Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutES-ParkPlan Park Commission 4-20-09 Park Commission Date: 4/20/09 REGULAR Item: 10 ITEM: Comprehensive Park and Recreation Plan; Metropolitan Council’s Response SUBMITTED BY: Kelli Matzek, Planner REVIEWED BY: Carol Kriegler, Project Assistant Kyle Klatt, Planning Director The City has submitted an approved version of the Parks and Recreation Plan to the Metropolitan Council for an informal review and has received comments back that must be incorporated into the final document before it can be formally adopted by the City. The Park Commission is being asked to review the required changes by the Metropolitan Council and staff’s proposed responses and to provide a recommendation to the City Council. The required changes by the Metropolitan Council do not change the intent or character of the Park Plan. The Metropolitan Land Planning Act requires every municipality and county within the seven- county metropolitan area to prepare and to submit a comprehensive plan to the Metropolitan Council. Updated Comprehensive Plans for the current review cycle were due in December of 2008; however, the City of Lake Elmo was among a group of communities that received a six- month extension to complete its update. The new deadline for Lake Elmo to submit an updated Comprehensive Plan is May 29, 2009. This deadline includes a formal submission of the Lake Elmo Park and Recreation Plan. SUMMARY: The Lake Elmo Comprehensive Park and Recreation Plan was formed through many public meetings held in 2006, 2007 and 2008. Through input by residents, commissioners, and council members, the document was written, revised, and approved at the local level. Since then, the city has submitted the approved document to the Metropolitan Council for an initial and informal review. The Metropolitan Council reviewed the document and submitted a letter outlining four items to be addressed, and in some cases, incorporated into the Lake Elmo Comprehensive Park and Recreation Plan. METROPOLITAN COUNCIL COMMENT: The Metropolitan Council’s approved master-plan boundaries for Lake Elmo Park Reserve include 8 “in-holding” parcels to be acquired by Washington County. These in-holding parcels should be shown on the 2030 Park System Plan Map as land proposed to be acquired for the park reserve. CITY RESPONSE: The 2030 Park System Plan Map will be updated to identify the eight parcels as land proposed to be acquired for the park reserve. This will provide consistency in information for those interested in property near the regional park reserve. METROPOLITAN COUNCIL COMMENT: The 2030 Park System Plan Map shows a local Special Use Park Search Area on the southeastern shore of Lake Elmo. This local park search area appears to be within the boundaries of Lake Elmo Park Reserve. If that is the case, the land is already preserved as parkland and specifying a park search area would be duplicative. 1 CITY RESPONSE: In order to clarify that the city is interested in purchasing or receiving property on Lake Elmo if and when feasible, but is not focused on existing Washington County parkland or a specific property, staff is proposing to move the search area circle along the east side of the lake and to make the corresponding text changes. The existing text in the Park Plan (page 3-22) identifies that “A different location may be sought if the southeast location should prove to be infeasible or if a preferred alternative is found.” To conform with the slight alteration of the search area, the word “southeast” will be changed to “eastern.” The intent of the search area is maintained. METROPOLITAN COUNCIL COMMENT: The Park Plan needs to include a discussion of the proposed Washington County Greenway Regional Trail in the text of the plan. CITY RESPONSE: A short narrative will be added to the Lake Elmo Park Plan regarding the proposed county trail. “The Washington County Greenway Regional Trail is proposed to connect the City of Hastings to Cottage Grove Regional Park, Lake Elmo Park Reserve and Big Marine Park Reserve. Washington County will conduct a master planning process for this trail in the future.” METROPOLITAN COUNCIL COMMENT: When the city submits the comprehensive plan update for official review, the update needs to include the Trail Guide Plan for review as well. CITY RESPONSE: The Trail Guide Plan will be submitted. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION; PARK PLAN PROCESS  Since September of 2006, the Park Commission discussed the Park Plan at nine public meetings during 2006 and 2007. The commission worked with the park planning consultants over the year and a half to formulate the recommended document.  A well attended public open house was held on February 15, 2007. Twenty-five residents signed in at the door and five written comments were received. A number of verbal comments were received by commissioners, staff, and the consultants at the meeting as well.  On March 14, 2007, the Village Area Master Plan consultants presented the village plan and discussed with the Park Commission the vision for parks in the village area.  A joint City Council and Park Commission meeting was held on April 24, 2007. At this meeting, the commission received comments and feedback from the Council on the draft plan.  A preference menu was conducted during the months of September and October to further engage public input. Fifty-two responses were received and reviewed by the commission for potential integration into the park plan.  After twelve months of discussion, public input, and editing, the Park Commission recommended the approval of the Comprehensive Park Plan at their September 17, 2007 meeting.  The Planning Commission reviewed the park plan and held a public hearing on December 10, 2007 at which no one from the public spoke for or against the plan. After discussion, the commission unanimously recommended approval of the plan.  The City Council reviewed the park plan and had a few changes which were then incorporated into the document. The City Council approved the Park Plan in 2008.  The Lake Elmo Comprehensive Park and Recreation Plan was submitted to the Metropolitan Council for an informal review. 2 SUGGESTED MOTION FOR CONSIDERATION: Move to recommend incorporating the changes to the final document to respond to the Metropolitan Council’s requirements. ORDER OF BUSINESS: - Introduction ............................................................... Carol Kriegler, Project Assistant - Discussion/Questions ................................................................. Park Commissioners - Call for a motion ................................................................................ Chair Facilitates - Discussion of Commission on the motion ........................................... Chair Facilitates - Action by the Park Commission ................................... Chair & Commission Members 3