09/03/1981 - Advisory Parks & Recreation Commission•
ADVISORY PARK AND RECREATION COMMITTEE
REGULAR MEETING
EAGAN, MINNESOTA.
EAGAN CITY HALL
SEPTEMBER 3, 1981
6:30 P.M. - PARKS TOUR*
7:30 P.M. - REGULAR MEETING
AGENDA
I. CALL MEETING TO ORDER AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
II. ADOPT AGENDA AND APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF AUGUST 6, 1981
III. DEVELOPMENT PROPOSALS
None
IV. OLD BUSINESS
None
V. NEW BUSINESS
None
VI. OTHER BUSINESS /REPORTS
VII. ADJOURNMENT
a. Council Action - Parks Dedications
b. Minutes of Study Committee for Parks Master Plan
of August 19: Establish date for next meeting.
c. Northview Athletic Field
d. Donation
* The Committee was tour City parks beginning at 6:30 p.m.
The regular meeting will begin at 7:30 p.m.
•
MEMO TO: PARKS MASTER PLAN STUDY COMMITTEE
FROM: KEN VRAA, DIRECTOR OF PARKS AND RECREATION
RE: PRELIMINARY LIST; SYSTEM NEEDS
August 26, 1981
I've taken the liberty of preparing for discussion by the
study committee, a preliminary listing of issues that the City
of Eagan may wish to address prior to the plan, in a master
plan, or in the process of developing a master plan. This is
a preliminary list and requires revisement, additional discussion,
and review before it could act as a basis for master parks
plan. I would hope that at a future meeting of the study
committee, each item could be elaborated on in some detail.
1. Need to pull together existing park policies and
practices. And, in some instances prepare or be
able to respond and give direction on a number of
issues that should be in the planning of a park
system; ie. what is the City park policies as it
relates to "boat access" and the use of City lakes?
Does the City take aggressive steps or passive
approval in allowing /not allowing lake usage?
2. What are the recreational objectives of the community?
Should the City seek to provide a balanced approach
to recreational activities - arts, athletics, enrich-
ment programs, passive interest - or is it singular
in scope?
3. Special use facilities: Pools, ice arena, nature
center, rifle range, comLilunity picnic.
4. Review types and uses of parks: definitions that can
accurately describe to the reader how that park will
materialize once developed; and how it could be used.
5. Relate school district(s) plans for development as
it would impact the parks system. What impact on the
City will the development of a high school have on
parks systems needs? What about -new elementary schools?
6. Horse trails /snowmobile trails?
7. Impact of county and regional park facilities on system
plan?
8. Need to develop overall system wide priorities for:
Neighborhood Park Development /Re- development.
Community Park Development.
Special Use Facilities
Acquisition
And "threshold" levels for enactment.
9. Review existing park service areas. Utilizing these
service areas, develop "park sections" for community
study.
Preliminary List; System Needs - Memo
Page 2
10. With park definitions; develop intensity levels of
use and corresponding levels of maintenance required.
11. Review tennis courts, hockey rinks and need for
lighted facilities.
12. Review water based recreation resources:
Fish Lake
McCarthy
Thomas Lake
Carlson Lake
Blackhawk
Bur Oak
13. With City staff, develop a methodology for which a
master plan can efficiently be reviewed and updated.
14. Perform site analysis for "undeveloped" park areas;
develop concept plans for:
Rahn Carlson Lake
Capricorn /Wedgewood Lakeside
South Oaks Cinnamon Ridge
Windcrest Windtree
Coachman Others
15. Site analysis of existing park currently "developed ";
revision for improvements:
Evergreen Woodhaven
Lexington Northview
Highview Oak Chase
Country Home Heights Well Site
River Hills Pilot Knob
Cedar Pond Others
16. Review existing P.U. Developments for proposed park
land dedications.
17. After analysis, define specific relationships and
intended use relationship for Thomas Lake Park,
Patrick Eagan and Blackhawk Parks.
18. Review of park system to inter- relate preserve areas
with those held in reserve for later development.
19. Preparation of short term development /acquisition
objectives, 2 -4 years and preparation of long term
development /acquisition objectives, 4 -8 years.
Consistent with identifiable needs, future growth,
and future population service groups.
20. Review /analysis of community for historical, and
ornamental parks /open space.
21. Analysis; qualitative and quantitative, of open space,
preserves, and reserve areas by a select methodology
which addresses water, slopes, "environmental" relation-
ships, vegetation, soils, etc.; to determine "value"
of the land parcel within the system.
22. Other
• COMPREHENSIVE PARK PLAN MEETING # 2 August 19, 1981
Present: Martin
Thurston
Masin
Carroll
Vraa
Presenters: Mr. Fred Hoisington
Mr. John Worrall
of
Brauer & Associates
The director explained that Fred Hoisington and John Worrall
were present by invitation extended on behalf of the committee
to explain to members of the conuuittee the process by which a
master parks plan might be developed, its content, and its
importance to a developing municipal park system.
Mr. Hoisington indicated the importance that consultants and
members of the community recognize the difference between
communities, and that the needs are entirely different from
City to City. Because of this, it's important to specifically
design a process and plan content for each community even though
each master plan ray have the same elements included. In dis-
tinguishing between the existing city comp plan which deals
with parks and that of a master plan he indicated that the comp
plan tends to deal with parks as one dimensional, in a "passive"
type of document. As such, it is not intended to take active
posture for park. The comp plan is intended to respond, while
a master plan is active and a specific document which hopes to
achieve. The master plan goes beyond that of a comp plan as
it indicates what goes first, what type of facility goes into
the park, and how it relates to other park elements. It also
expresses a concern for those people that are here now and yet
to come.
In the process of a master plan, the plan first seeks to identify
the opportunities that exist in the community, and to quantify
and qualify needs as it relates to a park system. Do you know
what your needs are, how much and how many? It's important to
develop an overall concept of parks and the features of a system.
It's important to relate design with an ideal, meaningful "whole"
rather than a park at a time. Because it (master Plan) is an
interrelated system there is a body of policy that will carry
ahead to the next generation of committee, council, and adminis-
tration, so there is not a loss of consistency in the overall
system. This consistency is important as the body of document
becomes a base line in which parks planning and development can
continue. As such it can resist the special interest groups
whose needs may be important but have less priority than the
overall objectives of the parks system. It tends to be an
"objective" document rather than to rely on immediate, emotional
Comprehensive Park Plan Meeting 4t2
• needs as they may come up from time to time.
•
•
Page 2
The master plan would include time -lines and a period in which
development is to suppose to happen with short term and long
term goals for the future of the community and the population
yet to come. The master plan is a benefit because people have
the benefit of knowing, and the ability to make informed
decisions by public, staff and officials as it relates to their
relationship to a parks system. In effect it acts as a "text-
book" and knowledge as a reference source. The master parks
plan will help in that you can get what you need for parks
dedication. To make sure it "fits" into the system and not
just because it is there and available to the community.
Mr. Hoisington indicated that the master plan process usually
consists of a five step sequence. First data collection,
followed by public participation, needs identification, plan
formulation and then the final plan documentation. There are
numerous headings under each category and the five step process
could be expanded if it were so desired. Generally this is not
necessary. These five steps can cover any kind of master plan
or parks plan process, and the divisions of responsibility can
generally vary under each of these steps. Mr. Hoisington indi-
cated that perhaps the biggest departure in the approach used by
Brauer and Associates is the fact that public participation has
become a integral part of the plan very early in its process.
Mr. Hoisington went on to explain in greater detail each of the
five process steps. Under data collection he indicated that
this is really an inventory in review of existing features to
find out what areas conflict and what are supportive. Things
need to be taken advantage of or may present themselves as an
obstacle for further parks system. Distinct programs and policies
are reviewed, historical features, land use, housing and housing
density, population changes, etc.,etc.
Mr. Hoisington explained that the second step, of public partici-
pation, was one of interaction of City officials, special interest
groups as well as selected and interested people who wish to
participate in the process. It is important for public partici-
pation process as it helps to establish what the direction of
the community should be as it relates to its parks system. Is
the community "interested in a balanced system which incorporates
all aspects of a parks system or should the direction be toward
one particular segment of parks needs ?" This public participation
process would help to define what the direction of the plan
should be and the focus of park dedication. Following the inter-
active process a report is issued with the objectives of what the
future parks system should be like. Mr. Hoisington indicated if
there were concern that people aren't interested in the park
system the committee would be quickly surprised at how people
will come out in support of parks once they are into an inter-
active role with people who want results and see things happen.
•
•
Comprehensive Park Plan Meeting #2
Page 3
In response to a question Mr. Hoisington indicated that in
bringing individuals into an active role, some background in-
formation has to be supplied to the individuals in order to
allow them to understand the realities and the current status
of the parks system. He explained that people, in an inter-
active role share ideas and are not able to espouse only one
singular thought and dominate a meeting so the individuals
singular priority becomes the priority of the City as a whole.
It's a sharing and exchange of ideas.
Mr. Hoisington indicated that an alternative to the public
participation process would be that a survey could be developed
by telephone or otherwise. The difference is that people in a
survey can only reflect their own thoughts with no opportunity
to interact and see the other view points and other needs from
neighbors around them.
The next step is the needs identification where assumptions
about the future is made, what types of people will be moving
into the community, projections as to what their recreational
values are, how many, how soon, how you build for it. He ex-
plained that the comp plan already has gone to a great detail
in the development of its standards and classifications, but
that it needs to have more life and to have more meaning. A
more specific definition as to what a neighborhood park is.
"Should it become an active or a passive facility, or are there
other different types of neighborhood facilities ?" Consequently
these needs and standards need to be refined, enhanced and be
identifiable to those who are to read it.
The fourth step of this plan is formularization and concept
development that fulfill the needs and the standards of the
community; with a public form so there is an opportunity to
review, react and change that concept plan. Finally, after
this review and adoption, there is the fifth step which is
the final plan, which is simply the consolidation of all the
work that has gone on prior to this point. It's the design,
completion and printing of it in its entirety.
Mr. Hoisington went on to explain what the work load might be,
and what responsibility could be shared in each of these processes.
He indicated that the staff could do a substantial amount of
the work if it has time to complete it. It's important to a
timely process to understand how much time is available and the
work that would be involved before a decision is made as to who
and how this work will be done. The consultant must be consulted
to organize the information that staff and volunteers might
have to put together to assure then they get the information
that it will need to perform the analysis. He felt that it was
important that the consultant organize the public informational
process to insure that there is a good interaction as questions
are answered and all perspectives are shared fairly. He indi-
cated that volunteers and staff could select and make sure that
people got there. Following the analysis of the meeting, committee
members and staff could prepare the objective statements with
•
•
Comprehensive Park Plan Meeting #2
Page 4
minimal help from the consulting firm if it was felt desirable.
He indicated that this could be a time consuming process and that
there must be at least good interaction between the two. In
terms of reproductions and distribution again this could be held
by the couuiiunity and staff as well as by the consulting firm.
He concluded by saying that the consultant has the knowledge
to and must be responsible for the overall scheduling he has the
design capability for concept drawings and the final plan formu-
lation for the master plan.
John Worrall explained the contents of the master plan illumi-
nating on the current work that the City of Plymouth is doing
in regards to their master plan. In response to a question,
he indicated that Brauer and Associates have begun working with
the City of Plymouth in April of this year and hopes to complete
the plan by November of this year. He indicated that in Plymouth
there were six tasks or processes that the parks commission in
Plymouth had decided it would follow. He indicated at this
time that they had completed three steps and was nearly finished
with the fourth phase. Again, in response to a question he
indicated that the committee met frequently in special sessions
to deal with the master plan as well as taking some time in its
regularly scheduled meetings to work on the process.
The first task the City of Plymouth was to complete was the
objectives of the city plan and the master parks plan. What
was the City trying to do? A body of policy was developed in
regards to: preservation of a. certain park areas, acquisition
and development of park areas in established portions of the
community. Second was the documentation and an inventory, why
the community is the way it is at this time and what opportuni-
ties still existed.
The third phase was the needs identification and understanding
of definitions of what the system requires to fill the objectives,
needs and policies previously identified. Fourth phase, and
the one the community is currently working on, is the plan of
the future parks and the criteria for obtaining what has been
established as its needs. He indicated that the consultant has
helped develop a criteria for establishing the priorities, in
a sense a "sorting- system" to determine the essential items
that were important to the system. John further indicated that
priorities were broken down by categories as well. Priorities
for acquisition, priorities for development, and in the case
of Plymouth priorities for redevelopment of some existing
facilities. Once the priorities were established a C.I.P. is
to be established. The C.I.P. is based on population or a
threshold which are to trigger development a specific aspect
of the plan, included in the potential C.I.P. is a projection
of revenue sources as well as other funding sources which
would be available to enact a master parks plan. A series of
questions regarding various aspects of a master parks plan per-
taining to involvement of community, selection process of a
consultant, amount of time required to complete a master plan,
when and how to revise the master plan to keep it current with
changing times. After other general questions and discussion
the meeting was concluded.
•
•
Comprehensive Park Plan Meeting #2
Page 5
Next Meeting: Week of 7th, time, date, place to be established
at parks meeting of September 3.
Potential Agenda items: 1. Review of presentation by Brauer &
Associates.
2. "Where to go next ?"
3. Review of master plans done for
other communities.
4. Discussion of Eagan Parks system
needs.
•
•
•
MEMO TO: ADVISORY PARKS AND RECREATION CO'?IITTEE
FROM: KEN VRAA, DIRECTOR OF PARKS AND RECREATION
August 20, 1981
RE: BURNSVILLE PARKS BOND ISSUE
As some of you may be aware, the City of Burnsville has recently completed
its master parks plan process and is currently holding a series of neigh-
borhood meetings to review parks concept plans with the intended purpose
of going for voter approval of a parks bond issue in May of 1982.
I've been in contact with a member of the Burnsville planning staff to
obtain additional information on their process and neighborhood meetings.
Because the Burnsville process is similiar to what has been indicated as
a desirable process for the City of Eagan, I'm taking this opportunity to
inform you of the various neighborhood meetings Burnsville is holding.
Members of the Advisory Committee may wish to attend one or more of these
meetings to observe the process and to learn from Burnsville's successes/
failures or areas in which improvement might be made if Eagan were to do
the same. All of the meetings are held at the Burnsville City Hall on
Highway 13, commencing at 7:00 P.M. Meeting dates are September 1, 22,
October 6, 20 and November 3. All of these dates are on Tuesdays.
If any member would wish to attend one of these meetings they may want to
contact this office as I too will be attending at several of the neighbor-
hood meetings to take notes.
MEMO TO: MEMBERS, PARK AND RECREATION dOM1!.1I ^TEE
FROM KEN VRAA, DIRECTOR Of PARKS 4 RECL-ATION
RE: PARKS MASTER PLAN
The sub- committee studying the'parks'mastei;.
on Wednesday, August 19th at 4;34 P.M ' Ci
Mr. Fred Hoisington of Brauer' Associates
and will be present to discusg; the advantage
plan. I've asked that he cotlnnent on the pre
a plan, and how the consultant'; could utilize
the community, staff and City officials
All of the members are invited:' to attend, if' ,hey
i1af #is Scheduled to meet
;y' °Hall.
would care to
has accepted my invitation
[,and value of a master parks
less involved in developing
the internal resources of
•
•
MEMO TO: ADVISORY PARKS AND RECREATION COMMITTEE
FROM: KEN VRAA, DIRECTOR OF PARKS AND RECREATION
RE: SPECIAL MEETING
The Advisory Committee will be having a special meeting on Wednesday,
September 16th at 7:00 P.M. at the Parks and Recreation office on
Coachman. The purpose of the meeting will be to review and refine
the work of the study committee on the master park plans for recommendation
to the City Council.
If you are unable to attend, please contact the office.
September 9, 1981