Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout5.15.2017 parks commission packet NOTICE OF MEETING City of Lake Elmo Park Commission 3800 Laverne Avenue North May 15, 2017 6:30 PM AGENDA 1. Call to Order 2. Approve Agenda 3. Approve Minutes a) April 17, 2017 4. Central Greenway/Lake Elmo Regional Trail 5. 2018-2022 CIP (or set a special meeting) 6. Gonyea West Plat 7. Ways to enforce the leash law 8. June 2017 Meeting Agenda 9. Staff Reports & Commission Update 10. Adjourn ***Note: Every effort will be made to accommodate person or persons that need special considerations to attend this meeting due to a health condition or disability. Please contact the Lake Elmo City Clerk if you are in need of special accommodations. Our Mission is to Provide Quality Public Services in a Fiscally Responsible Manner While Preserving the City’s Open Space Character MINUTES City of Lake Elmo Parks Commission April 17, 2017 Members Present: Commissioners Ames, Frick, Nuenfeldt, Steele, Zeno Members Absent: Chair Weis, Commissioners Nelson, Olinger, and Pearce Staff Present: Public Works Director Weldon, City Planner Becker The meeting was called to order by Commissioner Frick at 6:30 PM. Approval of Agenda Becker asked to add Easton Village 2nd Addition to the agenda. Motion by Zeno to approve the agenda as amended, seconded by Steele. Motion passed. Approval of Minutes Zeno suggested the reference of someone named Guy to be fixed and adjust the comment regarding the Volleyball Courts to the minutes. Motion by Frick, seconded by Steele to approve the minutes with the adjustment of that comment. Motion passed. Lions Park Miller presented the new design P104. He talked about removing existing concession and moving the new concessions toward the home plate. They made room for 2 volley ball courts. They created an entrance area with a sign and a pollinator planting area. The northern parking area would also become the skating rink in the winter. The area would be gravel and large enough to accommodate a hockey rink. Comments were made that the parking will need to be moved out of the right-of-way. Steele said he felt that the design should be altered to accommodate young families such as moving the playground closer to the picnic areas or a trail connecting and not through the parking lot. He added that the baseline on the 45th parallel is nice but not a priority. Frick agreed that moving the parking to the east and moving the playground was important. Ames suggested that there should be a second designated picnic area near the playground. Which would keep costs down of moving the existing play structure. Ames also asked if the demolition of the house would be coming out of park dedication or if it would come out of the general fund. Barry Weeks mentioned that the proposed plan does not include a warming house and that is something the park currently has. His suggestion was to have a partial open and partially enclosed structure. Lighting was included in the initial phase but may need to get pulled out since it can be $150,000. The first phase includes demolishing the house and the concessions building. Discussion around what type of recommendation would be needed to move the project forward. Weldon explained they have to give a dollar amount and items they want on the first phase in order to send it forward to City Council. After Council approval then the project will go out for bids. The decision will need to be made soon if any work will be done this year on the field. Steele suggested that the Commission establish a dollar amount comfort level, he is comfortable with $400,000. Steele suggested to pull the south parking lot and volley ball court relocation to reduce the cost of Phase 1. Further discussion about not demolishing the existing concession stand by Frick and Nuenfeldt. Ames asked that by the time this goes to Council will there be more detailed information about costs available. Ames also asked to include the volley ball courts within Phase 1 of the project, if the budget allows, since they are not terribly expensive. Steele made a motion to adopt the plan for Lions Park per amended Commission recommendations, and to increase Phase 1 not to exceed an expenditure of $425,000. Frick seconded the motion. Motion passed. Neighborhood Park Development Guidelines Becker presented that after talking to a number of communities, most do not have any guidelines. Staff recommends that the Commission not adopt any standards. No action required on this item. Camera Protocol Procedure Becker presented that this Camera Protocol Procedure was something that was referred to in the Sally Manzara Interpretive Nature Center Lease and Operating agreement approval. Becker amended the Procedure to include that any cameras can be focused on trails for up to 24 hours contiguous or otherwise if more time is proposed that it must be approved by the Parks Commission and City Council. Becker stated that she researched other cities and was not able to find any with policies regarding camera placement. Frick pointed out that in Becker’s research some communities had cameras for security but not for nature. She said that there are times when she has witnessed suspicious activity that having them on camera may have been a good thing. Ames mentioned that at the previous meeting he expressed his concern about cameras in Sun Fish Lake Park. He has asked people within the community about their thoughts regarding cameras in the park and has yet to find anyone that is favorable to the idea. Ames stated that he is concerned about adopting a City wide camera policy that allows people to put cameras in other parks and possibly aim them at play structure or other portions of the park. He feels the Protocol is an exception to City Policy. City Policy is that we don’t allow private groups to have cameras in City parks. Steele suggested that the protocol indicate it is just for Sun Fish Lake Park and that in all other parks cameras are not allowed. Ames agreed to that. Frick asked if they need to vote to remove the camera protocol since the original vote was to put one in place. Becker explained the Camera Protocol Procedure was mentioned in the Nature Center Lease and Operating agreement. That item is going to Council tomorrow. The Camera Protocol Procedure is referenced in the agreement. In order to have something to reference and for staff to follow regarding camera placement, since the lease agreement says they can place cameras in the park, within the procedures. Discussion about having a Camera Protocol Procedure and when to establish it, either prior to going to Council or after approval since the Nature Center has not been constructed and will not be filming anything until the building is in place. They discussed putting a no camera policy until the protocol is established. Steele made a motion that no private entity can install a camera until they establish a protocol and that only the City shall install or authorize the installation of cameras until a new protocol procedure is drafted. Ames seconded the motion. Motion passed unanimously. Upcoming Developments Becker reported that the City has received final plat for Hidden Meadows 2nd addition, which is located to the south of Rock Point Church. The park dedication for that development is 7% of the assessed value, which has not been completed yet. Village Park Preserve is a proposed development located south of Easton Village. The City has not received a final plat. Their preliminary plat had park land to add to Reid Park that exceeded their required amount. Gonyea West, the City has not received a concept plan yet. It is a piece of property located on the west side of Lake Elmo Avenue. Southwind is located to the north of Hunters Crossing. With that development there will be about $90,000 for park dedication, with an assessment determining an exact number. This project will be discussed in detail later in the meeting. Lakewood Crossing is a proposed a commercial Planned Unit Development to the west of Kwik Trip. And we know their Park Land dedication is $17,190. Frick has questions about why Royal Golf was not included. Becker explained that there is not even an estimate available and that the City has just reached an agreement with them regarding who would be assessing the property for value. The Preliminary Plat is going to Council in May. Once Preliminary Plat has been then they would have get Final Plat approval. Frick thanked Becker for the information regarding these upcoming developments. No action required on this item. Southwind Final Plat Becker shared that the City has received a Final Plat application for the Southwind Development. This property was never brought before the Parks Commission before approval of the Preliminary Plat. No neighborhood park was dedicated to this development. The City will receive a monetary dedication. Ames mentioned service levels for parks. He also sked if Hunters Crossing has a park. He asked about the number of units in both developments. Becker said 46 units in Southwind and about 90 units in Hunters, though she is uncertain of that number. Ames expressed that this should be on Council’s radar, on Planning’s radar, and our radar that now over 100 homes has no access to a park. Since parks and trails need to be added at the time of development. Becker stated that there is no park in Hunters Crossing or Southwind. She stated that in the Comprehensive Plan that area is a neighborhood park search area. So she is not sure why neither development has a park. She stated that since this Final Plat is consistent with what was approved at Preliminary Plat in 2013 it has to move forward. She stated that she cannot speak to what was done in the past, only that City staff has now been working on bringing all developments before the Parks Commission for the reasons you are concerned with. No action required on this item. Easton Village 2nd Addition Plat Becker informed the Commission that the City has received Final Plat for Easton Village 2nd Addition. The proposed addition is on the north and east side of the current Easton Village development. One of the conditions of approval at the time of Preliminary Plat is that a trail connection be provided in the cul-de-sac, they are proposing to eliminate this trail connection to allow larger lots, a slightly different housing option, and a more private setting for these homes. Discussion about the fact this trail connect does little to the overall connectivity of the development and that the overall concern of the Parks Commission is to establish trail connections from once development to others and to provide Easton with connections to downtown. No action required on this item. May Meeting Lions Park – defining Phase 1 Washington County trail plan Ways to enforce the leash law Discussion Items Frick discussed the offerings, activities, and costs of Family Day • Live animal programs include the University of MN Raptor Center, they are going to bring a hawk and an owl • There is also going to be a presentation of turtles, snakes, and salamanders with a touching pond • There will be a nature trail with 12 stops and gift bags • The only reimbursement we would be looking for would be the cost of the live animal programs. The Park Commission does not have to approve a certain amount since it will come out of the General Fund. There appears to be some confusion if the Family Day was run as a City sponsored event or if it is run by volunteers and needs a Special Use Permit that needs to be reviewed and sent to Council. Frick stated that if the liability for the event were to fall to the volunteers putting it on, the event will likely not happen. Frick mentioned there is a situation in Sunfish Lake Park and in Reid Park where they walk their dog without a leash. Especially in Sunfish Lake Park, it is a challenge since you may not see the owner of the dog immediately and the owner often cannot keep their dogs within their site. Frick stated her dog was attached as a puppy and again as an older dog by dogs that were off-leash. She said she has also heard the screams of fawns being attacked by dogs while out on walks. She proposed more signage or to revisit a dog park to reduce the amount of people that let their dogs off-leash. Ames mentioned there are signs at every entrance that state no biking and that dogs need to be on leash, but those are frequently violated. He stated no amount of signage will change behavior. Ames stated that the County Park is staffed and there is a way to enforce that there. A member of the audience mentioned that she was at Sunfish Lake Park with her grand- children and they had gone up the trail a distance and she heard them screaming as they ran and were being chased by dogs. Staff Reports and Commission Update None given Meeting adjourned at 9:26 p.m. Respectfully Submitted, Tanya Nuss STAFF REPORT DATE: May 15, 2017 ITEM #: 4 TO: Parks Commission FROM: Emily Becker, City Planner AGENDA ITEM: Central Greenway Regional Trail REVIEWED BY: Kristina Handt, City Administrator BACKGROUND: Wayne Sandberg and Connor Schaefer of the Washington County Public Works Department will be presenting an overall update on where the County is at with the planning process of the Central Greenway Regional Trail. The County is currently working with the Met Council to receive Master Plan approval on the lower segment of the trail (Cottage Grove Ravine Regional Park to I-94, along CR-19). ATTACHMENTS: • City presentation on Lake Elmo Regional Trail 5/10/2017 1 Lake Elmo Regional Trail Trail Introduction Presentation Introductions Trail Subcommittee Jennifer Pelletier – Passer By Mike Zeno – Lake Elmo Parks Commission Pam Hartley – Lake Elmo Parks Commission Shane Weis – Lake Elmo Parks Commission 5/10/2017 2 Trail Selection Criteria Address Community Need Deliver students safely to school Bring people to our downtown Bring people to our parks Provide safe recreation Trail Diversity- Provide feel of LE Omit need to bike down highway 5 Trail Selection Criteria Cont. Compatibility with public grant opportunities Compatibility with private funding opportunities Feasibility of land acquisition 5/10/2017 3 Lake Elmo Regional Trail – Phase One Proposed Trail – Map Connect to existing Oakdale trail at Stillwater Blvd and Helmo/Ideal Ave Travel through Tablyn to Lake Elmo Park Reserve Pass through LEPR – Provide exit point to Sunfish Continue down Highway 5 right of way to Gorman's- connect to existing trail Lake Elmo Regional Trail – Phase Two Lake Elmo to Stillwater Senior High 5/10/2017 4 Costs Estimated cost without land acquisition Phase One - $827,316 (approx. 3.2 Miles) Phase Two - $765,600 (approx. 2.9 Miles) 5/10/2017 5 Other trails Trails considered, but not selected 94 to Lake Elmo via Lake Elmo Blvd 94 Corridor to highway 5 via Inwood Ave Public Grant Eligibility Local Trail Connection (DNR) Connect to public space or complete existing connections Max Grant $150,000 – 25% Match Federal Recreational Trail Program (DNR) Development of recreational trail linkage including trail side facilities Max Grant $150,000 – 25% Match 5/10/2017 6 Public Grant Eligibility Cont. Outdoor Recreation Grant (DNR) Internal park trails or support facilities Total average distribution - $335,000 Public Grant Eligibility Cont. Safe Route to Schools (SRTS)(MDOT) K-8 Schools Trail study required (already completed by Lake Elmo) Washington County Legacy Funds (MET) Parks of regional significance and trails that connect regional parks John Elhom to present 5/10/2017 7 Public Grant Eligibility Cont. Washington County Public Health SHIP funds MN Department of Health Funds Private & Other Sources of Funding Blue Cross Blue Shield McKnight Foundation Cargill Parks and trails council of MN 5/10/2017 8 Lake Elmo Regional Trail Let The Fun Begin Questions? “Informal Discussion” - Next Steps Identify possible stumbling blocks STAFF REPORT DATE: May 15, 2017 ITEM #: 6 TO: Parks Commission FROM: Emily Becker, City Planner AGENDA ITEM: 2018-2022 Parks CIP REVIEWED BY: Kristina Handt, City Administrator BACKGROUND: A Capital Improvement Program, or CIP, is a multi-year (typically 5 years) capital expenditure plan for a City’s infrastructure (such as streets, parks and utility systems), vehicles, and equipment and public buildings. It identifies the major projects needed and desired by the community, their potential costs and how they would be financed. Including a project in a CIP does not commit the city to that project. The City Council must specifically authorize each one, and the associated funding, before any project may proceed. When the CIP is reviewed (ideally annually, in conjunction with the budgeting process) projects may go forward as planned, advance ahead of schedule, be removed entirely, or new projects may be added, depending upon changes in circumstances and priorities. The Minnesota Land Planning Act requires that the implementation plan portion of the Comprehensive Plan include a CIP for major infrastructure needs (transportation, wastewater, water supply, parks and open space) for a five-year time period. Cities often expand the scope of their CIPs to include other capital needs (major equipment replacements, for example) and sometimes look beyond the five-year time period, up to 20 years in the future for some projects. Such projects represent more of a “wish-list” that can be evaluated each time the plan is updated. As a part of the Comprehensive Plan, the CIP has some legal standing. Minnesota Statutes Chapter 473.865 provides that “a local governmental unit shall not adopt any official control or fiscal device which is in conflict with its comprehensive plan.” A fiscal device includes a budget or bond issue; so it is important that the plan and CIP be kept up to date and in synch with city budgets. The primary benefit of a CIP is as a financial planning tool, to help the city plan for the impact of capital needs on future budgets and property taxes, and to help forecast the need for borrowing to undertake major projects. The information developed as part of the capital planning process can help document the need for various projects and help the City Council sort out competing priorities. Lake Elmo’s CIP includes all capital projects that cost at least $25,000 and have a useful life span of five years or longer. ISSUE BEFORE COMMISSION: What parks improvements should be included in the 2018-2022 CIP? When should they be completed? PROPOSAL DETAILS/ANALYSIS: Included in your packet is a document listing all of the City parks and trail projects staff is aware of at this time. Items Scheduled for 2017. There were items on the 2017-2021 CIP that have not yet been planned for or completed in 2017. These include PR-002, 50th Street Trail for $140,000 in 2017; PR-005, Pebble Park Improvements for $80,000 (restrooms, lighting and security features). Projects Recommended by Parks Commission and Removed from the 2017-2021 CIP Plan. PR-003, Demontreville Park Improvements for $75,000 (improvements and addition of baseball field, fencing, etc. and PR-007, Sunfish Lake Park Improvements for $2,000 (benches) of the 2017-2021 CIP recommended by the Parks Commission (and subsequently recommended to be removed by the Finance Committee) were removed in the 2017-2021 CIP adopted by Council. The Commission may wish to again recommend these be included in the 2018-2022 CIP, and so these were included in the 2018-2022 draft. Other Items? Any other items the Parks Commission would like to see in the 2018-2022 CIP need to be identified. Each member should come prepared to identify their top 5 priorities for the next 5 years. The commission can then also assign a priority to each project based upon the following framework: 1. Critical or urgent, high-priority projects that should be done if at all possible; a special effort should be made to find sufficient funding for all of the projects in this group. 2. Very important, high-priority projects that should be done as funding becomes available. 3. Important and worthwhile projects to be considered if funding is available; may be deferred to a subsequent year. 4. Less important, low-priority projects; desirable but not essential. 5. Future Consideration FISCAL IMPACT: Depends on project selection. Funds will come from the Park Dedication Fund. The City’s parkland dedication as of 3/16/17 is $975,417. This does not take in to account the funds ($150,000) approved for Savona Park and other items approved for the 2017-2021 Capital Improvement Plan. Outstanding funds expected to be collected in the relatively near future but cannot at this time be quantified due to lack of information on property values include park dedication from the following developments: Royal Golf Club; Easton Village 2nd and 3rd Addition; Village Park Preserve; Southwind (formerly known as Diedrich-Rieder, north of Hunter’s Crossing); and possibly Hidden Meadows (subdivision adjacent to Rockpoint Church). Park dedication fees for Lakewood Crossing 2nd Addition, the commercial development to the west of Kwik Trip, can be quantified and is expected to be $17,190. OPTIONS: 1) Commission identifies additional projects to add to the 2018-2022 CIP 2) No further projects are added so just the previously-identified projects would be forwarded on in the review process by Finance and Council. ATTACHMENTS: • 2018-2022 Draft Capital Improvement Plan Capital Improvement Plan - 2018 - 2022 City of Lake Elmo, Minnesota Contact City Administrator 2018 2022thru Department Parks and Recreation Description Addition of a field and bathroom at Demontreville Park Cost estimates: 2017: $75,000 for new field and regrading/updating current babseball field and fencing/tipped backstop 2018: $30,000 for pavillion Project #PR-003 Priority 2 Very Important Justification Feedback from residents during 2013 Park Survey, park commission site visits and Mahtomedi Baseball Association Budget Impact/Other Mahtomedi Baseball Association has been helping with some maintenance and indicated they would be willing to help with maintainng the additonal field Useful Life 25 years Project Name Demontreville Park Improvements Category Park Improvements Type Improvement Total Project Cost:$105,000 Status Pending Total20182019202020212022Expenditures 30,00030,000Construction/Maintenance 30,000 30,000Total Total20182019202020212022Funding Sources 30,00030,000Park Dedication Fund 30,000 30,000Total Monday, May 8, 2017Page 1Produced Using the Plan-It Capital Planning Software Capital Improvement Plan - 2018 - 2022 City of Lake Elmo, Minnesota Contact City Administrator 2018 2022thru Department Parks and Recreation Description Phase 1 Improvements were completed in 2016 which included a new shelter. Phase 3 (2018) Improvements would include paving the parking area and development of two volleyball courts Cost estimates: Parking area is 0.3 acres (13,068sq ft) and asphalt paving is $3.50/sq ft ($45,738) Volleyball Courts estimate is $10,000 Phase 2 (2017) would be restrooms, lighting and security features Cost estimate: Restrooms (Vault Toilets with running water to sinks): $65,000 Lighting and Security Features: $15,000 Project #PR-005 Priority 3 Important Justification Feedback from park user survey in 2013 Budget Impact/Other Useful Life Project Name Pebble Park Improvements Category Park Improvements Type Improvement Total Project Cost:$135,738 Status Active Total20182019202020212022Expenditures 55,73855,738Construction/Maintenance 55,738 55,738Total Total20182019202020212022Funding Sources 55,73855,738Park Dedication Fund 55,738 55,738Total Monday, May 8, 2017Page 2Produced Using the Plan-It Capital Planning Software Capital Improvement Plan - 2018 - 2022 City of Lake Elmo, Minnesota Contact City Administrator 2018 2022thru Department Parks and Recreation Description Improve trails to be suitable for mountain biking while also having options for walking and snowshoeing, add playground equipment for younger age groups (resident request), eliminate basketball court, addition of bathrooms, outdoor gym stations. Bleacher seats and extending fencing. Phase 1 (2018) Mountain biking Trail $50,000 assumes grant/donation from MORK/Stillwater High School Team Phase 2 (2019) Restooms: $100,000 Tot Lot: $12,500 Demo Court: Staff Time Outdoor Gym Stations: $15,000 Bleacher Seats: 4,750 Extending fence to prevent fly balls: $2,000 Project #PR-006 Priority 3 Important Justification Result of resident input during site visit Budget Impact/Other Useful Life Project Name Reid Park Improvements Category Park Improvements Type Improvement Total Project Cost:$184,250 Status Active Total20182019202020212022Expenditures 184,25050,000 134,250Construction/Maintenance 50,000 134,250 184,250Total Total20182019202020212022Funding Sources 50,00050,000Grants/Donation 134,250134,250Park Dedication Fund 50,000 134,250 184,250Total Monday, May 8, 2017Page 3Produced Using the Plan-It Capital Planning Software Capital Improvement Plan - 2018 - 2022 City of Lake Elmo, Minnesota Contact City Administrator 2018 2022thru Department Parks and Recreation Description Phase 1 (2017) Additional benches: $2,000 (could be donation or Eagel Scout project Phase 2 (2019) Paving of parking lot Cost estimate: Parking lot: $60,984 (17,424 sq ft at $3.50/sq ft) Improve trails to ADA standards ain Area 2 (prairie area): $87,889 for 6 foot wide asphalt 1 mile trail Project #PR-007 Priority 3 Important Justification Budget Impact/Other Useful Life Project Name Sunfish Lake Park Improvements Category Park Improvements Type Improvement Total Project Cost:$150,873 Status Pending Total20182019202020212022Expenditures 148,873148,873Construction/Maintenance 148,873 148,873Total Total20182019202020212022Funding Sources 148,873148,873Park Dedication Fund 148,873 148,873Total Monday, May 8, 2017Page 4Produced Using the Plan-It Capital Planning Software Capital Improvement Plan - 2018 - 2022 City of Lake Elmo, Minnesota Contact City Administrator 2018 2022thru Department Parks and Recreation Description Regional east west trail through Lake Elmo Phase 1: ($827,316-construction only, no land Connect to existing Oakdale trail at Stillwater Blvd and Helmo/Ideal Ave Travel through Tablyn Park to Lake Elmo Park Reseerve (LEPR) Pass through LEPR-provide exit point to Sunfish Lake Park Continue down Hwy5/CSAH 14 righ tof way to Gorman's-connect to exisitng trail Phase 2: ($765,600-construction only, no land) Lake Elmo to Stillwater Senior High Project #PR-009 Priority 3 Important Justification Trail would address the following community needs: -Deliver students safely to school -Bring people to our downtown -Bring people to our parks -Provide safe recreation -Trail Diversity-Provide feel of Lake Elmo -Omit need to bike down Hwy 5/CSAH 14 -Compatibility with public grant opportunities -Compatibility with private funding opportunities Feasibility of land acquisition Budget Impact/Other Additional trails to maintain-labor and materials Useful Life Project Name Lake Elmo Regional Trail Category Park Improvements Type Improvement Total Project Cost:$1,592,916 Status Active Total20182019202020212022Expenditures 1,592,916827,316 765,600Construction/Maintenance 827,316 765,600 1,592,916Total Total20182019202020212022Funding Sources 1,194,687620,487 574,200Grants/Donation 398,229206,829 191,400Park Dedication Fund 827,316 765,600 1,592,916Total Monday, May 8, 2017Page 5Produced Using the Plan-It Capital Planning Software Capital Improvement Plan - 2018 - 2022 City of Lake Elmo, Minnesota Contact Public Works Director 2018 2022thru Department Parks and Recreation Description truck will be multi-function with boom for tree trimming and other high work, crane for pulling lift station pumps, air compressor and tools for street sign work, line of tools and equipment to make fleet field repairs Project #PR-012 Priority n/a Justification Budget Impact/Other $200,000 total cost split equally amongst water (W-020), sewer (S-014), streets (PW-043) and parks Useful Life Project Name Service Truck Category Vehicles Type Equipment Total Project Cost:$50,000 Status New Recommendation Total20182019202020212022Expenditures 50,00050,000Equip/Vehicles/Furnishings 50,000 50,000Total Total20182019202020212022Funding Sources 50,00050,000Park Dedication Fund 50,000 50,000Total Monday, May 8, 2017Page 6Produced Using the Plan-It Capital Planning Software Capital Improvement Plan - 2018 - 2022 City of Lake Elmo, Minnesota Contact Public Works Director 2018 2022thru Department Parks and Recreation Description Replace 2006 Case Backhoe wirh a more manuverable unit. Will be outfitted with a plow for cul de sacs and other narrow streets. Project #PR-013 Priority n/a Justification Budget Impact/Other $60,000 total cost split amongst water (W-021), stormwater (SW-006), streets (PW-044) and parks equally Useful Life Project Name Trac Hoe Category Vehicles Type Equipment Total Project Cost:$15,000 Status New Recommendation Total20182019202020212022Expenditures 15,00015,000Equip/Vehicles/Furnishings 15,000 15,000Total Total20182019202020212022Funding Sources 15,00015,000Park Dedication Fund 15,000 15,000Total Monday, May 8, 2017Page 7Produced Using the Plan-It Capital Planning Software Capital Improvement Plan - 2018 - 2022 City of Lake Elmo, Minnesota Contact Public Works Director 2018 2022thru Department Parks and Recreation Description Tri-Deck 10ft mower replaces 2002 model Project #PR-014 Priority n/a Justification Budget Impact/Other lease options available Useful Life Project Name Tri-Deck Mower Category Vehicles Type Equipment Total Project Cost:$70,000 Status New Recommendation Total20182019202020212022Expenditures 70,00070,000Equip/Vehicles/Furnishings 70,000 70,000Total Total20182019202020212022Funding Sources 70,00070,000Park Dedication Fund 70,000 70,000Total Monday, May 8, 2017Page 8Produced Using the Plan-It Capital Planning Software Capital Improvement Plan - 2018 - 2022 City of Lake Elmo, Minnesota Contact Public Works Director 2018 2022thru Department Parks and Recreation Description One ton hook truck replaces 2009 vehicle. Truck will have interchangeable boxes and flat beds for multiple uses. Project #PR-015 Priority n/a Justification Budget Impact/Other Useful Life Project Name One Ton Truck Category Vehicles Type Equipment Total Project Cost:$130,000 Status New Recommendation Total20182019202020212022Expenditures 130,000130,000Equip/Vehicles/Furnishings 130,000 130,000Total Total20182019202020212022Funding Sources 130,000130,000Park Dedication Fund 130,000 130,000Total Monday, May 8, 2017Page 9Produced Using the Plan-It Capital Planning Software Capital Improvement Plan - 2018 - 2022 City of Lake Elmo, Minnesota Contact Public Works Director 2018 2022thru Department Parks and Recreation Description Replaces 2003 model. Used for ballfield maintenance, garbage collection and general parks maintenance Project #PR-016 Priority n/a Justification Budget Impact/Other Useful Life Project Name Cushman Category Vehicles Type Equipment Total Project Cost:$25,000 Status New Recommendation Total20182019202020212022Expenditures 25,00025,000Equip/Vehicles/Furnishings 25,000 25,000Total Total20182019202020212022Funding Sources 25,00025,000Park Dedication Fund 25,000 25,000Total Monday, May 8, 2017Page 10Produced Using the Plan-It Capital Planning Software STAFF REPORT DATE: May 15, 2017 ITEM #: TO: Parks Commission FROM: Emily Becker, City Planner AGENDA ITEM: Gonyea West Concept Plan BACKGROUND: The City has received application for a Concept Plan for the Gonyea West Property. This property is located west of Lake Elmo Avenue North and consists of two parcels of land and a portion of a third owned by Schiltgen Farms. The entire area to be developed consists of 99.12 acres, and the developer is proposing 279 units. Location Map ISSUE BEFORE COMMISSION: The Commission should make recommendation on the Gonyea West proposed Planned Unit Development (PUD) Concept Plan and Preliminary Plat. PROPOSAL DETAILS/ANALYSIS: Parks. The Comprehensive Park Plan identifies a neighborhood park search area over the proposed development area. The developer has identified two recreational areas on the Concept PUD that might be considered for neighborhood parkland dedication. The first is a 0.9 acre site with a small playground, swimming pool and fitness area near the northeastern entrance to the development. The other is a 3.3 acre site labeled open space on the Concept Plan currently planned as an open green area. The park dedication requirements for a 99.12 acres development would be 9.912 acres of parkland, or a combination of parkland or fees in lieu of parkland. Village Park Preserve (located south of Easton Village and which is also being developed by GWSA Land Development) has received Preliminary Plat approval and has proposed to dedicate 15.77 acres of parkland, which is 9.41 acres above the required amount for that development. Removing the wetland areas from the calculation results in a dedication amount of 15.37 acres. Village Preserve, which is also being developed by GWSA Land Development, paid fees in lieu of a portion of the required park land for the value of 1.57 acres. The Developer Agreement for this development indicates that this fee shall be paid as an escrow and released to the developer only upon this additional parkland being deeded to the City in an amount that satisfies the necessary parkland dedication of 1.57 acres. With the aforementioned land planned to be dedicated for Village Park Preserve above and beyond the required amount of usable parkland, less the value of land that has been escrowed and will be released back to the City, the developer would still have a remaining amount of parkland “credit” of 7.44 acres (15.37 acres of usable parkland – 6.36 acres of required parkland for Village Park Preserve – 1.57 acres credit towards parkland fees for Village Preserve). Therefore, if the developer were to dedicate a 3.3 acre site to the City for open space parkland as proposed, the parkland dedication requirement for this development would be satisfied, over and above the required amount (9.912 acres of required parkland – 3.3 acres of proposed parkland – 7.44 acre dedication credit = 0.828 acres over and above the required amount). Trails. The Comprehensive Trails Plan identifies a needed trail along the north edge of the development to connect to the private Sunfish Ponds HOA trail and an east-west trail connecting Lake Elmo Avenue near 39th Street east to the private Hamlet on Sunfish Lake HOA trails on the north side of Sunfish Lake. Note: According to City records, the Hamlet HOA trails were paid for by the City and were supposed to have been dedicated to the City when the plat was recorded. The Hamlet HOA currently maintains the trails. FISCAL IMPACT: As explained in this report, it is not expected that the City will be receiving additional parkland dedication funds for this development. ATTACHMENTS: • Gonyea West Concept PUD Plan and Preliminary Plat POND WETLAND POND POND POND POND OPEN SPACE STAFF REPORT DATE: May 15, 2017 ITEM #: 7 TO: Parks Commission FROM: Emily Becker, City Planner AGENDA ITEM: Off-Leash Dogs BACKGROUND: At its April meeting, the Parks Commission expressed concern with the number of off-leash dogs within City parks. The Commission stated this was specifically an issue in Sunfish Lake Park and Reid Park; the off-leash dogs have attacked other dogs and wildlife within these parks. The City’s Animal Ordinance, Section 95.012 states the following: § 95.012 PROHIBITION OF DOGS AND CATS RUNNING AT LARGE. It shall be unlawful for any person who owns, harbors or keeps a dog or cat to allow the dog or cat to run at large in the city. § 95.014 DOGS OR CATS WHICH ARE PUBLIC NUISANCES. Every unlicensed dog, unsecured female dog or cat in heat, and every dog or cat that runs at large or causes disturbance, or noise, in violation of the provisions of §§ 95.008 et seq. is declared a public nuisance. ISSUE FOR DISCUSSION: The Commission should decide what recommendation, if any, should be made to address a previously- expressed concern regarding enforcement of off-leash dogs within City parks. PROPOSAL DETAILS/ANALYSIS: Increased Signage. The Commission had mentioned that there are currently signs at every entrance within Sunfish Lake Park that state that no mountain biking is allowed and that dogs need to be on a leash. Would increased signage be an option to remind visitors throughout the park of park rules? Increased Enforcement. Staff has asked that the Washington County’s Sheriff’s Office patrol the area from time to time. Additionally, visitors of the park should make a point to call the Sheriff’s Office or the City’s Animal Control Officer should they see a dog in violation. There was a suggestion to contract with Washington County to have officers from the Lake Elmo Park Reserve monitor the park from time to time. FISCAL IMPACT: Increased enforcement of off-leash dogs may require additional cost to the City.