Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES <br />Parks & Recreation Commission <br />June ], 2006 <br />to be removed for this project, but the amount would be kept to a minimum. The observation <br />deck would be approximately 2'-3' above the water level and would be surrounded with a <br />railing. A couple of benches would also be added. The deck would resemble area fishing piers. <br />Mans opened the meeting up for comments from the general public. <br />Harold Feickert of 2590 Jackson Street asked if there was a water source or culvert that <br />connected Nadeau Wildlife Area to Savage Lake. Sanders commented that there is a stream that <br />enters Savage Lake and a driveway crosses it to give access to one home. Feickert asked if <br />there are fish in Savage Lake. Sanders stated that there may be fish in the lake, but he was <br />unsure. Feickert indicated that he did not object to the project, but felt the area would need <br />additional police patrol, especially in the area of Jackson Street and Lake Street, due to traff c <br />concerns. <br />Glenn Levine of 145 Lake Street stated that the original. intent of the Nadeau family who <br />donated the property for the park was to leave it as a nature park. He was not in favor of cutting <br />down the few trees that are present since this would change the whole perspective of the park <br />and would open the area up to more traffic He commented that added use would lead to <br />additional trash, litter, and impact on a small area. Additionally, there are already security <br />issues needing attention. The addition of an observation deck would make it easier for juveniles <br />to hide back in the woods where drinking and lewd acts could happen. He felt this park was <br />intended for younger children. Instead of fmiding an observation deck, he suggested improving <br />the children's play structure which is in dire need of replacement. Children always receive <br />slivers from the wood. He commented that many neighbors agree with him and he asked if <br />there have been any environmental impact studies on this project. He asked what the neighbors <br />should do next, such as start a petition. He felt the community survey results relating to the <br />observation deck were not credible since if you were to show those surveyed the big picture, <br />they would have changed their opinion. He stated that the money would be better spent on <br />additional maintenance of the park. He commented that trash cans are always full, litter is <br />scattered about, picnic tables are never moved when mowing, and sticks could be gathered. He <br />indicated that he is also concerned about trash entering the pond and safety issues relating to <br />young kids drowning with easier access to the water. <br />Mans asked if neighbors have tried to address the security issues in the past. Levine said that <br />the police have been called and residents have approached thejuveniles before. The juveniles <br />that have been seen in the park come in large quantities and are not known by residents. He <br />stated that they smoke and carouse in this remote area since it is not heavily patrolled. <br />Doug Prax of 135 Lake Street stated that he agrees with Levine. The planned project would <br />lead to more traffic and he is concerned about juveniles hiding on the property. He indicated <br />that they already have a problem with juveniles hanging out in this park. Just last night, ten <br />juveniles were seen congregating on this property. He felt the money budgeted should be used <br />for younger children such as replacing the children's play structure with a plastic one to <br />eliminate slivers from the wood. He stated that the cw-reut structure has a swing with loose <br />bolts that is hazardous. The trash cans are always full. More cans are needed and benches too. <br />He would rather have a park geared toward young children. <br />Page 2 of 5 <br />