Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1016017 Parks Packet NOTICE OF MEETING City of Lake Elmo Park Commission 3800 Laverne Avenue North October 16, 2017 6:30 PM AGENDA 1.Call to Order 2.Approve Agenda 3.Approve Minutes a)August 21, 2017 4.Recognition of Shane Weis 5.Adopt-a-Park Program 6.Central Greenway Regional Trail Update 7.Sunfish Lake Forest Management Plan 8. Sunfish Lake Hunt9. Sunfish Lake Park Biking10. Pickleball11. Staff Reports & Commission Update 12. 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 13. Continental Concept PUD Plan Review November 2017 Meeting Agenda 14. MINUTES City of Lake Elmo Parks Commission August 21, 2017 Members Present: Chair Frick, Commissioners Nelson, Nuenfeldt, Olinger, Pearce, Steele Members Absent: Commissioners Ames, Zeno Staff Present: Public Works Director Weldon, City Planner Becker The meeting was called to order by Chair Frick at 6:30 PM. Approval of Agenda Motion by Steele to approve the agenda as amended, seconded by Nelson. Motion passed. Approval of Minutes Motion by Frick, seconded by Nuenfeldt to approve the minutes as submitted. Steele proposed the addition of the date, not just June. Frick amended her motion, Nuenfeldt seconded the amendment. Motion passed. Election of Officers Chair Frick stated that Shane Weis resigned from the Parks Commission. Frick thanked former Chair Weis for his years of service on the Commission. Frick would like to work with the City Administrator to get Weis a plaque or something to commemorate his service. Frick stated that Olinger would like to remain an alternate and Pearce would become a voting member. Steele asked which commissioner is in the first alternate position. Olinger stated that she is the first alternate, but at this time would prefer to remain in the alternate position rather than being a full voting member. Frick suggested that this should be tabled for today and decided by staff. For this meeting both of you are needed for voting. Frick volunteered to be chair, but offered any additional nominations. Pearce nominated Frick for chair and Nuenfeldt seconded the nomination. Nomination passed. Steele nominated Nelson for Co-Chair, Frick seconded the nomination. Nomination passed. Frick nominated Nuenfeldt for Secretary. There was a discussion about what is the role of the secretary. Steele seconded the nomination. Nomination passed. Lions Park Dugouts Bill Wacker – 3603 Laverne Avenue N. Since he lives directly across the street from what is currently the art center, which will be removed, he is concerned about the new lighting and noise from the park. The concern is regarding the configuration of the park, including the proposed pavilion at the corner of the park where the existing art center is located. He requested to know where the lighting would be located on the site. Chair Frick thanked Wacker for his concerns and perspective. Frick informed him that some of the items he was addressing were approved at the City Council meetings, including the lighting plan and the Parks Commission did not have knowledge of where the lighting would be nor a copy of the lighting plan to provide him. Steele asked that Wacker hold off on comments and questions not related to the topics on the agenda. He suggested that at the next meeting, they could open it up to everyone with concerns about the park, allowing everyone’s opinion to be expressed fairly at another meeting. Steele asked that it be placed on the September or October meeting. He also asked that we notify the neighbors close to the park. Becker said that this can be placed on the agenda and notify neighbors. Becker also stated that bids have been awarded at the August 1, 2017 City Council meeting for the parking lot, volley ball court, some of the lighting within the park, and the demolition of the house. The dugouts and batting cages, the Lions have donated $20,000 and volunteers within the community for the construction of these. Barry Weeks – 3647 Lake Elmo Avenue N. presented on the dugouts. He spoke to the design of the dugouts that were proposed by Miller Architects. The bids that came in for the proposed design were between $92,000 and $118,000. So, those would not have been within the budget for this project. Lake Elmo Lions volunteered the money, but Weeks and some of his neighbors volunteered to do the work since labor costs can be so high and the money may not have been enough to complete the project. Weeks is asking for approval from the Parks Commission to complete this project. Steele mentioned that he wants to make sure we are building this to national standards, not setting ourselves up for lawsuits, and that it is ADA compliant. He also expressed concern about the liability of residents building these structures and getting hurt on City property. Weldon stated that staff would like to see the fence height remain the same as it will be around the ballfield which will be 8 ft. in front of the dugout. Something to consider with the design is that this field is not exclusive to Lake Elmo Baseball and placing locks on gates could lock some people out. The park is public and to be used by anyone. Staff will confirm with the Building Official regarding ADA compliance but believe a 36 in gate will suffice. Staff feels we want to not add gates at this time and exclude users, but add them if the need arises. Steele made a motion to approve the proposed design and the construction of the two dugouts as long as City staff can work with the volunteers to establish safety and ADA requirements. Nelson seconded the motion. Motion passed. Weeks thanked the people and organizations that have given over the years for the Lion’s Park. He also thanked the Parks Commission for their efforts and time spent on the project. The Parks Commission decided to create a plaque with all the names of the volunteers that work on the park to be added. Royal Golf Final Plat and Planned Unit Development Becker requested that Royal Golf be moved up the agenda. Becker presented that the City has received the Final Plat application for Royal Golf. The City had an appraisal done on the entire Preliminary Plat area. The appraisal of the land is $8,000,000. Royal Golf has proposed trails within the development and would pay fees in lieu of a park. They have proposed a trail phasing plan. The first phase of the trail would be constructed along 20th Street. The City is obligated to pay for the paving of the trails due to previous agreements. Staff is looking for recommendation on whether the land should be dedicated at this time or in future phases. Frick asked for clarification on the amount they will be dedicating to the City. Frick also asked about the money that was promised to the City for the ballfields. Becker clarified that they are responsible for dedicating $800,000 for the development, based on the appraisal value. After the construction of the trail it will be reduced by the amount that is spent on that. They will receive credit for the 30 ft. trail corridor. Becker added that the million dollars for the ballfields will be within the Developer Agreement and will be separate from the Park dedication money. Frick expressed some concern regarding the short trail along 20th Street and the existing slope of the land around there that may make it difficult to navigate. Pearce suggested he would like to see how the trail connects the rest of Lake Elmo. Steele and Frick discussed the cost and practicality of this portion of the trail and whether it is beneficial, especially at the proposed cost. Steele feels the roads are already the connectivity that the City needs and that the trails are only for the development. Clark Schroder spoke on behalf of Royal Golf that they developed the trail plan in conjunction with the City. He mentioned that the short portion of the trail along 10th Street is on their property and that when the property to the East develops, it would connect to Manning. They also have received feedback from multiple public meetings on the desire to have the trails. Steele made a motion to not approve the construction of the trails for any future phases of Royal Golf and take the money instead of the land and trails, but have the opportunity to review proposed trails at each phase of the development. Nelson seconded the motion for discussion. Frick, Nuenfeldt, Olinger, and Steele voted in favor of the motion. Nelson voted in opposition. Pearce abstained. Motion passed. Frick made a motion to not pursue the Phase 1 portion of the trail plan as it is submitted, unless it allowed a connection to the next road within the development, allowing the trail to go somewhere. Nuenfeldt seconded the motion. Frick decided to withdraw her initial motion after discussion. Frick made the motion to further review the Phase 1 trail plan to include extending the trail to the west to connect to roadway in the northwest portion of the development and determine the cost of that trail, upon review of the cost brought back to the Parks Commission a decision on this portion of the trail could be made. Nuenfeldt seconded the motion. Motion passed. Hammes Estates Park Improvements Becker reported that the City had allowed Hammes Estates to put $107,554 into an escrow for parkland dedication. The developer would receive credit for the installation of the amenities installed. The developer will receive credit for installation of a 16’ X 24’ shelter, picnic table, bike rack, grill station, retaining wall, fishing pier, canoe rack, concrete hard surface, woodland seed mix restoration, landscaping and parking lot improvements. The Parks Commission is being asked to review the proposed improvements to the park within the Hammes Estates Development (Lakeridge Crossing) and make recommendation to Council. Steele made a motion to accept the items presented. Frick seconded the motion. Motion passed. Village Park Preserve Final Plat Becker asked the Parks Commission to decide if they think we should accept the land dedication for a development that has not even submitted their Preliminary Plat yet? Becker also showed the proposed trail and explained how it was not called for in the Trails Plan, that shows it on 30th and not into Reed Park, additionally the proposed trail only goes a portion of the way into the park land dedication and does not connect to the existing Reed Park. Is the proposed trail necessary? If the City would like the trail, then the decision would be whether we want the trail to connect to Reid Park and if we would want to pay to pave the connection or ask the developer to pave it in lieu of land. Becker explained there are sidewalks proposed within the development that lead to 30th Street and the residents could have access to Reid Park from 30th Street. Becker explained that the developer would not receive parkland dedication for the wetlands on the property. Steele expressed concerns about the quality of the land being donated to the City were expressed. Concern about taking this land in advance of a project and not having a chance at something else. Steele had questions about the monetary value of the land. Frick and Nuenfeldt expressed support of protecting the land and conserving it. Frick also wants to ensure that the credits for this land can only be used at Gonyea West, as proposed and not applied to future projects. Frick made a motion to accept the parkland dedication as shown on the map, using the land for Gonyea West and Village Park Preserve plats. Nuenfeldt seconded the motion. Steele and Pearce opposed the motion. Nelson abstained. Frick made a motion to defer the trails. Olinger seconded the motion. Motion passed. Adopt-a-Park Program Weldon stated that this topic is not time sensitive. Parks Commission asked that it be moved to September. Comprehensive Plan Update Becker reported that the City has been holding a number of Stakeholder and Advisory panel meetings for the Comprehensive Plan update. There is going to be an Open House on Wednesday, August 23, 2017 from 7 to 9 pm at Christ Lutheran Church. This open house is focusing on land use, such as areas south of 10th Street and the Old Village area. The next phase of the planning process will be looking into trails and parks. The consultant will be attending a future Parks meeting to discuss these items and allow input. September Meeting Adopt-a-Park Program Washington County Central Greenway Regional Trail Recognition of Shane Weis Sunfish Lake Park Staff Reports and Commission Update Staff did bring the Sunfish Lake Park Forest Management Plan to the City Council at the August 14, 2017 City Council meeting. The Council did not approve the Forest Management Plan. They requested that there is a Workshop on the topic. Becker reported that they did not communicate their issues or concerns. And that holding the Council Workshop and establishing what their concerns are before having the Parks Commission spend more time on the Plan. Meeting adjourned at 9:32 p.m. Respectfully Submitted, Tanya Nuss STAFF REPORT DATE: 10/16/17 REGULAR ITEM #: 4 MOTION TO: Parks Commission FROM: Emily Becker, Planning Director AGENDA ITEM: Resolution Recognizing Shane Weis REVIEWED BY: Rob Weldon, Public Works Director BACKGROUND: Shane Weis served on the Parks Commission and was Chair for a number of years. Staff has drafted a Resolution expressing appreciation for his years of service. ISSUE BEFORE THE COMMISSION: The Commission is being asked to adopt Resolution 2017-002PR recognizing Shane Weis for his years of service and commitment to the Parks Commission through serving on the Commission since 2012 and serving as Chair since 2013. ATTACHMENTS: •Resolution 2017-002PR CITY OF LAKE ELMO PARKS COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2017-002PR: RECOGNIZING SHANE WEIS WHEREAS: Shane Weis served on the Lake Elmo Parks Commission from 2012 to 2017, serving as Chair from 2013 to 2017; and WHEREAS: Shane Weis served on the Lake Elmo Regional Trail Subcommittee; and NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the Lake Elmo Parks Commission recognizes Shane Weis for his years of service and commitment to the Lake Elmo Parks Commission. Signed this 16th day of October, 2017. _____________________________ Mary Frick Chair STAFF REPORT DATE: 10/16/2017 REGULAR ITEM #: 5 TO: Parks Commission FROM: Rob Weldon, Public Works Director AGENDA ITEM: Adopt-a-Park Program REVIEWED BY: Emily Becker, City Planner BACKGROUND: The City of Lake Elmo currently has 17 city parks maintained by the Public Works Department. These parks include natural areas, trails, playgrounds, tennis courts and ball fields. ISSUE BEFORE COMMISSION: Is the Parks Commission interested in exploring an Adopt-a-Park program beginning in the Spring of 2018? PROPOSAL DETAILS/ANALYSIS: An Adopt-a-Park Program would consist of very minor park maintenance focusing on making parks more appealing. Volunteers would perform tasks such as general spring and fall clean-up to remove debris, flower planting, and weeding. All materials needed would be provided by the city and coordinated through Public Works Adopt-A-Park is a public service program for volunteers who are interested in cleaning up Lake Elmo’s parks. It is an excellent way for residents and organizations to make a personal contribution to the community. FISCAL IMPACT: None. A volunteer program such as this may potentially save the city money as it could reduce the need for public works staff to carry out minor maintenance activities. OPTIONS: Direct Staff to further explore an Adopt-a-Park Program Direct Staff not to explore an Adopt-a-Park Program Table for further discussion STAFF REPORT DATE: 10/16/17 REGULAR ITEM #: 6 MOTION TO: Parks Commission FROM: Emily Becker, Planning Director AGENDA ITEM: Central Greenway Regional Trail Update REVIEWED BY: Rob Weldon, Public Works Director BACKGROUND: At its previous meeting, the Parks Commission asked for an update on the Central Greenway Regional Trail. Staff has contacted the County and is providing this update. ISSUE BEFORE THE COMMISSION: Who should be on the Technical Advisory Committee? PROPOSAL DETAILS/ANALYSIS: Request for Proposal. The County has put together a Request for Proposal (RFP), which the City had reviewed. The County issued the RFP on September 1, and proposals were due September 29, 2017. The City received three bids. Contract negotiations are expected October 23. Approval of proposals projected for November 21, 2017. The study should be completed by December 31, 2018. The entire project is projected to take about five years. The Parks Commission should decide who should be on the Technical Advisory Committee - Planning or Parks Commission member and who? There will be 4-5 meetings plus possible other open houses, pop-up meetings, etc. Routes. All options are still on the table. The County is gathering input from the public and fellow stakeholders before narrowing options. The master planning process will identify the preferred route. FISCAL IMPACT: The County will be asking that the City share 50% of cost share with the City. The City can use grants to cover their portion of the cost. Alternatively, if federal money is available, it would reduce both the City and County portions. The funding will be scheduled after the planning process. ATTACHMENTS: •Draft Central Greenway Regional Trail Master Plan: Lake Elmo Segment Request for Proposal Central Greenway Regional Trail Master Plan: Lake Elmo Segment REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL Issue Date: September 1, 2017 Proposals Due: September 29, 2017 Planning Division September, 2017 2 SECTION I. GENERAL INFORMATION 1.OBJECTIVE The purpose for the request for proposal (RFP) is to obtain proposals for the development of a master plan for the Central Greenway Regional Trail: Lake Elmo Segment in Washington County, MN. 2.PROJECT OVERVIEW The Central Greenway Regional Trail will enhance the region’s multi-modal transportation and recreation system by providing a 30 mile connection between three of the region’s premier regional park facilities: Big Marine Park Reserve, Lake Elmo Park Reserve and Cottage Grove Ravine Regional Park. The Central Greenway Regional Trail will also provide direct connections for people living in Washington County to vital employment, retail, and recreational destinations – providing safety, economic development, mobility, and environmental benefits. The Central Greenway Regional Trail is divided into three segments: South Segment: Cottage Grove Ravine Regional Park to Interstate 94 Status: Master plan completed, undergoing Metropolitan Council review Lake Elmo Segment: Interstate 94 to Highway 36 Status: The purpose of this RFP is to complete a master plan for this segment North Segment: Highway 36 to Big Marine Park Reserve Status: Master plan to be completed in subsequent years This master plan will focus on identifying the best trail alignment within the segment running through the City of Lake Elmo, between Interstate 94 and Highway 36. A map of the trail corridor is included as Attachment A1 and A2 of this document. The master plan must address the criteria set forth in the Metropolitan Council’s 2040 Regional Park Policy Plan for regional trails. The master plans must be in a form suitable for submittal to Washington County and the Metropolitan Council for review, and must be submitted in both printed and electronic format. A full description of deliverables is included in Section II of this document. 3.PROJECT OVERSIGHT Washington County staff will serve as project management and primary point of contact for direction, deliverable review and approval, management of contract, and external communications for the master planning process. 4.PROPOSAL DELIVERY INFORMATION The RFP is issued by the Public Works Department, Washington County. Please submit five physical copies and one digital pdf of the proposal to: Attn: Connor Schaefer 11660 Myeron Road North 3 Stillwater, MN 55082 connor.schaefer@co.washington.mn.us Proposals are due: September 29, 2017 Prospective submitters are responsible for the timely delivery of their proposal. Late proposals will not be considered or accepted. All information included in the submitted proposal will be classified in accordance with Section 13.591 of Minnesota statutes governing data practices. No other distribution of proposals is to be made by the submitter. The proposal must include a statement as to the period during which the proposal remains valid. This period must be at least 60 days from the due date for proposals to this RFP. 5.OPPORTUNITY FOR PROJECT QUESTIONS Submit all questions related to specific project requirements in writing by 4:30 PM on September 12, 2017. All questions should be submitted via email to connor.schaefer@co.washington.mn.us All questions regarding this RFP are to be directed only to the RFP Administrator, Connor Schaefer. Proposers may be disqualified if any unsolicited contact related to this RFP is made with an employee or representative of Washington County other than the RFP Administrator during the proposal process. Written responses to all questions received on time will be posted on September 15, 2017, at 4:30 PM on the Washington County bids website (www.co.washington.mn.us/bids). The responses will be posted as a Related Document within the initial RFP posting. No oral questions will be entertained prior to or after the deadline for written questions specified above. 6.CONTRACT ADMINISTRATOR Following the signing of the contract, all communications concerning the contract must be directed to: Connor Schaefer 11660 Myeron Road North Stillwater, MN 55082 connor.schaefer@co.washington.mn.us 7.PROJECT BUDGET AND SCHEDULE Washington County has budgeted $45,000 for the Central Greenway Regional Trail Master Plan: Lake Elmo Segment. The study should be completed by December 31, 2018. Suggestions or recommendations for the project schedule and streamlining of efforts are 4 strongly encouraged. 8.PROJECT STATUS COMMUNICATION Communication notifying Washington County of project status will be required by the contractor for the following: Status and amount expended on each active task Status and expected completion date of draft and final deliverable on each active task Necessary or proposed change in schedule or budget of any individual task or subtask after finalization of schedule and budget. Any changes in scope, project timelines, or both will need to be documented through a project memorandum with sign-off by the contractor and Washington County staff. 9.SCOPE OF WORK CHANGE Washington County will consider modifications to the scope of work that will result in more effectively accomplish the objectives of the master plan. Any modification submitted should be clearly marked as such within the proposal and cost estimate, with an explanation of its expected benefit and impact on other tasks within the scope of work. 10.INTERAGENCY COORDINATION While Washington County retains the responsibility for overall coordination and contact with the interested agencies including but not limited to jurisdictions, local interest groups, etc., it is recognized that the consultant may require certain information from these agencies in order to properly complete certain key tasks. All briefing of the agencies, request for information from the agencies, and contact with the agencies will be done with the full knowledge and active participation of Washington County. 11.INCURRING COSTS Washington County shall not, in any event, be liable for any pre-contractual expenses incurred by the proposers in the preparation of their proposals. Proposers shall not include any such expenses as part of their proposals. Pre-contractual expenses include preparing or submitting a response to this RFP and negotiating with Washington County on any matter related to this proposal. Any other expenses incurred by the proposer prior to the date of execution of the proposed contract will be considered a pre-contractual response. Total liability of Washington County is limited to the terms and conditions indicated in this agreement. 12.JOINT OFFERS Where two or more consultants desire to submit a single proposal in response to this RFP, they should do so on a prime-subcontractor basis rather than as a joint venture. Washington County intends to contract with one single firm and not multiple firms doing business as a joint venture. 13.CHANGES IN THE RFP 5 Changes made to the RFP as a result of questions or concerns raised will be put in writing to each prospective consultant prior to seven (7) calendar days before the date of proposals are due. 14.DISCLOSURE All information in a submitter’s proposal, except fee analysis, is subject to disclosure under the provisions of Minnesota Statute Chapter 13 “Minnesota Government Data Practices Act”. 15.ACCEPTANCE OR REJECTION OF PROPOSAL CONTENT The contents of this RFP and the proposal will become contractual obligations if a contract ensues. Failure of the selected consultant to accept these obligations may result in cancellation of the award. Washington County expressly reserves the right to amend or withdraw this RFP at any time and to reject any or all proposals. Proposers are not to collude with other proposers and competitors or take any other action, which will restrict competition. Evidence of such activity will result in rejection of the proposal. 16.PROPOSED TIMETABLE Request for Proposals Released – September 1, 2017 Written Questions Received – September 12, 2017 Response to Questions Released – September 15, 2017 Proposals Due – September 29, 2017 Oral Interviews (if necessary) – Week of October 16, 2017 Contract Negotiations – October 23, 2017 – November 17, 2017 Washington County Board Approval – November 21, 2017 6 SECTION II. WORK STATEMENT (Deliverables) 1.SCOPE OF SERVICES The proposer will work with Washington County staff and other stakeholders to create a master plan for the Lake Elmo segment of Central Greenway Regional Trail. The following section outlines the key responsibilities and deliverables to be included in the study. The proposal work plan should demonstrate an understanding of the requirements and propose an efficient process to deliver the master plan. 2.MASTER PLAN CONTENT The Central Greenway Regional Trail: Lake Elmo Segment Master Plan must examine and address all of the components of the Metropolitan Council’s 2040 Regional Parks Policy Plan for regional trails. The master plan document must include the following components: a.Boundaries and acquisition costs: A list of parcels to be acquired and the estimated total cost and schedule for their acquisition, and information on natural resources, site suitability, special assessments, potential contamination based on data from the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, and other conditions that affect acquisition of the site or location of the boundaries b.Demand forecast: Using Metropolitan Council and other resource information, identify recreational needs that will be met by the trail. c.Development concept: A plan for development, including schedule and cost estimates for the project. The plan should include: i.Mapping of existing and planned local and regional trail connections to the trail corridor ii.Wayfinding signage plan, indicating the types of signs, general locations along the trail corridor, and cost estimates. d.Conflicts: Identification of conflicts with other existing or proposed projects or land uses affecting the trail, including steps necessary for their resolution. e.Public services: A description of any non-recreational public services and facilities, such as roads or sewers, needed to accommodate the proposed trail, including the timing of these services and the arrangements necessary to provide them. f.Operations: Rules, regulations or ordinances affecting the trail, including estimated operations and maintenance costs and sources of revenue to operate and maintain the trail. g.Public engagement and participation: Describe process undertaken to engage the public and involve affected agencies, local units of government, and local, state, and federal recreation providers in the development of the master plan. The public engagement process must seek to mitigate existing racial, ethnic, cultural or linguistic barriers and include people of diverse races, ethnicities, classes, ages, abilities and national origin. The plan must include the public engagement plan and describe the process undertaken to engage those mentioned above. The process must include 7 opportunity for the public to be heard and to have influence over the contents in the master plan. The plan must address comments from all affected agencies, local units of government, and local, state and federal recreation providers. The plan must include a summary of comments received that identifies issues raised and content resulting from engagement efforts. h.Public awareness: Plans for making the public aware of services available when the regional trail is open, including how to access the trail by transit, if applicable. i.Accessibility: A plan that addresses accessibility, affordability, and other measures designed to ensure that the facility can be used by people with limited mobility. 3.DELIVERABLES The final master plan report must clearly define planning findings and recommendations; with graphic illustrations of planning and design solutions - including aerial photographs, ground photographs, drawings, maps, etc. The plans should also include cost estimates for proposed improvements. Five (5) copies of the entire master plan document must be printed on 8-1/2” x 11”, 70# off- white, printed two sides, black ink, spiral bound, hard cover, and sufficient illustrations and photos that display major elements of the text. The master plan document must be suitable for copying on a commercial black and white and color copying machines. One electronic version must be suitable for web site/Internet use. 4.WASHINGTON COUNTY WILL PROVIDE Washington County creates and maintains a variety of GIS data sets. For example, Washington County has digital orthophotography of the project area taken in 2017. The orthophotography is color, has a ground resolution of 6 inches, and has a horizontal accuracy of +/- 3 feet. The successful proposer may contact David Brandt, Geospatial Systems Architect (David.Brandt@co.washington.mn.us) for more details. Digital contour data with 2-foot contour intervals is also available for the entire project area. The contour data can be downloaded, at no charge, from the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, (MNDNR), via the MNDNR’s “MnTOPO” viewer application. Branding logos related to Washington County may also be provided by Washington County. 5.FEES The quoted fee shall include estimated reimbursable fees including all expenses associated with mailings and publications. The total fee shall be quoted as a ‘not to exceed’ fee. 8 SECTION III. INFORMATION REQUIRED FROM ALL PROPOSAL SUBMITTERS 1.PROPOSAL FORMAT The response must include seven copies of the proposal and one digital pdf format. The first page of the original must have the original signature of the officer who will be accountable for all representations. Proposals shall be prepared using 8 ½ x 11 double-sided paper with all text clear of bindings. Use of 11x17 fold-out sheets for large tables, charts, or diagrams is permissible, but should be limited. Index the proposal and sequentially number all pages throughout the section. Proposal narratives may not exceed 20 pages (one double-sided paper counts as two pages) in length including the cover letter and Executive Summary. An appendix may be included that contains resumes and examples of relevant work experience. This appendix is not to exceed 10 pages. The proposal narrative and appendices should be bound together in a single submittal. The proposal must contain information outlined below. 2.PROPOSAL OUTLINE In order to be considered valid, the proposal must be in writing, submitted on time in sealed packages, and be signed by an officer of the proposer who can be accountable for all representations. The proposal must contain the following information, presented in the order shown: 1.Cover Letter 2.Executive Summary 3.Profile of Organization State the full name and address of your organization, and if possible, the branch office or other subordinate element that will perform or assist in performing the work hereunder. Indicate whether it operates as an individual, partnership, or corporation; if as a corporation, include the state in which it is incorporated. If appropriate, state whether it is licensed to operate in the State of Minnesota. History of the firm, in terms of length of existence and organizational mission/goals. Include the size and organizational structure, past history, and the status and outcome of any lawsuits brought against the proposer in the past five years. 4.Description of Overall Approach Submit written narrative of the planning approach that you will implement in order to develop a master plan for the Lake Elmo segment of Central Greenway Regional Trail. The approach must include a public involvement plan that emphasizes community collaboration. This narrative must detail methods to first facilitate input from the community, and then convey the master plan content (once it is complete) to the public. Innovative approaches to public engagement are encouraged. 9 The proposal should address the specific number of scheduled meetings necessary, and role of the technical advisory committee (see Attachment B), to achieve the most productive results. This narrative may be supported by sketches or graphic material that would illustrate alternative approaches, as you feel are necessary (optional). 5.Work Plan Provide a breakdown of project by phases or tasks. For each task listed, identify: Specific staff to be involved, roles, and responsibilities. Time commitment for each person in hours per task. Schedule illustrating task relationships over the duration of the project. 6.Project Personnel Profile Identify individuals by name, title, skill, and qualification that will be employed in the work. Identify which staff will be working locally. Include resumes of key project personnel, including prior projects of similar size and scope for which the personnel played the same or a similar role as proposed for the project. Describe current assignment and time commitment to that assignment for all key personnel. Confirm that each team member will be fully engaged in the study as described for the duration of the contract. 7.Relevant Experience List specific types of experience your firm has had in the following areas: Planning and preparing master plans or master plan amendments for regional trails. Preparing development and operation costs for park facilities including multi-use trail. Working with the Metropolitan Council’s 2040 Regional Parks Policy Plan. Working with public committees on planning projects Using innovative methods effectively to build community support. Demonstrate past experience and familiarity with the study area (Appendix A1). 8.Budget Submit as part of proposal packet: 10  Firm name and contact information  Fee proposal for the Central Greenway Regional Trail Master Plan: Lake Elmo Segment which includes your firm’s ‘not to exceed’ fee. The quoted fee shall include estimated reimbursable fees including all expenses associated with mailings and publications. The quoted fee shall also include sales tax, if applicable.  Current hourly rates for staff.  Current overhead rates for all team member firms.  A per-meeting cost for any meetings that are to be held.  A schedule of reimbursable direct expenses by firm and expense type.  A 10% contingency which shall be included in the Project Budget.  Signature and contract information of authorized firm negotiator/expeditor. 3. PROPOSAL EVALUATION Proposals submitted in response to this RFP will be evaluated and scored, in accordance with the criteria outlined below, by an evaluation committee established by Washington County. The evaluation committee will consist of two members of Washington County staff and one City of Lake Elmo staff member. Washington County reserves the right to waive any minor irregularities in the proposal request process. Criteria Points Expressed understanding of project objectives and technical design of the proposal, work plan, and project approach. /20 The experience, resources, and qualifications of the proposal team and individuals to be assigned to the project as key personnel /20 Proposed public involvement approach and project team’s experience in conducting successful and comprehensive stakeholder engagement for similar projects. /30 The availability of personnel and other resources to perform the work within the specified project schedule. /15 The proposal team’s background and experience with similar work, including ability and experience in handling projects of similar nature. /15 Highest Possible Score /100 Washington County may interview any or all proposers at its discretion. Washington County will not be responsible for any costs incurred by a proposer in preparing for or making a presentation. Washington County reserves the right to select a consultant without conducting interviews. Washington County staff will make a final recommendation based on the written proposals, the results of oral interviews (if applicable), reference checks, and the recommendation of the 11 evaluation committee. If needed, that recommendation will be presented to the Washington County Board of Commissioners for approval. 4.PROPOSAL PROTEST PROCEDURE A formal letter of protest must be received by Washington County to the attention of Connor Schaefer, within ten business days of the date of the award notification. The letter must state specifically the reason for the protest and include any documentation needed to substantiate the claim(s). Washington County will have ten business days from the date of receipt of the protest letter in which to make a written response. Washington County may extend the period for purposes of investigating the protest, if it is warranted, by notifying the complainant in writing of their intentions within the above mentioned response time. If the complainant, after receiving the final written response from Washington County, is not satisfied that the reason for protest has been sufficiently resolved, he/she may file a request for an appeal to be heard by the Washington County Board of Commissioners. Such request must be written and received within ten business days from the date of the Washington County response letter. The letter shall be made to the attention of Molly O’Rourke, Washington County Administrator, who will schedule the hearing for the next available Washington County Board meeting, and inform the complainant in writing of said date and time. Washington County will not receive any service or product described in the proposal document from the successful proposer until the protest has been resolved. Washington County’s address: Washington County 11660 Myeron Rd N. Stillwater, MN 55082 5.CONTRACT The agreement to be executed between the successful proposer and Washington County will include the Required Terms and Conditions, which have been included in this RFP as Attachment C, and the provisions of the successful proposer’s proposal. Payments will be made upon achievement of agreed‐upon project milestones. If reimbursement of expenses is included, Washington County will only reimburse at actual cost for out of pocket expenses. If reimbursement for travel is permitted, all airfare shall first be authorized by Washington County and will be reimbursed at the lowest cost fare. Food, ground transportation, and lodging expenses necessitated by the Agreement will be reimbursed according to the Internal Revenue Service (“IRS”) Regular Per Diem Rate Method or actual cost, whichever is less. Mileage will be reimbursed at the IRS rate in effect at the time of travel. 6.ADDITIONAL INFORMATION AND COMMENTS Include any other information that may be pertinent, but not specifically asked for elsewhere. 12 Any changes in an RFP received from Washington County shall be acknowledged in the proposal. Additional information on Washington County parks and trails can be found at: https://www.co.washington.mn.us/Parks 13 CENTRAL GREENWAY REGIONAL TRAIL: LAKE ELMO SEGMENT Attachment A1 - Project Area 14 CENTRAL GREENWAY REGIONAL TRAIL: LAKE ELMO SEGMENT Attachment A2 - Project Area Aerial (Zoomed in) 15 CENTRAL GREENWAY REGIONAL TRAIL: LAKE ELMO SEGMENT Attachment B - Technical Advisory Committee A committee will be formed to assist in the planning process. They are a technical advisory committee composed of professional staff and citizen representatives who will provide input on the planning of the Central Greenway Regional Trail. The following list shows the proposed composition of the committee: Technical Advisory Committee: Washington County Public Works Staff (2) Washington County Parks and Open Space Commission Member (1) City of Lake Elmo Staff (1) City of Lake Elmo City Council or Planning Commission or Park Commission Member (1) Watershed District Staff or Planning Member (1) Metropolitan Council Staff (1) Metropolitan Council Parks and Open Space Commission Member (1) 16 A contract will be prepared by Washington County upon selection of a firm. Appropriate language will be added to document the specific nature and scope of services, costs, responsibilities, and liabilities of each party. Additional areas of concern may be incorporated, subject to mutual agreement between parties. General conditions set forth in this section will be incorporated into the professional services agreement. The following provisions I through XVII must be included in any contract and are non-negotiable. I. DOCUMENT FORMAT All word processing documents shall be done and provided to the County in Microsoft Word format, and not converted from other formats. Data files shall be provided in Microsoft Excel format. CAD files shall be provided in AutoCAD or MicroStation format. II. NONDISCRIMINATION The Consultant agrees to comply with the nondiscrimination provision set forth in Minnesota Statute 181.59. The Consultant’s failure to comply with section 181.59 may result in cancellation or termination of the agreement, and all money due or to become due under the contract may be forfeited for a second or any subsequent violation of the terms or conditions of this contract. III. STANDARDS The Consultant shall comply with all applicable Federal law, State statutes, Federal and State regulations, and local ordinances now in effect or adopted during the performance of the services herein until completion of said services. Failure to meet the requirements of the above shall be a substantial breach of the agreement and will be cause for cancellation of this contract. IV. POSSESSION OF FIREARMS ON COUNTY PREMISES Unless specifically required by the terms of this contract or the person it is subject to an exception provided by 18 USC§ 926B or 926BC (LEOSA) no provider of services pursuant to this contract or subcontractors shall carry or possess a firearm on county premises or while acting on behalf of Washington County pursuant to the terms of this agreement. Violation of this provision is grounds for immediate suspension or termination of this contract. V. SUBCONTRACTING AND ASSIGNMENT The Consultant shall not enter into any subcontract for performance of any services contemplated under this agreement; nor novate or assign any interest in the agreement, without the prior written approval of the county. Any assignment or novation may be made subject to such conditions and provisions as the county may impose. If the Consultant subcontracts the obligations under this agreement, the Consultant shall be responsible for the performance of all obligations by the subcontractors. CENTRAL GREENWAY REGIONAL TRAIL: LAKE ELMO SEGMENT Attachment C - Required Contract Terms and Conditions 17 VI. SUBCONTRACTOR PROMPT PAYMENT Pursuant to Minnesota Statute §471.425 subd. 4a., Consultant shall pay any subcontractors within 10 days of the Consultant’s receipt of payment from the county for undisputed services provided by the subcontractor. The Consultant shall pay interest of 1½ percent per month, or any part of a month, to the subcontractor on any disputed amount not paid on time to the subcontractor. The minimum monthly interest penalty payment for an unpaid balance of $100 or more is $10. For an unpaid balance of less than $100, the prime Consultant shall pay the actual penalty due to the subcontractor. The subcontractor shall have third party rights under this agreement to enforce this provision. VII. DATA PRACTICES All data collected, created, received, maintained, or disseminated for any purpose by the activities of the Consultant, because of this agreement shall be governed by the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act, Minnesota Statutes Chapter 13 (Act), as amended and the Rules implementing the Act now in force or as amended. The Consultant is subject to the requirements of the Act and Rules and must comply with those requirements as if it is a governmental entity. The remedies contained in section 13.08 of the Act shall apply to the Consultant. VIII. AUDITS, REPORTS, RECORDS AND MONITORING PROCEDURES/RECORDS AVAILABILITY & RETENTION Pursuant to Minn. Stat. section 16C.05 subd. 5, the Consultant will: Maintain records which reflect all revenues, costs incurred and services provided in the performance of this Agreement. Agree that the County, the State Auditor, or legislative authority, or any of their duly authorized representatives at any time during normal business hours, and as often as they may deem reasonably necessary, shall have access to and the right to examine, audit, excerpt, and transcribe any books, documents, papers, records, etc., and accounting procedures and practices and involve transactions relating to this agreement. The Consultant agrees to maintain these records for a period of six (6) years from the date of the termination of this agreement. IX. JURISDICTION & VENUE This contract, amendments and supplements thereto, shall be governed by the laws of the State of Minnesota. All actions brought under this agreement shall be brought exclusively in Minnesota State Courts of competent jurisdiction with venue in Washington County. X. CONTRACTOR DEBARMENT, SUSPENSION AND RESPONSIBILITY CERTIFICATION Federal Regulation 45 CFR 92.35 prohibits the county from purchasing goods or services with federal money from vendors who have been suspended or debarred by the federal government. Similarly, Minnesota Statutes, Section 16C.03, subdivision 2, provides the Commissioner of Administration with the authority to debar and suspend vendors who seek to contract with the county. Consultants may be suspended or debarred when it is determined through a duly authorized hearing process, that they have abused the public trust in a serious manner. By signing this agreement, the Consultant certifies that it and its principals* and employees: 18 A. Are not presently debarred, suspended, proposed for debarment, declared ineligible, or voluntarily excluded from transacting business by or with any federal, state, or local governmental department or agency; and B. Have not within a three year-period preceding this agreement: 1) been convicted of or had a civil judgment rendered against them for commission of fraud or a criminal offense in connection with obtaining, attempting to obtain or performing a public (federal, state, or local government) transaction or contract, 2) violated any federal or state antitrust statutes, or 3) committed embezzlement, theft, forgery, bribery, falsification or destruction of records, making false statements or receiving stolen property; and C. Are not presently indicted or otherwise criminally or civilly charged by a governmental entity for: 1)commission of fraud or a criminal offense in connection with obtaining, attempting to obtain or performing a public (federal, state, or local government) transaction, 2)violating any federal or state antitrust statutes, or 3)committing embezzlement, theft, forgery, bribery, falsification or destruction of records, making false statements or receiving stolen property; and D. Are not aware of any information and possess no knowledge that any subcontractor(s), that will perform work pursuant to this agreement, are in violation of any of the certifications set forth above; and E. Shall immediately give written notice to the contract manager should the Consultant come under investigation for allegations of fraud or a criminal offense in connection with obtaining or performing a public (federal, state, or local government) transaction, violating any federal or state antitrust statute, or committing embezzlement, theft, forgery, bribery, falsification of records, making false statements, or receiving stolen property. *Principals, for the purpose of this certification, means officers, directors, owners, partners, and persons having primary management or supervisory responsibilities within a business entity (e.g., general manager, plant manager, head of subsidiary division or business segment, and similar positions). XI. INDEMNIFICATION The Consultant agrees it will defend, indemnify and hold harmless the County, its officers and employees against any and all liability, loss, costs, damages, and expenses which the County, its officers, or employees may hereafter sustain, incur, or be required to pay arising out of the negligent or willful acts or omissions of the Consultant in the performance of this agreement. XII. INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS The Consultant agrees that in order to protect itself, as well as the County, under the indemnity provisions set forth above, it will at all times during the term of this Agreement, keep in force the following insurance protection in the limits specified: A. Commercial General Liability with contractual liability and Professional Liability coverage in the amount of the County’s tort liability limits set forth in Minnesota Statute 466.04 and as amended from time to time. B. Automobile coverage in the amount of the County’s tort liability limits set forth in Minnesota Statute 466.04 and as amended from time to time. 19 C. Worker’s Compensation in statutory amount. (if applicable) Prior to the effective date of this Agreement, the Consultant will furnish the County with a current and valid proof of insurance certificate indicating insurance coverage in the amounts required by this agreement. This certificate of insurance shall be on file with the County throughout the term of the agreement. As a condition subsequent to this agreement, Consultant shall insure that the certificate of insurance provided to the County will at all times be current. The parties agree that failure by the Consultant to maintain a current certificate of insurance with the County shall be a substantial breach of the contract and payments on the contract shall be withheld by the County until a certificate of insurance showing current insurance coverage in amounts required by the contract is provided to the County. Any policy obtained and maintained under this clause shall provide that it shall not be cancelled, materially changed, or not renewed without thirty days’ notice thereof to the County. XIII. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR It will be agreed that nothing within the contract is intended or should be construed in any manner as creating or establishing the relationship of co-partners between the parties or as constituting the Consultant as the agent, representative, or employee of the County or the Public Works Department for any purpose or in any manner whatsoever. The Consultant is to be and shall remain an independent consultant with respect to all services performed under this agreement. The Consultant will secure, at its own expense, all personnel required in performing services under the agreement. Any and all personnel of the Consultant or other persons, while engaged in the performance of any work or services required by the Consultant under this agreement shall have no contractual relationship with the County or the Public Works Department and shall not be considered employees of the County or Public Works Department. XIV. MODIFICATIONS Any material alteration, modification, or variation shall be reduced to writing as an amendment and signed by the parties. Any alterations, modifications, or variations deemed not to be material by agreement of the County and the Consultant shall not require written approval. XV.MERGER It is understood and agreed that the entire agreement of the parties is contained here and that this contract supersedes all oral agreements and negotiations between the parties relating to this subject matter. All items referred to in this contract are incorporated or attached and deemed to be part of the contract. XVI. CANCELLATION The County may cancel this Agreement at any time upon giving fifteen (15) days written notice sent to the Consultant at the address above. XVII. SERVICES BEYOND THE SCOPE OF THIS CONTRACT Any additional tasks added to this project must be by written amendment to this Contract signed by both parties. STAFF REPORT DATE: 10/16/17 REGULAR ITEM #: 7 MOTION TO: Parks Commission FROM: Emily Becker, Planning Director AGENDA ITEM: Sunfish Lake Forest Management Plan REVIEWED BY: Rob Weldon, Public Works Director BACKGROUND: At its June 19, 2017 meeting, the Parks Commission discussed breaking down the Sunfish Lake Forest Management Plan in to measurable goals so that it could be properly implemented. The Parks Commission suggested dividing the park in to sections and getting a forester to come in and assess the current conditions or setting up a plan internally. ISSUE BEFORE THE COMMISSION: What are the next steps in breaking down the Sunfish Lake Forest Management Plan? DETAILS/ANALYSIS: At its June meeting, Parks Commission members Olinger and Frick volunteered to identify the number and location of trees that need to be removed in order to get a quote from a forester (minutes from this meeting copied and pasted below). If this has been done, this can be reported on. Staff should be provided with clear direction on where to start with areas that are top priority for forest management in order to obtain an accurate quote. Sunfish Lake Park Forest Management Plan Becker stated that the Parks Commission is being asked to break down the Sunfish Lake Park Forest Management Plan into measurable goals so that it can be properly implemented. The goal of the plan is to protect and enhance the natural resources of the site and improve native plant communities. Frick informed the Commission on what she knew about the study from 2015. Discussing the damage the park experienced in 2013 and other conditions of the park, including oak wilt and buckthorn. Frick mentioned maybe to focus on leaning trees, oak wilt, and buckthorn. Discussion about dividing the park into sections, getting a forester to come in and assess the current conditions or setting up a plan internally. Handt asked if there would be any Commissioners that would be able to identify the number and location of the trees that need to be removed in order to get a quote. Olinger and Frick volunteered. 1 Tanya Nuss From:Kristina Handt Sent:Thursday, October 12, 2017 8:25 AM To:Tanya Nuss Cc:Emily Becker; Ben Prchal; Rob Weldon Subject:FW: Sunfish Lake Park Forest Management Plan Tanya, If this email from Mary hasn’t been added to the Parks packet, it should be. Kristina Handt City Administrator, City of Lake Elmo khandt@lakeelmo.org 651.747.3905 From: Mary Frick [mailto:maryfrick@LIVE.COM] Sent: Monday, September 18, 2017 2:58 PM To: Emily Becker <EBecker@lakeelmo.org>; Rob Wudlick (rwudlick@gmail.com) <rwudlick@gmail.com> Cc: Mike Pearson <MPearson@lakeelmo.org>; Kristina Handt <KHandt@lakeelmo.org> Subject: Sunfish Lake Park Forest Management Plan Hello Emily and Rob, I’d like to speak to the “Forest Management Plan” and breaking it down into more manageable goals, as the opportunity to discuss it at the Parks Commission Meeting is not available due to its cancellation because of lack of quorum. Separate from the Forest Management Plan, I think you’d agree that it’s a priority to keep the trails open and safe for users of the park. I believe the City is doing a good job in the trail upkeep. However, on occasion there are trees that fall on the trails or hang over the trails and it may take a number of weeks before the City identifies these trees and they are removed. As I’m in the park about once a week and cover the majority of the trails, I can provide assistance by notifying the City when there’s downfall and when hazards on the trails exist. If Rob would like, I could send on a weekly basis a Google map with those spots identified. However, I’m not formally trained as an arborist or forester in the further identification of hazardous trees. I volunteered to assist on hazardous trees, but without formal training or certification I’ve realized my limitations. I believe it is detrimental to the City for me to attempt further identification of hazardous trees in the Park, such as Oak Wilt or when a tree is compromised enough to warrant its removal. The Forest Management Plan clearly recommends that a trained individual should identify the hazardous trees. If the City doesn’t have an individual formally trained or certified in this area, I highly recommend it work with an individual who has those qualifications. Breaking down the Forest Management Plan into more manageable goals.-- The Park sustained considerable windfall damage in 2013. The Forest Management Plan was developed to address that damage as well as the overall health and future of this woodland. It’s my recommendation (and consensus should be sought with the other commissioners) that we first focus on those areas of greatest windfall damage and restoration of those sites. There are two sites in 2 the park (identified in Forest Management Plan) where considerable wind damage took place. One is in the north (~4.5 acres) near Tapestry and the other is in the south (~1.5 acres) closer to the parking lot. My recommended first goal is to work on the restoration of the north site which has closer proximity to houses and fire burden is a greater concern. The site can be accessed from the north through the public trail from Tapestry and has tree damage on both sides of the park trail. Based on the timeline schedule of the Forest Management Plan, trees should be marked for removal in the Oct-Nov time range and harvesting removal take place in the winter (Nov- March). It’s my recommendation that the City should identify within the next month a certified individual, e.g. a Forester, who can come in and mark those trees in the Oct-Nov. time range. The forester (Steve Kunde) who developed this Plan would be ideal as he is familiar with the area. During the winter, firewood contractors and/or city crews can come in to remove the wood for fire wood and haul away the chips for later use on the park trails. This activity is considered light to medium intensity per the Plan. Only a short portion of the park trail in the north would need to be closed during the winter months for these activities. In the spring (April-May), planting areas can be marked and tree seedlings can be planted in this area for restoration. Free seedlings around Arbor Day along with volunteers to plant them seems like a reasonable plan. The next focus would be on the restoration of the south site where Aspen damage is considerable. This would likely follow in the next year and would cover the same monthly sequence and work intensity, with specifics being tailored to the damage and restoration at that site. Oak Wilt—Focus on removal of trees with Oak Wilt would follow restoration of the north and south windfall sites. Small pockets of localized Oak Wilt within the Park were identified by the Forester during his development of the Forest Management Plan. However, it was presented with less concern because of the various types of Oaks within the Park that are not all subject to this disease. Oak Wilt was noted in several areas in the “north windfall site” and likely would be marked for removal in the Oct-Nov time frame (delineated above) by a trained individual. Oak Wilt is more easily identified during the Summer months using a trained observer, so I would suggest Summer marking and Winter removal of those trees only after restoration of the north and south windfall sites are completed. Buckthorn – Presently, the ability to remove buckthorn is difficult at best and comes with great effort. There is a lot of it in the Park, especially on the south west and west side of the Park. Unfortunately ignoring it comes at a cost, as over many years the buckthorn will prevent new Oak or other trees from growing and buckthorn will predominate. Even if the City attacks buckthorn removal by dealing with small sections of land at a time, I believe the City will need outside assistance in grants and workers to deal with this problem. My proposal is that either volunteers such as myself or City staff research what is available in assistance (e.g., Clean Water, Land and Legacy or Great River Greening) prior to any buckthorn removal plan development. Once outside assistance is known, then the degree of buckthorn removal can be planned. Please feel free to follow-up with any questions. Thanks, Mary Frick Park Commission Chair STAFF REPORT DATE: 10/16/17 REGULAR ITEM #: 8 MOTION TO: Parks Commission FROM: Emily Becker, Planning Director AGENDA ITEM: Continental Properties REVIEWED BY: Ben Prchal, City Planner BACKGROUND: The City has received a request from Continental 419 Fund LLC c/o Gwyn Wheeler for approval of a Comprehensive Plan Amendment to re-guide a portion of PID# 34.029.21.43.0003 from Urban Medium Density Residential to Urban High Density Residential along with a General Planned Unit Development (PUD) Concept Plan for a 300 unit multi-family development on a 21.60 acre parcel to be called Springs Apartments. The property is located south of the Savona neighborhood, north of Hudson Boulevard and west of Keats Avenue. ISSUE BEFORE THE COMMISSION: The Commission should review the proposed parkland for the development and make recommendation to Council. PROPOSAL DETAILS/ANALYSIS: Parkland Dedication. The proposed development does not propose a public park but does provide recreation for its residents through the club house, pool and open space. The neighborhood park search area plan of the Comprehensive Plan indicates that a neighborhood park should be located in the below indicated neighborhood park search area. This area is already served by Savona Park. The proposed development consists of 21.60 acres, and the Applicant would be required to pay a park dedication fee in lieu of land for subdivision of less than four lots for a commercial property at a fee of $4,500 per acre. This would require a fee of $97,200.00. Parks Commission 10/16/2017 Regular Agenda item # Page 2 Trails. The Comprehensive Plan’s Trail Plan shows a planned trail down the proposed street along the west side of the development. The proposed plan indicates a proposed sidewalk along the future road but not a trail. Trail connection requirements along Hudson Blvd need to be reviewed. A crosswalk with pedestrian ramps to cross 5th Street N, should be constructed. Totlot? The Planning Commission reviewed the proposed development at its September 25th meeting and recommended that , if Council approved the Concept Plan, a condition of approval be that the Parks Commission review the development for a need for a totlot. Below provides the demographics of residents of other Springs Apartment developments according to the applicant based on their 2016 data: • 9% of residents are ages 0-17 o 3% are pre-school age (0-4) o 6% are school age (5-17) • Based on 9%, the proposed Springs in Lake Elmo would have 46 residents 0-17 yrs old. This assumes: o Average household size of 1.8 (portfolio average) o 300 units, 513 residents (assuming 5% vacancy) FISCAL IMPACT: If the City decides to accept cash in lieu of required parkland, it will receive 10% of the sale price of the property for parkland dedication. RECOMMENDATION: Staff would recommend that a trail be substituted for a sidewalk and that there be no public park and fees in lieu of dedicated parkland. The Parks Commission should provide input on whether or not a totlot be required. ATTACHMENTS: • Continental (Springs Apartments) Site Plan STAFF REPORT DATE: 10/16/2017 REGULAR ITEM #: 9 TO: Parks Commission FROM: Rob Weldon, Public Works Director AGENDA ITEM: Firearm Deer Hunt in Sunfish Lake Park REVIEWED BY: BACKGROUND: Four years ago, in conjunction with Washington County’s Lake Elmo Regional Park, the City of Lake Elmo allowed a two-day firearm hunt in Sunfish Lake Park. ISSUE BEFORE COOMMISSION: Does the Park Commission support a two-day firearm hunt in Sunfish Lake Park? PROPOSAL DETAILS/ANALYSIS: If a two-day firearm, hunt is allowed the hunt would be conducted on the opening weekend of the Minnesota Gun Deer Season and follow all DNR Rules. Additionally, there would be a limited number of hunters allowed in the park at any one time. To obtain permission to hunt a date and time to sign up would need to be established and interested parties could sign up on a first come- first serve basis. In 2013, there were six zones established for hunting in the park and only six hunters allowed to hunt at a time. FISCAL IMPACT: none OPTIONS: - Recommend to City Council Approval of a two-day firearm hunt in Sunfish Lake Park - Deny two-day hunt in Sunfish Lake Park - Table for further discussion STAFF REPORT DATE: 10/16/17 REGULAR ITEM #: 10 MOTION TO: Parks Commission FROM: Emily Becker, Planning Director AGENDA ITEM: Mountain Biking – Sunfish Lake Park REVIEWED BY: Ben Prchal, City Planner BACKGROUND: Last month, the Parks Commission was scheduled to discuss biking in Sunfish Lake Park. Due to a lack of a quorum, the September meeting was canceled. Included in that meeting packet was a copy of the conservation easement, information from the City’s website and information provided by a resident. At the October 10, 2017 City Council work session, the Council directed staff to work with the Parks Commission and other experts to develop a plan to allow for mountain biking at Sunfish Lake Park. It has been recommended to us by both SASCA and the Minnesota Land Trust (MNLT) to work with Minnesota Off-Road Cyclists (MORC) if we choose to move forward in developing a project plan. However, prior to any construction of trails or allowing mountain biking use on current trails, we must first present a preliminary plan to the MNLT for approval as they have regulative authority over the land. ISSUE BEFORE THE COMMISSION: How would the Parks Commission like to proceed with developing a plan for mountain biking at Sunfish Lake Park? PROPOSAL DETAILS/ANALYSIS: Minnesota Land Trust Conservation Easement. The Minnesota Land Trust Conservation Easement does not explicitly prohibit mountain biking but certain terms of the easement agreement need to be adhered to. The use of mountain biking on any trails must minimize any adverse impact on the natural and scenic quality, and not create significant erosion. Trail Construction. The proposal for the development of mountain biking in Sunfish Lake Park is in the preliminary stage. After staff met with Minnesota Land trust they advised us to provide them with an outline of: - Where the multi-use trails will go - Maintenance plan - How do we plan to minimize erosion from the trails - The MNLT holds a conservation easement over the land, because of this we must first acquire approval from them before improvements are made in the park. Staff is looking for direction from the Parks Commission on how they’d like to move forward. FISCAL IMPACT: Cost of trail construction and maintenance to be determined through the design and build process. Parks Commission 10/16/2017 Page 2 OPTIONS: 1) Begin working on a concept plan showing the layout of possible trail locations 2) Solicit the help of MORC or another trail design, build and maintenance expert to develop a concept plan 3) Develop a Request for Qualifications (RFQ) for firms to design, build and/or maintain mountain biking trails RECOMMENDATION: Staff would recommend starting by soliciting the help of MORC or another trail expert to develop a concept plan. Then use that to go out for a formal Request for Proposals for design, build and maintenance if necessary. ATTACHMENTS: • Current Trail Map • Areal of Sunfish Lake Park • Previous packet items o Conservation Easement o Additional Background from website and resident STAFF REPORT DATE: 10/16/17 REGULAR ITEM #: 11 MOTION TO: Parks Commission FROM: Emily Becker, Planning Director AGENDA ITEM: Pickleball REVIEWED BY: Ben Prchal, City Planner Kristina Handt, City Administrator Rob Weldon, Public Works Director BACKGROUND: A few years ago a group came to the Parks Commission asking for pickleball courts. It is an increasingly popular sport according to an article recently published in the Pioneer Press. If desired, the Parks Commission should plan for this during the annual decisions on the Capital Improvement Plan (CIP). The next new park is planned for 2020. ISSUE BEFORE THE COMMISSION: Should the park planned for 2020 include pickleball? PROPOSAL DETAILS/ANALYSIS: The 2017-2021 CIP plans for a new park in 2020. While it does not designate which park that will be, many residents from the Village Preserve development have inquired about a park. This park is in close proximity to homes, and pickleball may be a sport that is a bit noisy to be placed in a park that is so near residences. The Inwood development may better support the demographic that pickleball tends to attract. Additionally, Staff had previously done research on pickleball courts. Notes are below. • Noise, orientation, and amenities (and resulting increased cost) including benches, gear storage, tables, restrooms, increased parking, maintenance storage, lighting, and fencing should also be taken in to consideration. o Acoustifence can be considered to reduce noise by over 50%, but a 6’X30’ roll will cost around $750. • Researched Cities with Pickleball Courts: o Apple Valley  Bank of 6 courts costed roughly $150,000 including fencing and sub-surface work. o New Hope  They painted an existing tennis court to accommodate pickleball. o St. Cloud  They recently installed a six court pickleball complex that cost $200,000. Parks Commission 10/16/2017 Page 2  The Parks Director commented that they have experienced a number of noise complaints due to not only the noise but the increased traffic. He stated that the court is very popular, and that people are there constantly. The nearest residence is about 300 feet. o Savage  They painted an existing tennis court to accommodate pickleball. o Bloomington  Most courts are painted with a yellow line on top of an existing tennis court. A single new tennis court cost $60,000 including demo of new courts. o Nearest Pickleball Court Locations:  Oakland Jr. High School (residents are allowed to use these courts during non- school hours)  Cottage Grove  Oakdale (6 member, outdoors)  Woodbury (6 member, 2 member outdoor courts and 25 member indoor courts) FISCAL IMPACT: Costs of a pickleball court can range from $300-$300,000 for a multi-sport complex. OPTIONS: 1) Plan to include pickleball as an amenity in the future park planned for 2020 in the City’s CIP. 2) Do not plan a park around pickleball as an amenity in the future park planned for 2020 in the City’s CIP. ATTACHMENTS: • Pioneer Press Pickleball Article It has a ‘stupid’ name, but tennis- style pickleball is catching on in the Twin Cities By Bob Shaw | bshaw@pioneerpress.com | Pioneer Press PUBLISHED: September 17, 2017 at 10:00 am | UPDATED: September 17, 2017 at 12:09 pm • • • • • Bob Smutka, a two-time pickleball international tournament player who competed in Amsterdam in 2014 and 2016, stretches out before playing pickleball at Shawnee Park in Woodbury on Wednesday, Sept. 13, 2017. Woodbury recently tore out two old tennis courts and replaced them with six pickleball courts. The Woodbury Pickleball Club, with 250 members, plays there from 9 a.m. to 1 p.m. six days a week. (Jean Pieri / Pioneer Press) Bob Smutka loves everything about his favorite sport, except for one little thing. It’s called pickleball. “It’s a stupid name for a great sport,” said Smutka, sweating on the sidelines during four hours of play in Woodbury on Wednesday. The name is so silly that it’s hard for newcomers to take the sport seriously, he said. Yet in the past five years, thousands of new players have rushed onto a soaring number of pickleball courts, including new courts in Woodbury, Shoreview, Cottage Grove and Forest Lake. “It’s growing like crazy,” said Marti Miles, part of the 250-member Woodbury Pickleball Club. Pickleball is what would happen if tennis and ping-pong fell into a blender. The court is small — three of them can fit onto a tennis court. The net is low — 2 inches lower than a tennis net. The racquets are light, similar to ping-pong paddles. The game has been described as tennis for couch potatoes. “I call it easy ping-pong,” said player Laura Hahn of West St. Paul. Pickleball has surged, along with the number of aging baby boomers. Older players find the sport much easier on knees, elbows and backs. One of them is Miles, who played tennis for 40 years until she discovered pickleball. “I never picked up a tennis racquet again,” she said, over the whacks and chatter of 24 people playing on the Woodbury courts. But younger players like it, too. “There is a perception that this is an old-people’s sport,” said Lake Johnson, recreation supervisor for Roseville. “But I am 25 and I can tell you that the younger generation is picking up on it.” That city added four outdoor courts in 2015, then six indoor courts in a local school. In neighboring Shoreview, 22 outdoor and indoor courts draw hundreds of players. Recreation program supervisor Jeremy Bailey said it was Minnesota snowbirds who got the pickleball rolling. The retirees played the sport in Florida, and wanted to see more pickleball in Shoreview. They stampeded to the city’s pickleball club, which now has 350 members. Shoreview responded with a pickleball building binge. “We found that ‘If you build it, they will come,’ ” said Bailey, stealing a line from the movie “Field of Dreams.” Woodbury recently tore out two unused tennis courts in Shawnee Park and replaced them with six pickleball courts. “That was our first stab at pickleball,” said assistant parks and recreation director Mike Adams. Officials were flabbergasted to see how popular those courts have become. Seven days a week, four to six hours a day, the courts are used by up to 40 players at a time. Members of the Woodbury Pickleball Club play at Shawnee Park. (Jean Pieri / Pioneer Press) On Wednesday, the courts were overflowing. Taking a break was 68-year-old Smutka, Woodbury’s prince of pickleball, who has twice played in Amsterdam at international pickleball tournaments. He was drenched in sweat, and took a swig of water from a bottle. “I lose 6 pounds of water- weight every day,” he said. Six days a week, four hours a day, Smutka terrorizes his opponents — as much as you can terrorize anyone with a ball that weighs as much as four miniature marshmallows. The lesser players tease him. “I am a beginner. I suck. But you can be very mean,” Hahn told him. “I only say things like, ‘The line is not your friend!’ ” countered Smutka. Smutka says the courts are overcrowded, and area parks are not keeping up. “The southeast quadrant of the Twin Cities is a dead zone — no pickleball courts,” he said, as he picked up a stray ball and tossed it back. Several players chatted next to him, and said socializing is part of the pickleball scene. While tennis is intense, well-starched and formal, pickleball is loosey-goosey and casual. Four players share a small court, and often switch partners. Women play with men. The games are short. And no one can take the game too seriously, with jokers like Hahn on the sidelines. “Could you TALK a little LOUDER?” she shouted, making fun of the old-player stereotype. “I am over 50! I can’t hear —!” But can the game overcome the name? The name’s origins are murky. Some say it was coined by a family whose dog’s name was Pickles, while others say it was named after “pickle boats” that were the last fishing boats to return to harbor. Either way, it’s not a name that inspires awe and dignity. “We’d have even more players if it were not called pickleball,” said player Miles. Silly or not, it’s becoming too big to ignore. Aficionados like Smutka have the highest hopes for their ridiculously named sport. “There is a move,” he said, “to get it into the Olympics.”