HomeMy WebLinkAbout03/06/1995 Park Board Packet CITY OF LINO LAKES
PARK BOARD MEETING
MONDAY, March 6, 1995
6 :30PM
***AGENDA***
1. Call to Order and Roll Call 6 :30pm
2 . Approval of Minutes from February 6, 1995 6:35pm
3 . Open Mike 6 :40pm
4 . Updates and Old Business
A. Impact Fees 6 :45pm
B. ADA Update 7:00pm
C. Joint City Council/Park Board Meeting 7:30pm
D. Neighborhood Meetings (liaisons) 8 : 00pm
E. Friends of the Park 8: 10pm
F. Recreation Focus Committee 8:20pm
G. Other 8 :30pm
5 . New Business 8 :40pm
6 . Schedule Next Park Board Meeting 8:55pm
7 . Adjourn 9:0 0pm
All times are approximate. Please call Sandie at 464-5562,
Extension 176, if you cannot attend this meeting.
• ice OW .uuL 1- .U1
;( CITE' : OF CIRCLE PINES
200 clvm Heights Circle Circle Pines,Minnesota 55014.1793 Tiiephons 741"828 ,
PAX 785.2850
Lee Ann 4n un M14r.Mayan 11)0 784-9724
H42e1 adder,O""Iflembsr Donovan Mayne.Counctlmarrkv a.
8nro!cVVW.QsaW ttWbV Michael A.FaNV.CounoUnwmber
Jame.W.Kelnath,Cay AdminbtraW
February 23, 1995
Marty Asleson •:
Park Board Staff Liaisbtt.
City of Lino Lakes
1189 Main St.
Lino Lakes, MN 55014
Dear Marty,
The City of Circle Pinpa Park Board invites you to a reception and welcome
for the new Anoka County Parks Director, John VonDeLinde and new Parks
Superintendent Mike ,Jacobson.
The welcoming reception will be an opportunity to meet these now individuals,
as well as network with familiar faces at the Anoka County Parks Department.
The receptions will be held at Circle Pines City Hall at 5:30 p.m., on Monday
;;'-r,.•,--%, the 6th of March, 1993: Refreshments and a light fruit plate will be
provided. Please RSVP:Pq calling City Hall at 784-5898 to let us know
whether or not you wilf-attend. We would appreciate it if you would
call by Thursday, the.Znd of March.
We hope that you will be able to join us in this welcome and networking
event.
Sincerely,
Phil Korst
Chairperson, Circle Pines Park Board
PK/mh
cc/Dave Phipps
�f1U'
Nnted On Remled Paear
,
CITY OF LINO LAKES
PARK BOARD MEETING
MONDAY, FEBRUARY 6, 1995
The February 6, 1995, City of Lino Lakes Park Board meeting was
called to order at 6 :35pm.
Roll call was taken, members present were George Lindy, Chair,
Sharon Lane, Pam Taschuk, Ken Johnson, and Amy Donlin. Also
present were Marty Asleson, Park, Recreation and Forestry
Coordinator, Barry Bernstein, Recreation Program Supervisor, and
Sandie Wood, Recording Secretary. Not present was Joe Schmidt.
APPROVAL OF DECEMBER 5, 1994 MINUTES: Sharon Lane made a motion
to approve the December 5, 1994 minutes, Pam Taschuk seconded the
motion. All voted aye. Minutes were approved.
OPEN MIKE: There was no one present to speak under Open Mike.
20/20 VISION UPDATE: Kim Sullivan introduced herself and gave an
update of the 20/20 Vision project. Kim provided the Park Board
with handouts that gave a breakdown of what the residents
interests are. Kim said there were approximately 250 people that
responded to the invitations that were sent out. She felt the
forums were a big success. The speakers said that this was the
largest turnout they have ever seen at a forum.
Kim said she wanted only to discuss park and recreation issues.
She said the citizens want to see increased, improved, and
maintained trails, they want to connect the community with
trails, they want bike trails, they want more open spaces, they
would also like adequate parking at the parks, they want to see
maintained and developed parks, they would like to see the
development of an adult use recreation facility, the development
of a center for parents with their children, and an area for the
elderly, and to increase recreational activities and build more
parks.
Kim left copies of the advisory group application. She told the
board members that if they would like to sign up, to be in one of
these advisory groups, they would be in the group as a resident
and not as a Park Board member. However, if Park Board members
are needed for their expertise they will receive a written
invitation to attend a group session.
Kim said the advisory groups will be meeting from March until May
and then go to the City Council for approval in June.
She went on to say in June we will be asked to start implementing
some of the recommendations that the residents come up with. She
did not think this was going to be hard for us because of what we
^ have already done with the Comprehensive Park Plan.
1
CITY OF LINO LAKES
PARK BOARD MEETING
MONDAY, FEBRUARY 6, 1995
She said there would be three advisory groups. Under Park and
Recreation the breakdown will be recreation (organized, whole
family) , community center, and trails. She also gave a summary
of the citizens' concerns.
Pam Taschuk asked if the advisory groups were going to be made up
of only adults. Kim said the groups can include young people
too. She felt it would be advantageous to have youth in the park
and recreation advisory group.
UPDATES AMID OLD BUSINESS:
A. Recreation Complex: George said the appraisal is almost
done. He told the board that he and Marty would be meeting with
the Noreen' s on February 7, 1995 to get a few questions answered.
Marty injected that it is a slow process and there is nothing
that can be done to speed up the process. He hopes to have more
information to the Park Board prior to the Joint City
Council/Park Board meeting on February 22 .
B. Recreation Focus Committee: Barry gave an overview of the
Recreation Focus Committee. He said that they have not meet
since November but will be meeting again on February 9, 1995 at
6 :30pm.
Marty discussed the Teen Sub-committee. He said the teens really
need to have a place to call their own. It is hard to keep them
interested without a place and a person to interact with.
Pam asked if the Park and Recreation Department had thought about
getting a college intern to act as a teen group leader as part of
their internship. Marty said yes but we do not have the money to
pay someone to do this. Pam said she has had interns from St.
Catherine' s College and the University of St. Thomas and does not
have to compensate them. Pam has a contact person and will talk
to Marty after the meeting. George asked if a teen community
center was being looked at in conjunction with a new city hall.
Marty said he thought so, but, maybe this was something that
could be addressed at the joint City Council/Park Board meeting
on February 22 .
C. Friends of the Park: Joe Schmidt was not present to give a
report on the Friends of the Park. Marty said they are doing
some promotional and marketing things. They had a t-shirt logo
contest and they will be selling t-shirts.
•-� He said Moline Concrete is committed to moving the Shoreview
building to the City Hall site.
2
CITY OF LINO LAKES
PARK BOARD MEETING
MONDAY, FEBRUARY 6, 1995
Marty said the Friends of the Park have been able to do a lot but
they are looking for more committee members. They are looking
for someone to help keep the books, people to help write grants
and meet with corporation or business people when they come to
town. Jacqueline Farm wants to do a community ball to try and
get the community involved with this group.
He also reported that they had received a $1, 000. 00 grant from
Target Industries to be used for the Performance in the Park
presentations.
George said most of the neighborhood groups are aware of the
Friends of the Park. Marty said that a lot of the neighborhood
groups have been give the Friends grant criteria.
D. Donation VFW Post 6583 : George said there was a memorandum
in the packets pertaining to the donation VFW Post 6583 gave the
City of Lino Lakes. George asked what the $3300.00 was going to
be used for. Marty responded that it was given for for new
playground equipment in parks. George wanted to know how these
funds were kept separate from dedicated funds vs . general fund
^ dollars. Marty said it would have to be earmarked for a park
area. Maybe there could be a three-way match from the Friends of
the Park and a neighborhood group. He also mentioned the
placement of a plaque stating it was donate by a specific group
or groups . George wanted to know what previous donations had
been used for. Marty responded that it had gone into playground
equipment, picnic tables, hockey rinks, and lighting. George
said it would be wise to remember this money is available and to
keep it in mind when working through meetings and needs, and to
remember it could be used for a park(s) if we run short.
However, he said it is too early now to make a recommendation to
where the money should be used.
Sharon wanted to know if a letter of thanks had been sent to the
VFW. Marty said the Police and Park and Recreation Departments
are working on a plaque to be presented at a future City council
meeting.
E. Lighting Information: George said he had seen Marty' s
response to the letter of inquiry in the Quad Newspaper. He said
it was a good response and hopefully it will answer a lot of
questions.
Marty showed a video tape on lighting. Amy asked if this was the
Park and Recreation Department' s video. Marty said no but he
would check to see if we could copy it.
3
^ CITY OF LINO LAKES
PARK BOARD MEETING
MONDAY, FEBRUARY 6, 1995
Sharon wanted to know if this type of lighting was cheaper
because it was so directed. Amy appreciated Marty showing the
tape and said that lighting is a big issue to her as well as
other people in the community. She continued by saying that low
spillage lighting should be pushed if there is a recreation
complex and if lighting is put in it. There was also discussion
about passing an ordinance pertaining to the type of lighting to
be used in the city.
Pam said Jeanne Kenow should also be kept in mind when discussing
lighting because she has gone through crime prevention through
environmental design and may be advising some commercial groups
that may be building and putting in lighting in the city.
Barry said if you wanted to see this type of lighting a good
place to go is Central Park in Roseville. (Victoria and County
Road C) Barry added that this is a park in a residential area.
F. Recreation Programs: Barry passed out an update of the
current winter activities which showed the number of participants
in the programs. He told the Park Board how the department was
doing with the programs that were running now.
Barry talked about the warminghouses and said a final report
would be done when the warminghouse season ends. He reported
that the numbers are down due to the type of winter we have had
so far. He continued by saying the warminghouses were open 10
days to 2 weeks later than usual because of the warm weather.
Barry went on to say that the Snack and Skate classes have really
taken off this year. There are about 53 participants this year
where there was only about 30 last year.
Kids Karate had about 70 students in the fall with about 53 in
the winter session. This is a real popular program with kids.
George wanted to know if a running tally was kept at each of the
warminghouses shelters. Barry explained the log books that are
kept at each of the shelters. George wanted to know if there was
much use at the Country Lakes Park rink. Barry responded that
there was more use on the weekends than during the week.
However, Rice Lake Elementary School does use this rink during
the weekdays so parents are learning of this rink through the
kids. Marty said it is the nicest, largest skating area we have.
Barry said it is anticipated that Lino Park will be open next
year with a warminghouse. There has been comments from the
neighborhood regarding the timed lighting. Marty said finishing
4
^ CITY OF LINO LAKES
PARK BOARD MEETING
MDNDAY, FEBRUARY 6, 1995
the warminghouse at Lino Park was an item on the Goals for 1993
and because of the warm weather, this winter, staff has been able
to work on the building. Marty continued by saying many things
have been accomplished because of the quality employees we have
working on the park maintenance crew. Tracey Urich, Mike
Hoffman, and Dave Lichtsheidl have done a good job and they all
have expertise in different areas so we are getting things done
in a quality manner. Marty thought this park would be a good
place to visit when the Park Board starts doing pre-meetings
again.
G. ADA Update: George asked Marty if he had been interviewing
for this position. Marty said he has not because the City
Council passed a resolution to get surrounding communities to
commit to become part of a Government Agency ADA Consortium.
After we have commitments from surrounding communities Marty said
he will be interviewing people for the ADA Coordinator position.
He told the board that Julee Quarve-Peterson has completed the
ADA Compliance Manuals. He said staff is currently reviewing and
critiquing this document. Julee will be meeting with staff and
the ADA Committee for a training session on Wednesday, February
22, 1995, at City Hall from 2 :30-4 :OOpm.
George asked if Jeff Shoenbauer, in his planning, is aware of
these new standards . Marty responded yes.
H. Recreation/Special Revenue Accounts: Marty read the green
sheet he had prepared for the Park Board. The special revenue
account is a city account that was set up to accumulate revenues
from recreation programs. Should a program draw more than an
anticipated budget, then the revenue account makes up the
difference. Over the last two years the Special Revenue Account
has accumulated a little over $3000 per year for an approximate
(pre-audit) total of about $6600. 00.
Marty said staff would like to discuss the possibilities of using
these funds. It , is felt that when revenues are generated from
programs, the funds may go into enhancing the programs they were
generated from, or other new program ideas.
Although caution needs to be taken for revenue/expense purposes,
there are some program needs that would be possible, or enhanced
by the use of these dollars. Staff wishes to use these funds.
Marty recommended a motion and recommendation from the Park Board
concerning this matter. The options would be to spend these
dollars for worthy program enhancement needs or let the funds
accumulate.
5
CITY OF LINO LAKES
PARK BOARD MEETING
MONDAY, FEBRUARY 6, 1995
Barry discussed some of the ideas that he and Marty had been
talking about. He said they discussed the possibility of buying
a net, to install at the Centennial Sports Arena, for indoor golf
lessons while there is a turf mat down. The cost would be
approximately $400-$500 . The other thing they were looking at is
the possibility of a batting cage to work on skills prior to the
start of the softball season. Barry said all these classes would
be fee paid programs. Marty wanted to know if some of the
softball dollars couldn' t be used to enhance the facilities.
George thought these ideas sounded good and would probably
generate enough money over the years to pay for nets and cages.
Sharon asked if any money had been withdrawn from this fund.
Barry said no. Pam expressed a concern about too much money
being left in this account. George didn' t think it was necessary
for Marty and Barry to come to the Park Board for approve prior
to spending these funds but thought an annual report, of where
the money was used, should be done. Marty said he would have to
go before the City Council for approval to use the money in this
fund because it is a new expenditure.
MOTION: Sharon Lane made a motion, seconded by Pam Taschuk to
recommend that the funds in the special revenue account be
designated, at the discretion of the Park and Recreation Staff,
for program enhancement and equipment with a buffer of $1000.00.
Motion passed unanimously.
NEW BUSINESS:
A. Neighborhood Meetings Update: Marty read a memo outlining
the meetings that he and Board members have attended. The
meetings have been with neighborhood groups from
Birchwood/Parkgrove/Pineridge (N-10) , Wenzel Farms, and
Brandywood. George is working on a follow-up meeting with the
Brandywood group. He said contact has been made with Homer
Tompkins from Pheasant Hills Preserve, and have set a budget and
started concept planning the (M-5) Park area. Marty said a
meeting has been scheduled for the Rice Lake Estates Neighborhood
in February. Marty said Jeff Shoenbauer has given him a price
for the M-5 Park of $1800. 00. This would cover the cost of a
neighborhood meeting and development of a plan. The cost for the
N-10 Park area is $2800. George said this is something the
neighborhood groups are going to have to be told so they can make
the decision on whether to budget the money or go to another
level of planning. Amy said maybe the neighborhoods would want
to do fundraising to raise the money for a higher level of
planning.
6
CITY OF LINO LAKES
PARK BOARD MEETING
MONDAY, FEBRUARY 6, 1995
There was discussion on the restructuring of the park dedication
fees. Amy thought the developer should be paying for some of the
expense of developing the park in the development rather than
putting the burden on the community. Marty said this was called
an impact fee and it would require a new ordinance passed by the
City Council. There was discussion on impact fees and Marty said
he would research to see if other communities in Minnesota were
doing this and report back to the Park Board at the next meeting.
Marty explained our current park dedication formula. He said, as
an example, the dollars put in the Pheasant Hills Preserve
dedicated fund could be used to purchase land to develop a park
in the middle of Pheasant Hills Preserve. George said Marty' s
example is relevant and thought he was alluding to Trappers
Crossing and Clearwater Creek. George said that the dedications
are meeting our current needs and we have to keep in mind that
this money is earmarked for specific areas.
There was discussion about what was going to happen in Trappers
Crossing and a contingency plan if the land was not acquired for
a recreation complex. George remembered discussing tot lots in
this park. George would like staff to review past Park Board
meeting minutes pertaining to Trappers Crossing and put it on the
next agenda for review.
George said "Neighborhood Meeting Update" should be on the Park
Board meeting agendas each month so the members can be kept up to
date on what is happening in the neighborhood areas.
B. Joint City Council/Park Board Meeting: Marty told the Park
Board that we would be meeting after the City Council Work
Session, approximately 6:30pm, on Wednesday, February 22 . Marty
said some of the things that should be addressed is general fund
revenue, a referendum, grants, a survey, recreation complex,
maintenance schedules, dead end trails, and funding for the Park
and Recreation Department. Amy said one item may be an
environmentally friendly golf course. Pam said building needs
for the City is something that should be discussed (how does it
affect the Park Board, City Hall, Recreation Complex, etc. )
George mentioned dead end trails, how do we fund and make them
contiguous. Ken asked where are the trails in the older part of
Lino Lakes. (north side) George added maintenance costs to the
list. George suggested that the Park Board members meet at
6: 15pm, at City Hall prior to the joint meeting.
7
CITY OF LINO LAKES
PARK BOARD MEETING
MOMAY, FEBRUARY 6, 1995
C. Forestry/Oakwilt Reforestation: Marty was going to show a
video but the video machine was broken. Marty talked about
oakwilt suppression. Since the State has initiated the
Cooperative Suppression Program in 1991 there has been almost a
half a million dollars in Federal suppression assistance put in
through the Department of Natural Resources, over 200 miles of
vibratory plow line has been put in, and over 700 infection
centers have been slated for 1995.
D. Trails/Inventory: Marty included a trail inventory update
memo in the packet. He said the inventory is now tied into
mapping coordinates so that there is an easy and understandable
method to inspect, and cost-track our existing system of
bituminous trails. He continued by saying we have also developed
a monthly inspection form as well as an inspection form for
mowing crews. Copies of these forms were included in the
packets. He continued by saying reserve officers are out looking
at the trails and are turning in report forms when they see a
problem. George asked what the mode of transportation was when
doing the monthly inspections. Marty said they will use the
Cushman or may use a bicycle in the future for some of the areas.
Marty said these inspection forms are need, in case there is an
incident we can review the files.
E. Playground Inspection Process: Marty said he was going to be
attending a MRPA Community Park Policing workshop with Council-
person Andy Neal on February 15.
Marty said he wasn't sure if some of the old playground equipment
conforms to the new consumer products standards. He said he is
in the process of training staff people how to do inspections.
An annual audit will be done and a report given to the Park
Board. He is going to continue a monthly inspection process that
is done the last Monday of each month. After the inspections are
done they will follow-up on problems that do exist.
George said we have to remember the increasing cost of
maintenance when doing funding because of the addition of new
equipment in the neighborhood parks.
F. Earth Day Celebration: Jackie Constant, Recycling
Coordinator, is co-chair of the Earth Day Committee this year.
There has been two meetings at the Wargo Nature Center to start
planning another celebration. The Earth Day Celebration will be
held on April 22 at the Wargo Nature Center and will be tied in
with the State' s 25th Great Minnesota Greenup.
8
CITY OF LINO LAKES
PARK BOARD MEETING
MONDAY, FEBRUARY 6, 1995
Amy said she had attended the second meeting and the connnittee
would like to have a landscaping for wildlife theme for the
celebration. She reported that Anoka County has a new recycling
trailer that has a lot of hands on displays for people to try.
Marty said they hope this will be a quad-comnnuzity celebration
with each conrunity doing their own thing and pulling it all
together.
NEXT MEETING: The next meeting was scheduled for March 6,
1995, 6:30pm, at City Hall.
ADJOURIMENT: A notion was made by Sharon Lane, seconded by
Pam Taschuk to adjourn. The meetings was adjourned at 9:10pm.
9
C I T Y O F
LNOLAW
LINO LAKES PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT
MEMORANDUM
DATE: 4/27/95
TO: Park Board Members
FROM: BARRY BERNSTEIN, RECREATION PROGRAM SUPERVISOR
SUBJECT: Spring Registration
I have enclosed early spring registration numbers for you to
observe. Please notice the registration period for most of these
programs will be in May.
I am very encouraged by our youth baseball program numbers. It
appears that the program is benefiting those persons who choose a
lesser competitive program.
Also, the numbers do not reflect the adult team activities. I
have listed below the numbers for each of these programs.
Adult Indoor Soccer
Our indoor soccer program has grown in popularity over the three
years of offering this program. This year we have eight co-rec
team and four men' s teams.
Adult Softball
How exciting! ! The first year of offering adult softball four
years ago we had six teams registered in our program. This year
we are almost filled to the limit of teams we can accommodate.
Forty seven teams are participating in this summer program.
Eleven co-rec teams are registered and thirty six men' s teams are
in this league. Our office has turned away approximately one
dozen teams from participating in our program.
If you have any questions please don' t hesitate to contact our
office at 464-5562 .
n
PARK, RECREATION AND FORESTRY DEPARTMENTS
7204 LAKE DRIVE,LINO LAKES,MINNESOTA 55014
(612)464-5562
C I T Y O F
11NOLA10
MMRANDUM
Date: April 26, 1995
From: Marty Asleson
To: Park Board Members
Subject: Pre-Park Board Field Meeting
I would like to meet at Lino Park at 5 :45pm on Monday, May 1,
1995, for our pre-park board field meeting. I would like the
opportunity to show you the newly remodeled shelter.
Hope to see you all there.
PARK,RECREATION AND FORESTRY DEPARTMENTS
7204 LAKE DRIVE,LINO LAKES,MINNESOTA 55014
(612)464-5562
C I T Y O F
-� LINO LAW
LINO LAKES PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMIT
MEMORANDUM
DATE: 4/27/95
TO: Park Board Members
FROM: BARRY BERNSTEIN, RECREATION PROGRAM SUPERVISOR
SUBJECT: Spring Registration
I have enclosed early spring registration numbers for you to
observe. Please notice the registration period for most of these
programs will be in May.
I am very encouraged by our youth baseball program numbers. It
appears that the program is benefiting those persons who choose a
lesser competitive program.
Also, the numbers do not reflect the adult team activities. I
have listed below the numbers for each of these programs.
Adult Indoor Soccer
Our indoor soccer program has grown in popularity over the three
years of offering this program. This year we have eight co-rec
team and four men' s teams.
Adult Softball
How exciting! ! The first year of offering adult softball four
years ago we had six teams registered in our program. This year
we are almost filled to the limit of teams we can accommodate.
Forty seven teams are participating in this summer program.
Eleven co-rec teams are registered and thirty six men' s teams are
in this league. Our office has turned away approximately one
dozen teams from participating in our program.
If you have any questions please don' t hesitate to contact our
office at 464-5562 .
PARK, RECREATION AND FORESTRY DEPARTMENTS
7204 LAKE DRIVE, LINO LAKES,MINNESOTA 55014
(612) 464-5562
April 25, 1995
,-� CLASS LIST
YOUTH
4-YR T-BALL 5/16-6/8 6-7:00 Sunset Oaks 24
4-YR T-BALL 6/19-7/12 10-11:00 City Hall 7
4-YR T-BALL 6/19-7/12 6-7:00 Sunset Oaks 7
----------------------------------------------------------------
5/6YR T-BALL 5/1-5/24 6:15-7: 30 Rice Lake#3 24
5/6YR T-BALL 6/19-7/17 11-12:15 City Hall 5
5/6YR T-BALL 6/19-7/17 6:15-7: 30 Rice Lake#3 6
5/6YR T-BALL 6/20-7/18 6:15-7: 30 Sunset Oaks 13
5/6YR T-BALL 7/27-8/22 6:15-7: 30 Rice Lake#3 8
----------------------------------------------------------------
7/8YR T-BALL 5/2-6/6 6:15-7:30 Rice Lake#3 13
7/8YR T-BALL 6/20-7/25 11-12:15 Sunrise #4 1
7/8YR T-BALL 6/20-7/25 6:15-7: 30 Rice Lake#3 8
7/8YR T-BALL 7/24-8/23 6:15-7:30 Rice Lake#3 0
----------------------------------------------------------------
TENNIS BEG. 6/19-7/17 1-2:00 Centennial 0
TENNIS BEG. 6/19-7/17 10: 30-11: 30 Arena 0
TENNIS BEG. 6/20-7/18 10:30-11:30 Arena 0
TENNIS ADVBE 6/19-7/17 2-3:00 Centennial 0
TENNIS INTER 6/20-7/18 1-2:00 Centennial 0
TENNIS USTA 6 -7 10-11:30 Centennial 0
-------------------------- ------------------------------------
GOLF BEG 6/20-6/29 12-1:00 Deer Meadows 1
GOLF BEG 6/19-6/28 11-12:00 Shadow Ridqe 1
GOLF INTER 6/5-6/14 5:30-6:30 Deer Meadows 0
----------------------------------------------------------------
SESSION #1 SWIMMING MON-THUR 6/19-6/29
9-9:45 INSTR 1 Level 4 0 INSTR 2 Level 3 0
9:50-10:35 INSTR 1 Level 3 0 INSTR 2 Level 4 0
10:40-11:25 INSTR 1 Level 2 0 INSTR 2 Level 1 0
11:30-12:15 INSTR 1 Level 1 0 INSTR 2 Level 2 0
12:20-1:05 INSTR 1 Wait list 0 INSTR 2 Wait list 0
SESSION #2 MON-THUR 7/10-7/20
9-9:45 INSTR 1 EmWaterSafe 0 INSTR 2 EmWaterSafe 0
9:50-10:35 INSTR 1 Level 3 0 INSTR 2 Level 4 0
10:40-11:25 INSTR 1 Level 4 0 INSTR 2 Level 3 0
11:30-12:15 INSTR 1 Level 1 0 INSTR 2 Level 2 0
12:20-1:05 INSTR 1 Level 2 0 INSTR 2 Level 1 0
SESSION #3 MON-THUR 7/24-8/3
9-9:45 INSTR 1 Level 3 0 INSTR 2 Level 4 0
9:50-10:35 INSTR 1 Level 2 0 INSTR 2 Level 3 1
10:40-11:25 INSTR 1 Level 4 0 INSTR 2 Level 1 1
11: 30-12:15 INSTR 1 Level 1 0 INSTR 2 Level 2 0
12:20-1:05 INSTR 1 Wait list 0 INSTR 2 Wait list 0
t .
ADULT
SLIM EXPRESS AEROBICS T/TH 3/14-5/30 6:30-7:45 22
SLIM EXPRESS AEROBICS T/TH 6/15-7/27 6: 30-7:45 3
COMBO AEROBICS M/WED 3/13-5/23 7-8:15 13
SAT.AEROBICS SAT. 4/1-6/3 9:30-10:45 2 .
----------------------------------------------------------------
APRIL
GOLF ADVBEG 4/10-4/19 5:45-6:45 Deer Meadows /
GOLF INTER 4/10-4/19 11:00-12:00 Shadow Ridqe /
GOLF BEG 4/10-4/19 12:00-1:00 Shadow Ridqe /
GOLF ADVBEG 4/11-4/20 6:50-7:50 Shadow Ridqe /
GOLF WM-BEG 4/18-4/27 5:45-6:45 Deer Meadows 6
GOLF ADVBEG 4/18-4/27 6:50-7:50 Deer Meadows /
MAY
GOLF ADV 5/1-5/10 6:50-7:50 Deer Meadows 2
GOLF WM-INTE 5/9-5/11 5:45-6:45 Deer Meadows 0
GOLF INTER 5/9,-17 6:50-7:50 Deer Meadows 1
GOLF BEG 5/16-5/25 5:45-6:45 Deer Meadows 6
GOLF ADVBEG 5/16-5/25 6:50-7:50 Deer Meadows 2
GOLF CLINIC 5:45-6:45 Shadow Ridge 0
JUNE
GOLF ADVBEG 6/5-6/14 6: 35-7: 35 Shadow Ridge 0
2
3
----------------------------------------------------------------
TENNIS BEG 6/19-7/17 4-5:00 Centennial 0
TENNIS BEG 6/20-7/18 7-8:00 Arena 0
TENNIS INTER 6/19-7/17 5: 30-6:30 Centennial 0
TENNIS INTER 6/20-7/18 6-7:00 Arena 0
MEMORANDUM
Date: February 27, 1995
From: Marty Asleson
To: Lino Lakes Park and recreation Board
Subject: Impact Fees
John Powell, our acting City Engineer is attending a conference
this week on impact fees. Originally, I planned to attend this
conference. since the conference is fairly expensive, I asked
John to attend the Park Board meeting to bring us up to date on
this requested agenda item.
n MEMORANDUM
Date: February 28, 1995
From: Marty Asleson
To: Lino Lakes Park and Recreation Board
Subject: ADA Update
Please find enclosed the introduction section and transition plan
section from the Executive Summary of the ADA study that was done
for the City of Lino Lakes by Julie Quarvie Peterson. The
Transition Plan lists facilities on different park sites in the
City with issues, costs, site priorities, and issue priorities
listed. Some of these costs may or may not reflect accurate
costs for these facility upgrade needs.
The Americans with Disabilities Act requires the city to allow
the public the opportunity to participate in the planning process
to make the City,s policies, programs, services and benefits
available to everyone. We have scheduled a meeting with our ADA
Committee for the 8th of March to review the document and to
start meeting these requirements.
We have also had some progress with our ADA Recreation
Consortium. I will update you on this at the meeting.
Introduction City of Lino Lakes
INTRODUCTION
The Americans With Disabilities Act of July 1990 is the most recent in a series of civil
rights laws for persons with disabilities. The City of Lino Lakes is obliged by the Americans
with Disabilities Act and earlier laws pertaining to the rights of persons with disabilities
including the Rehabilitation Act of 1973. The Americans With Disabilities Act expands the
rights of individuals with disabilities and increases the number of people protected under
the law. The Americans With Disabilities Act provides protection/opportunities for any
individual with a disability who chooses to use the programs, services and benefits of the
City of Lino Lakes.
The Americans with Disabilities Act states that each governing entity is to conduct a self-
evaluation of their programs, policies, services, benefits and facilities. It was the charge of
Julee Quarve-Peterson, Inc. to assist in the development of the self-evaluation process.
The self-evaluation "multi-step" process used to fulfill the obligations of the City of Lino
Lakes is outlined below and it is encouraged the City fulfill these activities:
♦ The City of Lino Lakes is to designate an employee who is to assume the role
of the Americans With Disabilities Act coordinator. The ADA coordinator
will ensure that the purpose and impact of the ADA is effectively
communicated to the public and staff. It will also be their responsibility to
follow-up on the implementation of the act.
♦ The City of Lino Lakes is to inform the public of it's efforts to remove
barriers within the City to accommodate the needs of individuals with
disabilities. This notification is to occur in several sources of media such as
newspaper, radio and television. It is also required that continuing
notification occur at such time as modifications to policies, procedures or
structures are implemented.
♦ The City of Lino Lakes is to ensure that any written communication
produced, such as newsletters, City Council meeting agendas, Park and
Recreation offerings, Community Development information and forms, etc.
be available upon request in alternate formats to accommodate individuals
with visual impairments. Other auxiliary services and aids, such as assistive
listening system kits and sign language interpreters, are to be available upon
request as well to accommodate persons who may be hard of hearing or deaf.
♦ The City of Lino Lakes is to establish a grievance procedure. This grievance
procedure is to ensure that a documented process is in place to allow
individuals with grievances (regarding accessibility) a due process as a
response to their concerns.
julee quarve-peterson,inc. Page 1
Introduction City of Lino Lakes
♦ The City of Lino Lakes is to conduct a comprehensive review of the City's
policies, programs, services, benefits, communication and employment
practices to ensure they do not discriminate against individuals that may want
to participate in their programs.
♦ The City of Lino Lakes is to encourage and seek out individuals with
disabilities and organizations representing disabilities as part of the process
in establishing priorities and reviewing the process of accessibility self-
evaluation.
♦ The City of Lino Lakes is to conduct a review of its structures and sites for
compliance with the current Americans With Disabilities Act accessibility
guidelines. Information provided as a result of the on-site audits is to be
incorporated with the finds of this report to assist the City of Lino Lakes in
development of the transition plan, noting that the City has options allowing
them to relocate or modify programs to make programs accessible where
architectural accessibility is not currently provided.
♦ Finally, the City of Lino Lakes is charged with the development of a
Transition Plan. The Transition Plan is a documentation of architectural
changes necessary to provide access to the City's programs. When it is
determined by the City of Lino Lakes that architectural changes will be
necessary, a transition plan is to document at a minimum the following items:
l.) Identification of the location and issue.
2.) A description of the recommended modifications.
3.) The approximate cost associated with modifications.
4.) The time frame for completion.
5.) The person responsible for implementation.
Sample transition forms for your use are provided as part of this report.
julee quarve-peterson,inc. Page 2
Transition Plan City of Lino Lakes
TRANSITION PLAN
The Transition Plan section is reserved for insertion of the plan of action the City of Lino
Lakes is proposing to remove barriers relating to architectural modifications.
A Transition Plan is to include the following information, at a minimum:
■ the issues for upgrade;
■ the location where the upgrade is needed;
■ probable costs;
■ the time frame for removing the barrier;
■ and the person responsible.
Program accessibility is an option in improving facility accessibility, i.e.: all programs must be
accessible, not necessarily all buildings. This gives the City of Lino Lakes the option of
relocating programs to accessible facilities in lieu of upgrading certain facilities to make
them accessible. The success of relocating programs to gain accessibility depends on the
current and future numbers and locations of individuals with disabilities. The long-range
goal should be to make all facilities accessible. How to move toward that goal remains the
responsibility of the City of Lino Lakes.
A Transition Plan format has been developed. julee quarve-peterson,inc. has incorporated
the following information into the Transition Plan:
■ the issues for upgrade; and
■ the location where the upgrade is needed;
It is the City of Lino Lakes's responsibility to complete the Transition Plan identifying:
■ probable costs;
■ the time frame for removing the barrier; and
■ and the person responsible for each project.
When completing the transition plan, we suggest the City of Lino Lakes take into
consideration the following criteria:
■ City-wide policies relating to the provision of general public with disabilities;
■ knowledge of future use of individual structures for City of Lino Lakes
activities;
■ knowledge of specific numbers and locations of community members who
would benefit from improved accessibility; and
■ knowledge of City budgets.
julee quarve-peterson,inc. Page 1
Transition Plan City of Lino Lakes
10� The transition plan should be a working document which the City of Lino Lakes will
annotate,supplement and amend as a record of their progress toward improving accessibility
to the City's facilities.
julee quarve-peterson,inc. Page 2
Transition Plan for the City of Lino Lakes
.
o
oCL
c
•c a
Person Completion
Site Issue Est. cost Date Res onsible Date Comments M.
Police Department Upgrade permanent room identification $390
signage. (Approximately
13 signs) 1 ST
Park and Recreation Stripe the accessible parking stall to be $110
Building "van accessible". 1 P
Park and Recreation Reduce the tension of the main entry $75
Building door. 1 P
Park and Recreation Bevel the threshold of the main entry $150
Building door. 1 P
Park and Recreation Upgrade the men's and women's single $60
Building use toilet rooms to be fully accessible:
display the white and blue International
Symbol of Accessibility. (Note:2
rooms.) 1 P
Park and Recreation Upgrade the men's and women's single $100
Building use toilet rooms to be fully accessible:
relocate the toilet paper dispenser below
the side wall horizontal grab bar. (Note:
2 rooms.) 1 P
Park and Recreation Upgrade the men's and women's single $100
Building use toilet rooms to be fully accessible:
insulate, protect or conceal the drain
pipes. (Note: 2 rooms.)
1 P
r { Page 5
l `
Transition Plan for the City of Lino Lakes
g T
•C o
o M
a a
Person Completion
Site Issue Est. cost Date lResponsible I Date Comments
Park and Recreation Upgrade the men's and women's single $200
Building use toilet rooms: lower the mirrors and
soap dispensers. (Note: 2
rooms.) 1 p
Park and Recreation Relocate the file cabinet along the path $0
Building of travel to the toilet rooms. 1 p
Park and Recreation Install permanent room identification $210 1 ST
Building si na e. (Approximately 7 signs)
Park and Recreation Eliminate the protruding hazard $0 1 ST
Building associated with the wall mounted shelf.
Arena Acres Park Provide an accessible curb cut/ramp at $750 2 P
the public street leading into the park.
Arena Acres Park Provide an accessible path of travel to $500 2 p
the tennis courts entrance.
i.e. crushed limestone
Arena Acres Park Modify the tennis court entrance. $500 2 p
Arena Acres Park Provide an accessible path of travel to $1,000 2 ST
the play equipment. 77-
i.e. crushed limestone °6
Arena Acres Park Add a resilient surface leading to the $3,000 2 ST
high impact activity areas associated
with the play equipment.
Page 6
Transition Plan for the City of Lino Lakes
w c
c o
o a
a a
Person Completion
Site Issue Est. cost Date lResponsible Date Comments 0
Arena Acres Park Provide an accessible path of travel $1,000" 2 ST
leading to the basket ball court. y ;)
i.e. crushed limestone
Arena Acres Park Provide more adaptive play equipment. $10,000- 2 LR
,i ? ,a -- $20,000
Birch Park Stripe the parking lot to provide a "van $110 2 P
accessible" parking stall.
Birch Park Install a set of swing-clear hinges on the $150 2 P
entry door to the shelter building.
Birch Park Reduce the tension of the entry door $75 2 P
leading into the shelter building.
Birch Park Bevel the threshold of the main entry $300 2 P
door leading into the shelter building.
Birch Park Provide an accessible path of travel $3,000 2 P
leading to the portable toilet facilities.
i.e. crushed limestone ""
Birch Park Provide one accessible portable toilet $1,200 2 P
facility. -/-4.
Birch Park Provide an accessible path of travel $3,000 2 ST
leading to the shelter building entrance.
i.e. crushed limestone
Birch Park Provide an accessible path of travel $3,000 2 ST
leading to the play equipment.
i.e. crushed limestone
Page 7
Transition Plan for the City of Lino Lakes
a,
o
o c
a
Person Completion a)
Site Issue Est. cost 113ate lResponsible Date Comments
Birch Park Provide a resilient surface leading to the $3,000 2 ST
high impact activity areas associated
with the play equipment.
Birch Park Provide an accessible path of travel $2,000 2 ST
leading to the ball field.
i.e. crushed limestone
Birch Park Provide wheelchair viewing positions $500 2 ST
adjacent to the ball field spectator
seatin i.e. crushed limestone
Birch Park Upgrade one of the picnic tables to be $650 2 ST
fully accessible.
Birch Park Upgrade the door leading into the $1,075 2 LR
mechanical room to provide a wider
opening, accessible hardware and
beveled threshold.
Birch Park Provide more adaptive play equipment. $10000- 2 LR
$20:000
City Hall Park Provide a "van accessible" parking stall. $110 1 P
City Hall Park Provide a standard accessible parking $110 1 P
stall in addition to the "van accessible"
parking stall.
City Hall Park Pave the parking lot to provide a firm $15,000 1ST
surface.
Page 8
Transition Plan for ine City of Lino Lakes
o
O C
a a
Person Completion (D
Site Issue Est. cost Date Responsible Date Comments F
City Hall Park Provide an accessible path of travel $3,000 1 ST
leading to the play equipment and
swings. i.e. crushed limestone
City Hall Park Provide a resilient surface leading to the $3,000 1 ST
high impact activity areas associated
with the play equipment and swings.
City Hall Park Provide an accessible path of travel $1,000 1 ST
leading to the ball fields.
i.e. crushed limestone
City Hall Park Widen the gate entrances leading onto $200 1 ST
the ball fields.
City Hall Park Provide wheelchair viewing positions $1,000
1 ST
adjacent to ball field spectator seating -
2 locations. i.e. crushed limestone
City Hall Park Provide an accessible path of travel $3,000 1 ST
leading to the basket ball court.
i.e. crushed limestone
City Hall Park Upgrade the picnic table adjacent to the $650 1 ST
play equipment to be fully accessible.
City Hall Park Provide more adaptive play equipment. $10,000- 1 LR
$20,000
Country Lakes Park Stripe the parking lot to identify $220 1 p
boundaries of the accessible parking
stalls (quantity 2 .
Page 9
Transition Plan for the City of Lino Lakes
1 o
o c
IL a
Person Completion a) 0
Site Issue Est. cost Date lResponsible I Date Comments
--
Country Lakes Park Add a van accessible parking stall. $110 1 P
Country Lakes Park At such time full parking lot is striped, $330 1 P
increase number of accessible parking
stalls to meet 1:25 requirement.
Country Lakes Park Ramp the path of travel to the fishing $1,500 1 P
dock.
Country Lakes Park Install a bumper rail along the outside $750
edges of the fishing dock. 1 P
Country Lakes Park Provide an accessible path of travel $1,000
leading to the portable toilet facility.
i.e. crushed limestone 1 P
Country Lakes Park Provide a minimum of one accessible $1,200
portable toilet facility. 1 P
Country Lakes Park Provide an accessible path of travel to $3,000
the swimming beach. (i.e. crushed
limestone) 1 ST
Country Lakes Park Provide an accessible path of travel $2,000
leading from the swimming beach to the
water's edge. 1 ST
Country Lakes Park Provide an accessible path of travel to $3,000
the fishing dock. (i.e. crushed
limestone) 1 ST
Page 10
Transition Plan for use City of Lino Lakes
27
w c
•c o
o r_
d 0.
Person Completion CD 0
Site Issue Est. cost IDate lResponsible I Date Comments CO I
Country Lakes Park Upgrade 10% of the picnic tables to be $1,300
accessible. 1 ST
Country Lakes Park Pave the parking lot to provide a firm $20,000
surface. 1 LR
Country Lakes Park Provide fishing pole cut-outs at the $100
fishing dock. 1 LR
Country Lakes Park Provide a larger turning radius at the $1,000
end of the dock. 1 LR
Country Lakes Park Provide an accessible path of travel $1,000
leading to the trailer. 1 LR
Country Lakes Park Upgrade the trailer entrance with $325
accessible hardware. 1 LR
Lino Park Provide a "van accessible"parking stall. $110
2 P
Lino Park Provide a standard accessible parking $110
stall in addition to the "van accessible"
parking stall. 2 p
Lino Park Provide a path of travel leading from th $1,000
accessible parking stall to the gate
entrance into the park. (i.e. crushed
limestone) 2 p
Lino Park Provide an accessible path of travel $500
leading to the play equipment.
i.e. crushed limestone 2 ST
Page 11
Transition Plan for tiie City of Lino Lakes
z, ..
,ao
o c
•c a
Person Completion Q �
Site Issue Est. cost Date lResponsible Date Comments
Lino Park Provide a resilient surface from the $3,000
accessible entrance to the high impact
activity areas associated with the play
equipment. 2 ST
Lino Park Provide an accessible path of travel $2,000
leading to the picnic shelter.
i.e. crushed limestone 2 ST
Lino Park Modify or replace 10% of the picnic $300
tables to be fully accessible.
(Quantity 2 2 ST
Lino Park Provide a path of travel leading to the $2,000
shelter building entrance.
i.e. crushed limestone 2 LR
Lino Park Upgrade the doors leading into the $650
shelter building to be fully accessible. 2 LR
Lino Park Provide an accessible path of travel $4,000
leading to the ball field.
i.e. crushed limestone 2 LR
Lino Park Provide more adaptive play equipment. $10,000-
$20,000 2 LR
Rice Lake Elementary Provide an accessible path of travel $3;000
Park leading to the soccer field spectator
seatin i.e. crushed limestone 2 ST
Rice Lake Elementary Provide a firm surface adjacent to $500
Park spectator seating. (i.e. crushed
limestone) 2 ST
Page 12
Transition Plan for tine City of Lino Lakes
o
o c
•= a
Person Completion (D 0
Site Issue Est. cost Date lResponsible Date Comments
Rice Lake Elementary Add sections of resilient surface leading $3,000
Park to additional play equipment. 2 ST
Rice Lake Elementary Provide more adaptive play equipment. $10,000
Park 2 LR
Shenandoah Park Provide an accessible path of travel to $3,000
the picnic table. (i.e. crushed
limestone) 3 ST
Shenandoah Park Provide a firm surface underneath the $500
picnic table. 3 ST
Shenandoah Park Modify the picnic table to be fully $150
accessible. 3 ST
Shenandoah Park Provide an accessible path of travel $2,000
leading to the play equipment combine
with a path of travel leading to the picnic
table. (i.e. crushed limestone)
3 ST
Shenandoah Park Provide a resilient surface leading to the $3,000
high impact activity areas associated
with the play equipment. 3 ST
Shenandoah Park Provide an accessible path of travel $3,000
leading to the ballfield. (i.e. crushed
limestone) 3 LR
Shenandoah Park Provide more adaptive play equipment. $20,000
3 LR
Page 13
Transition Plan for Lue City of Lino Lakes
o
o •o
IX
Person Completion a.
SiteI Issue IEst. cost IDate Comments CO
South Reshanau Lake Add benches along the trail every 200'. $4,000
Estates Park (Approximately 4 3 ST
South Reshanau Lake Provide a firm surface adjacent to the included
Estates Park bench seating. above 3 ST
South Reshanau Lake Provide more adaptive play equipment. $10,000
Estates Park 3 LR
Sunrise Park Provide a "van accessible" parking stall. $110
1 P
Sunrise Park Widen existing accessible parking stalls, $220
and provide additional stalls if needed,
to meet accessibility guidelines.
1 1 P
Sunrise Park Provide an accessible path of travel to $0
the portable toilet facility. 1 P
Sunrise Park Provide a minimum of one accessible $1,200
ortable toilet facility. 1 p
Sunrise Park Construct a ramp leading to the shelter $1,000
building. 1 p
Sunrise Park Replace the door hardware to the entry $325
door. 1 p
Sunrise Park Upgrade the toilet rooms to be fully $2,500
accessible. Note: 2 rooms. 1 P
Page 14
Transition Plan for time City of Lino Lakes
o
o •c
a a
Person Completion (D
Site Issue Est. cost Date Res onsible Date Comments N
Sunrise Park Provide an accessible path of travel to $3,000
the play equipment and swings.
i.e. crushed limestone 1 ST
Sunrise Park Provide a resilient surface leading to the $3,000
high impact activity areas associated
with the play equipment. 1 ST
Sunrise Park Provide an accessible path of travel $1,000
leading to the sand volley ball court.
i.e. crushed limestone 1 ST
Sunrise Park Provide an accessible path of travel $15,000
leading to the ball fields-4 locations.
i.e. crushed limestone 1 ST
Sunrise Park Widen the gate entrances to the ball $800
fields-4 locations. 1 ST
Sunrise Park Provide a firm surface adjacent to $3,000
spectator seating associated with the
ball fields, horseshoe court and sand
volley ball court-6 locations.
i.e. crushed limestone 1 ST
Sunrise Park Provide an accessible path of travel to $5,000
the hard surface horseshoe courts.
i.e. crushed limestone 1 ST
Sunrise Park Upgrade one of the horseshoe courts to $3,000
be of a firm surface. 1 ST
Page 15
Transition Plan for the City of Lino Lakes
o
o •r-
a a
Person Completion
Site Issue Est. cost Date Res onsible Date Commentsco
Sunrise Park Provide an accessible path of travel to $2,000
the picnic shelters. (i.e. crushed
limestone) 1 ST
Sunrise Park Modify or replace 10% of the picnic $600
tables to be fully accessible.
(Quantity 4 1 ST
Sunrise Park Pave the parking lot. $20,000 1 LR
Sunrise Park Provide more adaptive play equipment. $20,000
1 LR
Sunrise Park Upgrade door hardware leading to the $650
mechanical room and garage storage. 1 LR
Sunset Oaks Park Provide a"van accessible"parking stall. $110
3P
Sunset Oaks Park Position the access aisle adjacent to the $300
sidewalk leading into the park. 3 P
Sunset Oaks Park Provide an accessible path of travel to $1,000
the picnic table. (i.e. crushed
limestone) 3 ST
Sunset Oaks Park Provide a firm surface underneath the $500
picnic table. 3 ST
Sunset Oaks Park Modify the picnic table to be fully $150
accessible. 3 ST
Page 16
i
Transition Plan for the City of Lino Lakes
o
o c
Person Completion 4
Site Issue Est. cost Date lResponsible I Date Comments in
Sunset Oaks Park Provide a firm surface adjacent to $200
bench seating. (i.e. crushed limestone)
3 ST
Sunset Oaks Park Provide a resilient surface from the $1,500
accessible entrance to the swings. 3 ST
Sunset Oaks Park Provide more adaptive play equipment. $10,000
3 LR
Page 17
�•, MEMORANDUM
Date: February 27, 1995
From: Marty Asleson
To: Lino Lakes Park and Recreation Board
Subject: Neighborhood Meeting Update
Within the last month we have met with two neighborhoods and at
the time of this memo, there is another one scheduled with the
Brandywood neighborhood on tuesday night. All have been
progressive and problem solving, interactive sessions.
Rice Lake Estates met on the 17th of February. this was a Friday
night meeting and my hopes for a good turn-out were not good. To
my surprise there were at least 50 people attending this meeting.
Staff present included myself and Barry Bernstein, and Mary
Sarrion from the City of Circle Pines. Drawings were presented
depicting the nature of the two lots that were dedicated. Park
Comprehensive Plan sections were handed out and the debate of
what to do next was continued. Mary will act as a strong
spokesperson on the Circle Pines side to help speed-up the joint
park concept. A request for wetland exemption was presented to
the Rice Creek Watershed, and a letter returned stating that the
two lots met the exemption qualifications. Please find a copy of
this letter enclosed. The parcels would need to be presented to
the Rice Creek Watershed Board for approval. It was decided to
wait until about June to revisit this issue.
Wenzel Farms met again on the 21st of February to gain consensus
and develop a budget. As you recall, $15,000 were allocated for
the development of the park. A basic concept plan was generated,
and changes made in response to neighborhood interest. I have
included the original concept plan. We are presently working on
refining cost and priorities for this park.
Pheasant Hills Preserve: I received a letter from Homer Tompkins
authorizing the budget for the M-5 park development to be between
$18,000 and $30,000, with $1800 to be used to develop a master-
plan. I have Jeff Schoenbauer working on this now.
Birchwood Acres/ Parkgrove/ Pine Ridge: Neighborhood wanted a
scaled drawing for presentation purposes. I am working on this
with OSM and Brauer on playground positioning.
City Hall: Please find enclosed Project Track Sheet #: 95-01
4�
� � I
�U
U p-
� o
i
� O J
JSq' 1
lzi y
t(l}�
Y V
! E-
\ m
OWN
s - 1 G
s =�% W Cl
� u
J
Q
C
r�
Rice Creek watershe
3585 LEXINGTON AVENUE NORTH, SUITE 132
ARDEN HILLS, MINNESOTA 55126-8016 *«
February 10, 1995 TELEPHONE (612)483-0634
FAX(612)483-9186
Marty Asleson
City of Lino Lakes Board of Managers
1 Regular Meetings:
189 Main Street
2nd and 4th Wednesdays
Lino Lakes MN 55014-2123 at Shoreview City Hall
KATE DREWRY, District Admin.
Dear Marty: BONITA TORPE, Admin.Assist.
SUBJ: Request for WCA Exemption--Rice Lake Estates
With reference to your letter of 1/26/95, and based on the
documentation you submitted therewith, this will confirm that the
wetland fill proposed for Lots 1 and 2, Block 2, Rice Lake Estates
is exempt from the Wetland Conservation Act under Exemption #24 for
previously approved projects.
Note that this Exemption requires that "those elements of the
project that can be carried out without changing the approved plan
and without . . . filling must be done in that manner, " i.e. , the
fill should be kept to the absolute minimum required.
An RCWD permit will be required of the contractor that will do this
work. The City may submit a grading and erosion control plan as
soon as it's available and we will establish a "dummy" permit file
in the name of "successful bidder" for this project. The plan can
then be pre-reviewed/approved and the contractor will only need to
pay the fees, post the surety and sign the application form when
the project is ready to go.
One final note, I could not determine from the information you
submitted whether a U.S. Army Corps of Engineers permit was ever
secured. If you do not have such a permit, you will need to
contact Tim Fell at the Corps.
Please le me know if you have any questions.
Sind y,
to Dre
District Administrator
r�
bct
cc: Correspondence Log
File: City of Lino Lakes
BOARD OF MANAGERS
A.J.CARDINAL, SR. CAROLE V. RYDEN ROBERT M. HULT BARBARA A. HAAKE EUGENE L. PETERSON
ANOKA COUNTY RAMSEY COUNTY WASHINGTON COUNTY RAMSEY COUNTY ANOKA COUNTY
MONTGOMERY WATSON Consulting EnRineen 593-9000•Co-Counsel!HAROLD H SHEFF 332-1000,MICHELLE I.ULRICH 699-984S
TO From RN rlAAIA&,iN
CoJDeDL Co.
Phone a p Photo i
IF"*I ,7 O -7� 7 Fax P oa 5�
a
a
t r~`
j�
Ni14
♦ d
L r LM
�IZS60v m
6 a
P
r L
O/
A S O•� I Z o
41
!`? �./ �j/�^i <s el<ly. 4 9Z•05 lod/ ° °p' // o
011
'f//
?: co
H 1071/70 , L (frI d'/J
64
1 m e 9 + 2� °OZ. �V10N� 1.
4 1 0 / _ A0
�1 °0 a+.4y (Lys? £1.2< Y M .S►O681N o
�B/ •j iP9P� } g v - '.A �, 1 b EI'Z[ SL I m
%N�g�A t• a �' m M ----
.SON 9g y 4 e 1e4 d w (/rj Ir a� 09
o zs•I9I
01 A` 1 ZL'191 ♦abt+ A o d £ o a° w
V)
i
(j' �/, $ `�,'zg�g'ir►e se'zn Ms►e6eN Z �---
a `•• 61'Z01 61,116 Sol 0
.' • ..•. Y1•. 1 MOO.O£-99N•. , '� ' cl
\ (J` r f _ / '►
f.` V 300.0£-1 N 0919ZZ _-..•. fj O�+ • N o L
(Z 99.9z _ = lt) s.v(o/J N\= r/.) =(z/)_ _CF1J n (60 `
' •/!i 22 20 - N; ^' 4 L r•0 S V ZI.61 r0'is Ot SGI
41 ./ / ROV� A p r a196 y
b w 1
e `
rA` 2r °1 u S c o
28• °2`y A p S 4 be 161 *.St"e6B N
8g. �sF 26-st -"--•i0`6.1. oG (� - °6 �4 L6•991 I" - I S£I - 1
N ` s.< 4� 61. 4
-M < 9zLz (gl�s/ a oe'
A • b O Oe
< / 81`ti N vi ra t°T)�c'� \ p 9ti'.
•Q+/�_ 16o4 is / ty'£i Ip id111 prP. r/ 9et •` r A°� tl` V f 9'6E I*zc Qc
9<2 'MrON 11.6tN Al OFaj • 4. ,4Z� .c, y o �mo°•5►-69N Lip d
,�,:,`,•.>.`-`. = i C�MQ�°E! a [�/ L'4q '60'0/ + Sti m v/ w N 'lmiu q? m 422 0
Y N �reL)ro _ Z8N li/) N .a 4 _ a C9E) _ _ '+( )Pl o o�lY/ O r
.• ' �Ojl� ♦ =a �=I,a mw N 001.1 + •£z'bBNli ` �b 99'►2:• ---.£9oz •
ev
0, W 1Lp'll S£1 �Il - \
p0 O L I °O OCIf'l/ fn
�.�,.i� d ^'" ro _ 8(1>�N M00'£►'6YNw Ip :/�1 MOO-cb-fi9N T l'Y) 1ui
�r y w o01M►M��N va ym'=�90 St l' 1�T= S41 m m Sil •T�i•1 O►'Ctl ({4 £I
I° d w�l 9N 7p NM a - O. q 1•1 O z/ .O O"/ O y O �O Ts
v w o� 001` "-4 �OI N y z Z/(Llj° s£I (pi) (Lf) ce)�/ w z/
N �Lf-69Na II"Ze O N
-M ool N .� _ 9 Qz sE z or•st1-4 st1 N
•�'/i�J N� NO Op // O Z� p OC L/ p O'O
0 I� N O -
N w w VJ-N r NI•� £EI O nat* to
t£I ° Lil �00 °b•Sfl
b• />.•I a4�1� N pCXh 1°y O4.
0 .0 11� G/ 0 O O/_ O O m 8/ O rr O O/ 0 0 0 O D
I'YS►•69N °i w cSl) ��t) (<f) r /.!S) (EII) Z
41 2�"!L2 01 '4 fs ^u`001 N ' sit tl m m sE1 o►•stl , r%£1 fm rn
M•S►e69N £f•69N.4 p Ow G O 06 oh m o m wy11 CO,
d M 96 4y /6tFl! Si 6C,�j o 6iL5�o o�E k
Sil s£I y 0►'C£1 L£1 p
Y w N° Vyl/Z O/J Irp". �ZB/)9L•L►£t I m a a p£'L'S((C3I�N Oa�°(N•Z!L')/Z LG7 11_cj°� --7 p-"m•�.'SLSL�)'L`/ c
m o
LL•f2 021 a
Q LOSfl LO'E£1 ZISf1 2�l 2L£021 -
Alu• -r_O q r9LNN 9i'cil O'SLI A29'Z NI'++
00
�\
-
u i qM 00•S►-6Bs �°1 m LZ) o00-S►•6B� m MO0 S►-GoN m O,s£l. m a
• e
N w
eo ►t. a ri IrI w ss Sil ss c£1 a Ls cil w m r�
M,01e99A v_ m 19'f�r� z £•m Lf'SI� fE[
o
s. _ Y��y 'e z °m ivog sie n. yr wv a=
"(s/) �s 6C'L£ tq <�'�"! i♦E'9f (9°� 01o•
/�,, 1'I4.M� / !EZ 92 Os - L1 ik o SLL'Sil w a _m 62s.Ltl azyl o 6VZ,,'t£1 0 0 0 6L 1'.L£'. q o ( j1L LL1 o m
NNV/d 228•�( Id. 09,y Yd. ��J/,9,4 w (b v _m .i °�6?�✓ a _v(WZ _u v wC=S!�"• a a `r fj o s r0
N .N 96•L£) °� N 91'6t1 9t•6t1 A I" £9'Ltl N N LZ'1►1 O Y
z ►s! C7 sect 1}+7 e
OO 'Mo9L N£ Z V 3( ` yG
Iwm $£6r Z werl'2 0000 o CY) 6L.11o �.css �h2) ILoz'" °�°�91 F o 02�
ZS•6L1 s9i set 1•---- Oft z Oft 0►1 0►1 zo
4LO'6Z-69N ♦ M Sfe69N D M,Sfo69N7 O
fl•S91
:�4'.,_l.,•, Z �`b/m°G Z 5c00:L'G)z► o, w: m�LhJ
z to M•SOro69N ''^"p� rp
° (°0/) Z 6
0ziS9'Ib SO 102 ° 991 oft or1 of 'D•a . O -69N M00s0-69N M,6M00-S►•69N
([6)op ° a 1)
°/ O
M.Sw SON
WenzelFarms Park
• Our neighborhood is having a meeting 0 WILL YOU HELP US ENSURE THE
on Tuesday, February 21st at 7 PM at AVAILABILITY OF PARK
Lino Lakes City Hall - you are invited! FACILITIES TO ALL RESIDENTS?
Please call Lou Ann or Mike at 783- # If you are willing to make a donation to
1201 for information. the Lino Lakes Friends of the Parks
• The purpose of this meeting is to review Foundation, and specify that it is to be
and approve the equipment being used towards a bench or other
purchased for the park. >> Note: this equipment for our park, the donation is
is a different agenda from what was tax deductible to you and has the
previously planned. potential to create matching funds from
• A playground equipment company will the foundation for our park. For
provide graphics of three "dream example, a picnic table with bench seats
parks" - including one that was drafted will cost $100. If 4 residents donated
by Wenzel Farms residents. $25.00 each, we have the potential to
• We want the park design to get 2 tables for the price of one! Of
accommodate all residents - from 2 course, our money goes a lot further
years old on up. Current estimates that way. Please-consider this option,
show that we will reach the limit of our and we'll discuss it further on Tuesday.
$15,000 budget as we try to do that. A suggested park equipment list and
park map a?8 included
Wenzel Farms Park, page 2
• SUGGESTED PARK EQUIPMENT It's obvious that we need help choosing
LIST: equipment that will suit everyone - and
• $200 - "Jungle gym" equipment for if we "want it all", we need to consider
2- 5 year olds (already purchased). how to fund the rest of it.
• +/- $ 800 - 101000 - "Jungle Gym" Please come to the meeting on
equipment for 5 - 12 year olds: Curly Tuesday and help us design a park that
climber, elbow slide, transfer station, will grow with our neighborhood and
clatter bridge, rung ladder, step ladder, suit everyone's needs.
wave slide, challenge ladder.
• $ 4,000 - 1/2 Court Basketball
(permanent Post and net).
�__...
)
400 - Sand Volleyball Court
(permanent posts and net).
• $100 each: 2 picnic tables w/benches <
and 2 benches with backs.
w
• $13000 - Swings.
• $ 1,640 - Various handicapped`` '
accessibility requirements, grading,
edging, path, concrete.
�w
c
b O J P N
r
,
semi' ikv - -� i i��—_ _.�N ; D�m MEADOWN CT _.._N-- v
c
b IN I O
AT R C
- ,o P � • V N - �0.4 1 -. s a ♦ V N I U N °, l _. .__--. L
0)
T NET
_ - I T - P O b O - I' N (I ♦ V P J 0 ,p V m
9E DRIVE V 'rONj • • r 8ANn5 - o 0
r PE p�V � o ,. P U ♦4^' - 4 N - [ N o OA .-
CA c
1 m
Nvl w L Aj
a� _ 4 y CTI
- b a �P ♦ A � � w ,nv - - - 4 pO 1 P • • CT Z � _
D w w r w • r I S` �
• AV E.
F _ - _ SECOND . SAmr JOSEPH
CEMETERY
�C p l K
a a g� - - , o
PC N c 4 7C tR
I O N _ N 4 ♦ O w '� ti
6 � r
P 3 \
RIC V
f- N 4 ♦ N I I \
N .4 ti N WE 1lIEL ARM T RD •ADD.- �[ I
Q Z y WNIPP I
�/ w r N.y�� - - = o'♦ F P o _ I _ -J.
o
/ Z
1
to ♦ _ N z
T
_ o �' ------- FOURT AVENUE--
.
li O J1A u
S if O. 01 )
u
Z D
TAG I O � O
ZP
v � Nw4y T
v+ r
1
9
b _
p •• ,n
f " C - -
Afn� m
0 x i J
I
HE
... .::.. :. . . :.: .:: :::.: :.: . .:.:. ... ::...: ............
PROJECT #: 95-01.
PROJECT: City Hall Shelter/Park Development
DATE OF ORIGIN: January 18, 1995
TO: Parks & Recreation Board Members
City of Lino Lakes
FRON: Marty Asleson
Parks, Recreation, and Forestry Coordinator
OVERVIEN STATEMENTS:
The City of Shorview will donate a 30' octagon shaped shelter for$1.00
This a 400 square foot building
The inside of the building is open, with no interior walls. The ceiling has exposed trusses. The entire structure is insulated and is usable for winter as well as for
playground programs.
The building requires a concrete slab for a base. No footings should be required, except for the center support.
The Hockey Rink will have a bituminous mat placed in it to facilitate multi-use.
The Playground structure will have to be moved.
Lighting will be moved from the back 15 acres to the hockey rink area.
l� STAFF COMENTS/ISSUES FOR CONSIDERATION:
The building provides an opportunity for the city to obtain an older but structurally sound building for minimal costs.
Cost estimates:
8uildin
ve uilding--------$2950
2. Site preparation------$400-$800
3. Concrete slab-------- of materials 9 S65/yd.$455
4. Utilities-------- Electric run from the pole barn approx. 300 feet and building to lights--S2500
Gas, run from City Hall------$495
Furnace, $500 or use existing,
water, from city hall-------Stub-in at this time.
no sewer or septic, will use portable, and stub for future.
telephone---hookup charges----$100
Playground Move
ovenoveA9iEF our existing crews--2 weeks work
Lightinofor riMc
Li—ghts moved by Anoka Electric; wire salvaged from the existing lighting. hook-up charge:
Hockey rink light hook-ups---
H_okey rink
o iS T'�ting help from Forest Lake Hockey Association; this would be a coordinated effort.
Hockey rink materials---$8000
Bituminous surface materials-----S6500
Bituminous surface prep and materials---$13,430
Positive Attributes: 1} .. Multi-use
2) .....meet goals
3) ...support from northside athletic
41-----Possible monetary support from charitable givers
)----Free building and move.
Negative Attributes: 1) ..Possibly will not be able to move playground
2) .....Still looking at a possible over-run on budget.
.... define the following for second option (if necessary) ....omit bituminous
Positive Attributes: 1] .. without charitable donation, would meet budget
3; .....
Negative Attributes: 1) ...removes some multi-use
2) .....
RECREATIONAL PROGRAMMING ISSUES: The following identifies potential impacts to current and future recreational programing:
..... addressing the northside recreation needs and the spillover to the already overuse on the south-side.
✓�` COMPREHENSIVE KAN REFERENCES: Refer to the following references for information that may affect discussions related to this issue.
Description Comment Complies with the Como Plan and aoals for current protects
Section 2 - Assessment of
Parks & Recreation Board 1 City of Lino Lakes
NEIGHBORHOOD LIAISONS
George Lindy - Brandywood
Ken Johnson -
Joe Schmidt - Baldwin Lake and Quailridge
Pam Taschuk - Shores of Marshan
Amy Donlin - t���u,rJL G
Sharon Lane - Wenzel Farms
Betty Piper -
CITY OF
Igo MV�6ffi
Parks and Recreation Advisory Group Kick-Off
March 11, 1995 Agenda
9:30 AM Meet at City Hall - Introductions
9:40 AM Board bus for Maplewood Community Center
10:15 AM Presentation & Tour, Maplewood Community Center
11:00 AM Board bus for Shoreview Community Center
11:25 AM Presentation & Tour, Shoreview Community Center
12:10 PM Board bus for New Brighton Community Center
12:20 PM Presentation & Tour, New Brighton Community Center
1:00 PM Board bus for Lino Lakes City Hall
Discussion:
4
I. Advisory Group Chair/Vice Chair
II. Staff attendance
III. Establish meeting days, times, locations
IV. Agenda for first meeting
C I T Y OF
UNO LAW
Advisory Group
CMeeting 1 -Agenda
I. Introductions: People and the process
A) Introductions
B) Review tonight's agenda & housekeeping
C) Discussion of selection of Advisory Group Chair& Vice Chair
II. Review Advisory Group Mission
III. Establish meeting days/times/locations
IV. Team Training: Roles of Leader/Team/Facilitator/Scribe
V. Select Advisory Group Chair & Vice Chair
VI. Establish agenda for next meeting (Meeting 2 -Resources)
VII. Adjourn
C IT Y OF
UNO LAW
Parks and Recreation Advisory Group Kick-Off
Saturday, March 11th 9:30 AM
1) What do you think the purpose of Lino Lakes' Community Center is?
2) What types of things should be included in a Community Center,ie:Family
recreation, City Govenunent, Commercial hub, etc.?
3)How do you define family recreation, ie:Continuing education, organized recreation,
unstructured activities, on-site babysitting services,indoor/outdoor sports, etc.?
4)Consider community diversity and its impact on a Community Center.
5)Consider how to fund a Community Center.
How do other Community Centers stack up?:
Issue Maplewood Shoreview New Brighton
Why was this
community center
built?
How long did it
take to build from
the time they had
the idea?
How was it paid
for?
What is offered in
this building
besides recreation?
What structured
activities are
offered?
What unstructured
activies?
What gets used the
most?
What would you
not do again?
What type of
security is there in
the building?
If you could add
anything you want
in this building,
what would it be?
TKDA TOLTZ,KING,DUVALL,ANDERSON
AND ASSOCIATES,INCORPORATED
ENGINEERS•ARCHITECTS• PLANNERS 1500 PIPER JAFFRAY PLAZA
4"CEDAR STREET
SAINT PAUL,MINNESOTA55101-2140
PHONE:612292-4400 FAX'612292-0083
MEMORANDUM
Marty Asleson
To: Parks Superintendent Reference: Park Dedication Requirements
Randy Schumacher,
Copies To: City Administrator, _ Lino Lakes,Minnesota
Bill Hawkins,
City Attorney
From: John Powell
i
Date: March 6, 1995 Commission No. 10414-950
Recently, I attended a seminar on Land Development specifically relating to the impact of a recent US
Supreme Court decision regarding land dedication requirements. Attached are copies of the presentation
notes from the panelist specifically discussing the impact on park dedication. My general comments are
as follows:
1. Minnesota State Statutes allow cities to promulgate rules for land subdivision including requiring
subdivisions to dedicate land for public uses such as streets,utilities, drainage,or parks.
2. The land dedicated must be a "reasonable portion" having a "reasonable relationship" to the
proposed subdivision.
3. "A dedication requirement is reasonable if the requirement is no more than what is borne by other
developers. If it is unreasonable, the dedication requirement is a taking."
4. It appears Minnesota may not be as affected by the Dolan decision as some other states because
the "reasonable relationship" standard already used in Minnesota is similar to the"rough
proportionality" standard indicated in the Dolan case.
5. The City may want to consider refining its Comprehensive Park Plan to determine specific service
areas for each park and the total cost of the proposed park system. This has likely been done
informally as part of the plan preparation; formal documentation of this information may be useful
in the future.
6. The recent court decision appears to be more applicable to cities who overstep their bounds in
dedication requirements and has less impact on cities requesting reasonable dedications.
I have provided my comments on this topic strictly from a layman's point of view. You must consult the
n City Attorney for a formal opinion on what impact, if any, the recent Supreme Court decision has on the
City. You may also want to clarify what statute authority the City has when requiring park dedication
from commercial-industrial developments.
APPLYING THE SUPREME COURT'S "ROUGH PROPORTIONALITY" TEST TO
LOCAL PARK DEDICATION ORDINANCES
by
John W. Shardlow, AICP
President and Director of Planning
DAHLGREN, SHARDLOW, & UBAN, INC.
300 First Avenue North, Suite 210
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401
(612) 339-3300
BACKGROUND
In recent years, there have been a number of U.S. Supreme Court rulings that have addressed the
limits of governmental authority in the public interest versus land owners' rights. Some of these
cases have been hailed as "landmark cases" largely because this is an area where there had
previously been a great deal of ambiguity. You will note in reviewing the written materials
provided by other speakers, that even with the famous "takings trilogy" of 1987 (First English,
Keystone, and Nollan) and the 1994 Dolan v. City of Tigard (Dolan), the Court stopped short of
defining a "taking" by either a formula or a rule. Rather, the court advises that one must rely on
an ad hoc set of factual inquiries in evaluating specific cases.
The purpose of this presentation is to address the question of how one should go about
addressing the "essential nexus" requirement and "rough proportionality" test identified by the
Court in applying a local park dedication ordinance. Obviously, this review will also assist
landowners who are evaluating a proposed dedication that is being requested of them by a local
unit of government. Unfortunately, this presentation will also fall short of providing a definitive
formula or rule for evaluating the reasonableness of a local ordinance. The reason for failing to
do so is that there is no general formula or rule that can be applied uniformly to a wide variety of
jurisdictions. To the contrary, both the "essential nexus" requirement and "rough
proportionality" test can only be understood and justified in the context of a particular local park
and open space plan.
Therefore, this presentation will identify the general steps that one could take to satisfy these
requirements. I would argue that they are essentially the same steps that responsible
communities have been taking for years in preparing and implementing their local park and open
space plans. There is no question, however, that decisions made by local communities will
come under closer scrutiny as a result of Dolan. Some more careful analysis of the effects of
various developments on the community's park system will be needed to support the dedication
requirements. This analysis will, in all likelihood, allow the community to fine tune its
n ordinance to insure its fairness.
,.WN THE ROLE OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND ADOPTED PARKS AND OPEN
SPACE PLAN
There is nothing about any of the takings cases noted above that limits the choices that
communities can make about the types of park systems they provide for their residents and
visitors. The level and nature of service that the community provides is still solidly within the
limits of its authority to decide. The Dolan case, and its predecessors, speak to the
reasonableness and fairness of the methods of distributing the costs of providing these facilities.
Prior to the Dolan case and the coining of the "rough proportionality" phrase, we used to talk
about these matters in terms of the "reasonable relationship" test. Quite candidly, from a practical
perspective,I am not certain that there is a great deal of difference between these two findings. I
tend to view the Dolan case as a clarification of what the Court said in 1987 in the other takings
cases. Rather than simply leaving "reasonably related" to be defined on a case-by -case basis,
they said that the dedication or exaction has to be "roughly proportionate"to the demand caused
by the development.
Clearly the terms roughly proportionate starts to suggest an analysis that considers the proposed
development in the context of an entire system. The best tool available to local units of
government to understand all of the systems that comprise their community is the comprehensive
plan. Within the comprehensive plan, the parks element or plan defines the system of facilities
and services that the community plans to provide to its residents.
Figure 1 is a hypothetical Park Classification table that summarizes all of the components of a
local park system. Individual community plans may be similar or very different from this
example,but it works for illustrative purposes. The summary of the various parks within the
system establishes several key factors that are relevant to this discussion.
First, it identifies the types of uses and activities that take place in the park. This identifies who
is typically served by this facility. It also identifies the service area for the park, the size of the
site, and other spatial and natural requirements for the facility. This establishes how much and
what type of land is needed, which relates to the cost of providing the facility to the entire user
group. Finally, it describes in general terms where these facilities need to be located in order to
function properly. This is very important in making the types of specific site selection and other
important design decisions that must be made.
What is missing from this table is information about how many potential users either currently
live or will someday live within the various service area boundaries. The comprehensive plan
will identify the proposed land uses and densities within these service areas. It will also include
information about the timing of this development and other relevant information.
2
So now we have defined a parks system for the subject community. This park plan sets forth the
level and type of service that the community plans to provide for its residents. It includes a
description and proposed locations for all of the various types of parks to be provided and
defines the areas to be served by them. By reviewing the comprehensive plan, one can determine
the number of users that will ultimately reside within the various service areas.
With this information one can determine how much land must be purchased and where it is
needed and determine how many people it will serve. Basically, a fair dedication requirement
would be one that is reasonably related to these considerations.
It is important to remember that modern community park systems include both neighborhood
parks and community scale parks. They also include trail systems, natural preserves, and other
special use facilities. Logically, if a community has decided to provide community scale parks,
natural preserves, interpretive areas and special use facilities, it will have determined that it is
the broad community's interest to do so. As long as the cost of providing these facilities is not
unfairly concentrated on new developers or other minority interests, there is no reason why these
costs could not also be included in a dedication requirement.
Where this set of issues becomes problematic is when communities go too far in assigning the
burden to one set of beneficiaries. Many local politicians find it easier to pay for the cost of
fancy park facilities by placing the burden on developers and "newcomers to our community".
This approach provides the opportunity to have our cake (build a fancy park system) and eat it
too (at someone else's expense) and avoid the flack of levying taxes to provide this level of
services.
It is also important to remember that there are intangible benefits to parks and open spaces and
other factors that make it virtually impossible to either justify or challenge a park dedication
standard with actuarial accuracy. No one knows exactly how many people are going to live in
an area, or of that population, how many will use the parks. Use patterns change over time as do
the nature of the facilities themselves. What we can do is make reasoned judgements based on
planned densities and review existing local use experiences and national standards to estimate
users and service areas.
ILLUSTRATIVE EXAMPLE
Figure 2 is a very simplified illustration of a hypothetical community. You will note that this
example shows a portion of the community in a regional park and also shows a community scale
park, some trail corridors, and a system of neighborhood parks.
This illustration shows the service areas of all of these various parks and is intended to assist you
in understanding how one might approach the analysis to complete the rough proportionality test.
Community trails are generally facilities that benefit the entire community. Therefore, if the
community seeks to have developers contribute to a trail fund. the amount of the contribution
n
should be equal to the cost of the entire system divided by their proportionate share of the trail
users. If the community requests land dedication to accommodate a trail corridor, this land must
be factored into the entire amount of land needed to accommodate all of the parks and trails to
serve the service area. There are many cases of cornununities that attempt to add trail dedication
on top of maximum park land dedication. There is nothing inherently wrong with requiring
dedication for both a portion of a trail and all or part of a park. The key is to recognize that land
is land,and it all has to be factored in to the analysis.
SAMPLE PARK DEDICATION REQUIREMENTS FROM TWIN CITIES
METROPOLITAN AREA COMMUNITIES
Figure 3 is a summary of the current park dedication requirements in several Twin Cities area
communities. This summary clearly illustrates the differences between communities regarding
the level of park service they propose to provide to their residents. It is also instructive as it
reflects the emphasis that each community places on open space as part of its park system. There
is a deeply rooted philosophical attitude in many of the developing communities within the
region that views density as evil. This attitude is reflected in not only the park dedication
requirements in these communities, but also in their lot sizes and other zoning and engineering
standards.
From our review of the park dedication ordinances in these communities, we did not find any
that contained a summary of analysis or any other information that would address the rough
proportionality test. This analysis could be appropriately contained in their adopted park plans..
However, in our review of a sample bf these plans,we did not find any such analysis.
Ideally,I would argue that the park plan should contain a complete analysis of the existing and
proposed park system, who uses it, and the necessary background to explain the fairness of the
dedication ordinance. The purpose and intent section of the ordinance itself should refer to the
plan, but also include a clear and concise summary of the justification for requiring park
dedication and the basis for sharing the financial burden. Again, what we have seen to date falls
far short of this standard, with most simply setting forth a basic percentage, with supporting
statements of conclusions.
PARK DEDICATION FOR COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL LAND
The example presented above illustrates a basic approach to completing a rough proportionality
test for parks to serve residential areas. Each community will have to adjust its analysis to
respond to their own unique conditions set of objectives. challenges and opportunities.
Nevertheless, the basic analysis is pretty straight forward - you decide what the total amount of
land requirements are and you divide out the costs of providing it according to some rational
formula. This task becomes more complicated when commercial and industrial land is
considered.
4
I believe there is a fundamental right for a community to decide (within reasonable limits)how it
wants to develop. Cities within our region and across the State vary widely in their emphasis on
economic development, community aesthetics, environmental protection, and many other
objectives. These choices affect the image and character of the community and they are
normally reflected in the community's comprehensive plan and ordinances.
Just as I argue that the community gets to decide what kind of park system it provides, it also
gets to decide how much commercial and industrial land it will zone and provide services to.
Obviously,these types of land use are intensive and consumptive of open space, and they involve
large paved parking lots, buildings and they bring employees and users into the community. In
short,they consume land and create intensive activity centers. By designating land for
commercial and/or industrial use, the community inevitably causes this land to be valued higher
than property planned and zoned for less intensive use. Clearly, the value of land is based on
how it can be used.
I do not see any reason why a community could not find that it is in the public interest to retain
and maintain some open space as it develops. Furthermore, I do not see why that community
could not conclude that all of the land owners, representing all of the types of uses proposed for
the community,must share in the burden of providing some percentage of their land as
permanent open space. Certainly,this is what setback and lot coverage standards do, and I think
the justification could be rationally extended to include park dedication. Therefore, I would
argue that some base level of land dedication could be established for all types of development
and that approach could be justified.
Where the matter becomes more complicated is when the analysis shifts to identifying which
types of land use create a demand for park services. If you challenge a park director in a
suburban community about the requirement for park dedication in an industrial project,they will
usually respond that their community has a tremendous demand for facilities caused by league
play(softball,tennis, broomball, etc.), and that it is the employees from companies in town that
participate in these leagues.
If a community chooses to justify park dedication in industrial districts because every land use
must contribute some base line amount of land for open space, I believe that is reasonable and
defensible. If, on the other hand,this dedication is justified based on the demand for park
facilities caused by employees, the matter becomes much more complicated. At the very least,
the community should complete some analysis to determine the percentage of use (however
defined)that is attributable to employees of local companies and what percentage is generated by
residential development. However, what I believe you will find is great disparities between the
level of demand created by a large diverse grouping of businesses that happen to fall within the
same zoning category. You will find some businesses that generate tremendous demand for
services and some that generate none. Among the latter category, there will undoubtedly be
5
some uses, that for a variety of reasons, simply will not have any impact on the park system. If
the fundamental justification for the park dedication is based upon a rough proportionality of the
demand for services,this situation will lead to problems.
Commercial uses offer even more challenges than industrial development to a community
seeking to base a park dedication ordinance on demand. Again. I am not saying that it cannot be
done.but it will be very difficult to address the multiplicity of uses,characteristics and
circumstances with a straight forward dedication formula. here one is even more likely to
encounter many businesses that simply do not place any demand on the active park areas in the
community.
In summary, I believe a case can be made for some base line level of land dedication for open
space from all types of land use. With some care and consideration, I believe the community
could craft a plan and ordinance that would provide same flexibiliry in how-this land is used once
it is dedicated. The general premise would be that collectively the community has agreed on the
type of community it wants to become. Since everyone stands to benefit from the retention of
open space and a quality park system, all should share a portion of the financial burden of
providing the land. I do feel strongly that in light of Dolan, communities need to do a much
better job of malting the case for this base line level of dedication. One should not have to read
between the lines to learn why the community feels the required percentage is appropriate.
Beyond the base line level of land dedication, I believe•that local ordinances should look to some
version of the rough proportionality approach outlined above and that this analysis should be
tested with local experience, (user data) even if it is formulated based upon national standards.
For the park facilities to serve league play and other facilities to serve visitors to the community,
consideration should be given to responding to this demand through user fees. Modern
communities are increasingly functioning in a variety of enterprise activities. A system that
proposes to charge those who actually us--facilities for the cost of providing and maintaining
them avoids the pitfalls inevitably attached to blanket dedication formulas that will undoubtedly
unfairly exact payment from some who will never create any demand on the system.
6
PARK CLASSIFICATION
..............
:<<sae::::<>:�><>•::::_:`;:;::A;;::;«"::
....................................:.:.....................
-
. ..................
Mini-Park Specialized facilities that serve a Within residential
concentrated or limited population or developments
specific group of citizens; may be in Less than''/.mile 2-10 acres
locations such as apartment complexes,
townhouse or single family developments
Neighborhood Arm for intense recreational activities such % to 1/2 mile radius to Physiography suited for Proximity to
Park Playground as field games, court games, crafts, serve a population of 10-25 acres intense development elementary
apparatus area, skating, neighborhood 4,000 to 5,000 schools
centers (neighborhood)
Community Area for intense recreational facilities such Physiography suited for Proximity to
Playfield as athletic fields and swimming pools;could 3-5 neighborhoods • 25-50 acres intense development secondary school
include neighborhood use. and other public
facilities
Community Area of natural or ornamental quality for Affords natural features Proximity to
Park outdoor recreation such as walking, with varied physiographic community
viewing, sitting, picnicking, could have 3-5 neighborhoods 25-50 acres interest facilities and
some field and court games where resources
are available
Regional Park Area of natural or ornamental quality for 200-500 acres Complete natural setting Where natural
nature-0riented outdoor recreation such as 3-5 communities' (100 acre contiguous to water bodies resource occurs-
picnicking, boating, fishing, swimming, or water courses where particularly
skiing,hiking and camping. minimum) possible water.
Regional Park Area of natural quality for nature-oriented 1,000 + acres; Diversity of unique Where resource
cserve outdoor recreation such as viewing and sufficient area to resources,i.e.,topography, occurs
studying nature, wildlife - habitat, County encompass the lakes, streams, marshes,
conservation,camping,picnicking,hiking& Multi-county s o u r c e flora,fauna.
fishing. envisioned for
preservation
Linear Park Areas developed for one or mere varying Sufficient width Utilize man-made and/or Where linear
(Trails, modes of recreation travel such as hiking, to provide natural linear resources resource occur.
parkways) biking, snowmobiling, horseback riding, in a x i in u in such as utility corridors, Link components
crosscountry skiing,canoeing,and driving. protection of right-of-way, drainage of recreation
resource & ways, bluff lines, system. Link
maximum use, vegetation patterns, and other community
sufficient lengths roads facilities such as
to accomplish schools, library,
purpose. and commercial
areas.
Historic Park Areas which preserve, maintains, and Sufficient area to Historically significant - Where resource
interprets buildings, sites and objects of c n c o in p a s s represent the broad occurs. Where
historical and archeological significance facility or cultural, political, event occurred.
resource economic, military, or
social history associated
with historical figure,
architectural specimen,
major archeological site
large enough to protect all
significant resources.
Special Use Area providing specialized or single purpose S p e c i f i c Appropriate to particular Site where
recreation activities such as golf courses and s t a n d a r d s specialized use. appropriate.
ZOOS. applicable to
desired activity
Figure 1
Future kesidential
1
Mini-Park
acres
1 / \ located within residential developments
Neighborhood Park
Al I t 1 / \ 10-25 acres
�� ❑ / )(1 Col �i � �/ ` / � located within a 1/-1 to 1/'. mile of residcnls
C'ortununily Park
\ �'.' 1 � / � •� � �; 2i-5(1 acres
L serves 3 to 5 neighborhoods
Regional Park
200-500 acres
iZ 4 f serves entire City and udj:icent communities
1, � � � -
-7 \ \ / Linear Park
7h / — \ 0 located along toad r o Ws and utility corridors
provides Pedestrian and bikc access to areas throughout the City
Illustrative City Park System
y / \ nu :Cale
VA �vnI atw.
CITY REQUIREMENTS FOR SUBDIVISION PARK DEDICATION
CITY OF WOODBURY • 10% of Developed Land Standard
• City Looking to Establish Policies for Acquisition of Additional
R.O.W. on Undeveloped Land for Future Trail Corridor Linkages
• Cash Payments in Lieu of Park Dedication. Land Values Evaluated
Annually
CITY OF EAGAN • % of Park Dedication Land Based on Unit Densities
P 0 - 1 units 8%
1.9 - 3.5 units 10%
0 3.5 - 5.9 units 12%
6 - 8 units 14%
• Cash Payments in Lieu of Park Dedication
CITY OF ROSEVILLE • 10% for All Residential Zoning Areas
• 5% in All Other Areas
• Cash Payments in Lieu of Park Dedication.Land Values Evaluated
Every Two Years
CITY OF PLYMOUTH • 2 Units or less - 10%
n • 2-12 Units - 10%+ 4 of Actual Units minus 2
• + 12 Units -20%
• New Wetland Ordinance Might Change Requirements for Park
Dedication
CITY OF CHANHASSEN • One Acre of Park for Every 75* People
• *Single Family Lot = 3 People, Two Family Lot = 6 People,
Apartment or Townhome = 1 Person per Bedroom
• Cash Payment in Lieu of Park Dedication
CITY OF MINNETONKA • 10%of Gross Project Area-Active and Passive Recreational Uses
Suited to the Needs of Residents
• Cash Payments in Lieu of Park Dedication
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE • 10% of Developable Land
• Cash Payments in Lieu of Park Dedication Has Occurred 90% of
the Time
CITY OF BURNSVILLE • 5% of Land on Non-Residential Properties
• Park Land Dedication Based on Population Projections Made by
,•-� City
• Cash Payments in Lieu of Park Dedication
Figure 3