08/04/1983 - Advisory Parks & Recreation CommissionMEMO TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS
TOM HEDGES, CITY ADMINISTRATOR
FROM: KEN VRAA, DIRECTOR OF PARKS AND RECREATION
DATE: AUGUST 18, 1983
RE: JOINT MEETING CITY COUNCIL ADVISORY PARKS RECREATION COMMISSION
Attached to this cover memo is section "J" of the Parks System Plan
entitled "Funding and Implementation." This section will comprise the
major discussion item at the joint Council /Commission which is now scheduled
for August 30th.
The Advisory Commission, at the July Commission meeting, spent a con-
siderable amount of time in reviewing cost estimates for individual park
development sites. And, subsequently revised the proposed park site develop-
ment summary. The individual park site costs have been condensed to a one
page summary sheet and is part of the "Funding and Implementation" section.
The entire section was then reviewed by the Commission at the August 4th
meeting, where it was recommended for review by the City Council at this
now scheduled joint meeting.
A complete agenda will be developed with the City Administrator,
Chairman Martin, Mr. Erkkila and I to insure that the time spent by the
Council and Commission are maximized as work on the study begins to come
to an ending. There are numerous items, in addition to this section review,
which will require discussion and direction to be given to the consultant
and staff. The review of these items will insure that the study meets
expectations for completion and completeness.
cc: Roger Martin, Chairman
Advisory Parks Recreation Commission
Respectfully submitted,
Ken Vraa, Director
Parks and Recreation
August 18, 1983
MEMO TO: ADVISORY PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION
FROM: KEN VRAA, DIRECTOR OF PARKS AND RECREATION
RE: JOINT MEETING CITY COUNCIL ADVISORY PARKS RECREATION COMMISSION
A joint meeting of the City Council and Advisory Parks and Recreation Commission
has been set for Tuesday, August 30th at 7 :00 P.M. at the Eagan City Hall.
Please reserve this date on your calendar for this joint meeting.
The members of the City Council have now been sent the section regarding
"Funding and Implementation" plan which will be the main topic of dis-
cussion at that meeting. In addition, the City Administrator, Chairman
Martin, Mr. Erkkila and I will be developing a complete agenda of other
system study issues for discussion. This will maximize on the time of the
Council and Commission and identify items which will require direction to
be given to the consultant and staff as the planning study comes to an
end.
The Director of Parks and Recreation has also been in contact with the
Director of Parks and Recreation with the City of Apple Valley, to establish
a date for a joint meeting between the two cities Advisory Commissions.
Please be aware that Apple Valley Parks and Recreation Commission has
issued an invitation to Eagan for Tuesday, October the 18th at Valley Wood
Clubhouse (formerly Lebanon Hills Golf Course) for this joint meeting.
Please reserve this date on your calendar for this special meeting with
the Apple Valley Commission. Topics of discussion will include: Develop-
ment progress of the Lebanon Hills Regional Park as well as other items of
mutual concern.
Respectfully submitted
Ken Vraa, Director
Parks and Recreation
cc: Tom Hedges, City Administrator
.=city of eogan
3795 PILOT KNOB ROAD, P.O. BOX 21199
EAGAN, MINNESOTA 55121
PHONE: (612) 454 -8100
August 16, 1983
Mr. Scott Nelson, President E.A.A.
Mr. Bill Katzenmaier, President R.A.A.
Mr. Tony Lancette, Eagan Hockey Assn.
Gentlemen:
For a period of nearly 18 months, the City Parks and Recreation
Commission has been working on a Comprehensive Park Systems Guide
Plan. This study is in the final stages of completion, and hope-
fully, with only minor adjustments required, will be done soon.
I'm sure it's no surprise to you that the Commission has de-
termined the City is in short supply of nearly every recreational
facility needed, whether it be athletic fields to play equipment
to picnic areas. How to meet that shortage what is being planned,
how many, where and what type, is the agenda items I would like to
discuss with you.
I would like to set up a late afternoon or early evening meet-
ing where we can all meet together to briefly review the major
elements of the plan that have a bearing on youth athletics.
This discussion should help you to understand what is happening,
what needs to happen, and, from your comments allow me to suggest
revisions to the Systems Plan before it's completed.
I'll be contacting you shortly to suggest a date, something after
the 24th of August. If you have a preference for a particular time,
please let me know so I can try to coordiia e an acceptable time to
all of us.
KV :bp
cc: Roger Martin, Chairman
Advisory Parks Recreation Commission
Tom Hedges, City Administrator
Ke irector
Par s and Recreation
THE LONE OAK TREE THE SYMBOL OF STRENGTH AND GROWTH IN OUR COMMUNITY
BEA BLOMQUIST
Mayor
THOMAS EGAN
JAMES A. SMITH
JERRY THOMAS
THEODORE WACHTER
Council Members
THOMAS HEDGES
City Administrator
EUGENE VAN OVERBEKE
City Clerk
_city of acigcin
3795 PILOT KNOB ROAD, P.O. BOX 21199
EAGAN, MINNESOTA 55121
PHONE: (612) 454 -8100
August 12, 1983
Bonestroo, Rosene, Anderlik Associates, Inc.
Consulting Engineers
2335 West Trunk Highway 36
St. Paul, MN 55113
Sirs:
On behalf of the Advisory Parks and Recreation Commission, the
City of Eagan and the Parks and Recreation Department staff, I want
to acknowledge and thank you for the contribution from your firm to
the City's Parks and Recreation Department.
These funds: will be placed in the Park Development fund for
distribution to the City's park system.
Again, please accept my sincere appreciation for your generous
contribution.
RM:bp
cc: Mayor Bea Blomquist
Tom Hedges, City Administrator
Ken Vraa, Director of Parks Recreation
EUGENE VAN OVERBEKE
City Clerk
Si er
d
Roger Martin, Chairman
Advisory Parks Recreation Commission
THE LONE OAK TREE...THE SYMBOL OF STRENGTH AND GROWTH IN OUR COMMUNITY
BEA BLOMQUIST
Mayor
THOMAS EGAN
JAMES A. SMITH
JERRY THOMAS
THEODORE WACHTER
Council Members
THOMAS HEDGES
City Administrator
EAGAN CITY HALL
7 :00 P.M.
August 4, 1983
1. CALL TO ORDER AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
2. INTRODUCTION OF NEWLY APPOINTED COMMISSION MEMBERS
Mrs. Sandy Bertz
Mr. William Jackson
3. APPROVAL OF AGENDA AND APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF JULY 7, 1983
4. DEVELOPMENT PROPOSALS
5. OLD BUSINESS
8. ADJOURNMENT
TENTATIVE AGENDA
ADVISORY PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION
EAGAN, MINNESOTA
(a) Tri -Land Sunset 3rd Addition
(b) Pleasant Knoll Condominiums Will Stenzel
(a) Surrey Heights 6th Addition Dan Gustafson
(b) System Plan Study Funding and Implementation Section
6. NEW BUSINESS
(a) None
(b)
7. OTHER BUSINESS /REPORTS
(a) L.A.W.C.O.N. Submission
(b) Park Names Distribution to Residents
(c) Comsery Softball Field Addition
(d) September Tour of Recreational Facilities
(e) Informational Discussion Race Track Proposal
MEMO TO: ADVISORY PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION
FROM: KEN VRAA, DIRECTOR OF PARKS AND RECREATION
RE: AUGUST 4th COMMISSION MEETING
AUGUST 1, 1983
Following the call to order, introduction and welcome of newly
appointed Commission members Sandy Bertz and William Jackson to the
Commission is in order.
Under development proposal, there are two for consideration and
recommendation by the Commission.
Sunset 3rd Addition, located in park service section 25, consist
of 5 acres for 7 single family lots. (Planner report enclosed)
An existing home would be platted on lot 7, thus creating six new
lots. Because of the size and location of this plat, it's staff's
recommendation to accept a cash dedication on the six newly created
lots.
Pleasant Knoll, located in park service section 28. A planning
report has not been included as this item will not be presented until
the August meeting. Because the development includes potential park
land dedication, review by the Commission seems appropriate.
The development consists of 18.7 acres and 112 proposed condominium
units. The plat is part of the Blackhawk South P.U.D. and includes Heine
Pond.
The P.U.D. agreement has provided for parks dedication of 10 acres
consisting primarily of the pond and access to County Road 30. Staff
has reviewed with the developer this proposed dedication as included
in the P.D., as well as the recommendation for the Systems Plan to
acquire an additional 1.5 acres beyond the committed park land. If
required the developer has expressed a willingness to dedicate the
land included in the P.U.D. and additional park land being sought by
the City. This dedication would be for approximately 15 acres.
The developer asked that in so doing, a trail connection from the
development to the park would be considered and allowed. And, that the
parking area not allow for overnight parking or storage of campers,
boats and trailers, etc, beyond normal park hours.
After review by the Commission, it would be appropriate to consider
acceptance /rejection of the 10 acre P.U.D. dedication of park land and
the gift from the developer of approximately 5 acres for park purposes.
Old Business:
Mr. Dan Gustafson and Mr. Ken Applebaum have requested to appear be-
fore the Commission concerning the cash dedication requirement for Surrey
Heights 6th Addition. A separate one page memo has been included.
Tim Erkkila will be presenting the preliminary draft of the Funding
and Implementation plans. Staff has received a draft copy to be reviewed.
The Commission will receive their copy at the meeting on Thursday.
Page 2
NEW BUSINESS
There are no items at this time to be discussed.
OTHER BUSINESS /REPORTS
There are a number of items which staff will update and inform
the Commission about. These items have been listed on the agenda.
Also included in the packet is a recent advertisement concerning
"Wave Pools." The article was written for a trade journal and has been
reprinted for advertising purposes.
As always, should you have any questions, in regards to the agenda
of enclosed material, please feel free to contact the office.
CITY OF EAGAN
SUBJECT: REZONING AND PRELIMINARY PLAT SUNSET 3RD
ADDITION
APPLICANT: TRI -LAND INC., BRADLEY J. SWENSON
LOCATION: PART OF THE SZ OF THE NWq OF SECTION 25
EXISTING ZONING: A (AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT)
DATE OF PUBLIC HEARING: JULY 26, 1983
DATE OF REPORT: JULY 20, 1983
REPORTED BY: DALE C. RUNKLE, CITY PLANNER
APPLICATION SUBMITTED: The first application submitted is a request
to rezone approximately 5 acres from A (Agricultural) to R -1 (Residen-
tial Single District) located in part of the Sh of the NWQ of Section
25.
The second application submitted is a request for preliminary plat
approval, Sunset 3rd Addition, which would consist of approximately
5 acres and contain 7 single family lots.
ZONING AND LAND USE
Presently, the parcel is zoned Agricultural and would only allow one
home per 5 acres. The Comprehensive Guide Plan designates this par
cel as R -1 (Residential Single District) and would allow a density of
0 -3 dwelling units per acre.
COMMENTS
The proposed parcel is located directly east of Overview Estates Re-
plat, a single family residential area. To the north is Sunset 2nd
Addition, which is a subdivision that was recently approved also con-
taining single family lots. The property to the west is presently
large lots or basically undeveloped, and the area to the south is
comprised of large 5 -acre agriculturally -zoned tracts.
Access to this parcel would be by Golden Meadow Road which has been
improved to the westerly edge of Overview Estates. The applicant is
proposing to construct a cul -de -sac, Golden Meadow Court, which would
provide access to six single family lots. Lot 7 presently is the
homestead of the original property owner and wishes to include his
home in this particular plat. The reason Lot 7 is so large is that
the only buildable portion of the lot is on the easterly side where
the existing home is located. The area westerly will be a ponding
area, or a low area, which will probably not be developed in the
near future. Therefore, the applicant is requesting the six lots
CITY OF EAGAN
REZONING AND PRELIMINARY PLAT SUNSET 3RD ADDITION
JULY 26, 1983
PAGE TWO
and platting his own home as Lot 7 which would contain the rest of
the acreage.
In review of this preliminary plat, the first six lots contain 12,000
square feet and a minimum of 85' frontage at the 30' setback. There-
fore, all lots in this preliminary plat meet the minimum R -1 zoning
standards.
If approved, the preliminary plat should be subject to the following
conditions:
1) No variances be allowed for side setbacks except for topograph-
ic or vegetation reasons.
2) The plat shall be subject to the Park Commission's review for
park dedication.
3) A development agreement shall be entered into and signed by the
applicant prior to final plat application.
DCR /jach
ENGINEERING RECOMMENDATIONS
4) If streets and utilities are to be installed privately, then the
plans and specifications shall be prepared by a registered engi-
neer in accordance with City standards.
5) In addition to typical utility and drainage easements, a 20'
utility easement shall be required over the common lot line be-
tween Lots 3 and 4,and an easement of sufficient width over the
westerly portion of Lot 7 will also be required for storm sewer.
6) A 30' half right -of -way shall be dedicated for Golden Meadow Road.
7) All costs associated with extending the existing Golden Meadow
Road and the utilities within Golden Meadow Road and also the
internal street and utilities shall be the sole responsibility
of this development.
RMH /jach
MEMO TO:
FROM:
DATE:
THE ADVISORY PLANNING COMMISSION, C/O DALE C. RUNKLE,
CITY PLANNER
RICHARD M. HEFTI, ASSISTANT CITY ENGINEER
JULY 21, 1983
SUBJECT: SUNSET 3RD ADDITION PRELIMINARY PLAT
The Engineering Division of the Department of Public Works has the
following comments for consideration by the Planning Commission
and City Council regarding this proposed development.
I. DRAINAGE /TOPOGRAPHY
This proposed development is located within the SW4 of the NWQ of
Section 25, just west of Overview Estates and north of Golden Mea-
dow Road. The topography for this area consists of rolling terrain.
The slopes associated with this terrain are approximately 7 -8% over
most of this parcel except the northwest corner where the slopes
approach 20% to the natural existing depression located there. The
existing drainage for Lots 1 -6 around Golden Meadow Court is gen-
erally to the south, towards Golden Meadow Road while the drainage
over Lot 7 is towards the depression located near the northwest cor-
ner of this lot.
The proposed grading over this parcel will he limited to the grad-
ing within Golden Meadow Court since the existing topography can be
easily adapted to building upon. Subsequently, the drainage will
remain the same as it is presently. Lot 7 contains the existing
house on this parcel and would require no grading since the north-
westerly portion of this lot is considered unbuildable due to the
steep slopes and huge amounts of fill which would be required to
try to make it buildable. The drainage from Golden Meadow Court
is being proposed to be collected by storm sewer and deposited with-
in the 24" storm sewer located within Golden Meadow Road. This, in
turn, outlets into Schwanz Lake located to the southwest of this
development. Figure 1 illustrates this development's location with-
in the Schwanz Lake (Pond LP -32) area. Presently this pond does
not have an outlet, however, a feasibility report for installing
the trunk storm sewer outlet to this pond has been authorized by
the Council with construction being anticipated to begin this fall.
II. UTILITIES
Utilities exist within Golden Meadow Road in the proximity of this
proposed development of sufficient size, capacity and depth to pro-
vide service to it. Figure 2 reveals the existing utilities within
Golden Meadow Road and includes a 24" storm sewer, an 8" water main,
and an 8" sanitary sewer.
To service this parcel with utilities, it will be necessary to ex-
tend both the water main and sanitary sewer within Golden Meadow
Road to the west and terminate at a point at least 60' west of the
ENGINEERING REPORT
SUNSET 3RD ADDITION
JULY 26, 1983
PAGE TWO
east lot line of Lot 7. Golden Meadow Court is proposed to be ser-
viced from the utilities within Golden Meadow Road. An 8" sewer
will be required to be constructed within Golden Meadow Court along
with a 6" water main which shall extend to the north property line
of this parcel to connect with the proposed water main for Sunset
2nd Addition. Meanwhile, it is being proposed to extend a short
lead from the existing storm sewer to the north to intercept the
runoff from Golden Meadow Court.
III. STREETS
Access to this proposed development is currently from Golden Meadow
Road. This is presently a paved City street, 34' wide with concrete
curb and gutter to approximately the east property line of this pro-
posed development. From there it extends west as a gravel road and
ends approximately 200' west of the east line of Lot 7. From there,
it is just a dirt trail to the end of the parcel.
The proposed access to the internal Lots 1 -6, Block 1 is by way of
Golden Meadow Court which is a 130' cul -de -sac off of Golden Meadow
Road. This is well within the maximum length for cul-de-sacs as
outlined in the City Code. It is recommended that Golden Meadow
Road be constructed to its ultimate design of 34' wide bituminous
surfacing with concrete curb and gutter to a point at least 60' west
of the east line of Lot 7. Similarly, Golden Meadow Court should
also be 34' wide with concrete curb and gutter and bituminous sur-
facing. No trailways or sidewalks will be required since Golden
Meadow Road is not a collector street.
IV. RIGHT -OF- WAY /EASEMENTS
West of Overview Estates, Golden Meadow Road exists as a 60' ease-
ment which was dedicated in 1971. Nevertheless, this proposed de-
velopment should dedicate a 30' half right -of -way for Golden Mea-
dow Road along with this proposed preliminary plat. In addition,
Golden Meadow Court is proposed to be platted with a 50' right -of-
way with the cul -de -sac radius being 60'. This right -of -way for
Golden Meadow Court shall be dedicated with this plat.
A typical 10' utility easement shall be dedicated along all public-
ly dedicated right -of -way. In addition, a 10' drainage and utility
easement shall be dedicated over all interior lot lines with a 5'
drainage and utility easement being dedicated adjacent to all ex-
terior lot lines. An exception to this would be that a 20' ease-
ment should be dedicated over the common lot line between Lots 3
and 4 to incorporate the proposed water main. Finally, a utility
easement of sufficient width will be required for storm sewer out-
let construction resulting from the Sunset 1st and 2nd Additions.
At this time, it is not possible to determine an exact location for
this easement, however, it will probably be located within the wes-
tern portion of Lot 7. The exact location will not be known until
ENGINEERING REPORT
SUNSET 3RD ADDITION
JULY 26, 1983
PAGE THREE
preparation of final plans have been completed.
V. ASSESSMENTS
A check on assessments has revealed that both trunk area water and
trunk area sanitary sewer have been previously assessed, leaving
only trunk area storm sewer to be assessed. However, this devel-
opment's responsibility for this assessment has been fulfilled as
it will be listed as a pending assessment under Project 383 (Schwanz
Lake trunk storm sewer outlet).
All costs associated with extending existing utilities and streets
and also installing the internal utilities and streets shall be the
sole responsibility of this development.
I will be available to discuss any aspect of this report in detail
with the Advisory Planning Commission at their meeting on July 26,
1983.
Respectfully submitted,
RMH /jach
Richard M. Hef P.E.
Assistant City Engineer
1.)
8 7 7. 0
L
866.0 i
1...
870.0 A PDEN 0 T 833.0
JP-14 Gdp
ri)
J 1., 882.0
JP 14
,1 N, 8780 6
875.0
f
13 i,
I r....;)
7"
846.01
"i
880.3 877 0
G-c
,s? 1
...J. J JP-45 JP-46 JP-331 1 JP-17
,fl
t, lij
°t AS:S. 890.3 8940
892.2
JP -'t
848.0 848.0 1 ‘1".0. 1
\N
1 I,
f
4
JP 42
886.3 i 8
0- 7
1, J
I
o s i' 88 7.1 8870 1-3.-15 c j 9 P 26 -1 0 2 j• e 0
862.7
L.S.-14
888.0 i2: a ■NED r
JP 4
-40 0
JP-I8 .1 4 4 0 SHINA
0
886 .0 *co
Cr
8900 1 868.0
815.7 JP j j .r• .j
830.0.
JP-44 ,t F
'll'ett.1 i
,4.li r 13)i..LJ, i cc
JP-11 to
c2_890.7 r 877.0 L
1 1 1 ii
36 J- 896:0 J J-1
888
124 21 j_m .0 ...z.....
870.2 1
1 J-p
JP-I9
Q t JP-30 874.0
-,•-•:•\.:,,,r-1 1
c
8 f 872.7
882.0 -1 7
j j
4. 4
J-OT 1
:J.,/ 001j)
J-x
1
,-h-
1;1
852.0
8550 .,a L.s.-17
'1
1
JP- 9 1 __J__ t A ;7 ,627 JP-2
817.0 I r
822„
....2._._.
23
JP-21
x
20"))/' 855
2 884.0 J-s 5'
PAT Fti C K c
ce
A-- J-r
J-v
‘2.11
r JP-22
I JP-24
I JP
t EA GAN
*NI I
j 8 rP 1 7 7 1 0 7: 1 i I
2
8200 J.
o`b/ jJ LS-113
I i
8/9.31 1
ssy JP-29
1 1 1,1
925. 3 1 1 1 ■1 804.0
940.0
1 11- 818.0 k ii
ip i
J -1
*oft,
)L ee 5 WiLIEOLTA; PA
Rtt--LA,y.
I I i21 'NI
t1 I 9000
1
VI
I.
1
956 0 1
1
i c> 1 Iltill
J-u 1 nor i
1..i.-0
....11....
I,- k■ tgl -i I J
973.0 01 1
i
1;917.0
---7-
884.0 -__898.0
88 0 2
.4%
888.0
1
1
p39/ N.,/ 9000 '0, LP-46
879.2
-sh 898.0
9 iQ WO 1
DP-18
DP-7 I
f i r",111
1
o
8
860 0
N D- w
D
858.3
DP
T
E -g
864.0
LS.-26
895.5', Y I.
2
4 E.'St 1
l 5 1 t--
86
1 J ,,fle78.0
c.FF
LP
861.3
j 875.0
8670
0
TA
LP
OU N TY 902.5
9040
PARK L
LP
878.3
882.5
LP-15
E X CEPTION
''t21:1_18,
908.6
91/. 5
LP
920.4
922.0
LP
9/73
12
L'-14
'0
922.0
LP-34
L--,. ''"40 B
LP-37 Iiii'Le,a et4IJii 1,
L ■N j
8
88 7B
LP 863.0 \C'•
862.0 8640
LP
900.2
903.0
kij
L)'
rook- 1,4 PO
LP-33
886.2
8880
LP
883.2
886.0
F I GAARE 1
S
4.4T-4
.10
I N,
9070
LP-7
11I- ?"I t t t 4 t 11 t 906.0
LP-49 tI.
s "ttp_ 9070
912.0
6
\\910 9/5.0 i i
ir 1
LP-28
911.0
I\ 9/50 ii
1J .s
LP425 ti
926.0 II
9270 il
"Y
II
il
I
LP LP-27
2 0 1
922.0
926.0
1
I
I
I I
LP-23
926 0 w
93410 4
LP
908.3
9/6.0
01047
020 -29
040 -29
L
021 -26
060 2 9
c ^966
DR1\
a .9�
CO. RD.30 DIFFLEY RD.
FIGURE
-cal!!!
NW 1/4
NE 1/4
EE 1/4
COUNTY RD. 610. 36
VICINITY MAP
PRELIMINARY PLAT: SUNSET 3RD ADDITION
470
SCALE 1'= 40'
w^'
106
119
140
6
w
7 0
GOLDEN MEADOW RD.
140
111
1:41. O11CIIFI 110. TINT 1424 0
01 710 0662 0144113
7001 2
1006 4
:1111, 4.1 23 00x11.0 44 10lld2: CU441<46.:: 110 MU.
111114 01 100 14 1 1162 01 SAID x.0. 1 624 M 40114 LINL W 1102
4
1020; MKS 1104101; LOOM LIU 234.00 FIST; MACS 40611 7
2100110 24 11111110 11 SZCONDS 10rt 261.17 0007; 140241.1111 I30A
40 POINT 4. OMN4 001711 22 412411 44 6100211 36 0110101 0001 TO
10111 01ST4rt 1114.01 MDT WT Of 141ST LIDS 01 424 1.4. I, 462
110121 01 NDI2I2I00; 1NY11 51 110141 4 611117110 14 100401 DIM 10
4 POINT DISTANT 1324. R17 MST Of YD DOOR 4; MOM 00112411
42.70 TAI01R14L C462, C4(002 (0 m I01M407 130.11 RE7;
MNO 11471 32 106111 41 01007U 14 03(420 6231 161 0111; MINCE
147620311047 4100 4 1*03401111. NR 1400062 TOM (001162127 11.14
0317; 1111610 0411 4.46 1103; 2494 OUT 036.11 MT TO 10162 Of
24046111.
GROSS 4440:3 4404
100(040 LAND 00: 0-1
SITE DATA
410140714 411. 1012 TO 403 3 1007 041441 411/UNTl 4 014 AND
44 107 LO43 0.121 0TUNIS& 11011. 10 NOT 41Ot071 4 •12
MIST L04I.
TRI -LAND CO.
SHEET 1 OF 3
MW 1/4
l'
NI 1/4
O+
V
t!
1/4
SW 1/4
ND. NO. 33
VICINITY MAP
SCALE 1"- 40'
PRELIMINARY PLAT: SUNSET 3RD ADDITION
Mira. 011101100x tor nor 01 101 IR l lr *03.742 or 1131104 110.
1010111/0 1/. 410 11 040140 U My (SIS lr la 1010
100101 •1 110 son* 1.01 00 40 1.9. 1 V 701 1 00 1.110 01 10
*10; 101001 110111 *100 COIL LIM 000.00 1017: 142.n Oro 7
0160111 M 110411 17 1000101 Ott 01.01 Rqt 1015104011 0100
3.1 70191 T1000 1,7111 01 camas M 41000111 M MINN MIST TO
MM 0114011 110.01 MT 0817 01 11111 110 A Mr 0.0. •01
MM M 010003.: 71101 LS 0141919 Y 10119 10 Wag 017 TO
FOOT 11913.10 0114. FUT x191 01 0*0 Mt 3.; 70110 0111447
•1N 100101001 001. COMM M 01 S 111141271140 101.01 11117;
11110 5 M 010501 0, 11110n, M 1c01 1101 rl 1111 T10C
04.04101114 4000 0 1110711110 000 0010101 01 m 010101117 11.70
1017: •4 00150 0.01 1111; 101061 LW 000.00 7017 10 NM 01
1111417000.
0010 4001.01:1 41300
MM US 410 010: 011
41042970: 3.11 1011 TO MN 1 0101 01.43.01 4100410 r Sot 00
1010 Ulf LORI 01110 01101110 1900. WOW 410971 01 ALL
10140 LD00.
EXISTING
PROPOSED CONTOURS
TRI -LAND CO.
SHEET OF 3
MEMO TO: ADVISORY PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION
FROM: KEN VRAA, DIRECTOR OF PARKS AND RECREATION
RE: PARKS DEDICATION SURREY GARDENS ADDITION
AUGUST 1983
At the May 1983 meeting of the Commission, the preliminary plat of
Surrey Gardens 6th Addition was presented. The plat proposed two
fourty-four unit apartment buildings.
Background: The preliminary plat was subsequently approved by the
Planning Commission and City Council. The Advisory Commission
recommended that a cash dedication for each unit and an asphalt
trail along Yankee Doodle Road be required.
Issue: Mr. Dan Gustafson, developer of the project, had noted that
the cash parks dedication for the Surrey Heights development had
included a provision for "early" parks dedication when the original
development began in the early 1970's for the Surrey Heights develop-
ment. Staff has reviewed available records from that time which
suggest that a cash dedication of $40.00 per unit for the first phases
was agreed upon. However, in the absence of formal record keeping at
that time there is lack of information beyond this which would clearly
indicate the number of units and the amount paid for the first phases
of development. Available minutes which have been reviewed do not
clearly indicate that later phases of the Surrey Heights development
were even included in this agreement for early cash dedication.
Staff has met with Mr. Gustafson at his request to review this issue,
but no conclusions has been rendered. In the absence of information to
the contrary, staff is reluctant to recommend a reduction or dismissal
of the cash dedication requirement unless the developer is able to pro-
duce information which would show conclusively that a cash dedication
was paid to cover the number of units constructed and planned for
Surrey Heights development including the 6th addition.
Mr. Gustafson has asked to appear before the Advisory Commission to
discuss informally the history of the Surrey Heights Development and
his understanding of the payment of the parks cash dedication require-
ment in an effort to resolve this issue. Mr. Gustafson has also indicated
that he will review past records and agreements that may be available
to him prior to his appearance in an effort to find additional information
which may assist the Commission in making a determination as to the pay-
ment of a cash dedication for the proposed 6th addition.
NOTE: The existing cash dedication requirement is $252.00 per unit x
88 units proposed $22,176.00.
International Magazine for Managers of Parks, Recreation Are
Management Maintenance Design
R. Eric Reickel
"Don't make waves!" Nearly every parks and recrea-
tion facilities manager, whether in the public or
private sector, has been on the receiving end of this
advice at one time or another. Given the nature of
our activities and our traditional reliance on the
whims of the public when it comes to funding, this
is, no doubt, often sound advice.
Sometimes, it really does not pay for us to make
waves in carrying out our mandates. At other times,
however, waves are the best things to make in
providing the public with interesting and rewarding
recreational opportunities, particularly in an urban
or semi -urban environment. Making waves is pre-
cisely what this article is all about. But before I dive
into a discussion of the success we have had making
waves at the Oakland County Parks Recreation
Commission, a little background is in order.
In 1968, Michigan passed a $100 million recre-
ational bond issue designed to fund the expansion
and renovation of the state's various parks and
recreation systems. The voters set aside $25 million
to fund urban area park grants for municipal and
county systems such as the Oakland County Parks
Recreation Commission (OCPRC) and its Waterford
Oaks County Park, near Pontiac, Michigan. In 1973,
Front cover: The Waterford Oaks wave action pool in Oakland County, Michigan,
hosts 1500 users per day in season.
The Waterford Oaks
Wave Action Pool
R. ERIC REICKEL is a graduate of
Michigan State University, with a
B.S. degree in community recrea-
tion, and has completed the Indiana
University Executive Development
Program. He has been manager of
the Oakland County, Michigan:
Parks and Recreation Commission
since 1972.
Mr. Reickel is a longstanding
member of the National Recreation
and Park Association and has been
active in the NRPA's American Park
and Recreation Society. He has been
a member of the Board of Regents,
Revenue Sources Management
School, since 1978 and is chairman
for 1981 -1982. Mr. Reickel served on
the Board of Directors, Michigan
Recreation and Park Association, in
1978 -1979 and was president in
1969. He has held various positions
with that organization and currently
serves as chairman of the Public Af-
fairs Committee.
the OCPRC was awarded $750,000 from this grant to
be used at Waterford Oaks, with the stipulation that
the funds be used to build a swimming pool. That
figure was increased to $1.5 million with the addi-
tion of funds provided by a county one quarter mill
property tax.
If this sounds like a stipulation any parks and
recreation commission could easily live with, con-
sider the fact that Oakland County is blessed with
more than 600 lakes and a plethora of municipal and
private swimming pools. The public was not very
enthusiastic about the prospect of $1.5 million being
spent on another pool in a county with 600 lakes. In
addition, the depressed economic climate at the
time gave rise to a loud public outcry for more
accountability and greater self- sufficiency in public
recreational facilities.
To satisfy the public, the OCPRC proposed con-
structing an indoor pool, or natatorium, with a
10 -meter diving board and spectator seating. The
commission hoped to hold AAU meets in the facility
and generate self- supporting funds. Bids on the
project went out, but they came back with price tags
in the area of $3 million, twice as much as the
amount available. The project was dismissed as too
expensive.
By 1975, time was running out. The OCPRC
was faced with a "use it or lose it" situation, and I
2
proposed making waves as a solution. I had seen a
wave action pool the only one of its kind in
North America at Decatur, Alabama. I was con-
vinced it was the only pool for recreational swim-
ming and a big improvement over what I call
"sheep dips" conventional rectangular pools.
Eventually, the entire commission was con-
vinced of the viability of the project. Using the
fast -track construction method under the direction
of Barton Malow, the construction managers who
built the Pontiac Silverdome and the Hubert H.
Humphrey Metrodome in Minneapolis, the OCPRC
was able to guarantee the cost of a wave action pool
at $1.5 million.
Despite public skepticism and media condem-
nation, ground was broken on November 1, 1975.
Work progressed throughout the winter, and the
Waterford Oaks wave action pool opened to the
public on July 1, 1976. The project was completed in
a very short time, and it came in at a total cost of
$1,425,000, a full $575,000 under budget.
Seven years ago, the Waterford Oaks facility
was only the third pool of its kind in the country.
One of the four 75 -hp electric fans which create air pressure to move
the water up four chutes into the pool.
Photo: Gary Buzzalini
Today, there are well over 40 in operation across the
land. Obviously, the wave action concept is gaining
wider acceptance. The number of such pools now in
use testifies to this fact. The concept also is widely
accepted by the public. Since it opened, the
Waterford Oaks wave action pool has become a hot
property. More than 1,500 people use and enjoy the
facility each day between Memorial Day and Labor
Day.
Making waves in Oakland County has been
successful and rewarding for the OCPRC and the
public. No doubt, many parks and recreation facility
managers are considering similar installations, and
a closer look at how a wave action pool stacks up to
conventional pools may offer some valuable in-
sights.
Unique is the best word to describe the wave
action pool compared to the rectangular pools we
are all familiar with. This is most apparent, perhaps,
in the facility's fan -like shape. The Waterford Oaks
wave action pool is 180 feet long. It is 82 feet wide
at one end, where the water is eight feet deep, and
140 feet wide at the shallow end, where there is zero
depth. That is a big fan, indeed.
Designed by Jack Monteith of Hoyem- Basso,
architects of Bloomfield Hills, Michigan, and with
principal components supplied by Automated
Swimpools, Inc., of Ashland, Ohio, under the Wave
Tek trademark, the pool has a water surface of
17,550 feet and a water volume of 470,000 gallons.
Waves in a three -foot diminishing surf origi-
nate in the deep end using four 75 -hp electric fans
that create air pressure on water in five rooms, or
caissons, below the surface. An hydraulic, electroni-
cally controlled system moves four air chutes be-
tween rooms of varying size. Air from the chutes
forces water out of the caissons through small,
screen covered portals, and waves are created.
Under the control of a mini computer system,
air chute movement is regulated to create waves in
15- minute intervals followed by 10- minute periods
of calm. However, the system's mini processor can
be programmed to create waves in many different
frequencies.
Obviously, the unique design and concept of a
wave action pool require a filtering system some-
what different from those found in conventional
pools. Because waves are created on an essentially
flat water surface, more surface is exposed to the
elements than in most pools. More frequent filtra-
tion is required as a result. At Waterford Oaks,
water is filtered at a rate of 3,800 gallons per minute
through a diatomaceous earth system. Total water
turnover is completed in four hours, considerably
less than in a conventional pool, where turnover is
usually six to seven hours.
Because of its zero depth, the pool also features
a modified gutter system. Gutters do not surround
3
reports a
0
31
vim
These unparalleled profits have been
generated by the city -owned WaveTek facility
at Pt. Mallard Park in Decatur, Alabama.
During 12 seasons of service, these operating profits were
achieved after operating expenses were deducted. And,
approximately 1.7 million customers were attracted to this
WaveTek facility.
While most cities are subsidising their public swimming pool
operations, the cities that own WaveTek pools are generating
profits. And some are even paying off the intitial capital expense
plus interest.
Like Pt. Mallard, there are 46 other WaveTek pools in action
throughout the western hemisphere. A WaveTek pool is perfect
for people of all ages. Depths range from 0 to 8 feet. The shallow
end is ideal for families with toddlers. Swimmers and non-
swimmers alike safely body surf, ride rubber rafts or just bob up
and down in the whitecaps. The wave action exercises and
invigorates everyone in a way no ordinary pool can.
People get more for their money with a WaveTek pool and so do
you! We have a 13 minute film that shows how it all happens.
Write or call collect and we'll arrange a showing.
Automated Swimpools, Inc.,
P. O.
Mansfield, Ohio 44901.
Telephone: (419) 529 -2203.
Telex: 987413
Iir
a 0
Reprinted with the permission of Parks Recreation Resources publication.
6
create air pockets that dramatically reduce noise.
Acoustical tiles were used on the ceilings of the
caissons, and poured concrete walls 12 inches thick
house the wave equipment. These features have
solved the noise problem, an important considera-
tion in residential areas. But any site or noise prob-
lems are far outweighed by the many advantages of
the wave action pool.
"The public is more than willing to
pay the fees for a unique recreational
opportunity judging by annual at-
tendance figures that have climbed
from 76,000 in 1977 to well over
100,000 in 1981."
Earlier I referred briefly to operating costs. Al-
though I cannot speak for other such facilities, I do
know the story at Waterford Oaks. Its entrance fees
remain the lowest of any wave action pool in North
America, despite a 25 -cent increase instituted this
year. Adults now pay $2.75, children only $1.75.
Our entrance fees are intentionally low in keep-
ing with our stated objective to operate the facility
at or near break -even. The public is more than
willing to pay the fees for a unique recreational
opportunity judging by annual attendance figures
that have climbed from 76,000 in 1977 to well over
100,000 in 1981.
The wave action concept can be a real money-
maker if a different philosophy is used, but we have
managed to obtain our objectives. In 1981, for
example, revenues from the pool reached $160,000,
and operating expenses totaled $159,000. In 1982,
and with the addition of a new water slide attraction
adjacent to the pool, revenues are expected to reach
$307,000 with expenses of only $219,000.
A wave- action pool provides the distinct advan-
tage of self- sufficiency over conventional pools,
which traditionally require continued subsidization.
However, there are other equally important benefits
worth mentioning. The wave action pool is, beyond
a doubt, the most versatile recreational swimming
facility imaginable today. For example, the pool is a
unique, first -rate teaching device. Before the pool
was constructed, there were virtually no swimming
teaching facilities in Oakland County. Today, we
have a fine facility, and because of the pool's zero
depth, it is much easier and safer to teach young
children to swim. Swimming lessons are offered in
seven categories from 9 to 11 in the morning, Mon-
day through Friday. The classes are in great de-
mand, including those for ages five to adult, from
beginner through swimmer level, and life saving.
The pool's zero depth also makes previously
difficult swimming opportunities easily available to
the handicapped. Wheelchairs are allowed in the
Waterford Oaks pool, and the response from hand-
icapped patrons has been tremendous.
The design of the pool also opens it to competi-
tive events in the 25 -meter format, and the pool is
available to special groups before and after its 11
a.m. to 8 p.m. weekday and 9 a.m. to 8 p.m.
weekend schedule. The pool also is the site of kayak
competition by local enthusiasts because of the
waves, and the U.S. Coast Guard even has used the
pool in rescue training.
Versatility is an important aspect of any wave
action facility, particularly when compared to a con-
ventional pool. At Waterford Oaks, we have ex-
panded on this theme by adding versatility to our
heating operations. In 1981, the OCPRC spent
$17,000 on two solar heating systems, one each for
the pool and the bathhouse. Retrofitting a solar
heating system for the pool has provided some relief
in heating bills. The bathhouse system, however,
has been very effective in keeping shower water
between 120 and 130 Fahrenheit while substan-
tially reducing heating costs. A solar blanket also
covers the pool each night.
When all is said and done, and I have said a
great deal, it is my firm belief that a wave action
pool is the most reasonable public recreational
swimming facility today. Although it may not be
right for each and every park system or location, I
believe it is the obligation of every parks and recrea-
tion facilities manager at least to explore the con-
cept. It really does have much to offer.
There are many advantages to a wave action
pool, and these far outweigh any problems al-
though I know of no major ones associated with
the concept. Like no other facility, a wave action
pool offers diverse recreational opportunities for all
ages, is extremely versatile, uniquely self- sufficient,
and can even act as a profit center. The facility is
safe and, equally important, it is a good place to
bring the entire family for a full day of healthy,
exciting recreation.
Although there was initial opposition to the
wave action concept in Oakland County, with its
600 lakes, the Waterford Oaks pool has proven to be
a tremendous boon, in fact a splashing success in all
areas. The popularity of facilities such as ours is
increasing across the nation, and I see only greater
growth in the years ahead.
Apparently, the days of the "sheep dip" pool
are numbered. All parks and recreation facilities
managers have a professional responsibility to con-
sider this rewarding, exciting wave- action approach
when and if the opportunity presents itself, and
based on my experiences at Waterford Oaks, my
advice is, "Let's make waves!" O
5
the interior but operate on three sides in conjunc-
tion with a drain in the floor at the shallow end.
Although it must filter more water faster than in
a standard pool, the filtration system system does
not require an abnormal amount of ingredients to
perform its work. In a typical season, the system
uses 40 55 -gallon drums of muriatic acid, 250 50-
pound bags of diatomaceous earth, and 1,000 gal-
lons of chlorine weekly.
The pool's bottom is another unique feature.
Because of zero depth at one end and eight -foot
depth at the other, the bottom contour is somewhat
unusual. In addition, an aggregate Marcite com-
pound covers the bottom. This compound is re-
quired to create greater traction because of the
movement of the waves.
In many respects, the pool's design and filtra-
tion requirements are unique, and similarly unique
qualities are evident in the overall pool complex. At
one time, 1,200 people are allowed into the pool
area, with a 600 person in -water capacity. To ac-
commodate the crowds typical at the pool, there are
parking spaces for 300 cars, a large modern bath-
house, complete concession stands, and a 25,000
square -foot deck carpeted with Astroturf.
While a conventional pool might have a deck
elevation of six inches to one foot depending on the
gutter system used, the wave action pool has a
constant deck elevation of 2.5 feet to accommodate
the waves. Because of the slope of the bottom,
however, the deck is only six inches above the water
surface at the shallow end. A walkway clearance of
at least four feet is required around the entire pool
on the deck for lifeguard access.
Despite its unusual appearance and design fea-
tures, the wave action pool does not differ all that
much from conventional facilities in several impor-
tant areas. The pool is maintained by a typical
four person crew working part time. Each day, the
crew runs through a standard checklist that includes
testing ph and chlorine levels, vacuum cleaning the
bottom, inspecting the filtration system, and
monitoring the performance of all electrical systems
and the wave generating equipment. Adjustments
to the wave equipment seldom are required. Be-
cause Astroturf is used on the deck surface, mainte-
nance crews also clean the surface daily using a
self propelled machine that washes, vacuums, and
disinfects.
There are no diving boards at the Waterford
Oaks wave action pool, and a typical lifeguard staff
of 20 is retained. Lifeguards monitor the pool from
its perimeters and from two elevated stations
equipped with shut -off buttons that can stop the
waves in three seconds. Since the pool opened,
lifeguards have reported their work is easier than in
conventional pools because of the added safety of
zero depth and the inclination of swimmers to exer-
cise more caution when the waves are in action.
"Surf's up" at 15- minute intervals at Waterford Oaks, but the system
can be programmed to create waves in many different frequencies.
If this description gives the impression that the
Waterford Oaks wave action pool is not all that
different from a conventional pool, except in its
unique design and the recreational opportunities it
affords, this impression is totally accurate. The
wave action pool poses no greater problems than a
standard facility. It is equally easy to maintain,
offers few mechanical problems despite the presence
of wave generating equipment, and is not appreci-
ably more expensive to operate.
To say there are no differences, however, would
be misleading. Several things should be mentioned.
In selecting the site, typical soil condition considera-
tions prevail. However, a slope is a definite advan-
tage because of the pool's contour and the fact that a
lower soil elevation at the deep end will aid in
concealing the power plant and wave generation
structures.
Another characteristic that should be noted is
the noise of the wave generating electric fans. Make
no mistake, the fans are noisy, but this problem is
easily overcome. At Waterford Oaks, double -door
construction in the four wave caissons was used to
4