Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout06/05/1995 Park Board Packet CITY OF LINO LAKES PARK BOARD MEETING MONDAY, JUKE 51 1995 6 :30PM ***AGENDA*** 1. Call to Order and Roll Call 6:30pm 2 . Approval of Minutes from May 1 & May 9, 1995 6 :35pm 3 . Open Mike 6 :40pm 4 . Master Plan Presentation/ 6 :45pm Neighborhood Meetings Update Pheasant Hills, Brandywood, Birchwood 5 . 20/20 Vision Update 7:45pm 6. New Business A. East to West Shadow Lake Drive Trail 8:15pm 7 . Updates and Old Business A. Rice Lake Estates Park - Verbal 8:30pm B. Friends of the Park Update - Verbal 8:45pm C. Recreation Programs Update - Barry 8:55pm D. Minor Subdivison Dedication Summary 9:05pm E. Other Updates and Old Business 9:15pm 8. Schedule Next Park Board Meeting 9:25pm 9 . Adjourn 9:3 0pm C I T Y O F -� INO LAW DRANDUM Date: May 30, 1995 Frcan: Marty Asleson To: Park Board Members Subject: Pre-Park Board Field Meeting It was decided at the May 1, 1995 Park Board meeting that we would have the June Pre-Park Board meeting at Wenzel Farm Park. Please meet there at 5:45pm. Hope to see you there. n PARK, RECREATION AND FORESTRY DEPARTMENTS 7204 LAKE DRIVE,LINO LAKES,MINNESOTA 55014 (612)464-5562 City of Lino Lakes Parks Arena Acres Pax ANDALL o RO DEAU KE City Hall Pa ( M Lino LBac Street c P TIER LA E. i 7+ Sunset Oaks I G RGE WATCH E I I-m ST. RSHAN E Pi I/Ree Bldg CENTERVILLE LAK Burris �E RICE LAKE HANAU E 1 LAKE r n LABIRCH d //q Birch r h ARrtONM1IEA0 A IA BALD EA LE LAKE OTTER LAK jr ARENA ACRES PARK . • • 519 Andall Street 1 t BIRCH PARK 6520 Phewnt Run South • • • • • CRY HALL PARK 1189 Main Street • • • • • COUNTRY LAKES PARK 6600 Wed Shy Lake Drive • • • • • LINO PARK • • • • • • 7850 Lake Drive PARKS&REC BLDC. 7204 Like Drive i1 RICE LAKE ELEM.PARK 575 Birch Street • • SHENANDOAH PARK 475 Arrowlrad Drive • SUNRISE PARK mte • • • • • • • • • 6918 Surmise Ave SUNSET OAKS PARK 7401 Leonud Avenue • • 13 CITY OF LINO LAKES PARK BOARD MEETING M0NDAY, MAY 1, 1995 The May 1, 1995, City of Lino Lakes Park Board meeting was called to order at 6 :30pm. Roll call was taken, members present were Ken Johnson, Acting Chair, Sharon Lane, Pam Taschuk, Amy Donlin, and Betty Piper. Also present were Marty Asleson, Park, Recreation, and Forestry Coordinator, Barry Bernstein, Recreation Program Supervisor, and Sandie Wood, Recording Secretary. Absent were George Lindy and Joe Schmidt. APPROVAL OF APRIL 3, 1995 MINUTES: Sharon Lane said the date for the first Wenzel Farm meeting was incorrect. The minutes read "January 1, 1995" they should have read "January 30, 1995. " Sharon made a motion to accept the minutes as corrected, Amy seconded the motion. Minutes were approved with corrections. OPEN MIKE: There was no one present to speak under Open Mike. GRANT APPLICATION - FRIENDS OF THE PARK: Martha Walmsley was present to discuss the Friends of the Park grant application process. She said the Friends of the Park Committee does not have the knowledge and expertise on whether the layout and design of a park meets the Comprehensive Plan so that is why they have the neighborhood groups come before the Park Board with their request for approval. Martha stated the neighborhood groups, when approved, give their donation to the Friends, the Friends then gives a matching fund grant, up to $2, 000, to the neighborhood organization. The Friends Committee purchases the equipment without paying sales tax then turns around immediately and donates the equipment back to the City. She said the Friends of the Park Committee pays for tangible items only, not labor. Betty Piper asked if the grants were given year round or at a specific time of the year. Martha said throughout the year. Sharon asked if Wenzel Farms was approved. Martha said they have been approved and will receive $2, 000. Martha then told the Park Board of some of the highlights of the year. They received a $1, 000 grant from Target Stores, Inc. , they will use some monies donated from Little League to install an irrigation system at Sunrise Park. Martha told the board about the t-shirt contest that the Friends sponsored at Rice Lake Elementary School. The winner had his design printed on Friends of the Park t-shirts and they will sell for $15 . Marty said when you purchase a shirt you become a 1 CITY OF LINO LAKES PARK BOARD MEETING MONDAY, MAY 1, 1995 member of Friends of the Park. NEW BUSINESS JOYCE LUND TRAIL: Marty read the memo that John and Joyce Lund sent to Mary Kay Wyland. They referenced the donated land on the westerly side of the creek at 480 Arrowhead Drive, as a possible trail site connecting the southerly trail and Shenandoah Park on the north side of Arrowhead Drive. Marty then read the green sheet that was prepared for the board. He said this would be an excellent trail location because it would be located directly across the street from Shenandoah Park. The only existing trail access off of the Park Grove Development to Arrowhead Drive is about a quarter mile to the east via the old Fox Trail stub. When the trail was initially installed, running along the south side of the houses on the south side of Arrowhead Drive, people were using the Lund Property for access to the park and we had to install a fence to discourage encroachment. It was Marty' s opinion that this would be a good trail connection to acquire. He continued by saying they have met with the Rice Creek Watershed on the site and it was discussed that the culvert extension would be needed for this to be allowed, that it would not exceed the 400 square feet allowable fill, and that a letter and simple sketch would be needed for approval. He then asked the board to see Michael Krech' s memo on the costs for this work. He stated that there would also be costs for grading and rocking the trail in. He felt the cost should not exceed $500 . He then showed the property, ditch, building setback and culvert location on an overhead. Marty then introduced John and Joyce Lund. Joyce told the Park Board the history of the development and explained why Parcel A and B are divided the way they are. Marty recommended to acquire the Lund property by donation. Use Dedicated Park Dollars to accomplish legal and mechanical work. Ken asked if the approximate cost of this work would be between $4000 and $4500 . Marty responded yes. Ken asked if it would be a problem to get the money from the Dedicated Park Fund. Marty didn't think it would be a problem. Ken also asked if it was high or low land. Marty said it was generally high land except 2 CITY OF LINO LAKES PARK BOARD MEETING, MONDAY, MAY 1, 1995 where the culvert was. Ken then asked if there would be a problem extending the culvert. Marty said Kate Drury looked at it and she didn' t feel it exceeded the 400 foot requirement before the permit requirement came into effect. Amy thank the Lund' s for the generous donation to the city and said it was going to be a real benefit to the residents. Pam asked if the neighbors had been told that they were going to do this. Joyce said no. NOTION: Amy moved to entertain the Lund' s generous offer and accept it as it stands. There was discussion on whether to include the use of dedicated park funds in the motion. NOTION AMENDED TO READ: Amy moved to entertain the Lund' s generous offer and also okay the additional costs, from dedicated park funds, associated with the trail link. Sharon seconded the motion. The motion was amended and approved unanimously. Joyce wanted to know if the Board would keep them informed as to what was going to be done. Ken said this would have to go to the City Council for final approval because the Park Board is only an advisory board. UPDATES AND OLD BUSINESS SPECIAL REVENUE ACCOUNTS: Marty said at a past Park Board meeting he and Barry discussed special revenue accounts and the board said they wanted a $1000 buffer in the account. Marty explained that a fence was really needed at Rice Lake #3 field and he went before the City Council to get approval on the expenditure. The council approved the expenditure, of the special revenue dollars, but they made it very clear that this was a unique situation, a first time thing, and that they needed to work on a policy for special revenue accounts. Marty wanted the Park Board to know what happened at the Council meeting. He said this was going to have to be looked at when budget time came and if they could show a need, the money may be moved to a capitol account. Ken said he couldn't see the money coming from the recreation programs going into capitol improvements now. He said the recreation program is still growing and the money needs to be put back into the programs. Marty said he agrees but he could .-. understand why other departments feel the same way. 3 CITY OF LINO LAKES PARK BOARD MEETING MONDAY, MAY 1, 1995 Pam wanted to know if it was harder to get money if special revenue dollars goes into the general fund account. She felt if the Recreation Department was making the money it should stay in the department. Marty said the City Council looks at it as several departments generating income from taxpayers. FRIENDS OF THE PARK UPDATE: Marty talked about the T-shirt contest at Rice Lake Elementary. Pam asked where the t-shirts were going to be sold. Marty said at other activities, the Park and Recreation Office, and maybe at City Hall. Betty wanted to know if they could be sold at the school since it was generated from an activity at the school. Marty will bring this up at the next Friends meeting. He continued the update by saying the golf tournament has been tabled until next year. A committee is going to be formed and they will meet to work on this tournament so they get a quality event. John VonDeLinde and Bill Hawk are okay with doing this tournament next year. Marty is going to talk to the Lions Club and see if they would form a partnership. Marty has not talked to John Saccoman but he will contact Betty when he does. Marty said the Friends of the Park Committee is a small group of people doing a lot and they are trying to recruit more people into the organi zat ion. RECREATION PROGRAMS UPDATE: Barry told the Park Board he wanted them to know what is going on in the Recreation Department with our programs. He talked about his memo and the registration numbers on the class list. He said the indoor soccer program has grown in popularity over the three years that it has been offered. There are eight co-rec teams and four men' s teams in the leagues this spring. This is eight teams more than in the program last year. The Soccer leagues are playing at the Centennial Ice Arena. Barry said the first year there were only six teams in the softball program and this year the adult softball program is almost filled to the limit. There are 47 teams playing from Sunday to Thursday evenings. He had to turn away about 12 teams this year. Ken asked if people were turned away because we did not have the facilities to accommodate all the teams. Barry responded yes. 4 CITY OF LINO LAKES PARK BOARD MEETING MONDAY, MAY 1, 1995 PROJECT UPDATES: RICE LAKE ESTATES Marty said this is a joint park between the City of Lino Lakes and the City of Circle Pines in the Rice Lake Estates area. He said the neighborhood has meet with the City of Circle Pines Park Board regarding this park. Marty continued by saying Jeff Schoenbauer, the City of Lino Lakes Park Planner, is now working with the City of Circle Pines so we are on the same note. He said they have looked at the two lots in the area (Lot 2, Block 1, the farthest north lot and Lot 1, Block 2 the farthest south lot) to get cost figures to make them buildable lots. The first lot is $11, 300, (assuming a permit can be attained) . This includes mobilization, common excavation, clearing trees, restoration, and silk fence. He said the idea is to take the lots and sell them and invest the joint park idea. He said the $11,300 figure may be reduced if we can come up with the fill which will cost approximately $5, 000 . He said they went out and dug test holes and the first lot seemed to be an okay lot to improve. To make the second lot buildable the cost would be ,.1 $37, 900. When a test probe was set it did not bottom out. There would be a lot of organic material that would have to be taken out of that lot. Amy wanted to know why we had this property as park land. Marty said that is what we took as dedicated park land, the builder was suppose to make them buildable lots and he went bankrupt. MOTION: Sharon Lane made a motion to submit plans to the Rice Creek Water Shed District for approval. Pam Taschuk second the motion and it passed unanimously. NEIGHBORHOOD MEETINGS Marty talked about the three neighborhood meetings that have been scheduled at City Hall on May 15. Jeff Schoenbauer will be present at these meetings. At 6:30pm the Pheasant Hills Preserve people will meet, 7:30pm Birchwood Acres people will have their meeting, and at 8 :30pm the residents from Brandywood Park will meet. PHEASANT HILLS PRESERVE Marty said he has been working, with Pam Backer and the Pheasant Hills Preserve people, on the 3 acre park on the east side of Pheasant Hills. He said the trail plan meets the comprehensive plan. He then talked about the layout of the park. He talked ...� about the hard court surface area. He says budget of $18, 000- $25, 000 includes a fire ring, 1/2 court basketball area, grass 5 CITY OF LINO LAKES PARK BOARD MEETING MONDAY, MAY 1, 1995 volleyball, a picnic area and play equipment. BERMS CENTURY FARMS There was discussion on the transportation trail need along Lilac Street. Marty says he is still working on this development with John Johnson and will be meeting with Kate Drury. Ken asked if the trail would be sufficient to support maintenance equipment until such time the road is in. Marty responded yes if it is using the tops of berm. If we are using boardwalk it would only support the weight of a cushman or light weight utility vehicle but not a truck. BRANDYWOOD PARK Marty spent time with Jeff Schoenbauer last week and walked the area. He said the base map is done and well on the way to have a master plan for the park. He and George may be flying over the area on May 6 to get some aerial photos. CITY HALL PARK Ken asked about City Hall Park. Marty said he talked to Jerry Hafman and they will let us have the building in August. He says he will start making the arrangements to move the building. Marty said he and Barry would like to wait until all the programs are done at that park before moving the building in. PLAYGROUND EQUIPMENT During the audit they found several problems. Marty would like to get the playground manufacturers to come out, inspect, and give an estimate to retrofit the equipment. Ken said this should be done before we do our fall goal setting session so we know where we are at. SHORES OF MARSHAN II Marty gave an update on the Shores of Marshan II development. Marty will be meeting with the developer and if Hokanson can get Marty a drawing, that meets the comprehensive plan, he will try to have a special Park Board meeting on May 9 . If the proposal passes it can be placed on the Planning and zoning meeting agenda on May 10, 1995 . Sharon wanted to know about the zoning and Pam asked about the density of this development. Marty said the density has been reduced from 216 units to 112 units and it is zoned multi-family. ATHLETIC COMPLEX Marty said he and George have been seeking available property, in the city, and have been meeting with residents. Marty said he should have a better answer by the next meeting. 6 CITY OF LINO LAKES PARK BOARD MEETING MONDAY, MAY 1, 1995 Marty said he attended a Centerville Park Board meeting because they were talking about purchasing land and building a complex. He suggested that both cities look at this and look at cost sharing. NEXT MEETING: The next meeting will be June 5, 1995, 6:30pm at City Hall. The Board requested the June pre-meeting be held at Pheasant Hills. ADJOURN: Pam Taschuk made a motion to adjourn, seconded by Amy Donlin. Meeting was adjourned at 8:05pm. r 7 CITY OF LINO LAKES SPECIAL PARK BOARD MEETING TUESDAY, MAY 9, 1995 The May 9, 1995, City of Lino Lakes Special Park Board meeting was called to order at 7:30pm. Roll call was taken, members present were George Lindy, Chair, Sharon Lane, Ken Johnson, Betty Piper, and Joe Schmidt. SHORES OF MARSHAN II• Marty started to give background information by stating the Park Board reviewed the Shores of Marshan II in October of 1994 . At that time this project was reviewed as a subdivision, with all of the requirements for park dedication under the park dedication ordinance. This ordinance is made lawful under state law that allows for a percentage of park land be allowed to public purposes in subdivisions. The stated allowance is 10 percent of the project land, and most commonly makes allowances for higher percentages in subdivisions of higher density. Marty went on to say that recently, the request for the Shores of Marshan II Subdivision was withdrawn. A new site-plan for condominiums was submitted. The Park Board now needs to review this site-plan for conformance to the Comprehensive Plan. Marty said the property is zoned R-4 which allows high density residential development (15 units per acre) . The proposed site plan provides 112 units for an overall density of 3 .8 units per acre. This would require a 3 . 06 acre park dedication based on the developments 25 .5 acres of buildable land. The developer is proposing to dedicate 3 . 03 acres, adding to the existing 1. 9 acres on the Shores of Marshan I. Our Comprehensive Plan indicates a total need of 5 acres of park area in this neighborhood. The addition would bring the total park acreage to 4 . 93 acres, rounded off to 5 acres. The configuration of this acreage would allow for the placement of the many amenities that might be expected in this park. In addition the developer is proposing to grade this park area to a configuration what would match the existing grade of the Shores of Marshan I. The developer has agreed to dedicate, grade, and gravel the trail along Marshan Lake, and grade the trail along Aqua Lane. We would be responsible for obtaining permits on this trail. Since this is a county park road there should be no problems with this location. Marty recommended to accept the developers proposal for park and trail dedication. 1 ^ CITY OF LINO LAKES SPECIAL PARK BOARD MEETING TUESDAY, MAY 9, 1995 Sharon wanted to know how many feet there were from the lake to the street. Kirk said about 1000 feet. Kirk said he has been working with the Department of Natural Resources regarding green space. George said in increasing the park size to try to make this whole park a contiguous large parcel the developer will move five units from the proposed park area to another location in the development. Marty told the members it is up to the neighborhood but there should be enough room for a 8-10 year old soccer field, an informal ballfield, picnic tables, benches and maybe a hard court surface area. He said there is plenty of room to do what is needed and it does meet the needs of the Comprehensive Park Plan. Ken asked if the trail along Aqua Lane will go in the right-of- way. Marty said the developer will grade and gravel the trail and the City will get the permit. Ken then asked about the trail along Lake Drive. Marty said this trail is not going to be put there now. Sharon asked about trees in the dedicated park area. Marty said there were several Box Elder trees that would probably be removed. George summarized the project and asked for a motion from one of the Park Board members. MOTION: Sharon Lane made a motion to accept the proposal as outlined. In addition the trail will have a gradual S connection, to meet the existing trail to the North, and a 13 , radius on the south end. George said Pam Taschuk turned in an absentee ballot in favor of the proposed plan. Ken Johnson seconded the motion and it passed unanimously. ADJOURN: Sharon made a motion to adjourn. Joe seconded the motion. Meeting was adjourned at 7 :54pm. 2 AGENDA ITEM STAFF ORIGINATOR: Marty Asleson DATE: May 31, 1995 TOPIC: Master-plan Review for Pheasant Hills Preserve, Brandywood, and Parkgrove Parks BACKGROUND Several meetings have been held in the past to begin the process of master-planning the three parks. We held a meeting on the 15th of May and had good representation from each of these neighborhoods. Brauer was present to present master-plans and take comment on revisions. Minor revisions were made to these park plans. The Birchwood/Parkgrove area was surveyed by the neighborhood. I have enclosed a copy of this survey. Please find enclosed copies of these plans, and estimates for construction purposes. I will bring the finished master-plans to the board for discussion and comment for revision and or acceptance. Jeff Schoenbauer will be on vacation so I will present the plans and issues. One subject that has come up is that of funding and park dedication dollar. Residents from the different neighborhoods wish to know how much was dedicated, how much was spent, and the Park Boards policy on spending these dollars in the areas that the dollars were taken from. I have included a breakout of the dollars that have been taken from past dedications. I have also asked Mary Vaske, our Finance Director to research where dollars have been spent in the past. This will take some time to collect. The purpose of this report is to accept the master-plans for the three parks. OPTIONS 1. Accept the master-plans for Pheasant Hills Preserve, Brandywood, and Parkgrove area parks 2. Accept the plans with revision 3. Refer back to staff for other consideration RECOMMENDATION -� . Accept the plans for future development Sheetl Dedication Fees Subdivision Fee Land Lots Pk. Ac. $Spent Expediture Appollo Meadows $21,000 No —Birchwood Acres 1 $25,200 Yes —Birchwood Acres 1[ $19,000 Yes —Birchwood Acres 111 $8,090 Yes _131ackduck Estates $0 Yes Brandywood I & 11 $0 Yes Brandywood 111 $7,000 No Cntry Lakes Estates $13,250 No Fox Trace $35,000 No Oak Brook Penn. $2,000 No Oaks of Lino $9,900 No Park Grove $28,783 Yes Park View $16,000 No Pineridgel $0 Yes Pineridge 11 $9,540 No Pineridge 111 $9,010 No Pheasant Hills I & 11 $0 Yes PHP 111 $5,300 No PHP IV $12,190 No PHP V $19,080 No PHP VI $10, 070 No Quail Ridge $0 Yes —Shores of Marshan $7,560 Yes Sunrise Meadows $28,800 No Sunny Gate I & 11 $16,000 No Sunny Gate 111 $12,400 No Sunny Gate IV $7,200 No Wenzel Farms $38,400 Yes Woodridge $23,875 No Woods of Baldwin L. $0 Yes Page 1 MEMORANDUM Date: May 1, 1995 From: Marty Asleson To: Residents of: Pheasant Hills Preserve Brandy Wood Birchwood Acres/Park Grove/Pineridge Subject: Neighborhood Meeting; Parks Master-Planning Review We have scheduled a time to meet with any residents in you neighborhood to review the developing master-plan for your neighborhood park. We are trying to save money by scheduling three of these meetings on the 15th of May at City Hall , in the Council Chambers. The meetings will be run consecutively in one hour time blocks. The purpose of these meetings will be to look at and comment on some better defined, scaled master plans. Jeff Schoenbauer, from Brauer and Associates, our Parks Planner, will be there to lead the discussions. We are limiting the time for each segment to 1 hour. The schedule is as follows: Pheasant Hills Park: 6:30 PM. Birchwood Park: 7: 30 PM. Brandywood Park: 8: 30 PM. Please limit the scope of these meetings to that of the elements or park features in existing or in expansion areas if this is relevant to your park. Hope to see you at this meeting. Your input is very important. Thank you. Sincerely, rty; sleson Parks Recreation and Forestry Coordinator City of Lino Lakes r . yy yr• {►,�. ! " 1 ," .�J« - oil ,t -1�`,c fir~ t•�-� �i�" vo '~ A irk=,:�,• ,�:�>,il. ��� �•sr,,,i� ;�.i� ,�1�, r, 'ail: :'•= ,( � i 0,r `I ' .r♦ '•• �:,i db - • 1 Homeowner Survey for New Neighborhood Park Park Grove/Birchwood Acres/Pine Ridge/Reshanau Estates As a neighbor and potential user of this neighborhood park,your input is important to help guide the City of Lino Lakes as they make plans to develop this area. It is critical that we have a voice in deciding which facilities will best serve our recreational needs and the well-being of this neighborhood. Please take a few minutes to fill out this survey. m .Q m cc T a% a -� � ().� O � U _ a) 0 0 Z N C 0 C 0 Z) Informal sports facilities 1. Open grass play field 2. Baseball area(grass field with backstop) 3. Tennis court 4. Basketball court 5. Skating rink 6. Jogging course with workout stations 7. Horseshoes, shuffleboard.etc. 8. Hard surface for hopscotch, four square, etc. 9. Volleyball (sand court) 10. Other Organized sports facilities 11. Baseball diamonds (dirt infield, fences, etc. for leagues) 12. Hockey rink (boards, nets,lights, etc. for leagues) 13. Tennis courts (lights, etc. for clubs & leagues) 14. Football field (goal post, etc. for leagues) 15. Soccer field (goals, etc. for leagues) 16. Jogging/running track 17. Other Q 0 Sa) OO zN C D cn o o :D Other facilities 18. Picnic shelter 19. Winter warming house 20. Restrooms 21. Play ground equipment(pre-school ages) 22. Play structures (elementary school ages) 23. Nature walk(prairie grass, wild flowers,etc.) 24. Benches, picnic tables, grills, etc. 25. Other Other ideas or comments: Address Name (Optional) -Neighborhood Park Survey Results -------------- Highy Somewhat Not Desirable Desirable Desirable Unacceptable— ----- ---- -------- :Weighting 2 Points I Point -1 Point -2 Points Rank Votes Pts. Votes Pts. Votes Pts. Votes Pts. Total j=piay structures (eieme_nta­ry_­sc_hooI ages) 43 86 12 12 8 -8 0 0 90 2 Open grass play field 35 70 23 23 _ 3 -3 1 -2 88 —3 !Playground equipment (pre-school ages) 41 82 13 13 9 -9 0 0 86 4 Nature Walk 34 68 14 14 11 -11 3 -6 65 6 1 Benches, picnic tables, grills, etc. 28 56 21 21 12 -12 1 -2 63 —6 iVolleyball (sand court). 22 44 24 24 15 -16 2 -4 49 lennis court 25 so 18 18 12 -12 8 -16 40 !Basketball court 26 52 16 16 16 -16 6 -12 40 9 'Picnic shelter 21 42 23 23 13 -13 6 -12- 40 10 Restrooms 33 66 8 8 7 -7 14 -28 39 11 Skating rink 20 40 19 19 19 -19 6 -12 28 12 Baseball area 20 40 19 19 15 -15 8 -16 28 13 Jogging course with workout stations 16 32 16 16 24 -24 5 -10 14 14 Winter warming house 16 32 18 18 18 -18 10 -20 12 16 Hard surface for hopscotch, four square, etc. 10 20 19 19 31 -31 4 -8 0 _16 Baseball diamonds (dirt infield, fences, etc.) 15 30 10 10 16 -16 22 -44 -20 17 'Tennis courts (lights, etc) 13 26 10 10 20 -20 20 -40 -24 18 1,Jogging/running track 10 20 10 10 26 -26 17 -34 -30 19 �Hockey rink (boards, nets,lights, etc.) 10 20 9 9 22 -22 22 -44 -37 20 !Horseshoes, shuffleboard, etc 1 2 13 1 13 42 -42]_ 6 -12__i_- _ 21 :Soccer Field (goals, etc.) 16 -42 _I 4�_10 10 20 -20 24 �48 2 i Football Field (goal post, etc.) 2 -9§__±9 28 1 -28 24 _48�43 Neighborhood Park Survey Results Highy Somewhat Not Desirable Desirable Desirable Unacceptable Weighting 2 Points 1 Point -1 Point -2 Points Informal Sports Facilities_ Votes Pts. Votes Pts. Votes Pts. Votes Pts. Total Open grass play field 35 70 23 23 3 -3 1 -2 88 Baseball area 20 40 19 19 15 -15 8 -16 28 Tennis court 25 50 18 18 12 -12 8 -16 40 Basketball court 26 52 16 16 16 -16 6 -12 40 Skating rink 20 40 19 19 19 -19 6 -12 28 Jogging course with workout stations 16 32 16 16 24 -24 5 -10 14 Horseshoes, shuffleboard, etc 1 2 13 13 42 -42 6 .12 -39 Hard surface for hopscotch, four square, etc. 10 20 19 19 31 -31 4 -8 0 Volleyball (sand court) 22 44 24 24 15 -16 2 -4 49 Organized Sports Facilities Votes Pts. Votes Pts. Votes Pts. Votes Pts. Total Baseball diamonds (dirt infield, fences, etc.) 15 30 10 10 16 -16 22 -44 -20 Hockey rink (boards, nets,lights, etc.) 10 20 9 9 22 -22 22 -44 -37 Tennis courts (lights, etc) 13 26 10 10 20 -20 20 -40 -24 Football Field (goal post, etc.) 2 4 9 9 28 -28 24 -48 -63 Soccer Field (goals, etc.) 8 16 10 10 20 -20 24 -48 -42 Jogging/running track 10 20 10 10 26 -26 17 -34 -30 Other Facilities Votes Pts. Votes Pts. Votes Pts. Votes Pts. Total Picnic shelter 21 42 23 23 13 -13 6 -12 40 Winter warming house 16 32 18 18 18 -18 10 -20 12 Restrooms 33 66 8 8 7 -7 14 -28 39 Playground equipment (pre-school ages) 41 82 13 13 9 -9 0 0 86 Play structures (elementary school ages) 43 86 12 12 8 -8 0 0 90 Nature Walk _ 34 68 14 14 11 -11 3 -6 65 Benches, picnic tables, grills, etc. 28 56 21 21 12 -12 1 -2 63 Other suggested facilities Cross country ski trails Sledding area with ramp Swings, slides, etc Wading pool Archery range XX- . . ... ... ..... W.. ...... . ...X ..I .............I I. ..... .... .... ... ....... ................ ............ ............ I ..I .. ....II .... . ....... .................... ..... . ",... ... .. .. ........... .............. ................ ......... ... . . .......... .......... . . ............ ........ IX HomeownerSurvey .......... ........ ................X.: ��NeighborhoodPark ::tt:•::c:::;•:t•::tau•::�tttta::t•:t•:;•::•::•:::•::•::•:;•::•:o:::::tc>:•:t•:;•::::;:::::•>:�:•::•;»::::;::::::>:•:;t•::t::::t:::::;•>::::;t•:::::;t:::::>::;•:;;a:>::•t::;•:s::•::•::t•:::t::c::t::tttt:t::t'` ... .::: :::::....... ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::•:::::::::::::::•::::::::::•::•::•:::•:::::•:::::•::•:::.::•.::.:::.:::::,..:::.::.::... ..... ........................................................................................... ... ................................ ....................... ............ :rYh2:; �i{`tiSt�::•:t8.�.:vi:ii: ■ General Results s s All informal sports categories were positive i v e xshuffleboard,e cep t horseshoes, et c. - All organized sports is categories swere negative tiv o - All other ark facilitieseswerepos posi tive e restrooms categorywas s1i slightly pol arized - O gg Cher suggested facilities included: r n cross country ski rail s s trails Y : tz..t.:izi'• ii sledding area wading pool archery range IN XX V. XX } c'<%•'• Homeowner Surveyfor Neighborhood rk Pa.......... .......... ........... .. ...... ■ Survey Su a Distribution {Mi - Birchwood 0o Acres 19 responses ses { - Pine Ridge -- responses 1 7 - Park Grove -- 27 responses s - Rehn --s a au Estates 0 responses ■ Survey Analysis S e Anal 1 s - Tallied a Iced votes for h a i each tom and d response se - De termined i ed weighted d 1 g to totals • „ „ 2fr "hi ghly h l desirable", rdesirable"1 for somewhat g Y -1 for - o "not desirable", o es able 2 for "unacceptable" r p y - Ra nking a n of items b weighted 1 g Y totals { ...................................................... .... . ............................................................. .. . ........................................... ......... .. ......... ....... ....... ........... .......... ...................... .......................... .. .................................. ...................... .. ... .. ............. ... .......... . ...... ..... .. .............................................................. ... .... . .. ............................................. .............. . ......... ...................................... ................... .. ........... . ................. ....................... ............ . . ...... ............... ............... . . .......................................... .. ........... . .. . ......... .. .. .... ... .............. ... .. .. ....... ......... .. .... ..... ........ ............ ... ... .... ............................................................. .. ........ ........ . ...I .. ............... .. . .......... ................................................ ............... ..... ............ ............ . ...... ......... .. ............ .............................................................. . . ....... ............................................................. .... ...... .... . .......... ... ................................. .......................... .... ............ ............ . . .. .. ..... ............ ... ...... .... ..... . ..... ..... .. . ....... . ................. ............ .. ........ ........ . ... .................................................. ......... ............. ..... ...... .............. Homeowne r Surve y for .... ...... Ne 'ghborhood Park .. . . . .. ................ ........ ------------- .......... R!: 0 Survey Format .. .. ...iMii ... .1.10 Basic categories Informal sports facilities Organized s orts facilities p .. ...... . ... .. ... .... Other park facilities ... ...... .................. Response options ... ............... 9 Highly desirable e Somewhat desirable * Not it e Unacceptable .. ........ • .......... . . ....... . . ... . ... ....... ......... ...... . ... ........ . . ... ...I . . ....... .. . ....... ......... ....... .... M .............. . ..... ........•... ...... .........11.1... o Homeowner Su verfor . ........... ................... y Neighborhood a ...................... P rk ................ ..................... - ------------------------- ---------- ..... ..... . ■ To Ten Items bYweighted totals ) - Play structure forelementary school ages s 90 - Open e ass play field 8 8 Playground equipment m r pre-school oo1 ages � 86 ) Nature walk wi th h prairie asses & wildflowers 65 Benches , picnic tables & grills �63 ) - Sand a d court volleyball 49 Tennisinformal co r u t4 0 Ba sketball I etbal court rf informal 1 40 c a - Picnic cn c shelter 40 - Restrooms 39 aiis{i••:'LL•L'•{{.{:.}<•::•:...}••::;::..;;..:.;L:.,;;.:.;;:.:::{.::L_...;}.;:.;...i...... :•:iLLi•...:y:};,;};}•h:'Y:}.•.: .x}x}Li:;:;tLS:;:LytitL,:jt i:;•}:!;:{}•:<+`v:}:;:C.:{:4;::•:;:!•:Ltt•::L;i:Lit;i:i•:;tt•:.L <:;;{:.::•}::{" :`fir�� � <:::.�;;L•} >:'c??{: `.{{{{>.�:{{•`.{{{{`{< {�?{:j`{';>:>1�;r?.•,':`isF::•,:;:,;`;�i}:i:;;;j::{ti{i si';{}{{t'i{{>ti{�o;:>.`2{};:'':{'>:`.•:i�:�{i't t��'`{i{{{{{ctw.,xx•nri:.m:w'{>Yt�»{{;:::' . .. ... .... ............ .. I ......... .......... ..... .... ........... ..... ............. . ............ ........ . .....I ...... ......................... .. .. .. . . .... ........ ... .... ..... .. .... ......... .. .. .... . . . ... .. .. .... . . ............ ... .. .. ... ... . ........ .... ...... .. . .. .. . . .... ......... .. .... ................... ...... I .. ... . . .............................. .................... .............................. . ........... . . .. . . ........... .............. ........................ ............................. ............. .. . .. ... .................................... .................... Homeowner S urvey for .... . .......... N. ............. . Neig hborhood Park ...... .... - -------------------- .......... ..........I ........................................................................... ...... ..................................................... -------------- ......... .. . . .. .......... X.N.: .......................... ........ .......... 0 Undesirable Items (ranked by weighted totals) .......................... .............. ............. ........... Football field (-63) Soccer field (42) Horseshoes, shuffleboard, etc. (-39) Hockey rink (-37) jogging/running track (-30) Tennis courts with lights (-24) Baseball diamonds (-20) ............... ... . ... ... ............ ... ............. .... ........ ........ ..... ........ ... 1 1. ....... .. ... ...... . ...I . .............. . ........... . ........ . ........ ......... .... I .... 11 ........ - Design Concept Cost Estimate Birch Park Design Concept Cost Estimate for Birch Park Item Includes Materials and Installation Site Vbbrk Gear and grub 50Q 00 underbrush. General grading to level site for proposed 2,000.00 uses. Trail Development 6'and 8'asphalt trail through park 15,000.00 Play Structure 6"x 6"timber container(2 high x 550 LF) 5,500.00 12"sand base 2,800.00 (240 Cl) Play and swing structure 25,000.00 Gazebo Overlook Budget figure for covered structure 12,000.00 Site Amenifies Picnic tables 3,000.00 ^ Development Site benches z 400.00 Horseshoe pit 600.00 Half-court basketball 5,500.00 Exercise course 2,500.00 Seed/Sod and Plantings(trees and ground cover). 10,000.00 Plantings Sod high traffic areas 1,500.00 Seed manicured turf areas. 5,500.00 Total 93,800.00 Cost Note: The above materials and installation costs are based on spring 1995 prices as supplied by local contractors. Costs are also based on the assumption that negotiated contracts will be used for the various work items(as opposed to a formal bid process). City of Lino Lakes 1 Brauer&Associates, Ltd. #95-11 ''` �:: -mil: 11% :1 • • 1 �lr�Ii�_- r \�I is �"Jl�'r • .� .,%! _�t�i 1 !',:�•- \tom =�:'a„ _�� 'r�I `�• _mil; �. I,� �� �I�I ��•Ir�' \l.- ,fry Its`IOff :: ♦, 47 CI,•..,: � ' �147M fj- Irk" Ir •a 1 1• 1l • Design Concept Cost Estimate Brandywood Park Design Concept Cost Estimate for Brandywood Park Item Includes Materials and Installation Site Vbbrk Gear and grub 500.00 underbrush. General grading to level site for proposed 4,000.00 uses. Trail Development 6'and 8'asphalt trail through park and 17,500.00 hard surface play area (Phase I only). Play Structure 6"x 6"timer container(2 high x 360 LF) 3,600.00 12"sand base 1,450.00 (125 Cl) Play and swing stnxture 22,000.00 Site Amenities Picnic tables 4,000.00 Development Site benches Z 100.00 Horseshoe pit 600.00 Half-court basketball 5,500.00 Boardwalks 9,000.00 Seed/Sod and Naturalized plantings(trees and ground 5,000.00 Plantings cover). Sod high traffic areas 1,000.00 Seed manicured turf areas. 1,500.00 Total 77,750.00 Cost Note: The above materials and installation oasts are based on spring 1995 prices as supplied by local contractors. Costs are also based on the assumption that negotiated contracts MY be used for the various work items (as opposed to a formal bid process). City of Lino Lakes 1 Brauer&Associates, Ltd. #95-16 • � �\I% �,:�-_:` ..fry: r r;'L_ ` \I�: �' • • • �11� fv� 1 .NI fi, \I► • - • � fir\ rl� if\� �l� �(;, �\ram li�rr ffr� - a' �\Ih �; li'� :Ir\• i 11 lie.., II- \I=?. r� ri\ ( r►h�t � .�''' ./���1)�Ir�11r�, �II��� �/r�, ,r� fry 'fr��. '�\lii/—.\li rh fr \I� .�C Alp" 1� • D WA i `11► � �Imo= ��/ '� /'�\I% l�\I�' .lr�� 1 f ' i r.1. Design Concept Cost Estimate Pheasant Hills Mni-Park n Design Concept Cost Estimate for Pheasant Hills Mini-Park /tern Includes Materials and Installation Site Kbrk Gear and grub 500.00 underbrush. General grading to level site for proposed 2,000.00 uses. Trail Development 6'and 8'asphalt trail through park 9,200.00 Play Structure 6"x 6"timber container(2 high x 330 LF) 3,300.00 12"sand base 1,300.00 (110 Clq Play and swing structure 18,000.00 Site Amenities Picnic table(3) 1,200.00 Development Site benches(2) 400.00 Horseshoe pit 600.00 Half-court basketball 5,500.00 Overlook 3,200.00 Seed/Sod and Naturalized plantings(trees and ground 2,000.00 Plantings cover). Sod high traffic areas 500.00 Seed manicured turf areas. 1,000.00 Total 48,700.00 Cost Note. The above materials and installation costs are based on spring 1995 prices as supplied by local contractors. Costs are also based on the assumption that negotiated contracts will be used for the various work items(as opposed to a formal bid process). City of Lino Lakes 1 Brauer&Associates, Ltd. #95-12 C I T Y O F JINID LAW MOORANDUM Date: May 31, 1995 From: Marty Asleson To: All Park Board Members Subject: 20/20 Vision Attached please find the recommendations that have come from the 20/20 Vision Park and Recreation Advisory Group. Brian Bourassa will be at the meeting to update the Park Board on these recommendations. PARK, RECREATION AND FORESTRY DEPARTMENTS 7204 LAKE DRIVE,LINO LAKES,MINNESOTA 55014 (612)464-5562 Parks and Recreation Advisory Group 1. Mission: To develop actionable recommendations, based on citizen driven requirements, for enhancements to Parks, Recreation, and Open Spaces in the City of Lino Lakes. 11. Vision: Trails To expedite the development of a comprehensive trail system with first emphasis on the linking of the Lino Lakes community, utilizing the regional park where possible; continuing emphasis over the long run to linking the community to state trails and surrounding communities. A. Trails recommendation 1 Devise a detailed development and construction plan specifically for trails. Include completion dates and funding needs. Map current and future trails (include dates),and provide information to area residents through city newsletter. Set a goal for completing trails in established communities within 5 years. Rationale: This will provide an on-going network to revise and prioritize trail development,ensuring a quality product for the users and efficient use of funding. Action Plan What action? Who's responsible? Done Date Review overall trail needs and build into annual Advisory Group, Director, 1/96 goals. Base on 5-year goal for established Parks and Rec,Park Board neighborhoods. Continue development in new neighborhoods. Develop trail map with established trails and Advisory Group, Director, 1996,plan annual development goals-make every attempt Parks and Rec., Anoka done to work closely with county to capitalize on County Parks, Park Board shared costs. Approve budget requirements for 5-year trail City Council Fiscal `96 plan. / 20/20 Vision A Community Plannin Project 1 5/18/95:PKAG Parks and Recreation Advisory Group B. Trails recommendation 2 Develop a long-term planning relationship with Anoka County Parks. Pursue grants that are mutually beneficial. Rationale: Remove the barriers between the organizations to develop trail corridors from: I) East-West, then 2) North-South portions of Lino Lakes. Economies of scale in working with the County. Create street and off-road corridors that will link all regions of the city. Action Plan : What action? Who's responsible? Done Date Prioritize corridors— Advisory Group 1995 Suggest east-west first through Chain of Lakes as affordable,short term,and most desired by citizens attending 20/20 Vision Forums.. Key prioritization issue is accessibility to existing Anoka County equipment and facilities(beach, playgrounds)-making these facilities readily available to Lino Lakes citizens at minimal additional access cost, and no additional equipment or maintenance expenses. / 20/20 Vision A Community Plannin Project 2 5/18/95: PKAG Parks and Recreation Advisory Group C. Trails recommendation 3 = Schedule annual/biennial plan review sessions with diverse user groups (walking clubs,biking clubs, horse riding clubs,youth,seniors, MnDOT). Review financing and construction details. Rationale. This will provide an on-going network to revise and prioritize trail development, ensuring a safe, quality product for diverse users and efficient use of funding. Action Plan What action? Who's responsible? Done Date Contact local trail-oriented organizations and Advisory Group. 8/95 establish relationships. Schedule dates for trail plan review, including a Advisory Group in 1/96 periodic survey of trail use patterns. conjunction with Citizens Advisory Groups Steering Committee. Publicize pending goals review via newsletter. Advisory Group in 1/96 Include scheduled dates for review. conjunction with City newsletter. Publish results of review with final approval of Advisory Group and Park Annually, Park Board. Board in conjunction with begin 4/96 City staff in City newsletter. / 20/20 Vision A Community Plannin Project 3 5/18/95: PKAG Parks and Recreation Advisory Group D. Trails recommendation 4: Dedicate additional funds from the city budget and be more aggressive in seeking funds from state, federal, private,civic,and business sources to complete planned trail systems in Lino Lakes. Rationale: There is a current comprehensive plan that establishes connecting trails throughout the city and to the surrounding community. Funding has not been adequate to complete the system in a timely manner. Action Plan : What action? Who's responsible? Done Date Establish a plan which guarantees allocated Advisory Group,Director, 9/95 funds to complete trail system in established parks and Rec,Park Board, areas within a 5-year period. (Identify total City Council allocation and budget by year.) Hire external consultant to specifically pursue Advisory Group,Director, 7/95 ISTEA funds,and other available state and Parks and Rec. federal monies. Identify specific grant development date. Establish a citizens' advisory board whose Director,Parks and Rec. 7/95 specific goal is to seek community support for fundraising for community trail system development and maintenance. I 20/20 Vision A Community Plannin Project 4 5/18/95: PKAG Parks and Recreation Advisory Group E. Trails recommendation 5: Continue to expedite development in new neighborhoods. Rationale: There are less problems and expense to the city with trail development in new neighborhoods. Less expense : Developer provides easement,grading and gravel base. Less problems : Residents purchase property knowing the locations of trail corridors, and do not have to allow additional easement. Frequently, people in new neighborhoods are more familiar with trail systems. Costs for trails and parks are include in the price of their homes. Existing areas often resist trail development for several reasons. First, they must provide easement for the trail placement. Second,they may not be comfortable with "outsiders" suddenly traveling through their yards or neighborhoods. Last, many of the existing residences have "oversized" lots,and recreate in their own yards. Action Plan : What action? Who's responsible? Done Date Prior to construction of 20%of the homes in a Parks,Rec,and Forestry Now and new neighborhood, trail improvements shall be Department ongoing completed to a gravel base. Pave trails in new neighborhoods within one year Parks,Rec,and Forestry Now and of initial trail improvements to gravel base. Department ongoing 20/20 Vision A Community Plannin Project 5 5/19/95: PKAG Parks and Recreation Advisory Group F. Trails recommendation 6: Devise a detailed development and construction plan for trails. Include dates and funding needs. Map current and future trails (include dates),and provide information to area residents through city newsletter. Set a goal for completing trails in established communities. Rationale: This will provide an on-going network to revise and prioritize trail development ensuring a quality product for the users and efficient use of funding. Action Plan What action? Who's responsible? Done Date Review trail needs and back into annual goals. Advisory Group,Director, Base on 5-year goal for established communities. Park and Rec, Park Board Develop trail map with established trails and Advisory Group, Director, annual development goals. Parks and Rec.,Park Board Approve budget requirements for 5-year trail City Council plan. 20120 Vision A Community Plannin Project 6 5/19/95:PKAG Parks and Recreation Advisory Group III. Vision: Community Center To develop a self-supporting gathering place,central to the community, with the purpose of providing self-sustaining, family-oriented, recreational,and educational activities for a diverse use base in a "city campus" environment. A. Recreation Center Recommendation 1: Construct a gathering place and recreation facility within a "city campus" environment. Evaluate the potential of building a city hall/community center combination building. Rationale: Placing a community center with other municipal buildings would provide a convenient town center for city functions and recreation. In addition,cost savings by combining the two structures may result in the community center being a more financially viable option. Action Plan What action? Who's responsible? Done Date Survey to provide needs assessment and site City Administrator;Parks, selection. For needs assessment,consider: Rec, and Forestry Dept, City - Estimate structure costs if separate vs,together Engineer -Trail head potential - Passive outdoor gathering space - Outdoor recreation See Appendix A for additional items (Prioritization based on 20/20 Forum results r / 20/20 Vision A Community Plannin Project 5/19/95: PKAG Parks and Recreation Advisory Group B. Recreation Center Recommendation 2: Evaluate the potential of public/private partnership(s) in the construction and operation of a recreational center. Rationale: Partnerships with school districts,county organizations, and/or private business could reduce the financial burden on the city and enable the facility to achieve financial independence at an excellerated rate. Action Plan: What action? Who's responsible? Done Date Solicit private partnerships for the City Staff recreation center Solicit possible partnerships with state, City Staff county,and school districts, service clubs Evaluate partnership potentials and Parks, Rec and Forestry recommend finalist Draft partnership agreements Approve partnerships City Council C. Recreation Center Recommendation 3: Develop a detailed plan that ensures that the recreation center is self-supporting within 3 years of start-up. Rationale: With the many other needs of the city, it would be irresponsible to operate a recreation center that could not be self-supporting. Without a detailed plan and financing to meet this recreation center goal is an unacceptable risk. What action? Who's responsible? Done Date Develop supporting construction and operating costs plan. Review financing alternatives: - Local and state grants - Partnerships recommendation - Capital funds/public funding 20/20 Vision A Community Plannin Project 8 5/19/95: PKAG Parks and Recrearion Advisory Group IV. Vision. Park Development To develop a comprehensive, balanced, high-quality,cost-effective system of parks and leisure-oriented activities/programs for city residents to use and enjoy. A. Park Development Recommendation 1: Provide for adequate staff to ensure a high-quality recreation program and the development/maintenance of safe parks, recreation areas and trails. Rationale: Limiting staffing would reduce the quality and safety of the park and recreation experience. Temporary/summer positions would have a secondary benefit of employment for area residents. Action Plan: What action? Who's responsible? Done Date Evaluate current staff in comparison to Park Board Prior to facilities by benchmarking other fiscal communities 196 Develop a five-year staffing plan based on Park Board 1/96 Park/Rec/Trail development plan Submit staffing plan and associated payroll Park Board/Council 7/96 to city council for approval Determine final plan and budget Park Board/City Council 7/96 accordingly 20/20 Vision A Community Plannin Project 9 5/18/95: PKAG Parks and Recreation Advisory Group B_ Park Development Recommendation 2: Funding for existing and proposed park development should come from all the following sources: user fees (programs and facilities) increased budget allotment referendum for park development Rationale: The current pace at which parks are being developed and re-developed is not acceptable, The residents have expressed their desire for more parks being developed. Action Plan: What action? Who's responsible? Done date? Consider a city-wide survey to verify City Council w/consultant citizens'desires for park development Based on the development plan,allocate Parks/Recreation/Forestry resources accordingly Dept Proceed w/parks referendum - (designate Park Board w/Advisory appropriation of funds) Group Consider development of additional revenue- Parks/Recreation/Forestry producing programs (not necessarily Department additional scheduled recreation programs, ie: ballparks,city golf course) 20/20 Vision A Community Plannin Project to 5/l8/95: PKAG Parks and Recreation Advisory Group C. Park Development Recommendation 3: Promote neighborhood/community involvement in development and maintenance of parrs. Rationale: Residents using the parks should have input in the development/maintenance of parks. This will also generate support for the parks and reduce operating and maintenance costs, ie: "Adopt-a-Park". Action Plan: What action? Who's responsible? Done Date Increase community awareness of Parks/Rec/Forestry Department 1/96 park facilities/locations through monthly communications Create a list of upcoming park Parks/Rec/Forestry Department projects and specify tasks in which volunteers can help to raise funds, maintain or developarks. n Create a map to have available to the Parks/Rec/forestry Department community which clearly delineates and Parks Advisory Group parks (present and proposed), trails, and other recreational facilities. .r 20/20 Vision A Community Plannin Project 11 5/18/95: PKAG Parks and Recreation Advisory Group D. Park Development Recommendation 4: Continue action outlined in the Parks Comprehensive Plan: land acquisition, development of new parks, maintain and upgrade old parks. Rationale: The growing population of Lino Lakes will increase demand for parks. Action Plan: What action? Who's responsible? Done Date Continue annual review of CPP to revise Park Board, 1/96 goals/priorities for park development Parks/Rec/Forestry Department Develop time table for completion of acquisition/development of new parks, with prioritization of developing revenue-producing facilities Prioritize completion of parks in June 1997 neighborhoods that were developed prior to une 1995. In residential developments after 1995, parks will be totally developed by 80% occupancy of development. 20/20 Vision A Community Plannin Project 12 5/18/95: PKAG C I T Y O F Date: May 31, 1995 From: Marty Asleson To: Lino Lakes Park and Recreation Board Subject: Trail Discussion Between East and West Shadow Lake Drive Over the last several years there has been discussion periodically about a possible trail link between East (Blackduck) and West Shadow Lake Drive. The idea was put on hold because of the litigation that occurred over the last few years in the North Blackduck area. I have been contacted by members of the homeowners association in North Reshanau recently about the possibility of residents fund- raising to begin implementing this trail segment. Although this is an idea that folks seem to want, there are some complications that are present in this project. First, the access off of Blackduck is owned by the Homeowners Association. We would need to have the present utility easement redescribed to include public trail. Second, The first 125 feet of this trail would be used for their boat launch. I believe that this matter can be worked out by some additional gateing considerations. We would also need to research our exposure on this subject. Third, the homeowners association intends to begin construction on their park. The homeowners association is concerned about present hikers/joggers getting hurt, so they are considering blocking this area off. This may create some residents that have used what they thought was regional park to get around the lake to become upset when they cant get through. My suggestion to them was to leave a small fenced area for residents to get through. However, it is private property. Perhaps, the best thing to do is to let this whole thing cool down a bit, and work with the homeowners association over the next few years to resolve this matter. In the mean time, Mr. Frank Moss from the homeowners association has agreed to act a spokesperson for the project if we should receive any calls. I think with some patience and good planning we can make this trail segment work out for all residents who have enjoyed the link around the lake. PARK,RECREATION,FORESTRY,AND RECYCLING DEPARTMENTS 7204 LAKE DRIVE,LINO LAKES,MINNESOTA 55014 (612)464-5562 MEMORANDUM Date: June 1, 1995 From: Marty Asleson To: Lino Lakes Park and Recreation Board subject: Minor Subdivision and Commercial Development Park Dedication Collections Please find attached a memorandum from Mary Kay Wyland concerning the past collections for minor subdivisions since September, 1994. The question of collection of commercial fees needs to be resolved at the City Council level. The issue here is that of the city trying to attract commercial growth and the park dedication acting as a deterring factor to this focus. New development in the Apollo Business Park is tax increment financed, as an attraction for business. Since we do have this requirement in ordinance, it needs to be resolved by the city council, perhaps waiving this requirement for the present time. MEMORANDUM TO: Marty Asleson FROM: Mary Kay Wyland DATE: June 1, 1995 SUBJECT: Minor Subdivisions - September 1994 - May 1995 The following list outlines the Minor Subdivisions approved by the City Council in 1995. Adjacent to each listing is the Park Dedication fee that was required at the time of approval. J. Keefe, Rolling Hills Drive, minor subdivision for mortgage purposes, no park dedication required of applicant. Hardwood Creek, Subdivision of 10 acre parcel from 50 acres. $500 Park Dedication required. Kevin McKlevish, Subdivision of one parcel into two on Glenview Drive, $500 Park Dedication required. Art LaCasse, 24th Avenue. Subdivision created one building site, one site with existing home, and 20+ acres for development of Clearwater Creek Subdivision. One park dedication required for new building site, $500. Park Dedication to be collected for Clearwater Creek Subdivision at time of development agreement/final plat. Haag, White Pine Road, minor subdivision to add 40' to lot. Park Dedication previously paid. K-G Development, minor subdivision on White Pine Road and Baldwin Lake Road, Park Dedication to be collected with Woods of Baldwin Lake 2nd Addition. Five (5) Snow Owl Lane administrative subdivisions were approved between February of 194 and May of 195, $2,500 was collected in Park Dedication fees. COMMERCIAL: Wayne Scanlan, Otter Lake Road, minor subdivision to split 3 acre parcel from balance of lot. Park Dedication to be collected in accordance with Ordinance No. 5-91 when building permit is issued (dedication will be based on size of building and occupancy) . Nol-Tec, Apollo Business Park, minor subdivision - Park Dedication ,•1 previously collected with the platting of Lino Industrial Park. Blue Heron, Apollo Business Center, minor subdivision - Park Dedication not collected.