HomeMy WebLinkAbout06/06/1994 Park Board Packet ,.� City of Lino Lakes
PARK BOARD MEETING
Monday, June 6, 1994
6:30 PM
*** AGENDA ***
1. Call to Order and Roll Call 6:30 pm
s/a
2. Approval of Minutes of 44ar�-4-, 1994 6:35 pm
3. Open Mike 6:40 pm
4. Concept Review
A. Woodridge Estates II - Rick Carlson 6:45 pm
5. Updates
A. Trappers Crossing 7:15 pm
B. Recreation Complex/Referendum 7:45 pm
C. Focus Committee - Brian Bourassa 8:00 pm
D. Other Park and Recreation updates 8: 15 pm
6. Old Business
8: 30 pm
7. New Business 8:35 pm
8. Adjourn 8:40 pm
All times are approximate. Please call Sandie Wood at 464-5562 if
you cannot attend this meeting.
MEMORANDUM
TO: All Park Board Members
FROM: Marty Asleson
DATE: June 2, 1994
SUBJECT: Pre Park Board Field Meeting
To continue our summer field sessions I think we should meet at
Birch Park to discuss land issues. Please meet at 6520 Pheasant
Run South at 5:30 pm, if you can make it. Thank you.
r
CITY OF LINO LAKES
PARK BOARD MEETING
MONDAY, MAY 2, 1994
The City of Lino Lakes Park Board meeting was called to order at
6:33 p.m. at Lino Lakes City Hall by Chairperson George Lindy.
Roll Call as taken, members present were: Sharon Lane, Brian
Bourassa, George Lindy, Ken Johnson, Joe Schmidt, and Amy Donlin.
Pam Taschuk arrived at 6:42 p.m. Also in attendance were City
Council liaison Linda Elliott, Marty Asleson, Park, Recreation,
and Forestry Coordinator, and Sandie Wood, Parks Secretary. Not
in attendance were Becky Dvorak, Therapeutic Recreation
Specialist, and Barry Bernstein, Recreation Program Supervisor.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Sharon Lane moved approval of the April 4,
1994 minutes. Seconded by Joe Schmidt. Motion approved
unanimously with no corrections.
OPEN MIKE: No one was present for open mike.
TRAPPERS CROSSING: Lino Lakes Park, Recreation and Forestry
Coordinator, Marty Asleson gave a presentation on Trappers
Crossing. It is a 72 acre development in the southern half of
the city. It was formerly identified in the Comprehensive Park
Plan as the A-3 Recreation Complex. It includes a small area
north of Holly Drive. Birch Street is north of the area and
County Road J is south. There is 124 lots, zoned R-1X planned in
this area.
IL
Mr. Asleson pointed out the location of Birch Park and the
recreation complex on the overhead. He then showed an overlay
from the Comprehensive Park Plan and discussed the transportation
trail along Holly Drive, and the linear trail corridor which is
along the shoreline of the Cedar Lake area. He also discussed a
linear trail which is not a concern at this time.
Mary, Jeff Schoenbauer and Kirk Corson walked the area about a
week ago and discussed some of the issues involved in the area.
Marty stated because of county ditch 125 we need to provide a
safeway for people to get to the park area. He thought the depth
of the ditch, and freezing during the winter, would cause a very
hazardous situation for people trying to cross from the
development over to the park area. He also stated that it was a
very attractive area for children as well as adults both summer
and winter.
George Lindy questioned whether the trail provision was likely to
be a boardwalk trail as well as a bridge if it is wetland.
Marty continued to describe the area. There is currently about 5
1/2 acres in this park and the plan calls for about 8 - 10 acres.
1
other items outlined in the presentation were the location of a
peninsula across county ditch 25 adjoining Birch Park, wetlands,
the trail corridor around Cedar Lake, the most logical place to
put the trail, future planning of trail segments and funding
mechanisms. Marty said the developer is proposing park
dedications as well as a cash dedication for the 72 acre total
site area. This would amount to $76,680.44 or a dedication of
$613 .44 per lot.
Marty Asleson then introduced Kirk Corson, Hokanson Development,
to answer any questions the Park Board might have.
Kirk Corson opened by saying what he thought had to be
accomplished during the evening. He said the area going across
the park to the north was not owned by the Park Board and that it
was outside of the plat. The first thing to do is get permission
from the people that own the land to cross it. He asked if the
property owners developed the land, in the future, what kind of
impact would it have on the city's development. He also said
that if an easement was done and there was an injury on the
property the property owner would be liable. If it was condemned
it would separate the north parcel from the south parcel. He did
not know what was going to have to be done because it was a trail
outside the plat.
Kirk said he thought it would cost approximately $25,000 to
'~ develop the trail and discussed the culverts in the ditch.
George asked how deep the ditch was. Kirk responded probably 4-5
feet at the deepest part. '
George stated he thought the city would be setting precedence if
it required Hokanson to construct a walkway or pathway on
something that is not their property.
Mrs. Jean Cummings voiced her concern about becoming landlocked.
Per Brian's request she showed, on the map, the part of land that
would be landlocked. George then asked Mrs. Cummings how far her
property went north and east. She pointed out her land on the
map.
Brian questioned how her land was taxed. She stated it has been
taxed as farmland for the past six years.
Joe asked if she owned property on the east side. Jean responded
that she owned land only on the west.
Sharon asked if there was an appeal process on wetlands. Kirk
answered that it is hard to make changes.
Brian asked if there wasn't a link to Birch Park how far do you
think people will go to get to the park. Marty said he feels
2
people would cross the marsh.
There was further discussion about the property, making the
safest way for users to get to the parks, the purchase of land
from the Whitcombs, whether Jean had any future plans for the
property, questions on building to ADA standards, and how the
additional land could be used.
Kirk stated he had updated copies of the plat for the record.
MOTION: Ken Johnson made a motion, after lengthy discussion,
seconded by Pam Taschuk to:
1. Grade and gravel transportation trail 14 as indicated
on the plan.
2. Grade and gravel trail segments #1 and 13 and sign
both ends as "future park". Sign "future park" at both
ends of segment ,#2 and a cash dedication for equivalent
value of grading and graveling.
3. Finish trail segment 15, as indicated, which would
include a combination of grading, graveling, and
boardwalk. Verify egress approximate to peninsula as
nearly as possible.
4. Remaining park dedication, proposed in cash payment of
$76, 680.44, to be verified.
Motion passed unanimously:
MOTION: A motion was made by Sharon Lane to purchase property
from the Whitcomb family. The procedure would involve a
delineation of the property desired, by the Park Board, a fair
market appraisal and a negotiated land purchase. Amy Donlin
seconded. Motion passed unanimously.
OLD BUSINESS•
CPTED: Jeenie Keenow, Community Service Officer, Lino Lakes
Police Department was present to discuss Crime Prevention Through
Environmental Design (CPTED) . She explained that CPTED is
working with local planning departments in helping to design
security, in various stages of construction or existing
structures. The goal that is trying to be reached is to give
recommendations on security, on new developments and parks, to
the departments or councils involved. A recommendation would be
made on what could be done about crime and the fear of crime in a
particular area such as a park, neighborhood, or industrial area.
George stated that this was a very timely issue because at the
State of the City meeting one individual was concerned about
3
safety while using the trail systems. He asked Jeenie if she had
any input, as far as designing trails, for the safety of
individuals while using them. The Park Board would appreciate
any advise and information she might have. Ms. Keenow said it
was obvious a city could not afford lighting on both sides of the
whole length of the trail. She thinks the residents should be
educated. Police officers can give instructions on personal
security so the public will know the steps to take while on the
trails.
George also stated he thought the Park Board should be as
proactive as it can. Education and awareness is important to
help set people at ease before using the trails.
George asked Jeenie to give her input on what could be put into a
newsletter, regarding safety on the trails, and to help do a
training session so everything could be done to possibly prevent
an incident.
ANIMAL ORDINANCE: Jeenie started her presentation by saying she
had obtained ordinances from all over the metro area and used the
readings from various cities to try and apply them to what
problems she saw in the City of Lino Lakes, now as well as in the
future.
She referred to Page 9, Subdivision 4, Feces Disposal and how it
would incorporate with the parks and park property. She stated
this was just a proposal of the animal ordinance. Ms. Keenow
explained why feces disposal was a hard ordinance to enforce.
She also discussed tools and disposal of the animal feces.
Brian wanted to know how the current city ordinance read as to
animal feces on city streets. Jeenie explained the ordinance and
what would have to be done. It was asked if this proposal would
pertain to horses on streets too. Her response was yes.
Amy asked if this ordinance would apply to county roads or if it
was just a city application. Jeenie responded that it was a city
application and that the county would respond to dead animal
calls and cleanup.
Brian asked Amy if she meant gravel county roads or county
highways. Amy replied that she was referring to horses on 20th
Avenue S and did not see any objection to horse droppings on
gravel roads in that area. The ordinance would apply more to
homeowners property and mainly residential areas.
Jeenie again said that this was still being worked on and it was
not fine tuned. We would have to answer whether we wanted it and
if it was enforceable.
George made the comment that it would have to be uniformly
4
enforced whether it was dog or horse droppings.
Joe stated in 502.1, Subdivision 13, it reads that all dogs
should be kept under restraint. He asked what restraint refers
to. Jeenie responded by saying this was one area she would like
to see changed. We currently have a leash law but it does not
define the length of the leash. Current ordinance states the
animal must be in the immediate presence of the owner. She
explained that at night the owner will put his dog out and it let
it run the neighborhood. Technically the owner is outside, and
in the presence of the animal, so this is hard to enforce.
Brian asked if Jeenie gets a number of animal calls each day.
She said that it depends on the neighborhood, whether it is new
or old, the season and whether it is a holiday. There are many
factors that come into play.
Brian said he was not aware there was a problem with animals as
it relates to parks and trails. Pam said she sees dogs running
loose in the neighborhoods and then go into parks where there are
kids. Marty responded by saying you are more aware of the
problem when you deal with people on neighborhood by neighborhood
basis daily.
Marty voiced concern about Regulation 502.6, Subdivision 3, which
refers to acts which constitutes a nuisance. He asked about B
which reads: To be present on school grounds. Marty thinks it
should read "on school grounds and/or public facilities. It is
in Subdivision 4, Feces Disposal, Section C, and it should read
the same in 502.6. A provision should be made for when a
companion dog is needed on school grounds or city hall. He
voiced his concern about it complying to ADA Regulations. Jeenie
said the school district is responsible for that and they have
set the policy. However, she will talk to the school district
about it.
Brian thought the ordinance was good but stated that he hates to
over police something that is not a problem. He hasn't seen it
but Marty has and if you use it to take care of the problem -
fine. Pam stated that she has also seen the problem.
Joe asked if we had an animal control officer or if Anoka County
does it. Jeenie said she was the animal control officer but
other officers also transported dogs and responded to animal
complaints. The city of Lino Lakes has a contract with the Anoka
County Humane Society. They come and pickup contained dogs and
keep them in their facility until the owner claims them. Jeenie
said she relies on the Anoka County Humane Society to respond to
her calls. She said that about 90% of the animals picked up and
taken to the society are recovered by their owners. The owners
pay for the transportation fee, boarding fee, and other costs
incurred.
5
Joe stated his concern was the time frame it took from initial
call until the animal was picked up. Jeenie's reply was that the
humane society would not pickup the dog unless it was contained
either by an officer or in a garage and ordered from the police
department. Joe asked if she or a private party could contain a
dog without any repercussions. Jeenie responded that if the dog
was at large (no owner around) anyone could contain it and then
call the police.
George made a statement that Jeenie was basically making them
aware of the entire ordinance but the only concern, as a park
board, was the impact it has on the park and Jeenie had
thoroughly covered that. The boards biggest concerns were the
feces disposal and the voice or leash control.
Ms. Keenow asked the board to look it over and call her back if
there were any questions or other concerns or if the board wanted
to make any changes or additions.
Being no other questions the board thanked Jeenie for coming.
SHORES OF NARSHAN TRAIL: Marty gave background on this issue.
Included in the park packets were the minutes from the City
Council meeting held April 11, 1994. He continued by saying that
during the open-mike section James Ferris, from 7278 Stage Coach
Trail and Richard Backlund, 7270 Stage Coach Trail appeared to
discuss their concerns for the trail placement between their
houses.
t
Marty explained that he had met with these residents to discuss
viable options at this point. Their suggestion was to move the
trail to the north side of lot 1. They informed him they had
already discussed this with the owner of the lot and he did not
have any objection to the move. They also said they had talked
to Jack Menkveld and that he would move the trail. Marty pointed
out the move would place the trail on church property and that
they would need to talk to the church about this possibility and
the obtaining of an easement. They stated they would do this.
This would still give trail access, and in the interim a
segmented trail into the Regional Park, and would maintain the
trail loop in the development.
He then asked the members, that were present at the field
meeting, to comment.
Amy said she thought it was unacceptable the way it was. She
stated the homeowners were very disappointed for good reason.
She thought it sounded like a very agreeable solution could be
worked out.
Marty said their next step was to approach the church council to
6
present their idea.
Joe agreed with Marty's recommendation and the key is if the
trail can be moved with the homeowners initiative.
Marty stated that there were a couple of engineering and planning
and zoning problems but they were aware of them.
Sharon asked if the trail was rerouted and it resulted in a
longer trail would it be more costly. If so, who would pay for
it. Marty's response was that if Jack agreed to move the trail,
and the property owner to the north agreed to allow the trail to
be there, the only way it would impact the board was if an
easement had to be purchased from the church. George responded
that it would be them not the board making the purchase.
Ken said the area runs low and was wondering if it would have to
be built up some. Marty thought it would. Ken also agreed with
the fact that the trail is a bad situation but he did not want to
see the Park Board get into any more expense on this.
George didn't think it was acceptable that the board get into any
additional expense and wanted everyone understands that when this
plat went before the council the developer was asked on numerous
occasions if this was where he wanted the trail. The developers
response was yes, this was where he wanted it and he really
wanted the plat to go through. George feels this is the
developers problem and the board will help resolve it, but not at
the boards expense.
RECREATION COMPLEX UPDATE: George wanted to know if Marty had
looked into having the land appraised. Marty stated he had. He
has talked to Esther, she has leased the land for farming, and is
in no hurry to sell the property.
Marty has received two quotations to do the appraisal and has
discussed them with the city attorney. We need to make sure this
parcel will work from our stand point. Marty feels that before
the actual appraisal is done a wetland delineation and sketch, of
what can actually be done with the park area, should be
completed. This could be given to the appraiser so they can come
up with a fair market value of the property and to make sure the
land is suitable for what we want to do with it. He stated that
we should also be aware of Met Council tightening up on the
expansion of the MUSA boundaries and the affects it will have on
the appraisal.
Board member Johnson asked Marty if we need a full 80 acres with
the decrease of developable land in the city. Marty responded
that the Park Comprehensive Plan calls for a 50+ acre parcel and
he thought it was a realistic figure. Ken was concerned that we
were taking more than was needed and that we were taking land
7
that could provide a tax base. Marty replied that we did not
want to do that.
George said by doing a phantom plat we may find it is not as
developable as we might desire for the type of creation we might
need. He asked Marty to keep our size requirements in mind when
doing a layout of the sample plat. After the delineation is done
we can draw the recreation complex into the quick sketch to see
how it will fit into the parcel.
Brian asked Linda and Marty if the City Council was aware of this
latest action and if they were up to speed with the Park Board
getting the appraisal. Linda responded - yes they are.
OTHER PARR AND RECREATION UPDATES: Marty told the board that the
Recreation Focus Committee was canceled last month. He talked
about the letter Mayor Reinert received from Rob Schleicher. Rob
would like to become involved with the Recreation Focus
Committee. Marty wrote a letter and met with Rob and hopes to be
able to get a teenage group involved in the decision making
process via involvement, obtaining some concrete programs,
activities, and eventually facility support based on their input.
EARTH DAY: Marty discussed Earth Day and told what was scheduled
to take place this year. He hoped that Park Board members would
be able to come to the Wargo Nature Center for the event.
^-'\
RECREATION PROGRAMS: Marty explained that Barry and Becky asked
to be excused because of personal commitments. Marty reported
that softball had startedaand the dog obedience program was full
and doing well. Coach pitch baseball has 18 kids registered and
indoor soccer is doing fine. T-balls first session is full and
we are looking forward to a very busy summer.
OLD BIISINESS: There was no additional old business.
NEW BIISINESS: There was no new business to discuss.
ADJOURN: Pam Taschuk moved to adjourn. Seconded by Joe Schmidt.
Meeting was adjourned at 8:35 p.m.
8
AGENDA ITEM
STAFF ORIGINATOR Marty Asleson
DATE May 31, 1994
TOPIC Woodridge Estates II, Preliminary Discussion
AGR�ON >
Rick Carlson has shown interest in developing the parcel of land
south of Oakwood Lane. You may recall this parcel of land was
recently purchased by the Shorview Covenant Church, and the
northern portion of this land offered to the Parks and Recreation
Board for purchase consideration. It was decided at that time that
the land had a highly inflated value, included the inflated value
for wetland as well as upland, and had a total acreage of 1.7
acres. Also recall that there was no subdivision at that time
since the church purchased the entire parcel and so there was no
park dedication required.
Rick is possibly interested in developing the northern portion of
the church property. Before Rick pursues this idea any further he
wanted to simply discuss this project with the Park Board to get
their feelings for an idea on Park Land and trail dedication.
Rick owns Outlot B in the Woodridge Estates Subdivision. Please
see the attached maps and wetland delineation. This parcel would
contain approximately 1.59 acres of upland. Rick would propose
giving this as park dedication along with a strip on the north west
corner of the church property if he should pursue the purchase of
this parcel. Rick would also dedicate the trail corridor extending
from Woodridge Court through the church parcel. The strip on the
north east would allow for possible expansion to the land lock
piece of property in the north east corner of the property to the
West. Details on access to the park in Outlot B would need to be
incorporated in the development design. There are a couple of
possibilities.
Our Comprehensive Plan places a need for about 6 acres of park in
this area. The Woods of Baldwin Lake provided 2.18 Acres of mini-
park of which 1 acre is wetland. Rick's proposal would add to the
park acreage needs by adding about another 2 acres of upland
bringing our total park land acreage in this area to about 3.25
acres. The possibility would then be open to purchasing or taking
through dedication additional land in the adjoining property to the
west to bring up our park land needs to standards in this area.
Rick Carlson will be at the meeting to discuss this idea.
The purpose of this discussion is to provide input to a developer
on a hypothetical situation.
11�0 N O
Given the difficulties of providing park open space in this area,
I feel that this idea has some merit. With adequate access and
trail connections this has the potential to meet the park needs for
this area.
• en ,•..-.... `..�y.-..•w.n-...,-•+e+^M•,t.w.-µ,:;."--.-.•..,...�.•�^r^ar...�R+si+�sws „ .,y
23 4 !
■ j� / 29
i a_to t2
1( V 2e
K r — 26 ---26 i 31 32 3 , S
LA 4` --- 2S 4 ----2_ 1 2 P1NERl�GE
W I N �. , 24 - 3 , 6 y
� L� 24 _ , �1
(ri B — 23 -- --- - ------- 1 i 2 3 R
22 6 2
T
201 - -� - z • = 14 n °Me 9 6
13 17 1 PAN
12 1
10
6 10 R 3
4
5 ADD.3 0
13
--tU - --_ _SS °�.--
\j54 4, a
9 Z S3 42 i
Is
52
I.. __-_--_
6 - --- a4
TT - _- S1 SE
, 45
S -j _-- 49 - - 46
LINDA AVENUEI
•• 14�N�_. µ. 2 4 1 ;
--. -32___.-
R1 OUTLET a
-=� - - - — -fI+ z 3 4 i P T 6 b < i z 1
WHITE VINE RO. I I 7 ; 8
- - -
.l_N_ _
LaKU g
I 1
a I
I
10 10
.12 1 3 4 111161, P 9 1 1 2 3 4 2 _ 9 8 14 1 11
WOODRIDGE 6
- - 1 } 4 S 6 7 P 1 S 6 7 6 7 I 7 a--nn� i - _ _T N O. 107
O D G 9
s 4 P - 13v 12 12
1
Ovnal 12 12 5 4 3 2 I I
/ 1 A 13 13 > C< Y,DITC NO 25
---/ r 14 14 I_ _ N1N7-- Z
iS I 14
7� 16 •` � zl
O
20 2 20 r
21 � 21 15
�-
2 A '�' 22 - - - - -
2� 1
Q zP 2zs - -16 _ 20
29 18
� 30 26 _ 21 i
i
j r 17 I I CORD? RATE
31 32
ASH �ST REET _.17
___
DRAWN SEP. 1974 REVISED JAN. 1987 REVISED
REVISED NOV. 1978 REV. MAY 1988 REV.
REV. MAR.1980 REV. AUG. 1989 REV.
KA REV. SEP. 1981 REV. FEB. 1991 REV.
E REV. DEC . 1982 REV. FEB. 1992 REV.
�'�"� REV. JULY 1985 REV. REV.
:YdR REV. DEC. 1985 REV. REV.
SCALE I = 1500
g
V �a
r
WX�
rJ
I dM430 iol lea❑ -44-U =uaiiviolxp Ei WwoJ
inl$V�J: u
+.w. Haan wa ma ualGN db1 1 1
vti•✓ -b •S ._.-; :...... 4L�� VtUVi/t(,f,�rux.ruvi1��
r 8rxl MaO§�Vh
way.u'Paa.
Tp'd 5T�-3 98L - - H4.S-1?JH:7 '.S CEdkAHOIZI
12 i.
28
29 ; If t0
G 28
rr 26 1 31 32• / 3 4
AK E -- 236 23 _- -2- 2 PINERIbGE
EALDW I N 1 2
-- 23 —_ ------ t 3 R
--_ 1 .. _L ___ ----- S x 11 f0 9 S 1
22 I 2 6
6 3l
20
19 � _ t S W 13 16_ 4y
__.
9 6 t
{ i is 5 -—- - - - T 9 125
fT A( -- to-
__-- 10 It 3
t6 4
12 5 ADD•s o
14 6 u
—'e— — -- . -- -- --
F. 12
a
p 9, S3 42- 1 - - I -
... 32 43
1 7 S I 4 4
SO { 43 I
411
--i 13------' LINOA AVE,
— --
= • +• WHITE PINE R0. —�-�—
I
N IA
J --
K�
1 c �� 9 11 115 G {
i I i I i j 10 15 j 10 Q ! 3 - --� 10 !
1.
2 3 4 s1 I'd 7 a 9 1 1 2 3 4 2
_ 14 -1
W 0 RI ' 6 ' NO. 107
l - I 3 • 36 � Q t T 1 - -
j� _ T
O D 1 G q 5 6 T e 6 13"i 12 YI 12
'
-----
_ 1 3
Y2 11
It
1 ofw 12 12 s 4 3 z , l
---// I A 13 13 I > COUNTY D�TC. NO 25
14 14
7 1 15 14 ,
ti
I 16 of. \
h 1 tT ,T 4 a
19
1 2 20
19
20 23
-- O 2t �, 21 15 I
--- I 28 j4 \ - 16 _ p go
29 23 t IV I I
-- — 3O 26 - 6 17 19l 21 CORP
10..aw r zT
RATE
---- - ---- ASH STREET '--- - --- - --• —
DRAWN SEP. 1974 REVISED JAN. 198T REVISED
REVISED NOV. 1978 REV. MAY 1988 REV.
REV. MAR.1980 REV. AUG. 1989 REV.
KA REV. SEP. 1981 REV. FEB. 1991 REV.
REV. DEC . 1982 REV. FEB. 1992 REV.
REV. JULY 1985 REV. REV.
:Y►OR REV. DEC• 1985 REV. REV.
SCALE I" = 1500
RICHARD S. CARLSrfi Fl... - 706 -i2i3 P.ei
Poatih'brand
gnu ntu+a•.dull 1.0e,M, 7672 '+...�:y.-. .efPges 9 tpdaYUDnla Tuna n
f 11h IQth7ttlt[ e erea�rr �•�at��'�t. T u— .
okt_ CY'�+�r C aA¢1AV
c—pany SQ L cx.K z:s
��. .'-��' tasai'�6n .,fklnt.Gtrarge
FaxP Te:cprwnaf FiZF `+ �� r ry l Z
comments - �posilbn, �Peatrvy El— ❑Cat fer pkkup �
1
J
i 1 `
f r ,���r�����r✓� � �`y�
ti
AGENDA ITEM
STAFF ORIGINATOR Marty Asleson
DATE April 1, 1994
TOPIC Trappers Crossing Update
AChGR01 ND
Please find attached a copy of the trail crossing from Trappers
Crossing to Birch Park with the developers best estimate of the
shortest wetland area to span. I have walked this area with Kate
Drewery, the Administrator for the Rice Creek Watershed and it
appears that this area is probably as short as anywhere.
I also met with Jean Cummings to look at the concerns that she had.
As you recall, Jean had some concerns for land-locked parcels,
trail liability concerns, and concerns for developing her land to
the west. I will update you on these concerns at the meeting.
We have the potential to add to our park acreage totals to come
closer to standard needs for this area, particularly if dedication
is taken on the south-west side of the park when jean Commings
develops the area to the west. I will bring an overlay to
illustrate this.
tIFTIONS : : : :
This is update information. The request to purchase additional
land in regards to the peninsula will need to be on the next
council work session for information transfer.
ON
None at this time.
05/11/94 14:04 FAX 612 784 9136 HOKANSON 0 002/002
t ff Jz
V
x
./�
j -
Ile
t
i
f. {
� 1 1
1
n \
, z q
10
� 7 9 ♦
LAKE 9 3 6 7
� 10 'z ,- , IP
CHAN \
E A
,I 2a 2S2 A 19 Y 2
12 s z1 p
♦ 3 13 16 �. 1 6) a 3 a
V B•1• 2 1
.a 2
P 6
RESHAN 1 , ',18 a 3 1
E A$ z,3 0
��Ox, 1, 1 J 10
b B ,
19 3 �hxx 165 12 II ) Z
20 '�•xl 17 a
Q B p6a,
) 9 •F S ' 1211
19
► /
► 23 2 21 20 6 S a ) B 7 ° 6 4.;'.
SHORES 24 6
3 e
Y:
i 25'. 335 ., .��a .�1 J a S 7 PARK p 2 ) ♦
75
2' 32 J ,1 �2 1', W a 12 11 i0 9 ° \\ B 7 S
. 25 31 OQ. Q Y 7 2S 2621 1 to 2 i0/29 6 0 2 I
• 1 29 i9 �� ! u A 1 1 S
. C 5 !o 1' .l� 1. Is a 1s�z 2e A V a ♦ s R
m ,t
• PG G �� 1 21 O12 1.LQ 16 2 3 29 '00 ) 2 } 6 7
COUNTT?Y A� - J t Q 23 7 2 � — -- 9 2 17 22 30 PARK 2 1
Y 8�•.,'t # 7 1B" 21 31 /
!. LAKES --i-- _,.0 (`�li 26 Q B \,.'10 19 20 52 1
PARR A. 'o
i � 3'Qtw 5
• 23
••L..• ••i J. _�_ '
1 2 21 22 :2
— 21
SOD. ERICKSO a
W', r
> S Y B 16
c i l 22 21
i4 m 15
--15 — 19 9 i 10 1a 10
o' 1 1 12 13 12
f
3 A E j
_. 15 4 L61
t 0 L.A 2
IW
e K
.:AL• Clriw 1.of ML♦ PLAT 40.
.'.1i"• w 12 13 II ' :•':AGd ►;A0I 0 i.crflG, • �� �., Sl7L
22_ 2 'c•O.T 14
10 Z 21
9
Z 3 3 B £S 7t)f5 ' .::/TM �n / ' Y •2 1
s a 00° a
` 7 S
77
�r
CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY
k�
CARL W. PETERSON & ASSOC.,' INC. �!
7475 15th Street North-Suits 100Fitip_ '
� e ;
Oakdale, Minnesota 55128,
(612) 735-7606 AC/,UJStr:orf
7..
SURVEY MADE FOR City of Lino Lakes , 1189 Main Street , Lino Lakes , MN 5501 r ,
PROPERTY DESCRIPTION Legal Description
All that part of the Southwest Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of Section 28, township 31
North, Eange.22 West, City of Lino Lakes, Anoka County, Minnesota desciibed as follows;
commencing at the northeast comer of said Southwest.Quarter of the Southeast Quarter;
thence South 00 degrees 33 minutes 07 seconds West, assumed bearing, along the.seat lies of
said Southwest Quarter of the Southeast Quarter, a distance of 170.04 feet to the point of
beginning of the parcel of land to be described; thence North 89 degrees 29 minutes 30 seconds
West, a distance of 272.96 feet; thence South 22 degrees 30 minutes 00 seconds West, a distance
of 223.24 feet; thence South 89 degrees 29 minutes 30 seconds East, parallel with the north line
of said Southwest Quarter of the Southeast Quarter, a distance of 356.42 feet, more or less, to
its intersection with the east line of said Southwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter; thence
North 00 degrees 33 minutes 07 seconds East, along the east line of said Southwest Quarter of the
Southeast Quarter, a distance of 207.00 feet, more or less, to the point of beginning of the
parcel of land described.
c,. ERICI,-SG►b LIJIJ A►/D1 )IvAJ
C\, 0'1 / 2N C D.ERICKSON
2N0 ADDITION
/ �— S 89o29'30"E 350.00 1
l �ine SWI/4 SEI/4 NE Car.SW4/4BEV4 1
SEC 28 T31 N R22W. - SEC.28 73IN R22W
(Fnd(/2"nch 1P.0.25Feet
South and 0.82 Feet East
of True Corner.)
If
; 3
x
bWARRANTY DEED RECORDED BY D' p777656
? \ to
Fnd.RLS 12254 0.28 Feet South ---N89o29'30"W 418.54--- - -
1 8 0.88 East.,of True Corner.
N89029'30"W 272.96 =;
/ 9a°
7 0
w 3
� Cy
JgyO A v N
/ O rlow,
)N O
N
1 y s)
J(may
1.5 ACRES w tu
0
�p M
titi 8
co
I1 1
SCALE:1°=50,
S89029'30"E 356.42
1 hereby certify that th/s survey,prbn,Or report was
prepared by me or under my d/re01 snperv/s/on and that
/am a duly Rey/stered Land Serveyar under the lows
0 DENOTES 1/2 INCH IRON PIPE of the State of M/nnesola.
MONUMENT SET, MARKED WITH
A PLASTIC CAP INSCRIBED
RLS"19421"
DENOTES'. IRON MONUMENT FOUND,
SIZE AND MARKINGS AS SHOWN. BLAKE L.RIVARD Date
blinnesola RLS 19421
Orientation of this Bearing System is aswmsd'
>:�1.