Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPark and Recreation Advisory Commission Packet 11-10-1994Regular Meeting of the Park and Recreation Advisory Commission* November 10, 1994, 7:00 p.m. Public Safety Training Room, 2nd Floor AGENDA 1. Call to Order 2. Approval of Minutes 3. Visitor Presentations a. Athletic Associations b. Staff c. Others 4. Report on Past Council Action a. Trail system update 5. Unfinished Business a. Proposal for private swimming pool b. Study of unique open spaces update c. Accessible playground update d. Seven Ponds neighborhood park update e. West Medicine Lake City Park update f. Playfield/highschool update g. PRAC work plan for 1995 update It. Neighborhood parks' playground replacement update L Planning for northwest Plymouth 6. New Business a. b. 7. Commission Presentation 8. Staff Communication 9. Adjourn Next Regular Meeting - December 8 Minutes of the Park and Recreation Advisory Commission Meeting October 13, 1994 Page 31 Present: Chair Don Anderson, Commissioners Bildsoe, Fiemann, Johnson, Priebe, Wahl and Willegalle; staff Bisek, Blank, Hurlburt and Pederson 1. CALL TO ORDER Chair Anderson called the October meeting to order at 7 p.m. in the Public Safety Training Room. 2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES A motion was made by Commissioner Bildsoe and seconded by Commissioner Wahl to approve the minutes of the September meeting as presented. The motion carried with all ayes. 3. VISITOR PRESENTATIONS a. Athletic Associations. None were present at this meeting. b. Staff. Mary Bisek announced that late fall program registration had begun recently and that many programs are already filled. She stated that staff was attending the National Recreation and Parks Association Conference being held in Minneapolis this week. She also mentioned that gym space is becoming more and more difficult to get and that Rick Busch has lost some space this fall in District 281 for adult programming. When asked who is taking the gym space from us, Mary stated that the first priority goes to youth activities, and in this case, youth basketball and indoor soccer have been scheduled in the gym that Rick has had in the past. c. Others. Mona Domaas, 15910 46th Avenue, Plymouth. 4. PAST COUNCIL ACTION a. 1994 trail projects. Trail projects proposed for completion in 1994 have been postponed until 1995. 5. UNFINISHED BUSINESS a. Study of unique open spaces update. Director Blank distributed copies of the scoring criteria established by the open space subcommittee that will be used to rank all 30 of the proposed open space sites. The open space committee is hoping to have a report ready for the November PRAC meeting. b. Accessible playground update. Crews have recently poured the concrete base over which the rubber playground surface will be laid. The accessible playground should be completed by the end of the month. PRAC Minutes/October 1994 Page 32 c. Seven Ponds neighborhood park update. The City Council recently awarded a contract for the construction of the Seven Ponds playground. This park should be completed in late fall. The Seven Ponds homeowners' association has submitted a list of possible names for the park. Director Blank said that this list, along with some other suggestions, will be discussed at the November meeting. d. West Medicine Lake city park update. Surveying, staking and soil boring work is being conducted this fall. Director Blank anticipates groundbreaking to be sometime next May or June. e. Playfield/highschool update. Director Blank indicated that he meets weekly with representatives from the School District to discuss the proposed playfield/highschool project. He stated that 160 acres of land is available for the project, but it hasn't been determined yet exactly how much of that land the City will own. There are three proposed concepts for the playfield area that are being considered. f. PRAC work plan for 1995 - update from subcommittee. The subcommittee met and drafted some goals. These will be presented to PRAC at their November meeting. g. Neighborhood parks' playground replacement update. Playground replacements are being done at Mission Hills, Schmidt Lake, Hemlock and Timber Shores neighborhood parks. These replacements should be completed in time for next summer's use. Director Blank stated that ADA (Americans with Disabilities Act) is driving up the cost of replacing playground equipment. 6. NEW BUSINESS a. Planning for northwest Plymouth - Community Development Director Anne Hurlburt. Director Blank introduced Anne Hurlburt, who explained that the Community Development Department, consisting of the Planning and Building divisions, is the department that helps the Planning Commission and City Council develop the City's Comprehensive Plan. This plan must then be approved by the Metropolitan Council and be consistent with their plan for the entire metropolitan area. Ms. Hurlburt went on to explain that only the northwest portion of Plymouth remains to be developed, and that the Planning Commission will soon be working on guiding this area (deciding what's to be residential, commercial/industrial and public/semi-public). At the present time, this part of Plymouth is outside the Municipal Urban Service Area (without sewer) and for that reason has not been considered for development by builders. But according to Ms. Hurlburt, the pressure is increasing to develop this area, because the remaining land in Plymouth that is inside the sewer service area is pretty much all spoken for. The new proposed high school is located in the area not serviced by sewer, so this area needs to be guided soon. It will have to be determined how to get sewer service to the high school and how to route and handle traffic. Ms. Hurlburt indicated that past population projections for Plymouth put the population at 80,000 when the entire City is developed, but she feels that 60,000+ is a more realistic PRAC Minutes/October 1994 Page 33 figure. She stated that she believes northwest Plymouth will be guided mostly low-density residential. Commercial/industrial developments usually desire to be near major roads and the only major highways through this area are Highway 55 on the south and 494 on the east. When asked about the status of Schmidt Lake Road in this area, she indicated that it would probably be a two lane road through northwest Plymouth. The routing of the road through northwest Plymouth will have an impact on the Hollydale Golf Course as well as a proposed development. Currently, there are two alternates being considered. One takes the road south which would route it through the golf course, and the other takes it north, crossing the railroad tracks. Staff is meeting with the owner of Hollydale and the developer to determine the best location. The developer is anxious for a decision and has offered to give up some of his property to Hollydale if the road ends up going to the south and through the golf course. Another decision the City needs to make is where to locate the newest water tower, which also depends on the routing of Schmidt Lake Road. The tower could go on the north side or the south side. Ms. Hurlburt stated that the Planning Commission is also working on a wetlands ordinance. The ordinance will establish buffers around the wetlands in order to protect them from development. She indicated that there are 700 wetland areas in Plymouth, and they have been ranked anywhere from low quality to exceptional quality. Setbacks will be established from zero to ten feet for low quality wetlands and from 50 to 100 feet for exceptional quality wetlands. The setbacks will apply to new development only. When asked how this ordinance will be enforced, Ms. Hurlburt said that it would be difficult to enforce, because the staff cannot go out and check everyone's backyard. She said staff will have to rely on neighbors to report violations of the ordinance. Mona Domaas, 15910 46th Avenue, was present at the meeting to request a neighborhood park in her area, which is located in northwest Plymouth. She has been corresponding with Director Blank and the commissioners regarding the lack of a safe play area for the children in her development as well as surrounding developments. Turtle Lake Park is the closest neighborhood park, but access to it means crossing Vicksburg Lane. Another play area is located at Plymouth Creek Elementary, but access to this site means crossing County Road 9. Ms. Domaas is concerned about the safety of the children if they have to cross these two major roads to get to these play areas. Ms. Domaas questioned if there might be enough room left over at the water tower site to build a neighborhood park. Director Blank stated that after consulting with the Engineering department, it was determined that enough space for a play area may exist. Ms. Domaas stated that if the water tower ends up on the north side of Schmidt Lake Road, she and her neighbors face the same predicament --crossing a major road to get to it. She then questioned whether or not the developer, who indicated a willingness to give up some land for the Hollydale golf course, could be asked to donate additional land for neighborhood park. Director Blank responded that the City may consider that option, but no decision can be made until the water tower site and the road alignment is decided. b. Proposal for private swimming pool. Director Blank indicated that he had been contacted by the Plymouth -New Hope -Crystal Swim Club, because they would like to build a 50 PRAC Minutes/October 1994 Page 34 meter pool and 25 yard pool both under one roof, and they would like to do it on City owned land, specifically, somewhere within the confines of Plymouth Creek Park. They informed Director Blank that they intend to raise $4,000,000 to fund the project. He indicated that he would discuss the issue with them, but first asked that they provide him with a copy of their operating budget, the amount of land they would need, how they intend to handle parking, how they propose to raise money, etc. Any information that he has received prior to the PRAC November meeting will be distributed to the Commission at that time. c. Discuss trail system update. Director Blank was asked by the City Council to research which trails remain to be done in order to complete the entire trail system throughout Plymouth. In addition he was asked to estimate the cost and determine the best methods for getting the work done. Director Blank stated that he estimated the cost at $3,000,000. He asked PRAC for a recommendation to ask the traffic consultant to study trail needs on County Road 6 from Fernbrook to Xenium, on Medina Road from Dunkirk to Brockton, on Old County Road 9 from Polaris to Highway 55, on Vicksburg from Old County Road 9 to Schmidt Lake Road, and on Xenium from the Luce Line to 30th Avenue. A MOTION WAS MADE BY COMMISSIONER FIEMANN AND SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER JOHNSON RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL DIRECT THE TRAFFIC CONSULTANT TO STUDY THE TRAIL PROJECTS AS OUTLINED BY DIRECTOR BLANK IN HIS STAFF REPORT DATED OCTOBER 10, 1994. THE MOTION CARRIED WITH ALL AYES. 7. COMMISSION PRESENTATION None. 8. STAFF COMMUNICATION Director Blank stated that West Health Campus proposes to build a fitness complex when they construct their second building and they indicated that a nationally recognized fitness company would be associated with that complex. They approached both the cities of Plymouth and Maple Grove regarding their interest in being involved in a joint venture. Director Blank indicated that Plymouth wasn't interested in funding their fitness center. 9. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 9 p.m. DATE: November 7, 1994 TO: PRAC FROM: Eric J. Blank, Director, Parks and Recreation 66 SUBJECT: CLASSIC LAKE AQUATICS POOL PROPOSAL In today's packet you will find information provided by the Classic Lake Aquatics Club with regard to the proposed construction of a privately funded swimming pool in Plymouth Creek Park. At Thursday's meeting, you can anticipate that the Club will make a presentation lasting 15-20 minutes with regard to this subject and then open it up for questions by the Park Commission. I am recommending that you take no action on this item at this meeting, but hold it over for further discussion and review at subsequent meetings. Some of the major questions that need to be reviewed by the City include: 1. Can we afford to allocate seven acres of property to this particular use? 2. What would the citizens of Plymouth get in return for giving up seven acres of property? 3. For how long should we hold a spot open for this facility while they raise funds? 4. What affect would this pool have on our existing swimming program and the programs at the other publicly owned facilities, i.e., school district facilities? 5. What happens to the facility if the revenue projections are not met? 6. If we wanted to explore this idea, is this the best location for construction of this facility? 7. What other facilities do we anticipate in Plymouth Creek park in the future? Obviously, some of these questions are answered much easier than others. The Commission will need to discuss amongst themselves philosophically what role the City should play in a private venture such as this? EB/np CLASSIC LAKE AQUATICS, INC. WHAT IS CLASSIC LAKE AQUATICS, INC. ? Classic Lake Aquatics, Inc. is a vision of swimming for people of all ages. The vision incorporates a pair of indoor pools which will meet the perceived need for space for lessons, recreation, family activities, competitive functions, aquatic exercise, senior citizen programs, and other interest groups. WHO IS CLASSIC LAKE AQUATICS, INC. ? Classic Lake Aquatics, Inc. is a group of people who believe that a quality swimming facility is needed in the west Twin Cities metro area. These people are motivated by their committment to their families, their appreciation for the tremendous values of swimming as a lifelong activity, and their belief in the vision of a pool for all peoples. WHY IS THERE A CLASSIC LAKE AQUATICS, INC. ? The west metro area needs this pool. Although there are several pools in the Plymouth area, none offer adequate size for recreation and lessons; most have insufficient deck space or spectator seating; some have water temperatures which are excellent for the competitive users but too cold for young children in lessons while others are the opposite; all are too shallow for many of the specialized aquatics activities which are becomming popular. The beautiful pool in Shoreview is a wonderful design for recreation and lessons, but cannot meet any of the needs for competitive interests. The University of Minnesota Aquatic Center is a state of the art competitive facility but is limited in its ability to be used for lessons and recreation. We believe that both of these pool types can be placed under one roof, and so meet the needs of everyone. Aquatic Center Proposal CLA, Inc. Classic Lake Aquatics, Inc. 1 reduction Building an Aquatic Center in Plymouth Presenters are CLA, Inc. board members Chairman: Tom Franke Treasurer: Stuart Zook Community Marketing: Teri Erhardt Classic Lake Aquatics, Inc. 2 acs of Discussion History Need Project Capital Sources Operational Funding Request Classic Lake Aquatics, Inc. 3 Ory Competitive Swimming Age group Masters Tool time conflicts Broadening the View Recreation Lessons Exercise opportunities Use by interest groups Classic Lake Aquatics, Inc. 9 Overcome limitations of area pools A quality swimming facility west of the Mississippi Year round lessons Year round recreation Lap swimming for adults Senior fitness programs Classic Lake Aquatics, Inc. 5 e continued L vv lgtiY C>' Competitive meets and training USS USMS masters high school Special interests scuba synchronized swimming water polo A place for the family Classic Lake Aquatics, Inc. 6 1. L ea'3a' 50,000 square foot aquatics center 25 yard recreational pool with zero depth entry and play area 50 meter - 8 lane racing pool with a moveable bulkhead water slide full concession and retail area meeting rooms Classic Lake Aquatics, Inc. 7 ect continued o weight and aerobic areas mens and women locker rooms facility to include areas for all water activities - lesson program, senior program, recreational swimming, competitive training parking for 257 cars potential for future expansion Classic Lake Aquatics, Inc. 8 tal Sources a City of Plymouth (Land) Government Agencies Grants Classic Lake Aquatics, Inc. 9 ital Sources continued City of Plymouth Land Grants Corporate sponsorships Equipment donations Foundations Individual donations Government Agencies Classic Lake Aquatics, Inc. 10 F ational Funding @b9>' Lessons 3326 DRecreation 33% Special Interest Groups 10% C.L.A.S. '7% Events I o MiscellaneouslD% Classic Lake Aquatics, Inc. 11 i est st;f y CLA, Inc. is asking the city of Plymouth for a seven acre parcel of land on which this aquatic center can be built Specifically, the site on 37th and Plymouth Blvd Centrally located in downtown Plymouth Accessible to senior citizens Near major thoroughfares for people from the surrounding communities Classic Lake Aquatics, Inc. 12 CLASSIC LAKE AQUATICS PROGRAM OF OPERATIONS SWIM -AMERICA LESSON PROGRAM IN LESSON POOL 9:00-10:00,11:00-12:00, 5:30.6:30, 6:30-7:30 M -F & 9:00-10:00,10:00-11:00, 11:00-12:00 SAT FALL, WINTER, SPRING 9:00-10:00,10:00-11:00, 11:00-12:00, 5:30-6:30, 6:30-7:30 M -S SUMMER 6 KIDS/INSTRUCTOR, ONE GROUP/LANE, 8 CLASSES/HOUR, 3 SESSIONS/WEEK EACH CLASS IS 5 WEEKS LONG, AND 8 CLASSES EACH YEAR THE WATER SLIDE open each evening 3:30-5:30 before lessons, weekend days 12:00-6:00 AQUAEROBICS 10:00-11:00 am M -F, 2:00-3:00 pm M -F MASTERS 6:00-7:30 am M -F and 7:30-9:00 pm M -F WATER POLO 8:00-10:00 pm T,TH SCUBA 7:30-10:00 pm M,W,F,S REC SWIM SMALL POOL winter 3:30-5:30,7:30-9:00 pm M -F BIG POOL winter NO REC SWIM DURING SCHOOL DAYS SMALL POOL winter 12:00-9:00 pm S,S & HOLIDAY BIG POOL winter 12:00-9:00 S,S & HOLIDAY BIG POOL summer 12:00-9:00 S -S SMALL POOL summer 12:30-5:30 M -F SMALL POOL summer 12:00-9:00 S,S ADULT LAP SWIM BIG POOL - 7:30-9:00 am, 11:00-1:00, 7:30-10:00 pm M -F SMALL POOL - 7:30-9:00 am, 12:00-1:00 pm, 7:30-9:00 pm M -F RENTAL TO LOCAL INTEREST GROUPS - SYNCHRONIZED SWIMMING - GROUP RESERVATIONS COMPETITIVE SWIM CLUB - PRACTICE TIMES NATIONAL 5:30-7:00 am M,W and 3:30-6:00 pm M -F and 7:00-10:00 am S ADVANCED 3:30-5:30 pm M -F and 7:00-10:00 am S CONDITIONING 4:00-5:30 pm M -F STROKE 2 5:30-6:30 pm M -F OR 6:30-7:30 pm M -F STROKE 1 5:30-6:30 pm M,T,R,F OR 6:30-7:30 M,T,R,F ANNUAL SOURCES OF INCOME ANNUAL EXPENSES CLASS POOL USE FEE DIRECTOR LESSONS ASST DIRECTOR DAILY PROGRAMMING HEAD GUARDIINST SWIM MEETS JANITORIAL CONCESSIONS FICA RETAIL BENEFITS ADVERTISING OPERATIONS DONATIONS INSURANCE EVENTS GUARDS DATE: November 5, 1994 TO: PRAC FROM: Eric J. Blank, Director, Parks and Recreation SUBJECT: Open Space Interim Report Attached for your review is a draft Open Space interim report. The Open Space Committee is still reviewing this document and may make additions or changes. If necessary, a revised copy will be handed out at Thursday's Commission meeting. The committee would like this report to be forwarded to the City Council for their. November 14 work session or November 21 regular agenda. EB/np Open Space Interim Report (draft -11/7/94) Background History The Open Space Committee has been meeting regularly from March 10, 1994, to present. This has included 17 full meetings and 3 sub -committee meetings. The committee consists of four (4) citizen ward representatives, three (3) PRAC members, one (1) Planning commission member, and one (1) Council Coordinating Representative, along with three (3) City Staff Liaisons. The Committee has established a mission statement, goals and objectives, and a definition of open space to focus and guide us in our tasks (see attachment). The initial project was to assess what and where Plymouth had open space, apart from existing parks, trails, schools, golf courses, etc. Site Selection Initial site selection was done by staff using aerial photographs and their knowledge of the community. This first phase resulted in approximately 80 sites and 1,500 acres being identified as open space. The committee established the following set of criteria to narrow the number of sites to a manageable number near 35: Current protection possible through City ordinances, DNR, Corps of Engineers, or other state or federal regulations? Can the area be protected by other means, such as scenic or preservation easements, overviews, etc.? Historical significance, such as Indian burial mounds, State historical sites, etc.? Regional distribution throughout the community. Size, 10 acres or greater and/or next to existing open space. Site Evaluation After paring down our list of potentially significant sites to 30, Beth Nixon of Short -Elliott - Hendrickson was hired to evaluate the sites based on very specific biological information she collected on each site. The grade and rank follow criteria developed by the DNR Natural Heritage program and are the primary factors used in prioritizing the sites from an ecological viewpoint (see Table 1 of Summary of Report). Sites were prioritized based upon: ecological considerations grade rank size linkage to other natural areas, and sometimes practicality of management. Ranking The committee took the results from the biological review and established weighted criteria to further refine the list of high priority sites (see Open Space Ranking). Primary criteria included: Biological review Perceived threat of loss Estimated cost per acre (inside the MUSA vs. outside the MUSA) Protection by existing City ordinance This final ranking provided for a clearer picture of which sites were deemed most important with a definite break occurring between the sixth (6th) and seventh (7th) sites. These criteria reflected the committee's desire to establish clear objectives vs. subjective criteria for ranking the highest priority sites. Future Considerations 1. Usage Guidelines The committee has discussed establishing guidelines for the public use of property eventually designated as open space. The concern is to make this designation different from our park property (high impact usage) and restrict public usage to low impact on the site to preserve as well as possible the existing ecosystem. 2. Maintenance and Restoration Efforts Many of the sites will need some type of management or restoration efforts into the future to ensure their unique existence throughout the encroachment of development. The type and costs of such practices must be a consideration in designating areas as open space. Many of these practices are included in the Summary Report prepared by Beth Nixon. 3. Impact of Proposed Wetland Ordinance and GIS Information a. Wetland Ordinance The proposed Wetland ordinance may very well impact many of the potential fifteen (15) high priority sites. Some of the sites may not need much protection as open space as much may be protected by the new ordinance. Other sites may become more fragile and ecosystems fragmented due to development limited to upland areas. b. GIS Information As the City adds GIS capabilities to its current technology, site specific accuracy will increase. This will allow for better details of the existing ecosystems and the impact of different uses. 4. Designation and Acquisition of Open Space The committee has not focused on this aspect. There is a need to protect the designated sites, but through which means is a tough question. Some ideas used by other cities include: Acquisition Easements Ordinances The Open Space Committee has not at this time considered methods of financing the cost of open Space acquisition. The committee felt that an interim report to the Park Commission and City Council should precede financial planning. The Open Space committee would like further clarification and direction from the City Council and Park Commission on what additional work the Committee will be responsible for. The Open Space Committee is willing to meet in joint session with the City Council and PRAC if the Council would like a work session on this subject. Plymouth Open Space Committee Mission Statement To identify key open undeveloped spaces for preservation to assure that the City of Plymouth retains its unique character, diverse ecological balance and quality of life. 5/11/94 Plymouth Open Space Committee Open Space Open Space is defined as undeveloped lands or natural landscape features with scenic, esthetic, or conservation value that justifies their preservation in their natural undeveloped state. Open Space includes woodlands, wetlands and adjacent property that is a critical part of the ecosystem of the site. 5/11/94 Plymouth Open Space Committee Goals and Objectives Identify all open spaces to consider for preservation based on unique features, diversity of features and adequate size Establish criteria for purpose of recommending sites to be preserved Determine method to evaluate ecological and environmental features of sites and conduct a physical inventory of potential sites. Prioritize sites and determine recommended number of sites to preserve Identify methods to preserve sites Determine appropriate public communication, participation and input Develop usage guidelines Identify potential funding sources Make recommendation to the Park and Recreation Advisory Commission and City Council regarding sites to be preserved Priori 6 13 2 1 3 8 15 14 7 11 12 10 9 5 4 TABLE 1 SITE GRADE, RANK' AND PRIORITY Site Community Grade Rank Size, High Priority Sites 1C Oak Forest BC THR Lowland Hardwood C SPC 48.9 Willow Swamp/Marsh C SPC/SEC 1D Maple -Basswood Forest C END 29.1 IG Oak Forest B THR 78.8 Willow Swamp/Marsh B SPC 11 Maple -Basswood Forest A END 53.3 1K Maple -Basswood Forest B END 39.6 1L Oak Forest B THR 26.1 2D Oak Forest C THR 13.4 2F Oak Forest N/A THR 24.3 3A Oak Forest BC THR Cattail Marsh B SEC 35.7 Emergent Marsh C SPC 3H Hardwood Swamp C SPC Willow Swamp B SPC 12.4 Maple -Basswood C END Cattail Marsh B SEC 31 Lowland Hardwood Forest BC SPC 13.7 3L Oak Forest B TER 30.1 Willow Swamp C SPC 3M Hardwood Swamp C SPC 10.5 Willow Shrub Swamp B SPC 3N Tamarack Swamp AB SPC Cattail Marsh B SEC 46.2 Emergent Marsh C SPC 4A Oak Forest BC THR Willow Swamp B SPC 53.5 Lowland Hardwood Forest C SPC Cattail Marsh B SEC Prairie, mesic D END Priori 6 13 2 1 3 8 15 14 7 11 12 10 9 5 4 Site Community Grade Rank Size Priori Low Priority Sites (no priority assigned) IA Oak Forest N/A THR 15.3 1B Maple-Basswood Forest C END 57.9 IE Oak Forest C THR Emergent Marsh SPC 12 1F Lowland Hardwoods Forest C SPC 16.3 Maple-Basswood Forest B END Cattail and Emergent Marsh C SEC 1H Willow Swamp B SPC 33.9 Oak Forest C THR 1N Cattail Marsh D SEC 11.7 Emergent Marsh D SPC 1S Maple-Basswood Forest B END 14.2 2A Old Field N/A 17.6 2E Pine Plantation N/A 3.1 3B Lowland Hardwoods D SPC Oak Forest B THR 15.3 Emergent Marsh C SPC 3C Lowland Hardwood Forest D SPC 18.5 Emergent Marsh D SPC 33 Cattail Marsh CD SEC 12.2 3K Emergent Marsh C SPC Shrub Swamp C SPC 10 Lowland Hardwood Forest C SPC 4B Maple-Basswood Forest B END 23.3 4C Lowland Hardwood Forest BC SPC Oak Forest BC THR 8.8 Cattail Marsh BC SEC Minnesota state ranks determined for natural communities by the Natural Heritage Program and Minnesota County Biological Survey ecologist; END=endangered, THR=threatened, SPC=special concern, SEC=secure. z Significant acres. Most sites include additional acreage with developed acreage. 3 Priority for preserving site with respect to ecological character. Only sites in the high priority group were given a priority rating. SCORING CRITERIA BIOLOGICAL REVIEW 1=70 6=60 11=50 2=68 7=58 12=48 3=66 8=56 13=46 4=64 9=54 14=44 5 = 62 10 = 52 15 = 42 THREAT OF LOSS 1 year 15 points 2-4 years 10 points 5 or more years 5 points ESTIMATED COST PER ACRE 0-$30,000/acre 5 points over $30,000/acre 0 points PROTECTED BY EXISTING CITY ORDINANCE 0-25% 10 points 26-75% 6 points over 76 % 2 points OPEN SPACE SCORE RANKING EXAMPLb{ These are the examples which the subcommittee asked me to prepare. I will be contacting you regarding an upcoming subcommittee meeting. Eric Blank 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Biological Review 70 68 66 64 62 60 58 Threat of Loss 5 5 10 15 15 5 15 Estimated Cost Per Acre 5 5 0 0 0 5 0 Protected by Existing City Ordinance 10 10 10 6 6 6 6 TOTAL 90 88 86 85 83 76 79 These are the examples which the subcommittee asked me to prepare. I will be contacting you regarding an upcoming subcommittee meeting. Eric Blank OPEN SPACE RANKING SITE 11 iG I IK 4A 3A 1L I 1C 3M 31 1 2F I 2DFD 3H 3L BI Rev 70 66 bb 64 56 62 66 60 64 46 44 42 50 52 Threat d Loss 6 5 10 15 15 16 10 5 10 15 15 15 5 b Ed"ed Cal PAero b b 0 O 6 0 0 5 0 O 0 0 6 0 PnAected by Exlsdng My Orcknmvco 10 10 10 6 6 6 10 6 5 6 10 10 10 2 2 TOTAL Be 56 66 84 63 7d 74 70 K 65 67 66 52 W BALL RANKING; 1 2 3 4 5 5 T 8 9 46 11 12 13 14 15 DATE: November 5, 1994 TO: PRAC EFROM: Eric 1. Blank, Director, Parks and Recreation SUBJECT: 1995 WORK PLAN Attached is a draft copy of the 1995 work plan as developed by the PRAC subcommittee. Please bring any written comments you have for additions, corrections or changes to Thursday's meeting. The Commission needs to adopt this work plan at your December 8 meeting. EB/np GRAFT PARK AND RECREATION ADVISORY COMMISSION WORK PLAN FOR 1995 On August 29, 1994, the City Council adopted resolution 94-507. This resolution mandates that all the City's boards, committees and commissions shall submit an annual work plan to the City Council for approval. Listed below in no particular order are the 1995 general work areas of the Park and Recreation Advisory Commission: 1. The Commission will annually review and develop a five year capital improvements program. The parks component shall consider all capital improvements for parks, trails, special facilities, etc., and the sources of funding for each project. Submission of this portion of the CIP shall he to the Community Development Department for a public hearing held by the Planning Commission. 2. The Park Commission will accept and review the recommendations of the Open Space Committee with regard to preservation of open spaces throughout the community. The Commission's review will entail specific site review of all recommended sites for acquisition andlor restrictive development and appropriate funding analysis of each and every site. These recommendations will be passed on to the City Council as part of the capital improvements program annually adopted by the Commission and the City. 3. Trails. The Commission will review and discuss the priorities for an accelerated trail improvement program. The goal of the program will he to prioritize all of the trail development within the MUSA area of the community for the next 24- 36 months. The Commission will also review appropriate funding for these capital items. As with the open space, the funding for this program will he incorporated into the capital improvements program as adopted by the Parks Commission. 4. Ninth playfield-highschool site. The Commission will review the master site planning for the ninth playfield site in coordination with the Wayzata School District. The site planning review will move forward in a timely fashion in order to meet the Council's goal of having Phase I of the park project operational by 1997. 5. West Medicine Lake Park. The Commission will continue to review the plans as they develop for West Medicine Lake Park. The Commission will set priorities for which facilities are to be developed within the adopted budget for the project. The Commission will also explore available funding sources for the third phase of the project which is the anticipated construction of a recreation building. The Commission will continue to receive and evaluate citizen input with regard to detailed design elements of the park. 6. Comprehensive park system planning for northwest Plymouth. The Park Commission will work closely with the Planning Commission and Planning staff as they begin the analysis and development of a comprehensive plan for northwest Plymouth. The Park Commission's responsibility will include: analyzing future neighborhood park sites, open space sites, trail corridors and a tenth playfield in this area. The Commission will also look at the overall Comprehensive Plan to ensure that there are not areas that have been overlooked in previous planning efforts. 7. Acquisition of playfield site #10. The adopted 1995 capital improvement program allocates funding for the acquisition of playfield site #10. This is in keeping with the Council's goal of planning out in the future prior to development for major park acquisitions. The Commission will analyze the acquisition of the tenth playfield site as it is impacted by the acquisition and development of the ninth playfield site. A final recommendation on the acres required and specific site will be forwarded to the City Council at the earliest possible time. In addition to the list above, the Commission will also continue with its ongoing practice of working with the athletic associations and citizen groups for the overall betterment of the City through a sound park and recreation plan. A fiscally conservative capital and operating plan will be part of the Commission's review and recommendation for future City park and recreation facilities and activities. Inp DATE: November 7, 1994 TO: PRAC C TZ FROM: Eric J. Blank, Director, Parks and Recreation SUBJECT: PLANNING FOR NORTHWEST PLYMOUTH Attached for your review is some additional information with regard to the neighborhoods west of Vicksburg and north of Old 9. In the comprehensive plan, this area is Neighborhood No. 17. It has an estimated ultimate population of 1,180 people and a park need of five acres. On the enclosed map is an enlargement of area 17. There are currently approximately 178 homes in this area. If you multiply by four people per residence you come up with 712 people. Based on this projection, it would appear that this area will not reach the 1,180 projected in the plan. There is some area left for development in the northeast corner of the neighborhood. I have also enclosed a concept plan submitted by a developer for the intersection of Schmidt Lake Road and Vicksburg Lane. In this concept he has shown a possible water tower and park site at the northwest corner of Schmidt Lake Road and Vicksburg Lane. However, at this time, the water tower site has not been selected. The City plan does call for a trail on Vicksburg Lane which currently dead ends at Old County Road 9. EB/np Attachments 3. EXISTING PARKS INVENTORY AND NEEDS With park standards established and forming the framework for the future park system, an inventory of existing parks was made during April, 1981 to determine the pre- sent state of the system. The results of the inventory are summarized in the following tables. The tables not only include inventory results, but also compare exist- inq parks to the park standards, thus pointing out the areas and size of deficiencies. TABLE 1 NEIGHBORHOOD PARK NEEDS - ULTIMATE 13 2,730 Schmidt Lake/6.9 14 Actual Neigh- Projected Existing Park Needs Ultimate bor- Ultimate Neighborhood at 2.5-3.5 Deficiency hood Population Parks/Acres Acre/1,000* Acres) 1 1,780 5-6 None 2 0 0 None 3 2,220 5.5-8 5.5-8 4 950 5 5 5 3,420 8.5-12 8.5-12 6 5,800 14.5-20 14.5-20 7 3,880 9.5-13.5 9.5-13.5 8 1,450 5 5 9 4,100 10-14 10-14 10 1,070 Ti mbers hones (part)/5 5 None 11 2,020 5-7 5-7 12 3,300 8-11.5 8-11.5 13 2,730 Schmidt Lake/6.9 14 3,600 15 1,880 5,640 Amhurst/11.0 17a 1,180 540_ 19 1,710 20 3,000 21 4,560 Plymouth Creek Park 28 0 part)/15 22 1,400 23 3,440 24 2,820 Mission Hl l Is/19.3 25 5,330 Four Seasons/28.3 26 4,080 Kilmer/1.3 23rd d E.M.L./4.9 E. Medicine Lake part)/1.7 27 2,270 Hemlock/0.3 W. Medicine Lake part)/3.5 28 0 29 2,520 Unnamed park/22 7.0-9.5 9-12.5 5-6.5 14-20 5 0 5-6 7.5-10.5 11.5-16 5 8.5-12 7-10 13.5-18.5 10-14 5.5-8 0 6.5-9 None 9-12.5 5-6.5 3-9 5 None 5-6 7.5-10.5 11.5-16 minimum recommended size = 5 acres Comments primarlly office Industrial; population esthete probably too high entirely office -Industrial could be provided by Maple Grove could be provided by Maple Grove; see also comments for 5 and 6 Egan Park (20.7 ac) could be developed as neighborhood park to serve neighbor- hoods eighborhoods4,5 and 6 a neighborhood park at Pomerleau Lake could serve neighborhoods 7 and 8 Zachary Lane Elem. could be developed as neighborhood park, but location Is poor primarily Industrial could be provided in Plymouth Creek Park 5 -could be provided In Plymouth Creek Park 8.5-12 -should be north of creek; population estimate probably too high None None -may require additional facilities; erosion problems exist 7-11 -23rd and E.M.L. needs development 1.5-4 -part of W. Medicine Lake Park (3.5 ac) functions as neighborhood park None -entirely Industrial 6.5-9 -outlots In Maple Creek addition require Co sc 2sgL Ac-uloPM N7 8- 1/15/82 I urL 60TH AVE2in 1 1 , Be1$S o Elm 178 A 8` — r©--- Plymouth t _ 3 14 r o....E' 1;, Creek s -- . A*- -; re0caL a i hstrig x y sow Mer 4 'tom i f _ / t•1. E 2k AVE 5t FF i October 20, 1994 Mona Domaas 15910 46th Avenue N Plymouth, MN 55446 Dear Mona: r0 CITY OF PUMOUTR This is in response to your letter dated October 14. You asked a number of questions that I will try to respond to in the order that you asked them. First, there are still two options available for the water tower site, one north of Schmidt Lake Road and one south of Schmidt Lake Road. Either option appears to have enough acreage involved that we could have a small park area set aside. Staff will look at and make a recommendation to the Park Commission about the option of taking additional park dedication south of the road if the water tower goes north of the road. That is one viable option, but I don't want to make any promises at this time that the City may not be able to keep. Next, with regard to the Seven Ponds Park issue, the City followed its Comprehensive Park Plan and received dedicated park land from the Seven Ponds Development prior to Lundgren Bros. buying the Heather Run property lying to the west. We ended up with half the neighborhood having a private park available to it and half the neighborhood with no park available. With regard to priority, the Park Commission annually looks at all the undeveloped park sites we own in the community and determines the priority for which site will be developed each year. The Commission was unanimous in recommending that the Seven Ponds/Heather Run site be developed in 1994. Your last question had to do with the restoration of older parks in the community. We are not rebuilding entire parks. We are simply replacing playground structures that have worn out and have become dangerous. They also do not meet the current guidelines for handicapped accessibility and safety. The City has an on-going program for maintaining and keeping all of its park facilities in good, safe condition. Federal ADA legislation also requires that we work towards compliance with handicapped accessible playgrounds throughout our entire park system. I hope this helped clarify the questions you had. If you have further concerns, please call me at 550- 5131. Sincerely, nc 7. Blank, Director Parks and Recreation EB/np cc: City Council L,PRAC We Listen • We Solve • We Care 3400 PLYMOUTH BOULEVARD • PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55447 • TELEPHONE (612) 550-5000 October 14, 1994 Mr. Eric Blank Director Plymouth Park and Recreation 3400 Plymouth Boulevard Plymouth, Minnesota 55447 Dear Mr. Blank: I have some concerns that I would like to bring up after attending the Park and Recreation Advisory Commission meeting last night. First, I am beginning to wonder how feasible is putting the park on the water tower site. It appears to me that there are too many IF's to really make a determination. IF Schmitt Road goes North of the railroad tracks, the children will have to cross the tracks. If Schmitt Road goes North of the tracks AND the water tower goes North of Schmitt Road the children will have to cross Schmitt Road AND the tracks. IF Schmitt Road comes South of the tracks, but the water tower goes on the North of the road, the children will have to cross Schmitt Lake Road. This leaves us with only ONE WAY that the water tower site would work -- IF SCHMITT LAKE ROAD COMES TO THE SOUTH OF THE TRACKS AND THE WATER TOWER TO THE SOUTH SIDE OF SCHMITT LAKE ROAD. This seems like TOO MANY IF'S! Why can't we just request some land from a developer? This seems to me to be a much more feasible option, and with less time restraints regarding the "what if's". Secondly, I would like to ask a question regarding Seven Ponds. During the meeting you stated that the City repeatedly asked the developer NOT to put in a development park, because the City was going to put in a park. In your own words you state that the development park is "a stone's throw" from the City Park. Which was put in first? If the development park was already there and the City Park went in second, why did the City feel this was a priority? Now they have two parks and we have none. You keep commenting that we have Plymouth Creek School. Well, they have Greenwood School. I am just questioning as to why certain priorities are priorities. Third and last. You mentioned that there were going to be three or four parks that are going to be torn down and renovated.' My question is: Are these parks hazardous, or just worn? Is it possible that perhaps one could be put on hold so that our neighborhood could have some priority? If hazardous, tear it down and let them wait in line for a turn at obtaining a park, like we have. Afterall, they have at least HAD a park to use. Again, I am just questioning priorities. I plan to keep informed and move our neighborhood to action to let the Commission and yourself know that we feel it is time our neighborhood was a priority. Sincerely, q Mona J. Domaas 15910 46th Avenue North Plymouth, MN 55446 557-0908 cc: Park Advisory Commission City Council Mr. Eric Blank Director Plymouth Park and Recreation 3400 Plymouth Boulevard Plymouth, Minnesota 55447 Dear Mr. Blank: September 26, 1994 lZagree / Hr -5. omCC5 176(5 Co"I Vey ed m y P. ,:77-. )5 e,-tt,-/y , / C atvCe rtllow 1 '{&M 4/e AJ. Thank you for meeting with me Friday, September 16 to discuss some of my questions and concerns regarding a park for our neighborhood. I am defining our neighborhood as North of County Road Nine and West of Vicksburg. I would like to address some of the issues you presented today, along with some comments and questions regarding the minutes of the September 8th meeting of the Park and Recreation Advisory Commission. First of all is your statement that the city requires a minimum of five acres and a population of 3,000 residents in order to quality for consideration of a neighborhood park. While I can understand the City's rational regarding this point, let me express mine. I received information from the financial department, that for every 100 of property tax, $2.57 goes to park and recreation. The houses in our area pay annual property taxes ranging from $5,000 to 7,500. Taking $5,000 as a figure, this means an annual dollar amount of $128.50 goes to benefit other parks, trails et cetera, of which our neighborhood has none. While we may not have the resident numbers necessary (according to city standards) to generate a park, let me put forth this argument. I have lived in this neighborhood for six years, most others for ten. If we multiply the annual figure we pay of $128.50 to park and recreation times ten years we get $1,285.00. If we multiply this by ONLY ten houses we get $10,285 having been contributed towards a park system that does not benefit our neighborhood. Oxbow has approximately 26 residences. Our neighborhood is approximately ten years old and we have already contributed a minimum of approximately $33,410 to the park system. This figure does not include any cost of park dedication fees mentioned in number six of the agenda. But let me get to this point. Our neighborhood is no longer this small. I was unable to get actual residence counts from the city. These are approximate numbers of a physical count of houses I conducted: Golf View 51 Deer Run 13 Fawn Creek 27 Autumn Hills 14 (additional new phase started/not Total NEW 105 counted) It is my understanding, according to the minutes, "that a park Mr. Eric Blank Director Plymouth Park and Recreation 3400 Plymouth Boulevard Plymouth, Minnesota 55447 Dear Mr. Blank: Thank you for meetin e F of my questions and rns reg I am fining*, allc ghborhood WeVickswould liq preys nted tod wit the s of the Sep Advi y Commission. First of all is % u five acres and a 1io 1< for 'de ation of a the s tiona re recei e n rm i n fi 100 f pr er x, houses in o pa 7,500. Taki $5, September 26, 1994 Sei ober 1611& atpark fg r : ity of mee 601 and SW issues you ons regarding and Recreation rbior"11 t they requires a minimum of 0 re idents in order to quality rk. While I can and stand ngrnanc'Ma'lnt, let me e` ess m I e de art at f verP Ip , etoparka -P e at' The property to s rg((g''ing 5,000 to a figure, thi can n ual dollar amount o 28.50 go o benefit er s, 1 et cetera, of whh nei hborh od has none. le y not have the res nu b r necessary (ac r ng ty standards) to gen ra e p let me put ort s a nt. I have lived in this n hood for si ass, most thers for ten. If we multip e nnual figure pay of 8.50 to park and recreation wt es t ye rs we get $1, 5.00. I e multiply this by ONLY ten ses we get $10,285 havi g b tributed towards a park system at oes rot benefit our neig cod. Oxbow has approximately 26 resid S. Our neighborhood approximately ten years old and we have 1 early contributed a minimum of approximately $33,410 to the park system. This figure does not include any cost of park dedication fees mentioned in number six of the agenda. But let me get to this point. Our neighborhood is no longer this small. I was unable to get actual residence counts from the city. These are approximate numbers of a physical count of houses I conducted: Golf View Deer Run Fawn Creek Autumn Hills Total NEW It is my understanding, 51 13 27 14 (additional new phase started/not 105 counted) according to the minutes, "that a park