PARKS, RECREATION AND NATURAL RESOURCES COMMISSION
MINUTES OF MARCH 7,1991 MEETING
PAGE 5
6. To allow the developer to improve upon Pond A and B and AP-22, subject to the following
requirements:
a. Either lower the H.W.L. of AP-22 below the Highline Trail or reconstruct the trail
above the 100 year frequency elevation. Also, they are asked to revise the
bottom contours to the northern cell of Pond AP-22, providing for open water and
a shallow area for wildlife.
b. To revise the south shoreline of the south cell of Pond AP-22, eliminating the
lineal channel.
7. To provide positive recommendation for the variance request to the recreation open
space requirement with the modification that the tree stand to the west of AP-23 be
considered as recreational open space with the location and size to be worked out with
staff.
HIGHLINE TRAIL CORRIDOR
As background, Steve Sullivan reminded the Commission that they have reviewed this issue on
numerous occasions concerning the unauthorized grading within the Highline Trail corridor. Steve
indicated that Paul Thomas, representing Tri-Land, has been in contact with the City during this process
so that alternatives could be prepared for the Commission to review.
Paul Thomas explained that three alternatives have been prepared for the Commission to review
and he is looking for a recommendation as to which plan will be most appropriate in rectifying the
problem. Because of the potential impact to the park, it was felt that several options should be provided.
S The first option shows the fun-off coming down to a retaining wall near Lot 8 and would continue
between the two homes on Park Knoll Drive that are now experiencing a ponding problem. It would be
necessary to repair or replace a driveway on one of the lots and address the ponding problem behind
the home on Lot 8. Steve Sullivan noted that this ponding problem has been occurring for the last three
years. Mr. Thomas continued that this option controls the flow, remedies the situation that exists on Lot
8, however there is concern for the overland flow at Park Knoll Drive. It was also noted that there would
need to be corrective measures taken regarding the restoration of the retaining wall discussed in this
scenario. Steve Sullivan explained that the impact to the park would be the need to restore turf after the
grading and repairs.
Option 2 involves using a controlled outlet to carry 4 CFS to the east down the slope and outlet
into the pond. In response to a question regarding disturbance of existing trees, Mr. Thomas responded
that in this scenario they would attempt to avoid all trees. Steve Sullivan noted that the impact to the park
using this scenario would be that the pipe would run through the park and into a 5 foot deep pipe with
the disturbed area being approximately 10 feet wide running the length of the pipe installation. Steve
continued that the pipe would need to be sized to adequately provide for the storm water flow it will need
to handle; the disturbed area will be contained; the plan would require the crossing of the existing bike
pate and there would be a need to make sure added water will not impact the vegetation around the
existing pond.
Option 3 provided for a pond with a controlled outlet into a ditch. Steve Sullivan noted that the
impact of this option would be a much larger area that would need to be disturbed resulting in larger
visual consequences within the park.
Jon Wingard explained that with the development of Lexington Point 5th and the surrounding
residential areas the watershed area has increased significantly. After reviewing all three options,
Engineering shows a preference to Option 2 because of the low amount of maintenance required. Once
the pipe has been installed the City has agreed to take on the responsibility of this pipe as part of the
City's storm water system. Option 1 and 3 would be more maintenance intensive, therefore they would
not be recommended.
9.
ADVISORY PARKS, RECREATION AND NATURAL RESOURCES COMMISSION
MINUTES OF MARCH 7,1991 MEETING
PAGE 6
George Kubik noted that the Parks and Recreation Department tries to be a good neighbor
however it has been asked on many occasions to provide for storm water retention on parkland to provide
for the development around the park. He continued that this impact to the parks continues to be a
serious problem and that he did not care for any of the options that had been presented thus far. His
preference would be to provide an option(s) that would have no impact on the Highline Corridor or Trapp
Farm Park.
John Griggs asked where the catch basin was on Park Knoll Drive. Jon Wingard explained that
the water would run down the lot line to Park Knoll Drive and then south on Park Knoll Drive to the nearest
catch basin. John then asked why an underground pipe could not go directly into the storm water
system. Lee Markell noted that it would require digging up Park Knoll Drive. Paul Thomas noted that it
is possible to tie into the existing storm water system, however, it would not be able to handle the extra
run-off because the system was designed for a 5 year storm.
John Griggs asked if the pond at Trapp Farm Park was a storm water pond to which Ken Vraa
responded affirmatively. Dick Carroll expressed his concern for the occurrence of a 100 year storm and
asked what impact this would have on the pond within Trapp Farm Park. John Wingard stated that those
calculations had not been completed to date. John Griggs expressed his concern for bring 8 developed
acres along with 2 acres of parkland into the existing storm water pond. Mr. Thomas responded that the
original storm water plan only provided for a 5 year storm system, therefore, it was his concern that it
would not be able to handle a 100 year storm. Mr. Thomas also stated that if the storm water system
were being developed now the developer would've had to provide a plan for 5 year run-off as well as the
100 year occurrence but both the developer and the city missed this point in their final review of the storm
water plan.
George Kubik reiterated the importance of retaining the integrity of this high priority, highly visible
park and didn't'feel that the options provided address the request for no further impact to the park.
After further discussion, George Kubik moved, Shawn Hunter seconded with all members voting
in favor to recommend that erosion control be done as soon as possible (with staff approval), affected
area to be seeded and restored as soon as possible (with staff approval); the full impact of Options 1 and
2 to be considered and include mitigating enhancements along with alternatives to be provided that do
not affect park property at all.
LONG RANGE PLANNING WORKSHOP
It was noted that Thursday, April 18, 6:30 P.M. has been designated as a workshop session for
long range planning. A reminder notice will be sent to Commission members prior to the meeting.
REQUEST FOR GARDEN PLOT; COUNTY RESTITUTION PROGRAM
John VonDeLinde explained that Dakota County Court Services Department had approached the
City with a request to establish a raised garden bed at the Lexington/Diffley site that would be cultivated,
planted and tended by the Summer Youth Restitution participants under the direction of 2 adult
supervisors from the Court Services Department. The County would be responsible for all work
associated with planting and maintaining the garden including bring water to the site by tanker truck. The
site would allow for suitable access and parking and will be in close proximity to the water filling station
located at the northwest corner of Lexington/Diffley intersection.
George Kubik asked if the County had reviewed the site and were aware of the vandalism
potential. John indicated that they were familiar with the possible problems and were willing to work with
the City to make this a workable situation.
George Kubik moved, Shawn Hunter seconded with all members voting in favor to approve the
request of the Dakota County Department of Court Services to use a portion of the Lexington/Diffley park
site for the purposes of establishing a community 'food shelf garden during the 1991 growing season.
If -
ADVISORY PARKS, RECREATION AND NATURAL RESOURCES COMMISSION
MINUTES OF MARCH 7, 1991 MEETING
PAGE 7
The agreement would further stipulate that there is a one-year restriction and that the City of Eagan would
not be responsible for injuries. John Griggs asked that consideration be given to emphasize organic
gardening practices.
BUILDING CONSTRUCTION UPDATE
Stephen Sullivan noted that all three buildings have reached the point of substantial completion
and punch lists have been prepared for the buildings.
COMMUNITY SURVEY - DRAFT
Rich Brash explained that the purpose of the survey provided within the packet was to provide
a base line for water quality education success. The plan is to send out 700 surveys in anticipation that
350 will be returned to obtain a high level of confidence in information. The 700 addresses selection will
be total random selection. Mike Vogel indicated that 50% return seems to be very optimistic. Rich
responded that they are hopeful that there will be enough interest in this issue that the surveys will be
returned in a timely fashion. Additionally, a follow-up will be done to those addressed that have not
returned a survey in the time frame allocated. It is hoped that the survey will go out around the 1st of
April.
Shawn Hunter asked why the recycling information was being duplicated suggesting that
information currently in existence should be used. John Griggs stated he was pleased to see the City
take these issues on at a city level and suggested that perhaps the results could be shared with the
county to help with their efforts also. In conclusion, Rich Brash asked Commission members to let him
know if there were further questions regarding the survey.
PETITION PROCESS FOR LAKE WATER MANAGEMENT
Rich Brash reviewed the proposed petition process for lake/pond management assistance. He
reviewed each step of the petition process explaining how a resident can begin a request for assistance
and the consistent process that will be followed in each case. John Griggs commented that it was an
excellent process but asked what the time line would be since neighborhood groups or individuals can
become disenchanted if the process takes longer than they are prepared for. Rich responded that it was
difficult to answer this question but it is hoped that three months would be an anticipated time frame.
The time frame will be more clearly defined once a petition has gone through the whole process. It is
anticipated that the first issue may come before the Commission in April. Ken Vraa added that it may not
be necessary to go through the entire petition process before an issue is resolved. John Griggs noted
that there is the possibility of streamlining the process on similar issues as well. Another concern was
the amount of staff time that would be involved in the petition process.
George Kubik commented that this was a very fine piece of work and looks forward to seeing the
proposed petition process again after Rich has had an opportunity of incorporating the input from this
meeting. Mr. Griggs asked that Rich create two separate flow charts; one to reflect new issues and one
to address similar issues which have been addressed in earlier petitions so as to identify cost savings.
Mr. Kubik asked Rich to bring this petition process back to the Commission for a vote after fine tuning
based on the suggested revisions.
HAPPENINGS
It was noted that Jules Erickson and Benita Soller would be beginning their internship with the
department beginning on March 25th. Jules is a graduate of Sibley High School and Benita is a graduate
of Burnsville High School. Additional items discussed included over 100 coaches participated in the latest
NYSCA coaches training, the attendance of the Senior Coffee Club that meets on Tuesdays at the Silver
Bell McDonald's continues to grow, the popular '55 Alive" safe driving sponsored by AARP offered to
Eagan Seniors also allows for a 10% discount on auto insurance. Spring recreation program registration
will occur on Saturday, March 9 from 10 - 12 noon, Rahn Park shelter building upgrades were completed,
//.
ADVISORY PARKS, RECREATION AND NATURAL RESOURCES COMMISSION
MINUTES OF MARCH 7, 1991 MEETING
PAGE 8
Alex Lammers, Paul Graham and Don Buecksler recently finished construction of a new portable hockey
rink at Lexington.
SPECIAL MEETING - BLACKHAWK PARK - MARCH 14, 1991
George Kubik reminded the Commission of a special meeting on Thursday, March 14th to address
Blackhawk Park. The meeting is scheduled for 7:00 P.M. in Council Chambers and all members are urged
to attend.
JOINT COMMUNITY COMMISSION MEETING
Ken Vraa noted that five years ago there was a joint meeting of Advisory Parks
Commissions/Boards to share views and do some brainstorming. All those that attended felt this was a
very beneficial meeting. Lakeville has offered to host another similar meeting and would hope to schedule
it for possibly April 15th or 27th. The Commission will be kept abreast of further developments in this
meeting schedule.
ROUND TABLE
George Kubik congratulated Shawn Hunter and his wife on the arrival of their daughter, Rachael
Elizabeth.
John Griggs commented that he appreciated the agenda being published in the paper. He asked
if there was any further information regarding signs at City Hall. John VonDeLinde responded that the
standard message board with removable letters, illuminated would cost approximately $50-90/square foot
with the base being extra. It is anticipated that the total cost would be approximately $3,000 - 6,000.
Another option would be electronic message boards with a cost range of $10,000 - 20,000. These would
also be very maintenance intensive. It is felt that the best option would be the standard message board.
George Kubik asked that further information be obtained regarding the advantages/disadvantages of
these types of signs as well as obtaining information from communities that currently use this vehicle to
get information to the public. John VonDeLinde did note that portables are no longer allowed per City
Code therefore a permanent structure would be required.
John Griggs noted that the Community Event Task Force continues to discuss options for a
community event. Regarding the St. Paul Chamber Orchestra, it was recommended that John follow up
with the orchestra to discuss pricing and options available. He also mentioned that he had tapes
available for any Commission member who would like to preview their music. Another meeting will be
called to provide updated information.
With no further business to conduct, John Griggs moved, Lee Markell seconded with all members
voting in favor to adjourn the meeting. The meeting was adjourned at 11:10 P.M.
SECRETARY
DATE
/Z.
Subject to approval
MINUTES OF A SPECIAL MEETING OF
THE ADVISORY PARKS, RECREATION AND NATURAL RESOURCES COMMISSION
EAGAN, MINNESOTA
MARCH 14, 1991
A special meeting of the Advisory Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission was
called to order at 7:00 P.M. on Thursday, March 14, 1991 with the following Commission Members
present: George Kubik, John Griggs, Shawn Hunter, Ted Billy, Michael Vogel, Lee Markell, Deborah
Johnson and Dick Carroll. Commission Member Jack Johnson was not present. Staff present included
Ken Vraa, Director of Parks and Recreation; Stephen Sullivan, Landscape Architect/Parks Planner; Dorothy
Peterson, Superintendent of Recreation; John VonDeLinde, Parks Superintendent; Rich Brasch, Water
Quality Coordinator; Craig Johnson, Landscape Architect and Cherryl Mesko, Secretary.
BLACKHAWK PARK
Director Vraa reminded the Commission that there were 51 people in attendance at the February
20, 1991 meeting when a public meeting was held regarding the development of Blackhawk Park. He
reviewed the questions that were asked those in attendance noting that the responses were very
diversified. The primary emphasis at that meeting was the preservation and conservation of this park.
The design team that has been working on this process included, Dorothy Peterson, Rich Brasch, John
VonDeLinde, Steve Sullivan, Pat Jostad, Craig Johnson, Rich Pelletier and Ken Vraa. Pat Jostad was the
only design team member who was unable to attend this meeting.
As background, Mr. Vraa stated that the original Park System Plan was developed in 1982 as a
plan to provide for the future park and recreation needs of the city. A set of standards were developed
establishing the need for specific facilities as the population of Eagan continued to grow. Different park
needs were identified and the designation of neighborhood parks and community parks were clearly
defined. The 1982 plan continues to be a guide for parks development.
The initial meetings regarding the planning for Blackhawk Park included establishing a Mission
Statement along with Goals and Objectives. Mr. Vraa reviewed both these items point by point noting that
preservation was the main emphasis in the planning for this park. Along with the expertise of staff design
team members, Pat Jostad's naturalist background proved to be invaluable in planning the preservation
and selective development of the site.
Steve Sullivan reviewed the background of the site noting that 40 acres were originally acquired
in the early 70's with addition land being added through parkland dedication over the years. In 1990/91
the acquisition of the southern access was completed through the Murphy property. The issue of access
has been discussed several times with different locations being considered. One of the access points
considered was the southern access off the Murphy property; another was the northern access between
Blackhawk Glenn and Blackhawk Ponds; another was off Riverton Avenue and yet another off Palisade
Way where there is currently an access point.
Steve continued with an aerial view of the site showing the primary characteristics of the site, the
residential areas surrounding the park, the lakes and ponds in and near the park, the very wooded
section on the east side of the park, the smaller wooded area to the west of the park, the open space
where development would be most appropriate, the location of the existing playground and the existing
trails. Steve then showed a topography of the site indicating the high and low areas throughout the park
site. The slope gradients were next to be displayed and discussed. It was noted that the central plateau
area, which would be most appropriate for development, had a grade of 0-6%.
/3.
ADVISORY PARKS, RECREATION AND NATURAL RESOURCES COMMISSION
MINUTES OF MARCH 14,1991 SPECIAL MEETING
PAGE 2
Mr. Sullivan continued with the drainage of the area along with information on the soil types and
public utilities. He then reviewed the climatic conditions of the site explaining some of the design criteria
used to plan for things like sledding hills, picnic areas, etc.
Ken Vraa added that Naturalist Pat Jostad had completed an inventory of the flora and fauna on
this site. Additionally, Landscape Architects Steve Sullivan and Craig Johnson as well as City Forester
Tom Schuster completed an inventory. Ken stated that Pat Jostad had been hired to do.a site analysis
and was then added to the design team. Since Pat was unable to be at the meeting, Ken showed a tape
of her presentation from the February 20, 1991 meeting. Her presentation emphasized sensitivity to the
park and she commented that the planning process for Blackhawk Park has focused on that point. Pat
continued that her job was to say where everything was in the park, what areas would
be designated for development and what areas could not be touched. Pat explained active recreation
designation as an area where active use will not affect existing vegetation. She stated that it is not a
question as to whether this park will be used rather a question of how to best guide users through the
park. She described a passive recreation area which would include use such as a trail; conservancy area
as a protected area where no recreation penetration would occur and applied management areas such
as slopes that would be covered. All of these areas were identified and located within the Blackhawk Park
site.
Steve Sullivan then reviewed the refined plan for Blackhawk Park. He commented that Pat Jostad
had been very effective in helping to preserve many areas within the park. Steve continued that it Is
always a balancing act to preserve parkland areas yet provide for the needs of the community. With the
input from so many people with varying areas of expertise it is felt that the best plan to fit the needs of
the community have been incorporated in the refined plan. Some of the considerations in planning a
community park include trails, interpretive opportunities, picnicking areas, cross-country ski trails, shelter
buildings, sledding opportunities and parking.
Steve continued that the refined plan shows some changes from the original facility plan.
Originally the plan provided for 300 car parking. The refined plan shows this downsized to 165 spaces.
Regarding access, staff has heard from residents to the north that they wanted access to the park, access
from north Murphy Parkway would decentralize and cause grave damage to vegetation in the conservency
area whereas access from Murphy Parkway north of the Murphy property would bring people to the center
of the park with the least amount of disturbance to the park. Access on Palisade currently has a road
stubbed to it which would also provide for easy access from the west. The preferred Murphy Parkway
access will provide for some tree loss, however a reforestation plan has been completed to mitigate that
loss so that the parking lot can be hidden. The Palisade access would provide for a parking lot where
the nursery is currently located and will be tucked back and screened by the existing berm. The facilities
planned will provide for 4-season use of the park. The tubing hill shown is on the north facing slope and
continues to an open flat area which would result in no tree loss. The shelter building would be similar
to that of Trapp Farm Park and would set on top of the tubing hill. This can facilitate tubing groups in the
winter as well as providing shelter for activities in the summer. The open flat area at the bottom of the
hill can provide for open play area in the summer as well.
The area to the south would provide for a larger developed area. The parking lot would bring
people to a pavilion/family games area/playground with the building footprint similar to that of Thomas
Lake pavilion. The playground would be central to both building areas as well as accessible to the people
from the north. All development appears to be occurring in the broom grass area.
/4-.
ADVISORY PARKS, RECREATION AND NATURAL RESOURCES COMMISSION
MINUTES OF MARCH 14, 1991 SPECIAL MEETING
PAGE 3
A small pier/canoe access and boardwalk is provided on Blackhawk Lake. The boardwalk would
help to isolate the east portion of the lake keeping canoeing to the west. The boardwalk would be a low
profile so the site lines wouldn't be impacted. Within the woods there would be an interpretive area and
there would also be four satellite picnic areas throughout the park.
The trails are shown to be hard surface trails that tie into the park with the balance of the trails
being soft surface. The loop trail around the lake is proposed to be soft surface as well. Steve expressed
some concern for the need for a trail access or turf path on North Murphy Parkway. He asked those
residents who live near that access for their input.
Steve continued that reforestation will occur along the western edge of the park and staff will work
with those residents abutting the park to ensure adequate buffering. Reforestation will also occur along
the 35E side slope and along the south access into the park.
In conclusion Steve stated that in planning this park some of the issues addressed included
wanting to meet the facility needs of the community, sensitivity to the site, need to manage and upgrade
depleted area and the preservation of quality acres. The total acreage of Blackhawk is approximately 80
acres and with the refined plan only eight of those acres are planned to be developed.
Ken Vraa introduced Bob Byers and Cindy Gray of Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc. who have
prepared a traffic and parking study for Blackhawk Park. Ken also explained that the Commission
members had a great deal of background information regarding Blackhawk Park that they were
referencing during the meeting. He stated that a copy of all the information in the Commission Members
possession was bound in a book at the front counter and anyone wanting to review this information was
welcome to do so.
Mr. Byers of SEH indicated that their review found that a considerable amount of thought had
been dedicated for the improvement of Blackhawk Park. The main objectives of the traffic analysis was
to determine the traffic volume impacts to those streets from which access to the park could be provided
and identify any operational problems which may result from the access from Murphy Parkway and
develop potential solutions to those problems. In determining how much traffic would impact this area
estimated trip generation needed to be determined. A trip was defined as any vehicle going into the park
or any vehicle exiting from the park; therefore any vehicle going into the park is accounted for twice.
Based on that criteria it was determined that on a typical summer weekday, 85 trips would be generated;
on a typical summer weekend day, 380 trips would be generated; and on a peak weekend day, 400 trips
would be generated.
Another area studied was the increased traffic on the roadways adjacent to and in the vicinity of
Blackhawk Park. Traffic growth on Murphy Parkway will occur due to the buildout of the single family
residential lots in the subdivision. The current volume east of the location of the park access is estimated
at approximately 240 trips per day. Once all the lots are built on, this volume should be expected to
increase to about 540 trips per day. The weekday traffic volume at the Palisade Way access is estimated
at 30 trips per day. It is estimated that Saturday or Sunday traffic volumes at the Palisade Way entrance
would range from 110-120 trips per day. Both weekday and weekend traffic volumes during the winter
could be similar to volumes generated during the summer months, due to the close proximity of this
driveway to the sliding hill. Based on peak tubing days at Trapp Farm Park, the volume on the Palisade
Way access could reach approximately 100-120 per day, from time to time, when tubing conditions are
ideal.
/? `
ADVISORY PARKS, RECREATION AND NATURAL RESOURCES COMMISSION
MINUTES OF MARCH 14, 1991 SPECIAL MEETING
PAGE 4
Average daily weekend traffic volumes of approximately 265-285 vehicles per day on the Murphy
Parkway access represent approximately 70 percent of the total trip generation of the park. Weekday
traffic volumes would be approximately 55 trips.
From a traffic operations perspective, the traffic resulting from Blackhawk Park is not expected to
create any degradation of existing traffic conditions. It was also noted that the maximum holiday parking
demand barely exceeds the number of spaces shown on the conceptual plans by approximately 15
spaces. It is the recommendation of SEH that some thought be given to how overflow parking will be
handled in those infrequent events when the parking lots are filled.
In looking at the Murphy Parkway access, the 30 foot roadway width is desirable due to the grade
and the existence of the trailway in very close proximity to the road. The design of the retaining walls
appears adequate given the topography constraints and the available right-of-way. SEH noted some
concerns regarding left turning traffic from Murphy Parkway to the access road, however, the low volumes,
lower operating speeds and adequate sight distance make the need for special considerations such as
a turn lane and/or channelization unnecessary.
Mr. Beyers indicated that placement of directional signs along Deerwood Drive, Riverton Avenue,
Blackhawk Road and Murphy Parkway will guide drivers to the park entrances, reducing the amount of
unnecessary traffic on the residential streets which could otherwise occur. A sign 400 feet from the park
entrance on eastbound Murphy Parkway is recommended to inform drives of the left turn entrance into
the park.
In conclusion, Mr. Beyers stated that Blackhawk Park is not expected to negatively impact traffic
operations or capacity on Murphy Parkway,Deerwood Drive, Riverton Avenue or Palisade Way. The
volume of traffic resulting from the park will be noticeable to the residents, however, the park traffic does
not raise traffic volumes to the point where the streets will no longer have a residential character.
Gunnar Isberg, 1528 Blackhawk Ridge Court indicated he lives north of Blackhawk Park. He
commented that he felt the park plan was excellent, that all issues appear to have been addressed. He
specifically is looking forward to the trail system that will allow him access to the park from the north. He
was pleased to see that the sensitivity to the eastern portion of the site was respected. One suggestion
would be to have park benches distributed throughout the trail system to allow for resting stations. He
did indicate a concern for the boardwalk stating he would prefer seeing a bridge at the narrows of the
lake. Mr Isberg complimented staff on providing a good plan for Blackhawk Park.
Paul Hansen, 3900 Riverton noted that he has been a resident of this area for many years. He
worked for Leo Murphy in the past and knows this piece of property very well. He stated this was a
beautiful park in it's virgin state and did not want to see it developed. He expressed his concern for park
expansion when there are currently other parks in shambles as well as his concern for budget constraints
the City will be facing. He did note that within Blackhawk Park the cross-country trails had only been
tracked once, the playground equipment is in terrible shape and the trails have not been maintained and
cleaned up. He suggested developing the prairie area to its fullest and leaving the park the way it is. Mr.
Hansen thanked the Commission for listening to his concerns and opinions.
Tim Lano, representing 'Citizens for a Better Blackhawk', commented on Ken Vraa's assessment
of "divergence of opinions' from the questionnaire filled out at the February 20th meeting. He continued
that one person from the north side had indicated they like the park plan, whereas 50 people have
indicated they don't want it. He wanted to know why public opinion is solicited when it is not listened to.
/6 .
ADVISORY PARKS, RECREATION AND NATURAL RESOURCES COMMISSION
MINUTES OF MARCH 14, 1991 SPECIAL MEETING
PAGE 5
He continued that 80% of the people answering the questionnaire wanted a passive park with no pavilion
and the pavilion continues to be a part of the park plan. Mr. Lano stated that this is the only community
park without a direct access.
Dennis Anderson, 1606 Murphy Parkway questioned who wanted this park developed anyway.
He expressed concern for dollars that would be spent for an 'award winning park' that the City didn't
have. He also does not want traffic in this area and asked the Commission to consider the opinions of
the people who have attended these meetings and shared their feelings. He reiterated that they did not
want a pavilion or lights in this park and the statistics of the survey clearly show that people wanted a
passive park with little development. It would appear that they are not being listened to and he would
hope that this plan isn't just 'pushed through'.
Ken Ische, 3881 Palisade Way expressed his concern for the traffic. His concern is that if people
want to park on the east lot and it is full, they will enter via Palisade resulting in traffic going back and
forth from one parking lot to another.
Mike Murphy, 3882 Palisade Way stated that there are no current traffic counts at the intersection
of Cochrane and Blackhawk. He noted that he had informally counted the traffic but felt that this needs
to be done in a more formal manner feeling that traffic entering and exiting at a Palisade entrance would
not necessarily be routed back onto Deerwood. He feels a good deal of traffic enters and exits the park
by way of Cochrane to Blackhawk Road. He asked if there was input from the police department since
they are experiencing trouble with teenagers at the other parks. He asked that a history be provided of
various parks listing things like under age drinking, vandalism, etc. Ken Vraa responded that these types
of problems do exist, as in any community, however with the visibility of the Explorers who patrol the parks
on a regular basis the incidents have been reduced. Mr. Murphy reiterated the need to have a traffic
count done at Cochrane and Blackhawk along with input from the police department.
Ken Lundy, 1593 Murphy Parkway expressed his concern for traffic at Murphy Parkway and the
safety of the children that live in this area. His concern is based on the possibility that people will
overshoot the entrance and enter the residential area. Secondly he felt the traffic count was not as high
as was previously reported and asked if construction vehicles were included in the count. Last, he
wanted to know what the cost would be for the park.
Cindy Gray of SEH responded that the traffic count for that neighborhood was based on an
industry standard of 10-12 trips per day per home. They used the average number of trips per day at the
buildout of 45 homes. Construction and realtor traffic was not taken into consideration for the totals. The
same method of calculation was used at the Riverton entrance.
Mr. Balsberg, 1610 Murphy Parkway commented that he was opposed to bringing traffic into his
residential area. He stated that there are 3 blind curves from Deerwood to Murphy Parkway and
questioned why direct access could not be gained from Deerwood. He stated that a cost estimate to
build the access road would be $500,000 and felt the money could be used for other purposes such as
acquiring more of the Murphy property and bringing access in directly from Deerwood. Steve Sullivan
responded that this was looked at, however the grading costs to bring in an access from Deerwood, trying
to accommodate a parking lot, etc. would be rather prohibitive. Steve also mentioned that a great deal
of time has been spent in analyzing an appropriate access to the park along with negotiating the southern
access. A suggestion from the crowd was to have the City acquire all of the Murphy land and use that
as a direct access from Deerwood.
/7
ADVISORY PARKS, RECREATION AND NATURAL RESOURCES COMMISSION
MINUTES OF MARCH 14,1991 SPECIAL MEETING
PAGE 6
Because of the questions regarding costs, Ken Vraa provided the preliminary cost projection.
Anticipated in the first stage would be grading/site work, utilities, parking lot, trails, recreation facilities and
turf establishment with an anticipated cost of $479,175-494,175. Stage II would include shelter/pavilion
construction, lighting, recreation facilities, landscaping and site furnishings for an anticipated cost of
$466,500-516,500.00. Total construction costs are anticipated at $950,000-1,000,000. Ken continued that
the monies would come from the Park Site Acquisition Fund which is funded by developers when they
are required to make a cash parkland dedication as part of their development. In addition the City has
received a LAWCON grant for the development of Blackhawk Park. A question was asked regarding
whether or not the park needed to be completed by a specific time. Ken responded that there was no
deadline for the funds in the PSAF to be spent however they can be used only for park development.
It has also been the policy to keep a balance in this fund for working capital and emergency funds.
Al Rehder, 1581 Murphy Parkway asked what the balance was in the Park Site Fund now. Ken
Vraa responded that there is approximately $1,000,000 in the fund. Mr. Rehder asked if the access costs
included the 8 feet of retaining wall. He also wanted to know if it was keystone or natural wall. Steve
Sullivan responded that the cost is based on a concrete modular wall. Mr. Rehder then asked if the 50-55
foot R.O.W provided for temporary easements and if they did, are those easements current. Mr. Rehder
expressed the opinion that some of the easements have expired on 12/30/90. Steve Sullivan stated he
would look into this and report back.
Nancy Blasberg, 1610 Murphy Parkway suggested that since there is such a substantial balance
in the Park Site Fund the dollars should be spent to acquire the entire Murphy property to provide a direct
access from Deerwood.
Mr. Larson, 3823 Riverton stated he prefers access from Deerwood. He asked what the cost of
maintenance would be once the park is completed. John VonDeLinde responded that based on Eagan's
experience community parks are the least expensive to maintain. Neighborhood parks on the other hand,
typically have facilities like rinks and athletic fields which are more labor intensive. With the 4.75 acres
of bluegrass that will need to be mowed, this will be incorporated into the regular mowing schedule. With
two buildings, the park attendant will be responsible for litter pick up and minor maintenance while they
are at the site and the buildings will then be rotated into the a regular maintenance schedule. It is
anticipated the playground should last 10-15 years before consideration is given to replacing it. The
bituminous trails will become a part of the long term maintenance program. There is not a dollar figure
available to address all maintenance since it will be dependent upon what is actually developed within
the park.
Monica Anderson stated that she was opposed to the Murphy Parkway access and was
concerned for the probability of cars ending on a dead end street. She does not want a pavilion/shelter
building within the park. She feels that an attempt is being made to combine both Trapp and Thomas
Lake into one grandiose park. Further, she wanted a guarantee that this won't be another Carlson Lake
tragedy. She wanted assurances that reforested areas will be planted with trees of similar size to those
that may have been lost. She would like to see some guarantees that this will not happen or what actions
will be taken to penalize people for their carelessness.
Tom Engquist, 3840 Riverton stated he is trying to make a positive comment regarding this
development process but he has a sinking feeling that nobody is listening to the request and concerns
being expressed.
/8.
ADVISORY PARKS, RECREATION AND NATURAL RESOURCES COMMISSION
MINUTES OF MARCH 14, 1991 SPECIAL MEETING
PAGE 7
Cindy Hansen, 1574 Murphy Parkway stated that she is concerned about the steep curvy road
that will bring people into this park. She continued that she has seen Trapp Farm Park and Thomas Lake
Park but those facilities do not seem to be used so she wondered why there was a need to provide for
another pavilion in this park. She also stated that in the winter the school bus will not drive down Murphy
Parkway because of the steep, unsafe condition that exists.
Questions directed to John VonDeLinde by Paul Hansen, 3900 Riverton, included why Blackhawk
Park hadn't been maintained, why weren't the cross country trails maintained, why wasn't the playground
equipment kept in repair. He continued by stating that enough information had not been obtained
regarding the historical significance of this site since he is aware of Indian burial mounds on the site. He
has been in contact with the Mn. Historical Society so that this issue can be investigated completely as
it should have been initially. John VonDeLinde responded that he agreed with the need to be cautious
and sensitive in developing a site such as Blackhawk Park, however all information required by the
Historical Society relative to this site and as it relates to the LAWCON grant was provided. Decisions
made by governmental agencies were provided to the City and it is John's opinion that all requirements
were met to allow for the development of this site. John concluded that he would be following up with
the State agencies that have worked on this parcel immediately on Friday.
Gunnar Isberg stated that he knew he was in a minority, however he asked the Commission to
think about the 'empty seats' of those who are not attending the meeting. He suggested that perhaps
the trail system could begin and this portion should not impact the neighborhoods.
George Kubik asked that those in attendance honor the opinions of people even if they do not
agree with them.
Judy Epple, 3856 Riverton commented that there is not guarantee that the 'empty seats' would
agree with the planned development. She further stated that she would like to have a meeting where the
Commission listened to input first and did the presentation after that was completed.
George Kubik closed the public hearing portion of the meeting, thanked all those in attendance
for taking the time to attend the meeting and then asked Commission members for their input.
Shawn Hunter indicated that he appreciated the idea of 'untouched' land but indicated the
Commission's role is to look at the needs of the community as a whole. It is usually the case that the
biggest input comes from neighbors immediately surrounding a park and it continues to be/problem
obtaining input from residents throughout the city. Shawn noted that he had spent a great deal of time
soliciting input from several people regarding this park. What he found was that they wanted access to
the park; the amount of development is subjective. It appears that with the pavilion being a big issue, the
people that use pavilions regularly look forward to having another one in the City. There was an extensive
amount of work done to substantiate the need for more pavilion/shelter buildings in parks. The issue of
buying the balance of the Murphy property for direct access into a park would be irresponsible planning
on the part of the Commission and the City. He stated he was satisfied that traffic levels are sufficient to
handle the access points as they are planned.
Deborah Johnson asked if there were any other environmental analysis done besides that of Pat
Jostad. George Kubik brought the Commission's attention to a letter received by the Minnesota River
Valley Audubon Club stating that the plan as proposed addresses the concerns that were previously
expressed in reference to the original proposal. The Chapter then endorsed the plans for Blackhawk Park
in its present form.
ADVISORY PARKS, RECREATION AND NATURAL RESOURCES COMMISSION
MINUTES OF MARCH 14, 1991 MEETING
PAGE 8
Lee Markell indicated that there are always variations in plans. For example, could one access
off Riverton be proposed as Phase I holding off on the Murphy Parkway access. He asked about the
possibility of phasing the park development. Shawn Hunter asked if it would be possible to construct the
loop trail around the lake and provide access for those resident from the north. Steve Sullivan responded
that it would be necessary to study these suggestion because of the cost constraints in phasing. Staff
will need to look at reorganizing facilities in priority order with one parking lot.
Lee Markell also suggested that with the safety concerns off Murphy Parkway could consideration
be given to closing this access in the winter only having the west access open in winter.
Mike Vogel commented that if a phased development were proposed access would need to be
based on what portion is to be developed first. He suggested that the first phase could concentrate on
natural resources,trails, access,canoe access, etc. Then after further study,the development of passive
or recreation needs followed by active recreation needs could be addressed. He is not sure this is a
feasible option because of the costs involved but it may be considered.
John Griggs stated he was in favor of the park being developed as presented. He empathized
with the neighbors surrounding the park, however,in his discussion with Eagan residents he found that
they would like to use this park but access continues to be a problem. Parks are planned for people to
use and in order to use them they need access. With access comes the need for parking lots for people
who are not within walking distance. George Kubik commented that people travel to community parks
• for specific reasons depending upon what facilities are provided within the park.
John Griggs expressed the need to address the impact of overflow parking before the plan goes
on any further. Shawn Hunter stated that the parking lot should not be sized too large. Because of the
intense development of this site Shawn suggested developing in three phases. Perhaps the upper
parking lot could be developed first with the shelter building, loop trail board walk or bridge then move
on to a second phase to include south access, a portion of the parking lot, a portion of the pavilion and
then expand these facilities as the need arises.
Ted Billy appreciated the concern expressed for a passive park however, having lived in the city
for 20 years he has seen Eagan grow from a village to a city of almost 50,000 people. The bottom line
is that in a city this size development will occur and the Commission's task is to look forward to plan for
the needs of the residents when full growth is reached. He feels that staff has done an excellent job in
trying to meet the needs of future development while staying within the guidelines of the Park System
Plan. He commented that 75% of this piece of property will remain in it's natural, undeveloped state. He
also appreciated the comments regarding wildlife preservation, however, all building displaces wildlife and
the city cannot afford the luxury of dedicating this entire parcel as a wildlife preserve.
Dick Carroll commented that he is a non-voting member of the Commission however as a long-
term member of the Commission he is keenly aware of the park facility needs that have arisen over the
last several years. He noted that the Commission's task is difficult since they need to continually look to
the future needs of the whole community in acquiring parkland for future development. That is why
Blackhawk Park has been so carefully reviewed and analyzed.
After further discussion and with several questions still remaining, Shawn Hunter moved, John
Griggs seconded with all members voting in favor to table the decision on Blackhawk Park development
until the April 4, 1991 meeting.
20.
ADVISORY PARKS, RECREATION AND NATURAL RESOURCES COMMISSION
MINUTES OF MARCH 14, 1991 MEETING
PAGE 9
As clarification, Ken Vraa asked if staff should be addressing the priority of a trailway, cost
implications of a parking lot on the west side as a phased process as well as looking as different
variations of phasing. George Kubik noted that there were several issues that remain for clarification.
Shawn Hunter and John Griggs withdrew their motion and second.
The issues of clarification included a proposed bridge versus a boardwalk; loop trail installation
early in development; pavilion design flexibility; consideration for switching the location of the pavilion and
shelter building; consideration given to providing concessions within the shelter building and have those
dollars offset some of the maintenance costs as well as the options for phasing.
After further discussion, Shawn Hunter moved, Mike Vogel seconded with all members voting in
favor to table the Blackhawk Park development issue until the April 4, 1991 Commission meeting.
PARK SERVICE AREA 21
Ken Vraa explained that this issue involved the anticipated expansion of a middle school adjacent
to the Deerwood Elementary School site. This is an issue that the Commission will be able to discuss
further when more information is available. It is anticipated that this item will be deferred to the April 4,
1991 meeting.
With no further business to conduct, Shawn Hunter moved, Mike Vogel seconded with all
members voting in favor to adjourn. The meeting was adjourned at 11:10 P.M.
Secretary
Date
21.
MEMORANDUM
TO: ADVISORY PARKS, RECREATION AND NATURAL RESOURCES
COMMISSION
FROM: STEPHEN SULLIVAN, LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT/PARKS PLANNER
DOROTHY PETERSON, SUPERINTENDENT OF RECREATION
RICH BRASCH, WATER QUALITY COORDINATOR
DATE: MARCH 27, 1991
RE: PARK CENTER 2ND ADDITION - CITY OF EAGAN
PROPOSAL
An application has been submitted requesting a preliminary plat of 6.8 acres for a 65 unit senior
housing complex.
BACKGROUND
The subject parcel is located south of Rahn Park, east of Cedar Cliff Commercial Addition, within
the northwest quadrant of the Cliff Lake Road and Cliff Road. The Commission has previously
reviewed this parcel. On April 1, 1985, the Commission reviewed a request for a Comprehensive
Guide Plan change from Mixed Residential to Commercial. The Commission expressed concern
regarding tree loss and the compatibility of the commercial land use adjacent to Rahn Park. The
Commission again reviewed this parcel at the December 1, 1988, meeting. The request was for
the rezoning from Agricultural to Planned Development. It was at this time that the acquisition
of approximately 6 acres of the 21.25 acres was being pursued by the H. R. A. for senior citizen
housing. The Commission's recommendations were as follows:
1. The developer provide staff with a tree inventory and revise the grading/layout plan to
preserve additional significant vegetation.
2. The developer resubmit a landscape plan which increases the density and size of plant
material adjacent to Rahn Park providing the required screening/buffering according to the
Landscape Policy.
3. A 5 foot wide sidewalk be placed along Cliff Road and the existing sidewalk adjacent to
old Rahn Road be extended to the proposed 8 foot trail along Cliff Lake Road.
4. That a catch basin be placed for run-off before entering Rahn Park.
5. That this parcel be subject to a cash parkland dedication.
23.
Park Center 2nd Addition
April 2, 1991
Page 2
ITEMS FOR COMMISSION REVIEW
Staff has evaluated this proposal and found three primary issue categories:
1. Development/Parks Dedication Issues
II. Senior Center Issues
III. Water Quality Issues
Within these categories are several issues for Commission review. Steve Sullivan, Landscape
Architect/Parks Planner, will evaluate the Development/Parks Dedication Issues. Dorothy
Peterson, Recreation Superintendent, will evaluate the Senior Center issues. Rich Brasch, Water
Quality Coordinator, will evaluate the Water Quality Issues.
1. DEVELOPMENT/PARKS DEDICATION ISSUES
The Commission will need to evaluate these following issues:
A. Does the proposal preserve significant trees?
B. Is the layout compatible with adjacent Rahn Park?
C. Does surface runoff from the parcel influence Rahn Park?
D. What are the trailway obligations?
E. What is the Parks Dedication requirement?
A. Does the proposal preserve significant trees?
The developer has completed a tree inventory for the parcel. Staff has overlayed the
grading plan and tree survey to evaluate the developmental impact. (See Figure #1). The
twin building plan is a direct result of the developers sensitivity to existing woodland areas
and topographic characteristics. A 10' high wooded knoll will remain between the two
buildings. The eastern building location does result in the loss of approximately 8 oak
trees. The oak trees along the west property line are preserved. The grading plan
indicates a small swale to the north of the west building which removes approximately 11
oak trees. Staff concludes that the grading plan can be revised to preserve this tree group.
24.
Park Center 2nd Addition
April 2, 1991
Page 3
B. Is the layout compatible to adjacent Rahn Park?
The preservation of the wooded knoll and the orientation of the parking lots away from
the park is sensitive to Rahn Park. The primary impact is that the 3 story structures are
within 40' - 60' of the southern park boundary. The north/south orientation of the
buildings minimizes the visual mass of the structure from the park. Staff feels that the
landscape plan should include plant material along the north faces of the two buildings to
provide additional buffer from the park.
C. Does the surface run-off influence Rahn Park?
The upgrading of Pond AP-50 and the trunk storm sewer improvements result in minimal
influence regarding run-off to Rahn Park.
The swale north of the west building directs approximately 1.5 c.f.s. into the park. This
minor watershed area should have no detrimental impact to Rahn Park.
D. What is the trailway obligation?
The development is responsible for an 8' bituminous trail along Cliff Road. The 5'
sidewalk extension along Rahn Road was completed with the construction of Park Center
Drive. As part of the public improvements for the construction of the road a 6' concrete
sidewalk is placed adjacent to Park Center Drive connecting to the proposed Cliff Road
trail. This sidewalk will provide pedestrian linkage to the adjacent commercial land uses
and parkland from the senior facility. The developer and City should also consider the
feasibility of direct pedestrian trails into Rahn Park.
E. What is the park's dedication requirement?
The proposal will be subject to a cash parks dedication.
II. SENIOR CENTER ISSUES
A second general area of issues regarding this project are identified as public policy
questions for the City. They are presented for the Commission's evaluation.
A. Is a public facility, such as a senior center, permissible in R4 zoning?
B. What is the City's philosophy toward the development of a public facility within the
seniors housing building?
25.
Park Center 2nd Addition
April 2, 1991
Page 4
A. Is a public facility permissible in R4 zoning?
Staff has pursued this question with the City attorney's office. A public facility is permitted
in R4.
B. What is the city's philosophy toward the development of a public facility within the senior
housing building?
The preliminary design of Eagan's Senior housing provides a facility for congregate dining,
and probable meeting/activity space. The inclusion of these facilities creates a window of
opportunity to plan for recreational, social and informational programming for all of the
community's senior population.
The scope of activities offered at the Senior Housing facility could range from none to the
City's current level of bi-monthly events to a fully operational senior center.
Early definition of the City's role in senior activities would allow for pro-active preparation
for the immediate future and for the long term.
BACKGROUND
Parks and Recreation first began conducting activities for senior citizens in 1984. Staff met with
a group of ten to twelve seniors who had indicated an interest in senior activities in Eagan. The
vehicle used to determine interest was a questionnaire, administered at a Police Department
Senior Citizen Appreciation Day. Senior activities have evolved from one afternoon meeting a
month to two afternoon meetings, a morning walking club and a weekly coffee club at the Silver
Bell McDonalds.
The department's seniors mailing list has increased from the initial 60 or so names to over 220
households. It is known that not all Eagan seniors are on that list.
Participation in activities fluctuates from as low as twenty (20) to well over fifty (50), subject to
the activity. Staff is aware that numerous widows lack transportation to the Fire Administration
Building where activities are held.
ISSUES
Informal discussion with seniors, direct inquiry from seniors and staff observation of the role
played by Parks and Recreation at other Senior Centers in neighboring communities has raised
the following questions:
o Is a senior center ever to be provided within Eagan' corporate boundaries?
G Is a senior housing facility the appropriate location for a senior center?
C What is the City's role in providing a senior center facility?
o What is the City's Department of Parks and Recreation's role in the programming of a
senior center?
Z6.
Park Center 2nd Addition
April 2, 1991
Page 5
DISCUSSION
Eagan's current senior population is perhaps 3 to 4% of the total population. That percentage
is likely to increase in the next decade as the first "baby boomers" become age 55. The age at
which persons choose to become active in senior citizen activities is an individual phenomenon.
Seniors currently active in Eagan's seniors group range in age from the late 50's to age 90!
Of the individuals who regularly participate in Department senior activities, support for a senior
center in Eagan exists.
Of the Eagan residents who participate in senior activities at the Sioux Trail or Rosemount Senior
Centers it is not known, because the question has not been asked, whether Eagan activity would
be preferred.
Staff perceives that the bias of the senior age population is that Eagan should offer a senior
center. Representatives from the Dakota County H.R.A. attended the Department's March 26
Seniors Meeting. Among the questions seniors asked were:
Could the community use the recreational space the facility provides?
Could the Eagan Seniors group meet there?
Does H.R.A. operate senior centers in the facilities it manages?
The Rosemount Senior Center provides the model for the location of an activities center within
a Senior Housing Complex. The Rosemount center also demonstrates a joint powers cooperation
between the City of Rosemount and the School District.
In general, however, senior center locations in the communities that offer them are located
wherever space is found. Examples are: in a community center (Crystal), in a school that has
been closed and now houses community education (Hopkins, St. Louis Park, Robbinsdale) or
space within a school (Hastings, W. St. Paul, So. St. Paul). Farmington and Lakeville appear to
be unique having provided separate facilities for senior centers in a downtown area.
The roles of cities and the partnerships formed to enable a community to offer senior centers are
varied and unique to each community's circumstance.
The Amhurst/Wilder Foundation, in the January-February issue of the Good Age Newspaper,
reports the following Metropolitan Council statistics:
In the Twin Cities Metropolitan area:
- 50% of senior center operations are totally funded by cities
- 30% of senior center operations are totally funded by school districts
- 1 in 4 senior centers are funded by counties
- 1 in 4 senior centers receives United Way funds
2?.
Park Center 2nd Addition
April 2, 1991
Page 6
In South of the River municipalities:
The cities of Lakeville and Farmington fund senior center operations.
Community Education has undertaken primary senior center operations in Burnsville,
Rosemount, Hastings, West St. Paul and Inver Grove Heights.
Joint powers between the cities and school districts occur in Burnsville and South St. Paul
and to a lesser degree in Rosemount and Farmington.
No clear cut precedent can be discerned from the experience of others.
Senior centers that are operated by cities, typically are programmed and managed by Parks and
Recreation Departments. In Farmington and Lakeville, for example, senior center staff are
supervised by recreation personnel.
An example of a city/school district joint venture is found in Burnsville. The senior center, located
adjacent to the Sioux Trail Elementary school, is leased to the City (at no actual fee). The City
pays the utilities and all expenses related to the center's structure, The coordinator of the senior
center is a school district employee. Funds for the school district's share of this operation are
budgeted from the general community education levy.
Initial funding for senior center operations has, in the past, been available through grants from
the Metropolitan Council. Staff is in the process of inquiring whether this grant program
continues in existence.
Precedent does exist for ISD 196 Community Education to provide senior center personnel and
programs. Eagan's proposed senior housing will be located in ISD 196. The concept of a joint
powers arrangement between the City and the school district is a possible alternative to the City
assuming sole responsibility for senior citizen programs and senior center options.
III.
A.
WATER QUALITY
What water quality requirements must be met for the development?
The 6.8 acre Park Center, 2nd Addition lies in several different drainage basins. About
four acres of the development drains through an existing storm sewer to Pond AP-50.
About .3 acres of the development will drain through another existing storm sewer to Pond
AP-25. Each of these areas will contain substantial impervious surface. The remaining 2.5
acres within the development will drain overland to Pond AP-49 within Rahn Park. This
area is not expected to contain any impervious surfaces.
AP-50 is a .6 acre, 2.86 acre-foot stormwater basin. AP-50 was constructed by the
developer during the summer of 1990 and was intended to store and treat run-off from the
developer's 4 acres of property as well as run-off from previously developed commercial
and residential properties outside the proposed project areas. The pond discharges to a
series of small ponds (collectively called AP-49) in Rahn Park which are Class III water
bodies designated for scenic/recreation uses.
28.
Park Center 2nd Addition
April 2, 1991
Page 7
Pond AP-25 is designated as a nutrient trap in the City's Water Quality Management Plan
and was constructed as a public improvement by the City to treat run-off from 31 acres of
commercial and residential property, including part of the proposed development. AP-25
discharges to a storm sewer trunk. The water is carried to a stormwater basin before it is
released into Langhoven Lake, a scenic/recreational (Class III) pond in Woodhaven Park.
Analysis of the site and drainage using the City's water quality model indicates that AP-50
is too small to fully treat the entire developed drainage area but substantially exceeds the
capacity needed to treat run-off expected from that portion of the Park Center 2nd
Addition development that falls within this drainage basin. AP-25 is designed to provide
sufficient area and volume to adequately treat run-off from a 31 acre drainage dominated
by commercial land uses after the drainage is fully developed. Additional phosphorus
inputs from the .3 acres of the Park Center 2nd Addition that lies within this drainage will
have a negligible impact on down drainage water quality. Finally, overland flow to AP-49
from vegetated areas within the proposed development should also have a negligible
impact on AP-49.
Based on this analysis, the developer's share of water quality treatment responsibilities
appear to have been met for the property. However, some degradation of water quality
can be expected in Pond AP-49 because treatment needs for the entire basin of AP-50
exceed that pond's treatment capacity.
As with many projects, the most significant threat to water quality will occur during the
construction stage. Strict construction site erosion control must be practiced to prevent
the introduction of excessive sediment into AP-50, AP-49, and AP-25. Excessive sediment
will severely impair the treatment capabilities of AP-50 and AP-25 (with commensurate
indirect impacts to downstream water bodies) and could destroy the scenic qualities of AP-
49 in Rahn Park.
FOR COMMISSION ACTION
The Commission may consider the following recommendations:
1. The developer revise the grading plan to preserve the oak stand north of the west building.
2. The landscape plan be revised to provide plant material along the north face of the two
buildings providing additional buffer from the park.
3. The developer be responsible for a 6' wide sidewalk along Park Center Drive to Cliff
Road. The developer provide an 8' bituminous trail along Cliff Road.
4. The proposal be subject to a cash parks dedication.
5. A senior center should be provided within Eagan's corporate boundaries.
2qi.
Park Center 2nd Addition
April 2, 1991
Page 8
6. The senior housing facility is an appropriate location for such a facility.
7. The City should provide a leadership role in providing a senior center facility.
8. The Department of Parks and Recreation should be authorized to study potential
management, staffing and operation of a senior center.
SS:DP:RB/nh
attachments
I
LI- 'I
?qc8
0
W
1L J, N s
_-J
Cam` ?
! \ 1
14
P?aEt.l?.l?a W
III
LoT?1
c-i ?_J Y
c" bfJ/lf.S?
1l/jj anrtsrE
?ees".e
d I
III
LL.
ELEV.
L!_ POND
AP-50
.5ok
9o7.j
N $9-4'.f 2LN
131704
?y ~ %0
•
• 0
F Q ?
x W ?
GE
913
20 \
CENTER so ?? a+ba
+go 6+ 0 11 5
z x x
9sE.7 90$1 901.6 qox 9/a4 9le-9 .7
3roex ofa 3
_Vio
MEMORANDUM
TO: ADVISORY PARKS, RECREATION AND NATURAL RESOURCES
COMMISSION
FROM: KEN VRAA, DIRECTOR OF PARKS & RECREATION
STEPHEN SULLIVAN, LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT
JOHN VONDELINDE, SUPERINTENDENT OF PARKS
CRAIG JOHNSON, LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT
DATE: MARCH 20, 1991
RE: BLACKHAWK PARK COMMUNITY ISSUES
Staff has reviewed the issues and questions generated from the March 14 Advisory Parks,
Recreation & Natural Resource Commission meeting. The following information is staff's
response to the various issues:
1. Are the access road easements temporary or permanent regarding the adjacent
lots within Blackhawk Ponds?
• Staff received permanent easements for road construction and conservation
for Lots 6, 9, 10, 11 of Block 2, Blackhawk Ponds Addition.
• The easement was provided by Meritor Development at the time of the final
plat.
• The easement allows slopes, fills and retaining walls within these properties.
It also allows reforestation according to a planting plan prepared by the
City.
• The conservation portion of the easement restricts the land owner from
constructing or installing man made objects, store recreational vehicles and
firewood.
2. Can the east parking lot be connected to the west parking lot via a roadway?
The east parking lot is at approximately an 885 elevation. The west parking
lot is at approximately a 825 elevation. This 60' vertical difference is taken
via a ridge line which separates these two facilities. The ridge gradient is
steep with an average slope of 25%. In order to provide a road between
the parking lot at a 10-12% maximum gradient one would need 500' feet
horizontally to provide this connection.
A connecting road could consume a considerable quantity of fill and bisect
the park space within the central plateau area.
J.5.
The additional road length and associated grading would increase the cost
of parks development.
3.
Can both peak and average parking needs be taken care of within the park?
The Blackhawk Design Team has adopted the philosophy that all parking
shall be accomplished within the park.
The traffic study performed by S.E.H. Engineering, Inc., finds that the
average week-end parking need is for 170 spaces. The park currently
meets the average week-end parking need with 175 proposed stalls.
The traffic study indicates the peak parking need for Blackhawk Park based
on holiday use would be for 190 stalls. The current number of stalls is 175,
just 15 short of the peak parking stalls needed. Staff feels confident that
these additional stalls can be accommodated the few times a year when
needed by providing temporary parking along the access roads or within
a turf overflow area.
4.
Will benches be placed adjacent to the loop trail?
Benches will be conveniently located throughout the park, including
adjacent to the loop trail. Benches are typically located on regular intervals
along trails, trail junction points, observation areas and facilities.
5.
What is the sign program?
• Staff has not developed a comprehensive sign program for Blackhawk
Park.
• The initial review indicates primary entrance signs at:
Deerwood Drive & Murphy Parkway
South access road and Murphy Parkway
Palisades Way & Riverton Avenue
• Directional signs to the primary entrances may be located at:
Murphy Parkway south of the south access road
Blackhawk Road & Riverton Avenue
Deerwood Drive & Riverton Avenue
• Miscellaneous information signage is anticipated such as: no parking along
the access roads, park regulation signage and a kiosk to provide general
park information.
I¢.
6. Can the trail on Riverton Avenue extend to the Palisades Way access road?
• The trail link from Riverton Avenue extending to the Palisades Way access
is feasible. The boulevard width is 12.5 feet, with an 8 foot trail leaving 4.5
feet of safety zone. Several signs and other encumbrances would need to
be relocated.
7. Can Murphy Parkway within the Blackhawk Addition be realigned to provide a tee
intersection at the southern park access road?
• The City's traffic consultant has given preliminary review regarding the
possibility of a tee intersection. This preliminary review concludes that a tee
intersection alignment may be possible. The engineering and costs
associated with this alternative has not been pursued at this time.
• The traffic consultant concludes within the traffic study that the safety and
operational effectiveness of the current alignment of Murphy Parkway works
well and that a tee intersection is not needed from a traffic stand point.
8. Can the development of the Park be phased?
• The phasing of construction is not untypical for the development of an
Eagan Park. There is however a difference between phasing of
construction and the approval of a park master plan. All phases of
construction in Eagan Parks have been based on an approved master plan.
This provides for assurances that first phase construction will blend itself
with any future construction activities and the ultimate development of the
park.
• The cost projections prepared for the Advisory Commission at its special
meeting on March 14th, assumed a phasing of construction. The initial
phase provided for all grading, utilities, access roads, parking, trail
construction, and access to Blackhawk Lake. The second phase of
construction would provide for the park shelter buildings, parking lot
lighting, miscellaneous recreational facility development and other surface
development. It would be quite likely that even this phase of construction
would have been further sub-divided and spread out over a number of
years. Trapp Farm Park, for an example, still is not completed to its
ultimate development, as was envisioned in the Park Master Plan of
1984/85.
If the Commission wishes to review the construction phase of the park, staff would urge
the Commission to first approve a Master Plan for the park. From'this, alternative stages
of construction could be considered. Staff has provided you with one alternative.
A second alternative may include the following, assuming approval of the refined plan:
All grading would be completed with the initial construction contract, this would include:
grading for the access roads and parking lots for both the upper and lower parking,
5.
trailway, building pad, play areas and lake access. Surface development would be
confined to the east side of the park. The south access roadway and parking lot, along
with bituminous trail construction, soft surface trail construction, boardwalk and lake
access. The upper elevation (west side) parking lot, shelter building and sanitary sewer
would not be completed in the initial phases. This would be done in future phases of
construction. The next phase of construction would include the pavilion and scattered
picnic site locations - leaving the west uplands area of the park to the very last phase.
Again, the last phase would include parking lot surfacing, sewer and shelter building.
The parking spaces being provided within the first phase would be compatible with the
types of facilities/parking needs to be developed. That is, use of the park facilities on the
east side would not exceed the capacities of the parking lot. The three phase approach
cost estimate would be as follows.
PHASE I IMPROVEMENTS:
Grading & Site Work $ 87,000.00
Utilities 65,000.00
Parking & Road
(East side only) 86,600.00
Trails $111,975-126,975.00
Recreation Facilities 14,000.00
Turf 33,300.00
$397,875-412,875.00
PHASE II IMPROVEMENTS:
Pavilion w/rest room $175,000-225,000.00
Recreation Facilities 80,000.00
Site Furnishing 21,500.00
Landscaping 20,000.00
Lighting 27,000.00
$318,000-373,500.00
PHASE III IMPROVEMENTS:
West Parking Lot $54,800.00
Building 125,000.00
Sewer 16,500.00
Lighting 8,000.00
$203,500.00
34.
9. Should there be a bridge, boardwalk or no crossing area at the narrows to connect
the neighborhoods to the north?
• A bridge or boardwalk would best accommodate handicap use.
• A bridge would allow sight lines under and past the structure.
• A boardwalk would allow sight lines over and past the structure.
• A bridge or boardwalk would assist in preserving conservation areas.
• A bridge would cost 30% more than a boardwalk.
• No crossing would eliminate a loop trail around the east basin, providing
only a dead-end system.
• No crossing would mean all users would have to go through conservancy
areas, there and back.
• No crossing would put the active area of the park twice (0.4 mile) further
from the north access.
• No crossing may require a bituminous trail instead of soft surface through
conservancy areas to accommodate three season use.
10. What are the cost comparisons of a bridge vs boardwalk?
• Minnesota Department of Natural Resources - Stillwater State Prison
Floating Boardwalk (Exhibit A)
• 2 - 6' X 16' Ramps
@ $1,961.00 each $ 3,992.00
• 160 Lin.Ft. Walkway Sections w/railings
@ $3,233.00/ 20' Section
8 @ $3,233.00 each $25,864.00
• 2 Footings
@ $1,500.00 each $ 3,000.00
Materials Only $32,786.00
31.
• Super deck System
Floating Boardwalk (Exhibit B)
• 2 - 7' X 16' Ramps - Nature Walk w/frame
224 S. F. @ $12.00/S. F.
$ 2,688.00
• 160 Lin.Ft. Floating Docks
7'X160'
1120 S.F. @ $20.00 $22,400.00
• 320 Lin.Ft. Handicap Railings
@ $16.00/Lin.Ft. $ 5,1200.00
• 2 Footings
@ $1,500.00 each $ 3,000.00
Materials Only $33,208.00
• Continental Bridge
Pre-Fabricated Steel Bridge (Exhibit C)
• 8' X 120' Self-weathering steel
Wood Decking w/railings
Lump Sum @ $41,600.0($41,600.00
• 2 Footings
@ $840.00 each $ 1,680.00
Materials Only $43,280.00
11
Should consideration be given to the operation of a pleasure skating rink in
Blackhawk Park ?
As a result of the Blackhawk Park public hearing, some Commission members have
raised the question of the feasibility/desirability of including a pleasure skating rink
in the park master plan. Staff would like to respond with the following list of
positive and negative attributes related to such a facility:
• Positive
• A pleasure rink would be complimentary to other winter activities,
including snow tubing and cross country skiing. The park could
essentially become a "winter outdoor recreation facility" - supporting
all three major winter activities. No other site in Eagan would offer
such an opportunity.
14? -
If the skating rink were located on Blackhawk Lake, it could
potentially include a "skating trail" configuration. This type of lineal
skating experience would be unique to the Eagan Park System.
Nestled in among the trees and prairies, Blackhawk Park would
provide a truly natural setting for winter skating not duplicated by
neighborhood parks.
A skating rink at Blackhawk Park would be second only to Well Site
Park in offering a large sheet of ice for general public skating
(smaller Class D neighborhood rinks notwithstanding)
Negative
There are presently nine skating surfaces (5 pleasure rinks, 4 hockey
rinks) within one mile of Blackhawk Park. The addition of a skating
surface at Blackhawk Park would further bias the greater availability
of skating in the western half of the City.
As reflected in the current master plan, the distance between the
south parking lot and a skating rink on Blackhawk Lake would be
approximately 800 feet. By generally accepted design standards this
is considered to be an excessive distance. Minimizing this distance
might require developing a suitable skating surface on land, or
moving the parking lot closer to the lake.
A skating rink on Blackhawk Lake would generally be hidden from
the view of most park visitors. This lack of visibility would negatively
influence marketing of the facility and detract from the
"complimentary sense" of winter recreation activities. This could be
mitigated however by creating a smaller terrestrial rink near the
sledding hill (assuming the feasibility of such).
A continuous skating trail connecting the east and west basins of
Blackhawk Lake would require removal of the proposed boardwalk
in the fall, and replacement in the spring. This would add additional
maintenance requirements during the two busiest seasons of the
year.
The thickness and safety of ice could be influenced by two
hydrologic factors. An aerator is proposed for the south side of the
western basin. This would likely consist of an underground sub-
terrestrial baffle system with a portable pump located on the lake.
Aerators are known to produce open water conditions and thinner
ice within the general operating area.
if.
With more than 9,000 acres draining into Blackhawk Park, winter
melting can produce high levels of water flow through the lake and
create underwater currents. Ice borings in Blackhawk Lake in
January, 1991, revealed ice depths of eight inches in some areas.
(Source -Rich Brasch)
A lack of certainty over ice depth raises questions of safety and
liability, both with respect to maintenance crews working on the lake,
as well as the public. The Department of Natural Resources
guidelines recommend a minimum ice thickness of 12" to 15" for
plow trucks and tractors - used in snow removal and ice shaving.
The skating season on lakes is generally shorter than in a terrestrial
condition due to the need for sufficient ice depth for maintenance
equipment. Snow removal and maintenance operations can also be
hampered by wind drifts, cracks in the ice, and standing water.
In the process of deliberating over a skating rink in Blackhawk Park, the Commission
should take into consideration issues affecting the general design philosophy for the park,
the desire for pleasure skating, terrestrial vs lake skating, operations and marketing
issues, and potential public liability/safety questions.
12. Will the City be required to obtain another written sign-off from the Minnesota
Historical Society regarding historical and archeological resources?
An assertion was made at the Blackhawk Park hearing that the City's letter
of review from the Minnesota Historical Society, dated 10-30-87, was no
longer valid and that an updated authorization would need to be made prior
to commencement of park construction this year. In response, staff has
spoken with Wayne Sames, Director of the Outdoor Recreation Grants
Program, Minnesota Department of Trade and Economic Development, in
regards to this allegation. Mr. Sames has assured the City that based upon
his conversation with Dennis Gimmestad, Director of the State Historical
Preservation Office, that the Historical Society's position continues to be
valid and that there is no automatic expiration of their concurrence on this
project. Therefore, the assertion is false and no additional action is required
by the City. A copy of the letter from Mr. Sames, indicated the same, is
attached to this issue statement.
If, however, the individual making the claim can substantiate the presence
of archeological remnants in the park, and if the Historical Society
determines that additional review is necessary, the City would obviously
want to cooperate to ensure the protection of any significant historical
resources.
4W -
13. What level of maintenance was provided in Blackhawk Park in 1990?
Assertions were made by the same individual at the Blackhawk Park
hearing in regards to the infrequent level of mowing of park grounds and
trails, and cross country ski grooming during the 1990/91 season. A review
of mowing records indicates that Blackhawk Park was mowed on 15
occasions in 1990. During the months of June, July and August, mowings
occurred an average of every 7 working days. In regards to trail grooming,
the City has been contracting with the City of Lakeville for the past seven
or eight years for this service. Despite generally shallow snow conditions
throughout the winter months, the City of Lakeville was able to groom
Eagan's cross-country ski trail at Blackhawk Park, Patrick Eagan and
Northview Park on four separate occasions. These dates were 12/26/90
and 1/2,19,28/91.
14. What will be the additional cost for operating and maintaining Blackhawk Park, if
the Park Master Plan is approved as currently proposed and how much will taxes
increase for an average household as a result?
This question about maintenance costs and taxes was also posed during
the public hearing. This is an excellent question and one which staff had
planned to cover in greater detail as a component of the
management/operations section of the park design guide. In an effort to
provide the Commission with more information at this time, the following
discussion is presented:
First it is important to keep in mind that maintenance costs are already
being expended at Blackhawk Park. Current maintenance activities include
mowing and turf management on an approximately 4 acres, trails
maintenance, monthly playground inspections and repairs, litter collection
and cross-country ski trail grooming. It is estimated that the cost of
performing this maintenance is in the neighborhood of $4,500 per year.
In an effort to better understand maintenance and operation costs for the
park following full development staff has prepared an itemized projection of
costs for 18 categories of recreation and sport facilities. These include: turf
maintenance, parking lots, lighting, pavilion, shelter, satellites, picnic areas,
playground, bituminous trails, aglime trails, fishing pier/boardwalk, tubing
hill, canoe access, cross-country ski trails, skating rink, lake aeration
system, prairie management and landscape management. Added to these
costs was a 10% contingency taking into consideration miscellaneous
responses to vandalism, repairs and other unanticipated needs.
Based on this review, staff's best projection for operating Blackhawk Park
at full development, will be in the range of $32,000 per year. Offsetting
these costs will be income generation of about $4,000 per year from shelter
and pavilion reservations. This leaves a net operating expense of roughly
$28,000 per year. Therefore the operations and maintenance costs at full
4-/.
development will represent an increase of approximately $24,000 over
present costs. Assuming that maintenance programs remain at the same
level of service in other parks, these added expenses will need to be
addressed in subsequent budgeting cycles.
• The question was also raised in regard to what impact these operating
costs would have on tax increases. Consultation with the City Finance
Director indicates that on a home with an $80,000 market value the increase
would be approximately 44 cents per year; a $120,000 market value home
would increase by approximately 87 cents per year and a $200,000 market
value home would increase by approximately $2.84 per year. Thus, it can
be concluded that the marginal increase for operating the park would be
relatively insignificant for the average home owner.
15. Would winter maintenance of the south access road be a problem?
Staff has discussed this access road item with Arnie Erhart, Eagan's Street
Superintendent. The grade of the road is not ideal, but certainly maintainable in
regards to ice and snow removal. The down gradient from Murphy Parkway
facilitates the maintenance operation.
4-Z
AL i, p,1tr' AMp : "L'! M/=PcL
% tiGU N YVLIAW
-tti h#-}? m 3!'Sb„
t?rLOXP
W 4tzAj(, cr #A 421 S is
f'ti .• ONr+ 'i1 $
IDV f*.r il%??!' . ° Lfli'.?7
a
io
r _ a
CT'
Decking
Anti-Skid Surface
r ..
'dry
Piling Br.
Float
Single Outside Connector (G.)
> ' Spacers
Multiple Width Float/Deck Connector (H.)
141/4" sq. Utility Grooves
rp(RNT b
Wooden Rub Rail* , - Maxi-rail*
Top
Chord
The Plate*
Bottom
Chord
Vertical Web
Floor Beam
Support \ ` Diagonal Web
``
Angle Mount Plate
L End Floor Beam ?- Identification *Optlonal
Deck Stringers Plaque
?KHt?JT G
45.
Minnesota Department of
Trade and Economic Development
March 21, 1991
Mr. John VonDeLinde
Superintendent of Parks
City of Eagan
Municipal Center
3830 Pilot Knob Road
Eagan, Minnesota 55121
RE: OREC-0005-M-FY88
(Formerly LW27-01271)
Blackhawk Lake Community Park
Dear John:
Community Development Division
900 American Center Building
150 East Kellogg Boulevard
St. Paul, Minnesota 55101-1421
612/296-5005
Fax: 612/296-5287
In response to your inquiry regarding the status of. historical and archeological
review for the proposed Blackhawk.Lake Community Park development, I reviewed the
pertinent documents in our project file. As indicated by the enclosed copy of a
letter from Mr. Dennis Gimmestad, then Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer,
the Minnesota Historical Society completed a review of the project as required by
state and federal laws and regulations in 1987. The review, which is required for
final approval of an Outdoor Recreation Grant, indicated that there are "...no
known sites of historic, architectural, cultural, archeological, or engineering
significance within the area of the proposed'project." The Historical Society did
not recommend any further study or surveys of the area.
This last point is significant since the Historical Society will normally
recommend an archeological and historical survey of an area if it has any reason
to believe that important sites might exist, even if there is no existing concrete
evidence or file information.
As far as this office is concerned, the proposed project was reviewed in the same
manner as all other proposed Outdoor Recreation Grant projects and there is no
reason to question the recommendations of the Historical Society in that regard.
On the question of whether Historical Society reviews automatically expire after
some specific period of time I can tell you that I have never heard of such a
provision. To be sure, however, I did check with Mr. Gimmestad, who is now. the
Historic Preservation, Field Services and Grants Department Head for the
Historical Society. He assured me that no such automatic review expiration
exists. He did say that a new review could be ordered if some new specific
evidence of archeological or historical sites were presented.
n11NNEN1rA (A?
1_0 7 •
An Equal Opportunity Employer
John VonDeLinde Page Two 3-21-91
In that regard, Mr. Gimmestad has informed me that an Eagan resident recently
contacted one of his staff archeologists and suggested that there may be burial
sites within the park. The Historical Society will be contacting you soon to
request site plans and other information about the park and, possibly, to arrange
for an on-site inspection. The Historical Society will then make recommendations
for further action, if any is required. I have requested that they expedite this
additional review in light of the need to begin the park development this year.
am confident that, even if burial sites are found, appropriate adjustments in the
site plan can be made or other mitigating measures can be pursued that will allow
for the planned development of recreational facilities in the park.
In summary, Eagan has to date complied fully with all requirements of
Historical Society and the Outdoor Recreation Grant program related to
possible archeological and/or historical sites within Blackhawk Park.
of any assistance during completion of this latest review, please let
Sincerely,
Wayne Sames, Director
Outdoor Recreation Grant Project
WS/sm
OR.GEN/II106-CP
cc: Mr. Dennis Gimmestad, Historic Preservation, Field Services and
Grants Department Head, Minnesota Historical Society
the
review of
If I can be
me know.
48
MEMO TO: EAGAN ADVISORY PARK, RECREATION
AND NATURAL RESOURCES COMMISSION
FROM: JOHN VONDELINDE, SUPERINTENDENT OF PARKS
DATE: MARCH 26, 1991
SUBJECT: MESSAGE BOARD - EAGAN MUNICIPAL CENTER
As the Commission will recall, staff gave a verbal report at the March meeting regarding
options and costs for installing a message board at the Eagan Municipal Center. The report
was made in response to a previous request of the Commission for more information on this
topic. This memorandum is intended to provide the Commission with a more formalized
written review of product options, size requirements, maintenance considerations, and cost.
In preparation of the report, the Superintendent of Parks met with representatives from
Schad/Tracy Signs and Sign Art. Both of these companies have extensive experience in
custom outdoor signage and have done considerable work in the City of Eagan.
Based on the information provided, it appears that two major options are available to the
city: 1. An electronic message board or, 2. A standard type message board.
Option #1 - Electronic Message Board
Electonic message boards are the newest form of technology in outdoor information
conveyance. These signs have found uses in a variety of commercial and public enterprises.
Perhaps the best illustration of an electronic message board in Eagan, is the one located at
Firstar Eagan Bank on Yankee Doodle and Pilot Knob Roads.
Design / Use Considerations
A number of shapes, configurations and mounting methods are available for electronic
message boards. Typically most of these signs use a single line of script with an option for
messages that move across the screen or flash. One of the primary drawbacks to electronic
message boards is the limited amount of information that can be presented at any one time.
This can make it difficult for passersby to quickly view a message in it's entirety. However,
because electronic message boards are more eye catching, they do tend to draw greater
attention of the public.
4y.
Cost
One of the biggest drawbacks to electronic message centers is their high cost. Estimates
from the two vendors for a single line electronic message board, approximately, 8 feet by 4
feet in size, range from $10,000 to as much as $20,000 for the hardware alone. This cost
does not reflect the base or pole system used to support the sign or the cost of installing
underground electrical service. At least $3,000 should be added to the cost for installation.
Therefore, the cost could range from about $400 to $700 per square foot.
Maintenance
Both companies frankly admitted that the cost of maintaining an electronic message center
is very high. The electronic lighting system and circuitry boards used in operating the system
are expensive to maintain when they break down. Also, special training is required for
inputting new messages making the systems somewhat less than user friendly. In the final
anaylsis, neither company seems genuinely interested in selling this product to the City.
Option 2 - Standard Type Message Board
Design/Use
Similar to electronic message boards the options for design, material and color choices are
virtually endless. As the Commission will recall a number of different sign designs were
distributed at the March meeting. With regard to size, both companies recommended an
8 foot wide by 6 foot high message center. The top 2 feet of the sign would be the header
which could include the name of the city and an appropriate logo. With six inch letters, a
total of six lines of 24 characters each would be available on the message board. This would
provide adequate space for announcing the times, dates, and brief information about
community events. The reader board would be double faced and aligned perpendicularly
to the adjacent street, i.e. Pilot Knob Road or Wescott Road. The sign would also be
illuminated on both sides for ease of visibility at night. The face of the message board would
utilize either a polycarbonate or acrylic face with locking cover. A supply of 250 - 300 letters
would be available for interchanging messages. The system would be very user friendly - a
simple flip of the key and replacement of the letters is all that would be necessary.
Cost
Standard message boards are far less expensive than their electronic counterparts. For an
8 foot by 6 foot sign, cost could vary between $2500 to as much as $5000 depending on
materials, colors, and any special architectural treatments. Installation could add another
$1500 to $3000 depending on the extent of work done by city forces. On a square foot basis
cost would be in the range of about $80 to $170 or roughly 25% of the cost for an electronic
message center.
2
Maintenance
Standard type message centers are essentially maintenance free. The annodized aluminum
and polycarbonate faces in use today have a virtually endless life span. The only required
maintenance is periodically changing the fluorescent lighting fixtures and cleaning of the glass
faces.
Conclusion
Based on the above discussion, the Parks and Recreation Department would favor a
standard type message center if one were to be installed at the Eagan Municipal Center.
Staff would like to note, however, that the sign would likely be used for a variety of
community event postings and not just limited to recreation offerings. Therefore, the issue
of a message center really extends beyond the purview of the Advisory Park, Recreation and
Natural Resources Commission. Before this item is forwarded to the Council - if that is the
Commission's direction - it might be wise to first discuss it with any other affected city
departments.
r ny additional questions, staff would be happy to respond to them
Jo n K. VonDeLinde
of Parks
JKV/nab
park:ADVPRNRC.084
3
151.
1R ?-6 '91 10,42 SIGNART-ST. PAUL
.15.
R
r o?
P.3
TITLE
t r ?. 33 ' . '.9 o'Mi r?C 11Yq Ir ?.. a• /aa a .;
w,+aahn?ww.M „wa+?OM?
SCALE D11tE NUMBER •+•M • %. caw of "W
?" .r. •Y' i101'?Mgtlrjn.ww? uMww?Y?wMwwwww .... -•. ?._.__.-. _-
h1AR 26 '91 10:41 SIGNART-ST. PAIL P.2
Q , Stgnt .01 Wlsconelnl. SignArt of Minnesota
2t1;i3 MondttvF Fld.• :: • .: . 2595 Pilot Knob Ad. #121
Eau Ctaire, Wf 64701 aAdWe-hlgi s, MN 55120
.(715) BU61xt. !: •. Eie
? :.. FAX.71 &834 Q. ... ..
FAX-51A:6.4W2081 _ ,.
QUOTATION/CONTRACT Pleeee'keep'Uie wtrte copy'artd rettirn'the '
%
DATE OF -al. tYFATIQN Maxrh 4 1 91
ACCEPTANCE.DATE .... _ y :. .. =:.
't • .?? •tPJ QTEpGQMPLATION RATE) ciq; ?'t'?C1 3?t?Pkc
a 1t48'PALL Q.SI?IP t}EUVEA TO:
BUYER City Of MGM
:f ,...
ADDRESSW -'3830• P i l o t ' i r b• R d p.0,. BoX 211'98' ?
CtTV1$TATE,ZIP Eagan MN 5521.2
PHONE" 454-8100 7 • '
ATTNs .7'Qittn X, Vandal i K1e
DESICr4IPTION/CQIVDITIONS „ ....
Plsa? r.o.vc! Uoosi 000100ns 1-10 on the reverse side of this pane b0foro ginning.
SignArt Co to Construct. and install cne 6 rx 8 t -double' faced mc>n m nt
sign.
i(Ay * Flat acryli:C des; iv=y.in. color * Decoration as per cr><alorAd• artwtark.
*.. Tracks for 4 rows of 8" copy cF 5 rows of 6" copyy.
* mctrtxied a].tAC1i Wise cab] itlet?s w# h self baked polyurethane ' finish.
* trt>deCi alumirwan dividers between face sections.
* UL listed cold weather fluorescent Lighting.
* .Ste..,.pones set into hick ,base.
(D is k b t$e by othexs. )
* Electrical h ook--up . by ot1 ers ,
,$3460.OQ 1wtaUed ..
. (A) Font of 250 changeab7.,e leir ers :. ,
.$320.00 (6").
$410.00 '(8")
.W) Optiot>$a locking Clear 1i,• doors ;
.'7• aavtering cbangeable copy area...
?_.... 1200.00.
••.:... Permits not inoluded• in bid -price..
Normal permitting is done at cost of city permits and fees. (Not'inciu led in. sign price.)
Veriancl,,colldiAgnal use or other appeals are clone at ".of hearing fees.nlua 34.00 per hour stall time and mileage.
SgnArt ist3erves•the•flght to withdraw this quotation If not•accepted'within 60•daye.
TOTAL COST
t t TAX- . x4v'in
TOTAL u ANY, JNC.
., • •• •• SIGNARTcol
' .. ..Operations Manager.
DEPOSIT 17 tt'E . .. " t .
DUE WITI4 ORDER
BALANCE 50% + Petits.. .
DUE UPON COMPLETION .ACt:EP•TE0.aY , •
TITLE
,54.
MEMO TO: ADVISORY PARK, RECREATION, AND
NATURAL RESOURCES COMMISSION
FROM: KEN VRAA, DIRECTOR OF PARKS AND RECREATION
JOHN VONDELINDE, SUPERINTENDENT OF PARKS
DATE: MARCH 26, 1991
SUBJECT: ARBOR DAY PROCLAMATION
Back ound
Since the first Arbor Day program was held in 1987 the Commission has been asked, each
year, to adopt an "official" resolution in support of Arbor Day activities and tree planting
in the community. A copy of this year's draft resolution can be found on the following page.
The resolution declares Saturday, April 27th as Arbor Day and the month of May as Arbor
Month in Eagan. In keeping with tradition the resolution will be presented to the public
during the official ceremony at Slater Acres Park on April 27th.
For Commission Action
The Commission is graciously asked to adopt the enclosed Arbor Day Resolution. A
companion resolution will then be forwarded to the City Council for their adoption on April
16th.
Attachment
park:ADVPRNRC.085
S15-
EAGAN ADVISORY PARKS, RECREATION, AND NATURAL RESOURCES COMMISSION
RESOLUTION
A PROCLAMATION OF EAGAN ARBOR DAY
AND EAGAN ARBOR MONTH
WHEREAS, trees were a significant attraction to Minnesota's settlers
because of the usefulness and the beauty they provided; and
WHEREAS, trees are a most valuable resource in Minnesota and Eagan
today - purifying our air and water, helping conserve our soil, serving as
recreational settings, providing habitat for wildlife of all kinds, and enriching
our lives in so many important ways; and
WHEREAS, pollutants, tree diseases, and urban expansion have damaged
and continued to threaten our trees, creating the need for reforestation programs
and concerted public action toward ensuring the future of our City's ubran
forests; and
WHEREAS, each year the people of Minneosta pay special attention to
the wonderful gift that our trees represent and dedicate themselves to the
continued health of our state's trees; and
WHEREAS, the City of Eagan has been recognized, for the fourth
consecutive year, as a Tree City USA community by the National Arbor Day
Foundation and desires to continue its tree-planting programs,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Eagan Advisory Parks,
Recreation, and Natural Resources Commission does hereby proclaim Saturday, April
27, 1991 to be ARBOR DAY and the month of May, 1991 to be ARBOR MONTH in the City
of Eagan.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Commission further urges citizens to
become more aware of the importance of trees to the well-being of our City and
State; and to participate in City tree planting programs which will ensure a
greener place for our citizens to live in the decades to come.
ADVISORY PARKS, RECREATION AND
NATURAL RESOURCES COMMISSION
By:
Chairman
By:
Secretary
Motion made by:
Seconded by:
Those in favor:
Those against:
Dated:
MEMORANDUM
TO: ADVISORY PARK, RECREATION & NATURAL RESOURCE
COMMISSION
FROM: KEN VRAA, DIRECTOR OF PARKS & RECREATION
STEVE SULLIVAN, LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT/PARKS PLANNER
DATE: MARCH 18, 1991
RE: SCHOOL/CITY COOPERATION -ARRANGEMENTS FOR FUTURE PARK
ISSUE
The purpose of this memorandum is to explore the possibility of meeting the park needs in
Park Service Area 21 through a cooperative effort with School District 196 in the
development of a middle school/park.
BACKGROUND
The City of Eagan and School District 196 have previously developed two school/park sites
and developed a third joint use agreement for Northview Athletic and Eagan High
School/Dakota Hills Middle School. The joint development agreements for Scott
Elementary School included the City acquiring property for the park simultaneously with the
School District. At the time of the development of the park site, the City and the School
District reached an agreement whereby the School District would grade the site and the City
would be responsible for the development and long-term maintenance. The City provides
maintenance to the grounds of both the school and City property at this site. The City
entered a similar agreement with the development and maintenance of Downing Park
adjacent to the Oak Ridge Elementary School now under construction.
FUTURE SCHOOL NEEDS
School District 196 has projected the possible need for another middle school; therefore,
they have acquired twenty-one (21) acres adjacent to the fourteen (14) acre Deerwood
Elementary School located south of Deerwood Drive. The District expects to develop a
joint elementary/middle school concept similar to that which was employed at Scott
Highlands in Apple Valley.
Attached to this memorandum is concept Exhibit A which depicts the concept plan
developed by the consultant architect for this project. This exhibit reflects how the thirty-six
(36) acre combined site might be developed. This site does not currently meet the District's
facility needs for a middle school and elementary school.
15h•
School/City Cooperation
March 18, 1991
Page 2
The layout does not provide for a track, softball fields or soccer fields which are traditional
in a middle school setting. The shortage of these facilities appears to be the stimulus to the
District's request for the school/park concept via the City's acquisition of additional acreage.
PARKS SYSTEMS PLAN
The City's Comprehensive Development Plan initially located a small neighborhood park in
Park Service Area 21. The approximate location is the area where Deerwood Elementary
School is now located. The Commission re-examined the site in the late 1980's with the
school construction. It was concluded that a small neighborhood park would still be
desirable for that park service area and that parkland would come through the park
dedication process. It was anticipated that the land would be located immediately west of
the school site near the current athletic fields. The purpose of the park would be to
compliment the existing facilities which include soccer fields, two small ballfields and
playground equipment.
In consideration that the School District has now acquired the potential park area and
designated its use for a middle school, the Commission again will need to evaluate the
neighborhood park needs in Park Service Area 21.
PARK SERVICE AREA
Park Service Area 21 is bounded on the south by Diffley Road, to the east by Pilot Knob
Road and to the west by 35-E. Deerwood Drive does run into the park service area. Future
road construction anticipates the extension of Thomas Lake Road north to Deerwood on
or near the quarter section. The sub-division of this park service area by a collector street
makes servicing of the neighborhood more difficult.
The Planning Department provides the following information regarding the park service area
and the projections for the resident population for this area.
The below chart provides a tabulation of dwelling units and estimated population in
Park Service Area 21, both for current and ultimate conditions.
It should be noted that, considering previous and pending litigation, some or all of
the vacant property located in the SW 1/4 of Section 21 within Park Service Area 21
may develop with commercial uses as opposed to residential uses. However, the
below chart assumes future residential use of this property based on its current Land
Use Guide Plan designation. Should this property develop with commercial uses, the
ultimate dwelling units would drop to approximately 565 total units and the ultimate
population projection would drop to approximately 1,514 for Park Service Area 21.
5
School/City Cooperation
March 18, 1991
Page 3
CURRENT
PARK SF TH MF TOTAL Tt3TAL
DISTRICT UNITS UNITS UNITS UNITS POP
21 139 23 0 162 501
ULTIMATE
PARK SF TH MF TOTAL TOTAL
DISTRICT UNITS UNITS UNITS UNITS POP
21 586 115 60 761 2102
Some down zoning of the property occurred in the 1980's. Since the School District is now
taking out thirty-six (36) acres previously designated as residential property, there will be a
further reduction in the number of residents once anticipated for this area. As Commission
members are aware, the City is embroiled in a lawsuit regarding the land/use designation of
the intersection at Diffley and 35-E. Should the determination be made that the property
be zoned for commercial use, there would be a further reduction in the number of residents
within this park service area. Planning projection of 1,514 residents within Park Service
Area 21 reflects the commercial land use designation in lieu of the 2,102 residents if the
parcel were to remain residential.
PARK/SCHOOL CONCEPTS
Wold Architects, on behalf of the School District, has developed two initial options for
reviewing the site which would include park acquisition. These options are identified as
Options B and C on the attached sheet. With Option B, the City would acquire 4.1 acres
of additional property. This would allow and facilitate for the expansion of the site, include
an additional balifield, soccer field and access from the proposed extension of thomas Lake
Road. The site plan also provides for a track facility. Option C would have the City
acquiring 7.3 acres of land and provide essentially the same facilities as Option B. This
option also provides a loosening of the site and increased parking for the park/school.
CITY ALTERNATIVES
There are various alternatives that the City could take regarding this proposal. The first
alternative is the "no park" option. The "no park" option is defensible given the relatively
low population projected for this park service area. The Park System Plan Standard for the
population of a Park Service Area for a neighborhood park ranges from 2,000 to 5,000
residents. Considering the build out population range of 1,514 - 2,000 residents, this tends
to be at or below the threshold for a neighborhood park.
451.
School/City Cooperation
March 18, 1991
Page 4
Residents could be served by the facilities that are provided by the school development even
if no park was included within the park service area. The softball fields, the tennis courts,
baseball fields and playground equipment provided by the school development would
provide a limited public need for recreation facilities. The acquisition for additional
parkland, therefore, may not commendably improve services provided to the neighborhood,
especially if this acquisition provides only athletic facilities.
The "yes" option would help the City acquire four to seven (4 to 7) acres through the
dedication process. This additional land could be developed along lines under options B and
C or another alternative.
Alternative B, which concept is based on a 4.1 acre City acquisition, provides an additional
softball field with a soccer overlay. These additional fields provide a facility program which
is consistent with the need of the proposed middle school. These additional facilities are
somewhat redundant regarding neighborhood park and considering the total athletic facilities
included within the school site. The primary benefit to the proposal is the potential
utilization of the existing playground, hardcourt, parking lot and open play areas within the
elementary school site. The question always arises within a school/park concept whether the
general public use times will be impeded due to school use timeframes. With elementary
schools, typically, evening and weekend uses are open for public use. The addition of a
middle school will not effect this scenario in regard to the playground and hard court but
open play space and athletic fields will be used in the evening by school activities. The
alternative B concept is an institutional layout which provides minimal passive and general
open space. The Commission may recall that, in regards to the Woodland Elementary and
Oak Ridge School/Parks, both sites have natural areas for passive uses such as trails and
benches associated with the typical recreation facilities.
Alternative C, which is based on a 7.3 acre acquisition, provides an additional softball field
with a soccer overlay and parking area. The previous conclusions for alternative B regarding
facility redundancy benefit existing facilities, use compatibility, institutional layout and lack
of passive area persists with this concept. The primary difference is the additional
acquisition of 3.2 acres for parking. The lack of significant benefit of this acquisition from
a City perspective is obvious considering the minimal parking need for a neighborhood park.
The typical school park scenario does typically provide low development and acquisition
costs for the City. The City typically bears the long term cost of maintenance for a majority
of the school sites. The commission should evaluate both concepts in consideration to the
long term costs in relationship to the benefit of a school/neighborhood park concept as
proposed.
(o
School/City Cooperation
March 18, 1991
Page 5
A third option is a "wait and see" option. If the Commission feels that a park is still
essential in this area, it could take a land dedication until the other land parcels are
developed. This would place a park in closer proximity to where residential development
may occur. Staff has provided an exhibit that indicates remaining parcels within the park
service area which have not been developed or platted. The land areas include several small
parcels to the north of Deerwood Drive with the primary parcels south of the school site.
A 40 acre parcel lies directly south of the school site. This parcel is designated for
residential land use and a 4 acre or cash parks dedication. This area could support a mini-
park within Park Service Area 21. The Commission may recall that the Park System Plan
provides for mini-parks. The mini-park standards are as follows:
COMPONENT USE SERVICE
AREA SITE SITE
ATTRIBUTES SITE
LOCATION
Mini Park Serves a Serves a Size Some portion High density
(City concentrated small varies of the site neighborhoods
jurisdiction or population service but must be where typical
private specific age area, use- suitable for the private yards
group, or usually less able specific use do not exist.
provides only than 1/4 area which required May be in
limited facilities mile is the site. locations such
on a local basis. radius, typi- as apartment
Typically mini population cally 1 complexes,
parks provide served is at to 4 townhouse
only one or two least 500 acres. developments
basic facilities residents. or commercial
such as play centers.
equipment, open
field games area
or a short trail
The largest parcel is a 120 acre parcel southeast of the school site which could either result
in commercial or residential land use. If the parcel were to go residential, the population
of the park service area south of Deerwood would be approximately 1360 or 65% of the
overall park service area population. The Commission may consider again a mini park or
possibly a neighborhood park. In consideration that the 120 acre parcel is commercial, the
population of the park service area south of Deerwood is 782 or 51% of the overall park
service area population. Therefore, approximately one half of the service area would reside
on each side of Deerwood.
(Dl.
School/City Cooperation
March 18, 1991
Page 6
The Commission could acquire 4 acres with the undeveloped 40 acre parcel south of the
school site or consider that the school facilities could accommodate these 782 residents. The
commission should notice that north of Deerwood Drive only 2 residential parcels remain
undeveloped. One is a 10 acre parcel across from Deerwood Elementary and the other is
a 25 acre parcel northwest of the Fire Administration Building. This 25 acre parcel is part
of the Blackhawk Park Planned Development and has previously fulfilled its parks
dedication. As the Commission may see, very little opportunity for a mini park exists north
of Deerwood Drive.
FOR COMMISSION ACTION:
To provide direction to the City Council and staff in regards to the desirability and need to
acquire parkland in Park Service Section 21 through the dedication process and/or work with
Independent School District 196 in the development of a school/park site until the District
proceeds with the development of a middle school.
KV:SH/nh
Enclosures
&2'.
- "WOOD
UNDEVELOPED AND UNPLATTED PARCELS
Drown y: Drawing Title
M. AWL& Qua a FIGURE NO.
D tC
Von r %M
"/-I I - -MJ
HOMESTEAD i
_-! :...,^.s-",.•. I \ - .c 891 ( c
14.6 ACBes \ \ \
EE
E M Y
cl)
3 _ I
1Q?/
j i
OPTION A
THOMAS LAKE ROAD TOTAL ACREAGE • 36
MIDDLE SCHOOL &4-.
ISD #196
WOLD ARCHITECTS
1" = 200•
HOMESTEAD
TO REMAI
HOMESTEAD'
r \
FF ..?.
- - 8g1
ATH TIC
--- mvo OA 0
r i.• Y+i''°.' a ei? PGA M C. O . 1
S :.. 14.6 ACFI S \
EER
3.2 ^QR.
1
Ado --? _ lip
10
1 Dv
OPTION C
THOMAS LAKE ROAD TOTAL ACREAGE • 43.3
MIDDLE SCHOOL ISD #196
WOLD ARCHITECTS 1" = 200'
._ . ..v YOU r
HOMESTEAD
1 ? TO REMAI
HOMESTEAb'
UA.
qti? °A D
ACA" M AiGR C S\ \ t
- - - - 14.6 __
?. EM Y
jk.
six
COD
J 1 _
l WF-FL D
OPTION B
THOMAS LAKE ROAD TOTAL ACREAGE • 40.1
MIDDLE SCHOOL ISD #196
WOLD ARCHITECTS 1" = 200•
TO: ADVISORY PARKS, RECREATION, AND NATURAL RESOURCES
COMMISSION
FROM: RICH BRASCH, WATER RESOURCES COORDINATOR
RE: ESTIMATED TIMELINE FOR COMPLETING TASKS DURING PETITION
PROCESS FOR LAKE/POND MANAGEMENT ASSISTANCE.
DATE: MARCH 28, 1991
At the Commission meeting on March 7, 1991, staff discussed a
proposed process for handling neighborhood concerns regarding pond
and lake management issues. A copy of the memo for the March 7
meeting is attached for your reference. The Commission has asked
that staff estimate the time required to complete the major tasks
identified in that process. The following table identifies those
time frames for each of the tasks listed. Time periods listed are
from the date of submission of the correct and complete petition.
Task
Initial meeting with petitioners
Time
Within 2 weeks after
petition is submitted
Research Report drafted
Presentation of Research Report
to Commission
Presentation of Research Report
to Council
Feasibility Report drafted
Presentation of Feasibility
Report to Commission
Presentation of Feasibility
Report to Council
Prioritization of Capital
Improvements Project by
Commission
Within 6 weeks after
petition is submitted
Within 8 weeks
Within 10 weeks
Within 14 weeks
Within 16 weeks
Within 18 weeks
Within 23 weeks
The time frames identified above are estimated and will vary
depending on workloads and competing priorities. I'll await your
comments on this schedule. Thanks.
(07.
MEMO TO: ADVISORY PARKS, RECREATION, AND NATURAL RESOURCES
COMMISSION
FROM: RICH BRASCH, WATER RESOURCE COORDINATOR
DATE: FEBRUARY 28, 1991
SUBJECT: PETITITION PROCESS FOR WATER MANAGEMENT CONCERNS
Introduction
For some time, the City has been fielding citizen requests for
assistance to investigate/resolve concerns about pond management or
poor water quality in neighborhood water bodies. In order to
provide for a consistant approach, city staff has developed a
proposal for handling these requests for assistance. The process
is outlined in narrative form below and illustrated in a flow chart
on the attachment.
The Process
Step 1. The City receives an inquiry from an individual or group
of individuals for assistance. In the majority of cases, city
staff will probably be able to resolve the problem or answer the
question. Those concerns that require a more in-depth
investigation and analysis will be referred to Step 2.
Step 2. A written petition requesting action will be submitted to
city staff. The petition will identify the water body of concern,
state the problem and it's suspected cause, and describe the action
requested of the city. The petition must be signed by at least 51%
of the landowners whose property abuts the water body in question.
Both the Advisory Parks, Recreation and Natural Resource Commission
and the City Council will be notified of the petition.
Step 3. An informal meeting will be held with the petitioners to
discuss issues relevant to the petition, such as the history of the
problem and solution alternatives that should be investigated.
Step 4. Based on discussions with the petitioners and research by
City staff, a Research Report (2-4 pages) will be prepared which
gives a general background and history of the issue and presents
the alternatives that could be investigated as potential solutions.
The report will be distributed to both the Advisory Parks,
Recreation, and Natural Resources Commission and the City Council.
Step 5. The Research Report will be presented to and discussed
with the Advisory Parks, Recreation, and Natural Resources
Commission, with the petitioners and any other parties who have
expressed an interest in the issue notified and invited to attend
and present comments at the Commission meeting. The purpose of the
meeting is to assure that the description of the situation is
factually correct, that all reasonable alternatives for problem
68
ADVISORY PARKS, RECREATION, AND NATURAL RESOURCES
PAGE 2.
FEBRUARY 28, 1991
solution are identified, and that the Commission is given
sufficient information to make a sound recommendation to the City
Council on how to handle the concern.
Step 6. The Research Report, together with the Commission's
recommendations, will be forwarded to the City Council. The
petitioners and other parties expressing an interest in the issue
will be notified to appear at the meeting and provide comments if
they so desire.
Step 7. If the City Council decides that a.) there is sufficient
information to terminate city involvement in the requested action
or b.) City staff should/can resolve the concern with existing
resources, the process would terminate. If the Council decides
that a more in-depth investigation is needed and/or that a solution
of the problem could require the commitment of city resources
outside normal operations, it will order a feasibility study. The
feasibility study will include an analysis of legal issues - if any
- and an estimate of the costs of each alternative.
Step 8. The draft feasibility report will be presented to the
Advisory Parks, Recreation, and Natural Resources Commission. The
petitioners and other interested parties will be notified of this
meeting. The purpose of this meeting will be to present the
Commission with sufficient information so that it can make a
recommendation to the Council on a proposed course of action,
identify what impacts that action would have on city water
resources, and determine how that action could affect funding
priorities in the existing budget.
Step 9. The feasibility report and Commission recommendation will
be presented to the City Council for action. If the Council
decides that no action on the part of the City is warranted, the
petition process is terminated. If the Council decides that City
action is warranted, it will specify the appropriate action and
refer the matter of how and when funding will be made available to
the Advisory Parks, Recreation, and Natural Resources Commission.
Conclusion
This process is designed to enlist the participation of the
Advisory Parks and Recreation Commission and the City Council in
dealing with neighborhood water management concerns that could
compete for funding resources with other city water management
priorities. We are recommending the close involvement of the
Advisory Parks, Recreation, and Natural Resources Commission
because of their assigned responsibilities for overseeing
109.
ADVISORY PARKS, RECREATION, AND NATURAL RESOURCES COMMISSION
PAGE 3.
FEBRUARY 28, 1991
coordination of the City's Water Quality Management Plan. The City
Council is involved because of their role as the ultimate policy
and budgetary decision-maker in the allocation of City resources to
address water quality-related issues.
Staff seeks the endorsement by the Commission of this or a modified
procedure to establish a policy on how to deal with requests for
city assistance from the public regarding lake management concerns.
Rich Brasch
Water Resource Coordinator
RB
cc: Thomas A. Colbert, Director of Public Works
John VonDeLinde, Superintendent of Parks
Io .
PETITION PROCESS FOR LAKE/POND MANAGEMENT ASSISTANCE
Initial Request I
for Assistance
Petition Submitted
Meeting with Petitioners
Research Report Prepared
Research Report Presented to
APRNRC*
Report provided to Council
Research Report Presented to Council with
Commission Recommendations
City Involvement Action Taken Based on Council Orders Feasibility Report for
Terminated Research Report Further Consideration
Referred to APRNRC
for Funding Draft Feasibility Report
Prepared and Presented to
APRNRC*
Feasibility Report Presented
to Council with Commission
Recommendations
*Advisory Parks, Recreation and Natural
Resources Commission
City Staff resolves the concern
City Council and APRNRC* notified
City Involvement I
Terminated
I Action I
Referred to Commission for
Prioritization Year/Cycle
'7/.
EAGAN PARKS AND RECREATION
HAPPENINGS - MARCH, 1991
1.*« Results of the tennis interest survey have been tabulated. The survey was sent to 143 individuals
who: Participated in the Departments' Intermediate lessons, were registered in the 1990 South
of the River Tennis Camps or participated in Eagan or Burnsville High School tennis. (not a
random sample!) Fifty-six (56) surveys were returned; 39%.
The respondents were: Varsity players 29%
JV players 46%
Jr. High/Middle School 18%
Intermediate lessons 7%
57% of the respondents took part in Eagan's tennis program in 1990.
90% plan to participate in the Departments' tennis program in 1991.
44% in the lesson program
42% in the South of the River tennis camps
40% in a tournament
42% in a Jr. Tennis League
When the Junior team Tennis League was further defined, 64% of the respondents said that they
had interest in participating in that activity.
When asked whether membership in USTA (United States Tennis Association) was of interest,
63% of the respondents said yes.
Respondents profile: 36 youth were ages 15-17
9 ' ' ' 13-14
6' ' ' 11-12
5 respondents did not provide their age
Schools represented by the survey responses were:
Eagan High 20
Burnsville High 14
Prior Lake High 3
Lakeville High 2
Dakota Hills MS 6
Miscellaneous 11
The survey confirms an interest among youth tennis players for summer team/league play. For
those same players, membership in USTA is of interest.
Grant money is available for start-up leagues through USTA. Staff will pursue the submission of
an application.
2.*« The impact of Eagan High and Dakota Hills Middle Schools on City facilities for spring co-
curricular activities will be significant. The schools field use additionally impacts the timing of pre-
season field preparation. School events begin a month earlier than the City's programs.
The facilities on which Eagan High softball and baseball programs will occur are: Northview
Athletic, Rahn Athletic, Goat Hill and Rahn Park.
73.
Dakota Hills Middle School will use: Northview Athletic, Goat Hill, Walnut Hill, Bridle Ridge and
Mueller Farm Park.
In addition to normal field maintenance, the Department may be asked to chalk fields for games.
A fee for this service is being negotiated.
3.*« Staff, attending a recent EAA board meeting, has learned that the EAA/RAAA joint track program
has 'hundreds' of participants. (The RAAA representative did not have the exact figure, however
it is in excess of 800).
The Eagan High School track will be used for the Saturday meets. The meets begin on April 20
and continue for five (5) consecutive weeks. If one wishes to observe a group of organized
volunteers, stop in to see a youth track meet!
4.*« EAA's registrations for baseball, softball, travel soccer and bantam soccer are nearing completion.
A comparison of numbers of participants, 1990-1991 can now be made. The impact on facilities
will again be significant.
Baseball 1990 1991
Grades: K-1 Mites 22 teams boys 22 teams 374 boys
2-3 Squirts 26 28 392
4-5 Minors 20 26 364
6-7 Majors 10 12 172
8-9 Ponys 3 5 65
Sub Totals 81 1178 93 1367
Travel 5 64 7 79
86 1242 100 1446
Softball 1990 1991
Mites 10 teams girls 12 teams 144 girls
Minis 12 10 120
Squirts 12 12 144
Juniors 9 10 120
Intermediate 4 3 42
Seniors 2 2 28
Sub Totals 49 548 49 598
Travel 2 19 4 56
51 567 53 654
Bantam Soccer 14 teams 163 14 teams 224
children children
Travel Soccer 15 teams 269 16 teams 288
youth youth
Total Youth: 1990: Z241 1991: Z612
74.
Eagan youth play on three additional baseball teams:
The Eagan Bulls (formerly Blue Jays), and teams sponsored by the VFW and The American
legion.
5.*« The Youth Connection Council, Youth Development ISD 196, is pursuing the concept of hosting
a dance for all School District 196 youth grades 8 and older. Staff, as a member of the Council,
has asked and will continue to ask 'devils advocate' questions in order that the youth, in their
enthusiasm, not look past behavior issues that merit anticipation!
6.*44 Four families have received financial assistance for program fees through the scholarship
program. A total benefit of $160.00 was received by the participants.
7.*« A new program called the Eagan Youth Safety Camp is being planned for ages 8 & 9 this
summer. Through a coordinated effort with the Police and Fire Department, Recreation staff will
be responsible for registration and for providing recreational activities. Proposed topics include:
Bicycle Safety, Operation Lifesaver, Animal Control and Safety, Water Safety, Stranger Danger,
Weather Safety and Firearms Safety. Staff anticipates much interest in this unique camp
experience.
8.*<< As of March 26, there are 204 adult slowpitch softball teams registered for the 1991 season. This
is up from 197 teams in 1990. Play begins at the end of April and beginning of May. Teams will
fill up the fields at Northview Athletic Park and utilize fields at Rahn Athletic Park.
9.*1 Two coaching certification clinics were held for youth soccer. Sixteen (16) second and third year
coaches and nineteen (19) first year coaches attended these National Youth Sports Coaches
Association sponsored clinics. First year softball and baseball coaches can get certified Saturday,
April 6. Second or third year softball and baseball coaches have their opportunity April 8.
10.*,, To date, 14 youth are signed up for our April Fool's Party to be held in January. We'll be giving
away one million dollars, a caribbean cruise and if you believe that, you should have attended the
party.
11.*<, Star Gazing has over thirty pre-registered names. This will be held on a clear evening either April
2nd or 4th. Walter Hayes, an Eagan resident and member of the Minnesota Astronomical Society,
will lead us on a tour of the spring sky.
12.*« The Earth Day Walk is planned for April 21, Noon, at Thomas Lake Park. Even more is planned
this year, covering water quality, recycling and more. Participants will walk at their own pace and
distance, returning for a hot dog picnic lunch. Information will be presented on a variety of Earth
Day topics. Register with Parks and Recreation by Wednesday, April 17.
13.*« A new portable hockey rink destined for use at Lexington Park next winter was completed by park
maintenance workers Paul Graham, Alex Lammers and Don Buecksler. Painting and staining of
the hockey panels was done under an arrangement with the week-end youth restitution program.
14.*« Gary Skogstad and Scott Eppen fabricated and installed new storage shelves and helmet racks
for the new Goat Hill dugouts. This improvement should make it much easier for teams to store
their bats, helmets, gloves, etc., during games held at this site.
15.*« The annual playground inspection and repair program also began in the month of March. These
inspections will continue on a monthly basis through the end of the primary use season in
October.
16.*« Efforts continued in the area of equipment, maintenance and preparations for the upcoming park
maintenance season. Among these tasks included preparation of the groundsmaster mowers
with mowing decks, grinding of reels and bed knives for the gang mowers, sharpening of aerator
tines, maintenance to weed trimmers and hand mowers, along with a host of other equipment
preparations. The majority of this work is being done by maintenance worker Steve Taylor and
Dan Curtin.
17.*« Preparations began in a number of different areas for the upcoming softball/baseball season.
Staff have begun the spring grading operation on athletic infields at Northview, Goat and Rahn
Athletic Parks. A number of preparations are also being made in anticipation of the use of these
sites by the Eagan High School and Dakota Hills Middle School beginning in early April. In the
same regard, the School District and City are also working cooperatively on expansion of the
baseball fields at Northview Elementary School. These fields are needed for expanding baseball
programs being experienced by both agencies. Other details included the cleaning and repair
of all bases, cleaning and restocking storage rooms at the athletic sites, provision of line striping
chalk, etc. This year looks like we will have extremely heavy use on all City ballfields.
18.*« The sledding hill at Trapp Farm Park was officially closed in late February. The final clean up of
the site and removal of fence and hay bales has been scheduled for late March, pending suitable
conditions to minimize impact to the turf. The removal of the old portable hockey rink at
Lexington Park is also scheduled for late March or early April.
19.*« The winter aeration system at Fish Lake continued in full operation through the entire month of
March. Despite the snow melt and periodic rain late in the month, oxygen levels continued to
remain relatively low. It was expected that with ice out in early April, operation of the system can
be terminated for the year.
20.*,, Sweeping of the City's 70+ miles of boulevard trails was undertaken in late March. Equipment
used in this often dirty and dusty job, were two of the department's groundmaster units, along
with a new Case tractor outfitted with hydraulic powered brooms. Staff extends a word of thanks
to Alex Lammers, Paul Graham, Steve Hadden and Don Buecksler for taking on this important
annual task.
21.*<< The sweeping of parking lots and access roads into the parks is being done by the Street
Department under a cooperative arrangement with the Parks & Recreation Department.
22.*<< Tennis nets were put up at Northview and Rahn Parks during the last week in March. These sites
are now available for use by the general public, as well as the High School, which will begin
outdoor practice for the upcoming season soon.
23.*« The City Forestry Division was busy on a number of items during March. On March 12, 13, 14,
City Forester, Tom Schuster, visited with the City's six elementary schools to inform the third
grade students about the upcoming poster contest. Note: The Commission will again be asked
to judge the finalist from each school and the grand prize winner at the April Commission
meeting.
24.*« Preparations continued on the annual Arbor Day and Tree Sale Programs to be held on April 27th
and May 4th.
25.*,, Tree pruning continued during the month of March in City parks and public buildings, with much
of the work being carried out by seasonal forestry assistant, Dave Wills. Preparations have also
begun for plantings with the ordering of stock for Carlson Lake and Slater Acres Parks. The City
Forester and Superintendent of Parks has also begun work on drafting a new community forestry
brochure patterned after the department's facilities brochure. It will likely contain five or six
individual components dealing with topics such as: planting and maintenance of trees, insects
and diseases, residential landscaping and planting for wildlife.
26.*« A number of employees participated in continuing education programs during the month of
March. Rich Pelletier, Gary Skogstad and Scott Eppen attended a conference sponsored by MTI
Distributing on the topic of irrigation maintenance and turf. Steve Taylor and Dan Curtin also
participated in a Toro Grounds Maintenance School at the same company. On Wednesday,
March 21, Tom Schuster attended the annual Shade Tree Inspectors Workshop sponsored by the
University of Minnesota and Department of Agriculture for recertification of his inspectors license.
On March 5 & 6th, John VonDeLinde and Rich Brasch attended the annual Clean Water
Partnership Grant Workshop to assist them in preparation and administration of grant related
materials for the Schwanz Lake diagnostic/feasibility study.
27.*<< The City recently received the Regional Policy implementation Award from the Metropolitan
Council for its water quality management efforts. The Council commended the City for its action
in planning and implementing a broad approach to water quality management that includes an
inventory and classification of the lakes and ponds within the City, setting priorities for water
quality maintenance and improvement, implementing a monitoring program, and committing the
financial, legal, and staffing resources to begin implementing the plan. The Council established
the award in 1989 to give recognition to local initiatives that support or implement Metropolitan
Council policies. This is the second time the award has been given.
28.*« Snow melt run-off sampling for the Schwanz Lake Diagnostic Feasibility study was completed
during the first week in March. The results will help the City determine which sub-basins in the
Schwanz Lake water shed contribute the highest nutrient concentrations to the lake. Intensive
in-lake and run-off sampling will continue through October 1991.
29.*« The 3rd Annual Community Clean-up Day will be held on Saturday, April 27, 1991. This year's
event will focus on cleaning up areas surrounding some of the City's ponds and lakes.
Registration deadline is 4:30 P.M., Monday, April 15. Please register with the Eagan Recycling
Program (454-8100)
30.*« The environmental survey conveys water quality, recycling, lawn care and other issues will likely
be sent out during the first week in April. As a result of comments from the Commission and
others, the survey has been shortened by almost 25%.
31.*,< The City's first major capital improvement project aimed specifically at water quality improvement
will be constructed this summer. Pond JP-67 will be constructed near the intersection of
Duckwood Drive and Denmark Avenue, and will serve as a nutrient basin to treat run-off from the
Town Center. The project is designed to improve the quality of run-off entering Fish Lake.
Construction bids will be received for the project in late March and final City Council approval to
proceed is expected in early April.
4/2/91 Council Meeting
4/4/91 Commission Meeting
79.
SUBJECT: PRELIMINARY PLAT
PARK CENTER 2ND ADDITION
APPLICANT: DAKOTA COUNTY HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT
AUTHORITY
LOCATION: OUTLOT A, PARK CENTER ADDITION
EXISTING ZONING: R-4 (MULTIPLE)
DATE OF PUBLIC HEARING: MARCH 26,1991
DATE OF REPORT: MARCH 20, 1991
COMPILED BY: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
APPLICATION SUMMARY: The Dakota County Housing and Redevelopment Authority,
together with Arvid Elness Architects Inc. and the City of Eagan, have submitted an
application requesting a Preliminary Plat of 6.8 acres for a senior citizen housing complex
located on Outlot A, Park Center Addition.
ZONING & LAND USE: North of the site is Rahn Park, to the south and east of the site
are the undeveloped outlots of Park Center Addition. West of the site is Cedar Cliff
Commercial Park 2nd Addition and Cedar Cliff 3rd Addition (R-1).
BACKGROUND: The original Park Center Addition was final platted in September 1990.
Initially when Park Center was being proposed, Dakota County HRA was appraising the
northwest area of the site for a senior housing site. The entire Park Center Addition plat
was platted as five outlots. Specific uses were spelled out for the outlots: 4,500 sq. ft.
restaurant; 86,600 sq. ft. retail center; 6,000 sq. ft. retail; 4,800 sq. ft. bank; and the 65 unit
senior citizen apartment complex. All of these uses (with the exception of the senior
housing--Outlot A) are defined in a Planned Development Agreement.
COMMENTS: The proposed project is two three-story buildings (65 units total) with a
center car court to be constructed in the first phase. The building, located on the westerly
portion of the site, will be constructed of brick and aluminum siding to meet the City's
maintenance-free requirement. Underground parking is provided as well as 21 outdoor
parking stalls. All setback regulations meet City Code requirements.
Access to the site is from Park Center Drive which is a loop street off Cliff Road. The car
court is an area used for pick up or drop off to the entries of both the proposed and future
building.
11.
Two existing stands of mature oak trees were carefully considered during the site planning.
One exists along the west property line and the other is located in the north half of the site.
Careful grading plan preparation and in the field marking should be done to serve these
trees. The trees will serve both as a nice amenity, as well as screening from the single family
homes to the west.
0).
GRADING/DRAINAGE/EROSION CONTROL: The grading of the, Park Center
development included the grading for the street, Park Center Drive, and the adjacent pond,
Pond AP-50. The grading did not include the grading of the HRA site. Therefore, this
development will be responsible for grading this site.
The preliminary grading plan proposes to match the grades of the site as much as possible.
Two retaining walls are proposed to be constructed to help save trees. The existing oak
trees along the west property line and north property line shall be saved and protected
during the grading operation.
The existing 15" storm sewer that serves as the outlet for Pond AP-50 that heads to the
north along the west edge of this site shall be protected during the grading of this site. The
15" line is approximately 30' deep at the north edge of the proposed westerly building.
The Park Center development provided an 18" storm sewer with invert elevation of 897.0
to serve the west half of the HRA site under City Project #583. The drainage from the
west half of the site will be conveyed to Pond AP-50 which is in the southwest comer of the
HRA site. The drainage from the east half of the site will be conveyed to the existing 36"
storm sewer that is along the east property line. The 36" line drains to Pond AP-25.
The development will be responsible for installing and maintaining erosion control measures
in accordance with the City's Erosion/Sediment Control Manual. Special erosion control
measures will be incorporated into this plan to assure that no eroded materials are washed
into the existing ponding area.
WATER DUALITY: The Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission will
evaluate whether any additional water quality treatment measures for the proposed
development are necessary. Limited space is available to expand treatment ponds on or
near the development site. Therefore, a cash dedication will probably be the recommended
method of satisfying any additional treatment requirements for this development if they are
necessary.
UTILITIES: Sanitary sewer and water main service were provided to this site with the Park
Center development under City Project #583. An 8" sanitary sewer stub has been provided
from Park Center Drive to the south edge of this site with an invert elevation of 895.0. In
addition, an 8" water main stub was provided off Park Center Drive to the south end of this
site. The water main layout for the HRA site shall include adequate hydrants to provide
fire protection to this site.
STREETS/ACCESS/CIRCULATION: Access to this site has been provided by the Park
Center development through the construction of Park Center Drive under City Project #583.
Park Center Drive connects to Cliff Road and when Cliff Road is upgraded, the western
connection of Park Center Drive will have a full access opening with tam lanes and
signalization at Cliff Road. The eastern connection of Park Center Drive at Cliff Road will
be a right-in, right-out only intersection. The preliminary site plan shows the driveway
connecting to Park Center Drive will be in one location to serve this site.
8?'/
The construction of Park Center Drive includes the installation of a 6' wide concrete walk
along the north side of the street.
EASEMENTS/RIGHT-OF-WAY/PERMITS: Adequate right-of-way has already been
dedicated for Park Center Drive, therefore no additional right-of-way will be required.
The existing 15" storm sewer that runs along the west side of this site needs to have a 40'
wide easement dedicated over it since it is approximately 30' deep at the north edge of this
site. An alternative to the dedication of additional easements would be to construct deeper
footings for the building proposed to be constructed along side the storm sewer pipe. The
deeper footings would be constructed through the old sewer trench down to original ground.
This development shall be responsible for ensuring that all regulatory agency permits are
acquired prior to final plat approval.
8a.
FINANCIAL OBLIGATION - Park Center 2nd
Based upon the study of the financial obligations collected in the past and the uses proposed
for the property, the following charges are proposed. The charges are computed using the
City's existing fee schedule and connections proposed to be made to the City's utility system
based on the submitted plans
Improvement Use Rate Quantity Amount
Storm Sewer Trunk M.F. $.017/SF 229,735 SF 3905
Total $3,905
This parcel also has a pending assessment of $49,239.70 related to the installation of streets
and utilities under Project 583.
83.
PARK CENTER 3RD ADDITION CONDITIONS:
1. These standard conditions of plat approval as adopted by Council action on July
10, 1990 shall be complied with:
B1, C2, C4, C5, El, Fl, G1, H1
2. Snow fencing shall be placed around the existing trees prior to any grading.
84.
STANDARD CONDITIONS OF PLAT APPROVAL
A. Financial Obligations
1. This development shall accept its additional financial
obligations as defined in the staff's report in
accordance with the final plat dimensions and the rates
in effect at the time of final plat approval.
B. Easements and Rights-of-Way
1. This development shall dedicate 10' drainage and utility
easements centered over all common lot lines and adjacent
to private property or public right-of-way.
2. This development shall dedicate, provide, or financially
guarantee the acquisition costs of additional drainage,
ponding, and utility easements as required by the
alignment, depth, and storage capacity of all required
public utilities and streets located beyond the
boundaries of this plat or outside of dedicated public
right-of-way as necessary to service this development or
accommodate' it.
3. This development shall dedicate all public right-of-way
and temporary slope easements for ultimate development
of adjacent roadways as required by the appropriate
jurisdictional agency.
4. This development shall dedicate adequate drainage and
ponding easements to incorporate the required high water
elevation necessitated by City storm water storage volume
requirements.
C. Plans and Specifications
1. All public streets and utilities necessary to provide
service to this development shall be designed by a
registered professional engineer in accordance with City
codes, engineering standards, guidelines and policies.
2. A detailed grading, drainage, erosion, and sediment
control plan must be prepared in accordance with current
City standards prior to final. plat approval.
3. This development shall insure that all temporary dead end
public streets shall have a cul-de-sac constructed in
accordance with City engineering standards.
'5-.
STANDARD CONDITIONS OF PLAT APPROVAL
PAGE TWO
4. A detailed landscape plan shall be submitted on the
proposed grading plan. The financial guarantee shall be
included in the Development Contract and not be released
until one year after the date of installation.
5. All internal public and private streets shall be
constructed within the required right-of-way in
accordance with City Code and engineering standards.
D. Public Improvements
1. If any public improvements are to be installed under a
City contract, the appropriate project must be approved
at a formal public hearing by Council action prior to
final plat approval.
E. Permits
1. This development shall be responsible for the acquisition
of all regulatory agency permits in the time frame
required by the affected agency..
F. Parks and Trails Dedication
1. This development shall fulfill its parks dedication
requirements as recommended by the Advisory Parks and
Recreation Commission and approved by Council action.
G. Water Quality Dedication
1. This development shall be responsible for providing a
cash dedication in addition to/in lieu of ponding
requirements in accordance with the criteria identified
in the City's Water Quality Management Plan.
H. Other
1. All standard platting and zoning conditions shall be
adhered to unless specifically granted a variance by
Council action.
Advisory Planning Commission
Approved: August 25, 1987
Revised:
plataprv.con
LTS #2
City Council
September 15, 1987
July 10, 1990
c •\
LOT I
BLOCK I
CEDAR CLIFF
COMM. PARK 4
-COUNTY -14.
8?. N
CWFF 1¢A4D
..
y,- 'iul c)J)1t4ary as a{ll] PI,u,
1
ems,.
6
- a:
It .-?....
FINANCIAL OBLIGATION
OUTLOT
:::. ...
•
w CENTER . _ ^._ . _
'
Jr J - _
• ff9'?!'22"t
\ d 3?s
_
? 1 - ?s000
so-so 30 30
y
r? d' ?
?1`'60? 3927
s=so=odod'
low
` g; a
:°
•? -:O UTLOT OUTLOT t
8 c
: N
f I
?'x N
A
Ml p,-
"1
109 ?t100 30 30 393 q2---
12 5772' -
1 ?- N99•,3'22"W
19 SE 014, SEC. 30. -we 27,- ?6i 23 - T
PARK CENTER 2ND
Trunk Storm Sewer Upgrade
0.
RECREATION SUB-COMMITTEE MEETING
THURSDAY, APRIL 4, 1991
6:00 P.M.
CONFERENCE ROOMS A & B
PREFERRED PLAN
CITIZENS FOR A BETTER BLACKHAWK PARK
* Preserve passive natural park
* No pavilion
* Limits on lighting and park hours
* Direct Deerwood access
REQUESTED REVISIONS
CITIZENS FOR A BETTER BLACKHAWK PARK
* T intersection at park access road and Murphy Parkway
* Entrance construction begin concurrently if multiple accesses are
planned
* Assurances that Murphy Parkway or Riverton will not be the sole
entrance to the park.
* Safety review with neighborhood regarding access, i.e. street
lights, speed limit, signs, etc.
* Move Murphy access road southwest 20 feet and provide fence or
buffer
* Assurances on future development of Murphy triangle north of
proposed road on Murphy access. This should be come part of the
Park and kept in its native state.
* Murphy access lot limited to 60 cars with no future expansion
* Alternate configuration for pavilion(s) to accommodate multiple
small groups throughout the park. The pavilions should be
designed for family and friends small gatherings not for the
large gatherings.
* Limit Park hours. (i.e. close at 9;00)
* Close Murphy Park access road during winter months
* Allow all types of sled on the hill, don't make it a tubing hill
* Access to the playground with strollers