The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About100614 Park Retreat NotesMINUTES City of Lake Elmo Park Commission – Planning Retreat Monday, October 6, 2014 Members Present: Hartley, Nelson, Weis, Zeno (6:33), Silvernale, Steele, Frick, Hietpas, Nelson Members Absent: Ames, Others Present: Planning Commissioner Larson, Taxpayer Relations & Communications Coordinator MacLeod, PWS Bouthilet, Park Maintainer Colemer, City Administrator Zuleger The meeting was called to order by Chair Weis at XXXX PM. Results of Sanctuary Park Survey 58 surveys were sent to all properties in the sanctuary neighborhood. 48 surveys were returned in total, by deadline. Results: 35 votes to install equipment this fall in the proposed location; 13* votes to postpone installment until spring (*4 ‘no’ votes were from one individual who owns four lots in the neighborhood). Discussion Steele asked what residents were told about park location when moving into the neighborhood. Zuleger responded that it is hard to pinpoint as several conflicting messages had been provided by various sources (ie. Realtors). Frick noted that she was not present during the vote on approving the park installation. She asked if the commission had considered all locations and deemed the location for the play equipment the best choice. Commission confirmed. Steele stated that he does not like the park – he feels it is a troubled park in terms of parking and security. In spite, he feels that the votes in favor are convincing and thinks they should listen to the residents. Motion made to approve park installation in Fall 2014 at determined site. M/S/P: Hartley/Silvernale: Approved 7-0 2015 Park Commission Planning Retreat a. Recap/Grade 2014 Plan of Work Reeves asked for general comments about plan of work. Steele thought the POW was an excellent blueprint for the year. He suggested that they review an updated copy at each monthly meeting to track progress. (Zuleger suggested that assigned deadlines could be added as well). Steele also suggested bringing the master plan back to the forefront. Silvernale suggested making a monthly plan for the entire year. He would like to see the commission get one item 100% complete each month. (Reeves stated that Weiss did a good job of this – Hartley echoed) Weis affirmed the schedule idea – a reason why the “park priority item” was placed on agenda. Frick recommended reviewing frequently to remove items that become irrelevant. She questioned using a project management program to chart progress. Hartley likes that the plan of work is broken out into different categories. Reeves stated that about 50% of goals were completed and from a success standpoint – the commission accomplished a lot in the past year. Reeves asked for reactions to the scorecard. Silvernale: LERT feels they haven’t made any progress…doesn’t think they’re much further along than last year. Zuleger responded that they have made progress in terms of gaining a stronger understanding about projects, and building relationships with Washington County Parks Department. Reeves: With 11 developments in the works he thinks the city has an opportunity through council/commissions/staff to ask where they want parks in the city and where they want connections. Frick stated that it would be nice to have a large map highlighting all developments to get a holistic viewpoint. Steele feels they should be aggressive as possible with park space in the I94 corridor. He does not like the trend with pocket parks. Larson feels that there has not been good continuity between the park and planning commission to this point. Larson expressed concern about the abundance in development in the I94 corridor. Zuleger responded that due to modern stormwater management plans, there is less space that can be allocated to parks. Steele asked if they could possibly do a joining park and planning meeting when discussing new developments. Zuleger suggested that the commission add updating the park plan to their 2015 plan of work. b. Priority Setting Priorities for 2015 1. Trails 2. Comp plan 2b. Sunfish Lake Park (forestry and park plan) 3. Continue on park improvements ($300k) Weis Park and trail plan Take lead on downtown green space Sunfish improvements per task force recommendations. Zeno Work with HOA to create connections to their trails and look into ownership options Establish plan for sunfish lake park area 3 Create a comprehensive park and trail plan Hartley Sunfish Lake Park tree removal and forestry plan LERT/Trails – getting them off the ground Complete upgrades to community parks that were discussed in 2014 Steele Complete park improvements in tablyn as discussed Allocate $300K to improve existing parks Develop master plan for Reid Park Frick More land for hiking trails Sunfish park forestry management Create a comprehensive park plan Nelson Trails Streamline meeting processes Maintain LE theme throughout community Hietpas More trees and forestry maintenance Create a comprehensive park plan including village green Complete existing park improvements Silvernale LERT/trails Sunfish improvements Keep Sanctuary/Geotschel planning on the radar Colemer Better understanding of timing for projects Determine ice rink location Parking at Ridge Park Bouthilet Pebble Park ball fields/parking lot Land trust approved forestry management plan Paved trails through Reid Park, connecting to downtown/31st street c. Review Current Parkland Dedication Fund Balance Current balance after payouts $779,761.59. Fund will continue to be replenished through new development. d. 2015 Park Revitalization Plan Commission recommends spending $350k - $400k toward 2015 park revitalization efforts. Priorities/expenditures - Sunfish Lake park/forestry/nature preserve - ADA Playground (Reid) - Pebble/Tablyn completion - Reid Park Bathroom/planning (Hietpas asked for developer to complete plan) - Lions Park - Alternate Activities (Frisbee golf) - Park planning - New park development - Equipment (mowers and skidsteer for the parks) e. 2015 City of Lake Elmo Trail Plan Recap on current/proposed Lake Elmo trail system: Manning will have trail on both sides of road from I94 to high school (8’ ped trail) – East border 5th Street developers paying for 100% - 8’ped, 5’ trail and sidewalk – Inwood to Manning. Trying to find enough ROW to put trail on 10th with repaving. Northern border, 50th to tri-lakes to Gateway (identified trail area – will need to spend money on) LERT Continues to be key in the search areas (most eligible for funding opportunities). In order to keep trail process moving, and be considered for inclusion on Washington County’s Master Plan a Certified trail plan including connections to neighborhoods would need to be completed. First step is a feasibility study; approximate cost $35-$50k, working with Washington County. Motion to approve expenditure not to exceed $50k for LERT feasibility study. M/S/P: Weis/Hartley: Approved 7-0 f. 2015 Sunfish Lake/Forestry Plan of Work Sunfish Task force: Met a couple of times. Found several uses in areas 1 & 2. When they started talking about area 3 they thought it would be best to meet in the area, and that’s where they left off. Frick frustrated with the storm damage. Would like to get plan completed to present to land trust and gain approval. Motion to develop forestry plan not to exceed $10k. Discussion: Hietpas concerned how important it is to remove the fallen. Expressed that there are some other options to take down select trees. Not beneficial to deal with fallen stuff with buckthorn invasion. M/S/P: Frick/Hartley: Approved 7-0 Hietpas mentioned that with the plantings done in Sunfish, they had talked about planting seedlings and asked if anyone is interested in participating in the effort. Weis recommended putting the item on October park agenda. Weis asked if they wanted to continue with further discussion about Sunfish activity planning. Steele asked that the commission wait for the task force report. Retreat Recap Mention of upcoming planning meeting and downtown summit next week. Adjourned at 8:53 pm