HomeMy WebLinkAbout021914 Park Commission Minutes
MINUTES
City of Lake Elmo Park Commission
Wednesday, February 19, 2014
Members Present: Steele, Nelson, Weis, Frick, Ames, Hietpas, Zeno
Members Absent: Hartley, Silvernale
Others Present: Administrator Zuleger, Planning Commissioner Larson, Mayor Pearson, Taxpayer Relations
& Communications Coordinator MacLeod, PWS Bouthilet
The meeting was called to order by Chair Weis at 6:33 PM.
Approval of Agenda
M/S/P: Steele/Ames: Approved 7-0
Approval of December 16, 2013 Minutes
M/S/P: Steele/Hietpas: Approved 7-0
Approval of January 30, 2014 Minutes
M/S/P: Steele/Frick: Approved 4-0 Weis, Zeno, Ames abstain
Assign Mary Frick to Full Member/David Steele to Alternate
Zuleger explained that at the previous meeting officers had been elected but, as an alternate, Frick was
inappropriately appointed as vice chair. Steele volunteered to switch to role of alternate to allow Frick to
become a full member.
M/S/P: Ames/Zeno: Approved 7-0
Presentations
a. Dennis Bloom, ISD 834, Joint Park at Oak-Land Junior High
Dennis Bloom, Director of Operations Stillwater Public Schools addressed the commission to talk about a
partnership between city and the district concerning a park expansion at Oak-Land Junior High School. The
district is planning to completely reconstruct the tennis court area of the park at a cost of $310,000 (alternate
facility funds - not levy funds). The project includes the reconstruction of three existing courts. For an additional
$80,000 three new courts could be constructed in addition to the three existing.
The district proposed that the park commission pay $80k to cover the three additional courts and to form
partnership for future (public) park development.
Ames asked about the demand of the parks and if there was a need to double court space. Bloom responded
that the courts are heavily used by public and the added space would also helpful for the schools.
Ames asked about the plan for maintenance over time. Bloom confirmed that the school district would be
completely responsible for maintenance.
Bloom stated that the district would be going out for bids early April, with the bid offering on April 17, 2014.
Bloom added that the projects would be bid separately and that the park commission would be committing to
no more than $80k.
Frick asked about public use of the facility. Bloom responded that they do advertise public use of the facilities
and that they are opening Oakland Junior High as community center. Frick asked about signage stating that it
is public access. Bloom confirmed that there currently is no signage but that it could be added. Hietpas asked if
there was lighting. Bloom confirmed no lighting. Steele asked who primarily uses current courts – if they were
Lake Elmo residents. Bloom could not confirm.
Ames asked about the proposed bike path along Manning. Bloom responded that they were part of the
Manning project but wasn’t certain when they would be going in. Ames asked if there would be flexibility to
extend a trail from the west to the Manning Ave. bike path. Bloom confirmed that it was a possibility, and
mentioned that there was already an unofficial trail developed.
Zuleger stated that from a cash flow standpoint it is difficult to develop a park in that area because the land is
guided for commercial use. In this case, Zuleger said that they would likely be getting the investment back in
parkland dedication funds from development in that quadrant. Zuleger also said that it makes sense location-
wise.
Steele asked about the timeline on development of the park, and expressed hesitancy in funding the project if
the park wouldn’t be developed for several years. Zuleger and Bloom responded that the commission would
set the pace. Bloom further expressed that it would be a great partnership and that they were already
collaborating on projects such as the student drop off point at Lake Elmo Elementary.
Steele stated that he did not see organized sports as a high priority based on the park survey and was
concerned that roughly 8% of the commission’s 2014 designated funds would be invested in something that he
wasn’t sure there was much demand. Ames referenced Zuleger’s earlier comments that the commission would
be benefitting from future parkland funds that they would acquire from future development, while already
having a park in place. Zuleger added that this partnership makes sense because staff has not been able to
determine where to put the park in that quadrant, and this would help solve the placement issue.
The entire area is 40 acres; an estimated 5 acres would be allocated for the community park space. Ames
stated that he was supportive of the idea, but would like more information about the wooded area and its
restrictions.
A motion was made to support the concept of a shared park space and tennis court expansion at Oak-Land
pending details of Joint Powers Agreement.
Ames/Hietpas: Approved 7-0
b. Megan Schmidt, Resident, Access to LEPR via 27th Street
Resident Megan Schmidt moved to Lake Elmo in September, near the northwest corner of the Lake Elmo Park
Reserve. Her neighborhood has been using an unofficial path into the Park Reserve and addressed the
commission to express interest in making an official entrance.
Weis clarified that they are looking for a neighborhood trail instead of public access. Schmidt confirmed.
Frick asked about ownership of the land in that area. According to the map, part is city-owned, part privately
owned and part watershed.
Currently the private property owners grant access. Schmidt is concerned that if the property, which is for sale,
is purchased residents would be restricted from future access. Schmidt asked if there was a way to make a
permanent easement for access into the park.
Ames suggested that they would need to acquire the ROW at the private property to gain access to the park.
Ames added that he liked the idea of access to park in the northwest corner but expressed concern toward
limiting access to one neighborhood, especially if they would be paying to create the access.
Ames stated that the commission is already looking to obtain access to the LEPR in the northwest part already,
so timing works well. Weis expressed concern that cutting through the privately owned land for access may be
a problem.
Steele asked Zuleger for guidance. Zuleger stated that they would have to acquire more information about the
easement, and added that they would need to go back to the county about access control. Weis answered that
it was a watershed easement. Zuleger replied that a watershed easement would be difficult to pave or improve.
Frick expressed concerns about offering neighborhood access to a county park that requires fees. Zuleger
confirmed that it was an issue that would need to be discussed.
Steele stated that overall he believes the commission thinks it is a good idea.
Zeno pointed out the possibility that creating an entrance in this area would result in people driving into the
neighborhood and parking on 27th Street to get into the park.
Old Business
a. New Park Sign Design (MacLeod)
MacLeod presented material options and pricing for two different sign designs. The estimate was acquired
from impression Signs and Graphics in Oakdale. Sign designs incorporated elements from the Damon Farber
theming.
Signs options range from $3,300 to $9,000 per sign based materials, which include Extira, aluminum, High
Density Polyethylene (HDP).
Ames asked what the CIP allocation was for signs. Zuleger responded that it wasn’t determined; an overall
budget was determined at $220,000. Zuleger added that with the addition of equipment and signs they would
be at about $340,000.
The commission was asked to select a design to move forward with. Design 1 was a more contemporary
option; Design 2 a more traditional option. Motion made to approve Design 1 to acquire more details.
M/S/P: Weis/Ames: Approved 7-0
b. Easton Village Re-Design (Tom Walters, Zuleger)
Tom Walters with Easton Village addressed the council. The Easton Village concept plan was presented to the
Park Commission at the last meeting and expressed concerns about walkability, connectivity, and access to
Reid Park. Walters presented an updated plan based on feedback received. The concept was redesigned to
include fewer cul-de-sacs and modifications to the pocket park (moving it further north and increasing the size).
The new design presents access into Reid from two points. Walters added that they envision that the park
would be added on to the north. Ames questioned the topography on park in lower left. Walters confirmed that
it is hilly, but would able to add a trail. Ames expressed consideration for potential uses.
Steele questioned what feedback Walters would like from the commission. Walters confirmed that he was just
following up
Zeno asked what the effect would be if Manning were to be turned into four-lane with a median. Walters
assured that there would still be room for trail and that the issue has already been discussed with the county.
Motion indicating the park commission supports the concept plan as it relates to park access/trails/land
M/S/P: Ames/Weis: Approved 7-0
New Business
a. Old Village “Village Green” Concept (Weis/Zuleger)
Weis shared that at the joint workshop with the Council it was discussed that the park commission be in line
with city’s future plan for village green. The commission didn’t feel that they were clear what the plan was.
Hietpas emphasized that it’s important to know the greater vision to be able to plan and account for larger park
areas. Frick stated that at the workshop Smith encouraged the commissioners to review the Village Green
plan.
Zuleger discussed the council’s plan for the Village green and where it would be located. Currently it is loosely
guided in the comp plan (included in the plan but does not have a designated place). The stakeholders in the
downtown area would like to see it located closer to Lake Elmo Avenue rather than where it is guided (east of
downtown), to keep downtown walkable and close to downtown businesses.
Ames expressed that during his time serving on the park commission he has seen multiple versions of the old
village plan. Ames requested to see the most current plan. Zuleger located one and displayed it on screen.
Zuleger shared that the next council workshop would focus on downtown development, which would include
market analysis. A Buxton analysis indicated that there wasn’t much available for retail.
Steele expressed that he liked the idea of moving the village green closer to downtown. He suggested that with
the development of senior housing in the area that perhaps some retail/food in the area would be desirable.
Zuleger responded that they small retail including a hardware store, market, coffee shop, etc., and would be
located near where the current ball fields are. The downtown area is zoned as mixed use, allowing houses,
commerce, public facilities, multi-family housing, etc.
Ames stated that he agrees with the village green being close to downtown, but that without a plan for a ball
field he feels reluctant to give up current ball park land. Frick added that she is most confused about the plan
for a sports complex and is concerned about the demand for the complex. Frick thought that current demand
would warrant a need, but wasn’t sure about the future. Zuleger expressed that many communities are moving
to open fields with portable backstops.
Zuleger pointed out where the current green was planned, including ball fields, which were located near the
wetlands. Zuleger discussed the vision of the green, and referenced Wausau’s 400 block as an example.
Steele suggested that if they add a green that they don’t skimp.
Ames asked that the park commission continue to be informed about the plan for the Old Village. Zuleger
invited commissioners to attend the March Council Workshop.
Steele confirmed that there are two different issues: where to place the park, and how to design it. Steele
suggested that the commission be active in designing what goes into the Village Green and expressed that he
would like them to be a part of that. Zuleger confirmed that it is their purview.
Zeno suggested that in order to add input to the development of the village green they need to be kept current
on what is happening. Zuleger provided commission with an update on the process of the approval of the Old
Village concept plan with Met Council.
Zuleger asked the commission how communication can become improved. They discussed the option of cross
sending agendas. Weis clarified that if the council packets include anything related to parks that a copy should
be forwarded to the commission. Larson suggested adding a password protected area on the website with
folders and resources including park related items.
Lions and VFW in the No Net Lost. Ames asked if the park areas could ever be changed without the
commission’s knowledge.
Zuleger added that they are catching up on the county transportation plan. He added that the huge issue for
downtown is parking.
b. Monthly Action Item: Placement of Equipment in Priority Park (Weis/Hartley)
Weis has started a “monthly action item,” meaning each month they pick a project to get started on. Weis
asked for the commissioners to suggest items to include.
This month he thought they could talk about refurbishing one item in a playground. Zuleger shared that
Hartley’s preference was Pebble; Commission agrees. Hietpas asked if it were refurbished or replaced.
Zuleger said that it would most likely be replaced. Hietpas asked how to make sure that happens.
Weis suggested that Bouthilet come to the next meeting with five different options with pricing. Frick suggested
providing with more direction. Bouthilet stated that there was a wide variety of options available and suggested
going in a new direction and trying some new ideas. Hietpas asked if new park plans could use a consistent
color scheme that possibly coordinates with the new signs. She suggested that earth tones would go well with
the theming. Ames requested a range of options and prices. He suggested that a play structure could drive
traffic to a park.
Steele suggested designating park expenditures all at once rather than piecemeal. The commission decided to
focus on designating budget at the March meeting.
Hietpas suggested that telling Bouthilet to come with a few different items, they need to provide a budget and
how it fits; suggests refining needs/desires first.
Meeting adjourned at 8:55 PM
Respectfully Submitted,
Alyssa MacLeod, Recording Secretary