11/18/1996 - Advisory Parks & Recreation Commission
AGENDA
ADVISORY PARKS, RECREATION AND NATURAL RESOURCES COMMISSION
EAGAN, MINNESOTA
Monday, November 18, 1996
7:00 PM
Eagan Municipal Center
City Council Chambers
6:00 PM Workshop - Report Card from Dakota Council for Healty Communities
2nd Floor Conference Room
A. 7:00 PM Regular Meeting
B. Call to Order and Pledge of Allegiance
C. Award of Appreciation - Ken Tyler
D. Approval of Agenda 7:05 pm
E. Approval of Minutes of Regular Meeting of October 14, 1996 7:07 pm
F. Visitors to be Heard 7:10 pm
G. Department Happenings Pages 3-4
7:12 pm
H. Consent Agenda
(1) Interim Use Permit - SMC Compost Services Page 5 7:17 pm
1. Development Proposals
(1) Gardenwood Ponds 3rd Addition Pages 7-18 7:25 pm
J. Old Business
(1) Request for Tennis Backboard at Woodhaven Park Pages 19-20 7:45 pm
K. New Business
(1) 1997 Parks/Trails Dedication Fees Pages 21-22 8:00 pm
(2) 1997 Fees and Charges Pages 23-24 8:15 pm
(3) Park Security Gate Request Pages 25-30 8:30 pm
(4) Park Closing Hours Pages 31-32 8:45 pm
L. Parks Development Update
(1) Holz Farm Cliff Road Access Pages 33-46 9:00 pm
(2) Lexington Diffley Landscaping 9:15 pm
M. Water Resources Update
(1) Lawn Chemical Control Update Pages 47-52 9:25 pm
(2) Approval to Pursue Wetland Banking Opportunity Pages 53-56 9:35 pm
N. Other Business and Reports
(1) Inver Grove Heights Joint Powers Agreement 9:45 pm
Parks Implications
(2) Playground Equipment Replacement Pages 57-58 10:00 pm
0. Round Table 10:15 pm
P. Adjournment 10:30 pm
The City of Eagan is committed to the policy that all persons have equal access to its programs, services, activities, facilities and employment
without regard to race, color, creed, religion, national origin, sex, disability, age, marital status , sexual orientation, or status with regard to public
assistance. Auxiliary aids for disabled persons wishing to participate are available upon request at least 96 hours in advance of the events. If a
notice of less than 96 hours is received, the City will attempt to provide the aids.
MEMO
_ city of eagan
TO: ADVISORY PARKS, RECREATION AND NATURAL RESOURCES
COMMISSION
FROM: KEN VRAA, DIRECTOR OF PARKS AND RECREATION
DATE: NOVEMBER 14, 1996
RE: NOVEMBER 1 S COMMISSION MEETING
The November meeting of the Commission has the potential for becoming a lengthy meeting given
the number of issues for the Commission to discuss. A careful reading of the packet materials will
allow staff to be specific about each agenda item and to help keep the meeting moving along.
The Commission meeting will begin at 6:00 pm to hear about the Healthy Communities initiative
of Dakota County. I urge you to attend this workshop session because I think you will find it very
enlightening.
The first item after the Department Happenings is a consent item. Unless there are questions, or a
motion to have this item taken off the Consent Agenda for discussion, a motion to approve the
Consent Agenda would be in order. Gardenwood Ponds 3rd Addition is listed as a development
item as there have been changes to the original preliminary plat which affect parks planning.
Old Business includes a request for the Commission to consider a tennis backboard at Woodhaven
Park. Staff suggests a discussion of this request by the Commission and, perhaps, it's referral to the
Parks Development Sub-committee.
Staff has prepared a single memo regarding the parks and trails dedication fees for 1997. The
Commission will obviously note a significant increase in fees being proposed based on a significant
increase in land costs. The Commission will need to make a recommendation to the City Council
since this item is scheduled for the December 4 Council meeting.
Fees and charges for 1997 are to be reviewed, as in previous years, for other departmental
charges. The Commission will note that staff is suggesting relatively few changes to the existing fee
schedule.
Items 3 and 4 under New Business are the outcome of requests by residents near Blackhawk and
Meadowland Parks following neighborhood meetings. These suggestions include earlier closing
hours for parks and gates at the park entrance. Please review the memo from staff regarding these
items.
Water resources update includes two action items; the Lawn Chemical Control Ordinance and an
issue on wetland banking. Water Resources Coordinator Rich Brasch has prepared separate memos
on each item.
There are currently two items under Other Business and Reports. Both items will require some
direction from the Commission. The first item will be presented verbally since a meeting
concerning this issue is scheduled for November 15.
Looking forward to seeing everyone on November 18! Also a reminder that a joint meeting has
been scheduled for 5:30 pm on November 19 with the City Council, Advisory Commission and
Open Space Task Force to comment on the recent park bond referendum.
Respectfully s omitted,
*/O~/
Ken Vraa
KV:cm
DEPARTMENT HAPPENINGS
OCTOBER/NOVEMBER,1996
1. Staff attended another meeting of School District 196 athletic personnel and youth athletic association representatives. This
session focused on travel sports and hockey. The issue in the advent of Eastview High School in the 1997-98 school year
and how to best provide sports experience for the youth. The portion of Eagan south of Diffley Road and west of Pilot Knob
Road is in the Eastview attendance area.
Staff anticipates several additional meetings, as it is the youth athletic associations' decision as to in which schools they
market programs and whom their membership by-laws identify as the population served. Natural adjustments among athletic
associations will occur once fear of or resistance to change is overcome.
2. The Department and the Eagan Hockey Association have scheduled evening dry land practice on the asphalt rink at Goat Hill
Park. The activity will end the week prior to Thanksgiving at which time with the help of cold temperatures, flooding of that
rink may be feasible.
3. Community Education District 196 is in the process of reviewing the role of local area advisory groups. The re-organization
of the Department a year ago which saw area managers no longer overseeing a complete package of services was detrimental
to continuation of the role previously established for local advisory committees. A manager whose prime responsibility is
facilities seemed to have difficulty providing leadership to an advisory group concerning the complete range of Community
Education Services. Staff, as liaison to the local area advisory group, are working with the local manager to re-energize the
commitments.
4. The Departments most recent babysitting/latch key clinic was at capacity enrollment. The clinics are offered four times a
year. The Fire Auxiliary has developed the curriculum and volunteers teach to their areas of expertise.
5. The cold, rainy weather on the day of the influenza immunization clinic seemed to affect participation. Only 24 people took
advantage of the service. As recently as two years ago, over 100 shots were administered.
6. The fall sessions of the 55 Alive/Mature Driving were held this month. The refresher course met the needs of 30 individuals.
A smaller group of 16 took the 8 hour "first time" seminar.
7. The Department may be hosting another student intern this winter. An inquiry has been received from an Eagan resident.
Winona State student. Staff will know by the November Commission meeting whether the student has selected our agency.
Interesting program opportunities are available in the winter.
8. Staff are attending, and participating in various venues of the MRPA state conference. The event is in the City of Duluth this
year.
9. Superintendent of Parks Olson accepted a plaque on behalf of the Department presented by Northview Elementary
School recognizing the Department's participation with the installation of the new play structure at the school.
10. The Department received a large "Thank You" card signed by students from Thomas Lake Elementary School
recognizing the Department's participation with the installation of the new play structure at the school.
11. Department staff assisted with the relocation of play elements at Oak Ridge Elementary School in an effort to bring
the play area into compliance with most current safety standards.
12. Personnel from the Parks and Street Departments have completed the installation of two new launch ramps at
Blackhawk Lake. The new ramp will allow a weed harvester access to both basins of the lake.
13. Forestry staff has installed a landscape planting at the trail entrance on the north side of Slater Acres Park. The
project was made possible by a donation from a developer working adjacent to the park.
14. Many park areas damaged by this summer's drought have been over seeded. The recent cold weather has frozen
the ground preventing seeding in all areas.
15. Staff has completed soil testing at selected sites in the system. The fertilization program will be modified in
accordance with the results. A "0" phosphorus fertilizer was used for the fall application. Over 55 tons of fertilizer
was used in 1996.
16. All seasonal shelters and trailers have been put in place at the winter sites.
17. Perennial planting bids in park areas have been prepared for winter.
18. The Department has purchased ballfield ag-lime from the City of Inver Grove Heights at a greatly reduced price.
The material was taken from a ballfield complex that is being reconstructed. Several loads were taken to the Dakota
Hills Middle School fields with city trucks.
19. The garage doors have been closed and the heating system turned on at the new Blackhawk pavilion. The heating
system is an in-floor electric mat. Staff will monitor the effectiveness of the system.
20. All seasonal buildings and facilities have been winterized.
rmtvpmod
4
ADVISORY PARKS, RECREATION AND NATURAL RESOURCES COMMISSION
NOVEMBER 18, 1996
CONSENT AGENDA
INTERIM USE PERMIT - SMC COMPOST SERVICES
1. The interim use permit should contain a condition which requires construction of
two ponding areas to contain runoff from the expansion. The design must be
approved by the water resources coordinator.
city of eagan MEMO
TO: ADVISORY PARKS, RECREATION AND NATURAL RESOURCES
COMMISSION
FROM: KEN VRAA, DIRECTOR OF PARKS AND RECREATION
DATE: NOVEMBER 13, 1996
RE: INTERIM USE PERMIT - SMC COMPOST SERVICES
WATER QUALITY AND WETLANDS
The project will involve expansion of the existing compost site by about 3.3 acres.
While runoff from the existing compost site is contained within a series of depressions
along the western margin of the site, runoff from the compost site expansion would be
discharged off-site to a proposed shallow pond which in turn discharges to a channel
that enters Pond EP-2 on the Borchert-Ingersoll property. Pond EP-2 has been re-
classified to indirect contact recreation due because it will be included as a major
recreational and scenic feature in the proposed North Park.
Because of the poor quality water associated with the leachate from plant material on
the site, the quality of the runoff water from the compost site expansion is expected to
be very poor. Thus, it is desirable to minimize discharge from the site as much as
possible. To minimize the potential for discharge to Pond EP-2, the owner of the
compost site will provide for two ponds-one on the compost site expansion and one on
Gopher Resource Property just to the east-which will have sufficient wet volume to fully
contain the runoff from very large rainfall events (i.e. over 100 year recurrence interval
precipitation events). With some minor design modifications, these ponds should
provide adequate protection of water quality in Pond EP-2. Maintenance of a wide grass
buffer adjacent to Pond EP-2 will also provide additional filtering of discharge from the
lower pond- should it occur-as the gradient of the conveyance channel becomes flatter
and the flow spreads laterally before reaching the pond.
There are no jurisdictional wetlands within the area affected by the proposed expansion.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
1. The interim use permit should contain a condition which requires construction of
two ponding areas to contain runoff from the expansion. The design must be
approved by the water resources coordinator.
5
ADVISORY PARKS, RECREATION AND NATURAL RESOURCES COMMISSION
NOVEMBER 18, 1996
DEVELOPMENT AGENDA
GARDENWOOD PONDS 3RD ADDITION
1. If the relocated trail alignment as identified by the developer is satisfactory, this
development shall be responsible for a parkland dedication for the area in which the
trail is to be located. The balance of the development is responsible for a cash parks
dedication and a cash trails dedication. The developer shall provide the City with a
Right of Entry to allow for the construction of the trail.
2. The Tree Preservation Plan shall be approved as proposed with the following
conditions:
a. The applicant shall work with staff to alter the tree removal limits on Lots 3, 4,
5 and 6 in an attempt to preserve additional significant trees.
b. Tree Protective Measures (i.e. 4 foot polyethylene laminte safety netting) shall
be installed at the Drip Line or at the perimeter of the Cirtical Root Zone,
whichever is greater, of significant trees/woodlands to be preserved.
c. The developer shall contact the City Forestry Division at least five days prior to
the issuance of the grading permit to ensure compliance with the approve Tree
Preservation Plan.
3. There are no additional water quality requ.rements for this parcel, since the on-site
pond that receives runoff from this area was sized assuming residential development
of the parcel in question. There are no jurisdictional wetlands within the parcel.
-city of eagan MEMO
TO: ADVISORY PARKS, RECREATION AND NATURAL RESOURCES
COMMISSION
FROM: KEN VRAA, DIRECTOR OF PARKS AND RECREATION
DATE: NOVEMBER 5, 1996
RE: GARDENWOOD PONDS 3RD ADDITION
BACKGROUND:
Joe Miller Homes, a D.R. Horton Company is requesting a Rezoning of approximately 1.5 acres from
PD-R- I Planned Development Single Family (outlots C ei D Bridle Ridge 2nd Addition) to R-1 Single
Family and a Preliminary Subdivision of 15 lots on 18.56 acres located north of Northview Park Road,
west of Trotters Ridge and southwest of Bald Lake in the NE 1 /4 of Section 23.
The 91 acre Gardenwood Ponds Addition subdivision received approval in 1993; a reapproval was
granted by the Council in 1994 and an extension to the reapproval was granted in 1995. Rather than
develop all of the lots at one time, the developer chose to develop the project in phases. The first phase
began construciton in 1995 and is basically complete. The second addition received final approval this
October.
The Comprehansive Guide Plan designates this area as D-1, Single Family Residential (0-3 units/acre).
The proposed development is consistent with that classification. The overall densityfor the project is .81
units/acre. The current zoning is R- I Single Family and Planned Development Single Family. The
developer is requesting a rezoning of 1.5 acres from the PD-R-1 zoning category to R-1 Single Family.
The reason for the rezoning is because the 1.5 acres formally of the Bridle Ridge 2nd Addition is now
being incorporated into this subdivision.
All area requirements and setback requirements meet or exceed minimum zoning standards.
PARKS/TRAILS DEDICATION
The Advisory Parks , Recreation and Natural Resources Commission reviewed the proposed Gardenwood
Ponds Addition in July of 1993 and recommended thirteen conditions including conditions for wetland
preservation, tree preservation and parks and trails dedication.
Not included in the development plan were two outlots identified as Outlots C and D, Bridle Ridge
Addition. These outlots were owned by Sienna Development and have now been sold to the developer
of Gardenwood Ponds. This preliminary plat reflects a change to the original Gardenwood Ponds
Addition which incorporates these two outlots.
TRAIL CONNECTION TO BALD LAKE:
A trail connection to Bald Lake from Northview Park Road, which would then go to the east and
eventually connect to Bridle Ridge Park/Elrene Road, has been planned by the City since the original
Bridle Ridge development was prepared years ago (see exhibit A). After reviewing the original
Gardenwood Ponds Addition, the Commission recommended that with the final platting and
development of the two outlots owned by Sienna, a trail/foot path would be developed. In order for
2
this to be accomplished, Gardenwood Ponds would dedicate two small parcels of property; one parcel is
adjacent to Northview Park Road and the second parcel is adjacent to Bald Lake (see Exhibit B). These
parcel dedications would be added to the existing park. The existing park parcel contains a small storm
water pond which has a high water elevation of 868.3. The park extends approximately ten feet to the
west of this pond. In order for a trail to be developed, it is necessary for the trail to go father to the
west; beyond what the City owns for parkland.
In a letter to the developer's engineer, Bob Wiegert, in August of 1993, staff outlined the need for an
additional forty feet of land beyond the current park boundary in order to put in the trail. The letter
confirmed an understanding that staff would be willing to accept a trail easement for this property rather
then a parks dedication since a dedication might result in the lots not meeting minimum lot sizes.
CHANGES TO PRELIMINARY PLAT:
Attached and identified as Exhibit C is the original proposed development scheme for this area of the
development. Exhibit D reflects the changes. Commission Members will note that the cul-de-sac has
been shifted to the east which, according to the developer, uses the level more efficently now that the
development is under one ownership. The shift also moves the future homes to the east and closer to the
originally proposed trail alignment.
ALTERNATIVE TRAIL ALIGNMENT:
Staff has walked the site with the developer to relocate the trail to a new location that is closer to the
pond and at an elevation lower than previously identified. This lower elevation does permit the trail user,
for the most part, to not be seen from the proposed house locations. This new trail location will require
additional clearing of ground vegetation although no significant trees will be lost as a result of trail
construction.
The developer is now concerned about the issue of liability for the future homeowner as a result of
granting a trail easement. Therefore the developer and staff are in agreement that the area needed for
the trail will be surveyed and dedicated to the City as park dedication. The balance of the dedication will
be a cash dedication.
It is staff's recommendation that the developer provide the City with a right of entry to the property
with the approved preliminary plat for the purpose of initiating trail construction. Staff would then
schedule this portion of the trail to be built in the spring of 1997, well in advance of the developer's
proposed time line for final plat approval and start of home construction scheduled for late 1997 or
early 1998. A legal description, outlot, will be defined for this land/trail and then dedication with the
final plat.
FOR COMMISSION ACTION:
As it relates to the issue of parks and trails dedication, the Commission should determine if the
relocated trail alignment is satisfactory, if a parkland dedication, with the balance in cash, is
acceptable, and if a right of entry for trail construction should be a condition of approval.
ATTACHMENTS:
A, B, C and D
Note: Commission Members may want to review the larger plan sets prior to the Commission meeting.
TREE PRESERVATION:
Significant vegetation on this site is comprised of oak, elm, black cherry, boxelder, hackberry, ash, birch,
cottonwood, and poplar trees. Tree diameters range from 6 inches to 34 inches, with an average
diameter of about 16 inches. The Tree Inventory as submitted by the applicant has identified a total of
235 significant trees. The Tree Preservation Plan as submitted indicates that site preparation and
grading will result in the removal of 34 significant trees (14.5% of the total). Allowable removal for this
type of development is 20 % of the existing significant vegetation. Staff review of the submitted grading
plan shows that there are an additional 9 trees inside the grading limits which will be destroyed if grading
commences as indicated. This additional removal along with the number indicated by the applicant will
total 43 trees being removed (18.3% of the total). This removal total is still less than the amount
allowed within the City of Eagan Tree Preservation Ordinance, therefore no tree replacement will be
required.
Additional Concerns
Staff is recommending that additional trees can be preserved on lots 3 through 6 if custom
grading of the lots occurs along with a utilization custom house design and placement within the lot.
Approximately 24 additional trees (planned to be removed through implementation of the submitted
grading plan) could be preserved through custom designing of these four lots. Most of these trees are
bur oaks in the 12" to 20" diameter range. Preservation of these additional trees will also result in a
more natural edge appearance of the larger preserved area in the back of these lots, as opposed to the
straight line cleared appearance as proposed by the applicant.
WATER QUALITY/WETLANDS:
There are no additional water quality requirements for this parcel, since the on-site pond that receives
runoff from this area was sized assuming residential development of the parcel in question. There are no
jurisdictional wetlands within the parcel.
IIl /III III,
BALD LAKE
f I I / / / / / 1 I ? Jl I
l / l l l I I, / . TOP OF I f \Q\\\\ \
STEEP SLOPE/ 1\ \\\\\A
IV'
e8o
1 I l 0.v'POND
OUTLOTD'PARK DEDICATION SIENNA CORP. ( f yti X.-.r :Y 1 3~4 T1 \ _ - 1 I \ i gy .:s.ssee: xi:t sg3a+ iu:ie : E r ::.Yr~i~'
PARK, v vv I~ .
I / ~o WANDERING ,
i r
OUTILOT
/o / r j r ~\\\\\i\\\\\ \ \ /ll/N!i
_---'SIENNA CORP.
J / / ! 1 1 / I I/ I ~ \ Il/ ~.i i ~ ~ 1111
I WI vu/C rq
OUTLOT-13/
v l// ) v v , o. l/lI
D.R. HORTON INC. 1 1 / I t/ , r I I , nl1
POND / l l u / U /c A)- f -41
14,
U/c
7y
PROPOSED TRAIL ALIGNMENT/ c
\ \ 1 I o
PARK DEDICATION
r / / \ \
/ lk
0-
fill)
` \ 0~~\2' \ / \ a - / 111 11111 1 I I\
FUTURE TRAIL TO
\ A'
NORTH RIDGE DRIVE `o if 0
END EXISTING TRAIL\ Np °~.'1~• \ }~r
° 50 100 L00 300 400 500
ART
444 hum
PARK \ \ \ ROAD
cp-
GARDENWOOD PONDS
OUTLOTS & PARK DEDICATION
EXHIBIT - B
' ROAD-_--
`l J r
5.
FRO I W1. ~ to - I L~
5
rfONlf _RplIS 7 14
0 5
UI
GARDENWOOD 4 1" -1
PONDS
10 2
3 r11=may
1 i z
BALD LAKE
tl 9
-111 ~ ~
° 1J1cLI [VAT
r- --T
)OL
• fpfV O;YEAGAN • • • •
J WANDERING WALK • R
\ QIUILU U •N•r••• • ~NT E
f J l 1 III
1LOT f. '~e 1 ~~~11 C9 i
r
f 1
41
10
r r) 11 I \ t I T •
20 at
OF .
OUTIOI'I
ZI • f~ fA
p® T 10T to
H 71 zz zj •
24
6R
22
Ih ;I a
1101
VICINITY MAP OF WANDERING WALK PARK
EXHIBIT - A
try J
4.
w •
• •
•
.
•
i
t
i
i
•
•
•
•
i
'1 - - - - - _ ` - - - 'lI ~/I~j~! II T1 01\11 •
1 ~ 11 3 I hjl~
r~ \RW ~ ` 2P ) rl 11 1 i'~/ 4 3 ri /l 1 I
/ l i •
WANDERIf
6
WALK
fI/
pI1L0i A
It -
III I 1 / • • : ± \
y~!
N'k 12
1 / 7 ~ ll IS
IS ~ \ II
e • 1~_ 11 ~r
11 7 ---~'i' 1 ,ill • _ 11 11
q r - l B 1 ~ ZiI JC • 17 11
j Z I a l) 4 • I) 11
13 IZ II ( N 5 ' 0 1- • 20 \.I 11 it
14 ( Ir t 1 (1
• '1
15
16 'IV
0 AL 00,
• CITY OF ALAN-o..•
• i~rf,//i'
RECREATION FIEL CI BRIDAL RIDGE BARK. • • a.f 23
\ \7 yy
PLAYG'D~ND 22
BACOUR4AML If 1( a arm s 1 L ~rj n zl
RING 20
19 i- - -
lI 1T\ 1 y i ~ B III 11 @ / 1 ~
0 - / 11 f1 ~T. ' ? RW
I1 q \ r, 4
10
01,111.91 U 14
X fit I!,
16
4.! ^ 444 111
17
r \ V 10 u . 20 I \ 12 23
V /~~i '45 24
l l
/IA / I/I//I/191IIII1I I \I 10///">//\''
V
BALD LAKE
2.1 v\
/Ib
POND • 1 / / / / 1\-1--\ (1++~'\\1\\ ~ ~ i ' ~/i ~ ~~i//~ /
7- l"'/~/,"""\\\\111 I\1\\~\~.\~~ i~!~i/ii-•Ji~~-
WALK = PARK
I ~ • ~ • r,. jJ / / ~1 1 1 G \ 0
/ / / / / / 1111 / / ~II11/l/',
1 _ 1 0, \
POND 0// l / 11 T1 ` 1\ i /C 1 f/1,
_ _ . ` - it / / °'///'///'i, / / ^ -I / \1 i~/' \ \
~L~! `\\~~~;\a- \ \ 111111 1 \l', R_m// / t i?h i'//e 1 !
111\\ I / / \ /0 9 / o/---\\\ \ \ \4
\ y a \~j>\\\\~_i. J/)may w I111111/Ily\\\\/
\ \~~C\\ of\? / J`~ ~/i ~ / 111111,! 11
\ IN
\ 9n ! p I q 1 1 I 1 1 \ I
\\~\`,\1 I I\\\ \ ~~a /inky// /l/ r r \ \ 1\
No? 11" \ ~y '0 J`'O 100 i00 300 400 500
v v~ ` RT/yV~~jl I 1/,u
PARK. ROAD-
^r- \ A li it \ \ \ / I I a / \
111 1 p \ / 1 I \ \ k
\ 1 1 ~ tI/ II e / I 1 1 1 r \ \ \ ~Z~`
ORIGINAL GARDENWOOD PONDS
DEVELOPMENT PLAN FROM 1993.
EXHIBIT - C
BALD LAKE
'Al
17-
POND • i , Ii" / \ \ \ \ \ , /~i2 _i _i .
/ • \ - l / 6 \ \ ~S ''iii Y ~i--
~ / / / . • T ~ I 1.~. / ~ ~ - - \ o ~ \ 111111\\\ ~ ~ - i~j ~ "i / \ I f I \ 1 1 K\
0 1 i. ~•y~ / - \ _ \I I ' -WALK PARK',
I ~I~.•~~.. v Leo=\I NpER1~;.-~,~
k ~\\Wp`\11 ;iT/~%p~~i
1//l///
1
/ / l 1/ll/// I/I\ \U/C ;o• \ I/IMlll
POND /l 111/ll , ~l i''\\1\ _ I lyC I` llh
lk ox
a l~ -ate 111 / ri / i - m \ /
\`~C o~\ \ t / \a / 11111/11 111
~ \ \ ~ \ ~ ~ yo q' ,'l'~ ! , N 1 411/11 I 1\\ I~\
'i/0 1 I " SO 100 L00 300 400 500
1 \ \k~~ c R~, ~~~`1 11. _N \
PARK \ ROAD
,1 \111 / \ , > l / \ ! \ ~r~~.\ / IN-
I
GARDENWOOD PONDS
REVISED
DEVELOPMENT PLAN 1996
EXHIBIT - D .
Eagan Community Deveiccment Department
ofEagm
Location Map 10
3
g
61,
irdenwood Ponds 3rd Addition N
i-rreliminary Subdivision and Rezoning 6W o 1200 Feet
Case No. 23-PP-20-9-96
l6
r) ~ ~ ~ ~ rll~llV V
C3 C7 E G7
T N pp
Q A nt.r utpi nn;nv)J;
ri
Q ~tiT ~t~
t~ to
Q
'Q m
Rn
,V t}t
RRIt7I
• t
0 F DR
"9.5. 0 5'd MITI
[Q P d a
MILL
~ t~ Paq _ ~ ~ ~rrrr
d ~ n
nWllVI(PAR1<ROAr)
) y, ti
PARK ROAD
NoR p.1
J7r-i~ n a
~Gardenwood Ponds Existing Conditions
Area Gardenwood Ponds Additions
N
100 0 100 200 300 Feet
dy .rl I ,~rl.ui t'llttiniulily
I1, vl Inlnul nl D q .ulna ulcer
[ ' w iNrr / ? \ 1111 I
of.
\ \ ,rot' _ /
TIP S~
Al"
i.-------------- Dp
r~ ?%1 l"~~ Tai `q r'
fTl ' 3
/ ~ ' Y•/•~ ItA M•
r_ eutsenotl
• L DROWAR PL•11 L PARA,VOUNT s°+s'
cnanmm PONDS DA HORTON. INC • MN. {NGINEUING oesleN
3RD AD011t0?r M.r sc ttN AGNI
.x.1DM
y /rv W/ _
%
w I-_ I
OIL-
• -r ° '~C~ / / D
. j 1 \ / • / • ~DD
_ %ea•`„~d \'X,~ Jam'
Lip
all
1 1
I i i k
D D.R. HORTO INC • Mtg. >M PARR VOUNT %3RD ADDRION wow
4 DENW~~NDS ENGINEER oESICN
IIEVAM R INGRM%tINwOM I=
Wxm"
MR. KEN VRAA
PARKS COMMISSIONER
CITY OF EAGAN
3830 PILOT KNOB ROAD
EAGAN, MINNESOTA 55122
SEPTEMBER 23, 1996
Dear Mr. Vraa:
On April 23, 1996, the neighbors of Woodhaven Park on Gold Trail
in Eagan began circulating a petition to have a BACKBOARD
constructed at the tennis court so that individuals can practice
and get exercise. We would also like to have a "no rollerblades"
sign hung on the courts. People think these are both excellent
ideas.
We are submitting this petition for your approval. Please respond
in writing or by phone call to:
Rosemary Tarnowski
3865 Dolomite Drive
Eagan, Minnesota 55122
Phone: 452-8226 or 438-0747 (work)
Thank you for you consideration of this matter.
Sincerely,
Rosemary Tarnowski
/9.
TO: CITY OF EAGAN - PARKS COMMISSION
DATE: April 23, 1996
We the undersigned, would like to have a backboard placed at the
tennis courts at Woodhaven Park on Gold Trail in Eagan. We would
also like a "NO ROLLERBLADES" sign hung on the tennis courts
fence.
NAME ADDRESS
j~' 383D L.aure( cf Eaya
3& e 3 2)o e a o.
J
Z-54 d
Wo 03
4u 6 - Ai< C%a- i
14-
P~o a-V
JOCK5
4cn, aft
L5 Dn' Vq- 20-30-1--
Y a/ ma 3 8 7D D o/ o mi r e D r.
y
MEMO
- city of eagan
DATE: November 5, 1996
TO: Advisory Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission
FROM: Ken Vraa, Director of Parks and Recreation
SUBJECT: 1997 Park and Trail Dedication Fees
Background
The Advisory Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission has annually recommended changes to
the Park and Trail Dedication effective on the first of the new year.
History/Discussion
Eagan's Park Dedication formula is based on average land values. Consequently, as land values increase,
so should the cash dedication equivalent.
For 1996, the Commission recommended a fee increase of $75 for a single family home and a Trail
Dedication increase from $105 to $150 per unit. A review of the past two years for Park and Trail amounts is
listed below:
1996 1995 1994
Single Family $950 $875 $724
Duplex 884 791 640
Townhouse/Quad 800 723 572
Apartments/Multiple 775 726 575
Trails 150 105 103
The significant increase in Park Dedication from 1994 to 1996 generally reflected the rapidly escalating land
value experienced during this time frame. Trails Dedication in 1996 reflected increasing construction costs
for trails and the increase in trail width from 8' to 10' along major corridors.
Other Communities
In reviewing comparisons with other communities experiencing similar growth patterns, it appears as if
Eagan is well positioned. Lakeville did not change their rates in 1996, keeping them the same as 1995.
They expect to modify the fee structure in 1997. Lakeville charges $900 for Parks and $225 for Trails.
Plymouth does not charge a Trails dedication, but currently charges $1,175 for Parks. The
commercial/industrial fee is $3,800 per acre. Chanhassen raised their fees in 1996. Single family/duplex is
$1,100 and Trails are $367. Multi-family is $900/Trail at $300. Commercial industrial is $4,500 and $1,500
for Trails.
Eden Prairie charged $945 in 1995 for a residential unit and $3,400 for commercial/industrial. Eden Prairie
does not have a Trails Dedication. None of the other communities have a water quality charge which Eagan
has. This charge is based on a percentage of the Park fee.
-2-
Park Dedication fees must also be defensible. That is, there must be a basis for the fee collected. A clear
connection between the need for parks (user and population demand) and the fee must be made. Eagan
dedication is based on land values. And, it appears those values are continuing to increase. Consequently,
an increase in the Park fees seems reasonable and justifiable.
Population Adjustments
Eagan Park Dedication is built on a ratio of parkland to people. The more people in a household or by type of
household, the bigger the impact on parks. In 1983, the City based its Parks calculation on 3.5 residents per
single family, 2.8 per duplex, 2.1 per townhome, and apartment units at 1.9. The Planning staff now
calculate these residents as 3.37 per single family, 3.36 per duplex, 1.97 per townhome and 1.79 per
apartment unit. It would be appropriate for the Commission to adopt those newer numbers in calculating
park needs and the resultant dedication requirement. Because of the density change, there is a resultant
change in the amount of park dedication per unit in the case of apartments and townhomes, a decrease;
despite an increase in land values.
Proposed 1997 Dedication Fees
Land Value
Single Family $1,042 $25,900
Duplex 1,038 25,900
Townhouse/Quad 777 32,900
Apartments/Multiple 772 35,900
Trail Fees to remain at $150
Commercial/Industrial $3,200 per acre
Trail fee to remain at $880 per acre
For Commission Action
To review and make recommendations for new census data per household for incorporation into the
dedication ordinance and to make a Parks and Trail Dedication recommendation for 1997.
,8Jkvt 15.96
A,
- city of eagan MEMO
DATE: November 5, 1996
TO: p Advisory Parks, Recreation and Natural Resource Commission
FROM: Dorothy Peterson, Superintendent of Recreation
SUBJECT: Fees and Charges
For Commission Action
To review the attached proposed fees and charges listing for FY 1997 and forward a
recommendation of its adoption to the City Council as presented or revise and recommend for City
Council action.
facts
• Fees and charges for use of park facilities were revised for FY 1995 at which time non-
resident fees were also instituted.
• The Department for the first time administered sales tax "point of sale" in 1996.
Administration was efficient and easily documented for the Finance Department.
• Tax exempt groups readily provided the Department with documentation concerning their
exempt status.
• Estimated revenue from athletic field rent for 1996 was $5,000 through September 30, 1996,
taxable rentals have totaled $3,075; tax exempt $6,238 for a total of $9,313. The 1997
estimate for athletic field rent is $5,000.
• Park shelter rent for 1996 was estimated at $9,000. Through September 30, 1996 actual
revenue has been: taxable $12,892; tax exempt $125. The estimate for 1997 park shelter
rent is $9,000.
• The primary source of tax exempt athletic field rent is from travel sports teams and
tournaments sponsored by EAA. Taxable rentals are generated from adult soccer, baseball,
softball and tennis teams.
• A fees and charges listing of fees for non-resident per team is not required as access to field
space for league play based on a 70% residency requirement. Single game reservations are
addressed under per day fees.
• Park shelter rent was generated from 173 pavilion, 13 shelter building and 41 sun shelter
reservations. A full season for the Blackhawk pavilion in 1997 will increase opportunity and
revenue.
• 14% of pavilion rentals were non-resident. Less than 10% of shelter building and sun
shelter rentals were by non-residents.
• A non-resident fee for reserved tubing was inadvertently omitted last year.
• Access to the kitchen at the Blackhawk pavilion is recommended at $30.00 resident and
non-resident.
Recommendation
Staff recommends that fees and charges for FY 1997 for rental of athletic fields and park shelters
remain at current levels. Incorporation of a non-resident reserved tubing fee is recommended for
consistency in administration. Revenues are healthy and Eagan residents are the primary
beneficiaries of affordable rates for use of park facilities.
cs10/11-Smemo.dp
PARKS AND RECREATION
FEES AND CHARGES SCHEDULE
FEE TYPE 1996 FEE PROPOSED 1997
Parkland Dedication
Single Family $ 857.00
Duplex 791.00
Townhouses/Quad 723.00
Apartments/Multiple 726.00
Commercial & Industrial .065/S.F.
2,83 1 /Acre
Trailway Dedication 105/Unit
880/Acre
RESIDENTS NON-RESIDENTS
Park Fees
Picnic Kit 3.00/7.00 (2) 3.00/7.00 (2) No Change
Trapp Farm. Thomas Lake & Blackhawk
Pavilions - Per Day 95.00 (1) (2) 115.00 (1) (2) No Change
Per'' V2 Day 65.00 (1) (2) 85.00 (1) (2) No Change
Blackhawk Pavilion - Kitchen 30.00 (2) 30.00 (2) New
Enclosed Shelter Buildings -
Per Day 95.00 (1) (2) 115.00 (1) (2) No Change
Per'' V2 Day 65.00 (1) (2) 85.00 (1) (2) No Change
Qpen Shelters - Per Day 30.00 (2) 50.00 (2) No Change
Extra Picnic Tables - Per Day 25.00 (2) 25.00 (2) No Change
(maximum of 6)
Athletic Facilities/Shelters
Fields - Per Field/Per Day 55.00 (1) (2) 75.00 (1) (2) No Change
Lights (if required) -
Tournaments Per Field/Hr. 30.00 (1) (2) 30.00 (1) (2) No Change
Building Cleaning - Per Day 55.00 (1) (2) 55.00 (1) (2) No Change
Restrooms/Bases/Field Chalking
Per Reservation 30.00 (2) 50.00 (2) No Change
Chuckwagon Grill 30.00 (2) 50.00 (2) No Change
Canopy - Per Day 55.00 (2) 75.00 (2) No Change
Maintenance Fee
Travel Baseball-Youth/Team 65.00 No Change
Adult/Team (6-9 games) 165.00 (2) No Change
Adult/ Team (10+ games) 315.00 (2) No Change
Travel Soccer/Hockey-
Travel Team 65.00 No Change
Concession Permit (max of 3) 215.00 No Change
Trapp Farm Reserved Tubing
acili
1 - 25 People 25.00/hr (1) (2) 45.00/hr (1) (2)
26 - 100 People 25.00/hr (1) (2) 45.00/hr (1) (2)
(plus $1.00/person/hr (plus $1.00/person/
over 25people) hour over 25 people)
(1) Requires damage deposit of $150
(2) Requires addition of 6.5% sales tax.
cs10/11-Smerw.dp
MEMO TO: Advisory Park Recreation and Natural Resources Commission
FROM: Paul Olson, Superintendent of Parks
Dorothy Peterson, Superintendent of Recreation
DATE: November 5, 1996
SUBJECT: Blackhawk Park Security
Blackhawk Park is unique in the City's system of parks. It's location, size, physical character and
resources, which include a high-quality lake and undisturbed woodland, create a sense of
seclusion not found in most metropolitan parks. The visual border of homes or businesses that
rings many parks is not evident. Unfortunately, the same amenities that make the park a
desirable destination for the well-intended park user have served to attract vandals and other
unauthorized activities. This report is a brief discussion of several alternatives meant to reduce
the vandalism and unauthorized use, the primary focus being an evaluation of the use of a gate.
At a recent meeting with neighbors, it was suggested that the City install a lockable gate at the
park entrance to control vehicular access. Because of the distance from adjoining residential
neighborhoods, some were of the opinion that the violators typically drove to the park. In
response, staff conducted a survey of other park and recreation providers to determine the
frequency with which gates were being used, the circumstances and the effectiveness.
Park and recreation providers at the State, County and local level were contacted. The responses
have been grouped accordingly.
*State of Minnesota (DNR)
Use of Gates: At sites with on-site staff or those patrolled regularly by an enforcement officer,
often on maintenance access roads.
Issues Raised:
- Gates have not prevented vandalism - people walk around them.
- Local enforcement agencies are "locked out" making emergency assistance difficult.
- Assumes that staff is available on a regular basis for opening and closing.
1
* County systems
Ramsey County
Use of Gates: Used at the entrances to Regional Parks. According to the operational plan, a
Sheriffs's Department Deputy is to open and close the gate at times consistent with the park
hours.
Issues
- Locking/unlocking must be done consistently at a regular time to maintain credibility.
- Gates have kept vehicles out, but not the vandals.
- Gates limit access to local enforcement agencies - some officers are unwilling to unlock the
gates.
- Increasing patrols of the parks has proven more effective.
- Dakota County
Use of Gates: Within parks at the entrances to primary facilities. The parks have a decentralized
design requiring multiple gates rather than a single gate at a primary access.
Issues Raised
- Opened and closed by "Park Patrol" staff.
- Specific to individual facilities rather than an entire park site.
- Gates have worked, and they hope to install more.
- Lights are used at selected sites.
- Wright County
Use of Gates: Used at the entrances to seasonal parks having developed facilities, primarily in
rural settings.
Issues Raised
- The gates are opened and closed by on-site staff during the season.
- Vehicles have been locked in the facilities. It can be difficult to locate the owners prior to
closing.
- Gates have prevented significant vandalism, though this may be attributable to the rural
location of the parks.
- Security lights are used at sites with facilities or structures.
2
* Municipalities
Plymouth
Use of Gates: The City has no gates in the park system.
- Rosemount
Issues Raised: There have been requests for gates; however, the City has chosen not to install
them due to concerns related to:
• Policy emergency access
• Staff availability to open and close
- Roseville
Use of Gate: Gates are used on a limited basis to control vehicular access to a secluded park area.
Issued Raised:
- The gate was installed in response to a specific problem involving after-hours "parking and
partying" in a secluded area of a large parking lot. The gate controls access to only a portion
of the lot.
- Staff opens and closes the gate during the summer season for additional parking.
- There is the potential to lock vehicles in.
- Security lights are in place at most sites.
- Lakeville
Use of Gates: The City does not use gates that limit access to a park - only special-use areas or
on maintenance drives within a park.
Issues Raised
- A key is issued to members of the archery club to allow them to open the gate controlling
access to the range.
- Maple Grove
Use of Gates: Gates are used only to control access to special-use areas including shelters, boat
launches and maintenance drives - not to control park access. The gates are opened by staff only
as needed.
3
017
Issues Raised
- A request for a gate to control access to a park had been made. The request was denied due
to concerns related to opening and closing procedures.
- Security lights have been installed in most parks.
- Burnsville
Use of Gates: No gates are used to control access to parks. Modified gates are used at trail heads
to prevent vehicular access.
Issued Raised
- Fold-down bollards have been used successfully at trail heads and on maintenance drives.
- Security lights are used at all paved lots.
- Buffalo
Use of Gates: Gates intended to control access to a park were installed at an isolated City park
and were used successfully for a number of years. The gates are no longer used due to liability
concerns raised after a snowmobile hit a cable gate in the park.
Issues Raised
- Liability.
- Security lights have been used successfully at numerous sites.
- Eagan Experience
Use of Gates: Upon completion of the initial phase of construction at the Northview Park
Athletic Complex, gates were installed on the new entrance road. The intent was to control
access, thereby reducing or preventing vandalism caused by persons driving into the site. The
surrounding property had not yet been developed; thus, the park setting was more rural than
urban.
It soon became apparent that the message of a gate would not be observed and unauthorized use
would become a problem. Vehicles routinely drove around the gate on the turf. Because there
was no regular on-site staff, the opening and closing times were consistent only with scheduled
league play at the facility, adding some confusion to the effort. The gate was eventually removed
from the roadway.
Summary
Based upon our conversations with other park providers, gates are seldom used to control the
primary access to parks. This is most apparent in Metropolitan areas where parks tend to be
located in more urban settings.
4
When residences or other structures border a park or are visible from a park, they create an
atmosphere of vigilance. Whether real or perceived, individuals intent on mischief are more
wary, always wondering if they are being watched from a nearby window, porch deck or
doorway. The movement of a vehicle, especially during the evening hours, can be very obvious,
at least in the mind of the vehicle operator.
To avoid detection, would-be hooligans in metropolitan areas often enter park areas on foot or
bicycle. Because most gates are designed and located to prevent vehicular access, they are of
little value in preventing non-vehicular access. Vehicular gates may have some value in
controlling access to special-use facilities intended for vehicular use, including boat ramps or
maintenance drives.
The successful use of gates, as reported by those surveyed, appears to be more common in those
parks located in rural settings. Would-be vandals must often drive to the park, leaving their
vehicle parked at the gate or along a road. Because the facilities may be located deep within the
park, they are less likely to want to walk into the park and are discouraged by the inability to
drive into the park. This is especially true for those parks having only a designated vehicular
access.
Other common issues raised regarding the use of gates include:
• Gates may prevent emergency vehicles from entering a park in response to an emergency
call. Not all units will have access to a key.
• To be credible, the gates must be opened and closed at a pre-set time on a consistent basis.
Without on-site staff, this cannot be assured.
• Vehicles may inadvertently be locked in the park. The person locking the gate may be
unwilling or unable to locate the owner.
• Security or police patrol units may be less likely to enter. They may not have a key or be
fearful of being locked in.
• Even with reflective surfaces, the gates may create a liability concern. Vandals can easily
cover or remove reflective materials making the gate nearly invisible to an unknowing
motorist, bicycle rider or unauthorized snowmobiler.
• The use of lighting was a primary deterrent to vandalism and unauthorized entry.
Recommendation
Staff recommends that a gate not be installed at the main vehicular entrance to Blackhawk Park
for the reasons listed in the summary section of this report.
5
c j
In lieu of a gate, staff recommends the implementation of the following action plan:
1. Install security lighting at the pavilion and parking lot.
Status: The pavilion security lights are now functioning properly. Two security lights have
been ordered for placement along the walkway and at the primary drop-off area in the
lot. Parking lot lights are being considered.
2. Increase police patrol of the park.
Status: The Police Department has been made aware of the past problems, and to the extent
possible, will attempt to maintain an increased presence.
3. Install a security system.
Status: A visual security system has been installed at the pavilion and is now functional.
4. Posting additional signs to increase awareness and make the issuance of citations more
viable.
Status: Park regulation signs have been installed at the primary access points. The park hours
will be posted at the entrance points off Murphy Parkway and Riverton Avenue.
* Please refer to the agenda item/staff recommendation pertaining to the changing of park
hours.
Paul Olson, Superintendent of Parks Dorothy Peterson, Superintendent of Recreation
PO/pjm
1:14pmtB1ack305
6
MEMO TO: ADVISORY PARK, RECREATION AND
NATURAL RESOURCES COMMISSION
FROM: KEN VRAA, DIRECTOR OF PARKS AND RECREATION
PAUL OLSON, SUPERINTENDENT OF PARKS
DOROTHY PETERSON, SUPERINTENDENT OF RECREATION
DATE: NOVEMBER 1, 1996
RE: PARK HOURS
Issue
The inconsistency that exists between the current park closing time and the city curfew for
minors.
Background
As defined in Section 10.23, Subdivision 2.A of the City Code, parks are open from 5:00 a.m. to
11:00 P.M.
Section 10.30, Subdivision 1 establishes a curfew of 10:00 p.m. for minors under the age of 16.
Exceptions are granted for organized activities including athletic, school or church events and
employment.
The dissimilarities between the curfew and park hours creates the potential for inconsistency in
the enforcement of the park closing. In theory, parks could become a haven for minors hoping to
add an unsupervised hour to their evening. Park staff or enforcement personnel may be put in the
position of differentiating between a young park patron with legitimate intentions and a minor
intent on malicious or devious behavior.
Most park areas are not scheduled or designed for late evening, after dark activities. The cost of
providing the appropriate venues, systems and staffing are prohibitive. The exception being
athletic sties with scheduled evening activities on the lighted fields or rinks and park areas which
play host to programmed recreational activities.
Discussion
Because park sites, exclusive of athletic sites, are not equipped or intended for late evening use, a
closing time consistent with the city curfew of 10:00 p.m. would seem appropriate. Most
activities at the lighted athletic sites are scheduled to be completed by 10:00 p.m. However, due
to weather delays or extra inning ball games, players and spectators at the ballfield sites may be
in the park after 10:00 p.m. Lighted hockey, tennis and football sites are much less likely to be
used after 10:00 p.m. because of the younger age of the scheduled users and the discretionary
attendance by users at the others.
Programmed recreational activities such as "moonwalks" or outdoor movies are intermittent
throughout the summer and may require an exemption specific to the activities.
Alternatives For Consideration
• No action, park hours remain as 5:00 a.m. to 11:00 p.m.
• Recommend that the City Code pertaining to curfews for minors be amended to coincide
with the current park closing hour of 11:00 p.m.
• Recommend that the City Code be amended changing the park closing hours for all
facilities to 10:00 p.m.
• Recommend that the City code be amended, changing the park closing hours for all park
facilities, except specific lighted athletic sites or those hosting a programmed recreational
activity, to 10:00 p.m. so as to be consistent with the curfew hours.
Ken Vraa Paul Olson Dorothy Peterson
Director of Superintendent of Parks Superintendent of Recreation
Parks & Recreation
PO/nab
I:\23b\aprnrc.311
~a.
TO: ADVISORY PARKS, RECREATION, AND NATURAL RESOURCES
COMMISSION
FROM: RICH BRASCH, WATER RESOURCES COORDINATOR
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION
RE: REVIEW/PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF DRAFT LAWN CHEMICAL
CONTROL ORDINANCE CONCEPT
DATE: NOVEMBER 12, 1996
Background
The City Council has directed the Advisory Parks, Recreation, and Natural Resources
Commission (APRNRC) and staff to draft and present for the Council's consideration a lawn
fertilizer control ordinance. On October 14, 1996, the Natural Resources Subcommittee met to
review and select the key concepts that should be included in a lawn chemical control ordinance.
A summary of that meeting is attached for your review. Please note that in addition to the
APRNRC members and staff present, City Council members Sandra Masin and Ted Wachter
also attended and provided direction. Based on the direction provided at this meeting, staff
outlined a draft lawn fertilizer ordinance which is also attached. The draft was forwarded to the
City Attorney's office for review, and while numerous wording changes were recommended by
that office, the overall concepts outlined in the draft do not require any significant alteration.
Commission Action Requested
Staff requests that the Commission review and comment on the concept ordinance and, if
appropriate, recommend that it be presented to the City Council for review and comment at an
upcoming workshop. A wider public review would then take place if the conceptual ordinance is
endorsed by both the Commission and Council.
Rich Brasch
Water Resources Coordinator
cc. Ken Vraa
NATURAL RESOURCES SUBCOMMITTEE
-MEETING SUMMARY-
OCTOBER 14,1996
Persons Attending:
Ted Wachter, City Council
Sandra Masin, City Council
Steve Thompson, APRNRC
Daryle Peterson, APRNRC
Tim Callister, APRNRC
Michael Vincent, APRNRC
Sharon Hills, City Attorney's Office
Paul Olson, staff
Rich Brasch, staff
Meeting Summary:
The meeting participants went over the Eagan Lawn Fertilizer Ordinance Conceptual Outline
dated October 8, 1996 sent out with the meeting packet. The purpose of the discussion was to
select the concepts that should be included in a draft lawn fertilizer ordinance. The outcome of
the discussion was as follows:
• The city should require commercial lawn fertilizer applicators to obtain a license
from the City and the license should be processed at and issued by the lowest
administrative level feasible (preferably the staff level).
• There should not be a requirement to submit information on fertilizer formulations
with the license application. Spot field checks should be all that is necessary to
determine compliance with license conditions regarding fertilizer content.
• There is no need to for Concept 3 to be included in the ordinance if Concept 2 is
dropped.
• A license fee should be charged to help cover the cost of processing the license
application.. The fee should be set by the City Council annually.
• The following recommendations were made regarding conditions of the license:
a. allow the City to randomly the fertilizers used by commercial applicators
within the city to determine compliance with phosphorus content standards.
b. drop the requirement for licensees to provide a no-phosphorus alternative; it
is illegal because it interferes with inter-state commerce.
c. require the license, or a copy thereof, to be in the possession of any party
employed by the licensee when making applications within the city.
d. require the licensees to have a sticker issued by the City affixed to their
vehicle denoting the possession of a valid license for that year.
e. drop the requirement that each vehicle be required to advertize the
availability of no-phosphorus fertilizer alternatives; there are also inter-state
commerce issues with this.
f. include limitations on the time of application of fertilizer, a prohibition on
spillage of fertilizer on impervious surfaces and a requirement to clean up any that
is spilled, and a prohibition on application of fertilizer within 15 feet of the
water's edge of any lake, pond, or wetland.
g. limit the phosphorus content of any fertilizer applied within the city to 3%
phosphorus by weight.
h. limit the total amount of phosphorus that can be applied to a unit area of turf
to .5 pounds per 1000 square feet, and require the licensee to track the total
amount of phosphorus applied to each lawn over the season
1. provide for an exemption from the previous two requirements if the need for
higher rates of application or phosphorus content is documented by a reliable soils
test.
• Newly established turf grass areas should be exempt from the provisions of this
ordinance regarding fertilizer content and application rate for the first growing
season.
• License forfeiture should be the primary enforcing mechanism for compliance
with the conditions of the license. Fines/imprisonment should be considered as
possible enforcement mechanism for carrying out commercial applicator activities
without a license.
• There should not be any provisions in the ordinance that apply to individual
property owners fertilizing their own lawns.
Staff was directed to assemble a rough draft of a conceptual ordinance, have the City Attorney
review the draft for any "fatal flaws", review the draft ordinance with the APRNRC at its
November 1996 meeting, then review the draft with the City Council to receive feed-back before
pursuing a review by commercial fertilizer applicators who would be affected by the ordinance.
Meeting summary prepared November 9, 1996 by R. Brasch
4y
CITY OF EAGAN
An Ordinance Relating To Lawn Fertilizer Content and Application Control
(November 9, 1996 draft)
1.1 PURPOSE
The City of Eagan has conducted studies and reviewed existing data and literature to determine the
current and projected water quality of various lakes within the community. This information indicates
that lake water quality may be improved if the amount of phosphorus from fertilizer and vegetative
sources entering the lakes through the storm drainage system as well as overland runoff is reduced. This
ordinance defines the regulations that the City of Eagan will use in maintaining and improving lake
resources enjoyed by its residents and other users.
1.2 DEFINITIONS
A. The term "commercial applicator" means a person or firm that has a commercial
applicator license issued by the Minnesota Commissioner of Agriculture.
1.3 REGULATIONS FOR COMMERCIAL LAWN FERTILIZER APPLICATORS
A. License Required. No person, firm, or franchise shall engage in the business of commercial lawn
fertilizer application within the City of Eagan unless a license has been obtained from the City as
provided herein.
B. License Application Procedure. Applications for a commercial lawn fertilizer applicator license
shall be submitted to the City water resources coordinator at least 30 days prior to the date of the
initial lawn fertilizer application each year by the applicator within the City. The application
shall consist of the following:
1. Application Form. Application forms shall be provided by the City and will require the
following information be provided by applicants:
a. The name, address, and telephone number of the applicant and any individuals
authorized to represent the applicant.
b. The policies your company uses to determine the timing of lawn fertilizer
applications and identify weather conditions acceptable for lawn fertilizer
applications.
2. License Fee. The license fee shall be designated from time to time by the City Council.
The license shall expire on the 31st day of December. The license fee shall not be pro-
rated.
C. Conditions of License. The commercial lawn fertilizer applicator license shall be issued subject
to the following conditions which shall be specified on the license form:
1. Random Sampling. Commercial lawn fertilizer applicators shall permit the City to
sample any commercial lawn fertilizer application to be applied within the City at any
time after issuance of the initial license. The cost of analyzing fertilizer samples taken
from the commercial applicator shall be paid by the commercial applicator if the sample
analysis indicates that the phosphorus content exceeds the levels authorized herein.
2. Possession of License. The commercial lawn fertilizer application license or a copy
thereof shall be in the possession of any party employed by the commercial lawn care
fertilizer applicator when making lawn fertilizer applications within the City. All
vehicles operated for lawn fertilizer application within the City by the commercial
applicator shall have affixed to (some portion of the vehicle) a sticker denoting
compliance with the licensing requirements for that year.
3. Timing of Application. No fertilizer applications may be made when the ground is
frozen or between November 15 and April 15 of the succeeding year.
4. Impervious Surfaces. Commercial applicators should not apply, spill, or otherwise cause
to be deposited fertilizer on impervious surfaces. All fertilizer on impervious surfaces
shall be removed before the commercial applicator leaves the site.
5. Buffer Zones. Fertilizer applications hall not be made within fifteen (15) feet of the edge
of the water of any wetland, pond, or lake.
6. Fertilizer Content and Application Rate. No commercial applicator shall apply any
fertilizer to turf within the City which contains more than 3 percent by weight of
phosphate expressed as P2O5. Annual amounts shall not exceed .5 pounds of phosphate
expressed as P2O5 per 1,000 square feet of lawn area unless the need for increasing the
total application and rate of application is documented by a lawn soil phosphorus test by
the University of Minnesota Soil Testing Lab and taken within the previous two years.
1.4 EXEMPT.
Newly established turf areas shall not be limited by this ordinance on the quantity of phosphorus
or phosphorus content of fertilizer applied for the first growing season.
1.5 RESPONSIBILITY OF LICENSEES
The conduct of agents or employees of a licensee, while engaged in the performance of their
duties for their principal or employer under such license, shall be deemed the conduct of the
licensee.
1.6 NON-COMPLIANCE
Failure to comply with any licensing requirement set forth in this section, or any other violation
of City code, shall constitute sufficient cause for the termination of the license by the City
Council following a public hearing. Failure to comply with the requirements of this section to
secure a license before operating as a commercial fertilizer applicator within the city shall be
guilty of a misdemeanor and upon conviction thereof shall be punished by a fine not to exceed
$ or to be imprisoned in the County danger for a period not to exceed _ days, or
both.
TO: ADVISORY PARKS, RECREATION, AND NATURAL RESOURCES
COMMISSION
FROM: RICH BRASCH, WATER RESOURCES COORDINATOR
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION
RE: STATUS OF WETLAND BANKING PROJECT INVESTIGATIONS
DATE: NOVEMBER 11, 1996
Background
For some time, staff have been searching for cost-effective, environmentally sound methods of
wetland mitigation that might be required in the future as a result of unavoidable wetland impacts
caused by City-sponsored projects, such as development of parks, construction of city streets,
etc. Staff have completed an investigation of opportunities to restore or create wetlands within
the city limits as a means of meeting wetland mitigation options through wetland "banking" and
wanted to share this information with the Commission. In addition, staff has found what it
believes is a viable wetland banking opportunity outside the City of Eagan that merits additional
investigation and is requesting that the Commission support authorization by the City Council to
investigate this opportunity in more detail.
Wetland banking involves the creation or restoration of a viable wetland in advance of causing
impacts which require mitigation in the form of replacement wetland. The "credits" generated by
the "banked" wetland can then be "withdrawn" as unavoidable impacts are incurred until the
credits are used up. The Wetlands Conservation Act (WCA) requires that impacts in the Metro
area be mitigated on a 2:1 basis, so we need twice as many credits in the bank as the area of
wetlands we expect to impact.
One big advantage of wetland banking is that there is the potential to generate significant
economies of scale. The unit costs of constructing small replacement wetlands are generally
much higher than the unit costs of constructing large wetlands. In addition, banking is a much
more efficient way to meet the processing requirements for wetland impacts. Thus, there are
financial as well as procedural advantages to developing a wetland bank.
Banking Opportunities in Eagan
In 1995, city water resources staff worked with a wetlands consulting firm and Dakota County to
conduct a search for potential wetland creation/restoration sites that could be used for a bank.
The first phase of the search focused on lands owned by the City of Eagan in an effort to reduce
the land acquisition component of total cost. In addition, the search focused on parcels that
would allow creation of 2 or more acres of wetland. In all, 100 parcels were evaluated. The
results of the office survey indicated that 91 parcels were rated as having poor potential for
wetland creation, 7 parcels as fair, 1 parcel as good, and 1 parcel as very good. Further
investigation, including field visits, revealed difficulties in developing any of the sites. A
53
number of factors contribute to the lack of good opportunities for wetland creation/restoration in
Eagan. The steep topography adjacent to many wetland basins makes it very difficult and
expensive to expand those basins to create additional wetland area. In addition, upland areas
adjacent to these basins are often heavily wooded. Finally, areas of hydric soils that have already
been filled or drained - generally the easiest areas to restore the conditions necessary to re-
establish a wetland - often have permanent structures on them such as buildings, roads, utilities,
etc. that can't be re-located cheaply.
The best site on City-owned land for wetland creation/restoration appears be a parcel located just
south of Westcott Road in Wandering Walk Park. A hydric soil unit about 3 acres in area has
been covered with fill. The depth of fill has been estimated at 4 feet. Because the fill would have
to be removed to expose the hydric soil unit, excavation would be needed. At $2/cubic yard,
excavation costs alone would be almost $13,000 per acre. In addition, a significant amount of
storm sewer and detention basin work would be necessary to generate water in sufficient quantity
and of sufficient quality to generate the hydrology necessary to sustain the wetland. While the
project has some merit, it is of marginal enough financial feasibility to warrant a look at other
options.
In 1996, City staff initiated an effort to look at private parcels for wetland banking potential.
Twenty-eight sites were evaluated. After office evaluation and field review, only two sites were
ranked as having good potential. While both sites had some technical merit for establishing a
wetland, land acquisition costs alone were estimated at about $45,000/acre for one parcel and
$30,000/ acre for the other.
Banking credit information released from the Minnesota Board of Water and Soil Resources in
December 1995 indicated that banked credits were selling for $500-$15,000/acre. In addition,
information from the Dakota County Soil and Water Conservation District indicates that the
Dakota County Highway Department considers $10,000/acre to be a reasonable value to pay for
creating or purchasing wetland banking credits. These figures provide a useful yardstick against
which to measure how reasonable the prospective costs of creating "bankable" wetlands in Eagan
are. These cost comparisons and other information presented in the project reports indicate there
is very limited potential to find an area that is both environmentally suitable and financially
reasonable for use as a wetland bank within the Eagan city limits.
Other Banking Opportunities
Staff have indicated informally to the Dakota County Soil and Water Conservation District that
we would be interested in knowing about potential wetland banking opportunities that arise in
areas of Dakota County outside the City of Eagan. One such possibility has emerged in an
agricultural area of Eureka Township approximately 5 miles south of Lakeville, where
restoration of a drained wetland currently under cultivation could generate 20-35 acres of
bankable wetland and upland buffer area.
This opportunity is noteworthy for several reasons. First, the project would involve restoration
of a large historical wetland that is currently drained by a tile line. These types of projects are
both cheaper than creating a wetland "from scratch" in an upland area and have a high
probability of success. The SWCD's wetland specialist has very roughly estimated the cost at
$7,000 - $9,000/acre, although there are a number of variables that could affect this unit cost. In
addition, the landowner is very cooperative because he sees establishment and permanent
protection of the wetland as compatible with his long-term development plans for the area which
involve construction of single family residences on large (5-10 acre) lots. Finally, a number of
other parties (including the Dakota County Highway Department and the Board of Water and
Soil Resources) are interested in this project as well. These entities are experienced in wetland
banking projects, and would provide partnership opportunities for splitting the costs (and
benefits) of establishing the wetland bank.
Commission Action Requested
Staff requests that the Commission forward a recommendation to the City Council authorizing
staff to proceed with further investigation of the wetland banking opportunity in Eureka
township, including an evaluation of the technical feasibility of the project and an identification
of the City's share of the cost of purchasing banking credits.
Rich Brasch
Water Resources Coordinator
cc. Ken Vraa
5S.
city of eagan MEMO
TO: ADVISORY PARKS, RECREATION AND NATURAL RESOURCES
COMMISSION
FROM: KEN VRAA, DIRECTOR OF PARKS AND RECREATION
PAUL OLSON, SUPERINTENDENT OF PARKS
DATE: NOVEMBER 13, 1995
RE: PLAY STRUCTURE REPLACEMENT
The City of Eagan currently has 40 play structures located within city parks. The structures vary in
size, primary material and play value. Many were installed in the early to mid 80's, the most
recent being the large structure at Blackhawk Park which was completed in 1994. A number of
the structures have begun to "show their age" and also signs of wear. In most Instances the wear
can be considered a positive indicator of regular use. Given the scope of the system, the age, the
evolution of safety and accessibility standards and the high cost of replacement, now may be an
appropriate time to discuss methods of evaluation and upgrading.
There currently are no "rules or laws" governing the care, maintenance or replacement of play
structures. In the early 1990's the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CISC) began to
develop guidelines for both manufacturers and owners of play structures. The guidelines, which
continue to be refined, have been adopted by the industry, safety professionals and courts as the
national standard to which the manufacturers and owners of play structures are held. The passage
of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), guaranteeing equal opportunities to the disabled has
also had a dramatic effect on the design and cost of play structures.
When they were installed all play structures in City of Eagan parks complied with the applicable
standards of that time. Refined scientific methods and measures have lead to the numerous
modifications and refinements. Safety and legal authorities have recognized the financial burden a
complete system renovation would place upon any entity responsible for providing recreational
facilities. Most have suggested the development of a realistic replacement or improvement plan
consistent with the available resources. The plan should include a "reasonable" schedule outlining
an action plan specific to each noncomplying structure or element. The measure of reasonableness
appears to be financial capacity. The exception being the immediate repair of any element or
structure which posses a threat or constitutes an open and obvious hazard. Eagan park
maintenance staff conducts thorough safety inspections of play structures and elements throughout
the year.
Staff is asking the Commission to consider the options for the development of a
compliance/replacement plan for play structures and play elements in Eagan Parks and to
determine their desired level of involvement.
57
Ootions
1. Structures
a. Retrofit - Replace those specific elements of a structure which do not comply with
current standards or show signs of deterioration.
A cost savings versus replacement allowing more sites to be addressed. The
work can often be completed in less time with stock parts.
• The individual pieces can be expensive ($2,000 - $3,000 a slide).
• Modifications to the structure may be necessary to allow a new retrofit
component to fit, adding labor and material costs.
• The original structural components remain.
Example: Ridgecliff park
*The spiral slide had cracked due to wear and age
*Identical replacement = $3,800
*New spiral slide with retrofit kit = $3,000
*Alternate, "S" style slide = $1,800
*Fire Pole = $ 750
b. Replacement - Remove the entire play structure and replace with a new piece.
• The entire structure complies with current standards
• Longevity
Costly - $20,000 - $25,000 a structure
2. Evaluation Procedures
a. Staff develops a systematic play structure replacement/retrofit plan for the entire
system utilizing age, condition and CPSC/ADA compliance as the primary factors.
The plan is subsequently submitted to the Commission for review.
Money is budgeted from the CIP on an annual basis at a level to be determined.
b. The Park Commission evaluates each structure either through site visitations or from
information provided by staff. A recommendation is made to staff.
Money is budgeted from the CIP as needed.
Ken Vraa Paul Olson
Director of Parks at Recreation Superintendent of Parks
PO/nab
4852 Wellington Court Eagan, MN 55122 JP_~"'
November 12, 1996 v i~'I1
The honorable Mayor Tom Egan and City Council members
3830 Pilot Knob Road
Eagan, MN 55122
Dear Mayor Egan:
I am writing regarding my concerns about pollution issues
at the Diamond T Ranch on Pilot Knob Road, and I am
requesting an opportunity to present my concerns at the
December 3 meeting of the City Council.
The ranch has been a source of environmental concern since
1991, when a resident on Wellington Way reported seeing
runoff containing horse manure in the storm sewer gutters.
Since that time, the ranch has been monitored by inspectors
from the City of Eagan and the State of Minnesota Pollution
Control Agency, with concerns being noted by both agencies.
In a conversation with Chris Lucke of the PCA, I learned that
the management of the Diamond T Ranch has failed to comply
with PCA regulations, and they have not complied with
conditions of the Interim B permit issued to Diamond T:
Their proposal for solving the problem of manure disposal
has not been approved by the PCA because it is not an
adequate solution.
The ranch is also in violation of city regulations. Accord-
ing to Eagan City Council minutes, -anuary 7, 1992, a
conditional use permit and stables license was issued to
allow Diamond T Ranch to operate a riding and boarding
stable at the Pilot Knob location. Please note conditions
3 and 4 of the conditional use permit #33-Ct?-21-11-91 which
state that the permit shall have a five-year period with
yearly review of compliance, and that the ranch shall meet
all state environmental and water cuality standards.
Clearly, Diamond T is not in compliance with the conditional
use permit.
Despite repeated efforts by city and state agencies to bring
Diamond T into compliance, the ranch continues to operate in
violation of state feedlot regulations and the city's
conditional use permit. That permit expires in January of
1997. I urge the City Council to use that permit as leverage
to force compliance. Demand a plan that can be approved by
the PCA, and demand immediate implementation of that plan.
Withhold renewal of the permit untie the ranch is in full
compliance with regulations.
This long-standing problem needs immediate attention before
further damage is done. The Thomases have been allowed to
operate in violation of regulations for nearly five years,
and they will continue to do so until the city acts to stop
them.
I will appreciate your response to my request for an oppor-
tunity to present my concerns at the City Council meeting
on December 3, and I urge your immediate investigation of
this matter. Develop a strong plan of action to stop this
source of damage to the city's natural resources.
Sincerely,
Sharon olbeck
c : K. lJraa
R. Brash