The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About02/01/1993 Park Board Packet CITY OF LINO LAKES *** PARK BOARD MEETING *** MONDAY, FEBRUARY 1, 1993 6:30 P.M. SCANNEE" AGENDA t/ 1. Call to Order and Roll Call `� (//2. Approval of Minutes of December 7, 1992 f 3 . Open Mike 4. Old Business A. Shores of Marshan Lake - Update- --B. Woods of Baldwin Lake/Clyde Rehbein Development and-. N-14 Park Updates i©. Brandywood Development Trail Decision L D. Woodridge Estates Trail Issue - Update✓ E. Recreation UpdateL. 1. Brochure New Proposed Programs 3 . Present Program Update - 4 . Star of the North Games L-'5. Birch Park -F. Other Old Business S. New Business v' City Hall Project - Verbal Report Centennial Little League - Jim Warnest All Boards Meeting - Verbal Report /D. Other New Business f 6. ADJOURN The balance in the Dedicated Park Fund as of December 31, 1992 was $200,707 . 39 n CITY OF LINO LAKES PARK BOARD MEETING MONDAY, DECEMBER 7, 1992 The regular meeting of the Lino Lakes Park Board was called to order at 6:30 p.m. on Monday December 7, 1992 at Lino Lakes City Hall by Chairman George Lindy. Roll Call was taken, members in attendance were Brian Bourassa, John Bauman, George Lindy, Ken Johnson, Jacquelyn Farm and Candy Toffoli. Not present was Ray Johnson. Also in attendance was Don Volk, Public Works Supervisor, Marty Asleson, Parks, Recreation and Forestry Coordinator, Barry Bernstein, Recreation Program Supervisor and Carole Kohler, Parks, Recreation and Forestry Secretary. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: The minutes of November 2, 1992 were approved with no corrections or additions. OPEN MIKE: No one appeared under Open Mike" OLD BUSINESS: Shores of Marshan Lake - This is a continuation of the trail issue in the Shores of Marshan Lake development that was brought before the board during "Open Mike" at last months meeting. Marty Asleson reviewed the situation with the board and explained that he and Don Volk met with Mr. Menkveld and Mr. Kolstad last week in an effort to resolve the trail issue. That meeting was concluded with an understanding between the developer and city staff that the developer hire Brauer and Associates and work with city staff to apply for permits to move the trail in question to an appropriate area where it becomes acceptably close to the backs of houses in the development. As a second option if this trail alignment is not allowed, a bypass between lots 7 and 8 and lots 12 and 13 would be discussed. This design would include a suitable set-back for an 8 foot trail off of the road. This off street "jog" would route the trail around the front side of the noted houses. City staff made recommendation of this agreement to the board for approval. Mr.Jack Menkveld and Mr. Roger Kolstad were in attendance. Mr. Kolstad appeared before the board and again requested the board consider the developers request for approval of the trail as he presented at the last meeting. That being an eight foot bituminous trail in the street easement along lots 8 through 14, then an 8 foot wide gravel trail (to be blacktopped by the City) out of the wetlands on the rear of lots 1 through 7 and would also provide lakeside trail easement for future use, if possible. Mr. Asleson commented that this concept (a repeat of what the developer asked for at the last meeting) was not discussed at the meeting last week. Also appearing before the board was Mr. and Mrs. Hutchings who had planned on buying a lot in this development until they were 1 CITY OF LINO LAKES PARK BOARD MEETING MONDAY, DECEMBER 7, 1992 informed that a trail would come by the back of their lot, possibly as close as 30 feet from the house. Mr. Hutchings commented that he will back out of the deal if the trail is moved that close to his back yard. Mr. Bill Pierce also addressed the board. He is a builder who is involved in building two houses in this development. Although the homes he is building are not directly involved in the trail issue, he is concerned that a precedent may be set, and that putting trails so close to peoples backyards is unreasonable. After lengthy discussion the board had several questions for the developer. Mr. Menkveld commented that he never did apply for a permit from the Corps of Engineers, even though he assured the board that he would when he first brought this issue before them. Mr. Lindy asked Mr. Kolstad if the developer wasn't aware at the time the final plat came before the council that there would be ramifications. Mr. Kolstad stated that the plat was "presented to the council that way in order to get it finalized and then planned to come back and try to get it moved later on" . He stated it was the developers decision to move the trail up. Mr. Menkveld says he has lost five out of six potential sales because of the trail issue and the length of time it's taking to get resolved. He says he was not trying to skirt around any governmental issues and says he did not apply for permits because he had "verbal" confirmation from the corps. But what would have been acceptable even up to March of 1992 is not acceptable now because of the new wetland laws. Mr. Kolstad requested the board make a decision tonight as this issue has been going on for such a long time. George Lindy explained to Mr. Kolstad that he doesn't feel the developer should put the burden to resolve this issue tonight on the board as it was developers responsibility to seek the necessary permits. Marty Asleson stated that we still do not know for sure that the trail in the originally platted location is not acceptable. Don Volk commented that until a permit is filed with the Corps, all discussion is purely speculation. A lengthy discussion followed where it was concluded that Mr. Menkveld thought it too costly to use Brauer & Associates as consultants to pursue the necessary permits, etc. Mr. Kolstad asked if they could make application to the corps without the assistance of Brauer and Associates. Park Board stated this may be OK. Staff recommended to the board that any corps application should be reviewed by the City before is it presented to the corps. Mr. Volk recommended Mr. Menkveld start the permitting process and work with city staff to pursue it. Mr. 201- Menkveld stated that he would "move the trail upon recommendation 2 CITY OF LINO LAKES PARK BOARD MEETING MONDAY, DECEMBER 7, 1992 of the corps, not city staff" . His main concern is of course, it will probably take at least two months. It also should be noted that if the original trail concept is approved by the Corps, it may be necessary to construct at least 100 feet of boardwalk. There was also some discussion about the need to bring the trail on the west side back in alignment for the next development to the south. RECOMMENDATION: George Lindy made a motion to recommend "for the Shores of Marshan Lake, concerning trail development: that the Park Board would like to keep the original trail easement which follows the shore of the lake. We would like to see the trail moved back to the "raised" (oxcart trail) portion of land - east of the homes. If this happens, then we would agree to vacate the existing approved trail easement which has been agreed is too close to the homes and an alternate 8 foot bituminous trail would follow Stagecoach Trail - beginning at lot 14 - leaving a 7 1/2 foot easement to the lake on lot 14 - traveling north to the north boundary of lot 8 - taking a 15 foot easement from lot 8 - down to the existing trail easement east of lots 1 - 2 and 3 per enclosed diagram of record. Also Mr. Menkvelds staff will work with city staff to prepare permit requests from the Corps of Engineers. " This motion was seconded by John Bauman all were in favor, motion carried. In closing, George Lindy suggested that if there is any way to expedite the process with the help of city staff, Mr. Menkveld should call either Marty Asleson or Don Volk and they will contact him (Mr. Lindy) in the hopes of resolving any potential set-backs that may arise. Don Volk will try to get this issue to the City Council work session coming up this Wednesday December 9 so they could act on it. Mr. Menkveld says he will start the permit process immediately. N-14, Woods of Baldwin Lake - Clyde Rehbein - Marty Asleson updated the board of the progress of this development. Mr. Clyde Rehbein is planning a development here as was previously brought before the board. Mr. Asleson distributed a letter from Mr. Rehbein in which he explained his proposal for park dedication. This is the area in which the City is looking to purchase property for parkland (N-14) according to the comprehensive plan. Mr. Rehbein's proposal would dedicate 2 . 18 of his property as noted on the attached map. Also he proposes to move the pond in the area. 3 V 23 November 1992 V �` Mr. Ray Johnson ' 7971 Nancy Drive Lino Lakes, MN 55014 Dear Ray: After much consideration and thought, we the members of the Lino Lakes City Council, respectfully request your resignation from the Lino Lakes Park Board effective December 31 st, 1992. We feel that your resignation from this board is in the best interests of the Park Board, and the future of the city's park development program. We make this request based on what we see as your disrespect for elected officials and staff, a lack of support for city policies, and a level of intimidation displayed at Park Board meetings towards members of the public. As you realize, we have L recently spent a great deal of time preparing and adopting a Comprehensive Park Plan and Development Guide that we wish to serve as a guide for the future. It is important that we coordinate our actions, and work as a team if we are to realize these goals. We appreciate the work you have done for our communities' parks in the past, but we must now consider the future. It is with the future in mind that we take this action. We look forward to your response. Sincerely,, Vern Reinert, Mayor Andy Ne , Council Mem r c,�Lk/ 4<'i Ail Sally Kueth r, ou cil Member da Elliott, Council Member John.Ae'rge,4Y6, Cou cil Member 1189 MAIN STREET, LINO LAKES,MINNE50TA 55014 612-464-5562 r"t AGENDA ITEM 4-A STAFF ORIGINATOR Marty As;leson DATE January 29, 1993; TOPIC Shores of Marshan Lake Issue BACKGROUND Please see attached memorandum OPTIONS At this time there are no options RECOMMENDATION Wait for more. information f AGENDA ITEM - 4 �1 MEMORANDUM TO: Lino Lakes Park Board FROM: Marty Asleson DATE: January 25, 1993 SUBJECT: Shores of Marshan Lake Trail Issue Please find a copy of a letter of the Shores of Marshan Lake trail issue that was sent to the planning and Zoning Board meeting on December 8, 1992 . Subsequently, the developer submitted letters to the Army Corps of Engineers applying for permits to have parts of the trail relocated. We have no further information on the progress of this permit at this time. We have been directed as staff to spend no more time on this issue, ^ and that the City Council may consider trail relocation if the developer has the permits approved. The City Council does not want to consider a trail/sidewalk situation. It is unfortunate that the developer took lightly the new wetland laws that have placed restrictions on wetland encroachment. It is also unfortunate that the consideration for minor encroachment, particularly when there is a proven social need, is not considered. Please see my correspondence with the Department of Natural Resources on the Brandywood trail issue. It appears that in this case we were all a little unprepared for the new changes. Our comprehensive plan addresses the need to avoid the wetlands. In order to do this completely bill greatly increasesour trail costs. �t We had a period of time to appeal the Brandywood trail permit. It appears that another city has appealed a similar situation. We have been informed that if they win their appeal then we most likely will win the Brandywood trail request. The solution to all of this is that in the future, there will be no final plat approvals without wetland permits approved. I also believe that we should be using our parks planning consultant to verify wetland boundaries and trail placement, and design quality control. AGENDA ITEM 4 A. MEMORANDUM TO: Planning and Zoning Board FROM: Marty Asleson, Parks and Recreation Coordinator Don Volk, Public Works Director Darrell Schneider, City Engineer DATE: December 8, 1992 SUBJECT: The Trail in The Shores Of Marshan Lake Please find attached the staff report to the December Park Board and the Park Board minutes relating to the trail issue in the Shores of Marshan Lake Development. As you recall, this trail was approved by the City Council as part of the final plat approval. The developer had originally conceptually placed the trail alignment in Corps controlled wetland. The developer failed to secure the appropriate written approval from the Army Corps of Engineers, so in order to keep their plat going they submitted the plan for final plat approval with the trail in its presently located position. In its present position the developer needed no approval because it was located out of the wetlands. The City Council brought up the fact that the trail was close to the planned housing in some instances , and asked them if they had any concerns about this. The developer made it clear that he was requesting that the alignment shown be approved. The developer returned to the November park board under open-mike to attempt to "renegotiate" this trail alignment up on the street or some sidewalk scenario. Since this was not on the agenda for renegotiation (the plat had been approved) the Park Board could not act on this issue. Staff subsequently met with Mr. Menkveld and Mr. Kolstad to attempt to develop a plan of action since it may not be in the best interest of the city to have the trail so close to the backside of houses (about 40 ft. from the prpsently staked wetland boundry in the case of the existing model home) . The plan is outlined in the staff report to the park board. The overall objective of this plan is to maintain the continuity and integrity of the linear trail corridor concept. In particular we wish to keep as our objective the idea of an uninterrupted recreational experience vs. a segmented trail that is not consistent with our comprehensive plan. It was discussed that in order to expedite the trail permits and the trail layout and design, the city would obtain a budget figure to layout, design, and apply for permits to install the trail in the preferred r- location on the lake-side of the homes. The budget was prepared with the exact overall scope of the project laid out. Please see the attachment. This budget was given to the developer. The developers spokesman, Mr. Roger Kolstad presented to the December park board an entirely different view of their willingness to follow through with the agreed-upon plan of action. Again, please remember that the engineering, trail design and layout, and permit process should have been done as part of the platting process. It was also well known what we wanted at the initial stages of the platting processes. After a much conflicting discussion it was agreed to follow the staff recommendations with a few changes. Please refer to the park board minutes. One change that we disagree with is one of the developer assuming responsibility for permit application with staff review. It is felt that at this time it is not in the best interest of the city to disregard our design and quality control program as set forth in the Brauer proposal. In order to present a quality permit to the Corps of Engineers, all of the elements as projected in the scope of work need to be considered. The developer must understand that any review that is done by staff will also be billed to the development at our established rates. Since we are not experts in soils engineering and landscape architecture, anything that we review will be referred to Brauer and Associates. As with any of the problems associated with development standards, design and layout in city projects, we have a review process set up by experts representing our interests. Brauer and Associates are our chosen parks and recreation representatives. The issue has also been complicated by the fact that Mr. Kolstad has assumed a spokesman responsibility with this development and potential home buyers were brought to the park board meeting. A city concern is that of a realestate agent working for the developer may make an inappropriate guarantee to people with purchase options on the properties that border the trail effected areas. Since the city council has already acted on the final plat approval, any recommendations by the park board that address the trail issue are hypothetical at this point and the people involved in the purchase of these lots should understand this. Our recommendation as staff is to pursue the preferred trail location on the lake-side of the homes with the options as set forth in the staff report to the park board with the modified concerns of the board as per?� the park board minutes. Our recommendation includes the services of our parks and recreation consultants, Brauer and Associates to provide the design and quality control necessary so that the best interests of the city are served. r i I AGENDA ITEM 4-g STAFF ORIGINATOR Marty Asleson DATE January 28, 1993 I TOPIC N-14 Woods of Baldwin Lake BACKGROUND The south Baldwin Lake area has a need for a 6 acre neighborhood park. Please see plate 20 of the Comprehensive Plan. The need has been further established,by a neighborhood group appearance and a petition at a recent park board meeting. A mini- park is desired in the neighborhood to tempora rily provide a neighborhood park until the approximately 6 acres can be acquired to the south. A trail access to the regional park is also important The developer for The Woods of Baldwin Lake is proposing to dedicate the lot on the east side of the development as their park dedication. OPTIONS 1. Accept the park and trail dedication as per proposal. Continue to pursue additional land as per Comprehensive Plan needs 2 . Deny land dedication - accept dollar dedication and use to purchase land elsewhere. 3. Accept cash dedication to be used as per other priorities as set forth in the Comprehensive Plan. RECOMMENDATION 1. Accept the park and trail dedication as per proposal. Continue to pursue additional land as per comprehensive` needs. MEMORANDUM TO: Lino Lakes Parks and Recreation Board FROM: Marty Asleson DATE: January 28, 1993 SUBJECT: Woods of Baldwin Lake Park Dedication The Woods of Baldwin Lake Developer, Mr. Clyde Rehbein has proposed the inclosed park land dedication. The total area of the development is 10. 16 acres. The total park land dedication proposed is 2 . 18 acres, of which approximately 1. 0 acres is water and wetland. This would satisfy the 10% land dedication requirement from this developer. This park would essentially be classified as a mini park. It is strongly recommended that we pursue the additional park land needs in this area to accomplish the goal of obtaining the projected 6 acre land need for this area. The thought concerning the location of the proposed Woods Of Baldwin Lake dedication is that an appropriate arrangement may be made for using Regional Park Land at the Regional Park entrance. If negotiation for additional land to the south becomes unattainable, th43n the use of the small amount of usable land in the Regional Park with the Rehbein dedication becomes very important. We are continuing the search to the south and have been in discussion on the purchase of the George Koza property directly south of Oakwood Lane. This parcel is about 17 acres with about 11 acres that are classified as wetland. We met with the owners agents and a church group that are interested in a cooperative purchase of some sort. The owner does not want to sell off pieces of this property for fear of making it un-developable. The problem that we have encountered is that the owner has what we feel is an inflated opinion of the value of his property. There has been some discussion of possibly sharing the costs of a land appraisal to resolve in our own minds the value of the property. The owner so far indicates that the land is worth $15, 000-$22, 000 per acre. The figures that I have seen all indicate much lower values for raw- land. A half acre of land with a house on it is viewed at a higher rate, by the county tax assessor, but not the additional land in a parcel over .the half-acre. Please refer to the attached green sheet for a recommendation. I don't like the idea of lowering our needs to mini-park, but it could be some time before another parcel is available, or it could become available tomorrow. The neighborhood has indicated to me that for the present time, they would be happy with the mini-park. AGENDA ITEM !� g THE WOODS OF BALDWIN LAKE Parkland Proposal To whom it may concern: I propose to dedicate the Parkland as-designated on the attached preliminary plat to the City of Lino Lakes. Along with the dedication of 2.18 acres of land, I am proposing to provide the necessary excavating to relocate the pond, and to provide approx- imately 330 feet of sidewalk within the right-of-way of White Pine Road between the city and county parks. The city shall be responsible for obtaining all necessary approvals and permits for moving the pond. The monetary compensation expected from the City for the above proposal shall be as follows: Retail value of Parkland being dedicated $60, 000. 00 Less improvements needed (driveway and sewer - (, 000 .0 0 /yQr�efi�ly and water services) -- 4, 000. 00 r� Less potential assessments -14, 500. 00 Less parkland dedication fee (10% of purchase price) -18, 000. 00 Excess value of land over 10% being dedicated $17,500. 00 Plus sidewalk provided 3,400. 00 Plus excavating provided 9,500. 00 Total cash compensation requested from the city $30,400. 00 Thank you. Sincerely, Cl" de Rehbein, President C. R. Investments, Inc. /Plg , �� V" WO-ODS o-f 1�L A.-LI) kmij LA-KC City of Lino Lakes; Anoka County R11 that part of the North half of the Southwest Quarter lying nest of the St. Paul Plater t'orks P.ight-of-way and South of Roadway recorded in Book 306 Page 213, of niscellancous, exec 70i feet and except the nest 1100 feet thereof all it ,� O ctr•e a 9S/70 5. .2 Td .r/(/ohG� =:o:m• ship 31, Range 22,. Anoka County, !'.innesota. / 7�/PS Tfa/ �anc� and wet/aid !/ lea t al�sg including that part of Vacated Whit, Pine Road accruing _ �'n 26000 CGS described property. �o _0 - � 61 z eva� _._ SBB`02 -� m — �I �e„ta�d /aid veJ• Ariz \� I /-� l/�..� �� ``.!65 ^ P•P.s'c F 'Bj.S E.:A vt e IGO O� I 1 1 / I ,•`\ h \\\ \138` \ I 1 9prF_4- i3/ �bR 11>LiilS• \� / 1FIV / 84Z7B \ :\;\\ qq 1 1 1 1 8 / J \ o /�J7 j _ L/ qo4� / /9.+. � "`tti I �� ♦<;' � It1 0491 \\ coo / /° oq / -...<..' ,,'�� /r '� - _• ,, - _j\\�J/ \ \ 200 \ 112 6 �\ -4- �� _ _99 i — ¢¢¢.¢2.� 904 see 0 / (�i��,' r- I i IL,(J L. o� - D�4 7 \ 2 gas / �___ — GT ESTN RE-H1-BnRIN EXCAVA'I'TNG, INC. ---- Lv4 AL DEPARTMENT 7-f09 LAKE DRIVE LINO LAKES,MN 55014 JEFFREY L.KNUTSON GENERAL COUNSEL 29 January, 1993 CITY OF LINO LAKES Farks and Recreation Department 1189.Main Street 'Lino Lakes, MN 55014 At'tetition riearty Re., Woods of Ral&w—fn. Lake Deat Marty! ?'h49 i.g to follow up our telephone conversation of Wednesday afternoon. h spoke last night with Clyde Rehbein and it is his inrentlon to dedicate the large 2+ acre lot to the east of Farkwood Lame as parkland. I .believe this is in line with staff recommendations. We are able to do this after reviewing site costs and assessments from the City per their January 26, 1993 calculation. if you: have any questions, please give me a call. Very truly yours, Jeffrey L. Knutson kb mitt•€f'"bfand tax`:ram-nsrnl taa Memo 7.671 -#03 P&9es I. � 1 _ F to 'l i Cc.• Co, Dept Phone i Fax 0 _j AGENDA ITEM 4 PLANNING REPORT TO: Line Lakes Planning Ccmnission FROM: Regina Cass/Aian Brixius DATE: 6 January 1993 RE: Lino T-a:-es - Foods of Baldwin Lake - Revised Preliminary Plat FILE NO: 194 . 01 - 92 .42 EXECUTIVE SUNMARY BACKGROUND C.R. Investments (applicant? has submitted a revised preliminary plat for 'moods of Baldwin- Lame, a single-fam;ily subdivision located along proposed vraite Pine Road and Oakwood mane. The site lies directly south of the :ice Creek Norti� Country Regional Trail Park. The revised preliminary plat is comprised of 16 lots on 10 . 16 acres and differs froim theoriginal preliminary plat in that the proposed park has been replaced with three single family lots. Attach ed fox reference : Exhibit A - Site Location_ Exhibit D - Revised Preliminary Plat RECOMMENDATION Based on the following review, our cffice :;eco:m. ends approval of the Woods of Baldwin Lake revised preliminary piat subject to the following conditions : 1 . Shift White P:i.n.e'. Road to the west 10 feet to allow the corner ^ of Lots 3 and 7 of Block 2 to -meet the miniwur, width of 115 feet. y A ,a 5,P ,. ;It 5 - '612' 595 9636•Fax. 59� 9837 ��?� ��a Zel�cs ��, ' Suite- r;� ` �i. LouimQui �'� �:, tvli`v Y�F d • +, � .�- .�- AGENDA fT�it�t 4 � i(d 2 . The carbon g-ct of ;, does not meet C-he � �i'r�.u:n depth of I3_5 feet ^�e v � 6 oe�. Blook 2 O :o+� meet n_`..nittlU.'[1 lot area of 1_2, 8-25 square feet. The play,.. should 1�4' revised to meet these minimums. 3 . Utility easements at least 10 feet wide be provided, centered along the property lines, Grading, drainage and utility plans are subject to review and approval by the City Engineer. 4 . The applicant to meet park and trail dedication requirements as reco=ended by the Park Advisory Committee and approved by the City Council . 5 . The applicant enter into a. development agreement with the City. 6 . C=Tnents from City Staff. ISSUES ANALYSIS Zoning. The site of the Moods of Baldwin Lake is zoned R-1X, Single Family Executive Residential. Arch: Lot 6 of Block 2 is short of the minimum lot size of 12, 825 square feet by 315 square feet. The revised preliminary plat indicates lots ranging in size from 12, 510 square feet to 93,200 square feet with ar average lot size of 24, 828 square feet. Width: :corner Lots 3 and 7 of Block 2 do not meet the minimum 115 foot required lot width. All interior lots meet the required 90 foot width required by the City Ordinance. Depths The corner Lot 7 of Block 2 is short of the minimum lot depth requirement by several feet. All proposed interior lots meet the required lot depth. It is noted that property ines can be adjusted to provide adequate width and depth by moving 'White Pine Circle 10 feet to the west . soth.a.ckst All lots are in compliance with minimur; setbacks outlined in the City Ordinance. Stree s. The revised preliminax-y plat indicates White Pine Road is a through street and the vacation of White Pine Road, shown on the preliminary plat previously submitted, is no longer being requested. With the extension of White Pine Road to the west, the proposed White pine Circle cul-de-sac has beer shortened in length and complies with the 500 foot- maxin5urn ".ength and 60 foot right-of- way required by City Ordinance , AGENDA ITEM 4 � Gr'ding and Drair t Drainage Easements: The proposed drainage. easement located on Lot 1, Block 1 to be reprised for size and configuration and subject to co..w:ent by the City Engineer. There is an additional wetland located in Lot 2 of dock 1 which :may require an easement after review by the City Engineer. Utility Easements: The revised preliminary plat does not show 10 foot wide easements centered along the property lines and must be revised to meet this requirement. Grading and drainage plans have been submitted to the City Engineer for review and must be approved as a condition of revised preliminary plat approval. . parks_and Trail. Dedication_ The difference between the preliminary plat previousl., eubmitted and the revised preliminary plat is the elimination of the park area on the west end.. Since the City wishes to establisa a connection to the regional park to the north and the revised pre1-:=:inary plat submitted to the Park Advisory Co,=nittee and gust be approved as a condition of revised preliminary pia; approval . It is noted that since the readjustment of lot lines is necessary to meet minimum standards, there is ,"N potential for creation of an access or trail easement through the proposed subdivision to the plats to the south. p vvelgpment Agree=en.t._ -As a condition of revised preliminary plat approval, the developer should post necessary securities and enter into a development agreement with the City. CONCLUSION used on the preceding review, our office recommends approval of the Woods of Baldwin Lake revised preliminary plat subject to the conditions listed in the Executive Surv-,ary of this report. pc: Clyde Rehbein AGENDA ITEM #4-D STAFF ORIGjNATOR Marty Asleson. DATE January 29, 1993 TOPIC Woodridge Estates Trail Issue BACKGROUND This is an ,update of an old issue that is still pending QPTIONS Have been discussed and acted upon RECOMMENDATION Have already been acted on z AGENDA ITEM 4 ? v [AGENDA ITEM �-- MEMORANDUM TO: Lino Lakes Park Board FROM: Marty Asleson DATE: January 25, 1993 SUBJECT: Woodridge Estates Trail Issue As per a previous request for an update on the trail issue in Woodridge court I have placed this on the agenda. You may or may not know that Mr. Appleby passed away recently from a sudden illness. Mr. Appleby was the property owner on the south side of the dedicated trail. Since then, the property owner to the north, Mr. Kuney has requested to be kept abreast of any progress on the trail issue. I have given Mr. Kuney a copy of the attached letter that I mailed to Mr. Carlson. ^ Basically, after discussing this issue with our city attorney, and in agreement with the last discussion on this subject by the Park Board, the responsibility to provide a trail access rests with the developer. We have no other information at this time. AGENDA ITEM is January 21, 1993 Mr. Richard Carlson Carlson, Drops & Associates 7671 Old Central Avenue Fridley, Minnesota 55432 Dear Rick, This is a follow up letter to the letter that I sent to you on August 25, 1992 ; and the letter that you sent to the City of Lino Lakes on December 22 , 1992 . The message that needs to be understood is that the trail issue in the Woodridge Estates Development must be resolved. As was indicated in the August 25th letter, you as the developer in Woodridge Estates have a legal responsibility to provide an access through your residential area on the southeast end. The original agreement was to have this trail link between Lots 19 and 20, of Block 3 , and specifically on the north 10 feet of Lot 20, Block 3 as is legally described in the Easement Deed that the City now owns. To add to this, and in light of the timing that you chose to install this trail the property owner to the south was not only unaware of this trail segment, but was angry to discover the trail installed on his private property. This was a trespass situation. The home owner on the south side, Lot 19, Block 3 then took legal action to have this trail removed and contracted the work out to be done. The five feet of trail on the north side of Lot 20, Block 3 was evidently removed at this time. The city did not order this work to be done. { It should be pointed out that at the January 8, 1992 Park Board meeting both adjacent property owners presented their feelings on this whole issue. The Park Board agreed that it is the developers obligation to provide a trail access and alternatives. They also stated that they would prefer not to see a trail where it is legally described and would like to see an alternate route. Staff n was than asked to seek legal advice on this matter. I have been directed to inform you that if this trail segment is not completed by this spring (when this becomes a workable AGENDA ITEM 4 t) situation) that the city will take action. This would include the /w-' holding of escrow dollars and withholding of building permits. The city would like to hear from you as soon as possible. It is our intention to inform adjacent property owners as per their request as soon as we have your reply. They have expressed a need to know what and when this work will be done. Thank you. sincerely, Marty sleson Parks and Recreation Coordinator City of Lino Lakes t AGENDA ITEM 4-C STAFF ORIGINATOR Marty Asleson DATE January 29, 1993 TOPIC Brandywood Trail Permit BACKGROUND Please see attached memorandum OPTIONS 1. Allow an appeal process to occur and wait 2., Proceed with design and engineering of a boardwalk RECOMMENDATION Both options should be considered. we inevitably will be faced with boardwalk segments in our trail network { AGENDA ITEM 4 .f. MEMORANDUM TO: Lino Lakes Park and Recreation Board FROM: Marty Asleson DATE: January 26, 1993 SUBJECT: Brandywood Trail Permit Please find attached copies of the correspondence that we had with the Department of Natural Resources concerning the trail access into Brandywood park at the platted north entrance. As I referenced in the Shores of Marshan Lake memo, there has been an appeal on a similar trail in another city. If the appeal is in favor of the city than we could expect to be able to culvert the two crossings in Brandywood. In the mean time I have asked SEH to give us a budget for the design and expediting of the boardwalk permit. I will also ask Brauer and Associates to submit a similar budget. It my understanding that in the Brandywood Second Addition, it is the cities responsibility to design and contract for the wetland crossings, and the costs will be assessed to the Brandywood project. r r STATE OF AGENDA ITEM 4 C U�HMZ(0)uQ ^ DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES METRO WATERS, 1200 Warner Road, St. Paul, MN 55106 PHONE NO. 772-7910 FILE NO. November 25, 1992 Mr. Marty Asleson City of Lino Lakes 1189 Main Street Lino Lakes, Minnesota 55014 RE: PERMIT APPLICATION 93-6042 , BRANDYWOOD PARK, TRAIL CROSSING OF PROTECTED WETLAND 2-255W, CITY OF LINO LAKES, ANOKA COUNTY Dear Mr. Asleson: In reviewing the above referenced permit application, some concerns have surfaced regarding your consideration of alternatives to wetland fill for the trail. Your application does not include alternatives, or rational for why your proposed design is the only feasible alternative. I have enclosed a copy of Minnesota Rules pertaining to the filling in of protected waters of the state of Minnesota. Please note part 6115.0191, subpart 3. , item F. Specifically, Minnesota Rules state that: 1. There must be no other feasible or practical alternative to the project which would have less impact. 2 . That the public need for the project rules out the no-build alternative. I understand that the trail must be designed for handicap accessibility. I believe though, that bridges, arches and boardwalks can be designed to accomodate these needs. Please call me if you need examples. If you have additional information which you believe should be considered in the review of your permit, or alternate design proposals, please submit them for our review. Please respond by December 20, 1992. If I receive no response, a limited permit will be issued authorizing a crossing that involves no fill. If you have any questions please feel free to call Tony DeMars or myself at 772-7910. Sincerely, 1-11-4 Tom Hoveyy Area Hydrologist Enclosure AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER 6115.0170 PUBLIC WATER RESOURCES AGENJITA ITEM 4r G; a Subp. 35. Riprap shore protection. "Riprap shore protection" means coarse stones, boulders, cobbles, artificially broken rock or concrete, or brick materials laid loosely or within gabion baskets against the slope of the existing bank of a protected water. Subp. 36. Seasonal dock. "Seasonal dock" means a dock so designed and fi j constructed that it may be removed from the lake or stream bed on a seasonal basis. All components such as supports, decking, and footings must be capable of removal by nonmechanized means. Subp. 37. Structure. "Structure" means any building, footing, foundation, slab, roof, boathouse, deck, wall, or any other object extending over, anchored, or permanently attached to the bed or bank of a protected water. Subp. 38. Structural height. "Structural height" means the vertical distance from the natural bed of the stream or watercourse measured at the downstream toe of the control structure or from the lowest elevation of the outside limit of `. the control structure, if it is not across a stream channel or watercourse, to the maximum storage elevation. Subp. 39. Swellhead."Swellhead" means the difference between the headwa- ter elevation necessary to pass the regional flood through the proposed structure and the tailwater elevation below the structure. Subp. 40. Temporary structure. "Temporary structure" means any seasonal dock or floating structure that can be removed from protected waters before winter freeze-up. } Subp. 41. Watercourse. "Watercourse" means any channel having definable beds and banks capable.of conducting generally confined runoff from adjacent ^ lands. During floods water may leave the confining beds and banks but under low and normal flows water is confined within the channel. A watercourse may be ' perennial or intermittent. Subp. 42. Water level control structure. "Water level control structure" means any structure which impounds or regulates the water surface elevation or flow of protected waters, including dams regulated under the provisions of parts 6115.0300 to 6115.0520. Subp. 43. Wharf. "Wharf" means a permanent structure constructed into 1 � navigable waters as a part of a port facility for berthing or mooring commercial watercraft, or for transferring cargo to and from watercraft in an industrial or commercial enterprise, or for loading or unloading passengers from commercial watercraft, or for the operation of a port facility. Statutory Authority: MS s 105.415 i History: 8 SR 533 6115.0180 [Repealed by amendment, 8 SR �33] 6115.0190 FILLING INTO PROTECTED WATERS. I j Subpart 1. Goals. It is the goal of the department to limit the placement of I any fill material into protected waters in order to: A. minimize encroachment, change, or damage to the environment; j B. regulate the quantity and quality of fill and the purposes for which �l : filling may be allowed based upon the capabilities of the waters to assimilate the material; and C. maintain consistency with floodplain, shoreland, and wild and scenic rivers management standards and ordinances. Subp. 2. Scope. Filling as used in this part involves placement of unconfined or loosely confined materials in protected waters. Subp. 3. Nonpermitted placement. Placement shall not be permitted in the following cases: ' AGENDA ITEM 4 C 5367 PUBLIC WATER RESOURCES 6115.0190 #$ A. to achieve vegetation control; B. to create upland areas, except where expressly provided herein; }` C. to stabilize beds of protected waters which cannot support fill materi- als because of excessive depths of muck, steep bank, bed slope, or other condi- tions; D. to stabilize or impound the site of active springs; E. to dispose of rock, sand, gravel, or any other solid material resulting from activities carried out above the ordinary high water mark; F.to construct a roadway or pathway,or create or improve land accesses from peripheral shorelands to islands, or to facilitate land transportation across the waters; however, where a project is proposed by a federal, state, or local government agency and this provision would prevent or restrict the project, or create a major conflict with other public purposes or interests, the commissioner may waive this provision provided: (1) there is no other feasible and practical alternative to the project_ that would have less environmental impact; and (2) that the public need for the project rules out the no-build alternative; G. filling of posted fish spawning areas is prohibited. Subp. 4. No permit required. No permit shall be required for the following activities unless prohibited under subpart 3: A. To install a beach sand blanket provided the sand or gravel layer does not exceed six inches in thickness, 50 feet in width along the shoreline, or one-half the width of the lot, whichever is less, and does not extend more than ten feet waterward of the ordinary high water mark,provided local watershed district and local zoning officials are given at least seven days notice by the landowner. B. For one additional installation of a sand or gravel layer subsequent to an initial installation at the same location and not exceeding the same amounts and dimensions allowed under item A. C. To install riprap shore protection, except along the shores of Lake Superior and officially designated trout streams, provided the riprap materials consist of natural rock having an average size of 12 inches or larger in its smallest dimension, and conform with the natural alignment of the shoreline, with a minimum finished slope not steeper than 3:1 horizontal:vertical, no materials are placed more than five feet waterward of the ordinary high water mark, and the material does not obstruct the flow of water. D. To place fill in a protected watercourse having a total drainage area, at its mouth, of five square miles or less, provided that the watercourse is not an officially designated trout stream and -the placement of fill shall not result in: (1) any diversions of water from the drainage area; ` (2) any impoundment of waters by damming the watercourse; (3) any actions which would result in erosion and cause sedimenta- tion of downstream waters as determined by the county or local soil and water r conservation district. Subp. 5. Permits required. Permits shall be required for the placement of fill in protected waters, except as provided under subparts 3 and 4, and shall meet all of the following requirements: A. -the project will involve a minimum of encroachment, change, or damage to the environment, including but not limited to fish and wildlife habitat, navigation, water supply, and storm water retention; B. the fill consists of clean inorganic material that is free of pollutants and nutrients; AGENDA ITEM 4 C h December 14, 1992 Mr. Tom Hovey Area Hydrologist Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Metro Waters, 1200 Warner Road St. Paul, Minnesota 55106 RE: PERMIT APPLICATION 93-6042, BRANDYWOOD ESTATES PARK, TRAIL CROSSING OF PROTECTED WETLAND 2-555W, CITY OF LINO LAKES, ANOKA COUNTY Dear Mr. Hovey: This letter is in response to your November 25, 1992, letter which indicated concerns for the above referenced permit application. Specifically, your letter requests additional information concerning h alternatives or rationale for why our proposed design is the only feasible alternative. The Brandywood Estates development initially was proposed to the City of Lino Lakes as a concept plan on March 28, 1990. As part of the planning process for the park area, we have in our file a letter from STS Consultants, Ltd. describing the absence of wetland conditions at the park site. Thus it appeared to us that we had a positive situation for park and trail entry points. Please see the enclosure (STS Project 94951-A). The preliminary plat approval for this plat occurred on June 8, 1990. Your letter of October 24, 1990 (enclosed) is consistent with the STS letter. By Spring of 1991, grading operations had begun on the first phase of the development. Basically, the City and the developer were locked into this approved residential housing plan at this time. Substantial dollars had been spent. The park in the southeast side of the development was set. During the same timeframe in August of 1990, parks and recreation staff realized the need to comprehensively look at the parks and trail requirements for the City. Accelerating city growth and the very expensive prospect of providing parks and recreational opportunity for future residents prompted us to hire Brauer and Associates to do this for us. The plan has been completed and adopted by our City Council. The park and trail plan lays out a system of parks and trails that will service area residents. The trail plan depicts the corridors for the various modes of travel between parks as well as between parks and developed areas. Please see the enclosed trail system legend. With respect to this plan, the specific trails within each park area are designed at the time that each development is proposed. Generally, within the context of our comprehensive plan, a primary goal is to provide a way for people to get through each development and in and out of each park. AGENDA ITEM 4 G Permit Application 93-6042 December 14, 1992 Page 2 Most of the internal park trails we would like to keep as natural as possible, but they are by no means intended to be "primitive" trail types. They are in high-density urban population areas. Our intent is to eventually route these residents into the more primitive and regional wildland areas inside the 2600-acre regional park in the heart of Lino Lakes. Philosophically, the real reasons that we manage these areas are humanly-based. That is why many city, county, and state park systems have designed trail systems around and sometimes through wetland areas. They are interesting to people. Trails allow managers of parks to create a public awareness of the environment and initiate environmental education programs. One of the major reasons that the current residents have moved into the City of Lino Lakes is because of the vast wetlands and the biologic diversity that they create. We need to be able to get them there through a quality system of trails. The Wetland Conservation Act of 1991 created new rules that changed the way that we all must look at wetland situations. We all believe in the conservation of this valuable resource. From our perspective, though, we believe in some instances, particularly in the case of a minor encroachment when the best interests of a given population of people are concerned, that there needs to be consideration for tolerance. We believe that the Brandywood trail entrance through 2-555W is a situation where this tolerance for a minor encroachment is in the best interest of the residents of Lino Lakes. That is, that the public need for the project rules out the no-build alternative. Our parks and recreation comprehensive plan states as a goal that the wetland areas are to be respected and avoided as much as possible. We believe that in this instance, and quite possibly in a few other situations in our developing trail system, that there needs to be some consideration given to cities that can show a public need. We believe that the public need is present in 2-555W. Consideration needs to be given to cities that may have been caught between the new wetland laws and commitments to already designed and built developments. The laws were written after substantial dollars had been spent and trail areas were locked in. We cannot change the design and trail configuration of the proposed trail through 2-555W. It will create a public hardship. Without a paved trail, we would not be able to service this park area adequately. Our city planners are also concerned with emergency access to this area of the park. Yes, we can allow for emergency access to the park via the entrance on the southwest end, but conceptually we had planned for a picnic area between the two areas of wetland crossing at the permit site. Both entrances to the park were designed to serve as access at different locations. The south park entrance was intended to provide access on the south side including new developments to the south. The northern entrance was intended to provide access for residents to the north. Please see the enclosed plat. ''%. Without an adequate paved trail on the north end we would not be able to adequately service the proposed area of use between the two crossings. AGENDA ITEM 4 G Permit Application 93-6042 December 14, 1992 Page 3 Yes, boardwalks can probably be designed for handicapped accessibility if an agency has the capital to do this. Lino Lakes does not. We believe that there are also other considerations. In-line skating has become very popular. Boardwalks will create hazards for this type of use. The City of Lino Lakes has extremely limited capital to build structures such as boardwalks and bridges. In order to traverse the approximately 20-foot and 60-foot crossings in 2-555W, large sums of money would be needed. Our engineers report that the alternative crossings would cost approximately an extra $60,000. Without the ability to culvert and pave a trail through this area, we will not, in all probability, be able to build an alternative trail through this area for many years to come, if ever. Again, please keep in mind that because this plat is already designed and this particular phase of the development is already built, we now have a bituminous trail going through a cul-de-sac leading up to the 2-555W area. From my years of experience and observation in parks and recreation, I am quite confident that people that live in this area will build their own bridges. We will see old boards and planking, tires, and other debris in the 2-555W area for people to step on. A culverted, bituminous trail would result in a much cleaner environmental (wetland) situation. The culverts would also allow us to control storm water flow rates in the area. Without the trail and culvert, storm water flow onto the property to the east will increase, contrary to public policy and practice. If this permit application is approved, we would be happy to work with the Department of Natural Resources to monitor the possible effects of water quality changes due to our proposed trail permit. We would also be willing to work with you to develop a public awareness or environmental education program for this area. Thank you for your consideration in this matter. Sincerely, Marty Asleson Parks and Recreation Coordinator City of Lino Lakes Enclosures: 4 c: Darrell Schneider Don Volk AGENDA ITEM 4 C l May 9, 1990 Mr. Steven Johnston Merila & Associates_. Inc. 8401 - 73rd Avenue North Brooklyn Park, MN 55428 STS Project 94951-A - Re: Brandywood Estates Park Addition - Dear Mr. Johnston: STS Consultants, Ltd. has completed a field reconnaissance of the proposed Brandywood Estates Park Addition, as requested by you. The location of the proposed park addition is outlined on the enclosed copy of an aerial map of the area. The objective of the field reconnaissance was to determine the approximate size and location of wetlands_ if present on the parcel. Indicators of surface water hydrology, soil types, and vegetation types present were evaluated to determine if wetland conditions were present on the site_ evidence of jurisdictional wetland conditions were identified at the site. Facultative �.etland species and evidence of limited spring flooding were found, but hydrological con- ditions are insufficient to support a functional wetland. The extent of the area prone to brief flooding events is limited to an area of approximately 25 feet in radius, centered approximately 100 feet west of the eastern boundary and 25 feet north of the southern boundary. The area prone to flooding is labeled as "seasonally moist" on the enclosed area map. Generally, the gradual slope and poorly drained soils of the site allow water to run-off from the site onto the property adjoining to the north, named the Brandywood Estates Housing Development_ Based upon the site conditions observed at the time of the field reconnaissance, we con- clude that wetland conditions are not present at the site. Thank you for the opportunity to assist you on this project. If you have questions con- cerning this letter, please contact us as soon as possible. Sincerely, STS CONSULTANTS, LTD. �-Theodore M. Frostman Steven J. Carlson Principal Scientist Environmental Technician SJ C/d j Enc. cc: Mr. Dennis Erickson STS Consultants Ltd_ Consuriing Engineers 3650 Annapolis Lane Minneapolis.Minnesota 55447 612.559.19001Fax 612.559.4507 AGENDA � C STATE OF �V6 - DDEPARTMENT OF NATURAL. RESOURCES �° ° METRO REGION T=RS - 1200 VYdZ\ER ROAD, ST_ PAUL, MN 55106 PsiONE NO. 772-7910 FILE NO. October 24, 1990 Mr. Steve Johnston Merila & Associates 8401 73rd Ave. N. Brooklyn Park, MN 55428-1508 RE: BRANDYWOOD ESTATES, WETLAND 2-555W, LINO LAKES, ANOKA CCUNTY Dear Mr. Johnston: I have reviewed the preliminary plan for the above-referenced project (July 5, 1990 Revision) and have the following caanents: DNR protected wetland 2-555W extends into the southeast boundary of our jurisdiction. The ordinary high water level (OHW) appears to be at approximately elevation 902 (plan datum) . No work in the wetland is planned, so no DNR permits will be required. Tim Fell (220-0360) should be contacted regarding U.S. Army Corps of Engineers jurisdiction. The runoff from White Oak Road appears to be going through a pretreatment basin before entering the wetland. This is good. According to the Lino Lakes. Flood Insurance Rate Map the 100-year floodplain is limited to areas east of White Oak Road. The Rice Creek Watershed District (Tom Rasmussen @ 473-4224) may be able to provide you with an actual elevation. A11 structures located in the 100-year flood area must be elevated to the regulatory flood protection elevation. Although the north end of the project is in the shoreland district of Ward's Lake all lots meet the size requirements of the City's shoreland ordinance. Thank you for the opportunity to review this project. Please call me if you have any questions. Sincerely, Ton Hovey SHORT ELL IOTT I ,'•ORICKSOid. 1idC. Area Hydrologist T 182:kap NOV - 1 1990 cc: John Miller, City of Lino Lakes ST. PAUL Ton Rasmussen, Rice Creek U7SD Tim Fell, USCOE Wetland 2-555W file AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER 'A-G VDA ITEM 4 C p7 _ N jr 614 - 1-4 -i T �..,, A, al CAUTION BRANDYWOOD ESTATES Iw:O.oM•En�...o �a u..«rK.a•.•�a !I � �O!!C _ z c --•W GRADING PLAN �� .c,ve4•�_. � L Section 6- Park and Trail System Plan City of Lino Lakes W J-- < Figure 63 (Part 1 of 2) Park and Trail System Plan O Z Uj 0 .•■ ■al .al al■ 7 F H g T v •--�C o C do r n la \ ! / »,7 I '}al • / I Trail DevelopTent Guldel[nes j LEGEND: N 3 \ N 2 ( p Geli cfit LAssopased With Linear Trail Curt dots 3 .� I 1�`: ........ And6pit ed Urban Development Limiu (Arcni Acrcs \ II thin dhidual rks)And (wol a Par ( �N•1 (A< "W' R s _.. Are jnlepded To.Be . Pnnclple Anerial In Co n-n With Furore Sub.Dt Is ons., P d- n/Oiry 1 L kages From w;�h;"All I "4 t ` ! \�[I ) pha {tar y WUIy.TTC N to al nilo n +w .ca,+.,.. Minor Arterial S bd To The,D ignated Ira I System ,.. " ' P, "1 Safely Protects Users Prom Urban Devicipinti l } ns Sh On 1n Planme To Be Defined Doting —,iI fi. rat `t's' '' i.1 ! - E goachme I And Assonated Vp)yPulaFT arfw .-..-............ C.11-0, {. fl e S W'"un PI pg,Rocess ThrouYh,.A. \j..•a/�i / !J - ,�.! "C Ailo.For R lauvely Unwturupted Pleuu e r C pc e bffon Beiwecd T'he Cily Apd The 1 n ;�' ^I --kr'k Arid Bik `To And ThrouBM The qjq;a - �ixS"" „•,,.,,,,, 1 S{ Minnesota Slate Aid Dove op;.,(ryP wi) '.) Par nY s r f U ae t , e lat e _ Mini Park R The c s I r u O Th. set # ) ItAddl 7p.Lr_ar T d(:o rdon Plate No 71 For ry ;�.` �A to di Ito all > i y! ;� 1 i1 __�`��. ' � ••Trviypn hat l "' Ne ghborhuod Yark 1 (\ Y Em oasu Is On 1 4 T I Fo Pcd r ru And > N•4" B U I Y atryeWU Tu Anil I The V P'rka,Aa w II C'+ Y 1 urk , )\�n ,` Aa In Aad Arno d l h City' I l yf ld/AlAlel'u(.0 npl., E �' / Z A•I M I Oncn Davolopcd wnhln Ul I g Or Fill— 1\ ) •I 9 �v Y; 1 (Ply Hall Park) It J iL0 w's... mear 1 rail Corr'Jor Rckional Park i � \ 1 c;1 D I{ d n.l a ........a ..... ti n'Det I dT,A11 Y h+(roil(will k l 1Jr'1'i u� Corrido,Or wrk)• , Transponai-,1 1(w I<O.w./1.� s,u 12 Scparalw F Il d )) , ...... .. ■ to itN G IL'mo nary I, Hi ke Route(ClIII T,n n �I on r,a-1 - Paved Should r) or ....................... 1. �•!- y Toll Segment Id 'f- Number yyi ,. / I,I I.i.. � t ( ,„'_' �7 ,,i':;' • Access Polnt'fo He,ionul Trails e �•• r ,,:.�. t „t a.>. �..ww...jnea.•ya :"' Y............ i :( .00.am'.o LonpRange Linear Tnl C—idor 9' N 7 IJ Des tcd'r .I Crown f"" t 1 • >;G' .•• • (Conceptual) 1 Ina Y 1 1 Y ♦ r Des`timed Trail C ss ng O Conceptual Local on fo,Furore 1 1 j r•'"'µY i`I 'I Ne ghbcrhood Parks(,Vler GPansion of Urban Development U,,u) 01 �.• J li yVLone•Ran&c Linear ail Corridors: Ii+ ,+ -7 I The Tra le ldc nfed Ond Plan As'Loog. Ra c4 ca Trail W ra Are Conapmal 0 I/a 1/2 J/a I 1 _ 1 !,^,a u. p�j,,,,,aoo i j '•�� Only And Intc ded TgDefne potential 1, 1 c•it 'I ,'r s Scale In Miles) �M•1 t • •� l`- tan er Trail�rt dor joss s For 1 III 1 '._ > •� '' ■■ r , Fun hit Cons ranoo WhenTh P Is y t.(Sur)I Oat! 15, Y, t i �I�_'S' '� GOV Updated In Th Fa(yrL. �. � "'S1' /! •1 ,Fs,i',T w:YGri L ... _- .,r.,»., Ar f ) 2 Linkiip Furore eua ea • IT Pro Ines Abe—� 1,I 9 may,,.,. • ,IVU� I{ .� .FN r r y ..'1L Y'ytT•"T .. dE r Match lane(Sec Pan I f2) Match lane(See Pan 2 Of 2)_- 6-18 U -:I' Section 6 -Park and Trail System Plan City of Lino Lakes L5 W F- Figure 63 (Part 2 of 2) Park and Trail System Plan 4 O Z W Match U (S.P 1O(2) _ -- -- -- -- r ✓i --�_�.. 5J ut - M 2 art�rtnv---cm-c--- - :.;z-S•�9c - P� ` M1 / !.. 1 � LR is sed t rl ` I ;I Ax fJ r Tr h u i 1 M 'ai 62 °- .x Cernc'rvlt.l..t•: • r r. 2r Y �L .t�' .r♦ \\ ., \ - j Cwmlulu f.unilry ll!I"r. )y.uw I 1 11 IP----- r ril l uk b l ilk,U min�u ,M-4, �, •1. � � _ ! - 77.Ij� �; Shu O 1..PI A 1u IeI y(d Uu �Gr`^ ;5:";•,` I /, �Se 6ci uw,vu on Pl.n„ g .• _ 1 !Y ro r ,ar ve EffoO 11 �'uY..And 1TLa I ../0(Typical) ♦ .� I •�X • 42II I r 1I.1241 V ''t ♦ i Y: 'Y)' ) ov Il r uq■ •a • ' N-15 - F 23 j /�i•ZP4�)t?+!:` (x� r + F 1 b0 i f 'x y> l r •! x ! t :.�J ��` :'_ I r I �-••r n .�...::. .::: I;.c. •.•, (Bnodywood ark)! t.0 1 / r..r..•� J7 ,1 (yvpl'�;,o ss Iks gnalcd Tru,l t ( ( r�.M ( N, - ��• �, Q b Cross ng-� I rs (Sb4r , 49 60 r•. ��i{'' i ®", _ x)Y �' :`. -_,:� 74, 34, I Deslgw d ToilC(oulhg + P ` f . 19 it I: I .�;u 25 : .. .. •• �4 ,..,;;:•; .F i1♦f'..: 4 :. 1 _' �Tn lgCcuxY ng f )� �-,-__.•'� g ♦!:'! '. ♦�or -: � '♦p?`°, .Q/,/ !% 0. U - h t_-......;i'::a �.r...,t_u uu+u.awr_ ♦ 1\� ♦ `` . t1 4ti t a 29 1 t�� N•10 .................... �•. ....... A3 � 9 ;.. �/ t O 0 l 59 �\ r✓ .......... ";ouzel: '.. ,r �� • ', nu „-- --- ' 6 ,= 5• F I I � i ,. 7r-' .r 7 tv i�^'�I w:..♦,v.. � � ....::�k� ... ''0 �w>.,..+.r•++.,-wa..,.�, O� i�i� j O ; d I' ��.�i,'•� .04�.-.,i�\ ��` j /� „GcuPca To-Whn LL, 4wy,Trl!SY>iuu / a 1 — r /'Y ` i , ♦ 1) nd Bald Eugle Ole{tyke Rcganel Pvk 0 To Sh.— w Trall Sy-. ........r.........• w....w.a:.wwm•.w.`a:aew...u...r..w....,...:.,..wn - •!I= l � 6-19 s v rC2/i 6 - Park and Trail System Plan City of Lino Lakes LU - Q - I= 6.4 (Part 2 of 6). Trail System Legend UJ D14, Trail Type Approx, Len h Description/Future Development Issues Transportation Trail 1.0 mile The trail runs along Fourth Avenue from Lilac Street to Main Street. It is intended to be located within the existing road right-of-way. Although a local road, County and State standards should still be adhered to for consistency. Ideally, the trail should be located as far away from the edge of the road as practical.A trail on one side of the road should be adequate to handle the anticipated traffic volumes,A Class II level of trail should be appropriate. Park Trail 0.6 miles The trail runs westerly from neighborhood park N-6 to the transportation trail along Fourth Ave.Although intended to be a park trail its entire length, only the western half will actually be within a linear trail corridor setting.The remainder of the trail traverses and area that lacks the natural character(i.e.,wetlands,woodlots, etc.) necessary for a linear trail corridor. In this case, a trail casement-separate from road r.o,w.'s-would be ideal to provide safe pedestrian movement from the furthest development areas to the neighborhood park.A Class II level of trail should be appropriate. Park Trail 0.3 miles The trail runs easterly from neighborhood park N-6 toward Lake Drive following an existing powerline easement.The easement will provide safe pedestrian movement from the developments along its route to the neighborhood park.It would be ideal, from a circulation standpoint, to have a crossing across Lake Drive. But since Lake Drive is a busy road, it is very important that the safety of this crossing be given due consideration, A Class 11 level of trail should be appropriate. Park/Trans.Trail 1.0 miles This trail location is based on the assumption that the undeveloped land within this park service area will be re-subdivided to urban densities. Should this expectation not be realized, the need for and/or location of this trail will require reevaluation. The first segment of trail is a transportation trail that intersects with the transportation trail running along Lilac Street (#14) and runs north adjacent to Laurie Avenue to the park.A park trail within a linear trail corridor setting is intended to run north-northeast from the park to Carl Street-largely following an existing drainage ditch.It is this segment of trail that is the most speculative since its location is dependent on what happens developmentally in this area in the future, In the long-term, the park trail is intended to continue north from Carl Street as shown on the master plan. In the short-term, a transportation trail is intended to run easterly along Carl Street until it intersects with the trail running along Fourth Avenue, It should be kept in mind that a safe pedestrian/bicycle crossing across Fourth Street will need to be developed.A Class II level of trail should be appropriate for all segments of this trail. Transportation Trail 1.6 mile The trail runs along Lilac Street from Sunset Road to Main Street. It is intended to be located within the existing road right-of-way, Since it is a county road, County and State standards will need to be adhered to as appropriate.A trail on one side of the road should be adequate to handle the anticipated traffic volumes.A Class II level of trail should be appropriate. Park Trail 0.7 miles The trail runs northerly from the future frontage/service road to Lilac Street within an existing 66'wide outlot/easement.Although not really a linear trail corridor as proposed in some areas of the city(i.e., such as trails #5 or #32), the overall width and natural character of this easement will allow for a rather nice park trail setting.A Class II level of trail should be appropriate. Park Trail 0.1 miles The trail runs easterly from M-1 (Sunset Oaks Park) to park trail #15 within an existing 66'wide outlot/easement.A Class II level of trail should be appropriate. Transportation Trail 0.2 mile The trail runs easterly from Lake Drive to park trail#18 through what is likely to be a commercial/business area along the interstate.The trail is intended to provide safe, off-street trail access to the regional park.A Class II level of trail should be appropriate. Park Trail 1.4 miles This trail is intended to be located within a linear trail corridor that begins at Aqua Lane and runs north-northeast following the shoreline of a Marshall Lake, the edge of wetlands, and, on the northern most segment, directly adjacent to or within the regional park. This trail represents an exceptional opportunity to use the linear trail corridor concept to its fullest potential and take advantage of views across Marshall Lake and the regional park.A Class lI level of trail should be appropriate. Transportation Trail 0.5 mile The trail first runs along the future frontage/service road from park trail#15 to Sunset Road.Then it follows Sunset Road across the interstate until it intersects with Elm Street. It is intended to be located within the existing road right-of-ways. County and State standards will need to be adhered to as appropriate. Road crossings should be developed only at controlled intersections.The bridge crossing should be clearly signed and striped.A Class 1I level of trail should be appropriate. 6-2( C� wA unu ,ruti System Plan City of Lino Lakes Figure 6.4 (Part 3 of 6). Trail System Legend W Q T.D. # Trail Approx. Length Description/Future Development Issues Z 20 Transportation Trail 1.3 miles The trail begins at Sunset Road and runs along Elm Street until it crosses Lake Drive and ties into the park trail adjacent to Marshan Lake LU (#18). Along Elm Street, it is intended to be located within the existing road right-of-way. County and State standards should be adhered 0 to as appropriate.A trail on one side of the road should be adequate to handle the anticipated traffic volumes.The crossing of Lake Drive Q is important for circulation purposes.But since its a busy road,it is also important that the safety of the crossing be given due consideration. A Class II level of trail should be appropriate the entire length of this trail. 21 Transportation Trail 1.1 miles The trail runs along Sunrise Drive from Elm Street to the trial along Lake Drive. It is intended to be located within the existing road right- of-way. Although a local road, County and State standards should still be adhered to as appropriate for consistency.A trail on one side of the road - preferably the east side-should be adequate to handle the anticipated traffic volumes.The crossing of Lake Drive is important for circulation purposes. But since its a busy road, it is also important that the safety of the crossing be given due consideration. A Class 11 level of trail should be appropriate. 22 Transportation Trail 0.3 miles The trail is intended to run within an existing trail casement, Fsscntially, it is intended to allow for pedestrian movement from within the subdivision(s) being developed along Lake Drive toward A-2 (Sunrise Park). No crossing is proposed across Lake Drive, A Class Il level of trail should be appropriate. 23 Transportation Trail 0.3 miles The trail is intended to run along Aqua Lane from Lake Drive to the park trail adjacent to Marshan Lake (#18)as well as into the regional trail system as shown. It is intended to be, located within the existing road right-of-way.Although a local road, County and State standards should still be adhered to as appropriate for consistency, A Class II level of trail should be appropriate. 24 Transportation Trail 4.2 miles The trail runs along Birch Street from Hodgson Road to County Road #54. It is intended to be located within the existing road right-of- way. County and State standards will need to be adhered to as appropriate.A trail on one side of the road should be adequate to handle the anticipated traffic volumes.A Class II level of trail should be appropriate. 25 Park/Trans,Trail 0.6 miles For the most part,this particular trail is already been or will be constructed in the near future.As the plan shows,a fair portion of this segment falls within a linear trail corridor,The northern most segment of the trail,which is shown as a transportation trail,is intended to provide a link to the elementary school as well as the transportation trail along Birch Street.A controlled crossing or underpass will be needed to allow pedestrians to safely cross Birch Street.A Class II level of trail should be appropriate for the entire length of this trail. 26 Park Trail 0.3 miles The trail runs southeasterly from the intersection of Hodgson Road and Birch Street to a point where it will cross Ware Road. Since the area that the trail traverses lacks the natural character(i.e.,wetlands, woodlots,etc.)necessary for a linear trail corridor, a trail casement - separate from road no.w.'s- should be used to provide safe pedestrian movement from the furthest development areas to the linear trail corridors, open spaces, and parks.A Class 11 level of trail should be appropriate. 27 Park Trail 0,6 miles Picking up where #26 left off at Ware Road, the trail runs southeasterly toward neighborhood park N-10.About 2/3's of the trails length will be located within a trail easement rather than a linear trail corridor.As with trail #26,the area lacks the natural character(i.e.,wetlands, woodlots, etc.) necessary for a linear trail corridor. The objective of this trail is to provide safe pedestrian movement front within this development area to the linear trail corridors,open spaces, and parks.The last third of this trail would be in a linear trail corridor that runs directly adjacent to an existing wetland area.A Class II level of trail should be appropriate for the entire length of this trail. 28 Transportation Trail 2.2 miles The trail runs along Hodgson Road from Lake Drive to Ash Street, It is intended to be located within the existing road right-of-way, County and State standards will need to be adhered to as appropriate.A trail on one side of the road should be adequate to handle the anticipated traffic volumes. A Class II level of trail should be appropriate, 29 Transportation Trail 2.2 miles The trail runs along Ware Road and 62nd Street.The objective of the trail is to provide a safe means to access the linear trail system from the development area north of 62nd Street between Hodgson Road and Ware Road. 6-22 Section b - Park and Trail System Plan City of Lino Lakes W Q Figure 6.4 (Part 4 of 6), Trail System Legend Z W (D I.D. # Trail Approx- Length DescriptionL�uture Development Issues 30 Park Trail 0.1 miles This trail is intended to be located within a linear trail corridor that runs easterly from neighborhood park N-14 to the existing road.Although short in length,the trail's location adjacent to wetlands and the regional park make it an exceptional opportunity to use the linear trail corridor concept to its fullest potential. A Class II level of trail should be appropriate, 31 Park Trail 0.5 miles For the most part, this trail is intended to be located within a linear trail corridor that runs east-west following a series wetland areas and pockets of trees/vegetation north of Ash Street.A short segment of the trail will be a transportation type trail as it crosses Woodridge Lane and follows woodridge Court.Ultimately,the trail is intended to link up to the regional trail system within the regional park.This trail represents a nice example of applying of the linear trail corridor concept.A Class lI level of trail should be appropriate, 32 Park Trail 1.1 miles This trail is intended to be located within a linear trail corridor which begins at its intersection with trail #25 (near Reshanau Lake Estates) and runs westerly following the edge of wetlands and woodlots to neighborhood park N-11(Birch Park).With the exception of Reshanau Lakes Estates, existing housing development is very light to non-existent along the entire length of the trail.As with trail #5, this trail represents an exceptional opportunity to use the linear trail corridor concept to its fullest potential,A Class II level of trail should be appropriate. 33 Park Trail 0.4 miles This trail really amounts to a spur trail that feeds into another linear trail. It too is intended to be located within a linear trail corridor that begins at its intersection with trail #32 and runs northerly following the edge of a drainage way, wetlands and woodlots to where it would ultimately dead end into a subdivision. Existing housing development is very light to non-existent along the entire length of this trail spur, Similar to trail *32,this trail represents a very nice opportunity to use the linear trail corridor concept to its fullest potential.One important note is that this trail is not intended to cross Birch Street.A Class II level of trail should be appropriate. 34 Park Trail 0.3 miles This trail also amounts to a spur trail that ties the future athletic complex A-3 into the linear trail corridor system.It too is intended to be located within a linear trail corridor that begins at its intersection with trail #32 and runs south through a wetland area to where it will tie into the athletic complex. Existing housing development is very light to non-existent along the entire length of this trail spur. Similar to trail #32, this trail represents a very nice opportunity to use the linear trail corridor concept to its fullest potential. Class 11 level of trail should be appropriate. 35 Park 'frail 0.4 miles For the most part, this trail is intended to be located within a linear trail corridor that begins at neighborhood park N-11 (Birch Park) and runs northerly following the edge of wetlands until it reaches the Birch Street no.w., where it then turns into a transportation trail and heads west to 12th Avenue,The intersection of Birch Street and 12th Ave, is important because the trail crosses both 12th Avenue and Birch Street to allow trail users to access the regional park.It is very important that the safety of this crossing be given due consideration.A Class II level of trail should be appropriate, 36 Transportation Trail 0.2 miles The trail runs along Holly Drive directly adjacent to the athletic complex. It is intended to be located within the existing road right-of-way, The trail's purpose is to provide easy access for pedestrians and bicyclists coming from the developed areas of the City to the athletic facilities.County and State standards will need to be adhered to as appropriate,A Class II level of trail should be appropriate. 37 Transportation Trail 0.5 miles The trail runs along 12th Avenue from Birch Street to Holly Drive,It is intended to be located within the existing road right-of-way.County and State standards will need to be adhered to as appropriate.A trail on one side of the road should be adequate to handle the•anticipated traffic volumes.The trail's purpose is to provide easy access for pedestrians and bicyclists coming from the developed areas of the City to the athletic facilities,A Class II level of trail should be appropriate. 38 Park Trail 0.2 miles This existing trail runs westerly from neighborhood park N-13(Brandywood) to when it ties into the transportation trail along 12th Avenue. Although the trail is located within a trail easement, the abundant trees and vegetation provide a very natural setting typically associated with a linear trail corridor.A Class II level of trail has been developed and is appropriate. 39 Park Trail 0.3 miles This trail is intended to be located within a linear trail corridor that begins at neighborhood park N-12 and runs easterly following the edge of a wetlands to mini park M-4. There is no existing housing developed along its entire length. This is another trail that represents an exceptional opportunity to use the linear trail corridor concept to its fullest potential.This particular trail will likely requir/ couple of l boardwalks and/or bridges to tra I -,everal stretches of wetlands.A Class II level of trail should be appropriate. l Section 6- Park and Trail System Plan City of Lino Lake i1J Q Figure 6.4 (Part 5 of 6). Trail System Legend 9 z UJ I.D. # Trail Amrox. Len tgth Descripdon/Future Development Issues Q 40 Park Trail 0.6 miles This trail is intended to be located within a linear trail corridor that begins at neighborhood park M4 and runs easterly following the edge of a wetlands to joint-use park JU-3.The trail is also intended to tie into the regional trail system in the future,There is no existing housing developed along its entire length.This is another trail that represents an exceptional opportunity to use the linear trail corridor concept ro its fullest potential.A Class II level of trail should be appropriate. `i 41 Park Trail 0.1 miles This trail runs south from JU-3 to the transportation trail along Birch Street (#2) and is simply intended to expand pedestrian access opportunities to JU-3 from development areas within the park's service area,A Class II level of trail should be appropriate. 42 Park Trail 0.4 miles This trail is intended to be located within a linear trail corridor that begins at joint use park JU-3 and runs easterly following the natural drainageways and the edge of a wetlands to mini park M-5. Although this trail will not be located directly adjacent to extensive wetlands i and open space areas as are some of the other trails in this area, it will still provide a natural setting that is much more desirable than a typical transportation type trail.A Class II level of trail should be appropriate. 'i 43 Park Trail 0.2 miles This trail is intended to be located within a linear trail corridor that begins at mini park M-5 and runs northerly following the natural drainageways and the edges of a wetlands to the regional park and trail system.As with trail #42, although this trail will not be located directly adjacent to extensive wetlands and open space areas, it will still provide a natural setting that is much more desirable than a typical transportation type trail.A Class II level of trail should be appropriate. 44 Park Trail 0.4 miles This trail is intended to be located within a linear trail corridor that begins at mini park M-5 and runs east - southeast following natural drainageways and edges of wetlands and within an existing water works easement running along the municipal boundary line.The trail will tie into the transportation trail along Birch Street, As with trail #42, although this trail will not be located directly adjacent to extensive j wetlands and open space areas, it will still provide a natural setting that is much more desirable than a typical transportation type trail. A ' Class II level of trail should be appropriate. f" 4S Park Trail 1.0 miles This trail is intended to be located within a linear trail corridor that begins at the Cedar Street and runs south following the edge of a wetlands, drainageways, and woodlots through neighborhood park N-15 to the future location of 64th Street E. This trail represents an exceptional opportunity to use the linear trail corridor concept to its fullest potential.A Class II level of trail should be appropriate, 46 Park Trail 0,7 miles This trail is intended to be located within a linear trail corridor that runs adjacent to the eastern shore of Amelia Lake.At this time, there is no existing housing developed along its entire length.However,a small subdivision is now in the planning stages,This trail also represents an exceptional opportunity to use the linear trail corridor concept to its fullest potential,A Class II level of trail should be appropriate. 47 Dike Route 5,0 miles The bike route runs along Main Street, which is a minor arterial roadway, from Sunset Road to Centerville, 48 Bike Route 4.7 miles The bike route runs along Lake Drive,which is a minor arterial roadway, from Circle Pines to the northern city limits. r_ 49 Bike Route 4,2 miles The bike route runs along Birch Street, which is a collector street, from Hodgson Road to County Road #54, 50 Dike Route 1.6 milts 'Ihe bike route runs along Lilac Street, which is a collector street, from Sunset Road to Main Street. t 51 Bike Route 1.6 miles The bike route runs along a frontage road, which is a State-Aid road, from Sunset Road to Lilac Street. 52 Bike Route I.0 miles The bike route runs along a frontage road,which is a State-Aid road, from Elm Street to Lake Drive, 53 Bike Route 1.3 miles The bike route runs along Elm Street,which is a collector street, from Sunset Road to Lake Drive, 54 Bike Route 3.0 miles The bike route runs along Sunset Road,which is a collector street, from Lake Drive to Main Street. r � \ L 'ectioii 6- Park and Trail Systent Plan City of Lino Lakes Q figure 6.4 (Part 6 of 6). Trail System Legend <D, # Trail ' Approx. Length Descripdon1Future Development Issues Y' SS Bike Route 2.2 miles The bike route runs along Hodgson Road,which is a minor arterial roadway, from Lake Drive to Ash Street. 56 Bike Route 1,7 miles The bike route runs along 62nd Street, which is a State-Aid road, from Hodgson Drive to Holly Drive. S7 Bike Route 2.6 miles The bike route runs along Holly Drive,which is a collector Street, from Ash Street to County Road 21. S3 Bike Route 0.5 miles The bike route runs along 12th Avenue,which is a collector street, from Birch Street to Holly Drive. 59 Bike Route 2.5 miles The bike route runs along County Road 21,which is a collector street, from I-35B to Centerville. 60 Bike Route 2.1 miles The bike route runs along County Road 54,which is a collector street, from I-35B to Centerville. 61 Bike Route 3,0 miles The bike route runs along the frontage road from White Bear Lake Township to Main Street. 62 Transportation Trail 0.7 miles The trail runs along Main Street from Centerville to 2,4th Avenue. It is intended to be located within the existing road right-of-way, County and State standards will need to be adhered to as appropriate.A trail on one side of the road should be adequate to handle the anticipated traffic volumes.A Class II level of trail should be appropriate. 63 Bike Route 0.7 miles The bike route runs along Main Street,which is a minor arterial roadway, from Centerville to 24th Avenue, 4. 64 Transportation Trail 1.4 miles The trail runs along 24th Avenue from Cedar Street to the future business area. It is intended to be located within the existing road right- of-way. County and State standards should be adhered for consistency. A trail on one side of the road should be adequate to handle the anticipated traffic volumes.A Class II level of trail should be appropriate. 65 Transportation Trail OS miles The trail runs along Cedar Street from the frontage road to the trail along 24th Avenue, It is intended to be located within the existing road right-of-way.County and State standards should be adhered for consistency.A trail on one side of the road should be adequate to handle the anticipated traffic volumes. A Class II level of trail should be appropriate. Total Trail Miles Under This Plan Type Total Miles Park 14.1 miles (trails within linear trail corridors) Transportation 29.2 miles (located in road r,o.w, but separated from actual roadway) Bike Routes 37,7 miles (paved shoulders) -r Total 81.0 (combined miles of trails and bike routes) 6-4 i AGENDA ITEM 4 � �n�STATE OF li�J LI�J E Z(Q)�Q DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES PHONE NO. METRO WATERS, 1200 Warner Road, St. Paul, MN 5 pig 772-7910 January 7, 1993 Mr. Marty Asleson City of Lino Lakes 1189 Main Street Lino Lakes, Minnesota 55014 RE: LIMITED PERMIT #93-6042 , PUBLIC WATERS WETLAND 2-555W, CITY OF LINO LAKES, ANOKA COUNTY Dear Mr. Asleson: Enclosed is Limited Permit #93-6042 authorizing the construction of two boardwalk wetland crossings at the west end of DNR Public Waters Wetland 2-555W, and within the Brandywood Park development. ,.� This is a modification of your proposal for placing fill for two 15 foot wide wetland crossings. Minnesota Rules, part 6115.0190, subpart 1, states that it is the goal of the Department to limit the placement of any fill material into protected waters in order to "minimize encroachment, change, or damage to the environment". Subpart 3 of the same rule states that filling is prohibited to construct a roadway or pathway unless there is "no other feasible or practical alternative to the project that would have less environmental impact" . In evaluating your permit request, we have determined that there is other feasible and practical alternatives to the project that would have less environmental impact. DNR staff has further determined that a trail access across the wetland at the requested locations can be accomplished with less environmental impact by the use of a structural boardwalk. - Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes,< Section 103G. 311, Subd. 5, the applicant, the managers of the watershed district, the board of supervisors of the soil and water conservation district or the mayor of the city may demand a hearing on the Order provided the demand for hearing and the bond required by Subd. 6 be filed with the Commissioner within 30 days. No bond or security is required of a public authority which demands a hearing. The Statutes further provide that if no demand for hearing be made or if a •� hearing is demanded but no bond is filed as required by Subd. 6, the Order shall become final at the expiration of 30 days after mailed notice thereof and no appeal of the Order may be taken to the Minnesota State Court of Appeals. AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER AGENDA 1TEM 4 G Mr. Asleson January 7, 1993 Page 2 Subdivision 6 requires that an applicant filing a demand for a public hearing execute and file a corporate surety bond or equivalent security to the State of Minnesota. The amount to be filed is $500. 00 as set by the Commissioner. The bond or security shall be conditioned for payment of certain costs and expenses of the public hearing if the Order is affirmed without material modification; however, the applicant's liability is limited to $750. 00. The $750. 00 limit does not apply when a public hearing is demanded by a public authority which is not the applicant. Bond forms will be supplied at your request. If you have any questions or concerns regarding this permit, please feel free to contact Area Hydrologist Tom Hovey at 772-7910. S ' cerely, MAcing Knudson Regional Hydrologist cc: USCOE, Tim Fell Anoka CD Rice Creek WSD Area Fisheries Manager, Bruce Gilbertson Area Wildlife Manager, Tim Wallace Wetland 2-555W file Ron Anderson, St. Paul Waters George Jurgenson, Conservation Officer LIMITED P.A. um C PROTECTED WATERS 93-6042 PERMIT Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 103, and on the basis of statements and information contained in the permit application, letters, maps, and plans submitted by the applicant and other supporting data, all of which are made a part hereof by reference, PERMISSION IS HEREBY GRANTED to the applicant named below to change the course, current, or cross section of the following: Protected Water County Unnamed Wetland 2-555W Anoka Name of Applicant Telephone Number (include Area Code) City of Lino Lakes (612) 464-5562 Address (No. & Street, RFD, Box No., City, State, Zip Code) 1189 Main Street, Lino Lakes, Minnesota 55014 Authorized to: construct 2 structural boardwalk crossings, 8 feet wide, on wooden pilings placed 8 feet on center, with 1 foot clearance above ordinary high water mark at center of boardwalk, in the locations indicated in the original application and as described in the provisions of this permit. Purpose of Permit Expiration Date of Permit wetland crossing November 30, 1993 Property described as: County NE1/4 SW1/4, Section 271 T31N, R22W Anoka s Indicated: (8) s Indicated: (11) the ordinary high water Does Not Apply level This permit is granted subject to the fol owing GENERAL and SPECIAL PROVISIONS: GENERAL PROVISIONS 1. This permit is permissive only and shall not release the Permittee from any liability or obligation imposed by Minnesota Statutes, Federal Law, or local ordinances relating thereto and shall remain in force subject to all conditions and limitations now or hereafter imposed by law. 2. This permit is not assignable except with the written consent of the Commissioner of Natural Resources. 3. The Regional Hydrologist shall be notified at least five days in advance of the commencement of the work authorized hereunder and shall be notified of its completion within five days thereafter. The Notice of Permit issued by the Commissioner shall be kept securely posted in a conspicuous place at the site of operations. 4. No change shall be made, without written permission previously obtained from the Commissioner of Natural Resources, in the dimensions, capacity, or location of any items of work authorized hereunder. 5. The Permittee shall grant access to the site at all reasonable times during and after construction to authorized representatives of the Commissioner of Natural Resources for inspection of the work authorized hereunder. 6. This Permit may be terminated by the (5ommissioner of Natural Resources at any time he/she deems it necessary for the conservation of water resources of the state, or in the interest of public health and welfare, or for violation of any of the provisions of this permit, unless otherwise provided in the Special Provisions. 7. Construction work authorized under this permit shall be completed on or before the date specified above. Upon written request to the Commissioner by the Permittee, stating the reason therefore, an extension of time may be obtained. 8. The excavation of soil authorized herein shall not be construed to include the removal of organic matter (as indicated above) unless the area from which such organic matter is removed, is impervious, or is sealed by the application of bentonite after excavation. 9. In all cases where the doing by the Permittee of anything authorized by this permit shall involve the taking, using, or damaging of any property rights or interests of any other person or persons, or of any publicly owned lands or improvements thereon or interests therein, the Permittee, before proceeding therewith, shall obtain the written consent of all persons, agencies, or authorities concerned, and shall acquire all property, rights, and interests necessary therefore. f\ MEMORANDUM TO: Linda Elliott FROM: Marty Asleson DATE: January 7, 1993 SUBJECT: Goals of the Park Board Lino I Ple ,tes from the October 13, special Par lysis was that the acquisition of the 1 . f (N-14) and the acquisition of the ath �` > J th side of the city should have a hig C out by the Park Board that the acq ; , �" = �'. . _ el should be preceded by some ind r ieighborhood. Subsequently, the nei �� attended the november Park Board mee r support of this initiative. The south side of town is very close to / G`y acquisition of this parcel should be e. The thought was to start im lternatives in addition to the use of Other goals are listed in the Park Board minutes as: 1. N-8 Cooperative Park with Circle Pines at Hodgson Road and Lake Drive. 2. N-12 The Quail Ridge Park development. 3 . M-2 The Shores of Marshan Lake Park development. 4 . A-1 The investigation of the possible alternatives for the acquisition of the needed additional park land at City Hall Park. 5. N-6 The investigation of the acquisition of the park land needs near Marilyn Drive and Country Lane. 6. N-11 The investigation of the purchase of the projected additional land needs at Birch Park. Please note that other than the N-14, and A-3 acquisitions the rest of the land for the most part, may be acquired through park dedication procedures. It was felt that the City Hall park land priority may not at this time have as high of a priority. This was identified in the comprehensive plan as a higher priority because z I ,-� of the lower value of this land at this time and that it would be a bargain if the property owners would be willing to sell now. The development issues were also prioritized. The N-8, N-12, M-2, and M-3 areas are all in areas of development that are going to need park facilities. Our comprehensive plan discusses the need to not sacrifice the quality of our existing facilities at the expense of the new development needs. There needs to be a balance struck here somehow. The Park Board indicated the desire to up grade the park at Leonard and Bradley (N-7) because of the badly deteriorating playground structure there, install a hockey rink on the north side of the city, and look at the possible master-planning of Country Lakes Park (C-1) to make it a more usable facility. The Park Board also wishes to establish as a goal that of the city finishing the bituminous surfaces on the roughed-in trails in the new development areas. Of particular interest to the Department of Parks and Recreation in addition to all of the goals that are set forth in Section 3 of the comprehensive plan is the need to be sensitive to the needs of the disabled. With the establishment of the Americans With Disabilities Act, we need to follow our comprehensive goals in relationship to newly established park and program areas, as well as the upgrading needs to our established immediate upgrade park areas (as dollars allow) for Sunrise, and Country Lakes Parks. Our overall goal is to follow our mission statement. That statement states: " 'The Purpose of the Lino Lakes Park System is to provide a comprehensive, balanced, and high quality system of parks, natural/open spaces, trails and leisure oriented activities/programs for the city residents to use and enjoy in as cost effective manner as possible. " One of the major goals of the Parks and Recreation board is to actively seek out alternative funding sources, ie. grants and donations to our newly established Parks Foundation to help fund all of the goals and priorities of the Parks and Recreation Comprehensive Plan. AGENDA ITEM 4-E STAFF ORIGINATOR Marty Asleson DATE January 29, 1993 TOPIC Recreation Summary/New program proposals BACKGROUND As a matter of recreation process planning, we develop a program plan "Proplan" that includes a program review so that we can improve on opportunities We also have a Special Revenue Account set up for these programs, so for each additional program (as the ideas or opportunities arise) we still have to go through an approval process so that they may be added to the account. OPTIONS 1. Approve adult indoor soccer 2. Disapprove F RECOMMENDATION #1. Approve adult indoor soccer AGENDA ITEM 4 MEMORANDUM TO: Park and Recreation Board Members FROM: Marty Asleson DATE: January 27, 1993 SUBJECT: Recreation Summary/New Program Proposals Please find attached a copy of a summary of our fall programs, and a copy of a new program plan for Adult Indoor Soccer that we wish to offer. We had an opportunity to program time in the new Centennial Sports Facility during the time blocked in for soccer. We have communicated with the Chiefs Soccer Club on this and works out alright for them. There was some concern since Chiefs Soccer is the fund-raising and principal youth group responsible for soccer time in the facility. We are in the process of planning a couple of other new ideas that we will show you at upcoming Park Board meetings. K r h LINO LAKES PARKS AND RECREATION PROGRAM PLANNING AND EVALUATION FORM PROGRAM: Adult Indoor Soccer YEAR: 1993 LOCATION: Centennial Sports Arena SEASON: March 21 - May 9 TIMES: Sunday Night Men's 7-8/8-9/9-10 pm Wednesday Night Co-Rec 8-9/9-10 pm DESCRIPTION: 6 teams - men's; 4 teams - co-rec. Is not in tended to conflict with Chief's Soccer activities. There will be 10 people per team at $4 .50 each. INSTRUCTOR: Sports Officials for men's league only PAY SCALE: $16-$17 game (hour) Scorekeeper $5/game PROGRAM CONTENT: The program for both men's and co-rec will be 8 weeks in length with no play-offs. The men's program will be held on Sunday evenings from 7-10 pm and co-rec on wednesday from 8-20 pm. The men's league will be officiated but the co-rec league will not be. This will be a seven week league with one practice game. PROGRAM GOALS AND OBJECTIVES: It is anticipated that this program will provide a fun and well organized league for adults in the area. This program will also help with the socialization of area residents. PROGRAM NEEDS AND IMPACTS: It is anticipated that this program will use the carpet and the goal nets that the Chief's Soccer Association has bought. It is also anticipated that this program will spur interest in this sportfand our program offerings. PROGRAM BUDGET: EXPENSES: $55 hr.arena rental x 5 hr. per week x 8 weeks = $2200 Sports official (men's only) @ 17 games x 24 x 2 per game = 816 Supplies (trophies & misc. equipment) = 250 Time keeper (men and co-rec) @ $5 hr x 40 games = 200 Advertising for the program = 100 $3566 10% for admin. costs 356. 60 TOTAL EXPENSES $3922 . 60 INCOME: 6 men's teams @ $490 ea = $2940 co-rec teams @ $450 x 4 = 1800 $4740 TOTAL INCOME +$817.40 ADMINISTRATION: TOTAL: EVALUATION - HOW DID THE PROGRAM MEET IT'S GOALS AND OBJECTIVES: WHAT WERE THE PARTICIPANT REACTIONS: INSTRUCTOR EVALUATION RESULTS: ORGANIZATIONAL IMPACTS: POLICIES PROCEDURES PRACTICES EVALUATION: /"1 MEMORANDUM DATE: 1/7/93 TO: Marty Asleson FROM: Barry Bernstein, Recreation Program Supervisor SUBJECT: Fall Program Summary Here is a program summary for the fall programs 1992 . Kids Karate• There were 48 participants in four separate class offerings Income: $21 per person x 48 people =$1023 Expenses: Instructor fees =$341 1 Scholarship participant = 21 362 Total +$682 Kids-er-cise (Rice Lake) 16 participants took part in this program. Income: $15 per person x 16 people ` =$240 Expenses: Instructor Fees =$175. 50 Supplies =$ 72 .75 =$248. 25 Total -$8 .25 Letters From Santa We received 16 letter requests. Income: $2 per letter request x 16 requests =$32 Expenses: Supplies =$16.90 Total +$15.10 Adult Aerobics Program: 60 participants took part in two separate classes Income: $45 per person x 60 people (1. 55 credit) =$2698. 45 Expenses: Instructor fees =$1812.20 Supplies =$ 299.88 „\ =$2122 .08 Total +$576.37 Gingerbread House Decorating Income: (participants/people in office) =$96 Expenses: Supplies =$126. 35 Total =$-30 .35 3-Player Basketball 5 teams participated in this league. Income: $40 per team x 5 teams =$160 Expenses: staff and supplies =$124 Total =$+36 r� AGENDA ITEM 4-E 4 STAFF ORIGINATOR Marty Asleson DATE January 29, 1993 i TOPIC Star of the North Games BACKGROUND Please see attached memorandum I I OPTIONS 1:. Proceed as per memorandum 2 Deny process I a RECOMMENDATION 1)) 1. Proceed AGENDA ITEM 4 r MEMORANDUM TO: All Park and Recreation Board Members FROM: Marty Asleson DATE: January 27, 1993 SUBJECT: Star of the North Games We have been asked support the Star of the North Games. Through Council Resolution this was done. The question of financial and material support including the possibilities of facility support were raised at a meeting that we had with the Centennial School District's Facility Coordinator, Brian Hegseth. Brian is the coordinating agent for this event from this area. This support, if the games are determined to be needed on our facilities, would include human resources. I informed Mr. Hegseth that when he has more information on the needs from the Star of the North Committee, that a budget would need to be established so that we can obtain approval for unbudgeted expenditures. We have not heard from him yet. Please find attached some background information on these games and note that they are allied with the Minnesota Recreation and Parks Association on a promotional basis. MRPA is our professional group in the state of Minnesota. Star of the North State Games/MRPA Partnership 000*N Background Information Who/What The Star of the North State Games and the MRPA have formed an alliance to mutually promote health, fitness and good sportsmanship through existing programs and new projects. When The partnership begins in 1993 and includes events and activities sponsored by both organizations. General Promotion The Star of the North State Games and MRPA will assist each other in marketing and promoting projects, programs and activities which address mutual interests through the following methods: 1. All existing channels of communication. 2. Presentations, media kits, news releases and articles. 3. Various publications, including posters, brochures, handbooks, newsletters and "„ON other selected promotional materials. 4. Clinics, workshops and conferences. Special Events The Star of the North State Games will conduct its 1993 Winter Games in Red Wing (Jan. 15-24) and its 1993 Summer Games in the Twin Cities north metro communities of Blaine, Circle Pines, Fridley, Mounds View, New Brighton and Spring Lakes Park (June 25-27) . The MRPA and Star of the North State Games will jointly administer the 10,000 Lakes Classic adult softball tournament in the Twin Cities north metro area on June 12-13. The event will be a world qualifying tournament. Information To receive additional information or entry materials about the Star of the North State Games and/or the 10,000 Lakes Classic, contact: Star of the North State Games 1700 105th Avenue Northeast P.O. Box 49144 Blaine, Minnesota 55449 Twin Cities metro area: 612-785-5678 Greater Minnesota: 1-800-756-STAR FAX: 612-785-5699 Star of the North Summer Games Background Information What The Star of the North Summer Games is an Olympic-style, multi-sport competition held annually for all Minnesota amateur athletes regardless of age of ability. Who Between 5,000 and 10,000 participants from more than 300 communities and nearly every Minnesota county compete in the Summer Games each year. When The Summer Games are conducted annually on the second, third and/or fourth weekends of June. Where Venues utilized for the Summer Games are provided by local schools, colleges, park and recreation departments, health clubs and other private and community facilities. Olympic Pageantry The Star of the North Summer Games includes all the drama and excitement of the Olympic Games, complete with a torch run and opening ceremony. The opening ceremony features a parade of athletes and lighting of the Star of the North flame. Medals Commemorative gold, silver and bronze medallions are awarded to the top three finishers in each competitive category. An average of 7,000 medals is awarded during the Summer Games. Sports Typical sports include arghery, badminton, baseball, basketball, cycling, diving, golf, gymnastics, horseshoes, judo, karate, powerlifting, racquetball soccer, softball, swimming, synchronized swimming, taekwondo, tennis, track and field, volleyball, weightlifting and wrestling. Summer Games Year Host Cities Participants Calendar 1988 St. Cloud 4, 354 1989 Burnsville 13 ,966 1990 Rochester 10, 043 1991 Blaine-Coon Rapids 9, 618 1992 Moorhead 5, 460 1993 Twin Cities North Metro 10,000+ 1994 Rochester 8, 000+ ''� 1995 Mankato Area 8, 000+ AGENDA ITEM 4-E` 5 STAFF ORIGINATOR Marty Asleson DATE January 29, 1993 TOPIC Birch Park BACKGROUND Neighborhood gratitude letter .OPTIONS None. RECOMMENDATION Work with neighborhood groups as per one of our defined goals AGENDA ITEM , 4 E rc MEMORANDUM TO: Lino Lakes Park Board Members FROM: Marty Asleson DATE: January 27, 1993 SUBJECT: Birch Park Please find attached a copy of a letter from the Birch Park neighborhood. I'm glad they like the improvements. TO: MARTY ASLESON FROM: D. ERICKSON 2ND ADDITION HOME OWNERS DATE: JANUARY 11, 1993 SUBJECT: IMPROVEMENTS TO OUR PARK The D. Erickson 2nd Addition Home Owners would like to thank you and all involved in the improvements made to our park! The improvements include: 1_ Swings and a slide. 2. Anew warming house. 3. A light in the park parking lot. The area children (some big kids to) are enjoying these additions to the park. We appreciate all the hard in work completing this project, especially considering the time constraints with winter being just around the corner. We would be willing to supply the labor to paint the warming house this spring. Please contact David Herrick at (653-9711) to coordinate. cc: Don Volk Public Works Director Randall Schumacher Citv Administrator Andy Neal City Council Member Sally Kuether City Council Member Linda Elliot City Council Member John Bergeson City Council Member Verne Reinert Mayor AGENDA ITEM 5 A MEMORANDUM TO: Lino Lakes Parks and Recreation Board FROM: Marty Asleson DATE: January 27, 1993 SUBJECT: Proposed City Hall Park Project Don Volk at the last Park Board meeting introduced the idea of using a U.S. Marine Corps construction battalion to work on a project. City Hall Park was suggested because of the unused area on the north side. Since then I was contacted by a Sergeant Ivanfeld and we meet to discuss interest, and scope of the project. The Marine Corps appears to be looking for training activities and has a wealth of human and equipment resources available for this type of project. According to Sergeant Ivanfeld, they would be interested in the City Hall Park. He has notified me that they have a surveyor and technical drawer available that could start to do some preliminary work. I would like to see these people work with Jeff Schoenbauer to develop a master plan for the park. Insight into the over-all concept, space use and future expansion need to be considered. I have placed this item on the goal summary report. I will also ask Mr. Ivanfeld if he can attend the Park Board meeting. AGENDA ITEM #5-B STAFF ORIGINATOR Marty Asleson DATE January 29, 1993 TOPIC Centennial Little League Agenda BACKGROUND Please see 'memorandum � OPTIONS This is an association decision as per the new directions. This is intended to be an informational item except for field use. 1. Approve field use 2. Deny request RECOMMENDATION 1. :Approve field use.. t AGEU40A ITEM 5 � s"% MEMORANDUM TO: All Park Board Members FROM: Marty Asleson DATE: January 25, 1993 SUBJECT: Centennial Little League Agenda Item I have asked the Centennial Little League to come to the Park Board meeting to inform you of some new directives that have been received from the National Little League headquarters. Also the youth league has submitted a request for the fields listed on the attached letter. This schedule falls into Barrys' approval for over all summer scheduling needs. s t AGENDA ITEM � 6 Centennial Little League P.O. Box 161 • Circle Pines, MN 55014 'anua=v1a 1�9` ' r . Martin Aslesen ; of Lino Lakes i ii=9 Main Street Lino Lakes, Mtn 55014 Dear ;la.r ter r 11 This letter serves to confirm Centennial Little League' s intention to use the baseball, /softball fields and facilities listed below for the summer months of 1993 beginning April 1 through August 15, 1993, Monday through Friday, from 4 p. m. until dark : Rice Lake Elementary _j __& -� G i men Lake i & 2 Shenandoah 3. renterville Elementary 3 8irch Fark p tii-ri i s- _ 4_ (o r 3) if you: have any questions or concerns, please feel free to contact me. My home phone number is 786-7175. Thank you for your assistance. Sincerely, i Fa.trick Ma.hr President Centennial Little League