Laserfiche WebLink
Park Board <br />October 7, 2020 <br />Page 4 <br />Council members and encourage them to continue funding the parks and trails with the <br />undesignated dollars. <br /> <br />7. PARK UPDATES <br /> <br />A. Lino Park Playground/Park Shelter Concept Plans <br /> <br />Rick DeGardner, Director of Public Services, presented the staff report. Mr. <br />DeGardner stated Lino Park is one of the three most utilized parks within Lino Lakes. <br />The current playground equipment was installed in 1998 and the open air shelter was <br />built in 1986. City staff asked WSB to create a few concept plans to replace the <br />existing playground equipment and shelter. City staff would like to improve the <br />separation between the parking lot and active park area, but they believe the <br />playground equipment should remain within the same general area because it sense <br />functionally and economically. Mr. DeGardner explained, 15 years ago, the City <br />conducted a remaster planning process of Lino Park and recommended the <br />playground structure be relocated within the trail loop. He continued, since then, the <br />open space area has been utilized more often for organized activities as well as for <br />Blue Heron Days. Because of the more frequent use of the open area than in years <br />past, City staff did not recommend relocating the playground equipment within the <br />trail loop. The potential funding sources for Lino Park are the Park and Trail Fund <br />and the Dedicated Parks Fund. Mr. DeGardner presented the three park concepts to <br />the board. He stated City staff prefers Concept #1. Concept #1 would relocate the <br />park shelter between the play area and the open space area. The downside to this <br />concept is the shelter would be removed from its original location. However, this <br />relocation would allow the electrical pedestals to remain within its existing location <br />and provide electrical power to the shelter. Another benefit to Concept #1 is the <br />existing sidewalk on the other side of the fence would remain while, on the opposite <br />side of the fence, a 5 ft. buffer with landscaping would be constructed which would <br />provide a larger buffer between the parking lot and the play area. He continued, <br />Concept #2 would keep the playground equipment and shelter in the same location <br />and would provide a buffer between the parking lot and play area. The benefit to <br />Concept #2 is it is less costly than Concept #1. Concept #3 would construct a <br />concrete plaza area with tables and umbrellas between the play area and open space <br />area. This concept would allow parents to observe their children playing either on the <br />playground equipment or in the open space area. There would be a shelter area <br />located in the southern portion of the park for larger groups. However, this concept <br />would require one of the electrical pedestals to be relocated. Mr. DeGardner asked <br />for the Park Board’s feedback regarding the three concept plans. <br /> <br />Ms. Haworth liked Concept #1 because of the buffer between the play area and the <br />parking lot, the location of the shelter, the shade provided by the shelter, and the <br />ability for parents to observe their kids playing on either the playground equipment or <br />within the open space area without having to relocate. <br />Mr. Jensen concurred. <br /> <br />Mr. Kusterman asked if there was any room to install a pickle ball court at Lino Park. <br />APPROVED MINUTES <br /> <br /> <br />