My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
PK PACKET 09122022
StAnthony
>
Parks & Planning Commission
>
Parks and Environmental Commission Packets
>
2022
>
PK PACKET 09122022
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/12/2022 3:04:01 PM
Creation date
9/9/2022 8:49:41 AM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
55
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
MEMORANDUM <br />To:City of Saint Anthony Village Parks & Environmental Commission <br />From:Jeremy Gumke, Public Works Director and Charlie Yunker, City Manager <br />Date:September 12, 2022 Parks & Environmental Commission Meeting <br />Request:Discussion on Dog Park Feasibility <br />BACKGROUND <br />At its annual Goal Setting session, the City Council identified an Action Step for staff in 2022, to explore the <br />feasibility of adding a dog park in St. Anthony. <br />Staff researched the best practices is dog park design in order to identify possible location(s) for a dog park <br />somewhere in the City. Attached to this memo is a report from the City of Ann Arbor, MI on ‘Recommendations <br />and Guidelines for Dog Park Site Selection, Design, Operations and Maintenance’, which summarized optimal <br />dog park design guidelines. <br />Staff is presenting the initial information gathered for the Commission’s input and any ideas on alternatives the <br />staff have not considered. The input will be conveyed to the City Council for their consideration. <br />This commission in 2014 reviewed the topic of a dog park, and the focus was the ice rink in Central Park for a <br />dual-use. After hearing from an official from the Minneapolis Park Board at the time, it was determined that: <br />“The commission consensus after her presentation was that this project would be a real challenge for <br />the following reasons: <br />•Area chosen not large enough for Dog Park. <br />•The need for a different type of surface other than grass (wood chips are the best surface). <br />•Fencing around the rink would need to be upgraded. <br />•Potential noise problems for nearby residents. <br />•It is necessary regardless of the size and layout, separation between large and small dog is <br />absolutely necessary (reduces dog fights).” <br />FINDINGS <br />The attached report (and other sources reviewed by staff that were not included) summarized best practices for <br />placement on Page 6-7. Staff focused on this section for evaluating potential sites for a dog park before <br />considering other aspects such as design or management. Key components are listed below: <br />Size: The recommended minimum size for dog parks varies considerably among cities, but is generally <br />between ½ acre and one acre.
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.