HomeMy WebLinkAbout121514 Park Commission Minutes
MINUTES
City of Lake Elmo Park Commission
Monday, December 15, 2014
Members Present: Hartley, Weis, Silvernale, Frick, Ames, Steele, Zeno
Members Absent: Nelson, Hietpas
Others Present: Taxpayer Relations & Communications Coordinator MacLeod, Planning Commissioner Rolf
Larson, Park Maintainer Colemer, City Administrator Zuleger, Planning Intern Riley
The meeting was called to order by Chair Weis at 6:41 PM.
Approval of Agenda
Zuleger requested to add Item B under New Business – DeMontreville Pool Issue.
M/S/P: Ames/Frick: Approved as amended 7-0
Approval of November 17, 2014 Minutes
Ames asked to change third paragraph, second page: “Ames is uncomfortable”
M/S/P: Weis/Hartley: Approved as amended 7-0
New Business
a. Carriage Station Park Deed & Maintenance
Two parcels of land in Carriage Station have never been deeded back to the city, as should have been
according to previous agreement. The first is an approximate 3.2 acre parcel where the park is located, and a
.5 acre parcel where the city well house is located. Zuleger said that he spoke to the representatives of the
HOA (Ed Kunnary and Dave O’Neil), and the city has an agreement verbally to take two pieces of land and
deed them back to the city. He is suggesting that the park commission ratify two parcels at this time.
Zuleger suggested that they have E.G. Rud survey and quitclaim the land, at the city’s expense.
Ames asked where the assumption of land for the park was. He asked where the maps identifying park land
were created and how the boundaries were determined. Zuleger said the only boundary they had was the
outlot, and there was no boundary delineation for the park specifically.
Zuleger asked the commission to recommend to council to create two outlots in Carriage Station Park (outlot
#1 carriage Station Proper 3.2 acres and the wellhouse .5 acres).
Motion made to create two parcels carriage station proper 3.2 acres, and .5 acres for the well house at
Carriage Station Park at the City expense
M/S/P: Hartley/Ames: Approved 7-0.
Dave O’Neil arrived at 6:50 pm after motion was made and approved. He was president of the HOA at the time
working with Marty (Rafferty), when he learned that the park was the back-up site for the wastewater treatment
system. An easement was also acquired across 50th in order to remain compliant.
O’Neil presented a map that identified the area of land that the HOA previously agreed to deed to the City. The
borders provided by the HOA were slightly different than what the City is proposing. O’Neil said that what was
discussed as a border in the past was the tree line.
Motion amended by Weis to be consistent with the agreement that the HOA created 8 years ago in relation to
the path.
b. DeMontreville Pool
The home at 7920 Demontreville Trail had a pool built beyond the property line, in DeMontreville Wildlife Park.
The property was permitted and passed inspection at the time (before current staff); it was city error. Zuleger
said that they had worked with land owner to buy a tenth of an acre to extend the lot line to include the pool.
The city will get it appraised, and come back to park commission and council for approval; money would go to
the park fund. Estimate between $4-10k.
The homeowner is interested in purchasing the land at market price. If the landowner does not agree, they city
will ask them to remove the pool.
Motion made to proceed as suggested to sell parcel of land to homeowner at market value to allow for
setbacks approximately 1/10th of an acre.
M/S/P: Ames/Hartley: Approved 7-0.
Old Business
a. Bee Safe City Ordinance
Riley gave a presentation outlining the declining health/population of bees and how cities are passing bee-safe
policies to address the issue. The ordinance would primarily ban neonicitinoids and systemic incesticides.
Shorewood is the first city in the metro to pass the ordinance. Stillwater is currently working on one.
The City’s land treatment methods are currently in compliance with the bee-safe ordinance, and there would be
no additional cost to become a bee-friendly city.
Steele asked for confirmation on what making a bee friendly habitat entails. Riley replied that it would be
ceasing the use of chemicals, and she said that they could potentially plant native species on city land. Steele
suggested that they could be more aggressive in their efforts to be bee friendly.
Hartley shared that at a recent conference she attended she learned that the packaging on some of common
chemicals tells you to use amounts that are about 10x the amount that most agricultural farmers would use.
Hartley asked if we have discussed emerald ash borer. Zuleger replied that they had proposed to put out trays,
but when the forestry program was disbanded, the effort lost steam. He said that they are telling folks not to
plant certain varieties of ash. Hartley said that some people are treating the ash with the systemic insecticides
(injections around the root zone).
Zuleger said he highly supports a bee-safe policy, and with the Engstrom development they will see a bee
friendly habitat; he will prescribe pollinator-based landscaping as well.
Steele thinks this is good work and would like to support this. He feels as part of the resolution they need to
include a more detailed plan. He would like to go beyond stopping the negative factors, and work on
implementing positive changes that encourage the bees. Zuleger responded that the ordinance would be a
good kick off and they could use the next 6 months to create a solid plan.
Motion made to accept the Bee Safe ordinance and approve staff to design an operational plan to implement
concepts by July 1.
Ames suggested that this be incorporated to the planning functions for upcoming developments to make sure
that they are in compliance.
Steele asked if there was something similar to help the butterfly population and was wondering if they could
look at a similar resolution in the next couple of months. Zuleger suggested that it’s covered in the pollinator.
M/S/P: Frick/Hartley: Approved 7-0.
b. Comprehensive Plan Updates
Riley presented updated information: playground equipment inventory, activities and amenities, parks service
map. 18,500 will most likely be the updated population projection for Thrive MSP 2040 (population needs to be
updated in Riley’s updates but remains concentrated in the I94 area).
The commission discussed that more parkland may be needed in the I94 corridor to compensate for density.
Zuleger asked what kind of space are they talking about and that having a definition to appropriate size would
help with planning efforts going forward (they want a minimum number for parkland when dealing with concept
plans). Ames suggested 3 acre minimum.
Steele thinks that they need to be aggressive with future developments to say they need the park land instead
of money in lieu of.
Zeno discussed the illusion factor to use landscaping to make parks feelings larger than they are.
Weis feels that they should leave a little bit of room for the developer to determine how much park is needed
based on demographics.
Larson said that he thinks a mistake they’ve made in the past is basing parkland on size rather than density.
Frick asked if changing the PUD language is needed.
Steele discussed incorporating wetlands into the park plans. Zuleger said that there are shoreland ordinances
that need to be taken into account.
Riley reiterated that they should have a strong definition of what open space is because now many
developments are putting storm ponds as their open space. Steele talked about adding some of these things to
agenda early on next year to discuss.
Weis suggested adding open space discussion to the next park agenda.
c. Easton Village Park Budget
Weis said that he was surprised about being given the price tag for the Easton Village proposed park at the
last meeting he did not want to penalize the developer for bringing a plan. He encouraged the commission to
decide on a budget to give the developers to work with. Zuleger stated that he had spoken with the developers
and were realistically looking at about $70k, similar to the Sanctuary Park budget.
The park is about 3 acres; development will have 271 units. The commission discussed taking a phased
approach, as no one was living there yet.
Ames stated that the park shouldn’t be built while no one is living there, but also doesn’t want to see happen
there what happened in Sanctuary. Ames suggested setting a policy where the commission would commit to
100% park development once the homes are at 50% developed.
The commission will discuss and devise a formula for putting equipment in new developments next month.
d. Sunfish Lake Task Force Plan Discussion
Steele suggested that they send emails suggesting edits that they would like on the plan, and revisit in
January. Weis suggested sending all items to Steele and have Steele discuss with the subcommittee (in order
to avoid open meeting) and present changes at the February meetings.
Zuleger shared with the commission that SunShare, a company for solar energy wants to come and present to
the commission about putting solar panels in Sunfish on the landfill. Ames talked about infrastructure in city
parks and they have denied items in the past (ie. water tower). Hartley would still like to see a dog park put into
the area. Zuleger reiterated that all they are looking for tonight is a yes or no toward whether they want these
people to come in and present.
Motion made to recommend that SunShare reevaluate a different location for solar panels.
M/S/P: Weis/Hartley: Approved 7-0.
Staff Report
a. MPCA Update
Zuleger is having coffee with MPCA Commissioner Stein on Thursday. There was never a solid promise made
by MPCA to provide funds in lieu of parkland – they would consider helping the city seek grants to cover the
cost of land. The real issue is whether the city can be relieved from the obligation to provide replacement land.
It is likely that the city can avoid penalization.
Zuleger confirmed that the next step (advised by the park commission) is to get the city out of obligation with
the DNR to replace the land. Commission confirmed.
b. January & February 2015 Meeting Dates
Meetings dates will be changed from regularly scheduled dates to January 5 due to Martin Luther King Jr. Day
on the19th and February 2 due to Presidents Day on the 16th
c. January Meeting Prep
Formula for implementing new parks (at what percent complete)
Open space definition for PUD (include Johnson)
Meeting adjourned at 9:08 PM
Respectfully Submitted,
Alyssa MacLeod, Recording Secretary