03/16/1998 - Advisory Parks & Recreation Commission
AGENDA
ADVISORY PARKS COMMISSION
EAGAN, MINNESOTA
Monday, March 16, 1998
7:00 PM
Eagan Municipal Center
City Council Chambers
A. 7:00 PM Regular Meeting
B. Call to Order and Pledge of Allegiance 7:02 pm
C. Approval of Agenda 7:03 pm
D. Approval of Minutes of Regular Meeting of February 12, 1998 7:04 pm
E. Visitors to be Heard 7:05 pm
F. Department Happenings Pages 1-2 7:06 pm
G. Consent Agenda 7:15 pm
H. Development Proposals
(1) Royal Oaks - Royal Oaks Realty Pages 3-8 7:16 pm
1. Old Business
(1) Skyline Display Update Pages 9-16 7:30 pm
(2) Revisions to Draft Comprehensive Plan Update Pages 17-18 7:50 pm
(3) Ranking Criteria for Opportunity Funds Pages 19-20 8:00 pm
J. New Business
(1) Faithful Shepherd School Pages 21-22 8:10 pm
(2) Reclamation of Wood Beams-Fire Admin Building Pages 23-24 8:30 pm
(3) Aquatic Facility Update Pages 25-42 8:45 pm
K. Parks Development Update
(1) Playground Equipment Selection 9:00 pm
(2) Park Shelter Building - Lexington Diffley Pages 43-46 9:05 pm
L. Water Resources Update
(1) 1997 Sampling Results Pages 47-50 9:10 pm
(2) Post Education Survey Results Pages 51-85 9:20 pm
M. Other Business and Reports
(1) Field Allocation - EAA Travel Baseball 9:30 pm
(2) Trail Clearing Pages 87-125 9:45 pm
(3) Kiosk Update 10:00 pm
N. Round Table 10:05 pm
0. Adjournment 10:15 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 event. If a notice of less than 96 hours is received, the City will attempt to provide the aids.
WORKSHOP - 6:00 PM
Establish Criteria for Opportunity Funds
ADVISORY PARKS COMMISSION
1998 MEETING SCHEDULE
NAME Feb Mar April May June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Jan
16 16 20 18 15 20 17 14 19 16 14
Terry Davis X
Jerry Farlee X
N.Mark Filipi x
Barbara Johnson Secretary O*
Bonnie Karson x
Alternate
Steven Knutson X
George Kubik X
Lee Markell Chair X
Daryle Petersen O*
John Rudolph V.Chair X
Michael Vincent x
Recreation Sub-Committee Natural Resources Sub-Committee Land Acquisition Sub-Committee
John Rudolph Daryle Peterson Lee Markell
George Kubik Michael Vincent Terry Davis
Jerry Farlee
Steve Knutson Mark Filipi Barbara Johnson
Bonnie Karson
UPCOMING MEETINGS:
OPEN ISSUES
1. Tour of Community Centers in other cities
2. Commission Review Workshop
3. Spring Maintenance Demonstration
a
-city of eagan MEMO
TO: ADVISORY PARKS COMMISSION
FROM: KEN VRAA, DIRECTOR OF PARKS AND RECREATION
DATE: MARCH 12,1998
SUBJECT: MARCH 16 COMMISSION MEETING
Thought I'd better warn you that this is a very full agenda for this month's meeting.
Prior to the regular meeting, there is a workshop for the Acquisition/Development Sub - Committee for
the development of criteria in evaluating requests to use the opportunity portion of the Park Site Fund.
All Commission Members are welcome to attend. This item has been placed on the regular agenda for
further discussion should the sub-committee be prepared to make a recommendation. The workshop
session will be in conference rooms 2A and B.
Following the Call to Order, Approval of Agenda, and Department Happenings, the first development
proposal will be considered. Royal Oaks Realty is proposing a single family residential development
east of Carriage Hills golf course and south of Yankee Doodle Road. A Staff report is provided for your
review.
OLD BUSINESS
The first item under Old Business is the proposal from Skyline Displays pertaining to the development of
a park on their property at the northeast corner of Lexington Avenue and Yankee Doodle Road.
Additional information is enclosed relative to the proposed project. Staff will introduce the project and
then have Skyline Displays make a presentation about the projects as they see it.
At February's meeting the Commission asked that the proposed changes to the Draft Comprehensive
Guide Plan be reviewed at the March 16 meeting given some changes proposed that could affect the
City. Member Davis articulated his concerns in regards to this issue, which have been enclosed for
review and discussion.
The third item under Old Business is the ranking, or evaluation criteria, to be considered when the
department receives a request to use Opportunity Funds from the Park Site Fund.
NEW BUSINESS
Under New Business, staff has received a request from the proposed Faithful Shepherd Catholic
Elementary School regarding the school's willingness to allow the City to use its future ball fields in lieu
of paying a parks dedication fee. A brief report and graphic showing the location of the school and the
ball fields is included. A representative from the school will be present to provide further information,
the timing of construction and the basis for a use agreement. A separate memo has been provided
regarding the potential of salvaging wood laminate beams from the Fire Administration building. These
beams could be adapted for use in an open air park shelter building. This is being presented for your
C
consideration at this time as the City Council will be making a determination on the Fire Administration
Construction Project at it's Tuesday Council meeting.
The third and final item under new business is the proposed Aquatic Facility. This will be a verbal
presentation, but enclosed is Report #2 from Water Technology along with a preliminary concept plan
for the family aquatic facility.
PARKS DEVELOPMENT UPDATE
Staff will provide a brief update on the playground equipment selection process and plans for
installation. A memo is also enclosed which addresses the current status of the proposed buildings at
Lexington/Diffley Athletic Fields.
WATER QUALITY UPDATE
Water Resources Coordinator Rich Brasch will be present to review results of he 1997 sampling program
and the education survey results. A brief memo is included on each item and a verbal supplement will be
provided.
OTHER BUSINESS AND REPORTS
Dave Jarvis has advised me that a petition has been circulated amongst travel baseball people regarding
the 16 year old program. The one Eagan team, that is registered with the South Suburban League,
(which is essentially the only league for this age group) is being run by an individual who will not allow
a second team into the league. The league recognizes the coach as the final word for a community's
need/desire to have a team or additional teams. Unfortunately, there appears to be enough boys willing
to make a second team, but they are being blocked from playing in the league by this coach. Apparently
the petition asks that Eagan Parks and Recreation not provide field space to this team until such time as
they allow a second team into the league. As of the writing of this memo, no petition has been presented.
Commission Member Petersen has asked that the issue of trail clearing be placed on the agenda for
discussion, noting that the City Council has asked staff to review the subject with them at a March 24
workshop. Attached is the information that was provided to the Council in 1996 when they chose to start
a limited trail-clearing program near schools. The final item is an update on trail Kiosks.
As always, if members are not able to attend the meeting(s), please call 681-4661 to advise staff.
Respectfully submitted,
Ken Vraa
`J
Department Happenings
March, 1998
1. Staff attended a meeting at Oak Woods of Eagan concerning congregate dining for Senior Citizens in
the city. The Food and Nutrition Services Division of the CAP Agency (Community Action Program)
has budgeted for and been funded to offer the program. Senior Citizens other than Oak Woods
residents are eligible to take part in this nutrition program. A May 1, 1998 start date is hoped for,
subject to Health Department licensure of the Oak Woods kitchen and hiring staff for the site.
2. Staff met with the LOGIS specialist for the city's GIS system. It appears that numerous applications
are available to be pursued by forestry, water quality and parks planning.
3. Staff attended the MRPA Aquatics Conference. Sessions on design, staffing, infectious disease and
pool management should be helpful over the next several months.
4. The Yankee Doodle Arts and Crafts Festival has begun its monthly planning meetings. The event
will again be held at Blue Cross Blue Shield. Festival dates are June 20 and 21.
5. The Department has received its first ever request for field space for Cricket. An adult team
comprised of primarily Eagan residents has interest in joining a league with teams from other
metropolitan areas.
6. Staff is preparing to receive participant numbers from the Eagan Athletic Association. Field
assignments will follow. Inquiry on field availability has been received from the new Eastview
Athletic Association. Currently 10% or less of Eastview participants are Eagan residents. A similar
percentage of Eagan youth register with the Mendota Athletic Association.
7. Recreation staff has begun preliminary planning for the Summer/Fall Discover Us! brochure which
will be distributed in mid-May. This issue will highlight activities that did not appear in the
February issue, repeat some traditional activities such as Summer In the Park, provide the
opportunity to add sections where necessary and introduce fall programs.
8. J.A. Management, Inc. has assumed management of 949 Wescott Trail, the building in which the
Wescott Service Center is located. This company is experienced in the Wescott neighborhood and
again provides on-site managers with whom staff has worked on projects and for the solution of
problems.
9. The Arts and Humanities Council has begun work on by-laws and the establishment of a board of
directors. Kay Gustafson, board president, is in the process of writing a grant application to the
Minnesota Regional Arts Council. The application addresses summer class offerings at the Art
House.
10. Staff will be conducting six National Youth Sports Coaches certification clinics between March 30 and
April 9. Typically 250 EAA coaches attend the spring clinics.
11. The winter skating and tubing season was the most short lived of any previously experienced by the
Department. Staff gave up on the tubing hill as of the end of February; the season is officially closed,
tubes put away and staff notified of the end of employment.
12. Mr. Loren Danson has been hired to fill the vacant Forestry/Park Maintenance position.
Loren is a graduate of the University of Minnesota and is currently working for the Davey
Tree Company. He is scheduled to start March 23.
13. Orders are being accepted for the spring tree sale scheduled for May 2.
14. Applications are being accepted at City Hall for seasonal park and forestry maintenance
positions. Evening and weekend hours are available.
15. Bids are out for the reconstruction of the north tennis courts at Rahn Park. The bid opening
is scheduled for March 16. Work would begin after June 1.
16. A number of off-road bituminous trails will be seal coated this year as part of the trail
maintenance program. The work is included in a multi-city seal coat project being
coordinated by the City of Burnsville. Because of the volume, the unit cost is reduced
allowing for additional feet of trail.
17. The Department will again utilize the services of the Dakota County Sentence to Service
Program to complete non-skilled tasks in park areas. Potential projects include park clean-
up, tree mulching, rink painting and landscaping.
18. Mowing units are being serviced and prepared for the onset of spring. Requests have
already been received for the use of fields!
19. Staff will again be purchasing a polymar coated, slow release fertilizer. The use of the
product has allowed staff to eliminate one application in general park areas. "O"
phosphorus materials will be used on several sites.
20. Application has been made to the Twin Cities Tree Trust for the provision of a summer crew
to construct an entrance walkway/ramp to the barn at Holz Farm. Previous projects have
included retaining walls, planters and decks.
21. Maintenance staff is constructing signs to replace the "old" style park signs that remain in
several parks. The new signs will be of a design consistent with that used at other parks
throughout the system.
22. An honors program student from Burnsville High School is researching the issue of ice
signing on the ponds and lakes of Eagan as a class project. The information is expected to
be available for staff review in May.
d.
ADVISORY PARKS COMMISSION
March 16,1998 Meeting
DEVELOPMENT AGENDA
ROYAL OAKS - ROYAL OAKS REALTY
1. This development shall be responsible for a cash parks dedication
2. This development shall be responsible for a cash traits dedication.
3. The Tree Preservation Plan as proposed shall be approved with the following conditions:
• Tree Protective measures (i.e. 4 foot polyethylene laminate safety netting) shall be
installed at the Drip lane or at the perimeter of the Critical Root Zone, whichever is
greater, of significant trees/woodlands to be preserved. No grade change,
construction activity, or storage of materials shall occur within this fenced area
• The applicant shall contact the City Forestry Division at least five days prior to the
issuance of the grading permit to Ensure compliance with the approved Tree
Preservation Plan.
• Individual lot tree preservation plans shall be required at the time of building permit
application for Lots 1through 9 and Lots 19 through 38.
4. This development shall meet water quality treatment requirements with on-site pending
to the maximum degree practicable. A supplemental cash dedication should be required
for that portion of the site draining to the west that will not be routed to an on-site
detention basin.
5. All detention basins shall be constructed according to the City's Standards for Detention
Basin Design, and have skimmers of acceptable design to the City installed on the pond
outlets.
6. Total wetland fill on the site shall be limited to 2,000 square feet or less in the wetlands
designated as Ponds 4 and 5 on the grading plan As per the de m:nimus provisions of the
Wetland Conservation Act, no mitigation will be required provided wetland fill impacts
do not exceed this figure.
7. A buffer within which no grading or vegetation clearing is prohibited shall be
established 30 feet back from the delineated edge of wetlands associated with Pond 3 and
Pond EP: 2.2 as designated on the grading plan. The only exception to this provision
should be the disturbance related to installation of the discharge pipe from Pond 2 to
Pond EP 2.2.
x MEMO
city of eagan
TO: ADVISORY PARKS COMMISSION
FROM: KEN VRAA, DIRECTOR OF PARKS AND RECREATION
DATE: MARCH 11, 1998
SUBJECT: ROYAL OAKS - ROYAL OAKS REALTY
BACKGROUND
Royal Oaks Realty, Inc. is requesting a Preliminary Subdivision and Rezoning to allow
development of 38 single family homes on 21.4 acres located on the east side of Wescott
Hills Drive, south of Yankee Doodle Road.
The proposed Royal Oaks subdivision will consist of 38 lots ranging in size from 12,919 s.f.
to 40,936 s.f. All lots meet or exceed code standards for lot size and width.
The proposed subdivision contains 3.4 acres that are currently zoned R-1 Single Family, the
remaining 18 acres are currently zoned Agricultural. These 18 acres will need to be rezoned
to R-1 Single Family to allow the proposed residential development. The R-1 zoning would
be consistent with the Comprehensive Guide Plan which designates this area for D-1 Single
Family Residential (0-3 units/acre).
The City has some concerns with the proposed roadway layout which consists of three cul-
de-sacs. As a matter of policy, the City encourages roadway connections which allow
through traffic circulation where feasible and logical. While this site has some physical
constraints that warrant some cul-de-sacs to preserve wetlands, woodlands, and steep slopes,
the main cul-de-sac (Shade Tree Ct.) could be extended to connect with Trails End Road to
the east without disturbing the sites significant features. Making this connection would be
consistent with a conceptual plan for circulation in the area that was reviewed by the City
when surrounding developments were being considered.
PARKS/TRAILS DEDICATION
This development would be subject to a cash parks dedication and a cash trails dedication.
TREE PRESERVATION
The submitted tree inventory indicates that there are 918 significant trees on site. Tree
species composition is primarily a mixture of hardwood deciduous trees, mostly bur, white,
and red oak trees (6" to 36" diameter). The balance of the significant trees are black cherry,
ash, elm, cottonwood, boxelder, maple, locust, ironwood, apple, jack pine, white pine and
spruce.
According to the submitted grading and tree preservation plan the applicant will remove 199
trees (21.7% of the total) during initial development (street construction, utility installation,
ponding, and the clearing of some house pads). According to the City of Eagan Tree
Preservation Ordinance, allowable removal for this type of development (residential, multiple
lot) is set at 25% of the existing significant vegetation during initial development phase, and
20% removal for each individual lot. With a proposed initial development significant tree
removal less than allowable limits, there is no tree mitigation associated with the initial
development phase.
The applicant is attempting to maximize tree preservation through the implementation of
custom grading on many of the 38 lots within this development. Tree preservation matters
on these lots will be addressed at the time of building permit application. The following lots
will be required to submit individual lot tree preservation plans at the time of building permit
application; lots 1-9, and lots 19-38.
Discussion - Significant Tree Protection During Construction
This development site not only has a large number of significant trees, but also has many lots
that have steep or rolling terrain or natural ponds on them. All of these factors make tree
preservation efforts difficult. Therefore, it is imperative that city ordinance required tree
protection measures are well communicated and followed through from initial construction to
site completion. Tree protection requirements, will be strictly enforced on this site.
Specifically, tree protection fencing must be placed at the Drip Line or at the perimeter of the
Critical Root Zone (whichever is greater) before any site grading or tree removal commences;
and that the applicant must notify the City Forestry Division at least five days prior to the
issuance of the grading permit to allow for inspection of tree protection fence placement and
to ensure compliance with the approved Tree Preservation Plan.
Staff is recommending approval of the Tree Preservation Plan as proposed with the following
conditions:
• To require that Tree Protective measures (i.e. 4 foot polyethylene laminate safety
netting) be installed at the Drip Line or at the perimeter of the Critical Root Zone,
whichever is greater, of significant trees/woodlands to be preserved. No grade
change, construction activity, or storage of materials shall occur within this fenced
area.
• To require that the applicant contact the City Forestry Division at least five days prior
to the issuance of the grading permit to ensure compliance with the approved Tree
Preservation Plan.
• To acknowledge that individual lot tree preservation plans will be required at the time
of building permit application for lots 1 through 9 and lots 19 through 38.
4
WATER QUALITY/WETLANDS
This development is located in drainage basin E and will generate runoff that will reach Pond
EP-2.2, a 14-acre lake classified for indirect contact recreation use and located in the
proposed North Park. Most of the impervious areas of the site - approximately 5.8 acres -
will drain to a constructed detention basin along the northern border of the parcel. The
detention basin will provide treatment adequate to protect water quality in Pond EP-2.
Another impervious portion of the site - about 2.6 acres - will drain to a proposed
sedimentation pond in the north central portion of the site before discharging to Pond EP-2.2.
Pond EP-2.2 is a designated stormwater management pond which does not currently have an
outlet. Further, it is not expected that an outlet will be installed as part of this project. If an
outlet is installed at a later date, this ponding configuration will be adequate to protect water
quality in Pond EP-2. Finally, about 2.2 acres of the western portion of the site, including
several hundred feet of the entrance road , will discharge off-site to the west untreated. Staff
proposes that a supplemental cash dedication be charged for this portion of the site.
Opportunities to treat this runoff will be evaluated when Westcott Hills Drive is upgraded,
presumably as part of a public improvement project associated with this development.
The developer's consultant has conducted a wetland inventory of the site. The inventory
resulted in the delineation of four jurisdictional wetland areas within the parcel. The
developer is proposing to fill a total of approximately 1700 square feet in two wetland basins,
one in south central portion of the site and the other in the southeastern (designated as Ponds
4 and 5, respectively, on the grading plan). The total wetland fill proposed is less than the
2,000 square foot de minimus exemption allowed by the Wetland Conservation Act and
therefore will require no mitigation. Staff is recommending a buffer extending 30 feet back
from the delineated wetland edge for a .3 acre Type 3 / 4 in the southwestern corner of the
site (Pond 3) and for the wetland complex associated with Pond EP-2.2 in the far northern
portion of the site. No grading or vegetation clearing should be allowed within this buffer.
Staff recommends that:
• The development meet water quality treatment requirements with on-site ponding to the
maximum degree practicable. A supplemental cash dedication should be required for that
portion of the site draining to the west, which will not be routed to an on-site detention basin.
• All detention basins be constructed according to the City's Standards for Detention Basin
Design, and have skimmers of acceptable design to the City installed on the pond outlets.
• Total wetland fill on the site be limited to 2,000 square feet or less in the wetlands
designated as Ponds 4 and 5 on the grading plan. As per the de minimus provisions of the
Wetland Conservation Act, no mitigation will be required provided wetland fill impacts do
not exceed this figure.
• A buffer within which no grading or vegetation clearing is prohibited be established 30 feet
back from the delineated edge of wetlands associated with Pond 3 and Pond EP-2.2 as
designated on the grading plan. The only exception to this provision should be the
disturbance related to installation of the discharge pipe from Pond 2 to Pond EP-2.2.
d.
FOR COMMISSION REVIEW
1. This development shall be responsible for a cash parks dedication.
2. This development shall be responsible for a cash trails dedication.
3. The Tree Preservation Plan as proposed shall be approved with the following conditions:
• Tree Protective measures (i.e. 4 foot polyethylene laminate safety netting) shall be
installed at the Drip Line or at the perimeter of the Critical Root Zone, whichever is
greater, of significant trees/woodlands to be preserved. No grade change, construction
activity, or storage of materials shall occur within this fenced area.
• The applicant shall contact the City Forestry Division at least five days prior to the
issuance of the grading permit to ensure compliance with the approved Tree
Preservation Plan.
• Individual lot tree preservation plans shall be required at the time of building permit
application for Lots Ithrough 9 and Lots 19 through 38.
4. This development shall meet water quality treatment requirements with on-site ponding to
the maximum degree practicable. A supplemental cash dedication should be required for
that portion of the site draining to the west that will not be routed to an on-site detention
basin.
5. All detention basins shall be constructed according to the City's Standards for Detention
Basin Design, and have skimmers of acceptable design to the City installed on the pond
outlets.
6. Total wetland fill on the site shall be limited to 2,000 square feet or less in the wetlands
designated as Ponds 4 and 5 on the grading plan. As per the de minimus provisions of the
Wetland Conservation Act, no mitigation will be required provided wetland fill impacts do
not exceed this figure.
7. A buffer within which no grading or vegetation clearing is prohibited shall be established
30 feet back from the delineated edge of wetlands associated with Pond 3 and Pond EP-2.2
as designated on the grading plan. The only exception to this provision should be the
disturbance related to installation of the discharge pipe from Pond 2 to Pond EP-2.2.
WESCOTT HILLS DRIVE
- - - - - - r----- r
c0
-i r J Iti r~ ~ 1 i+`r I I;~-1-:~-•+ai-----i
c 76
oi 4p
0.'a ttu ?1 ; _•ju m i ;r I Rill J.
1:1,/r~i N .f: 1 s y ( eWIIO ROSS! t.♦'uaN
HAMIINORNE'--LOUR RTC' .I, r r- Oiw C)
1 -l'•'r ~:w l ~ ~N 1r ;r~ :i ~j ~ ~ 1;1i ~'iY~~l, .~i •v 11 •a !.'1
FIT k
1 to / s -^r•-i -~r ui I 11
,n
S q '40 Cap
~ r _
r
a / i v • 1 7
/ • s
/
s 1 1
Fe0 Fr iv L_---------- ~ , +•I` r.. I r_ t+ -
' P~ $ a♦\ y l `r' l9 ' C, e•+;µ w~
p
l { N... ' I C)
r r • •
a£xo N 101 -i
I« lr r /
,,,r-----" g - f
1
'LL
---------------Y.~ `,r ) 1>. r ------N.-----r,
/ i :v t, _y stl r~
r
r
/ ; ~ 4 r~ ~ Tarr 1N a l y
ago
'l am
r
_ I 'a I F
1
i:i r C~NR « - ■STREET.~ a«~ I' e ,
- - - { -I ` 1` - - - TRAILS END ROAD -
C)C)(j' i `tt rJ 1 ta...::•l 7 r~ i -r-
c: C) r-1 I
to I 1 1 r I c' 1
ttsa t % r - - I 1
I
t !1il IF
F{-
RI Is11ttt"r_ Ii fiIli ~
II qg a? a" resew u. wr. uioorl f --t:i f~Fij It.{si If ~!';r ' a
SIM S~ € "qty' 1 tjj, 1? t ii '
o~, aliyIFs =S~j; _i
"lava ~ ~ 5?C i • 1 - ~ ~ ~ ~j I all i~_s. jt7~e i~l:g ~ lid { t
it L - - J+if
l4 r~it --L-=_ ~
4 A6R - -r-1- « "a`af Fit) a fit': E° 7§ {
o~ • ` e..s ra [ ~_e !-)fr at tl is''
99) wlra ...ter t,2 3 .6 IN
aCy spa gag t?zir il~y~..rr... ~ ; f~il' f~- I as
d ~ f{Ili :till t°_ f
er' C:C d K CCC -
~V I . h•
y PRELIMINARY PLAT _ James R. Hill, Inc.
ROYAL OAKS 1 KM#M / a4NEMS / S)MYORS
For. BRYCE THORPE / ROYAL OAKS REALTY, INC.
Q F « x'•1„0:: i ..o wos a." 1. ~..r>-~°r°.I mo a wol W. IX n w .ur
0
~~►.\`4~~~~~►~~ Y / ,-~~I\11111\\ )1\~(\ ~~*~iy!}/ I+'
1 /r o w+Y,.~ ~ } \I~~kt~~j' / 1 #~~'.,r•±~~,~'~~1~ ~ \ 1 II I I ~ ~ J\\ ,
Z t4
I I l y~ 4~~`J 111\~ \ FTC=f~~F,Y.1FKy 11 \~~t\t I
\1 .«x+1r\~x\3,~r-~ Ii I vf':1•. I \+t~i }"°~ECI~}t~~!//r~ ,Y` \ 1 i r
11 \ ,Lw+srb . 1 1.,0'~~+1~c`~\ J. I ~1 \ ~`l✓. ~ } l l 1111111 1
4f A.
4-' 4t
y +y j+~;• /cn l ! 4:4,<+e # \ 1111
L
14
~~~3+~. E li 11
eat" ± 1
1 t.: r13+~.r'Pi'?\ 1 I I / I \F_--x/r°s, f/, 1:I`± s~\
41
1 1 j//Y✓/ rim, / of l 1 4 i',1~' - / //i ~i.
►\1\e\` \111 I l/ /%i:
1\\\ 11111 11lsa v+.
I 1 1 1 ° ~•-y. " S 1 1 1 ! l 1 1 / / / s / / ~ ` - / / / '
\ 1111) 11/ * a 'i'ce "'°"1 1 1~ I! l / / I 1 /i.///
t-I+tl it / „p dy _ ° 1 11 I
\ JJ/ l /ljl/I/,/i /r/± $ X11 I II 1 11 _ /i~~~~•i•~ _
r-v
err%j
a / Il \ y / I I 1 \ / / /
It \ 1 I 11)11111'/*14--'+~
. \ I 1 I I I I/111111 /A;-
///~~J^✓~///I/k1~IF 1 i I! 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 \\`t- K
c \
11111111\\\\\\\\r
J /ice \ I \\\\~1 ~\\\\1~ / ,
\ 1\` l 1 ll !l l/ll/// \1111 ) I
/
ill ~ ~ _ -.i \ \ \ r ~l,~l/ I !l~( I~l ) l l l 1 I 11111 ,111/ 11 1 ~ '
\\\\\1. II I .
j sx
E
S
x
~w
ROYAL OAKS , James R. Hill, inc.
EXISTING CONDITIONS ~~\T
^ 4 ! BRYCE THORPE / ROYAL OAKS REALTY, INC. \ ?,m■c°..¢swlx ~..+nr ee,v
Q 7; «w tnMw •.t°.L °oir.~ w M.i. NOC InI)•ow. Iu Iw7lro-+r«
MEMO
of of eagan
TO: ADVISORY PARKS COMMISSION
FROM: KEN VRAA, DIRECTOR OF PARKS AND RECREATION
DATE: MARCH 12,1998
SUBJECT: DISCOVERY PARK - SKYLINE DISPLAYS
BACKGROUND:
The Commission may recall discussion of a proposal by Skyline Displays Inc. (Mr. and Mrs.
Beaulieu) to develop the northeast corner of Lexington Avenue and Yankee Doodle Road as
a special play area for the community. Although the property would remain in the ownership
of Skyline Displays, it would be treated as a public facility.
On Tuesday March 10, the Director of Parks and Recreation was presented with a concept
plan depicting how the corner property could be developed. Attached is a reduced copy of
the plan along with a written program statement prepared by their designer, David Anderson.
PROPOSAL:
As was explained, Skyline Displays would like to see the corner of their corporate site
developed for the benefit of the community, particularly the children. You will recall that
Skyline Displays developed a significant playground in Burnsville several years ago and
brought hundreds of their employees in to help construct it. They would like to do something
similar in Eagan by bringing in their employees to help build a portion of the park here.
Because construction of the corporate headquarters building is expected to be underway this
summer, they would like to begin construction of the park this summer. It's very likely that
the park would have to be developed in phases and that additional assistance would have to
be obtained from other sources. No dollar amounts have been identified to develop the park,
nor has there been a phasing plan developed.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION/DISCUSSION:
With their proposed development, Skyline is responsible for a park dedication of
approximately $102,235 based on 32 acres of land and a trails dedication of $27,920. Their
proposal is that park dedication dollars be used to help develop this park. Because the
property is valuable from a development perspective, staff has suggested that if the project
were to be approved by the City, there would have to be an agreement regarding any future
sale of the property, should that occur. If all, or a part of the property was sold, the park
dedication fees in place at the time would be due and payable in full.
Other issues that would have to be resolved would be liability for accidents, responsibility for
maintenance and upkeep, programming and scheduling for other then casual use. Also, who
is responsible for seeing to it that future phases are completed? The Commission may have
other questions that also need resolution.
In reviewing this issue, the Commission should also consider the alternatives. Given the size
of the parks dedication, could those funds be better spent elsewhere in the Park System? Are
there other, more important priorities? Or are the benefits of this park and the opportunity to
leverage the funds significant enough to make this a worthy project? Is the site too isolated
from residents to see much use or is the fact that there are no parks nearby to serve the
multiple dwelling units on Lexington Avenue and Yankee Doodle Road an important reason
to see this area improved? Does the Commission or the City foresee a better use for this
corner of the parcel?
What about the plan itself? Perhaps there is agreement to have a park at this location, but
does the proposed plan meet the overall needs of the area and fit the character of the land and
intended use?
COLLECTION OF PARK DEDICATION FEES:
Park dedication fees for commercial and industrial property are collected at the time of
building permit. Skyline Displays expects to secure their permit within the next two to three
weeks so construction of the facility can begin. Given the nature of this request, Skyline is
asking that the payment of the park dedication fees be suspended until the issue of Discovery
Park has been resolved. If the Commission sees this as a viable project, a motion to defer the
fees to a specific point in time or to be tied to the occupancy permit would be in order.
FOR COMMISSION ACTION:
The Commission is asked to discuss the proposal and provide direction on how to proceed
with this issue.
/b
THE ANDERSEN GROUP
ARCHITECTS, LTD
9 March 1998
Discovery Park
Yankee Doodle Road & Lexington Avenue
Eagan, Minnesota
Concept:
Discovery Park is intended to be a unique community focal point for Eagan. It is a,
place where the history of Eagan meets with the present, and embraces the future.
The result is a playful mix of historical interpretation, preservation of nature and a
playscape for children and adults. It will be designed to offer opportunities for a variety
of age groups and physical capabilities.
Located on the site of the historic Schmidt farm, the plan preserves a small grove of
oaks many of which predate the Eagan Community. The project area is part of a park
dedication requirement related to the development of Skyline Display's new facility that
is currently under construction. The property is bounded by Yankee Doodle road to the
South, Lexington Ave. to the west, Discovery Road to the east and Skyline Display to
the north.
The park will be divided into 3 zones: 1) a natural zone (including some tree
preservation areas); 2) a community events area (including a retainage pond), and 3) a
discovery play zone.
The creation of this park is intended as a community building project. Some
improvement for liability reasons must be contracted. Other components, such as the
plaza pavers and boardwalks offer an opportunity for community participation. This is
intended to create a feeling of "community ownership" of Discovery Park.
Intended User Groins.
The primary users of the park are likely to be as follows
Local residents within walking distance (primarily in multifamily units to the south and
west)
Local residents within 2 mile driving radius
School children form new Catholic school to be constructed just to the east
Employees from local businesses
Suite 211, 7601 Wayzata Blvd., Minneapolis, MN 55426 USA 612-593-0950 FAX 612-593-0033
Anticivated Activities:
Discovery Play
Historical interpretation
Relaxing / meditating / reading
Birdwatching
Gardening
Chess tournaments
Picnicking
Farmer's market
Art in the Park
Annual "Firefly Ball" on the boardwalk
Weddings and birthdays (rental of facilities)
Small concerts and plays
Outdoor movies
Fireworks / Laser light displays
Holiday lights
Folk dancing
Cycling
Nature walks
sunbathing
Ice skating
sledding
Kite flying
Restricted Activities:
Skateboarding
Swimming
Rollerblades (on discovery trail or boardwalk areas)
Bar-b-ques and open fires
The following is a summary of components:
• The silhouette of the original Schmidt farmhouse is maintained in the proposed picnic
shelter. Interpretive signage incorporated into the design will give visitors a sense of
history and place that many suburbs like Eagan sadly lack.
• A paved trail connection would be provided to the new Faithful Shepard Catholic
Elementary School, linking more than a mile of trails around the wetland areas. A road
crossing is defined by a change in surface texture and speed bumps to slow traffic.
ia.
• A nature trail (boardwalk) constructed of " Trex" (recycled plastic and wood fiber
product). This trail would route through the densest concentration of trees. The
boardwalk layout would include bird feeding stations and benches for people to sit
quitely and observe nature.
• A Discovery trail will offer children a variety of sequential opportunities for
imaginative play, and exploration. Benches are placed near each activity setting so
parents can observe their children as they progress along the pathways. The trail
includes a tunnel a zig-zagging trail through boulders, the "ruins" of a mysterious
temple, and a Discovery Fort designed as an abstract sculptural "signature"
overlooking Discovery Road.
• The visual focus of the park is a upper and lower plaza designed around a significant
existing oak tree. A pie shaped grade cut creates a plaza at the base of the tree while
the upper plaza surrounds the tree with seating areas. The pavers on the lower plaza
could be laid with volunteer labor. The retaining walls provide and opportunity for
"community graffiti" just as the oak tree used to serve as Eagan's community bulletin
board....
• Pond - while the pond is part of the stormwater retainage requirements, it also can be
designed as a water feature and be used a s an ice-skating pond in the winter. A liner
and an aerator unit may be required to maintain the water level and quality.
• Community garden plots provide the surrounding apartment residents an
opportunity to maintain vegetable gardens.
• Comfort Station / Warming house - this small structure shall serve as a winter
warming house for ice--skaters. It will include restroom facilities. skate rentals,
vending machines,telephone, staff office, mechanical room and battery storage a small
lounge area and a sun deck on the south side of the building.. It would be similar in scale
and concept to State Rest area facilities. The design would combine geothermal ground
wells, active and passive a solar along with daylighting principles. Energy would also
come from the windmill structure across the special events area. The geothermal wells
would be under the special events area.
• Site furnishings will include trash and recycle containers, benches, moveable
wheelstops,light posts, directional sigange, bollards, chess/checkers tables and picnic
tables. Bicycle racks will be placed to allow visitors to secure their bikes while they
engage in other activities at the park.
~3
• A garden maze and observation tower will be a unique part of the discovery
experience. Designed in the tradition of European gardens, the maze will allow kids (and
former kids) to "get lost" in in the green hedge world an discover an observation tower to
view the maze layout. For security purposes the maze would be fenced and gated after
park hours.
• The hillside amphitheater is designed for small community concerts and plays (such
as the "Teddy Bear Band..:")
Because of the limited size of the park, the design purposely limits parking. The
employee parking lot for Skyline Displays Inc. could be made available in evenings, and
weekends for special events. A special event area constructed of "grass-crete"
(concrete pavers that allow grass to grow through them) is proposed to provide for a
farmer's market and other events without increasing hard surface areas.
The Special Events plaza flows into the the paved plaza area recessed into the hillside
to the north. The Plaza is further defined by an arcade feature that serves as a
backdrop for special events, banners and seasonal lighting. The arcade terminates into
a windmill structure that is symbolic of the agricultural heritage of this site. Moveable
wheelstops allow the hardsurface parkin a rc-, +o flow into the plaza for special events.
U
LEXINGTON AVENUE
V ~ i I
\ l
J I r w
w
I ,
v I I 7
J 1
1
~ I
I ^ 1 N
.1 ! r
7 i 1
1
! a I
o
o I I L av
c I I ~ r-
' ( r
g Es
n ~
N _
DISCOVERY ROAD N
T P! OPP JOO+Y~OOP JPP~ V Nip PPJr Pa (1 ~0~ N
i P7 f: m9 xc 7'9 / S 'E f12 pppp g.rCMMMT Z p W
T pp.-.R~3C S;O ~S-•~ E~O ~.yi ;SIT 00 g6° °~V °C
Z ~ /`i ap • OR~~~=23C~gC
Ffy.:~~"'C$sGB v g~BQ a -iias3
^eFl , °T'w /
a $4p S 7
jai
$ _ 3 /
15
February 12, 1998
Lee Markel, Chair
Advisory Parks & Recreation Commission
City of Eagan
3830 Pilot Knob Road
Eagan, MN 55122
Dear Lee:
As you suggested, I'm writing this letter to express my concerns over one of the
revisions made at the February 10, 1998 Joint Meeting of the City Council and Advisory
Planning Commission to the Comprehensive Plan. The revision affects Goal #2 in the
Natural Resources section of the 1/30/98 CC/APC Subcommittee Final Draft of the
Comprehensive Plan Update.
Goal #2 reads as follows, prior to the revision:
2. To protect, and properly manage large open space areas within the City
and preserve significant elements of the City's "pre-development" natural
environment and wildlife habitat by minimizing fragmentation of
previously uninterrupted expanses of natural land.
The revision made at the joint meeting was to limit the application of this goal to public
property. A member of the Planning Commission suggested the change was necessary in
order to clarify the intent of the goal.
I would suggest that the revision has the opposite effect by contradicting other parts of
the Comprehensive Plan and thus would not reflect our intent. Further, the
Comprehensive Plan specifically refers to "City" property where it intends to differentiate
from "private". For example:
Policies
Resource Protection and Management
2. The City will strive to maintain existing natural corridors connecting parks and
open spaces. Comment: There is no limitation to public property.
3. The City will evaluate and, when appropriate, take advantage of opportunities to
acquire tax forfeit properties to add to the City's inventory of natural resource-
based open space as appropriate.. Comment: Tax forfeit property would not be
public property.
. 4. Eagan will continue to identify and acquire, when feasible, significant habitat
areas and areas of unique plant and animal species to ensure. their preservation for
posterity.. Comment: There is no limitation to public property.
Davis 4895 Safari Pass Eagan, Minnesota 55122-2690
Ph: (612) 452 - 2635 Fax: (612) 452-2152
/7,
DD
Development
3. On public parklands, the City will utilize site planning, construction, and
maintenance techniques to minimize negative impacts on the resource base. Comment:
Note e i c reference to "public parklands" to differentiate it from private property
and to further differentiate it from other types of city property. Also note the specific
reference to "City property" in Policy #4 of this section to differentiate it from private
property.
In addition, I would suggest that the revision could compromise the city's position
because it may suggest to a developer, for example, that the city was functioning outside
the scope of its own Goals if it were to function in a protectionism or managing mode in
implementing some of the Natural Resources Policies given in the above examples. As a
minimum, the contradictions between the Goals and Policies of the city may not be
viewed favorably for the city.
Finally, the revision has the potential to severely restrict flexibility and undermine
opportunities for the APrC and the city to acquire private land or, in partnership with the
private sector, protect and properly manage such land. The importance of retaining
flexibility on this point was clearly described in subsequent comments at the meeting by
the Mayor and Chair of the Planning Commission.
Please share my views with other members of the APrC, the CCIAPC Subcommittee,
City Council, and City Council as you deem appropriate.
Sinc ly,
Terry Tav'
APrC cc: Ken Vraa
Director of Parks and Recreation
Davis 489 safari Pass Eagan, Minnesota 5 122-2690
Ph: (612) 452 - 2635 Fax: (612) 452-2152
@mkk
-city of eagan MEMO
TO: ADVISORY PARKS COMMISSION
LAND ACQUISITION/DEVELOPMENT SUB-COMMITTEE
FROM: KEN VRAA, DIRECTOR OF PARKS AND RECREATION
DOROTHY PETERSON, SUPERINTENDENT OF RECREATION
DATE: MARCH 12,1998
SUBJECT: PROPOSED CRITERIA FOR EVALUATION OF REQUESTS FOR
FUNDING PROJECTS FROM CIP OPPORTUNITY SET-ASIDE FUNDS.
BACKGROUND:
The Land Acquisition/Development Sub-committee met on February 23, 1998. The purpose of
the meeting was to review the project proposal presented by EAA travel baseball for the
lighting of the small baseball field, dugout improvements and a batting tunnel at Goat Hill Park.
The sub-committee directed staff to prepare draft criteria for review.
FOR SUB-COMMITTEE ACTION:
Attached are draft criteria for the sub-committee's review at its meeting at 6:00 p.m. on March
16, 1998.
In addition to a recommendation on the criteria to the Commission as a whole, the sub-
committee may wish to address a process and time line for review of the Travel Baseball
proposal.
1q•
CRITERIA FOR EVALUATION OF PROJECTS PROPOSED FOR
CIP OPPORTUNITY SET-ASIDE FUNDS
1. Is the project identified on the 1997 overall Parks CIP Evaluation Summary, but
was not funded?
2. Is the project in conflict with any project on the CIP Recommended for Funding
List?
3. Does the proposed project enhance both public and private recreational
programming options?
4. Are the benefits of the proposed improvement enduring over an extended period
of time?
5. Is the proposed project inconsistent with the suggested park's Master Plan?
6. Is the project appropriate for the park suggested?
7. Is there any other park in which the project can be replicated?
8. Does the proposed project fit the Department's facility design standards?
9. Is the proposed project's time frame flexible to allow incorporation into the
Department's annual work plan within one to three years?
10. Is the proposed budget benefiting a wide segment of the community?
11. Is the proposed cost participation contribution representative of the groups' ability
to pay?
12. Is the cost participation pay back received in one to three annual installments?
DYA f t 3/12/98
o~ U .
w MEMO
city of eagan
TO: ADVISORY PARKS COMMISSION
FROM: KEN VRAA, DIRECTOR OF PARKS AND RECREATION
DATE: MARCH 12,1998
SUBJECT: FAITHFUL SHEPHERD CATHOLIC ELEMENTARY SCHOOL
ISSUE:
The Commission is being asked it they are interested in working out an agreement with the
proposed Faithful Shepherd Catholic Elementary School that would provide for the use of
their playfields in lieu of park dedication fees.
BACKGROUND:
The three local Catholic churches are proposing to construct an elementary school, grades
K-8, on 2.2 acres of land located east of Lexington Avenue and north of Yankee Doodle
Road. The school is likely to be built in phases, which have not yet been determined. It is
likely that the first phase of school construction will consist of grades K-3. Site grading that
is proposed to occur this summer would precede this. This grading work would include the
proposed athletic fields consisting of one full size soccer field and two ball fields. Attached to
this memo is a rendering of the school site plan. The plan is for the school to be ready for the
2000-2001 school year.
PROPOSAL:
Mr. Charles Hall, owner representative for the project has approached staff regarding the
potential collaboration between the school and the City. What has been discussed is an
arrangement similar to that which the City has with existing public schools. The school
would develop the fields and the City is allowed to use them during off-school hours for team
use. In this instance, the school would look for an exemption to its parks and trail dedication
requirements. This would amount to approximately $84,000 in park dedication fees and
$21,000 in trail dedication fees. Like the public schools, an agreement would provide for turf
maintenance to be done by the school, but the City would provide for dragging of the infields
and lining of fields during the summer.
The school is also proposing to complete a trail system that would connect from the school to
Yankee Doodle Road. The trail system would continue around ponds on this, and adjoining
property, and would connect to Skyline Display's trail to the east. This trail system follows
the conceptual idea that the Commission expressed an interest in some months ago when the
property was platted by Dart. The attached map reflects this trail plan.
of 1,
DISCUSSION:
This is the first instance that the City has considered an agreement of this scope with a
parochial school. However, staff is not aware of any statues that would preclude the City and
the school from reaching an agreement. If there is an interest in pursuing this concept, a
formal agreement would have to be developed which would carefully delineate the
responsibilities of the school and the City for maintenance of the fields, usage patterns and
investment for needed repairs and upkeep. Issues such as the need for additional infield
material, fertilization of turf, frequency of mowing would have to be addressed. The school
would also be concerned about liability in case of accidents on the fields or trails.
FOR COMMISSION ACTION:
The Commission is asked to review this proposal and provide a preliminary response to the
school. If the Commission does not wish to recommend pursuing such an agreement, then
action to maintain the park dedication responsibility should be considered. The Commission
can also consider an action to approve only after an agreement has been fully developed. If
that is the Commission's direction, then the Commission's input regarding concerns or issues
that should be addressed in an agreement would be appreciated. It might also be helpful for
this to be assigned to a sub-committee for review prior to the whole Commission making a
recommendation.
5Faithful Shepherd
St. Pa 13 Catholic Elementary
h21 55 School
Mendota Heights
I nn~Airport M ndota
D ~.6~•i Highway 110
St. Peter's
e
II n jt}" p~,
St. Thomas Beckett 9
.'hy
Sunfish Lake
St. Peter's ~
St. John Neumann
a -
i
Dakota County
School Districts
Parish
°Lone Oak Ro d
e0. ~k
'if.
` a',y proposed
f 35E school site I
Yankee Doodle Road
13
i
~II
I
y .
4 a Eagan
at c
a
a
Q
St. John
Neumann t
Q
Thomas
Beckett
35E
Site Plan
Hammel Green and Abrahamson February 23 1998
AMIN&
® Faithful huepherd
Catholic Elementary
School
aoet tlop berm
wodbW
iF
tMd-
pd. -
r
Ili ~
t. 1 0 '
OrV
i Q~4 rb'c
-0,00 tv
j r ® O ;r
AOL
rd I I r i F n a e- c a° 6' .alma {
- O 0 m m
® ® m
Site Plan
Hammel Green and Abrahamson February 23 1998
MEMO
- city of eagan
TO: ADVISORY PARKS COMMISSION
FROM: KEN VRAA, DIRECTOR OF PARKS AND RECREATION
PAUL OLSON, SUPERINTENDENT OF PARKS
DATE: MARCH 12,1998
SUBJECT: SALVAGING WOOD BEAMS FOR SHELTER CONSTRUCTION
ISSUE
The allocation of funds to allow for the salvaging of large wooden arch beams from the soon to be
demolished Fire Administration Building for use in the construction of a new park shelter. Additional
funding would be necessary to construct the shelter.
BACKGROUND
This April, the existing Eagan Fire Administration Building located northeast of the Municipal Center
at the intersection of Wescott and Pilot Knob will be demolished. Upon completion of the demolition,
construction will begin on a new Fire Administration Center.
The existing structure is a simple "post and beam" design consisting of 21 laminated arched beams.
The beams are of sufficient size to create a clear span of 40' in the meeting area.
An "add" alternate providing for the salvaging of the beams during the demolition process was
included in the bid package. The salvage cost proposed by the apparent low bidder on the project is
$4500. The beams have a replacement cost of approximately $1500 - $1800 each if purchased new.
(21 @ $1,650 = $34,650).
DISCUSSION
The arched beams in the Fire Administration Building have considerable value as a construction
element. The beams are constructed of laminated dimension lumber. They vary in depth from
approximately 1' on the ends to nearly 2' in the middle. The beams style is widely used in the
construction of open sided park shelter buildings. Because the beams are under the roof they are in
excellent condition both in appearance and condition and will remain so for many more years.
Staff is proposing that the beams be salvaged and utilized for the construction of a new open-sided park
shelter. The shelter would be approximately 70' x 40' in size replicating the size of the meeting wing
of the existing building. Other construction elements would include concrete columns, a floating
concrete slab and shingled roof. The beams would be protected by the roof thereby retaining their
integrity and appearance. The design would require the use of approximately 16 -18 of the 21 beams.
Any remaining beams would be sold or possibly stored, though storage would be difficult due to the
size. Scheduling construction of the shelter to coincide with construction of the Fire Administration
Building will eliminate the need for long term storage and reduce or eliminate future moving and
placement costs and ensure the beams retain their quality.
C13
Based upon prior bidding and "Kerns Cost Data," staff is estimating a cost of approximately $35,000 -
$40,000 to construct the shelter. A more exact cost will require an engineering analysis.
Construction Material (Estimated)
• 18 columns with spread footings
• 65 cy concrete 6" slab
• 50 sq. timberline shingle
• 6500 LF tongue/groove boards
• crane rental
• 125 cy common exc.
• 65 cy class 5
• hardware
• 15% contingency
After reviewing potential locations, staff is recommending that the shelter be constructed at the
Lexington-Diffley Athletic Complex in an area central to parking, soccer fields and the ballfields. The
Lexington-Diffley soccer fields are used by hundreds of youth on a nightly basis. Because the majority
of he fields are "mini-sized" most of the participants are under 10. Currently there is no shelter for
participants or spectators. The association and parents frequently arrange for team "socials" or
gatherings at the site before or after games. They are currently being held on a blanket or focused
around a vehicle. The shelter could also be an asset for future soft-ball tournaments.
FOR COMMISSION ACTION
To approve or deny a recommendation to the City Council for:
• The expenditure of $4,500 from the Parks Site Acquisition and Development Fund to salvage the
wooden arch beams from the existing Fire Administration Building.
• The expenditure of funds to secure the services of a consulting engineer to prepare plans and
specifications for the construction of a shelter building.
• The expenditure of funds for construction of the shelter. The estimated cost is $35,000 - $40,000.
~4.
CITY OF EAGAN, MINNESOTA
FAMILY AQUATIC CENTER STUDY
REPORT #2
February 24, 1998
Programming and Need Assessment
100 Park Avenue, Beaver Dam, WI 53916
PH: 920-887-7375 - FAX: 920-887-7999
5
CITY OF EAGAN
FAMILY AQUATIC CENTER
Program and Need Assessment Meeting
February 24, 1998
1:00 P.M. Staff Review
5:00 P.M. City Council Review
Meeting Attendees: Representatives of the City
Water Technology Staff
Charles Neuman
Carl Fuerst
Claude Rogers
Purpose:
A. Review Water Technology Report #2
B. Discuss the interests of the City on the requirements for the new aquatic facility
C. Review a list of prioritized project goals and objectives
D. Establish financial objectives, design objectives, bather capacity, and parking
requirements
E. Agree upon a design program concept for the proposed aquatic facility
F. Review a preliminary conceptual design and project cost estimates
G. Consider a phase program for development, if appropriate
H. Review agendas for future meetings
Consultant Comments:
The intent of Report #2, Program and Need Assessment, is to provide appropriate
preliminary data for review by the City in preparation of establishing the location, design,
and budget for the proposed Family Aquatic Center.
Aquatic Consultant:
WATER TECHNOLOGY, INC.
100 Park Avenue, Beaver Dam, WI 53916
Voice - 920.887.7375 FAX 920.887.7999
C~61
CITY OF EAGAN
COMMUNITY PROFILE
Source: City of Eagan
The City of Eagan is the largest city in Dakota County with a 1997 estimated population
of 60,000 people. The City is considered the southeast anchor to the Twin Cities
Metropolitan area. Major freeways provide regional vehicular access to the city.
Eagan currently is comprised of 23,272 households with an average of 2.72 persons per
household. The median income according to the 1990 census is $46,600 per overall
households; $51,000 per family households.
The most recent profile of Eagan's population shows that 31% are children under 18,
44% are ages 25-44, and persons over age 65 are 2%. Recent School District 196 K-12
enrollment projections for the City of Eagan suggest increases of students in grades K-5
through the year 2002 followed by a slow decline; projected to the year 2010. Grades 6-8
will continue to increase in student numbers through the year 2007. High school age
students are projected to increase in numbers through 2010.
The City of Eagan can be characterized as a young, affluent municipality that has yet to
reach total build out. School District projections suggest that the proportions of the
population in the various age groups will remain fairly constant in the foreseeable future.
PRELIMINARY PROGRAM & WORK PRODUCT FOR THE CONSULTANT
Source: City of Eagan
The City Council has deferred developing a final program for this facility until a
consultant is able to assist them. Key elements identified at this time are:
1. A pool with zero depth entry of not less than 20,000 square feet of water surface.
2. Two "high entry" water slides; one body slide and one flume for tube rides.
3. Additional water slides for small children and toddlers.
4. Water play features for smaller children to include sprays, slides, bubblers, jets,
water curtains, and waterfalls.
5. Sand/water play area.
6. Picnic area for small group reservation.
7. Structure(s) to house mechanical equipment, concessions, administrative
functions/admission sales, bathhouse, and emergency services.
8. Concessions eating area.
9. Ample deck and open space suitable for deck/lawn chairs and shade.
Other items to be considered will include: lap swim area, a defined "tiny tots" area,
"lazy river", sand volleyball, "deep water" turbulence.
Water Technology, Inc. 1 City of Eagan, Minnesota
FAMILY AQUATIC CENTER
ARCHITECTURAL OBJECTIVES
Source: City of Eagan
The following eighteen Architectural Objectives have been prepared by the City of Eagan
staff for further consideration by the Water Technology, Inc. planning and design team:
I. Aquatic center should provide a strong sense of community, pride and
spirit.
2. Entrance should be clearly visible and identifiable to potential users.
3. The design of the aquatic center shall be sensitive in design and layout to
the residential neighborhood to the east.
4. The aquatic center location and design should be sensitive to the natural
area surrounding the site.
5. The design should seek to take advantage of the topographic change and
landscaping.
6. The design of the aquatic center is to be dynamic and allow for site and
feature changes in future years.
7. Layout of the parking lot should be designed to be easily identified and
safe.
8. Vehicular and non-vehicular traffic flows should be easily identified and
accessed.
Identified secondary access for emergencies and deliveries should be
considered.
Operational traffic flows should be easily identified.
9. The aquatic center should be sized to accommodate community needs,
considering various and numerous user groups, i.e., tots, teens, adults.
10. Incorporate uniqueness into the central theme of the design that
consistently carries through to concessions, marketing, staffing, etc.
11. The design of the pool and structure should reflect and complement the
enduring style of the municipal center campus and not reflect any period of
time.
Water Technology, Inc. 2 City of Eagan, Minnesota
FAMILY AQUATIC CENTER
ARCHITECTURAL OBJECTIVES
(continued)
12. The aquatic center should provide a sense of openness, deck space, green
space, and family areas.
13. Provide space for activity outside of the pool itself.
14. Quality of materials should be aesthetically pleasing, durable, and provide
for ease of maintenance. (Value engineering)??
15. Location of mechanical, concessions, storage, administration, and
operations needs to be laid out in a convenient and efficient manner for the
public and staff.
16. Mechanical systems should provide optimum, efficient, innovative
operations for the facility.
17. Year round programming should be considered for the aquatic facility, i.e.,
library, civic arena and municipal center.
18. The aquatic center should be designed for evening use.
Water Technology, Inc. 3 City of Eagan, Minnesota
oC
FAMILY AQUATIC CENTER
PLANNING GOALS AND OBJECTIVES
The following Goals and Objectives have been reviewed and prioritized by eight City of
Eagan staff members and are considered realistic and accomplishable for the development
of a new outdoor Eagan Aquatic Center. The ranking is based upon IMPORTANCE with
a 5 being very high and 1 being very low.
FAMILY AQUATIC CENTER
PLANNING GOALS ANALYSIS RANK
To increase attendance and be financially self-supporting 4.9
To be an attractive, exciting, safe, and quality leisure experience 4.9
To attract greater youth, adult, and family participation 4.6
To satisfy a broad range of aquatic interests for all ages 3.9
PLANNING OBJECTIVES RANK
Develop an aesthetic quality to the outdoor pool environment 4.9
with appropriate signage, furniture, appurtenances and
landscaping.
Develop food and beverage service and concession area. 4.9
Make the aquatic facilities accessible to the handicapped. 4.9
Develop sufficient revenue to meet operating expenses. 4.9
Develop new outdoor aquatic facilities, that have appeal to youth, 4.6
adults and family activity.
Develop extensive areas of outdoor deck, turf, and shade for the 4.6
enjoyment of pool patrons.
Provide adequate patron access and parking facilities. 4.6
Water Technology, Inc. 4 City of Eagan, Minnesota
do
PLANNING OBJECTIVES (continued) RANK
Develop increased opportunity for small children/parent 4.3
aquatic play.
Provide attractive bathhouse amenities. 4.1
Develop opportunities for extended pool use. 4.1
Increase swimming pool attendance. 4.1
Develop sufficient revenue to pay back Principal to the 4.1
Community Investment Fund.
Develop new opportunities for casual non-water recreation 3.0
outdoor activities for youth and adults.
Develop programs and facilities in support of the public's 2.9
interest in fitness.
Water Technology, Inc. 5 City of Eagan, Minnesota
SWIMMING POOL STANDARD AND BATHER LOAD
CAPACITY FOR EAGAN, MINNESOTA
A. STANDARD
The Recreation, Park and Open Space Standards and Guidelines published by the
National Recreation and Park Association provide us with a facility development
standard for public outdoor swimming pools.
NRPA Swimming Pool Standards
1. One swimming pool per 20,000 population (Neighborhood)
2. Pools should accommodate 3 to 5% of total population at a time.
B. GENERAL ASSESSMENT OF STANDARD
Many changes and new concepts are currently taking place relative to the planning
for new public swimming pools. The trend towards the Family Aquatic Center,
rather than the traditional public swimming pool, is resulting in greater numbers
of swimmers and a broader age range of users than ever before. Design and
quality of facilities are the prime factor, rather than an increased number of
traditional pools.
In fact, the NRPA quantity standard of one pool per 20,000 persons is not a
reasonable standard in light of the following:
1. Increased mobility of the urban and rural population.
2. Increased cost of pool construction.
3. Smaller pools in greater numbers have not increased pool usage.
4. Larger community-wide pools/family aquatic centers have greater appeal
than smaller neighborhood pools.
5. Larger community-wide pools/family aquatic centers have a lower "per
participant" operating cost than the smaller neighborhood pools.
Water Technology, Inc. 6 1 City of Eagan, Minnesota
'aC
C. RECOMMENDED STANDARD
Outdoor aquatic facilities to serve 4% of Eagan's population at a time is a realistic
standard and should be considered for the development of future aquatic facilities.
A single outdoor Family Aquatic Center to be located at the City's Municipal
Center Campus is recommended to serve future outdoor needs.
D. MINNESOTA BATHER LOAD CAPACITY
The specific "Bather Load" requirement is established by the Minnesota
Department of Public Health and is the maximum permissible attendance at a
swimming pool at a given time based upon the Water Components.
E. COMPARISON BY STANDARD
Standard: Outdoor Family Aquatic Center and swimming pool facilities to
accommodate 4% of the population of the City of Eagan.
Eagan Standard Recommended
Year Population Base % Bather Load Capacity
1998 60,000 4% 2,400
F. RECOMMENDED BATHER CAPACITY TO MEET STANDARD
Proposed Family Aquatic Center Bather Capacity
Outdoor Bather Capacity - Proposed 2000
Future growth and expansion of 400
Family Aquatic Center
Total Eagan Bather Capacity to Meet 2400
Standard
Water Technology, Inc. 7 City of Eagan, Minnesota
~3 .
ANALYSIS OF PLANNING OBJECTIVES
A survey provided by Water Technology, Inc. establishing priorities and the importance
of each Planning Objective was completed by eight City staff members. The survey
indicates a ranking of 5 as "Very High Importance" and 1 as "Very Low Importance".
The consultants further reviewed the survey results, and their recommendations for
consideration in the Eagan Outdoor Family Aquatic Center are noted in bold type.
Survey
Rankine
PLANNING OBJECTIVE A
Develop new aquatic facilities that have appeal to youth, 4.6
adults, and family activity.
Heated pool water 5.0
Shallow Water Zero Depth Entry 4.8
Water Playground 4.5
Water Flume Slide - (Family) 4.5
Waterfalls, Fountains, and Sprays 4.4
Water Flume Slide (children) 4.4
Lighted Facilities For Night Use 4.4
Water Flume Slide - (High and Fast) 4.3
Tube Slide - (Family) 4.0
Lazy River Float Pool 3.4
Lap Swimming Pool 2.6
Adult Spa (Whirlpool) 2.3
Drop Slide (Deep Water) 2.3
Deep water - over 5' depth 2.1
Competitive swimming pool 1.6
Diving board - 1 meter 1.1
Diving board - 3 meter 1.0
PLANNING OBJECTIVE B
Develop extensive areas of deck, turf, and shade for the enjoyment 4.6
of pool patrons.
Sun Deck with Chaise Lounges 4.5
Shade Structure/Shelter 4.4
Shaded Pool Deck with Chaise Lounges 4.3
Turf Sunning Area 3.8
Observation Deck (Non-Patron) 3.4
Adult Only Deck with Chaise Lounges 2.4
Water Technology, Inc. 8 g City of Eagan, Minnesota
2~
Survey
Rankine
PLANNING OBJECTIVE C
Provide new opportunities for casual non-water recreation activities 3.0
for youth and adults.
Picnic Area 4.8
Wet Sand/Play area 4.0
Children's' Play Equipment 3.8
Small Group Reservable Shelter 3.8
Pool Rentals to Community and Business Groups 3.4
Dry Sand/Play area 3.1
Volleyball Sand Court 2.9
Tether Ball Sand Court 1.8
Miniature Golf 1.4
PLANNING OBJECTIVE D
Develop an aesthetic quality to the pool environment with 4.9
appropriate signage, furniture, appurtenances, and landscaping.
Landscape Environment 4.9
Aquatic Theme Concept 4.8
Coordinated Signs, Furniture, and Colors 4.6
Decorative Fencing 3.5
Floral Gardens and Displays 3.1
Artificial Stone Features 2.6
PLANNING OBJECTIVE E.
Develop increased opportunity for small children/parent aquatic play. 4.3
See Objectives AB, C, and D.
PLANNING OBJECTIVE F
Provide food and beverage service and concession area. 49
Provide Concession Deck (Sun and Shade) 5.0
Provide Snack and Beverage Service 4.9
Provide Umbrella Tables 4.4
Provide Extensive Fast Food and Beverage Service 4.1
Provide Concession Service for Non-Pool Patron in 3.3
Concession/Observation Area
Utilize a private concessionaire. 2.0
Provide Vending Machine Service Only 1.4
Water Technology, Inc. 9 City of Eagan, Minnesota
Survey
Ranking
PLANNING OBJECTIVE G
Develop programs and facilities in support of the public's interest in fitness. 2.9
Lap swimming lanes 2.6
Whirlpool spa 2.3
Fitness exercise deck 1.6
Sauna 1.6
PLANNING OBJECTIVE H
Make the aquatic facilities accessible to the handicapped. 4.9
Accessible showers, lockers, toilets. 4.9
Zero-depth shallow water access 4.8
Accessibility to all pool features. 3.5
Provide wheelchairs for use in the water. 2.5
PLANNING OBJECTIVE I
Provide convenient patron access and parking facilities. 4.6
Access sidewalks and trails 4.9
On-site parking 4.8
Bicycle parking 4.8
Bus access and parking 4.6
Public transportation available 3.0
PLANNING OBJECTIVE J
Provide attractive bathhouse amenities as may be required. 4.1
Pool Manager's Office 4.1
Family Changing Room 4.1
Individual (Private) Showers for Males and Females 4.0
Guard/Staff Shower and Locker Room 3.9
Individual (Private) Changing Spaces for Males and Females 3.5
Coin Lockers 3.4
Hair Dryers 3.4
Water Technology, Inc. 10 City of Eagan, Minnesota
v
ENTERTAINMENT CAPACITY
The following data is used in establishing the Entertainment Capacity requirements for
the Eagan Family Aquatic Center. The Entertainment Capacity suggests the diversity of
activities required to provide an entertainment value necessary to assure participation by
all ages with special emphasis on the family. The Entertainment Capacity is further
correlated to the Recommended Bather Capacity of 2000.
A. ENTERTAINMENT CAPACITY CALCULATIONS FOR WATER
COMPONENTS:
The following calculations provide the methodology for establishing the
Entertainment Capacity for each of the Water Components:
Leisure Pools one unit of entertainment capacity per 15 sq. ft. of water
surface less than 5' depth.
Zero depth pools
Activity pools
Water playgrounds
Interactive pools
Deep Water one unit of entertainment capacity per 25 sq. ft. of water
surface greater than 5' depth.
Lazy Rivers one unit of entertainment capacity per 20 sq. ft. of water
surface.
Water Slides capacity is based on the length of time the guest has to
wait to ride the slide. Normally, water slides have a
capacity of three to four riders per minute. The
maximum wait should be no more than fifteen minutes;
therefore, each slide has an entertainment capacity of 45
to 60.
Diversity the other element to be considered in entertainment
capacity is the diversity of attractions. Based on the
program of elements for a project, there must be
sufficient diversity to meet the entertainment
requirements.
Water Technology, Inc. I I City of Eagan, Minnesota
-3
B. MINIMUM REQUIRED ENTERTAINMENT CAPACITY
It has been determined by Water Technology, Inc., through previous on-site
surveys, that a Minimum Entertainment Capacity be established for both Water
and Park Components of a Family Aquatic Center.
Minimum Required Entertainment Capacity
Recommended Entertainment
Water Component Bather Ca ap city Capacity
70% of Bather Capacity 2,000 1,400
Park Component
30% of Bather Capacity 2,000 600
Minimum Required Entertainment Capacity 2,000
C. RECOMMENDED ENTERTAINMENT CAPACITY
Based upon a Bather Capacity of 2,000, and the Entertainment Capacity
calculation, the following capacities are recommended for the Eagan Family
Aquatic Center and each are reflected in the proposed Conceptual Plan.
Entertainment
Water Components Capacity (units)
1. Leisure Pool (17,280 S.F.) 1,152
2. Lazy River (12,000 S.F.) 600
3. Water Slides (4 slides/45) 180
4. Deep Water (1,800 S.F.) 72
Total Water Components 2,004
Entertainment
Park Components Capacity (units)
1. Turf 200
2. Deck and Chaise Lounge 400
3. Concession 300
4. Sand Play 100
Total Park Components 1,000
Total Recommended Entertainment Capacity 3,004(l)
(1) This total units exceeds the Minimum Required Entertainment Capacity
by 1,004.
Water Technology, Inc. 12 City of Eagan, Minnesota
D. DESIGN FEATURES
Eight major entertainment components reflect the diversity of activity required to
provide the entertainment capacity necessary to assure participation by all ages,
with special emphasis on the family.
The combination of four aquatic and four park components must provide an
overall leisure experience at sufficient levels to retain attendees' interest for a
maximum length of stay and to engender the repeat visits that will achieve
maximum attendance.
In addition to the eight entertainment components, the Family Aquatic Center will
also require a variety of Architectural and Site Support Features.
1. Water Component Features
a. Leisure Pool Features (17,280 S.F.) to include:
1) Pool with zero depth entry
2) Lap lanes
3) Water playground
b. Lazy River Features (12,000 S.F.) to include:
1) Main channel 800 L.F. in length with zero depth entry and
adventure channel
2) Plunge pool for tube slide
c. Deep Water Features (1,800 S.F.) to include:
1) Two (2) drop slides
d. Water Slide Features (4 slides) to include:
1) Two drop slides into Deep Water
2) One body flume slide into plunge area in Leisure Pool
3) One inner tube flume into Lazy River
2. Park Component Features
a. Concession Features to include:
1) Concession building with food prep, storage, and serving
windows
Water Technology, Inc. 13 City of Eagan, Minnesota
3~i
D. DESIGN FEATURES (continued)
2) Concession Patio with tables, chairs, benches, and shade
umbrellas
3) Concession turf for picnics
4) Remote concession operations
b. Sand Play Features to include:
1) Wet/Dry sand playground
2) Water Play features
3) Shower control point
c. Turf Features to include fully irrigated lawn areas for lounging,
sunbathing, including shaded turf zones
d. Deck and Chaise Lounge Features to include pockets of deck areas
established to provide for viewing of activities, sunbathing and
shaded areas for lounging. These areas would be interconnected
with walks and mandatory circulation deck spaces to provide an
integrated system of hard surface areas.
3. Architectural Features
a. Admission control functions
b. Bather Prep and locker rooms, including family changing areas
c. Administrative offices:
1) Pool manager
2) Staff
3) First Aid
d. Concession and Storage Area
e. Mechanical support equipment buildings
4. Site Support Features
a. Demolition and preparation of the site
Water Technology, Inc. 14 City of Eagan, Minnesota
D. DESIGN FEATURES (continued)
b. Utilities:
1) Sanitary Sewer
2) Water
3) Electric
4) Storm Sewer
5) Gas
6) Telephone
7) Cable TV
C. Parking & Service Access
1) Parking -cars
E. PRELIMINARY CONCEPTUAL SITE PLAN AND
ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION BUDGET
A large preliminary Conceptual Site Plan and the estimated Construction Budget
will be presented for review at the respective meetings on February 24, 1998.
Water Technology, Inc. 15 City of Eagan, Minnesota
4/.
1
0
/J 1
~ K K
• r r r o_ ~ + ~ Y
$ o't
j II I ~ p0~oo ,
1 1 j N 4~
a i. I
MEMO
- city of eagan
TO: ADVISORY PARKS COMMISSION
FROM: KEN VRAA, DIRECTOR OF PARKS AND RECREATION
PAUL OLSON, SUPERINTENDENT OF PARKS
DATE: MARCH 11, 1998
SUBJECT: LEXINGTON/DIFFLEY SERVICE BUILDINGS UPDATE
BACKGROUND
Construction of the Lexington/Diffley Athletic Complex began in 1994. Because of the scope
and scale of the project a phased approach was utilized. Phase I included the development of
the athletic fields, trails and centralized parking lots. The fields were opened for play in the
spring of 1996. Subsequent improvements have included a maintenance garage, landscaping, a
7" ballfield and an overflow parking lot.
Planning for Phase II improvements consisting of two service buildings began in 1996. The
buildings are to be located in the center "hub" area of each of the two ballfield clusters. A
"team" of departmental staff developed a program that became the basis for several design
schematics prepared by Jonathan Miller of Dimension Architecture. General features of the
buildings include restroom facilities, a tournament office, storage space, score keeping
facilities, a vending area, and covered exterior viewing or seating space. The Commission on
several occasions reviewed the schematic designs.
In 1997 the City Council directed the Advisory Parks Commission to develop a two year
Departmental Capital Improvement Program that began with 1998. The Commission held a
number of meetings and created a prioritization system that could be applied to all proposed
projects. The Lexington-Diffley service buildings were determined to be a high priority for
funding in 1998. The two year Capital Improvement Program was subsequently approved by
the City Council in late 1997.
UPDATE
In January the City entered into an architectural contract with Mr. Miller of Dimension
Architecture. The contract provides for the completion of construction plans and specification
for the buildings. The City also entered into a contract with Greystone Construction for the
provision of construction management services. Because Greystone Construction is also
serving as construction manager for the Civic Arena addition staff determined that the City
could realize a cost savings by utilizing construction management hours that would otherwise
be scheduled for the Civic Arena. The close proximity to the Civic Arena and the simplicity of
the service building plans will make the impact negligible.
43
The original cost estimates prepared by Greystone Construction suggested that the construction
costs would exceed the $350,000 allocated in total for the two buildings. Several meetings with
staff, the architect and Greystone were held in an attempt to "whittle" the costs down. It was
determined that a significant portion of the cost was due to the internal steel framework
necessitated by the truss size and exaggerated vertical roof line. The large trusses allowed for a
14' clear span overhand on three sides of the building. By reducing the clear span overhand to
12' on each side, a wood frame could be used in lieu of steel providing for significant cost
savings. The option of columns was also discussed, however, the cost, and staff's desire to
avoid obstacles in the public space negated the positive aspects. Two columns were
subsequently added to provide additional truss support though they are integral to the
rectangular shape of the building footprint.
Th slope of the upper level roof has been flattened thereby reducing not only the height but also
the weight. The slope of upper level roofline remains greater than that of the lower level to
maintain the visual appeal and character of the buildings. The flat cupola roof that was a
feature of one of the original designs has been eliminated.
A significant cost saving will be realized by utilizing a "floating slab" foundation in lieu of the
traditional concrete footings. Soil borings and subsequent analysis by Braun Engineering have
shown that the subsoils in the area of the buildings consists primarily of clean native sand
covered by important fill material. By removing the fill materials and backfilling with
additional sand a stable, permeable base that is not susceptible to frost heaving is created.
Because the building is not heated there will be little difference in the temperature of the slab
and supporting soils further reducing the likelihood of movement. A "frost beam" under the
building walls will aid in preventing any differential settling and distribute the weight of the
structures. The two support columns will be attached to the slab to maintain uniformity.
Interior modifications are limited to the material finishes, though the cost savings will still be
appreciable. A spray glaze or epoxy paint will be used on the restroom walls rather than
burnished block. The steps, walls and floors of the upper level will be a combination of
dimension lumber and plywood. Park maintenance staff will "customize" the upper level at a
later date to fit the needs of the Recreation staff. The walls of the storm room and office space
are to be painted block.
The final plans, specifications and bid documents are currently being finalized by the project
architect and construction manager. Staff is hoping to open bids on April 1 and have ground
broken within 30 days of the bid award. Construction will require 60-90 days.
s
-p ~
`r Q~
I I
a
f I' z i I i ~ T
p I I .2i tl~ I I
I f ~ I l I
v ~
rt
TT-
I I s l ~
II ~ z ~
r
II I ~ I~ ~
~I
ii m ~I I I I
- - i j
44
G } _ r
TO: ADVISORY PARKS COMMISSION
FROM: RICH BRASCH, WATER RESOURCES COORDINATOR
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION
RE: SUMMARY OF MONITORING RESULTS FOR 1997
DATE: MARCH 10, 1998
Attached is a graphical summary of summertime water clarity monitoring records for all
seven Class I direct contact recreation lakes and for selected Class II indirect contact
recreation lakes. As established in the City's water quality management plan, the mean
recreation season water clarity goals for Class I lakes is six feet, while that for Class II
lakes is three feet.
The summaries are compiled from water clarity data collected by resident volunteers
under the Citizen Lake Monitoring Program (CLMP). As Commission members may
recall, the CLMP program is a state-wide monitoring program coordinated by MnPCA
and designed to establish a long term record of water quality based on periodic water
clarity observations. The City of Eagan coordinates the program within the city
boundaries. City participation in the program began in 1989 and has been expanded
since then. Currently there are 26 volunteers collecting data on 27 lakes and ponds
within the City of Eagan. It should also be noted that the City's water quality
management program was authorized in April 1990 and reached full operational status in
December 1990.
Staff will present an overview of these data to the Commission at the March 16, 1998
meeting and would be pleased to answer any questions at that time.
Rich Brasch
Water Resources Coordinator
CC. Ken Vraa
CLMP LAKES (Class 1)
Mean Water Clarity
14 Secchi Depth (feet)
Carlson L.
12
+ Fish L.
10 -a- Heine Pond
8 / LeMay L.
--X- Schulze L.
~ 6 -
Thomas L.
4 Target Mean
-'F- Blackhawk L.
2 Schwartz L.
0
89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97
Year
Values from Mid-April thru early October
CLMPLAKE.prs
Class 11 Lakes
0 Bald L.
Burr Oak L.
8 - Cliff L.
rid - - E. Thomas L.
U) 6 - Fitz L.
r.
0 4 Gravel Pit L. (CP-9)
Hay L.
v 2 - Jensen L.
Manor L.
CI) 0 - o McCarthy L.
9°b pN N p(R ` ~O'Leary L.
Nq N°j N Noi Noi Noi r~°~ Target Mean
Year
TO: ADVISORY PARKS COMMISSION
FROM: RICH BRASCH, WATER RESOURCES COORDINATOR
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION
RE: RESULTS OF POST-EDUCATION PROJECT SURVEY FOR WATER
RESOURCES - CITY OF EAGAN
DATE: MARCH 10, 1998
Since 1994, the City of Eagan has been involved in a cooperative water resources
education project with Dakota County Environmental Education Program in an attempt to
raise general awareness of non-point source pollution control issues with residents of the
northern urbanized portion of Dakota County. One goal of the program was to establish a
benchmark against which to measure the effectiveness of the program. In an attempt to
do so, a telephone survey among Dakota County residents was conducted in June, 1994
to establish a baseline for level of knowledge and behavior profiles prior to initiation of
the county-wide program. The City of Eagan requested a significant increase in the
sample size surveyed in the Fish and Schwan Lake watersheds in order to establish a
similar statistically valid baseline for evaluation of public education activities in those
priority watersheds. The results of that survey were presented to the Commission at a
joint City Council/Commission workshop in 1995.
In October, 1997, a second survey of similar size was conducted to provide data to
compare with the data collected during the 1994 survey and to compare level of
knowledge and behavior profiles in individual cities with those for the County as a
whole. An analysis summarizing the results of the second survey is attached. The
volume of information contained in the summary is considerable. Staff will provide an
overview of some of the more significant findings at the March 16 meeting. Please feel
free to bring up any questions or issues at that time.
.tom l
Rich Brasch
Water Resources Coordinator
cc. Ken Vraa
City of Eagan
1997 Environment Study
Presented to:
Mr. Rich Brasch
City of Eagan
Analysis
Crosstabulations
Decision Resources, Ltd.
March, 1998
~3
Survey Overview
Decision Resources, Ltd., is pleased to present the results of this study to the City of Eagan.
This section provides a brief introduction to the specifications of the survey and a guide to
the organization of the written analysis.
While the most statistically sound procedures have been used to collect and
analyze the information presented herein, it must always be kept in mind that surveys are not
predictions. They are designed to measure public opinion within identifiable limits of accuracy
at specific points in time. This survey is in no way a prediction of opinions, perceptions, or
actions at any future point in time. After all, in public policy analysis, the major task is to impact
these revealed opinions in a constructive fashion.
The Principal Investigator for this study was Dr. William D. Morris; the Project
Director overseeing all phases of the research and analysis was Ms. Diane Traxler.
Research Design
This study contains the results of a telephone survey of 403 randomly selected residents in the
Schwanz Lake and Fish Lake Watersheds of the City of Eagan. Survey responses were gathered
by professional interviewers across the community between October 20 and 30, 1997. The
average interview took fifteen minutes.
All respondents interviewed in this study were part of a randomly generated sample of the
selected watersheds in the City of Eagan. In general, random samples such as this yield results
projectable to their respective universe within f 5.0 percent in 95 out of 100 cases.
Interviews were conducted by Decision Resources, Ltd., trained personnel from telephone banks
in St. Paul, Minnesota. Approximately twenty percent of all interviews were independently
validated for procedure and content by a Decision Resources, Ltd., supervisor. Completed
interviews were edited and coded at the company's headquarters in Minneapolis, Minnesota.
Statistical analysis and cross-tabulations were produced by the company's direct job entry access
facility to the University of Minnesota VAX Computer System.
Organization of the Study
The results of this study are presented in the following order:
The Analysis consists of a written report of the major findings. The results contained herein
were also presented verbally to the client.
Any further questions the reader may have about this study which are not answered in this report
should be directed to either Dr. Morris or Ms. Traxler.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Chapter One: Residential Demographics 5
Residential Demographics 6
Gender of Respondent 6
Watershed of Residence 6
Summary and Conclusions 6
Chapter Two: Lawn Care 7
Lawn Care .......................................................8
Lawn Responsibility 8
Educational Information ................................8
Grass Clippings and Fertilizer Treatments 10
Lawn Care Decisions 10
Weed Killer .........................................12
Application of Fertilizer 12
Soil Testing .........................................14
Disposal of Leftovers 14
Summary and Conclusions 15
Chapter Three: Water Quality Issues ...........................................16
Water Quality Issues 17
Destination of Fertilizer and/or Grass Clippings during Rainfall
.........17
Storm Run-Off .......................................17
Storm Drain Stenciling 19
Quality of Water in Local Streams 19
Drinking Water 20
Meaning of "Watershed" 21
Surface Water and Ground Water 21
Public School Programs 22
Phosphorous as Primary Pollution Source 23
Summary and Conclusions 23
Chapter Four: Solid Waste Disposal Issues 25
Solid Waste Disposal Issues 26
Dakota County Hazardous Waste Sites 26
Business Site Recycling Programs 26
Summary and Conclusions 30
Chapter Five: Final Thoughts ..................................................31
Final Thoughts ...................................................32
5~
r
~e
A
Decision
Resources Ltd.
~s\ 5
~ ~rrr~
ra
i
Ater' n~:
e
i
d::!u
,
De ra Pb
?':'?`'>iii•:•pv~'•'•••'••'••:••'•••. ' ::::~::::::::::<::::Y::?•:::i:'i
Residents of the Schwanz Lake and Fish Lake Watersheds in the City of Eagan were asked a
series of questions about their demographic backgrounds. These questions were asked for two
reasons: first, to validate this sample against 1990 U.S. Census findings; and, second, to track
any differences between subgroups and the rest of the population. There were no statistically
significant differences between the findings of this survey and the census data. And, throughout
the course of this study, subgroup differences will be discussed.
Gender of Respondent
The gender of each respondent was noted:
MALE 47%
FEMALE 53%
Women outnumbered men by six percent in the sample.
Watershed of Residence
The watershed of residence of each respondent was also noted:
FISH LAKE WATERSHED 51%
SCHWANZ LAKE WATERSHED 50%
The sample was stratified to provide equal representation of the two watersheds.
Summary and
Conclusions
Not unexpectedly, men and women were relatively equal within the sample. Watershed
differences reflected the purposeful stratification of the sample, not the overall population
differences between the two areas.
:::::.::::::.::........:::.~::::.:.v.......;.i:.:: ,i.:i.:iii::..,.::::•:..:.,..i.::::::i~>:<:;>::»>::;>::::~:::<::>.:::;>:::::>~:<•<;::::
x:; } .:::::::::::::.max:: ;...........•v: riim::::. y; V 4 n................:.;, ........{w::::; •:::::.i::: i'{•:'v i'•i:~iii
•:i~tivii'.:iiiiiX~iiiiiiii ~iiiiiii
viii::: •:i^i:•}
:;;r...
~ v. i~,...,.v.••: ij> iY;i::i:`~E:;•.'i!:!'f~yv4Y« ~::i:
'%:i.:i~~i+~::i:,>.:;:f::>.: is :>.~`••j':•'yTW
{i><:•:•'i::h:i::ti{:::':.{:ti:•:;::iiti<i:{::•i'r<i:ii?}iiiiiiiili iiv L;i'.L%:•i:•ii'riiiiiiii:•i:
~6
Residents who had responsibility for a lawn at their homes were asked a series of questions.
They were queried about seeing information related to lake water quality protection and the
impact this information had, if any, on their use of fertilizers and weed killers. Respondents were
asked about the time of year and the frequency with which they applied fertilizer. Questions
about the use of weed killer were also posed. Soil testing and its uses were discussed, and
finally, residents were asked about their disposal of left over lawn care products.
Lawn Responsibility
Residents were asked:
Do you have a lawn, for which you or someone
you designate is responsible for its care? Is it a
new lawn, less than two years old, or an estab-
lished lawn, over two years old?
Eighty-three percent reported responsibility for the care of their lawns:
Eagan County
YES/NEW LAWN 4% 9%
YES/ESTABLISHED 87% .74%
YES/UNSURE 0% 0%
NO 9% . 17%
DON'T KNOW/REFUSED 0% 0%
Nine percent reported it was a "new lawn," while eighty-seven percent had "established lawns."
The changes from the county results reflected newer home construction in several areas of
Southern Dakota County.
"Established lawns" were found more often in the Schwan Lake Watershed.
Educational Information
Residents responsible for lawns were asked:
Do you recall seeing any educational information
related to lake water quality protection within the
past year? Where did you see the information?
Sixty-eight percent recalled seeing educational information related to lake water quality
protection within the past year:
Eagan County
NO 30% . 50%
YES/CITY NEWSLETTER 16% 6%
LOCAL NEWSPAPER 12% . 13%
YES/DOOR HANGERS 4% 3%
YES/BROCHURES 21% . 12%
YES/SOMETHING ELSE 4% 3%
YES/DON'T RECALL 11% . 11%
DON'T KNOW/REFUSED 2% 1%
Twenty-one percent reported seeing it in "brochures," while sixteen percent saw it in "the City
Newsletter." Another twelve percent recalled coverage in their "local newspaper." Eleven
percent, though, could not recall the actual source of information. Four percent each saw "door
hangers" or something else.
Those without recollection of such information were more often those with a new lawn. "City
newsletter" was cited by more often by Fish Lake Watershed residents, while "door hangers" and
"brochures" were pointed to more frequently by Schwanz Lake Watershed residents. Men were
most apt to recall "local newspaper" coverage.
In comparison with the rest of the County, the City of Eagan has done an excellent job in
providing residents with information.
Those who recalled seeing information were asked the follow-up query:
Were you already doing what this educational
information suggested to reduce pollution from
run-off and protect lake water quality?
Eighty-five percent reported they were already undertaking some of the suggestions to reduce
pollution from run-off and protect lake water quality contained in the information:
Eagan County
YES 85% .75%
NO 9% .15%
DON'T KNOW/REFUSED 6% . 11%
Nine percent, though, were not doing any of the recommended activities.
The small subsample who were not already acting to protect area water quality were asked:
Did you learn anything from this educational infor-
mation that caused you to change your lawn care
practices?
Fifty-two percent reported they were impacted by the educational information:
Eagan County
YES 52% .73%
NO 26% . 13%
DON'T KNOW/REFUSED 22% . 13%
Schwanz Lake Watershed residents were most apt to report they had not learned anything which
caused them to change their lawn care practices.
The educational information provided to residents changed lawn care practices to better reduce
pollution from run-off in just three percent of the sample. However, it should be kept in mind
that Eagan residents in this area reported they were already undertaking many of the suggestions
made in the educational effort.
Grass Clippings and
Fertilizer Treatments
Respondents were asked:
From what you have heard or seen, if you leave grass
clippings on your lawn, is the number of required fer-
tilizing treatments increased, decreased, or does it
remain relatively unchanged?
Forty-two percent correctly responded that the number of treatments was "decreased:"
Eagan County
INCREASED 6% 8%
DECREASED 42% .44%
UNCHANGED 32% .23%
NO 2% ..2%
DON'T KNOW/REFUSED 18% .23%
Six percent reported an "increase," while thirty-two percent felt the number was "unchanged." In
comparison with the County as a whole, there was very little difference in opinions on this issue.
Men were most apt to think it would be "decreased."
Lawn Care Decisions
Residents were asked:
Who generally makes decisions about lawn care in
your household?
Sixty-six percent reported a "male" in the household generally made decisions about lawn care:
Eagan County
RESPONDENT/MALE 39% .40%
RESPONDENT/FEMALE 8% . 11%
SPOUSE/MALE 27% . 21%
SPOUSENEMALE 2% 2%
BOTH RESP AND SPOUSE 16% . 14%
SON/NEPHEW/MALE RELAT 1% 1%
GARDENER/COMPANY 0% 9%
SOMEONE ELSE 7% 1%
DON'T KNOW/REFUSED 1% 2%
In ten percent of the households, decision making authority was held by a "female." Sixteen
percent called it a joint decision, while seven percent relied upon "someone else."
Men were most apt to cite themselves, while women were more apt to point to themselves or
indicated the responsibility was shared.
Those with decision making authority were asked a follow-up question:
If you do so, in what month or months do you fertilize
your lawn?
"May" and "July" proved to be the most popular months, pointed to by thirty-seven percent each:
FIRST ALL
JANUARY 0% 0%
FEBRUARY 0% 0%
MARCH 6% 6%
APRIL 23% 23%
MAY 35% 37%
JUNE 14% 35%
JULY 3% 37%
AUGUST 1% 27%
SEPTEMBER 2% 33%
OCTOBER 1% 23%
NOVEMBER 0% 2%
DECEMBER 0% 0%
VARIES 9% 13%
DON'T KNOW/REFUSED 1% 7%
NONE 7% 7%
J'
Thirty-five percent fertilized in "June," while twenty-seven percent did so in "August" and
twenty-three percent did so in either "April" or "October." While a majority of respondents
fertilized their lawns twice annually, twenty-two percent did so at least four times per year.
"July" and "August" were particular favorites among Schwan Lake residents.
Weed Killer
Residents were queried:
When was weed killer applied to your lawn this year
spring, summer or fall?
Forty-five percent applied weed killer in the "spring:"
Eagan County
SPRING 45% .47%
SUMMER 9% 8%
FALL 4% 6%
MULTIPLE TIMES 26% . 19%
DON'T KNOW/REFUSED 16% .20%
Twenty-six percent reported doing so "multiple times" during the year.
There were no statistically significant subgroup differences.
Application of Fertilizer
Residents were asked:
Who applied fertilizer to your lawn last was it a
commercial applicator, you, or someone else in your
household, or was it never applied?
Forty-two percent reported applying fertilizer themselves:
Eagan County
COMMERCIAL APPLICATOR 31% .28%
YOU 42% .42%
SOMEONE ELSE 20% . 17%
NEVER APPLIED 6% . 11%
DON'T KNOW/REFUSED 1% 2%
(PS
Thirty-one percent relied upon a commercial applicator, while twenty percent relied upon
"someone else." Six percent said they "never applied" fertilizer.
Women were more apt to rely upon "someone else" or a "commercial applicator." Men tended
to point to themselves.
Resident not using a commercial applicator were asked:
How often do you calibrate your spreader, making
sure it is set right before using it each time, several
times each season, once each season, rarely, or never?
Fifty-seven percent reported calibrating their spreader right before use "each time:"
Eagan County
EACH TIME 57% .44%
SEVERAL TIMES/SEASON 6% . 13%
ONCE/SEASON 12% . 15%
RARELY 3% 4%
NEVER 10% 7%
DON'T KNOW/REFUSED 13% . 16%
Eighteen percent either calibrated "several times each season" or "once per season." Eagan
residents were thirteen percent more likely than Dakota County residents to calibrate their
spreader "each time" before use.
"Each time" was cited most often by Schwan Lake Watershed residents. "Several times a
season" was selected most often by Fish Lake Watershed residents. "Never" was also a favorite
of Fish Lake Watershed residents.
Next, those responsible for fertilizing their lawns were asked:
What is the phosphorous content of the fertilizer you
generally purchase?
Sixty-eight percent were unable to respond to the question:
Eagan County
1-3 13% . 11%
4-10 15% . 21%
11-15 3% 1%
OVER 15 1% 0%
DON'T KNOW/REFUSED 68% .68%
Among those responding, the dominant answer was a content level of 4-10. Fish Lake
Watershed residents were most apt to report a phosphorous level in the principal job function in
the four-to-
p
ten range. Men and those with established lawns were also much more likely to be able to
respond to this query.
Soil Testing
Residents were asked:
Have you had your soil tested in the past few years?
Did you base your fertilizer application on the results
of your soil test?
Fourteen percent reported having their soil tested in the past few years:
Eagan County
YES/YES 11% . 11%
YES/NO 3% ..3%
NO 77% .79%
DON'T KNOW/REFUSED 9% ..7%
Eleven percent reported basing fertilizer application on the results of the soil test. The City of
Eagan results were identical to the countywide findings. There were no statistically significant
subgroup variations.
Disposal of Leftovers
Residents were asked:
What do you usually do with your leftover weed killer
and other pesticides?
Twenty-three percent "stored it on my property," while twenty-eight percent "totally used it up:"
Eagan County
DON'T USE 14% . 12%
DON'T KNOW 12% 8%
USE UP 28% .24%
HAZARDOUS WASTE SITE 12% . 10%
STORE IT 23% .30%
RECYCLING CENTER 5% ..4%
COMMERCIAL APPLICATOR 5% 9%
OTHER 0% ..2%
REFUSED 1% ..2%
Fourteen percent did not use weed killer or other pesticides, while twelve percent disposed of
leftovers at a hazardous waste disposal site.
"Use up" was mentioned most often by men.
Summary and
Conclusions
Sixty-eight percent of the sample recalled seeing educational information related to lake water
quality protection during the past year. The most frequently recalled information sources were
city newsletter articles and brochures. Eighty-five percent of those seeing this information,
though, were already undertaking many of the suggestions to reduce pollution from run-off and
protect lake water quality. Significantly, among those who were not already undertaking these
measures, over one-half changed their behavior to conform to the practices outlined in the
educational information. Reflecting this knowledge base, for example, over forty percent knew
about the relationship between leaving grass clippings on the lawn and the number of required
fertilizer treatments.
Thirty-seven percent of the sample reported fertilizing their lawns in either May or July, with
thirty-five percent doing so in June. While the majority fertilized their lawns either once or twice
during the year, eighteen percent also reported fertilizing their lawns at least four times annually.
Spring proved to be the most popular time for applying weed killer. In tending to their lawns,
sixty-two percent reported either they or another family member applied fertilizer the last time.
While fifty-seven percent reported calibrating their spreader each time they used it, twenty-five
percent did so at most once or twice each season. Almost seventy percent, though, did not know
the phosphorous content of the fertilizer they generally purchased. Fourteen percent reported
having their soil tested in the past few years, with almost eleven percent of those individuals
basing their fertilizer application on the soil test results.
For a majority of residents, leftover weed killer and other pesticides were handled in one of two
ways: totally using them up, mentioned by twenty-eight percent, and storing leftovers, by twenty-
three percent. Fourteen percent reported they did not use either weed killer or fertilizer, twelve
percent took leftovers to a hazardous waste disposal site, and five percent relied upon a
commercial applicator for disposal.
~ii4i ii ii iiii:C~iiiiiiiy'~iiii; i::ii;:i}iii};:iiii:'vy:i~i'i'~i:•i'~i
;.y.4::: iij;::.v •.v: w.
:i: S'.:... .•iii}. is
..t
:i:}i:•}
':{:iii i'};•i}:•i}i}i}:•}}}i}}v :iit'riiY i:•}::i::ii iiiii!`{}?iiii': i:}
'iii:~i:i+:•ii iiii::n: ~iti:
KKi
L:.:i::?y ;~y'vi~::li::iiii is tiCyL
2v:i:Yi::i;:i::i::::i::::::i::i: i;} '::i .i ::i •i;ji:;:i ~ ~i:::::i':::i::::i:;i::i:<:i:::i::::i::'' :i::iij;i; i:ii;;:::::::::: v
:i: :?iit:•i i. ~'i ~4 ~ ii v: ::i::: ii;!v::tiv::>
':.1v.........
moil
'04M-
Schwanz Lake and Fish Lake Watershed residents were asked a short series of questions about
ground water quality issues. They were asked about the destination of run-off from their lawn.
Specifically, they were questioned about the path of runoff from their property. The impact of
the stenciling of storm drains was also examined. Finally, lake quality, drinking water, and
environmental issues knowledge were also considered.
Destination of Fertilizer
and/or Grass Clippings
during Rainfall
Residents were asked:
What do you think happens to fertilizer and/or grass
clippings on sidewalks and streets when it rains?
Sixty-four percent reported it "goes into a sewer," while thirteen percent stated it "drained into a
lake" and eleven percent thought it "went into a drain:"
Eagan County
DON'T KNOW 3% 4%
GOES INTO SEWER 64% .62%
DISSOLVES 1% 4%
SOAKS INTO SOIL/GROUND 2% 3%
RUNS INTO LAKES 13% 7%
INTO DRAIN 11% . 12%
RUNS DOWN STREET 3% 5%
INTO RIVER 1% 4%
"Goes into the sewer" was indicated most often by Schwanz Lake Watershed residents. They
were also more likely to think it went "into the river." Owners of new lawns were more apt to
think it "dissolves."
Storm Run-Off
Respondents were next asked:
During a storm, where does most of the rainwater or
snow melt runoff from your property drain into your
neighbor's lawn, into a nearby body of water, or some
place else? Where is that?
10,
Fifty-two percent reported storm run-off went into a "nearby body of water:"
Eagan County
NEIGHBOR'S LAWN 15% 15%
NEARBY BODY OF WATER 52% .37%
SOMEPLACE ELSE 2% 1%
SEWER 4% .22%
STREET 15% . 11%
GROUND 10% 5%
DON'T KNOW/REFUSED 2% 9%
Fifteen percent each pointed to the "street" or their "neighbor's lawn." Ten percent felt it soaked
into the "ground."
"Nearby body of water" was the favorite response of Schwan Lake Watershed residents.
"Neighbor's lawn" was pointed to most often by respondents with new lawns. "Street" was
mentioned most frequently by Fish Lake Watershed residents.
Then, a follow-up question about its next destination was asked:
Once run-off from your property enters a storm sewer or
catch basin, where does it go?
Thirty-three percent pointed to an "area lake," while twenty-nine percent said a "holding pond"
and nine percent reported the "river:"
Eagan County
UNSURE 24% .36%
WATER TREATMENT PLANT 4% 6%
HOLDING POND 29% . 15%
RIVER 9% .28%
AREA LAKE 33% . 11%
SEEPS INTO GROUND 1% 5%
SEWER 0% 0%
SCATTERED 0% 0%
In comparison with the County, twelve percent more respondents were able to answer this query.
"Area lake" was cited most often by Schwanz Lake Watershed residents and those with
established lawns, while "holding pond" was mentioned by men.
The next step in the process was considered:
Once run-off water enters a storm sewer or catch basin,
is it chemically treated and purified?
Fifty-eight percent reported that run-off water was not chemically treated and purified:
Eagan County
YES 11% . 13%
NO 58% .56%
DON'T KNOW/REFUSED 31% .31%
Only eleven percent thought it was treated and purified. In comparison with the countywide
findings, there was no statistically significant difference.
Those with new lawns, women, and Fish Lake Watershed residents were more apt to answer
"yes" to this query. Men were most apt to respond with "no," while women were also more
likely to be uncertain.
Storm Drain Stenciling
Respondents were asked:
Do you know what message the stenciling on storm
drains tells residents? What is the message?
Thirty-eight percent were correctly able to identify the message stenciled on storm drains:
Eagan County
NO 41% .56%
YES/WHERE RUN-OFF GOES 38% .21%
YES/DO NOT DUMP WASTE 4% 3%
YES/SOMETHING ELSE 10% 3%
DON'T KNOW/REFUSED 7% . 17%
However, forty-one percent reportedly had not noticed the stenciling on the storm drains. Eagan
residents, though, were much better informed than other Dakota County respondents.
"Yes/Where run-off goes" was the most frequent response of those with an established lawn.
Quality of Water in Local
Streams
Residents were queried:
How would you rate the quality of water in your local
streams, lakes, and ponds excellent, good, only fair,
or poor?
~7~
While forty-five percent rated the water quality of local streams to be "excellent" or "good,"
forty-seven percent saw it as "only fair" or "poor:"
Eagan County
EXCELLENT 3% 2%
GOOD 42% .37%
ONLY FAIR 36% .42%
POOR 11% .14%
DON'T KNOW/REFUSED 7% ..5%
Eagan residents were marginally more positive about the quality of the water in their local
streams, lakes, and ponds; than the County as a whole.
Unfavorable ratings were given most often by Fish Lake Watershed residents.
Drinking Water
Residents were asked:
Where does your community's drinking water come
from? And, how does it get there?
Twenty-nine percent thought their community's drinking water came from "wells," while twenty
percent pointed to a "city water tower:"
Eagan County
DON'T KNOW 33% .29%
CITY WATER TOWER 20% .20%
WELLS 29% .32%
RIVER 3% .10%
TREATMENT PLANT 7% ..6%
AQUIFER 4% ..2%
OTHER 4% ..1%
Seven percent thought drinking water came from a "treatment plant." Thirty-three percent,
though, were unable to answer this query.
"Wells" were selected most often by men. "City water tower" was chosen most frequently by
residents with new lawns and Schwanz Lake Watershed residents. Women were most apt to
point to a "treatment plant." Women were also most apt to be uncertain about the answer to this
query.
i3
Meaning of "Watershed"
Respondents were asked:
What does the term "watershed" mean to you?
Twenty-six percent thought it was a "holding area for water:"
Eagan County
UNSURE 260Zo . 340Zo
NOTHING 6% 3%
HOLDING AREA FOR WATER 26% .28%
RUN-OFF 20% . 16%
DRAINAGE 12% . 11%
UNDERGROUND WATER 5% 7%
CONSERVING WATER 1% 2%
SCATTERED 0% ..0%
Twenty percent associated "run-off' with wetlands, while twelve percent mentioned a connection
with "drainage." More Eagan respondents were able to answer this question than the Dakota
County norm.
"Drainage" was chosen by more frequently by men, while women were more apt to be uncertain
about the term.
Surface Water and Ground
Water
Residents were asked:
From what you have heard or seen, is surface water con-
nected to ground water? How is it connected?
Forty-five percent said the two were connected by water "seeping through the soil:"
Eagan County
UNSURE 27% .25%
NO CONNECTION 10% ..7%
SEEPS THROUGH SOIL 45% .43%
AQUIFER 5% ..5%
UNDERGROUND STREAMS 7% ..8%
RUN-OFF 3% ..6%
WELLS 2% ..4%
STORM DRAINS 0% ..2%
1) 4,
Differences in the response patterns of Eagan residents with the rest of the county were minimal.
"No connection" was indicated more frequently by Schwanz Lake Watershed residents. Women
and Fish Lake Watershed residents were much more to be unable to respond to this query.
Public School Programs
Respondents were asked:
From what you have heard or seen, does the water that
runs off'your lawn, driveway, and street eventually reach
[Fish Lake/Schwan Lake in Trapp Farm Park] through
the storm sewer system?
Sixty-two percent answered affirmatively, while nineteen percent responded "no:"
YES 62%
NO 16%
DON'T KNOW/REFUSED 22%
Sixteen percent, though, were unable to respond to this query. Schwanz Lake Watershed
residents were more apt to answer "yes," while Fish Lake Watershed residents were more likely
to be unable to respond to the query.
Eagan residents were next asked:
Have any children in your household attended the first
or second grade in any of the public elementary schools
in Eagan within the past two years?
Twenty-five percent of the households reported a child in that age group:
YES 25%
NO 75%
DON'T KNOW/REFUSED 0%
There were no statistically significant subgroup differences noted.
Residents who had children in public schools were then asked:
Did they mention or bring home materials from a play
called "Toadilly Turtle "they saw in school?
Seven percent recalled something about "Toadilly Turtle:"
'72- ~6;
YES 7%
NO 53%
DON'T KNOW/REFUSED 40%
But, fifty-three percent recalled nothing and forty percent were uncertain.
Those with new lawns and Schwanz Lake Watershed residents were most apt to recall this
program. Women were most apt to not recall hearing about this educational effort.
Phosphorous as Primary
Pollution Source
Respondents were queried:
Too much phosphorous in run-off entering lakes and
wetlands causes these water bodies to turn green and
scummy.
What do you think is the primary source of phosphorous
pollution in the run-off?
Eighty percent pointed to "fertilizers applied to lawns and turf areas:
GRASS CLIPPINGS AND LEAVES DEPOSITED
ON PAVED SURFACE 3%
FERTILIZERS APPLIED TO LAWNS/TURF
AREAS 80%
DON'T KNOW/REFUSED 17%
Only three percent blamed "grass clipping and leaves deposited on paved surfaces."
"Fertilizer" was pointed to even more often by Schwanz Lake Watershed residents, while Fish
Lake Watershed residents were most apt to be uncertain.
Summary and
Conclusions
In tracing the passage of storm water run-off, most residents were able to correctly identify the
steps. Almost all knew what happened to fertilizer and grass clippings on sidewalks and streets
when it rained. They were also able to identify a location where the run-off drained from their
property when it rained. About two-thirds successfully identified the destination of run-off water
when itentered a storm sewer or catch basin. And, a majority correctly noted that run-off water
was not chemically treated and purified. But, even so, only one-in-five residents were able to
correctly indicate the stenciled message on storm drains in their areas.
,23'~ 6 ,
Other water-related knowledge proved to be more variable. Quality ratings of water in local
streams, lakes, and ponds was marginally positive; in fact, somewhat more positive than the
countywide ratings. About two-thirds of the sample knew where their community's drinking
water comes from. About seventy percent of the sample were familiar with the term "watershed"
and three-quarters were knowledgeable about the connection between surface water and ground
water. Awareness of public school education programs on water quality topics proved somewhat
low, particularly in light of the effort made in local Eagan schools.
a .1. i:SUO
~ .8
Residents were asked a short series of questions about solid waste disposal. Two topics were
surveyed in this area: awareness of the Dakota County Hazardous Waste Sites and the presence
of recycling programs at job locations.
Dakota County Hazardous
Waste Sites
Respondents were asked:
Are you familiar with the locations of the Dakota County
Hazardous Waste Sites?
Seventy-six percent reported they were familiar with these locations:
Eagan County
YES 76% .60%
NO 24% .39%
DON'T KNOW/REFUSED 0% 1%
Familiarity was higher among those with an established lawn.
Business Site Recycling
Programs
Respondents were initially asked:
In what county do you work?
Thirty-six percent worked in Dakota County, while thirty-six percent also worked in Hennepin
County:
Eagan County
NOT WORKING OUTSIDE HOME 8%. 14%
WORK AT HOME 2% 5%
DAKOTA COUNTY 36% .32%
HENNEPIN COUNTY 36% .26%
RAMSEY COUNTY 12% .16%
SOMEPLACE ELSE 4% ..3%
DON'T KNOW/REFUSED 0%..4%
Twelve percent reported Ramsey County job locations. Eight percent did not work outside of the
home.
Those working outside of the home were asked a follow-up question:
Does the business you work in sponsor a recycling
program at the worksite?
Eighty-four percent reported their business sponsored a recycling program at the worksite:
Eagan County
YES 84% .80%
NO 13% .17%
DON'T KNOW/REFUSED 3% ..4%
Only thirteen percent reported a definite "no." There were no statistically significant subgroup
differences noted.
The respondents who had a recycling program at work were then instructed:
What kinds of items are collected at work?
A list of eight items was then read:
Office paper?
Eighty-two percent reported their business recycled office paper:
Eagan County
YES 82% .79%
NO 14% .19%
UNSURE 4%..2%
"No" was indicated more often by women. Clerical-Computer businesses were most apt to
recycle office paper, while retail and health care businesses were least likely to do so.
Aluminum cans?
Eighty-four percent reported their business recycled aluminum cans:
Eagan County
YES 84% .85%
NO 14% .12%
UNSURE 2% ..3%
There were no statistically significant subgroup differences noted.
Cardboard?
Forty-seven percent reported their business recycled cardboard:
Eagan County
YES 40% .47%
NO 55% .49%
UNSURE 4% ..3%
Men and Schwan Lake Watershed residents were most apt to report cardboard was recycled at
their place of business, while women and Fish Lake Watershed residents were more apt to report
the opposite. Retail businesses were most likely to recycle cardboard.
Glass?
Thirty-nine percent reported that glass was recycled at their job site:
Eagan County
YES 39% .42%
NO 57% .53%
UNSURE 4% 5%
"Yes" was offered most frequently by women and workers at manufacturing businesses.
Newspaper?
Fifty-six percent reported their business recycled newspaper:
Eagan County
YES 56% .56%
NO 40% .40%
UNSURE 3% 5%
School districts were most apt to recycle newspapers. "No" was posted most often by women
and retail businesses.
Tin cans?
Twenty-nine percent reported their businesses recycled tin cans:
Eagan County
YES 29% .32%
NO 66% .65%
UNSURE 5% ..3%
Manufacturing businesses and school districts were most apt to recycle tin cans. "No" was
pointed to most often by employees of retail businesses and clerical-computer businesses.
Plastic?
Plastic was recycled by forty-two percent of the businesses:
Eagan County
YES 42% .35%
NO 52% .62%
UNSURE 6% ..3%
Dakota County businesses and manufacturing businesses were most likely to recycle plastic.
"No" was chosen most frequently by Fish Lake Watershed residents.
Other products?
Twenty-six percent reported that other types of products were also recycled at their job sites:
Eagan County
YES 26% .26%
NO 53% .57%
UNSURE 21% .17%
"No" was posted most often by employees of manufacturing businesses, women, and Fish Lake
Watershed residents.
Finally, those working outside of the home were asked:
What type of business do you work in?
Eighteen percent worked in "clerical/computer" businesses, while fourteen percent worked for a
"manufacturing" business:
,-29
Eagan County
DON'T KNOW 2% ..3%
AUTOMOTIVE 1%..6%
RETAIL 7% ..9%
MANUFACTURING 14% .16%
SCHOOL DISTRICT 8% ..9%
CLERICAL/COMPUTER 18% .18%
HEALTH CARE 10% .13%
FOOD INDUSTRY 4% ..2%
SALES 9% ..5%
AIRLINES 7% ..3%
BLUE COLLAR 4% ..3%
ENGINEERING 4% ..3%
GOVERNMENT 5% ..5%
PROFESSIONAL OFFICE 3%..3%
SCATTERED 3% ..2%
Ten percent worked at "health care" businesses, while nine percent worked in "sales" and seven
percent each worked in "retail" or for an "airline."
"Manufacturing" and "airlines" were cited most frequently by men, while "health care," "school
district," and "retail" were pointed to most often by women.
Summary and
Conclusions
Seventy-six percent were aware of the location of the Dakota County Hazardous Waste Sites.
Similarly, over four-out-of-five workers outside of the home reported the presence of business
recycling programs, generally collecting aluminum cans, office paper, and newspaper. Lower,
though still significant numbers, reported the collection of cardboard, glass, plastic, tin cans, and
other types of products.
apte
u ;
~f<
The following conclusions can be reached from the results of this study:
I . In comparison with Dakota County as a whole, the knowledge level of Eagan residents
was substantially higher in two areas:
• Path of run-off from lawn to final surface water destination
• Connection of surface water to ground water
2. A very solid sixty-eight percent, twenty percent higher than the County norm, recalled
seeing educational information related to lake water quality protection within the past
year.
3. Three percent of the residents in the targeted watersheds changed their behavior in a
positive fashion as a result of reading the published educational information.
4. Most businesses have recycling programs at their job sites collecting materials that not
only take basic materials, such as office paper and aluminum cans, but also take materials
which are integral by-products of their enterprises.
THE APPLE VALLEY EXPERIENCE
To better understand the operational aspects of a pathway plowing program, an analysis of the
plowing program in Apple Valley was completed. Apple Valley has intensively maintained
pathways and sidewalks throughout the City for a number of years. Given their close proximity
and the similarity of physical characteristics, the experiences they have had may best translate to
what may be anticipated should Eagan implement a pathway plowing program. (Refer also to
the summary of a survey of 14 metro communities.)
Apple Valley
Eagan Equivalent
• Estimated miles of pathway cleared = 55 Est. Miles = 94
• 19 Park
• Equipment available for trail plowing • 75 Path & Sidewalk
(2) articulating 4-wheel drive units with snowblower or 0
"V" plow (1 holder, 1 MT trackless)
(1) articulating 4-wheel drive tractor with snowblower 0
or "V" plow
(1-3) 1 ton 4-wheel drive truck with plow blade 5 units available following
day 1 plowing
(1) 1 ton pickup with a front mounted snowblower truck only, no blower
(1-3) 4-wheel drive articulating pay loaders - clean up 2 units available following
functions when available day 3 plowing - no blower
• Staf mg Eagan Univalent
Streets =13 9
Utilities = 8 14
Equipment Maintenance = 2 2
Parks = 12 (includes 2 from golf course) 9
4-6 cleaning pathways
4-6 assisting with streets
1-2 cleaning rinks, limited snow removal only
1 ~
• Plowing Priorities
A. School-related pathways within the school districts walking distance parameters.
- K - 5th grade %2- mile radius
- 6th - 12th grade one-mile radius
B. City park frontage pathways
C. Along thoroughfares (County roads)
D. Miscellaneous walkways
• Plowing Statistics (based upon maintenance log sheets)
During the '95/'96 snow season
c Plowable snow events = 11 events (average year has 19 snow events)
o Total snowfall = 44" estimated
c Number of days during which pathway plowing was performed = 35 days
c Average number of plowable days @ snow event = 3.2 days
c Total man-hours spent plowing pathways = 748 man-hours
c Average man-hours required @ snow event = 68 man-hours
c Average man-hours @ mile @ event =1.25 man-hours
c Average number of persons assigned to pathway = 3+ (range 1 - 7)
plowing @ event @ day
o Estimated total cost @ season = $55,920
c Estimated cost @ snow event = $5,085
1gk: The average number of personsis higher (5+) on the first plowing day when priority
pathways are cleared.
• Plowing Responsibility
Plowing is done primarily by Park and Recreation star supplemented as needed by the Street
Department upon completion of route plowing.
Note: Upon cessation of a snowfall, two Park and Recreation maintenance staff members are
assigned to blow or plow snow from ice rinks. No brooming or flooding of surfaces is done.
The balance of the Park and Recreation maintenance staff (9) are assigned to pathway, street
and/or miscellaneous plowing. Intensive rink maintenance will not begin until the majority
of the plowing has been completed. (1 - 3 days).
• Snow Removal Ordinance
Applicable within commercial and residential districts
Business and homeowners adjacent to sidewalks must clear the walks within 48 hours of the
snowfall ending. The ordinance is enforced by the Police Department, typically based upon a
complaint or staff report.
2 0C
• Plowing Standard
Utilize the Street Department standard of a 2" accumulation. Additional plowing may be
necessary due to "winging back" of the boulevards or drifting.
• Plowing Schedule
Typically, Monday through Friday from 6:00 A.M. to 4:00 P.M. Overtime may be paid for
additional weekday hours or weekend work, depending upon the conditions and forecast.
• Sanding/Salting
No sand or salt is applied to pathways
• Bridges - Pathways across bridges are not cleared
• Spring Boulevard Repairs
Sod and turf repairs are made as necessary
Miscellaneous: Following the "Halloween Blizzard" of several years ago, approximately four
weeks was needed to clear pathways.
~I
r Yti N o M 8 t? 8 G o
LA -8 (0 f~ 00
•.•.w••.
I if •a i 1. IC:.~ j~ ~;n
ye , I e,~ i~"- , ` j 1' QY~ - Its
OIL
nv-nq
e' 44
i • i Ia1~1~° ~ . F ~ E'~I 11
` a
I~j ~~Il-~f•~`~^ ~ ~WWW ~11~~+a ltjl
1ti•' J"" •y/ ~,a I ssR„fi«h7CRFRRR:,:
< ' re+~s r 3
r r.
0._ -~."i,!I •aJfJ_'~` JC J tf'B$ i5 Qu
a
.s=Va_.
l - _ - -,5.- - Imo---_
w
• • e~ r7 ♦ • ss~a '
% j~f1 -l7iA a EY
0
~ _ 1'c •a,1` ''4 X11 r ~J ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ S4,Y. •
~ , ~ ~ `~h~:i. >o,.• . ~ x `lam „ -
.1 w 4,
N s\ 1 1% x - ' t►1 ~~,~~I l v g f.,g jy's 1 i:: 7;
O y7 \ r y 1' M a s Y.
Z
t P'I~y r 1
of of r C w.•*-,<~._ 't 11r, - ~ Y 6 s16 ~`'F }`i., • ~ ~ ~ ~ its I ~ : :i
p n
°o o_ o - I. a oi+.arr• - -
r OC oC s e b 8 0 • ' milli l il111
4 C~ o
CITY OF EAGAN
CURRENT SNOW REMOVAL
SEQUENCING AND STAFFING
The plowing of streets and cul de sacs following a significant snow event (2"+) requires the
combined effort of maintenance staff from the Streets, Utilities, and Park Departments. Plowing
is done under the direction of the Street Department.
A significant snow event generally requires a minimum of 3 days to complete all aspects of the
removal operation. Staff and equipment requirements are diminished with each successive day.
Additional snow during the removal process typically requires a return to the Day 1 schedule.
Timing of the snowfall or a significant accumulation may also effect the removal operation.
Removal Sequence and Staffing
Day 1 Plowing streets and cul de sacs (Total of 21+ City staff' and 2 contractor routes)
Streets; 9 staff plowing streets & cul de sacs
Eqpt. Mtce; 2 staff plowing streets & cul de sacs
Utilities; 9 staff plowing streets & cul de sacs 33-5 for operations,
production
'Parks; 1+ staff; plowing streets & cul de sacs
8+ staff; plowing parking lots, rinks,' Municipal Center
Contractual Svcs.; 1 main line route, 1 cul-de-sac route
NOTE: Upon completion of day 1 plowing, 1-Ton trucks are typically available for
additional assignments
Day 2 Clean up and sanding (Total of 9+ staff)
Streets; 9 staff plowing, scraping and salt/sanding
Eqpt. Mtc; 2 staff performing equipment maintenance functions
Utilities; 14 staff resuming routine maintenance and production functions
Parks; 9+ staff completing lots and resuming winter facility maintenance
functions
Day 3 Mixing salt/sand, widening (Total of 9 staff)
Streets; 9 staff widening plus hauling & mixing salt/sand
Eqpt. Mtce; 2 staff perform equipment maintenance functions
Utilities; 14 staff completing' utility production and maintenance functions
Parks; 9+ staff completing ice rink maintenance.
' All equipment capable of plowing is in use.
' Additional park staff is used to supplement the Day 1 plowing effort depending upon
conditions or during absences.
3 Three required for a minimum level of maintenance and service.
5 (1
CITY OF EAGAN
SNOW REMOVAL ACTIVITIES & STAFFING MATRIX
Day 1 Day 2 Day 3 Day 4
STREETS (9) SC SC SC OM
SC SC SC OM
SC SC SC OM
SC SC SC OM
' SC SC SC OM
SC SC Sc OM
µ SC SC SC OM
u SC SC SC OM
SC SC SC OM
EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE (2) SC VM VM VWFM
sC VM v I
PARKS (9) SC SC WFM
Sc WFM WFM SC WFM WFM Sc WFM WFM WFM
WFM WFM WFM WFM
u WFM WFM WFM WFM
u WFM WFM WFM WFM
u
WFM WFM WFM WFM
WFM WFM WFM WFM
UTILITIES (14) SC 2 oM OM OM
SC OM OM OM
sC oM OM OM
u
sC oM OM OM
SC oM OM OM
SC OM OM OM
SC OM OM OM
SC OM OM OM
µ SC OM OM OM
oM oM oM OM
OM OM OM OM
oM OM OM OM
OM OM OM OM
OM OM OM OM
CONTRACTOR (2 routes) SC
See Page 7 for the Definitions of Codes Y
~~Z
- Snow and Ice Control
Plowing and sanding of streets and cul de sacs. The widening of snow storage areas,
additional sanding and the mixing of salt/sand in anticipation of additional snow begins
on or after the second day of plowing.
VM - Vehicle Maintenance
Repair and maintenance of equipment from the City fleet. During periods of active
snow and ice control, priority is given to equipment required for control activities.
WFM - Winter Facility Maintenance
Maintenance functions necessary to ensure winter facilities are accessible, safe and
functional. Winter facilities include skating rinks, the tubing hill and park buildings
scheduled for recreational programs.
QM - Operations and Maintenance
Routine maintenance functions necessary to ensure the efficient operation of
established City systems and programs.
= Plowing of the City Municipal Center site and other non-street priority sites.
® Additional Park staff is used to supplement the plowing effort depending upon the snow
conditions or during staff absences.
® A minimum of three to five employees are necessary to operate utility systems and to
respond to emergency calls. Staffing at this minimum level does not allow for routine
maintenance or service response.
CITY OF EAGAN
LIGHT EQUIPMENT USE MATRIX
Snow Event
DAY -1 DaLZ Dal
Unit # Typs Dept•/Div.
105 % Ton, P Streets SC OM OM
114 1 Ton, P/S Streets SC SC OM
115 1 Ton, P/S Streets SC SC OM
120 1 Ton, P/S Streets SC SC OM
121 1 Ton, P/S Streets SC SC OM
127 1 Ton, P/S Streets SC OM OM
128 1 Ton, P/S Streets SC OM OM
149 %z Ton, P Streets SC OM OM
213 1 Ton, P/S Utilities SC OM OM
306 % Ton P Parks SC WFM WFM
307 % Ton P Parks (New `96) SC WFM WFM
310 % Ton P Parks SC WFM WFM
314 1 Ton P Parks SC OM OM
319 1 Ton P Parks SC OM OM
Not Equipped for Plowing
304 % Ton Parks WFM WFM WFM
305 % Ton Parks/Forestry OM OM OM
311 % Ton Parks WFM WFM WFM
Skid Steer Parks OM OM OM
Skid Steer Streets OM OM OM
NOTES: This matrix is subject to change. The use of equipment and the duration is
determined by the specific weather event and conditions
• P - Equipped with plow
• P/S - Equipped with sander and plow
• SC - Snow Control
• WFM - Winter Facility Maintenance
• OM - Operations and Maintenance
Refer to the staffing matrix for specific definitions.
NON-MOTORIZED TRAILS
WINTER MAINTENANCE
COST ANALYSIS
ESTIMATED MAINTENANCE COST @ MILE @ WINTER SEASON
Snow Frequency Maint Maint Total
Accumulation Hrs/Mi Cost/Hr
21, 7 .5
$43.00 $150.00
2"-6" 7 1.0
$43.00 $300.00
611-12" 3 1.5 $80.00 $360.00
12"+ 2 2.0 $80.00 $320.00
Sub Total $1,130.00 ___F Additional Maintenance @ Mile @ Season
• Clean up of intersections and excessive accumulation 5hrs @ $55.00 $ 275.00
• Property repairs
- Sod and Turf = $ 50.00
- Utilities = $100.00
- Landscape Materials = $100.00
_ $250.00
Estimated Total Cost @ Mile @ Season = $ 1,655.00
l
J'
FOOTNOTES
1. Snow accumulation - Total depth of snow accumulated on a hard surface trail since
the most recent "dry pavement condition". Accumulations are due to snowfall and/2r
the clearing of adjacent property or roadways. The number does not represent snow
events.
2. Frequency - Estimated average number of occurrences during a snow season. Based
upon data compiled by other metro region municipalities.
3. Maintenance Hours @ Mile - The number of man-hours required to clear the
accumulated snow from one mile of trail. Based upon an analysis of data compiled
by other metro region municipalities. (Season average = 1.25 - 1.3 man-hours @
mile.)
4. Maintenance cost @ Hour - The hourly cost of one operator and one piece of
equipment, rates per 1996 Eagan fee schedule
0" - 6" = 1 ton truck with "V" plow
6" - 12"+ =articulating vehicle with blower
clean up = skid steer with bucket
*NOTE: The city does not own a "V" plow or articulating vehicle with a blower.
X1'0
ADDITIONAL EQUIPMENT
The removal of snow in an urban area requires "task specific" equipment. Unlike street plowing,
there are fixed obstacles, such as stone walls and hedgerows bordering the paths and other
obstacles, including utility boxes, irrigation systems, benches and landscape materials which may
be obscured by accumulating snow. Because snow storage areas are limited or non-existent in
many areas, the ability to place snow during the removal process is essential.
Because of these conditions, no single piece of equipment can efficiently perform winter
maintenance activities on a large-scale pathway system. The implementation of a quality
program will require the purchase of multiple pieces of "task specific" equipment. In general,
greater accumulations equate to more sophisticated equipment and greater cost.
RECOMMENDED ACQUISITIONS
(3) "V" plows for % ton or 1 ton trucks.
A "V" plow is useful for clearing accumulation of 1 " - 6" of light snow from pathway
surfaces. The hydraulic folding feature of several brands allow snow to be carried through
an intersection or pushed to a specific storage location. Truck mounting allows for an
increased removal speed in open areas.
The usefulness of a "V" plow may diminish during the season as snow accumulates on the
boulevards because of the inability of the plow to "roll" snow on the top of a pile.
Estimated cost = 3 @ 4,000 = $12,000
(2) 4 X 4 articulating snow plow with a blower and plow.
These units are capable of opening a corridor through significant accumulations of both
fallen or plowed snow. The blower attachment has a hydraulic chute which can be used to
direct snow to specific locations or to blow snow into a truck. Their narrow width (<48")
allows the machine to negotiate along walls or around fixed obstacles in corridors too
narrow for a truck.
Because of the narrow width of the removal equipment, multiple passes may be necessary
to remove snow in wide corridors. To prevent clogging, the ground speed must be reduced
significantly when using the blower, especially when removing snow plowed onto the
boulevard from the street. Plowing or blowing to a "bare pavement" level of removal is
limited by pathway irregularities.
Estimated cost = 2 @ $75,000 = $150,00
(1) Small (1.8 yard) four-wheel drive loader with plow and/or blower.
A large "V" mounted on a loader would allow for the timely removal of significant
accumulations of snow in the wide corridors. The high-profile "V" plow would have the
capability to "roll" snow onto piles of previously plowed snow. Clean-up of intersections
could also be completed by utilizing the bucket attachment.
The unit would not be useable in narrow pathway corridors or those having a significant
number of obstacles.
Estimated cost = 1 @ $ 90.000
Estimated total of $252,000
all purchases
10-year amortized capital cost = $25,200 @ year (not including fuel and maintenance)
J2
D
LEGAL ISSUES
Minnesota statutes pertaining to the specific duties and subsequent liabilities of a municipality
are often ambiguous and open to variety of interpretations. Statutes pertaining to snow and ice
are no different, though it appears municipalities are afforded a degree of immunity.
Minnesota Statute 466.03, subdivision 4, states that a City will not be held liable for: "any claim
based on snow or ice conditions on any highway or public sidewalk that does not abut a publicly-
owned building or publicly-owned parking lot except when the condition is affirmatively caused
by the negligent acts of the municipality".
This immunity does not apply if the ice or snow condition was caused by what is determined to
be a negligent act of the City. An example may be a pile of snow pushed to the corner of any
intersection which obscures the vision of motorists and subsequently causes an accident.
Therefore, a City is obligated to not create a slippery condition. A distinction which is not
specifically stated is whether or not the ice and snow condition was artificially or naturally
created. If the condition was not caused by the government, it could argue for immunity. The
immunity may not apply if the City fails to remove a known dangerous condition created
artificially on a sidewalk.
The court has also ruled that a City may be immune under the discretionary immunity statute if it
can be determined that a decision was discretionary. The City should establish a priority system
which dictates which streets, paths or sidewalks are cleared first based upon use, traffic danger,
etc. In the case of extreme conditions, it may become difficult to maintain all walks or pathways
with available resources. The City must be able to document the social and/or economic factors
that were considered when deciding to plow or not plow.
If the snow and ice immunity does not apply, a basic standard of negligence would be called into
question. "Did the City exercise reasonable care?" If the City makes a good-faith effort to use its
"available resources" to maintain paths and walks, it may not assume the liability.
Information taken from LMCIT Loss Control Quarterly - "Ice and Snow: Does a City have
Immunity" by Ellen A. Longfellow, LMCIT Staff Attorney.
1: UpmW pva1.122
APPENDI
Eagan Trail Map
Survey
Survey Summary
Apple Valley `95/'96 Plowing Log
,1~
~ ~---ti-mot ~ ~ . 1 "~1 ~
Ssk£~ 1.
\ ! ~`\1 \
BOULEVARD WIDTH a i
0 - 3 FEET . %////////it, „ • 11 -1~- \ - 11
3 - 6 FEET
1
6 - 10 FEET / .~ii r••' t u J •i :1 20
23
10 + FEET , 1r•~ o. ~y~e
1
y% " {7s / 1 ry 1 ° 1 4< 1 .s 1 N 1. ~Ii~f~ al d X1:1
Ion
79
35
36 'k.
co'
~,1 ; ' 1~ Is~.,9(q'i. ~~p •e s0 0 R 9 r''~.y ,L r ~q
Aa.,pl xl '•~tS .`'o~V.•.e~,._-ti 1
raM ~ : l~.-_yyl.. ' _ 2S • ~.~_.s-ric ~b s"
1, •x.. `tea 77 r c Pa. i3~
23 c-
30 -d
4411 -494
41
47 Oor SB p ,
30
l I M/ i
I I 12 ~ d _
t_ " . -67
Ht a~
C3= 1, 70 67
°
;.s.r~~
'max i'~f:~ a., cam.{ '~`1~~8 y-~~_ : M
\ \ 1, ~ » .tai/ ~ ~ ' ~ ~'~'M• S, ~ y ~
53
fo
.511 50
pt.
PLOWING OF Art 4 Ax MEWA K4 SU VEy
The following are the results of the trail and sidewalk plowing of the surrounding communities.
The survey is split up into 13 questions;
1. How do you determine or classify priority in trail plowing?
2. Are a paths and walks in the city cleared?
3. What department is responsible for plowing?
4. What type of equipment do you use? # of miles? width of trails? How long does it take to clear all the trails?
5. What is your standard for plowing? V, 2" ..etc.
6. Is overtime paid for any trail or sidewalk plowing?
7. When is plowing performed ( Monday - Friday)? Daylight hours? Call out? By whom?
8. Is there an ordinance requiring residents or businesses to clear paths or walks adjacent to their property? If so, Ha, ig
do they have to clear the trail/walk? How is it enforced?
9. Do you coordinate with the county to prevent them form "Winging" snow back onto the trail?
10. Do you sand/salt paths or trails?
11. Do you repair sod damage in the spring?
12. How do you clear walks or trails on bridges?
13. How long have you been plowing trails/sidewalks?
The following cities surveyed:
Apple Valley Edina
Bloomington Farmington Plymouth
Burnsville Inver Grove Height Richfield Rosemount
Cottage Grove Lakeville nt
Eden Prairie Roseville
Mendota Heights Woodbury
INDIVIDUAL MUNICIPALITIES
CONTACT PERSON AND PHONE NUMBER
F ple Valley Thomas Adamini
1953-2420
omington Paul Edwardson
1948-8760
Burnsville Gary Erickson
895-4518
Cottage Grove Bob Pommercning
458-2854
Eden Prairie Wes Dunmore
949-8535
Edina Vince Codkriel
927-8861
Farmington Jim Bell
463-7111
Inver Grove Heights Neil Nauer
450-2556
Lakeville John Hoger
469-4431
Mendota Heights Terri Blum
454-4059
Plymouth Mark Peterson
509-5941
Richfield Jim Krusz
861-9170
Rosemount Rick Cook
423-4411
Roseville Ken Hox neier Lonnie Brokke
490-2289 628-0088
Woodbury Dick Riemenschnieder
730-5593
IQJ
1. How do you determine or classify priority in trail plowing?
Apple Valley Class A - School Children - Walking distance (23.1 miles)
Class B - City Parks - Frontage - (6.3 miles)
Class C - Along Thorough fares - (23.1 miles)
Class D - Walkways along less busy roads
Bloomington First - School and Handicap areas - Heavily foot traveled paths
Second - All others
Burnsville First - 4-5 miles around wildlife areas - ponding & bird watching activities
Cleaned off in order of skating rink priority
Cottage Grove First - School districts - Plowed at same time as street department goes out
Eden Prairie Class A - School walking routes, Senior center area
Class B - Main streets and skating rinks
Edina Plow the paths that are on a first use basis
Farmington Everything is done except sidewalks in the city
Inver Grove Heights
Lakeville High priority - Trails surrounding schools, especially elementary
Parks - only if used in the winter time
Mendota Heights Trails are taken care of after streets, rinks, and parking lots. No specific
order.
Plymouth First - Trails surrounding schools.
Second - major trail ways through parks and city
Richfield Schools do their own trails - Plow trails in east part of city to west.
Rosemount Trails are done after the streets are finished. There is no particular order
for the plowing route. Trails along collector streets and sidewalks leading
to schools are plowed. Very few interior park trails are plowed.
Roseville Class A - Schools - shopping centers - trails in park
Class B - Trails less traveled
Class C - Sidewalk plowing - residential
Woodbury Class 1 - Schools trails
Class 2 - Trails adjacent to major streets
Class 3 - Internal Park trails
I
2. Are AU trails and walks in the city cleared?
Apple Valley Trails through parks that are not used in the winter time are not plowed,
unless trails are used for school system.
Bloomington Private developments walkways are not maintained. Small paths within a
park are not plowed.
Burnsville Trails that are used for cross country skiing trails and those sidewalks on
streets with businesses. Street department is responsible for sidewalks.
Parks only maintain trails.
Cottage Grove Yes, all trails are plowed
Eden Prairie Only trails that are adjacent to busy roads and that have high amounts of
foot traffic.
Edina Yes, all the trails are plowed
Farmington Yes, all the trails are plowed, with considerations of the budget
restrictions.
Inver Grove Heights
Lakeville 95% of the trails are plowed within the city. Park trails that do not
complete a basic loop or in parks that are not used in the winter are not
plowed.
Mendota Heights Almost all are plowed, only small short stub sidewalks are not plowed.
Plymouth Snall neighborhood parks are not plowed.
Richfield Trails that are used for cross country skiing are not plowed and the trails in
Veterans park.
Rosemount Only trails that are used heavily by foot traffic.
Roseville Yes, all the trails are plowed
Woodbury 90-95% of the trails are plowed Slopes that are too steep are not plowed
in the winter time.
3. What department is responsible of plowing?
Apple Valley Parks and Recreation
Bloomington Parks Department
Burnsville
Parks Department -Walking trails
Streets Department - Sidewalks
Cottage Grove Out of the Snow removal budget, All departments come together.
Eden Prairie p~ Department
Edina Parks Department - park trails
Street Department - Sidewalks along streets
Farmington Parks Department
Inver Grove Heights
Lakeville Parks Department - 8 ft trail system
Streets Department - narrow cement sidewalks
Mendota Heights Parks Department
Plymouth Pam Department
Richfield Parks Department
Rosemount Streets and ground department
Roseville Parks Department
Woodbury Parks Department
lo~
4. What type of Equipment do you use? # of miles? width of trails?
How long does it take to clear the trail system?
Apple Valley 4-5ft sidewalks Holder and MT trackless with a snow blower or a V-plow
8ft wide trail - 1 ton with a 8ft or 9ft blade, Articulated tractor with a Boss
V-plow or a snow blower
51 miles of both trails and sidewalks
Bloomington 4 Holders and 1 Bombadier, both with blower and V-plow
Trails 4ft and 8ft.
300 miles of trails and sidewalks.
Usually takes 4-5 days to plow all the trails and sidewalk
Burnsville Sidewalks - (3) Holders - 4 wheel drive V-plow, blower, or broom
Trails - (2) Howard - broom or blower or 1 ton tricks with plows (8)
Width - 4 ft sidewalks 6-8 ft - trails
6 miles of trail , 70 miles of sidewalks- (done by street dept)
Usually takes 5-6 hours to clear trails
Cottage Grove 5 ft sidewalks - Holder with broom, blower, or side plow
8 ft trail -Pick up truck with angled 8ft western plow
20 miles of trails and sidewalks
Eden Prairie 4-5 ft sidewalks - Holder tractor with V-plow or snow blower
8ft wide trail - 3/4 4x4 -regular plow, Ford tractor with blower, Bobcat
with blower.
45 miles of trails and sidewalks - Takes approximately a day to plow
Edina Sidewalks - MT trackless with V-plow, brush, or blower (3)
8 ft trail - 4x4 trucks (Ford ranger) - with 6&7 ft blades (2)
7 miles of trail and 20 miles of sidewalk
Completed within 24 hours of snow fall
Farmington 4 ft sidewalk - John Deere with blower or brush (City property, not
residential)
8 ft wide trail - 1 ton dump truck with V-plow
Inver Grove Heights
Lakeville New Holland skid loader with V- plow, broom, or snow blower (2)
2-3 pick up trucks with snow blowers
(plow first with a V-plow and then follow with a broom)
28 miles of trails and sidewalk - 1 days -with 3 people
Mendota Heights Heavy snow fall - 7 ft blower on a 580D lawnmower
Light snow fall - 8 ft plow on a 4x4 truck
16 miles of trail - don't clear sidewalks
I~~
Plymouth 4-5ft Sidewalks - 2 MT trackless with V-plow, blower or brush
8- l Oft Trails - 3/4 - 1 ton or pick up with 7 ft blade
40 miles of sidewalk and trails
4 People takes 8 hours to complete plowing of sidewalk and trails
Richfield Sidewalks - MT trackless with V-plow and broom
10-12ft Trails - (5) 3/4 ton pick up with 3 V-plow, and 2 straight plow
12 miles of trail and 40 miles of sidewalk
Y: day with all 5 vehicles
Rosemount 5 ft sidewalks - Blower hooked up to a Summer lawn mower
8 ft trails - Pick up with a plow and V-plow
11 miles of sidewalk and trails
5-6 hours to complete plowing
Roseville 4-5 ft sidewalks - Holder with a V -plow, blower (purchasing MT trackless)
8 ft trails - Pick up truck - with regular plow
53 miles of sidewalk and trails
2 Y2 days with V -plow and 4 days with blower
Woodbury 5-6 ft trails MT trackless with a 5ft snow blower
8-10 ft trails with Pick up trucks or Blazer with V-plow
31 miles of trail
With 2 units - 20 man hours
~DC
5. What is your standard for plowing?
Apple Valley When the street department reacts - 2". Sometimes end up plowing 2- 3
times a storm, due to winging and snow drifts.
Bloomington Don't have any specific, look at the conditions, they feel if they clean up
right away it is easier to keep them clear of ice and snow.
Burnsville Use a sweeper is a light dusting - same as ice rinks. Otherwise 2" snow
fall is the standard for plowing.
Cottage Grove A 2" snowfall is the standard for plowing.
Eden Prairie A I" snowfall is the standard for plowing.
Edina Anything over a dusting is plowed.
Farmington A 2" snowfall is the standard for plowing.
Inver Grove Heights
Lakeville A I" snow fall is the standard for plowing.
Mendota Heights A 2" snow fall is the standard for plowing.
Plymouth Don't have a standard for plowing. They plow as needed. Many times
plow more than once.
Richfield Any amount, try to keep the trail ways clear of everything.
Rosemount A 2-" snow fall is the standard for plowing.
Roseville A 2" snow fall is the standard for plowing.
Woodbu A 2" snow fall is the standard for lowin same as street call out.
b`1
6. Is overtime paid for any trail or sidewalk plowing?
Apple Valley Yes, in a case by case basis.
Bloomington Yes, in the cases of school walkways and handicap trails. Try to avoid
overtime.
Burnsville Yes, when it is necessary.
Cottage Grove Yes, when it is necessary.
Eden Prairie Yes, when it is necessary.
Edina Yes, when it is necessary.
Farmington No, overtime is avoided
Inver Grove Heights
Lakeville Yes, when it is necessary.
Mendota Heights Yes, try to complete all trail plowing in a day.
Plymouth Yes, when it is necessary.
Richfield Yes, when it is necessary.
Rosemount No, if a storm occurs during the weekend, trails are not cleared until
Monday.
Roseville Normally, don't like to work overtime.
Woodbury Try not to, but if it is necess then will work overtime.
7. When is plowing performed - (Monday - Friday)? Daylight hours? Call out? By whom?
Apple Valley Depends on the storm, usually try to work Monday through Friday. Work
from 6am to 4 pm.
Bloomington Depends on the storm, usually try to work Monday through Friday. Start
plowing trails and sidewalks at 6am, try not to work in the dark, unsafe
conditions for the pedestrians.
Burnsville Usually work Monday through Friday, splitting shifts, limits overtime.
Monday through Friday 5:30am - 2:00pm and Saturday 4am - 12:30pm.
Cottage Grove Plowing is performed same time as street department. Split shifts to avoid
using overtime. Sometime working as early as 2:00am.
Eden Prairie Monday through Friday, start early to clear school and Senior center trails.
Called out by the parks department.
Edina Plowing is conducted anytime to keep the trails clean and safe for the
pedestrians. Plowing is conducted on the weekends, and nights.
Farmington Trails are cleaned during regular working hours, the night crews that flood
the rinks are also used to clean the trails.
Inver Grove Heights
Lakeville Monday through Friday, plowed mostly in the daylight hours. School
trails are before 8:00am.
Mendota Heights Trail plowing is done simultaneously with the street snow plowing. Trail
plowing is not done on a call out basis.
Plymouth Plowing is done whenever necessary, trails are cleared in day or night
hours. Trails are cleared after the street department has started
Richfield Monday through Friday, unless the snowfall occurs on the weekend
Daylight hours, try and work along with the street department. Sidewalks
are cleaned off last.
Rosemount Monday through Friday Only. Daylight hours after streets are completed
There is no call out just for trails.
Roseville Monday through Friday, unless it snows on the weekend. Snow plowing is
done at the same time as the street department, sometimes early mornings
are necessary.
Woodbury Monday through Friday, during the daylight hours, only called out on a
situation basis b the Parks department.
8. Is there an ordinance requiring residents or businesses to clear paths or walks
adjacent to their property? If so, How long do they have? Flow is it enforced?
Apple Valley Yes, they have an ordinance. The businesses and homeowners have 48
hours to clear the sidewalk. The police enforce the ordinance.
Bloomington They plow everything except private town homes and the Mall of Americas
sidewalks.
Burnsville Yes, there is an ordinance. The ordinance, however, is not enforced The
city is looking over the ordinance.
Cottage Grove The businesses and homeowners didn't want the ordinance. They plow
everything.
Eden Prairie No, the ordinance didn't pass.
Edina Yes, residents have 72 hours to clear the paths adjacent to their property.
The parks department informs the police, who then enforce the ordinance.
Farmington Yes, residents have 48 hours to clear the paths adjacent to their property.
The police enforce the ordinance.
Inver Grove Heights
Lakeville Call Don Volk- Public Works 9854541
Mendota Heights No
Plymouth No, Council tried to pass the ordinance for 1996.
Richfield No, they plow all the trails and sidewalks.
Rosemount Yes, see attached fax for actual ordinance. The only enforcement is a letter
sent out to resident when complaints are called in.
Roseville No
Woodbu T tannin 731-5790
II4'
i -i - -n-
P•1
CITY OF ROSEMOUNT 21175 -c143th Street West
Everything's Coming Up Rosemountil RoPse Sox SIN
A110 ~ovnc, MN
SS06&0510
Our Fax No: 423-5203 Phone. 612.423.4411
Fax: 612.423.5203
FACSEWLE COVER LETTER
DATE:
S qCv
Please deliver the following page(s) to:
NAME: z 4-- ra e,
FAX NUAMEFU L k - U ion
FROibi: l G jL
RE:_ C.,IQNN &s 1 aL j S t D A~ c.S
TOTAL number of pages including this cover sheet: 3
MASSAGE:
If you do not rweive the entire fax, please call
as soon as possible.
EARD COPY TO FOLLOW _ YF-S _ NO
CONFLDDMAI Ty NOTICE: MW taatettsls enclosed with this faesienile etutsnlissioa ace private and ~ and. ProWRy
at the ierul r. Ths information contained a the psatetill is*
and is intended only for the use of the indlvidual(a) oe ndty(l.)
Owed above. If you are not the intended recipient, be advised that any unauthorized diselosttts, copying. dlatnUdOn. Or do taking of any
action in feliance On the contents of this taleeopi•d inferntatiOn is strictly prohibited. If you have received this facsimas ttsnaalisa. in
error. Pl4s• immediately ratify us by t lepltOn+ to arrange for tsturn of the foewarded dot
nfnents t0 W. wa ftvin
c eeiwi.r in
lI reenw
ta11 reftow W 6
4-4-1
4-4-2-1
CHAPTER 4
SNOW REMOVAL ON SIDEWALKS
SECTION:
4-4-1: Snow Removal
4-4-1-1: Violation
4-4-2: Notice
4-4-2-1: Service of Notice
4-4-3: Nuisance
4-4-3-1: Assessment of Costs
4-4-4: Penalty
4-4-1: SNOW REMOVAL: Removal of snow and ice from trails and
sidewalks in the City shall be the responsibility of the abutting
property owners, or occupants. Those specifically listed as corridors and
identified by published notice shall be maintained by City. Snow and ice
shall be removed within twenty four (24) hours after the snow or ice has
accumulated. (Ord. XI1.13, 11-17-92)
4-4-1-1: VIOLATION: It shall be unlawful for any person to deposit
snow from private property upon any public street or public
right of way within the City.
4-4-2: NOTICE: If the snow and ice are not removed as required Jn
Section 4-4-1, the City may serve upon the owner or occupant
a notice ordering removal of the snow and ice within twenty four (24) hours.
4-4-2-1: SERVICE OF NOTICE: Service of notice may be
accomplished by personal service upon the owner or
occupant, or by leaving such notice with a person of suitable age and
discretion on the premises.
393
City of Rosemoum
JAr 1 L~~ ?5 1 1 : 13 C I T', ,F P,_,?Emout r
P 3
4-4-3
4-4-A .
4-4-3: NUISANCE: Snow and ice which is allowed to remain on a
concrete sidewalk within the C' for a longer than twenty four (24) hours after the same falls, gathers or accumulates period of ti
Ris
hereby declared to be a nuisance, and the City may remove the snow and
ice and charge the cost of the removal against the abutting property.
4-4-3-1: ASSESS."~ZEN? f
OF COSTS: Following such snow and ice
removal, the cost of removal shall be calculated. In
accordance with Minnesota Statutes 9429.101, the City Council shall
assess the cost against the abutting property owner.
4-4-4: PENALTY: Any person who violates Section 4-4-1-1 shall be
guilty of a misdemeanor. (Ord. 4, 12-4-84)
393
City of Roeemoruit
9. Do you coordinate with the county to prevent them from "winging" snow back onto the trail?
Apple Valley Yes, they try and coordinate with the county, most of the time they end up
cleaning up trail more than once a storm.
Bloomington It is really hard to coordinate even with there own street department, they
just plow the trails again.
Burnsville No
Cottage Grove The parks department and Washington County have a good relationship.
The county calls them and tells them when they are going to be "winging"
back the streets. The parks department then goes out again and plows the
trails.
Eden Prairie No, they just redo the trails when they notice the county has "winged" back
the snow from the boulevards.
Edina Yes, they plow once from the snow fall and then once again after the
"winging" has been completed.
Farmington Not a problem that they have at the present time.
Inver Grove Heights
Lakeville Really hard to coordinate with Dakota County. They just plow the trails
over again after the "winging" of the boulevards has been completed
Mendota Heights They watch for when the county comes and "wings" the boulevards and
then they replow the trail.
Plymouth Try to coordinate with the county, but the county is on a different schedule
from them so it is difficult.
Richfield No
Rosemount No
Roseville Yes, sometimes it is possible to coordinate with the county. Many times
they haul the snow out, from the winging, with dump trucks
Woodbury They have a good relationship with the county. The city often times
borrows equipment from the county. Sometimes the county comes and
cleans the trails after th have "winged" the boulevards.
II~
10. Do you sand/salt paths or trails?
Apple Valley No
Bloomington No
Burnsville No, not at this point.
Cottage Grove Only when necessary, they do own slip in sanders for the 3/4 ton trucks.
Eden Prairie No
Edina Yes, sand the inclines and the declines throughout the trail system.
Farmington Only when necessary, or when complaints are called in.
Inver Grove heights
Lakeville No
Mendota Heights No
Plymouth No
Richfield No
Rosemount Only in ice storm situations
Roseville Some park trails, use same guidelines as the street department for sanding
and salting.
Woodbury No, not currently. They do have a slip sander in the budget for the next
ar.
I. Do you repair sod damage in the spring?
Apple Valley Yes
Bloomington Yes, but just use black dirt and grass seed.
Burnsville Yes, they reseed the area and spray them later in the year.
Cottage Grove Yes, but they save on the sod replacement by placing orange tipped fence
posts along the edges of the trail. The residents are happy with this
method
Eden Prairie Yes, if large piece they sod, and use black dirt and seed if a small area.
Edina Yes, they are replace with sod in the spring.
Farmington Replace on complaint only.
Inver Grove Heights
Lakeville Yes
Mendota Heights Yes
Plymouth Yes, replacement varies with the location. Some replaced with sod and
others black dirt and seed
Richfield The trails are raised so they rarely have problems with hooking on the turf.
Rosemount Yes, black dirt and seed, occasionally sod if resident complains.
Roseville Only in a few cases.
Woodbu Yes, fairly minimal, use black dirt and ass seed.
IID
12. How do you clear walks or trails on bridges?
11 Apple Valley No, they do not clear the trails that go over the bridges.
Bloomington They utilize 4x4 trucks with plow or a 50in V- plow.
Burnsville They use a Holder or a bobcat to remove the snow from the bridges.
Cottage Grove Push snow off of the bridge and then haul the snow away with trucks.
Eden Prairie They use a 3/4 ton truck with a regular snow the ends of the bridge. They do not haul the snow aand . push the snow to
Edina All but two bridges are plowed. A regular 6ft truck plow is used
Farmington The snow blower is used for bridges. The bridges are left until all other
trails are finished
laver Grove Heights
Lakeville No.
Mendota Heights Only one bridge is done and a truck with a regular plow is used.
Plymouth The street department or the county do the plowing over the bridges.
Richfield No, don't have any trails that go over bridges.
Rosemount No don't have any bridges.
Roseville The county assists in the removal of snow, they use a snow blower and
blow the snow directly into the back of a truck.
Woodbury Snow removal over bridges is removed as necessary. They let the snow
accumulate and then they use a skidsteer and then move all the snow to the
side of the bride.
II~
13. How long has your municipality been plowing trails.
Apple Valley
Bloomington
Burnsville Plowing for over 20 years.
Cottage Grove Plowing for 13 years
Eden Prairie Plowing for 12 years
Edina As long as they can remember.
Farmington Plowing for 5-6 years.
Inver Grove Heights
Lakeville
Mendota Heights
Plymouth Plowing for 4 years.
Richfield Plowing for 33 years.
Rosemount Plowing for 20 years.
Roseville Plowing for 8 years.
Woodbury Plowin for 10 ears.
f~~
TRAIL PLOWING
COMMUNITY SURVEY SUMMARY ANALYSIS
(BASED UPON 14 RESPONSES)
(#0 Plowing Priorities
First Priority
58% School Walking Routes
21 % Miscellaneous Other Depending Upon Use Patterns
21 % No Order
(#2) Coverage
50% 90% or more of Trails Excluding Small Walks & Some Park Trails
28% All Public Walks and Trails
21 % Determined By Use
(0) Responsibility
64% Parks and Recreation
36% Combination
80% Streets and Parks
20% Streets
(#4) Analysis
Scope
* Miles Plowed @ Community
- Range; 11 (Rosemount) 300 Bloomington (76 Burnsville)
- Median; w/ Bloomington = 40
w/o Bloomington = 31
- Average; w/ Bloomington = 58
w/o Bloomington = 37.5
Performance
* Miles Plowed @ Community @ Day
- Average; w/ Bloomington = 70
W/o Bloomington = 38
* Miles Plowed @ Plowing Unit @ Day
- Average; 8.7 Miles
* Units Assigned to Plowing
- Range; 2 (Numerous) 11 (Burnsville)
- Average; 4 Units
TOTALS ALL COMMUNITIES
* Miles Plowed @ Community @ Day
- Average; w/ Bloomington = 70
w/o Bloomington = 38
* Miles Plowed @ Plowing Unit @ Day
- Average; 8.7
* Man Hours @ Mile @ Event
- Average; 1.3
Formulation
Desired Miles = Necessary Man Hours (NMH) @ Event
1.3
NMH = # of Employees Required
Desired Response Hours
Example
40 Miles Cleared in 6 Hours
40=30.8NMH
L3
JU = 5 Employees Required
6
(#5) Plowing Standard
58% 2" Accumulation
28% Any Accumulation
14% 1" Accumulation
(#6) Overtime Paid For Plowing
79% Overtime Paid to Operators
21 % Overtime is Avoided
(#7) Scheduling of Plowing
58% Monday - Firday only, Split Shifts
28% Any Time Including Weekends
21 % Monday - Firday, Weekend Callouts if Necessary
Miscellaneous
36% Plow Only During Day Light Hours
Coordination With Streets
28% Plan Simultaneously with Streets
14% Upon Oompletion of Streets
58% Non-specific Though Plowing During "Regular" Hours Appears to be
Most Common
(#8) Ordinance Pertaining to Clearing
43% No Ordinance
36% Ordinance in Place - Primarily Residential Walks, 24-72 Hours to Respond
21 % Miscellaneous - Unenforced
(#9) Coordination With County (Winging Back)
50% No, Replow as Necessary
43% Yes, as Possible - County May Assist with Clean-up
7% Not Applicable
(#10) Salting or Sanding
64% No
36% Spot Sanding
(#11) Spring Sod Repair
100% Yes, Primarily Soil and Seed
(#12) Clearing of Bridges W/Trails
58% City Clears, Variety of Means
14% County Clears
14% No Clearing
14% NoBridges on Trail System
(#13) Program in Place
* Average; 14 Years
10% 0 - 5 Years
40% 0 - 10
30% 5 - 10 Years
20% 10-15 Years
60%10+
40% 15+ Years
1995-96 Pathway Plowing
SNOWFALLAMOUNT/CLIMATIC' - NGASI q K r
EVENT DATEy - CONDITIONS:' c a . Q~-
7 %F. / s C;' a.x' ~OTS,ERSONNEC?TOT/dRS ~n`
L-l - 95 , S ► S AVCL MAIAJ 'LOT .^NL
7
9 I /6 S 40 F/L57 5AlOg4J
- t 9- ?S 8 S ~ 1 5.5 Z~. ~
-q 57
FI/ - s o- ~S / z s z z.5
9- f6 571 LL SNOWING- LOW/N(a 1 1 t_onDEIZ TO 4AyE5
i Z 9- 9 S /3Low/A/G RI,cTM/fs ~L L / 2
i2-~l' 9S 13ELow D'All i0 7-
00%i p
/2- IZ- 4' "T-oF AD i- MOB-Hf6H o .s 5 5 -ZI 2 / -9 Z.7" ADD~.SNOuJ-HlCerl ° Z O
I 1 ►1 4
IL - / -TS ►+ICsI-I 3♦° Fite.ELII.16 RAIIJ /9 ( 38
2-I -9S NIGH 150
E*AJuP I
/Z 4S C<<AnJU P t TIZ>ACE R 6 3 2
i -II- y AODL, T RAC 6 ZI
Z- -9 AOL TRA 's 5 R6516 E T CA&L 47AJWA
Z I Z. CLEAAJuP &pLAVIE AAX-EX CoN7. Acr
L -9t+ TOTAL F FOR / 4. S
3o, 6'
C0fApLET- Tm 8 Z O
- W OW some 7-0 6 /6 ro IL 9b COMpI ele S STE 'S OIVE - C's IucOtitD'LETE
- 6 "sA~oW ~ 94" Mot uRE
- - V
L 5 ART W C' 6 `s oIJ L
I- -
-9t. I " SluouJ SrRoNG twll~vds 7 42- ~ ~
Z - fly 7" SNOI.-J VERY STROJIlfi WI,I,OS l 2 9D OF SY STt: r! oP E CF-K. FEI~J C'
/-30- 91r Till- V RWINO ~ 6 tO + 35. NCH (•~ONE AFL THIS ~eK
/ - 3l - 9( TEMP. - 23°,{ e F AsSiSTE D - DAN REPLACED R%C- 4,
/ - / - V TEST CT IM RROWED TR.EETS Low a R. - jr FF
Z- z - 6 p. - 3Z° 5 .5 Z7.5 ►JO VAN A2%/ FF PLOW
9V Temp - 6'T S 20.
Z-6- b Tcrav, -ZoT
Z - - 9V wF pAaKs.Jtv Lest FRCP. o D R- owN A TER4 KRS.
Z' 8- 9b W F ARKiNG OT PRE?. 9 7-57 ALL wALKwA pATHWN S pGN
-Aaamimmsdm bw.alsi OT A A L 1 Z'S 2 I
0.5 13 ( 0/.S 8Z0 t.t TOTALS o FAR TNl S StI~SON
~1
J
_ Z Z
W
V. fl ~ ` W
O ~
Or ~ ~ J
' 41 4 ~
12
N v
` O
x b it) cQ
Ln %4 V
O
> LL
t
.e 'ter.
c
3 ~ N
O
r
a - A. SD
W
a ¢ C.
• h
1 1 N 1 1
i00® STIVA 3-IddV -UD 90tZ CS8 ZI9 YVd ZZ !rU 96 ST t0
cuan~ r_:, ^rc
ADVISORY PARKS COMMISSION
EAGAN, MINNESOTA
MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING OF FEBRUARY 12, 1998
A regular meeting of the Advisory Parks Commission was called to order at 7:00 p.m. on February 12,
1998 with the following Commission Members present: Terry Davis, Jerry Farlee, N. Mark Filipi, Bonnie Karson,
Steven Knutson, George Kubik, Lee Markell, John Rudolph, and Michael Vincent. Commission Members Barbara
Johnson and Daryle Petersen were not present. Staff present included Ken Vraa, Director of Parks and Recreation;
Dorothy Peterson, Superintendent of Recreation; Paul Olson, Parks Superintendent; CJ Lilly, Landscape
Architect/Parks Planner; Gregg Hove, Forestry Supervisor; Rich Brasch, Water Resources Coordinator; Julie
Farnham, Planner and Cherryl Mesko, Secretary.
INTRODUCTION OF NEW MEMBERS
Director Vraa introduced Bonnie Karson, N. Mark Filipi, Barbara Johnson, Daryle Petersen and John
Rudolph who were recently appointed by the City Council to the Commission. Members Filipi, Johnson, Petersen
and Rudolph continue their service on the Commission by being appointed to three year terms and Member Karson
was appointed to her first, one year alternate term.
COMMISSION ORGANIZATION
After describing the responsibilities for each office and explaining the voting procedure that included
initialing ballots, Director Vraa opened nominations for the Chairperson. John Rudolph nominated and Teary Davis
seconded the nomination of Lee Markell. George Kubik nominated and Lee Markell seconded the nomination of
John Rudolph. The nominations were closed, written ballots were submitted and counted naming Lee Markell as
Chairperson.
Director Vraa opened nominations for Vice-Chair. George Kubik nominated and Terry Davis seconded the
nomination of John Rudolph. Jerry Farlee nominated and Lee Markel] seconded the nomination of George Kubik.
Nominations were closed, written ballots were submitted and counted naming John Rudolph as Vice-Chair.
Director Vraa opened nominations for Secretary. Tent' Davis nominated and George Kubik seconded the
nomination of Michael Vincent. Michael Vincent nominated and Lee Markell seconded the nomination of Barbara
Johnson. Nominations were closed, written ballots were submitted and counted naming Barbara Johnson as
Secretary.
APPROVAL OF AGENDA
George Kubik moved, John Rudolph seconded with all members voting in favor to accept the
agenda as presented.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING OF JANUARY 12,1998
John Rudolph moved, Michael Vincent seconded with all members voting in favor to accept the minutes of
the regular meeting of January 12, 1998 as presented.
VISITORS TO BE HEARD
There were no visitors that wished to be heard under this agenda item.
Advisory Parks Commission
Minutes of February 12, 1998 Meeting
Page 2
DEPARTMENT HAPPENINGS
Items highlighted by Director Vraa included the new spring/summer Discover Us! brochure, EAA
registration beginning on February 21, receipt of a Mighty Kids Grant for $12,000 from the Minnesota Amateur
Sports Commission, completion of the McCarthy House remodeling, 43 applications received for the Forestry/Park
Maintenance position, Arbor Day scheduled for April 25 at Trapp Farm Park, annual tree sale scheduled for May 2
at the Eagan Maintenance Facility, and the bid preparation for the construction of two service/toilet buildings at the
Lexington/Diffley fields this summer.
CONSENT AGENDA
COMMONWEAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION
Michael Vincent moved, George Kubik seconded with all members voting in favor to make the following
recommendations to the City Council regarding Commonweal Development:
1. This development would be subject to a cash parks dedication and a cash trails dedication.
2. There are no tree preservation issues with this development.
3. Runoff from the parcel shall be directed to Pond DP-3.3, which contains sufficient wet pond volume to
meet water quality treatment requirements for this development.
DEVELOPMENT PROPOSALS
OAKVIEW CENTER - HOLIDAY STATION STORES
Following a brief introduction by Director Vraa, Coordinator Brasch noted that Holiday Station Stores is
requesting approval of a Preliminary Subdivision of 19 acres and 8 lots at the southeast corner of Lone Oak Road
and Highway 55. The plan also includes office/clinic use, a daycare, motel fast food restaurant and two sit down
restaurants.
Brasch continued that the site contains a low area along Highway 55 that has been designated for use as a
stormwater management basin when the land develops. After routing to this basin, stormwater will travel through
two other designated treatment basins downstream before reaching Bur Oak Pond in Bur Oak Park. On-site ponding
will be necessary to prevent significant degradation to water quality in Bur Oak Pond through a two-cell pond. Two
wetlands have been identified on the site; a Type 2 wetland near the Highway 55 right-of-way, .37 acres in area and
a small Type 6 wetland near the center of the site. The developer proposed to fill about 700 sq. ft. of the Type 2
wetland and all of the Type 6 wetland. Proposed replacement shows construction of a small replacement wetland
adjacent to the stormwater ponding features in the southeastern portion of the site. The remainder of the mitigation
would be met through construction of the first cell of the stormwater treatment basin in an upland area.
Forestry Supervisor Hove noted that the significant vegetation on this site is basically limited to two areas,
in the area of the proposed north entrance road and along the east portion of the north property line. The
development will result in the removal of 38 significant trees (57.6% of the total) and the removal of 15,610 square
feet (100%) of significant woodlands. Hove then reviewed potential mitigation for the site.
Member Markell asked if the road could be re-aligned to preserve some of the oaks west of the entrance.
He also asked if there could be any more preservation on the east side of the site since it looked so cramped.
Sarah Moran, representing the developer, stated that Dakota County had placed several restrictions relative
to the access to the site which is why there is significant tree removal at the entrance. They continue to review the
site and have identified approximately 9 more trees to be preserved. The plans are to phase the development from
the west to the east.
Advisory Parks Commission
Minutes of February 12, 1998 Meeting
Page 3
Member Rudolph asked what the time line was for completion. Peter Block, PD Development stated the
phasing has to do with the marketing of the site. Holiday, the fast food restaurant and hotel have been designated to
date. It is anticipated that the development could be complete in 18 months if the market is favorable. Member
Kubik also suggested additional buffering from the parking areas to Lone Oak Road.
Following a brief discussion, Michael Vincent moved, George Kubik seconded with all members voting in
favor to make the following recommendations to the City Council relative to Oakview Center:
1. This development shall be subject to a cash parks dedication and a cash trails dedication.
2. A revised landscape and tree-mitigation plan shall be required that shows a combination of the
installation of 56 Category B trees ( or some equivalent of Category A or Category C trees) to serve as
mitigation for significant tree removal in excess of allowable limits, (in addition to landscape
requirements) and the establishment of a cash mitigation to serve as mitigation in excess of allowable
limits.
3. Tree Protective measures (i.e. 4 foot polyethylene safety netting) shall be required to be installed at the
Drip Line or at the Critical Root Zone, whichever is greater, of significant trees/woodlands to be
preserved.
4. The applicant shall be required to contact the City Forestry Division at least five working days prior to
the issuance of the grading permit to ensure compliance with the approved Tree Preservation Plan.
5. The developer shall meet water quality mitigation requirements through on-site ponding and the
detention ponds shall meet the City standards for detention basin design.
6. The revised wetland mitigation plan received December 31, 1997 shall be approved.
7. Staff shall review the option of additional buffering from the parking areas to Lone Oak Road as
appropriate.
WISPARK ADDITION - WISPARK CORPORATION
Coordinator Brasch reviewed the background of this preliminary subdivision of 31.5 acres located on the
south side of Blue Gentian Road and the west side of TH149. The subdivision is planned to consist of two lots and
one outlot for potential construction of office buildings on the lots.
In reviewing the water quality/wetland issues, Brasch noted that the site is located along the eastern shore
of a 20 acre state protected water classified as a Class V nutrient trap. There is no planned public access to the pond
nor are there any downstream recreation classified water bodies. On-site ponding is recommended as the primary
means of meeting water quality protection requirements with a supplemental cash dedication for the shortfall in
treatment associated with the reduction in pond size to minimize tree impacts. Relative to wetlands, previous
grading of the site created a flat bench approximately 30 feet above the wetland with 5:1 slopes extending from the
edge of the bench to the edge of the pond. All grading for the development will take place on the bench above the
wetland with the exception of the detention basin in the southwest corner of the site. Staff is recommending that all
disturbed areas within 50 feet of the edge of the pond be re-vegetated with native perennial grasses and forbs after
grading.
Forestry Supervisor Hove noted that the applicant had submitted a "last minute" revised proposal with the
major changes relating to the design and placement of building one. With these revisions, tree preservation efforts
have been greatly improved on the site. There are 77 significant trees existing on site; 14 of them are oaks
measuring 20" or larger in diameter. The developer is proposing to remove only one of the large oaks while
preserving the rest. The site holds the largest oak (two trees with a main trunk) a total of 51" in diameter, found
within the City. This particular oak will be preserved inside an area of about 18,000 square feet. The new plan
proposes the removal of 21 significant trees (27.3%) and is well within the total allowable rate (47.5%).
Advisory Parks Commission
Minutes of February 12, 1998 Meeting
Page 4
Hove concluded by congratulating the developer for working diligently to bring the total tree removal down
to a reasonable number and for their efforts in preserving some of the largest oaks in the city. This thoughtful
planning results in no tree mitigation on site. Member Rudolph thanked the developer for their creative efforts
toward tree preservation.
Following a brief discussion, George Kubik moved, John Rudolph seconded with all members voting in
favor to make the following recommendations to the City Council relative to Wispark Addition:
1. This development shall be responsible for a cash parks dedication and a cash trails dedication.
2. On-site ponding shall be the primary means of meeting water quality treatment requirements and a
supplemental cash dedication shall be required to make up for any shortfalls in meeting the full
treatment requirement.
3. Filling of the wetland associated with Pond FP-1 is prohibited.
4. Any graded areas within 50 feet of the edge of Pond FP-1 shall be planted with native perennial grass
and forbs to act as a wetland buffer.
5. The Tree Preservation Plan shall be approved with the following conditions:
4 Tree Protective measures (i.e. 4-foot polyethylene safety netting) shall be installed at the Drip Line
or at the Critical Root Zone, whichever is greater, of the significant trees/woodlands to be
preserved.
4 The applicant shall contact the City Forestry Division at least five working days prior to the
issuance of the grading permit to ensure compliance with the approved Tree Preservation Plan.
OLD BUSINESS
There were no issues under this agenda item for the Commission to review.
NEW BUSINESS
PARK NAMING - WALDEN HEIGHTS PARK PARCEL
Director Vraa introduced this item explaining that in discussing the park adjacent to the Walden Heights
development it has always been referred to as Walden Heights Park. Because access to the park is proposed from
Pine Tree Lane, the Commission may wish to consider another name for the park.
Member Rudolph commented that there currently are other parks that have names not associated with the
street that accesses them and suggested that the name remain as Walden Heights Park.
After a brief discussion, John Rudolph moved, George Kubik seconded with all members voting in favor to
recommend to the City Council that the park adjacent to the Walden Heights development be officially named
Walden Heights Park.
LIGHTING AT LITTLE GOAT HILL FIELD - EAA REQUEST
Director Vraa explained that the City had been approached by Eagan Travel Baseball for consideration of
funding from the "Opportunity Fund" to provide facility improvements to Little Goat baseball field. Their request is
put lights on the little Goat Hill field where the 10-15 year olds typically play. They feel that the lights would allow
2 games per night on a field and will help with field availability. Their proposal suggests their willingness to share
the cost. Vraa concluded that staff is looking for direction on how the Commission wishes to proceed.
Advisory Parks Commission
Minutes of February 12, 1998 Meeting
Page 5
Member Markell noted that the Commission has discussed how best to take advantage of opportunities like
this that present themselves. Member Vincent asked if the Commission should set up criteria on how those funds
should be allocated before considering a request for funding. Member Markell asked what time frame EAA baseball
was looking for. Dan Dorgan, representing EAA baseball, stated that they would like to proceed as soon as possible
but would like to have the lights up for the 1999 season. Member Kubik noted that this should be reviewed at a sub-
committee level so that criteria can be established for this and future funding requests.
After further discussion, Terry Davis moved, George Kubik seconded with all members voting in favor to
send this issue to the Acquisition/Development sub-committee for review and establishment of criteria for funding
from the Opportunity Funds portion of the CIP.
Member Rudolph suggested that the Recreation sub-committee be involved in the review of this issue as
well. It was noted that once the meeting is scheduled, all members will be welcome to attend.
PARKS DEVELOPMENT UPDATE
There were no projects pending to update the Commission on.
WATER RESOURCES UPDATE
Water Resources Coordinator Brasch noted that the aerators are out at Thomas Lake, Blackhawk Lake and
Fish Lake and warned the public to stay off the ice because of its volatile state. He also talked about the upcoming
fertilizer sale run by the EHS Football Booster Club and how staff will coordinate information to the public during
that process.
OTHER BUSINESS AND REPORTS
SUBCOMMITTEE REPORTS
It was noted that the Acquisition/Development sub-committee met on January 28 to look at the use of tree
mitigation funds. An overview will be provided to the Commission once the review is completed.
ROUND TABLE
A meeting was scheduled for Monday, February 23 at 5:30 p.m. for the Acquisition/Development sub-
committee to discuss the Opportunity Funds of the CIP and continue review of the tree preservation funds.
Director Vraa noted that Water Technology Inc. will be presenting a public information meeting on
Wednesday, March 4 followed by a staff presented information meeting on March 10 regarding the family aquatic
facility.
Member Davis expressed some concern for wording that had been changed during the joint City Council,
Advisory Planning Commission and Advisory Parks Commission workshop relative to the Comprehensive Guide
Plan review of Parks and Recreation. There appeared to be an interpretation that open space referred to public land
only when, in fact, it should include all areas, Davis added.
Michael Vincent moved, Lee Markell seconded with all members voting in favor to send a letter to the City
Council relative to this issue. This will be brought back to the Advisory Commission at their March meeting as
well.
Advisory Parks Commission
Minutes of February 12, 1998 Meeting
Page 6
ADJOURNMENT
With no further business to conduct, Michael Vincent moved, George Kubik seconded with all
members voting in favor to adjourn the meeting. The meeting was adjourned at 8:30 p.m.
Secretary Date