Loading...
06/11/1981 - Advisory Parks & Recreation Commission• • • AGENDA ADVISORY PARKS AND RECREATION COMMITTEE REGULAR MEETING EAGAN, MINNESOTA CITY HALL JUNE 11, 1981 6:30 P.M. TOUR MEETING 7:30 P.M. REGULAR BUSINESS MEETING I. CALL MEETING TO ORDER & PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE II. ADOPT AGENDA & APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF MAY 7th, 1981 III. PRESENTATION/REQUEST - ASSOCIATION FOR RETARDED CITIZENS IV. DEVELOPMENT PROPOSALS V. OLD BUSINESS A. Cinnamon Ridge B. Winkler/Jackson - Parks Dedication C. Park Dedication D. Hill Top Estates - Trail VI. NEW BUSINESS A. Comprehensive Master Parks Plan B. Bond Issue Process C. Bicycle Trails Survey - Report D. Policy for Play Perimeters E. 1982 Budget VII. OTHER BUSINESS/REPORTS A. Summer -in -the -Park B. Ridge Cliffe Park - Program Update C. Council Action - Bicycle Trail Plan D. Other VIII. ADJOURNMENT NOTE: A tour of Park facility will begin at 6:30 P.M., departing from City Hall. The regular meeting will begin at 7:30 P.M. Members are again reminded that if they are not able to attend a meeting to notify the office. • MEMO TO: ADVISORY PARKS & RECREATION COMMITTEE FROM: KEN VRAA, DIRECTOR OF PARKS $ RECREATION June 1981 RE: REQUEST FOR FINANCIAL AID - ASSOCIATION FOR RETARDED CITIZENS The Dakota County Association for Retarded Citizens or D.A.R.0 - will be present at the June 11 Advisory meeting to request continuation of financial assistance for its program for 1981 -1982. Sue Seymour, executive director and Gail Colton who is the program director will be present to outline the needs and programs of D.A.R.C., as well as answer committee members questions. Background: The Dakota County Association for retarded citizens is a United Way Agency serving St. Paul and suburban counties of approximately 192,000 population. Through its Recreation Unlimited, D.A.R.C. sponsors community service for both children and adults in a joint cooperative effort of public agencies who are responsible for recreational services. This cooperative effort involves approximately 11 cities in eight school districts within the county. Attached is some additional information concerning Recreation Unlimited pro- gram, its 1981 budget summary, and proposed annual levy of support being sought from the various school districts and cities involved. Also attached is a 1980 recreation program report and 1980 participants by community. Both Ms Seymour and Ms Colton visited with the director of parks and recreation concerning their funding request. During this meeting and conversation it was pointed out that there are between 1,500 to 2,000 retarded individuals within the service area of D.A.R.C. As a rule of thumb, D.A.R.C. has indicated that approximately 1% of the total population within its service area is its target group. Applying this rule of thumb to the City of Eagan, there would then be approximately 225 individuals who are included in the special service population. It should be noted that the 1980 participant levels shown in the materials submitted by Recreation Unlimited there were 46 individuals within Eagan who participated in the program. This number also includes those individuals who are residents of the Orvilla Home and participate in programs sponsored there. It was pointed out that some of the problems faced by Recreation Unlimited, in addition to its financial problems, relates to identification and recruitment of individuals who are eligible for participation in the program. Because of the needs of this special population a great deal of staff time is also spent on transportation needs, outreach and working with parents of those that participate in the program. Funding: Review of the proposed three year funding plan from 1981 through 1984 show that Recreation Unlimited is seeking to reduce its reliance on foundation grants to that of governmental and instutional funding. In re- viewing the funding proposal members will note that funding requests antici- pate an increase of 15% for next year and 10% for subsequent years. To fund its program D.A.R.C. has devised a formula which would raise a portion of its budget through contributions by community education departments and the remainder from Cities' Parks and Recreation Departments based on a popu- lation formula. This formula would show that the City of Eagan's contribution would be $1,000. • • Request for Fiancial Aid - Association for Retarded Citizens - Memo Page 2 At this time it appears that School District #197 will participate in the proposed level of support along with the community of Apple Valley. Burnsville School District #191 have indicated that it chooses not to partici- pate in the program as it intends to run its own program through the community education department. Recommendation: The Parks and Recreation Advisory Committee should study the request from D.A.R.C. for funding with all due consideration. Recreation Unlimited provides a much needed social service which the Eagan Parks and Recreation Department is currently unable to do because of limited staff time. Other departments and agencies are similarly handicapped, therefore the concept of communities going together sponsoring the Recreation Unlimited consortium program has a great deal of merit. The concern of staff is not that of fund- ing the program rather, its that of insuring that the population within the limits of Eagan are adequately and proportionately being serviced by the funds being provided. Action to be Considered: To either approve, disapprove or modify the funding request from D.A.R.C. to the City Council for 1981, and budget year 1982. • • Dakota County Association for Retarded Citizens Recreation Unlimited is an expansion of the Dakota ARC's long standing interest in community recreation services. The agency has cosponsored summer day camp programs with cities of South St. Paul and Apple Valley since 1972 and swim lessons with the YMCA in West St. Paul since 1973. As more and more families came to the agency with requests for other recreation and socialization experiences for their children, the ARC looked around the county and found that full participation does not always extend beyond the classroom or job onto the playground or in social groups. With the aid of a CETA grant, Recreation Unlimited was initiated in January 1979 by hiring a recreation therapist who has worked with a committee representing 16 recreation related and mental retardation agencies. The project's program objectives are to make available to individuals of all ages a broad variety of healthy and life enhancing activities, on a year round basis, in all parts of the county, and in cooperation with the county's eleven principal cities and eight school. districts. The local recreation professionals are well aware, as ex- pressed in a White House Conference awareness paper, that "recreation is not just a pleasant indulgency - it is a crucial element in a full and rewarding life." Many of them have given enthusiastic approval to the project's county wide program design because, as one has stated: "it would be difficult for many public agencies to operate an independent program due to financial constraints, emaZZ numbers of participants and Zack of organizational time...collectively joined together, we are confident this project ziZZ prove itself." Serving 250 children and adults in 1980, Recreation Unlimited far exceeded the project's program objectives. Documentation on the variety and scope of the program will be found in the attached "1980 Program Report." The funding plan for the project has been worked out with representatives from local recreation providing agencies and county human services. It calls for the ARC to administer Recreation Unlimited with funding from the responsible agencies including eleven cities, eight school districts and the county. Based on a population formula, grants totalling $4,300 were received in 1980 from the cities of South St. Paul, Apple Valley, Eagan, Rosemount and School District #197. In early 1981, the Dakota County Human Services Board gave concept approval to participating in funding the project beginning in 1982. The three year funding plan and the goals for participation by municipalities and school districts is attached. • Association for Retarded Citizens in Dakota County I. Personnel II. Non-Personnel A. Space B. Equipment C. Supplies U. Travel E. Telephone F. Other TOTAL 1981 EXPENSES RECREATION UNLIMITED 1981 BUDGET SUMMARY EXPENSES Grants Services Total Requested Donated A. Salaries $17,717 $14,316 $ 3,401 8. Benefits 2,075 1,733 337 C. Contracts 10,217 3,592 6,625 $30,009 $19,646 $10,363 RECREATION UNLIMITED THREE YEAR FUNDING PLAN $ 3,681 $ 1,615 $ 2,066 all donated 1,850 1,850 1,580 1,230 350 425 425 -0- 15 2,845 11926 j935 INCOME c.----- 1981 . 1982 1983 1934 Foundation Grants $21,311 $ 8,450 $ 4;400 -0-' Government Grants County -0- 13,000 17,000 $21,384 Local 5,000 8,000 11,000 14,256 • Donated Services 15,624 ______..... _17,000 _....--- 19,000 --41---- 20,500 Total $41935 $46,450 $51,400 .---..=•--- ...--.---, aUla $ 6,665 $ 5,261 $26,311 $15,624 ======= • • • Recreation Unlimited Proposed Annual Level of Support School Districts (Community Education) # 6 - South St. Paul • #191 - Burnsville #192 - Lakeville #194 - Farmington #196 - Apple Valley/Rosemount #197 - West St, Paul/Mendota Hts. • #199 - Inver Grove Heights • #200 - Hastings Association for Retarded Citizens/Dakota County April, 1981 Cities (Parks and Recreation) Apple Valley Eagan Farmington Lakeville Mendota Heights Rosemount South St. Paul West St, Paul $ 1,200 2,800 500 500 1,000 600 1,500 1,300 3,000 1,000 200 600 300 300 800 700 These three districts deliver recreation services for the cities located in the district (Burnsville, Inver Grove Heights and Hastings) u npv �CaepuooaS o kie4uawa13 N ` 1— CD w - J Jays p ica[LeA alddy Lned '4S 'oS Lned '4S 'M aLiAnsuana ue6e3 .UnOWOSOu s5upseH a L L Pa)e1 uo36u!.Wae3 sa.H anoa9 aanuI s41.16 pH el.opuaw s;laaM 30 •oN )aaM aad sRea 4uan3 LepadS aosuods -o uo pe00 1- t— C M lD 1 Cr) U") N, CM r1 — v) a 4 .) L b M I } 111 •+ 1() — r-. LO 1 LO r■ i o; ` ....N4 j ....., ( ..._ o i i 1 1 '•i r-, 1 M ► — • M ' C0 V) f V), I 01 LC) VD Cr o! 1. 1 j o 4 d E a V ") 1 Chl to O • - Cr) CO co. d d o Ld 'Cr CO j VD CV `t' VD V 1 0 t 3 Li ? N. Q A �) r- >1 C-.) O > 1 L) Q. Ot U T) C11 d-) CC , (71 -I-) . = Z7 N . + >, c , > '- lD •4.) r , - 0 • r - 1 •r cx 1 • - •r- , C; r- V1' •r •r cr 4--) = 1: -, ' > =1 1_ L Oz =rr U O (J . c r- U v 1 I 1 L L v: > } 7 1 I —Ii N •r d C.0 C� a. Cl_ C1.. C)_ I G_ > , G Z R; S C . i L'S S a. a_ • ._.r N V) v1 V) .. V) I N ' t >. L 1 L7 N Q V) N O ? 1 I I 1 OO; O N; L rl r-•+ -I 1 - - • t '-r N N Cs.) 71 I i In co r, 1 o! ..n ■ r--1 i r, rf CV I 4 _�...�.,t- -.._� j.._..... O (✓ V) 1 to } ; } 4 1 • 1 1 1 1 C c 0 N 1 -II (y 1 K i Cl.) , C V 1 CJ 1 I V)' 0) C 1 L ; S. r ' 1 ^J , Cl.) �, 2 It t t~) C . 1 1 , 4 -- l•- t rt3 a o•tS 0 �_ 1 0) 1 C) (CS i 4- 0 I >' L L 4) , 1 Y Cy) , 13 4) : 'V i- 0 CC Cl- ' v IV O U 0 O ' •r a- cn 3 U L1. Q 1 1 I . co I-0 CT CT 1.0 CD N M' S O O . ^ CA N • ri N ' to CO •-� Cr) N Cr) • - .j +•�r.wr+� —.t M LA 4.1epuooas ' - -- _ ' , I cr ; a' Lo 4 4a e2 wawa l 3 i r° • `° { °° °° ) Ja • t y10.. 1 i t '; z �a l l ell a lddy N . , - ..•.,4.r ........_4 CV "' 1 "' 1 ii ‹r Q c co i .. i . N d lied •4s •o rn ° j d co Ilj . .......... i T i std R tried •4 S • M- . __.. — allinsuan8_ N ue6e3 4unowasoli p seH U046U.WaeJ s�H anoa9 aanUI r-4 s146pH e4opuaw s1aaM Jo •oN lam aad sfieJ 4uan3 lepads • 1 aosuods - o3 uo «>r:Do - { L N � 1 fO o i M Cr) N T JII j 1 Cr) N • I � z M fY N CC ,; d 0 RS •0 • a) l0 Cr) ! 1 Cr) J • • • • MEMO TO: ADVISORY PARKS AND RECREATION COMMITTEE FROM: KEN VRAA, DIRECTOR OF PARKS AND RECREATION RE: CINNAMMON RIDGE Background: Zachman Homes had previously submitted a P.U.D. for a 72 acre parcel of land north of Cliff and west of the new Cedar Avenue road which the Ad- visory Committee reviewed at their March meeting. After the review of the preliminary plat, the committee recommended that a "cash" park con- tribution be made. In the time since the committee's action, the proposed plan has been denied by the City Council and a new proposal has been prepared for submission. This new proposal eliminates some of the objections by the council, planning commission and residents that were made with the first proposal. As it affects parks, the new proposal has included some common ground area that is referred to as "park space." This has been included in the new pro- posal to overcome objections from residents of the River Hills 9 area who had felt that active play space for the densities proposed should be included. Therefore, the developer has included approximately 2 1/2 acres of open space within the development as well as the approximate 6 acres which fall beneath the "high- line" on the north border of the parcel. The six acre area is to accommodate some surface drainage needs but is also suitable for open space and some informal- active space. Issue: Information: June 1981 The developer has requested that the Advisory Committee review the possibility of giving the developer partial credit against the cash dedi- cation previously requested, for providing these two park areas within the new proposed development. Further, the developer has agreed to grade, restore top soil, and to seed the park area within the development. The issue is not whether there will be park space; rather, who will control and own the Park Area. The proposed development consisits of 15 single family homes, 52 town homes, 42 single family cluster homes, 196 condominium units and 300 units in the R -4 area. Under existing park dedication requirements, the developer would be required to dedicate 10% or approximately 7+ acres within the entire development, or a cash dedication of approximately $120,000 based on the proposal. The development plans show that approximately 6 acres on the north edge of the property is located beneath the existing power line. • Page 2 Past practices has been to give 50% credit for such land or in this case, 3 acres of credit if the property were to be accepted as park land to fulfill the requirements of parks dedication. The location of the 2 1/2 acre commons or park like area is centrally located and borders both condominiums and twin home units. Access to the park has been provided by two 30 foot trail easements. The park area, if not accepted by the City, would be held in common under the jurisdiction of the home owners asso- ciation which consisits solely of the residents in the twin home units. Alternatives /Comments: As previously mentioned, the developer has requested that the parks and recreation advisory committee take into consideration allowing of partial credit for the inclusion of this park area within the plat. Therefore, there are possibly two alternatives for the Advisory Committee to con- sider and make recommendation on. Alternative 1: Refuse to accept the two common areas as park land and receive total cash dedication. Comments: Because the committee has previously determined that additional park land is not necessary within this park service area, it would be justifiable to deny the request. Further, it would not be possible to develop a suitable park meeting park standards in this development. The developer has added the park land to enhance the proposed plat and not to fill previously identified park needs. However, from a broader perspec- tive, the additional land is of benefit to the community for open space, purpose, etc. By refusing to accept the park acreage, long term main- tenance cost of the property does not become the responsibility and burden of the City in the years ahead. Although the common space is provided within and for the total 72 acre development, it appears that ownership of the park area would be that of, and within the jurisdiction of, the home - owners association. Consettuently, the home owners association could act to restrict the use of the park area by other residents in the develop - ment or seek to restrict its use and functions for other than park pur- poses. As an example the neighborhood association might decide that it is appropriate for garden plots, kennels, or other non -park like functions for which the developer has intended or describe or use. By acceptance of the park like property from the develoment it also has the impact of removing this property from the tax role. Non - acceptance of the park property may prohibit /limit the future possi- bility of some park development which could take place along the northern portion of the site. As advisory members may recall, the City currently has a triangular piece of land beneath the overhead power line. With this existing parcel, and the acceptance of the park land within the pro- posed plat, a significant piece of land could be utilized for some limited types of park development at a later date. Hence, non - acceptance of this land means, that, perhaps an opportunity for parks usage could be lost. • • Page 3 Alternative 2: Acceptance of the areas that are created for park purposes within the plat and give the developer partial parks credit, If the advisory committee were to recommend that partial credit be given, it sould do so with the intent that the northern 6 acres be credited at 3 acres - following previous practice. Consequently, partial credit would then be given against approxi- mately 5 1/2 acres. Comments: Acceptance of the park area as part of the Eagan Park system insures that this area would be controlled for the betterment and enjoy- ment for all of the residents in the proposed plat as well as those in the area to the north. Long term maintenance cost would become the responsi- bility of the City, but this is relatively minor as crews are already in the immediate area. Development cost would become the responsiblilty of the City, however, this would appear not to be too significant because the small 2 1/2 acre parcel does not lend itself to intensive development. Further, the developer has previously agreed to grade and seed the site suitable for parks development. Because the Advisory Committee has pre - viously requested cash dedication and found that the area was adequately serviced by existing park facilities, the committee might be concerned about establishing a precedent for this type of situation in the future. However, it is a discretionary decision by the committee and future requests need not be approved by the advisory committee if they feel it is not appropriate at that time, does not meet park needs, or enhance recreational/ park opportunities within the service area. Review: The Advisory Committee should review the two alternatives and discuss the pros and cons of each for evaluation. Particular attention should be paid to what the Committee feels the overall benefit, use and suitability of this Park space has and its role in the park system. If it becomes the recommendation to accept the two designated park areas for inclusion into the City park system, the committee should discuss what conditions it feels are appropriate and determine a range of "percent of credit" that might be given against the cash dedication. Staff would then proceed with negotiations with the developer for the inclusion of the parkland into the City system, the amount of contribution against the designated cash dedications to be made, timing, development standards, etc. If the committee has any questions regarding this issue, or like addi- tional information, they sould contact the office prior to the meeting. Note: On may 26th the Advisory Planning Committee recommended approval of the preliminary plat, and on June 2nd the City Council also approved the preliminary plat. MEMO T0: ADVISORY PARKS & RECREATION COMMITTEE • FROM: KEN VRAA, DIRECTOR OF PARKS AND RECREATION RE: PARKS DEDICATION WINKLER /JACKSON ADDITION June 1981 As you will recall, at the last Advisory meeting the committee took action to seek parks dedication in the porposed division known as Winkler/ Jackson. As previously indicated in a separate memo to you on May 28, members of the Parks Advisory Committee have made a preliminary determina- tion of potential parks dedication. The parcel contains approximately 4.2 acres and abuts another parcel which contains 3.5 acres which the state highway department will be turning back to the City of Eagan. Total acreage for the overall park will contain approximately 7 1/2 acres. As previously indicated in the memo of May 28, the consulting engineering firm has done a preliminary estimate of potential grading costs based on a preliminary sketch plan. The consulting engineer has estimated that it will require 25,000 cubic yards of material to be moved at a cost of 75. to a cubic yard or approximately $18,750 to $21,250. It should be remembered that this is a preliminary estimate based on a preliminary sketch for the park and subsequent cost could deviate substantially from that which has been figured upon, dependent upon a final parks design and escalation in grading costs. Recommendation: That the Parks dedication of approximately 4.2 acres be affirmed to the City Council. Further, that the remaining parks dedication be in either cash or in grading of the Park Area to City Park design. Dependent on phasing of the development plan, it would appear that a saving could be realized by having site drading done in conjunction with development. Action to be considered: Either approve or disapprove of the 4.2 acres of park dedication (subject to modification) of the North Boundary dependent upon site characteristics and find plat process; and to either approve or disapprove the remaining parks dedication be in cash or in the form of park site grading /develop- ment or cash. Note: Attached is the Preliminary Concept Sketch for members review illustrating the park area involved. MEMO TO: ADVISORY PARKS F, RECREATION COMMITTFIE FROM: KEN VRAA, DIRECTOR OF PARKS f, RECRFATION RI: WINKLER /JACKSON ADDITION On Tuesday, May 12 members of the Parks and Recreation Development sub- committee met to review potential sites for parks acquisition in the pro- posed Winkler /Jackson parcel. The sub- committee met with members of City staff and the City's consulting engineer to review potential areas and to make a determination as to the suitability for parks dedication. After careful review of potential sites, it was the recommendation of the sub-committee to attempt to acquire approximately 4+ acres of park land immediately to the east of Slater's road and to the north of James Court. This land is immediately adjacent to the approximately 3+ acres of MNDot right -of -way which is to he returned to the City of Eagan. Before making a final determination and recommendation to the entire Advisory Parks and Recreation Committee to seek this parcel for parks dedication, staff was asked to develop potential sketch plans for analysis by the City's consulting engineering firm to determine potential develop- ment costs involved in grading of the site to provide the informal, active play space being sought for this,parks section. The sketch plans that will be drafted are not intended to indicate the eventual parks plan, but are intended to merely ascertain whether play elements will fit into the site and to make a preliminary study on grading costs. Knowledge of these costs will help the Advisory Parks Committee make a final determi- nation as to whether the potential parks dedication is economically feasible for use as parks area. By way of copy of this memo to Dale Runkle, City Planner, notification to the Advisory Planning Commission that the Advisory Parks Committee intends to seek parks dedication from the developer in this proposal. A final recommendation will not be made until preliminary costs are made available. cc: Dale Runkle, City Planner Tom Lledges, City Administrator • MEMO TO: ADVISORY PARKS AND RECREATION COMMITTEE FROM: KEN VRAA, DIRECTOR OF PARKS AND RECREATION RE: PARKS DEDICATION June 1981 Background: The Advisory Committee has previously determined that it will again review the parks dedication fees for recommendation to the City Council by October of 1981. Because there are several new members on the Advisory Committee within recent months, it was suggested that the different types of options for parks dedication be reviewed for both old and new members. Staff has compiled, on the attached four sheets, a synopsis of the various forms and formulas for cash and land dedication. Staff has also updated a previous survey of various communities, as of April this year, on types and amounts of dedication being required in other communities. This in- formation will be made available at the meeting of June 11th. At the June 11 meeting, staff will review the various formulas available as well as the results of the survey for discussion purposes. The Advisory Committee may wish to review the various advantages and dis- advantages of the formulas as a basis for understanding the parks dedica- tion issue. Action to be Taken: Direction by the committee will be needed to direct either the sub - committee or staff on how it may wish to proceed in this review process. ( 2,?c7tAk- (0- / 5744A" dede RESIDENTIAL (Cash) • Flat rate per unit ✓ Flat rate per lot e Flat rate per unit by density type • Flat percentage of fair market value of total development ✓ Cash dedication of the fair market value of the calculated land dedication amount e Percentage of fair market value according e.g. to density Flat percentage of fair market value or flat e.g. 10% of FMV for total area or rate per lot, whichever greater $300 per lot, whichever greater O Percentage of fair market value according to e.g. 100' wide or larger 5% of FMV lot size 100' wide or larger 10% of FMV Formulas: P 1. # units x persons /unit persons 250 e.g. $300 per unit e.g. $300 per lot (Current acquisition B 2. Cash dedication amount = acre demand cost per acre Acre demand _ # of dwelling units x pop. /dwelling units e.g. $300 per single family unit $250 per townhouse unit $150 per apartment unit e.g. 10% of fair market value 10% of FMV for 0 -2 units /AC 11% of FMV for 2 -3 units /AC 12% of FMV for 3 -4 units /AC 12 -15% of FMV for 4 + units /AC - acres of land x FMV = cash dedication amount Current development costs per acre) Number of dwelling units in project e.g. See Maplewood Pop. standard of 100 Requirements RESIDENTIAL (Land) s Flat percentage dedication of land * Dedication of land equivalent to 10% of the value of the total parcel e Percentage of land dedicated according ✓ Percentage of land dedicated according to lot size Formulas: e.g. 10% of total subdivision land area Persons a 1. # units x persons /unit = 250 - areas of land dedicated e.g. 20 acres at $120,000 value $12,000 land dedication Units/ e.g. Acre District 0 -6 R -1, R -2 - 10% of land to be subdivided 6+ R -3, R -4 - 12Z% of land to be subdivided e.g. Lot size 100' wide or larger - 5% of land being subdivided Lot less than 100' wide - 10% of total land to be subdivided e 2. .4 x acreage x no. of dwelling units (minimum amount, more can be required at City Council discretion) Note: A 2 -17% credit is offered in some communites in lieu of land dedication if on site recreation amenities are provided by the developer. • • • COMMERCIAL /INDUSTRIAL (Cash) • 5 -15% of land value • Percentage of land value with a fixed limit e.g. 10% of land value, but not to exceed $2,000 /acre . Fixed amount per acre Note: •Communities which require commercial /industrial park dedication still retain average residentail requirements. That is, commercial /industrial dedication requirements do not directly affect the residential requirements. COMMERCIAL /INDUSTRIAL (Land) . A 2 -15% dedication of the total land area e.g. $1,400 per acre • • MEMO TO: ADVISORY PARKS & RECREATION COMMITTEE FROM: KEN VRAA, DIRECTOR OF PARKS AND RECREATION RE: BOND ISSUE PROCESS Background: June 1981 At a previous meeting of the Advisory Parks and Recreation Committee, it was requested that the "steps" to a potential bond issue be outlined. The process to any bond issue can be as long or as short as may be desired. However, there are several significant steps or areas of concern that need to be taken. Like most issues which are broad and complex many of the identifiable steps take place simultaneously or in close cooperation with other steps but do not necessarily follow in a sequential pattern to achieve a final objective. Recognition Stage: Perhaps the most significant step which needs to be taken is the first one: that is the recognition that a need exists in the park system of such a magnitude that it warrants issuance of bonds to finance the work. The need(s) should then be refined and identified to a high degree of specifi- city. Expenditures should be identified with each specific need at each of the park locations. As an example, one might identify Blackhawk Park to be equipped with play equipment costing $5000. Other identifiable needs would also be earmarked for the park location and an estimated cost for that particular site. During the process of the needs identification, and cost estimate, it would be desirable to identify the priority of that park need, and a time frame for implementation of that development should the money be appro- priated. For example: the installation of play equipment might be addressed within a very early time frame (1982) while other needs might be contingent upon other factors. As an example, the construction of a shelter building may not take place until after a pathway into the site has been completed, or some other contingent factors have been completed before development occurs. In short, in addition to identifying the need, cost should be identified, the priority and the time frame for its implementation. Much of this effort could be accomplished through the process of develop- ing a parks master plan. A five year C.I.P. is also an acceptable tool to use as a means of identifying park needs. Review Stage: This stage consists of a thorough review of each project previously identified within the "master plan ". Because bond issues for financing of improvements are generally considered to be of long term nature it's important to review the priorities and expenditures required with an eye to what the needs are for the immediate year or two and as long as five and six years away. Serious study must be given to where parks need to be acquired, or what playground equipment might be needed in a newly develop- • Page 2 ing area four or five years from now. Because the amount of bond issue is also important, it's during this review phase that the anticipated dollar range of a bond issue should be addressed. By simultaneously ascertating the cost involved along with the determination of priorities, consensus is usually achieved as to what park needs will be presented in the bond issue. Officials of the City should have a good understanding and acceptance of what is being planned, what its cost will be and the time of possible implementation of the project. Consideration might be given to separate voting issues; two major types of expenditure. As an example, it might be determined that the bond issue should seek monies for two separate cate- gories; category one might be for park development while the second issue might be requested for park land acquisition. Again, prioritization for park needs and an estimated amount for each of these needs will help make this determination as what is the best policy for the City to follow. The third process step involved in a potential bond issue will be dis- cussion with the City's financial bonding consultant. This should begin at a stage in which a general dollar amount might be known for potential bond issues. The consultant would then do preliminary work and assist in the determination of the best method of financing the issuance of the bonds, the pay back periods, and other significant factors which would have impact on the issuance of these bonds. It would be at this time that one could begin to determine what the impact on the City's mill levy would be and what it might cost an average property owner. Once a final determination on the exact amount of the issuance is determined then these estimates can be further refined and a positive strategy be developed for the bond issue. Approval /date for election: After a thorough review and approval by the City Council, an election date would need to be set. This date would be to give ample time for the legal requirements to be met as well as a sufficient time for the City to prepare the necessary brochures, graphics, and information the public would require to make an informative decision. This phase would also trigger into effect a "public informational campaign" consisting of news releases, neighborhood meetings, as well as distribution of other types of data concerning the bond issue which the community would need. The "public information cam- paign" would be a key aspect of the bond issue as it would seek to communi- cate to the electorate what the needs are in the park system and how this bond issue would hope to address those needs. The purpose of this memo is to briefly identify the various steps or separate processes involved in establishing a bond issue. Potentially, there are any number of steps which might be included or could be included in such a process. These might include early neighborhood meetings and meetings with special interest groups to gain their input into what they feel the needs of the park system might be. Meetings of this type are valuable in gaining support for a bond issue and in determining what needs the community feels are important. The most significant of all steps, • • Page 3 however, is the first step. It's significant not only because it's the first step, but because it also begins to identify the deficiency and the needs which are to be addressed within the park system. As previously mentioned these needs should be identified not only for the present but the needs that might be foreseen within the next 4 to 6 year time frame. Should members of the Advisiory Committee like additional information beyond this preliminary memo, the Director of Parks and Recreation would be happy to discuss with the committee. • • June 1981 MEMO TO: ADVISORY PARKS & RECREATION COMMITTEE FROM: KEN VRAA, DIRECTOR OF PARKS & RECREATION RE: HILLTOP ESTATES PATH Attached is a letter from Mr. Rod Hardy, Dunn & Curry, concerning the path in the Hilltop Estates. The department head addressed a letter to Mr. Hardy asking when the path might be completed and a time table for its completion. As members may recall, a portion of the path was completed in the fall of 1980, but the entire path could not have been completed because of high water near the ponds. Mr. Moffat, who is referenced in the letter as a representative of the home owners, contacted the department on Monday, June 6, concerning the path after he received a copy of the letter. The long background on the proposed path, its purpose and intent, was given to Mr. Moffat. It was explained that the City had wanted the trail completed prior to the construction of homes so potential home buyers would be aware of its presence and impact. After some discussion, Mr. Moffat indicated that it was his opinion that the residents would not be presenting a petition. He further indicated that, in as much as the developer and the City have had an agreement in the past, the existing. residents would not want to interfere but to see the agreement completed. Staff will answer questions that the committee may have and will again address a letter to Mr. Hardy asking for a time table for completion of the pathway as previously agreed to. • • June 4, 1981 Mr. Ken Vraa, Director Eagan Parks $ Recreation Committee City of Eagan 3795 Pilot Knob Road Eagan, Minnesota 55122 Re: Path for Hilltop Estates. Dear Ken: Dunn & Curry Real Estate Management Inc. 4940 Viking Drive Pentagon Office Park Minneapolis, MN 55435 (612) 835 -2808 • Thank you for your letter of May 21, 1981, inquiring as to the status of the completion of the trail system in our Hilltop Estates project. As we discussed last fall, the residents of Hilltop Estates are concerned that the design and construction of the paths as they surround the two bodies of water on our property will not be consistent with what they believe is an appropriate path system for their needs and interests. While we recognize our obliga- tion to complete the pathway system, we believe that the interests of the residents should be taken into account. They are presently preparing a proper petition to the city to be presented to the Parks and Recreation Department indicating their interest in having a path that will be more natural and meandering be the path that will be built as proposed to one which will be of macadam and of a width that will destroy the treeline around the edge of the ponds. It is my hope that their petition will be signed up within the next week so that it may be submitted to you for your committee's review. Please be assured that we continue to recognize our commitment to the trail, however, we also have to recognize that our buyers have a legitimate interest in the final product as they will be the ones that will be using this trail. • • • If you have any additional questions, please give me a call. In the meantime, the representative for the homeowners in Hilltop Estates is John W. Moffat III, 4146 Blueberry Knoll, Eagan, MN 55123. If you have any questions of the residents, please feel free to contact him. Thank you for your continued efforts, I remain RDH:sr y yours, Rodne D. Hardy Vice President • MEMO TO: ADVISORY PARKS AND RECREATION COMMITTEE FROM: KEN VRAA, DIRECTOR OF PARKS AND RECREATION RE: COMPREHENSIVE MASTER PARKS PLAN Background: There has been general discussion by the committee and staff concerning the need for a City Parks Master Plan. This memo is in response to a request from the advisory committee to provide information regarding a master parks plan. This report is simply a brief overview of the process involved. At a later date, a detailed, supplementary report will be pro- vided upon demand. The term "master park plan" usually generates a variety of interpretations as to just exactly what a master plan is, its purpose, and its content. There is no exact definition that carries the same meaning for each indivi- dual. Nor is each master plan similar in the way it is prepared from community to community. Nevertheless, there are some commonalities that do exist in the process of each and every master plan. Following, is a brief outline of those basic factors homogeneous to a parks master plan. Master Plan Utility: A master plan evolves from an inventory and analysis of the community, and particulary from its existing parks system. The analysis is used as a starting point - the factual information that can be used as a statistical data base. Factors commonly under analysis are: A. Natural features such as water and wetlands, topography, woodlands, B. Sites of historical significance C. Population characteristics, such as current and projected populations, densities, composition, income, economic base within the community D. Transportation, utilities, and accessibility E. Inventory of existing park system, such as acreage, distribution, development, type of facilities, popu- lations served. The analysis will also look at quasi- public and private resources which have an impact on the park system and its future growth. 1. The utility of this type of information is highly apparent in master planning. For instance, a detailed inventory of existing parks, when matched against established national standards for parks, will indicate to the City existing deficiencies in the park system, thus providing a data base upon which improvements can be made to achieve the desired ratios of parks and facilities per given population. 2. To identify with greater accuracy each park's purpose and intent, the master plan is designed to identify the various parks by classification: playfields, tot lots, special facility, reserve area, conservation, etc., rather than utilizing the generic term of parks. 3. The master plan is a system plan. It seeks to integrate "individual parks" and open space of different characteristics into a "whole" integrated unit which seeks to capitalize on the advantages of each park's positive characteristic. This brings each park into a complete network of parks rather than to treat parks as individual units which have no relationship to each other. Links, such as trailway connections, may be addressed at the same time to illustrate how parks can become Comprehensive Master Parks Plan - Memo Page 2 a true network. 4. The system -wide master plan addresses recreational opportunities in programming to insure the physical facilities are planned for adequately meet the desired level of programming required /and /or desired. 5. The master plan predicts future needs and will identify deficiencies in the existing and future deficiencies based on the City's rate of growth. It will help to prioritize these needs, quantify them, and relate them in an orderly manner. As a prediction of the future, the study looks at such issues as zoning, growth factors, schools, existing policies, and public /private lands;since future needs can only be projected, it is necessary such predictions be updated at least every 5 years to absorb any changes which may occur. 6. A master plan, although it is a document, is a process of involvement and input. Neighborhood groups, special interest groups, elected and appointed officials, and informational support data, can all provide input into the plan. The actual process of working on the master plan on a community -wide basis helps to more fully define it, its product, and its implementation. It is, thus, the responsibility of the professional consultant who prepares the master plan to be skilled at integrating these inputs into a plan which is in harmony "with" the community rather than "for" the community. 7. The master plan is part of a work program and administrative tool for parks development. The "plan" portion is then followed by specific site plans which is then followed by detailed design and construction documents. The master plan is not a collection of individual "master plans" for each park, however many master plans may and do include concept or sketch plans for parks as a development guide. 8. The master plan may address trails, special use facilities (swimming pools, ice arena, auditorium), staffing pattern, ponding issues, and other park related matters of concern to the community, if it is the desire to have the plan do so. 9. In terms of financing, a master plan is designed to establish priorities/ sequences of acquisition and development of park lands. Since funding is usually scarce, it is necessary to identify priority projects. Hand in hand with the prioritizing of finance, a master plan fulfills legal requirements upon which grants -in -aid programs fund parks acquisition and development projects. A master plan also aids in the justification of budget priorities and bond issues relating to parks. 10. Finally, a master plan avoids unrelated planning by other groups that may be unqualified; avoids duplicating and overlapping of facilities; and administration changes take place. Summary: Mater plans begin with an analysis of the community, its parks, and its growth patterns. This information is compared against established standards and existing policies of the City. Deficiencies currently in the system and future deficiencies are noted; then a planned approach to development to meet the needs and deficiencies of the system and recreational programs are established. The master plan can also include park related issues such as the need for special facilities. • • Comprehensive Master Parks Plan - Memo Page 3 The cost of a master plan for parks varies widely and is dependent upon the plan of involvement, the elements to be defined in the plan, the extent of "pre- plan" work staff /City can provide and other variables. Recent master parks plans completed for other communities have cost as low as $18,000. (this particular community, however, is a maturing community with fewer parks issues than Eagan would have) Other Master Plans have cost upwards. of $30,000 to $35,000. The cost of any park plan is relative to the amount of data requested in the plan and the knowledge one obtains from ensuring an orderly, timely, and efficient growth to a parks system. Should the Advisory Committee members like additional information, staff will be happy to provide this. • i MEMO TO: TOM HEDGES, CITY ADMINISTRATOR ADVISORY PARKS AND RECREATION COMMITTEE Definition: June 1981 FROM: MICHELLE CORDS, PRACTICUM STUDENT KEN VRAA, DIRECTOR OF PARKS AND RECREATION RE: BICYCLE TRAIL SURVEY Title: Survey of bike trail usage on the Iighline Trail Purpose: The purpose of this survey is to determine the amount of, type of, and reasons for usage on the major bike trail extending from Nicols Road to Lexington Avenue; commonly referred to as the Highline Trail. The reason this site has been chosen is due to the extent of the system, as compared to the much shorter trails in the City of Eagan. In addition to determining numbers, this survey will also serve as an insight as to the users' opinion of the present trail and the system's future, whether users' bikes are registered, if illegal modes of transportation are being used, and what types of users are on the trail in terms of age, single or in groups, joggers, bikers, hikers, or other. It is the department's hunch one will be able to find consistency as to why people use the trails, and what neighborhoods most frequently use them. A survey of the type proposed is very timely, as the data gathered can be used for many purposes. One of the strong points about this survey is that it is designed to be used in the future on a recurring basis. This is very instrumental in monitoring user trends; whether the trails are continually being more heavily used as the trail system expands. Another use for this survey is that the department will obtain some insight as to whether or not users will support the continued expansion of the city- wide trail system by participating at public meetings and /or special trail campaigns. Finally, this survey should provide the department with a substantial informa- tion base to support the continued funding of the bike trail system. For the purpose of this study, Bike Trail will be defined as those routes specifically designed for use by bicyclists, but also including other compatible uses like joggers and hikers. Null Hypothesis: There is no difference in the number of cyclists using the bike trail at a given time; and there is no difference in the objectives and opinions of those persons using the bike trail. • Bicycle Trail Survey - Memo Page 2 Sources of Data: The department has selected three modes of data gathering: 1. Personal observations. 2. Personal interviews with users. 3. Photography Method: Observations, Interviews, & Photography To carry out the survey, a staff person will be stationed at different locations along the trail, at various time periods. The intent is to cover a cross - section of a full week, with each user -day consisting of twelve hours, be- ginning at 8:00 A.M. and ending at 8:00 P.M. While on the trail, the surveyor will conduct three modes of data gathering. First of all, an observer's tally sheet will be used to count numbers and ages of users, types of users, and groupings of users at a given location, at a given time segment. The second mode of data gathering will consist of direct interviews with users. Since it will be difficult to effectively interview every user observed, this mode will be conducted as time allows. The intent of the interview process is to gather input from the public about the Highline Trail. Types of information to be gathered include: A- Type of user Cyclist, hiker, jogger, other Illegal users Registered bikes Single, couples, small groups, family Ages B- Neighborhood of user C- Why user is on the trail Recreational transportation to destination area, alternative form of transportation. D- Does user like the trail and why E- What's user's perception about completing city -wide system Are users supporting the trail Will users participate in public meetings concerning the trails F- Further comments The final mode incorporated into the survey process, involves taking photographs/ slides along the trail. Elements to be included are: 1. Signage 2. Access to schools and parks 3. Action shots of users 4. Scenery and vistas seen from the trail 5. Variety of terrain 6. Problem areas on the trail Following, are exhibits of both the observer's tally and the interview question- naire to be used, along with a location map of the Highline Trail. 1 (Make a mark on all that apply) _I ON S9X CYCLIST II JOGGER HIKER OTHER(specify) ILLEGAL MODE OF TRANSPORTATION (specify) REGISTERED BIKE I SINGLE COUPLE II I SMALL GROUP FAMILY • • a cn as 0 • • Questionnaire: Age Male /Female Neighborhood where you live How often do you use the trail? Do you like the trail, if so why? Do you use the trail as a destination route to work, school, shopping, recreation, exercise? Do you support the trail system? Why? Would you be willing to participate in public meetings? How can the trail system be improved? If bike is not registered, tell user they can obtain one through the state. Do you have further comments? • DATE: LOCATION: TIME: • Bike Survey - Memo Page 3 Results: The department spent a great deal of time on the Highline Trail during the latter part of April and the month of May. For the most part, the results are very positive, but in relation to numbers of users, it is felt many limiting variables must be considered as they reflect the data to a large extent. If these variables could be overcome, user figures would probably be much higher. Following, are the limiting variables to be accounted for: A. The survey was conducted in the spring of the year. Consequently, inclement weather played a major role in shaping the results. Many days were quite chilly and windy, thus decreasing the number of potential users who might use the trail. B. In conjunction with spring weather, it should be noted school is still in session, thus during school hours, numbers of users are greatly de- creased. Also evidence shows weekends and after school hours to be more heavily used, thus supporting this statement. C. Since only one staff person carried out the majority of the survey, it is inevitable all segments of the trail could not be monitored at one time, and since not every user rides the whole trail each time, many people were probably missed. D. All results were averaged according to time segments. Thus, days of inclement weather were averaged along with peak days; the outcome being lower averages than could be expected if all days were peak days. E. Some segments of the trail are more heavily used than others. Conse- quently, on days when the surveyor was stationed on "quiet" stretches of the trail, numbers were considerably less. F. During the survey process, it was observed many users pass along the same trail segment a number of times. The surveyor did not account for this each time the user passed. Rather, the user was only accounted for once. G. Trail users were only accounted for when they specifically used the Highline Trail. This means trail segments feeding into the trail or segments connecting schools directly to neighborhoods, were not tallied. H. Hours before 8:00 A.M. and after 8:00 P.M. were not surveyed. If those hours were included, especially during long summer days, numbers would probably increase the daily averages. Awareness of the above constraints is essential to the analysis of the data gathered. The survey figures are only valid within the given circumstances. Later surveys may indicate higher results should some or all of the above variables be overcome. Following, is the synthesized data collected by the surveyor, along with necessary explanations where appropriate. Under 11 11 -20 21 -30 31 -40 41 -50 Over 51 53 -M 25 -M 82 -M 20 -F 28 -M 25 -F 21 -M 13 -F 9 -M 3 -F 4 -M 2 -F 69% -M 31% -F 78 102 53 34 12 6 27.4% 35.8% 18.6% 11.9% 4.2% 2.1% •o. Bike Survey - Memo Page 4 Data shows the average weekday has approximately 82.14 users /day at one location, while the average weekend has 123.4 users /day at one location. Thus, weekly projections would be: 82.14 x 5 days = 410.7 123.4 x 2 days = 246.8 657.5 users /week These figures reflect usage for the spring of the year. Summer projections would most likely reflect this formula: 123.4 x 7 = 863.8 users /wk. At one location The flow chart illustrates evidence of peak user times. On weekdays, it can be seen usage occurs before school and progressively increases during after school hours and into the evening. Weekends, on the other hand, indicate a progressive increase throughout the day. Reasons for the extremely different flows are primarily due to the presence of school and work hours occupying a major portion of each weekday vs. the extended periods of free time characteristically seen on weekends. The total number of users observed in the survey process was 322. A breakdown of types of users follows: Cyclists Joggers Hikers Illegal No. 231 38 49 3 (1 mini bike) 72% 12% 15% 1% (2 horses) In terms of users with pets, tabulations were made to provide insight as to the percentage of users who walk their pets and whether or not pets are leashed while on the trail. Following are the results: Hikers 33% were walking dogs. Of those, 71% were not leashed. Joggers 11% were jogging w /dogs. All were on leashes. Groupings of users indicate the following: Single Pair Small Group Family 112 52 18 14 Ages users were tallied by age groups as well as by sex. Data indicates the largest group falls between the ages of 11 -20, followed by children under 11; although it can be seen all age groups were represented. In terms of sex, 69% of the users were males, while 31% of the users were females. Number of Users by Age & Sex Exercise 35% Recreation 40% School 21.6% Work Shopping 1.7% I Church 1.7% Bike Survey - Memo Page 5 Of those users interviewed, 82% lived within one -half mile of the Highline Trail, while 1.5% lived within one mile, 6% within 2 miles, and 10.5% were from out of town. It can be expected that the majority of users live with- in close proximity to the trail, as it is readily accessible. The interesting figure to note is the percentage of out -of -town users. More specifically, these users were from Burnsville and Rosemount. Of the cyclists interviewed, 87.5% did not have registered bicycles. Although it is not mandatory to have a bicycle registered, staff did inform each user where they could go to get their bicycles registered by the State. Following, is a breakdown of how often users are on the trail. Daily 2 + /wk 1 /wk 1/2 wks. Less than every 2 wks. 26.3% 26.3% 14.5% 14.5% 18.4% It can be seen well over 50% use the trail more than once a week. Conversely, many users interviewed were on the trail for the first time. Of those, all were pleased with the trail and said they would use it more often in the future. All users interviewed liked the trail and were very excited about the possibility of a city -wide system. 41% stated they would be willing to attend public meetings concerning the bicycle trail system if given proper notice. Reasons stated as to why users like the trail, include the following. 1- Off the road and away from traffic, thus adding to safety and limiting noise and congestion. 2- Natural setting with a variety of ecosystems. Is very scenic with beautiful vistas. 3- Wildlife observation and bird watching opportunities. 4- Smooth riding surface with interesting terrain. 5- Convenient and close to home, thus readily accessible to users within close proximity to the trail. 6- Accessibility to parks and schools. Reasons for Using the Trail Users indicated if the system were ex- panded, there would be more opportunities to use the trail system as a destination route for shopping and work. Also, extending the trail all the way to the zoo would make it more accessible to trail users. Improvements to the trail, as cited by users, includes the following. 1- Expand the trail system; especially a connection to the new zoo and on east side of Pilot Knob Road to the shopping center (PDQ). 2- Hilly terrain in much of the existing system. With further expansion, include some routes with more level terrain. 3- Consider a safety crossing on Pilot Knob Road. During summer school, mothers take turns patrolling the crossing. Suggested remedies by users: • Bike Survey - Memo Page 6 Stop light or over pass. 4- Enforce horses and mini -bikes to keep them off trail. Surveyor observed 1 mini -bike and 2 horses while on the trail. 5- Correct or sign sharp turn at entrance to trail west of Thomas Lake Road. Further comments offered by users include: 1- Installing park benches near Thomas Lake Park and at intervals along the trail as resting points. 2- Accessibility to snowmobiles. 3- Consider an exercise trail in conjunction with the bike trail. 4- Impressed with the trail and its natural setting. Conclusion: Based on the data gathered in the field, the department concludes the bicycle trail survey was a very timely study. Actual numbers were tallied to analyze the amount of usage at a given time, on a given day. The interview process involved user input which in turn generated valuable geographic information, users' perceptions concerning the trail, and suggested improvements. Further- more, the interview process was good public relations between users and parks department staff, as many questions concerning the trail and the parks system in general could be answered. This report is of great utility to the department, as it can be used as support material for the further expansion and funding of the trails system. Also, suggested improvements, enforcement, and /or added amenities to the trail, as cited by users, can be used as a guide to further trail design and mainte- nance practices. Recommendations: Should this survey be conducted in the future, it is recommended steps be taken to control some of the limiting variables this survey was faced with. For instance, a survey taken during the summer with more than one staff person on the trail at a given time, may yield much higher and more accurate results in terms of numbers. As an addition to this survey, it may prove worthwhile to conduct a Phase II approach to gain data as to why bicyclists, joggers, hikers, etc. d� not use the trail. This would be a more difficult task, but none the less, very timely. Recommendations for locating and conducting a survey of this type may include: 1- Identifying high biker - jogger -hiker routes within the community other than the trail, as survey locations. 2- Consider shopping center locations. Note: As previously stated, photographs /slides were taken along the trail. These slides will be available upon request at the parks and recreation office. 3AV S1ODIN \\, JL Iav3VS V • • • D7 L!) 00 L/) Ln Ln Ln d' Lf) M 11) N L() CO l \O L/) d M N r.1 8:00 AM 7.5 8:30 7.5 9:00 1.13 9:30 1.13 10:00 1.3 10:30 1.63 11:00 1.33 11:30 1.55 12:00 1.3 12:30 .85 1:00 .85 1:30 .85 2:00 .85 2 :30 2.14 3:00 3.5 3:30 3.5 4:00 3.5 4:30 4.75 5:00 5.54 5:30 6.4 6:00 6.4 6:30 6.4 7:00 6.4 7:30 5.84 TOTAL 82.14 8:00 AM .5 8:30 .5 9:00 3 9:30 3 10:00 3 10:30 3 11:00 5.25 11:30 5.25 12:00 5.25 12:30 5.25 1:00 5.5 1:30 5.5 2:00 5.5 2:30 5.5 3:00 6.4 3:30 6.4 4:00 6.4 4:30 6.4 5:00 6.4 5:30 6.4 6:00 7.25 6:30 7.25 7:00 7.25 7:30 7.25 TOTAL 123.4 • • • Average Number of Trail Users/1/2 hr. Average Week Day Average Weekend Day MEMO TO: ADVISORY PARKS $ RECREATION COMMITTEE • FROM: KEN VRAA, DIRECTOR OF PARKS & RECREATION • • April 1981 RE: POLICY FOR PLAY PERIMETERS At the meeting of the sub - committee on "park names" the committee became involved in a discussion on play equipment and play perimeters. Concern was expressed that the City does not have a policy which addresses the fact that play equipment be retained within play perimeters with suitable ground cover to provide for safety. Although the department has no policy which specifically addresses this issue, the Parks and Recreation Department appears to have been following a departmental practice to include installation of a play perimeter and sand base when development occurred. However, if the Advisory Parks and Recreation Committee wishes to make this a policy of the department, it may do so by making a motion to that effect. Otherwise, it would be the intent of the department to continue the exist- ing practice of installation of a play perimeter and sand base to limit the City's liability involved through non - installation of materials • • MEMO TO: ADVISORY PARKS AND RECREATION COMMITTEE FROM: KEN VRAA, DIRECTOR OF PARKS AND RECREATION June 1981 RE: 1982 BUDGET PREPARATION Officially,_ the City as yet to begin work on its 1982 budget. However, the time for action for the budget is near at hand and your comments are being solicited. Although the department has adopted a practice of recognizing community and park needs throughout the entire year it is during the preparation of the budget that those needs eventually be- come a request to the City Council. Within the department the director will be contacting not only the supervisory staff but the maintenance and program personnel as well. Often times these individuals are able to make constructive suggestions for improvements which can greatly improve the effectiveness and efficiency of the department. The concerns, ideas and needs received will be assessed, along with the ongoing needs of the department for consideration and possible inclusion into the budget. It goes without saving that not all of these suggestions can be included in the budget. Rather, it will be important to prioritize these suggestions and at some point a determination will be made to include those that are the most important for consideration by the Council. Your suggestions and comments are welcomed as early as possible for budget consideration, but should be in the department office no later than June 25 to allow for ample time for review. • • MEMO TO: ADVISORY PARKS & RECREATION COMMITTEE FROM: KEN VRAA, DIRECTOR OF PARKS & RECREATION RE: REQUEST FOR USE OF NORTHVIEW ATHLETIC FIELD June 1981 Mr. Craig Stricker approached the staff on Monday, June 8, with a request to use Northview Athletic Fields for a fund raising event for his softball team which plays in an Apple Valley league. Mr. Stricker wants to sponsor an outdoor concert with "two or three bands ", charge an admission, as well as sell beer. He anticipates up to 500 people at a charge of $5.00 per person. His plans call for the bands to be set on a stage to be constructed on the plateau immediately adjacent to the soccer fields. The event would run from noon to 11:00 p.m. on a Saturday. Mr. Stricker is asking for Saturday, June 28. He has indicated his willingness to purchase liability insurance and to comply with any departmental provisions for staffing to insure the proper traffic control. Mr. Stricker will be at the June 11 meeting to present his ideas and to ask for permission to use the fields. Existing Policy The City does not have any policy or procedure to handle such requests. The City has an adopted fee schedule for the use of Northview for softball tournaments only but not for other purposes. Concerns /Recommendations Staff has not had time to adequately research and prepare a recom- mendation to the Advisory Committee concerning this request. It is felt that, should the Advisory Committee feel that this is an appropriate use for the facility, sufficient guidelines and safe- guards should be developed and written into a contractual agreement if approval is given. However, there are some concerns that do come to mind immediately: 1. Limited parking for the proposed crowd. 2. Use of athletic field for this type of event may result in substantial turf damage. 3. Amount of insurance liability required. 4. Need for vehicle parking and traffic control. 5. Requirement for City staff to be on site during the event. 6. Fees to be charged. 7. Rain /cancellation policy. 411 Northview Athletic Field Request June 1981 Page Two • • 8. Lack of a formal proposal to react to. 9. Lack of an adequate agreement. Action to be Considered To approve the request, with any conditions; to deny or to postpone until an adopted policy /procedure or agreement can be drafted. • MEMO TO: ADVISORY PARKS AND RECREATION COMMITTEE FROM: KEN VRAA, DIRECTOR OF PARKS AND RECREATION RE: SUMMER IN THE PARK /WAGONFUL 0' FUN June 1981 The Parks and Recreation Department will be conducting its afternoon play- ground activities commencing the week of June 15th. Also, the Eagan Wagon - ful 0' Fun will also begin its trips to the various playground sites be- ginning the week of June 15. As the Advisory Committee may recall, there was discussion concerning this at a previous meeting of the committee concerning the modification of the program and sites selected for both the Summer in the Park and Eagan Wagonful 0' Fun programs. These modifications were made as previously discussed with information concerning the programs being contained in the May Eagan City Newsletter. The staff of the summer programs have been selected. Staff is very pleased with the quality of applicants and was able to be selective in hiring individuals for the various positions. During the week of June 8th various staff members will be undergoing orientation and training sessions for the upcoming programs. At the June 11th meeting, the Director of Parks and Recreation will have available for review by the committee the playground leaders' handbook. This handbook contains various policy issues, planning issues, first aid and safety and activity suggestions for drama, games, music etc,, etc. Because of the size and volume of the materials contained within this handbook, it was not duplicated for distribution to individual members of the committee but will be available for individual review by committee members if so desired. In planning for the summer programs, weekly themes have been selected which various activities are to relate in some maner, shape or form. Weekly themes include Getting to Know You, Animal Friends and You, Wheels and Other Round Objects, Let's Pretend, etc. We felt these weekly themes will enhance the program and allow the leaders an imaginative approach to activities development. This item appears on the agenda for informational purposes. Should the Advisory Committee members have questions at that time concerning the program, staff would be happy to provide any answers. • L ( t y t2._55r1�� -J W% u,r�c =J FDOR ti 2 3'� / `1$v2n, 1 LDe.. NAitzi 1iN6,TaN, U.G. o 1J 363 R-,-,55e L_L SC- Nx�E_ t_)� F � c E. N.,J/>4:7+J r-)C N, U• C- 2 6 S) i2 u r 3 C35C 4-11e•J rra, 2 1 b 1152 KSF.n/ � C JI -T -. D.Cr. 205 0 • BEA BL OMOUV,T THOMAS HEDGES CITY AOMINISTRATOR MAYOR • THOMAS EGAN MARK PARRANTO IAMA S A. SMITH TI )OORI: WA( 1111 5 U111 MI MIA U Jun. 3, 1 96 i ',c. re iaan 1'«m ITa. ��dorn 2 344 Payburn ;;I dg. Wa ;Ii 1 il)it D. t;. 2051 CiTY OF EAGAN l'Plc able Congressman 'Iom Ila.gedorn, The City of Fagan would like to express a need for the continued support. of L funding. L.A.W.C.O.N., supported through designated funds, should continue to be available to communities, such as Fagan, for the acquisition and development of park lands. Funding appropriations for L.A.W.C.O.N. were designed to do that, and the City would benefit if these funds were returned. to the recreation and leisure services to fulfill a very real need. Fagan is a rapidly growing community with more people staying close to home to seek recreational pursuits. In order to retain a quality leisure environment for our citizen,,, L.A.W.C.O.N. funding is very neces ary to the continued acquisition and development of the parks system. Due to past success with l.,.A.W.C.O.N. funding within the community, the City has witnessed success of the program and asks you as a Minnesota Delegate, to reflect our need by supporting this program. coley to: Congrc,— man "l om liagedorn ,anal or Davy DurcnLerger SL aator Rudy Boschwitz 1795 PILOT KNOP ROA!) EAGAN, MINNESOTA 81'122 PHONE 454.5100 Sincerely. Roger Martin, Chairman Advisory Parks & Recreation Committee THE LONE C)AK TREE ... THE SYMBOL OF STRENGTH AND GROWTH IN OUR COMMUNITY. EUGENE VAN OVERBEKE CITY CLERK • • • MEMO TO: PARKS AND RECREATION COMMITTEE MEMBERS FROM: KEN VRAA, DIRECTOR OF PARKS AND RECREATION RE: JUNE ADVISORY MEETING May 28, 1981 Just a reminder that the regular meeting of the Advisory Committee is on Thursday, June llth, rather than June 4th. Tentatively, the committee will meet at 6:30 P.M. at the City Hall for a parks tour. The committee will visit four park sites. The tour will last approximately one hour, with the business portion of the meeting beginning at 7:30 P.M. Also enclosed is a separate memo concerning the park land in the proposed development and by Mr. Dick Winkler, as reviewed at the May meeting. This item will again appear on the June llth agenda for further action. Members should pay close attention to the packet when it arrives prior to the next meeting for any late changes in starting times or location. • • MEMO TO: ADVISORY PARKS & RECREATION COMMITTEE FROM: KEN VRAA, DIRECTOR OF PARKS F RECREATION RE: WINKLER /JACKSON ADDITION On Tuesday, May 12 members of the Parks and Recreation Development sub- committee met to review potential sites for parks acquisition in the pro- posed Winkler /Jackson parcel. The sub - committee met with members of City staff and the City's consulting engineer to review potential areas and to make a determination as to the suitability for parks dedication. After careful review of potential sites, it was the recommendation of the sub - committee to attempt to acquire approximately 4+ acres of park land immediately to the east of Slater's road and to the north of James Court. This land is immediately adjacent to the approximately 3+ acres of MNDot right -of -way which is to be returned to the City of Eagan. Before making a final determination and recommendation to the entire Advisory Parks and Recreation Committee to seek this parcel for parks dedication, staff was asked to develop potential sketch plans for analysis by the City's consulting engineering firm to determine potential develop- ment costs involved in grading of the site to provide the informal, active play space being sought for this.parks section. The sketch plans that will be drafted are not intended to indicate the eventual parks plan, but are intended to merely ascertain whether play elements will fit into the site and to make a preliminary study on grading costs. Knowledge of these costs will help the Advisory Parks Committee make a final determi- nation as to whether the potential parks dedication is economically feasible for use as parks area. By way of copy of this memo to Dale Runkle, City Planner, notification to the Advisory Planning Commission that the Advisory Parks Committee intends to seek parks dedication from the developer in this proposal. A final recommendation will not be made until preliminary costs are made available. cc: Dale Runkle, City Planner Tom Hedges, City Administrator • MEMO TO: PARKS AND RECREATION COMMITTEE MEMBERS FROM: KEN VRAA, DIRECTOR OF PARKS AND RECREATION RE: JUNE ADVISORY MEETING May 28, 1981 Just a reminder that the regular meeting of the Advisory Committee is on Thursday, June llth, rather than June 4th. Tentatively, the committee will meet at 6:30 P.M. at the City Hall for a parks tour. The committee will visit four park sites. The tour will last approximately one hour, with the business portion of the meeting beginning at 7:30 P.M. Also enclosed is a separate memo concerning the park land in the proposed development and by Mr. Dick Winkler, as reviewed at the. May meeting. This item will again appear on the June llth agenda for further action. Members should pay close attention to the packet when it arrives prior to the next meeting for any late changes in starting times or location. • MEMO TO: ADVISORY PARKS & RECREATION COMMITTEE FROM: KEN VRAA, DIRECTOR OF PARKS 8 RECREATION RE: WINKLER /JACKSON ADDITION On Tuesday, May 12 members of the Parks and Recreation Development sub- committee met to review potential sites for parks acquisition in the pro- posed Winkler /Jackson parcel. The sub - committee met with members of City staff and the City's consulting engineer to review potential areas and to make a determination as to the suitability for parks dedication. After careful review of potential sites, it was the recommendation of the . sub - committee to attempt to acquire approximately 4+ acres of park land immediately to the east of Slater's road and to the north of James Court. This land is immediately adjacent to the approximately 3+ acres of MNDot right -of -way which is to be returned to the City of Eagan. Before making a final determination and recommendation to the entire Advisory Parks and Recreation Committee to seek this parcel for parks dedication, staff was asked to develop potential sketch plans for analysis by the City's consulting engineering firm to determine potential develop- ment costs involved in grading of the site to provide the informal, active play space being sought for this parks section. The sketch plans that will be drafted are not intended to indicate the eventual parks plan, but are intended to merely ascertain whether play elements will fit into the site and to'make a preliminary study on grading costs. Knowledge of these costs will help tbe Advisory Parks Committee make a final determi- nation as to whether the potential parks dedication is economically feasible for use as parks area. By way of copy of this memo to Dale Runkle, City Planner, notification to the Advisory Planning Commission that the Advisory Parks Committee intends to seek parks dedication from the developer in this proposal. A final recommendation will not be made until preliminary costs are made available. cc: Dale Runkle, City Planner Tom Hedges, City Administrator