Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 06-27-05APPROVED Members Present: Leslie Defries, Mark Jacobs, Eric Johnson, Kelly Sampo Members Absent: Mike Eliason Staff Present: Dan Schultz, Director of Parks and Recreation and Sonja Honl, Recording Secretary Student Volunteer: None Others Present: Stephanie Berkebile, 3821 – 155th St. W., Rosemount, MN 1. CALL TO ORDER: Johnson called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. 2. ADDITIONS TO THE AGENDA: Old Business C. Livable Communities Grant. 3. APPROVAL OF THE MAY 23, 2005 MEETING MINUTES: MOTION by Jacobs to approve the minutes of May 23, 2005. SECOND by Defries. Ayes: 4 Nays: 0 Motion passed. 4. AUDIENCE INPUT: Ms. Berkebile was coming to the Commission with a concern about the bike path that leads to the tunnel north on Shannon Parkway by Shannon Park Elementary School. On May 29, 2005, her son had a bike accident when trying to enter that tunnel. He tried to make the turn, but couldn’t because the tunnel sits at about a 90º angle to the sidewalk. There’s no signage, the weeds were very high, and you can’t even tell the tunnel is there. He got down to the bottom of the path, could not make the turn, and hit the concrete culvert head-on. He was wearing a helmet and is fine, but he has a bump on his head four weeks after the fact. She did call the Police Department and report the incident. They told her they would bring it to the Park Board. Her concern was whether there should be a sign installed that says “No Bicycles” because it’s not really wide enough for bikes. 5. DISCUSSION (Response to Audience Input): Schultz explained that he had left a message at the work phone number Ms. Berkebile had given to the Police Department as we did not have her home phone number. Ms. Berkebile had not been in to get the message. Per Schultz, the City did have a risk manager at this spot about two weeks prior to this incident to look at another issue with the tunnel. Schultz called him after hearing about this incident, and he will come back and look at this area again. Staff has also talked to John Winters, the officer who took the report. Ms. Berkebile stated that she had heard from her father-in-law who went to lunch with a colleague of his who said she has a friend who had an accident at the same place. Schultz asked Ms. Berkebile to leave her home phone number so he could contact her. Johnson thanked Ms. Berkebile for bringing this matter to the Commission. 6. OLD BUSINESS: a. Play Equipment – Meadows Park - Schultz reviewed an updated color copy of the play equipment based on the recommendations from the Commission at the May 23, 2005 meeting. Per Schultz, the representative from Little Tykes/Flanagan Sales recommended going with a color called tropical yellow, which holds its color longer. He also recommended changing the accents slightly by making the climbing wall gray, and having red posts with yellow supports/railings to break up the predominance of red. There was discussion regarding the changes and the Commission agreed with the changes. They also agreed to have yellow accents (for the dividers and toppers) on the red roof canopies. MOTION by Sampo to change the color of the play equipment at Meadows Park as follows: posts to red, rails to tropical yellow, rock climbing wall to gray, and red roof canopies with tropical yellow plastic dividers and toppers. SECOND by Jacobs. Ayes: 4 Nays: 0 Motion passed. b. GlenRose Preliminary Plat – Schultz reviewed an updated preliminary plat submitted by Dean Johnson Homes. The developer would like to grade into the hill between the development and Erickson Park to fit the trail in and also to provide fill for the development. This hill currently provides a buffer between the development and the ball fields at Erickson Park. Schultz had asked the developer to provide a grading plan that would show the impact to the parks as far as tree removal, drainage, etc. Schultz had six recommendations regarding the plans. Schultz was looking for the Commission’s input regarding the grading in the park and the below recommendations: 1. cash dedication with the payment to be made at the rate at the time of payment 2. the trail connection at the mid-block of 140th Circle needs to be identified on their plan as a future connection to the north, giving us access to Connemara Trail 3. if grading is allowed in the park as per the plan, only removing seven trees from the northeast corner 4. the developer will pay for all costs associated with the new trail built on city park property 5. staff should review the feasibility of an underpass under Hwy. 3 and require any necessary easements from the developer 6. increase the buffer at the northeast edge of the park with additional plantings to create a buffer from the lights, etc. There was lengthy discussion, with the main focus being on the feasibility study and the underpass. The Commission expressed concern about getting people safely across Hwy. 3. Per Schultz, the Commission would need to make recommendations based on the submittal that is before us tonight. Whether that means recommending approval based on what was submitted, or recommending denial because they haven’t included any identification of a proposed underpass. Those are things the Commission has to decide on tonight. The Commission felt that the underpass was important and wanted to make it very clear that they’d like to see the underpass installed. Jacobs asked about the removal of the buffer and the impact of the lights and noise from the ball fields on the development. Per Schultz, if we allow them to grade in the park, we have the ability to have them create a buffer that doesn’t currently exist as far as tree plantings. Sampo asked if we could change “only remove seven trees” to “the seven identified trees”. Schultz agreed to this. MOTION by Sampo to approve the preliminary plat with the following conditions: 1. cash dedication with the payment to be made at the rate at the time of payment 2. the trail connection at the mid-block of 140th Circle needs to be identified on their plan as a future connection to the north, giving us access to Connemara Trail 3. grading is allowed in the park as per the plan, with only the seven identified trees to be removed from the northeast corner 4. the developer will pay for all costs associated with the new trail built on city park property 5. staff should review the feasibility of an underpass under Hwy. 3 and require any necessary easements from the developer 6. increase the buffer at the northeast edge of the park with additional plantings to create a buffer from the lights, etc. SECOND by Defries. Jacobs asked for clarification of the feasibility study. He felt that a lot depends on the feasibility study, and we don’t know what the results will be. Schultz suggested that the Commission could make a recommendation that they feel strongly that there should be an underpass, that it has been identified in other plans and it has been recommended by the Commission on other occasions. Ayes: 2 (Defries, Sampo) Nays: 2 (Jacobs, Johnson) Motion failed. Discussion continued. Schultz said the Commission could make a recommendation that the developer should provide the City with the necessary easements that would be required using MnDOT’s design for a public underpass, if feasible. The key is that the City Council gets the message that the Commission would like the underpass reviewed before they give approval. MOTION by Jacobs to defer approval of the plan until the completion of the underpass feasibility study. There was no second. Motion failed. Sampo clarified that the Commission can recommend to the City Council that the Commission really wants to see if the underpass is feasible. We would still expect the other conditions to be met. Jacobs disagreed and felt that the plan could change. He felt it was unfair to look at this without having all of the information. Schultz thought the Commission should make a recommendation to the City Council because the City Council would like to have input from the Commission on this plan one way or the other. Schultz suggested that the Commission recommend going forward with the plan, noting that the past recommendation with regard to an underpass has not been identified. This would let the City Council know how the Commission feels about the entire plan, and that they feel there is one piece missing. Schultz didn’t want the Commission to wait too long and then be unable to make a strong recommendation to the City Council based on the plan that was provided by the developer. 8:56 p.m. The Commission took a short break. 9:04 p.m. The meeting resumed. MOTION by Jacobs that the City complete an underpass feasibility study, however if such study is not approved by the City Council, our recommendations relative to the project include: 1. cash dedication with the payment to be made at the rate at the time of payment 2. the trail connection at the mid-block of 140th Circle needs to be identified on their plan as a future connection to the north, giving us access to Connemara Trail 3. grading is allowed in the park as per the plan, with only the seven identified trees to be removed from the northeast corner of the park 4. The developer will pay for all trail costs including those on City property 5. increase the buffer at the northeast edge of the park with additional plantings to create a buffer from the lights, etc. SECOND by Defries Discussion followed. Sampo asked what would happen if they do go ahead with the feasibility study; do they still take the five recommendations, or do they only do the feasibility study and nothing else? Per Schultz, the Council will see where the Commission stands on the other items based on the motion. Those five recommendations would be the recommendations Schultz would make to the City Council. Sampo asked if this covered everything. Per Schultz, yes. Ayes: 4 Nays: 0 Motion passes. c. Livable Communities Grant – Last year as part of the City’s efforts to redevelop the downtown area a Livable Communities Grant was submitted to the Metropolitan Council by the Community Development Department. The purpose of the grant was to secure funds to expand the entrance to Central Park, relocating the businesses presently in this location to create a more visible and inviting entrance to Central Park. The City didn’t receive the grant and is submitting it again this year. The Commission has been asked to provide support for the submittal of this grant. MOTION by Jacobs to recommend that the City Council approve a resolution supporting the Livable Communities Grant for Central Park. SECOND by Defries. Ayes: 4 Nays: 0 Motion passed. 7. NEW BUSINESS: a. Portable Toilets in City Parks – Schultz was bringing this item to the Commission because we have received calls from residents regarding the portable toilets in City parks. Callers are concerned about the color/look of the units, or are bothered by their smell or location. Some callers comment on all of these items. The City currently places portable toilets in parks where organized activities take place. Schultz asked the Commission to discuss the need for portable toilets in parks that do not have regularly scheduled events or are not capable of being rented, and the possibility of using screening materials and other methods to help the portable toilets blend into the parks. The Commission felt that this issue should be addressed and that there should be consistency as far as which parks have portable toilets, what they look like, where they are located, screening options, etc. It was suggested that the Parks Master Plan be updated to include guidelines for portable toilets. The Commission asked what other cities do and if it would be possible to get pictures of what they are doing. Schultz will bring this item back to the next meeting. b. 2006 CIP Budget – We are in the process of preparing the 2006 Annual Operating and Capital Improvement Budget (CIP). A draft of the budget has been submitted for approval. Items being proposed by the Parks and Recreation Department for 2006 are: $12,000 for replacement of old park signs; $250,000 for construction of a warming house at Bloomfield Park; $400,000 for the construction of Brockway Park. Schultz reviewed these items. c. Goal Setting Update on City Council Goals – The City Council and senior staff met in April and May and identified the most important strategic issues for the City of Rosemount. Schultz reviewed an outline of goals and action steps based on these meetings that was provided by Craig Rapp of Springsted, Inc. They will be putting together a more detailed report. Schultz asked the Commission if they’d like to discuss the goals at the regular meeting or have a separate work session. The Commission felt it would be best to have separate work session to discuss goals, future park development, and other issues. It was suggested that the Commission could either have a premeeting, or each Commission member could come up with a list of items they would like to discuss and then Schultz would prepare an agenda based on the most common items. Schultz will set up meeting dates and times via e-mail and have the Commission submit the topics for discussion. d. Director’s Report - The Parks Improvement Fund Balance as of May 31, 2005 was $1,131,592.02 No dedication fees were received in May. An issue has come up with CPDC paying their parks dedication at the current rate. They were to pay there second installment by June 1, 2005, but did not remember agreeing to pay parks dedication at the rate at the time of payment. Per Schultz we did have an agreement stating this that was an attachment to the subdivision agreement and CPDC had signed it. Schultz relayed this information to CPDC and we expect payment shortly. Interest was $1,302.35. Expenditures were $66,268.69, for the skate park equipment, bleachers, concrete pads and benches at Bloomfield Park. Rosemount Community Center Parking - Discussion continues with the school district administration regarding the Rosemount High School students parking in the Community Center parking lot. We are trying to work out an agreement with the school district that would allow a limited number of reduced fee parking passes for students who wish to park in the Community Center parking lot. Joint Meeting with the Farmington Parks and Recreation Commission – The joint meeting was tentatively scheduled for September 28, 2005 at 6:00 p.m. at Tamarack Park. There will be a BBQ/cook out, and an informal meeting to discuss trends, goals, etc. The Commission thought that date would be fine. 8. ADJOURNMENT MOTION by Defries to adjourn the meeting. SECOND by Sampo. Ayes: 4 Nays: 0 Motion passed. The meeting was adjourned at 10:05 p.m. Respectfully submitted by Sonja Honl, Recording Secretary