Parks Commission Agenda Packet 04-17-2003
.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
. 8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
.
AG NDA
PARKS C MMISSION
April 17,20 3 - 4:30 p.m.
West Pr irie Room
"To el/hl/I/ce COl/lfll1l11i(I' p ide through del.e1oping 1/1/11
maintaining d(r park.l wit a high stll/ull/rll of qlll/li(y"
Call to Order
Approve Minutes of March 20, 2003 r gular meeting.
Consideration of adding items to the a enda.
Citizens req uests.
Carlisle Village - Review of park and t ail layout.
Park Maintenance Items
Alternative areas for use by youth foot all
Sliding Hill - Bridge Park.
Groveland Park Plan
Country Club Park
Parks Commission Vacancy
Review of park land issues - Wild Mea ow
Adjourn.
.
.
.
NOTES TO PARK C MMISSION AGENDA
April 17, 2003
Agenda Item #
5. Carlisle Village - At the last meeting Dave Nash indicated that they would be ready to come back at
this meeting with a layout showing parks/tr ils based on his discussion with the Park Commission at tha'
meeting.
7 . Ballfield Use for Youth Football- At a pr vious meeting it was brought up that the ballfields should
not continue to be used for youth football b t it was felt that the Parks Commission should discuss what
alternatives are available for use by youth fo - tbal!. The Committee was to meet prior to this meeting.
If they have Rick Traver can update the Con mission.
8. Sliding Hill - Bridge Park: At the last mee ing Adam Hawkinson requested that this item be placed
on the next agenda.
9. Groveland Park - Adam Hawkinson has so e preliminary information on the park equipment and the
development of the park.
10.
Country Club Park - This was requested to be placed on the agenda by Adam Hawkinson.
11. Parks Commission Vacancy - The open po ition was listed on the website and was advertised in the
local papers. To date we have had two inqui ies but only one application was received. The closing
date for submitting an application is April 11,2003. Does the Parks Commission want to intcrview the
candidate(s) or just make a recommendation 0 the council.
12. Review of Park land issues - Wild Meado . Although the Parks Commission approved the park
land layout at their February mecting, some i sues have come to light since that time that need to be
presented to the Parks Commission. Adam 1 awkinson will inform the Commission of these concerns.
Other
At the last meeting the Parks Commission discussed ark dedication fees. Attached is information relating to
fees charged by other communities. .IcffO'Neill in icated that he will be preparing an agenda item on this thw
will probably go befcJre the Council at their April 14t or 28th meeting.
.
.
.
MIN TES
REGULAR MF:ETING - PARKS COMMISSION
Thursday, March 0,2003 - 4:30 p.m.
"To enhance community pri Ie through developing and
maintaining city parks with a high standard of quality."
Members Present:
Larry Nolan, Nancy eCafhey, Earl Smith, Rick Traver and Council
Liaison, Robbie Smih.
Members Absent:
Fran Fair
Staff Present:
Parks Superintenden , Adam Hawkinson and Deputy City Administrator,
Jeff O'Neill.
1. Call to Order.
Chair Larry Nolan called the meeting to ord rat 4;30 p.m. and declared a quorum present.
2. A rove minutes of Februa 20 2003 r ular meetin .
RICK TRAVER MOVED TO APPROVE HE MINUTES OF THE FEBRUARY 20,2003
REGULAR MEETING WITH A TYPING :ORRECTION. NANCY MCCAFFREY
SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION C RRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
3.
Consideration of addin items to the a c da.
Updates on the entrance signs, Walk and Roll and the city ball fields at Xcc/ Energy were added to
the agenda.
4. Citizen ReQuests.
None. At this time Chair Nolan acknowled ed Robbie Smith as council liaison to the Parks
Commission.
6.
Carlisle Villa e - Review of ark and trai la out.
This item was moved up on the agenda bee a Ise the representative for Gold Nugget was not yet
present. Dave Nash from MFRA submitted preliminary plans for the Carlisle development on the
Hermes property. The property is located to the east and south of the Wildwood Ridge and the
Rolling Woods development and contains a. proximately 78 acres. Jeef O'Neill presented some
background information concerning the dev lopment. Since this area is outside the scope of the
Comprehensive Parks and Pathway plan, the e are no guidelines indicating where parks or trails
should be located in this area.
.
Parks Commission Minutes - 3/20/03
./eff O'Neill located on a map those areas tha were being considered for annexation so the Parks
Commission could see where the new deve\o ment was taking place. Existing parks and trails near
the new developments were located. From th"re the Parks Commission analyzed where
appropriate sites were in the new developmel t area for parks. Earl Smith asked about a connecting
road in the new development area and Jeff 0' eill responded that there would be a connecting
road in the location of 85th Street.
.
Looking specifically at the Carlisle developm nt, Dave Nash noted that the site contains old growth
woods which the developer was trying to pres'rve as much as possible. The more heavily wooded
area is towards the back of the site. The dev loper will be present at the next Parks Commission
meeting to provide more detailed informatio on the development. The purpose of being at this
meeting was to get direction from the Parks C mmission as to location of parks and placement of
trails. .lefT O'Neill stated that the developmel t should have a connection to existing trails that have
been brought up to the development site. ./effO'Neill suggested a trail meandering through the
wooded area. Dave Nash stated that there are sidewalks included in the devclopment. Adam
Hawkinson asked if the sidewalk would be ex ended to where the park is in the Rolling Woods
area. Adam Hawkinson felt if there was not g ing to be a park in the Carlisle development there
should be a sidewalk extending to the park in oIling Woods so that residents from Carlisle Village
could access the Rolling Woods park.
At this time there was general discussion on t e overall new development area and where parks
should be located. It was pointed out that Water Tower Park is a passive park and the park at
Rolling Woods is only about I 1;2 acres so the arks Commission felt there was a need of acquiring
additional park land and that the area should b active park area. Since this area is not in the
Comprehensive Park Plan there is nothing to t II the developers what type of park is needed in their
area or where it should be located. Part of the discussion tonight is to provide stafTwith infl.mnation
that can be used in updating the Comprehensi e Park and Pathway Plan. Earl Smith stated there is
a need fl.)r ballfields as well as play area and th t would require larger tracts of park land. The
Parks Commission is looking for a site for a b,-llfield complex because the need for that is great and
will continue to grow. The fecling of the Par's Commission is that the park dedication fee is not
generating enough revenue for the City to pure lase the larger sites needed for a ballfield complex.
While the ordinance allows the City to take 10 () of land area of a development for park land, most
developments were not large enough where 10 0 of the land value would yield the 40 acres needed
for a ballfield complex. The Parks COll1missi n also raised the question of the number of
townhouses being developed and whether that ype of housing was being overdone. JcffO'Neill
stated that 3 units per acre was the deJinition il the comprehensive plan for low density housing but
the Council will be considering a policy settin a ratio of detached and attached units in a
subdi vision.
.
The Parks Commission felt another park was n eded to serve the Shultz/farr/Holker area. The
Parks Commission looked at whether the Rolli g Woods park could be expanded to serve a larger
area. Because of the topography of the site and the presence of wetlands expanding that park
2
.
Parks Commission Minutes - 3/20/03
would not be feasible. Earl Smith stated hat until the Comprehensive Park plan is brought up to
date he does not see how the City could p an for development. /-Ie also felt that until the
Comprehensive Park plan is changed, the )arks Commission should continue to take land
dedication rathcr than cash. The Parks C nunission felt that the City Council should be made
aware of the Parks Commission feeling th t the park dedication fees should be increased. The
Parks Commission felt that if they take caJ1 in lieu of land, the cash value is not sufficient to buy
park land. The Parks Commission also re isited the qucstion of having fewer small parks because
of the maintenance issucs.
.
After considerable discussion, the consens IS of the Parks Commission was that an active play area
i()r the Shultz/Farr/Holker area should be I cated somewhere in the approximately 120 acres of the
Holker property. Anothcr activc play arc' should be considered for the O'Brien/Klein area. Also
in this general area there was consideration for trying to acquire] 5-20 acres for ballfield
development. Rick Traver suggested that dam Hawkinson and .IeffO'Neill should work on this
and bring it back to the Parks Commission. This will bc the basis for the update to the
Comprehensive Park plan. The Parks Commission discussed the area needed for a ballfield
complex. They ieIt at least 40 acres would be needed and the site should be away from residential
developmcnt with major roads to the site. he most likely area would be in the
Kjellberg/Hcllman/Schluender area. The P rks Commission felt the complex should serve the
needs t(n at least 20 years and that becausc fthe immcdiate nceds for ball fields this should be a
priority.
Robbie Smith asked how the Parks Commis ion would determine how mueh the park dedication
Jee should bc increased. .IetT O'Neill respOI ded that the fee should be set based on the cost to
acquire and develop park land. Dave Nash it dicated that the developer would not be opposed to
putting a park in the Carlisle development.
5. Gold N U Jet - Review of ark and trail la
J lorst Grazer was present to review the park a 1d trail layout in the Gold Nugget development. Jeff
O'Neill provided background noting that in I 98 a plan had been approved for the Gold Nugget
development. The developer has now come. ack with a plan that has received concept approval
by the Planning Commission and City Counci contingent upon Parks Commission revicw.
.
Horst Grazer stated that the Gold Nugget plan that was approved in 1998 was t()r 220 acres of
residential lots. Since that time the comprehel sive plan has changed and so has the proposed
developmcnt. Now 70 acres of the parcel is d signated t()f commercial/industrial use and the
remaining 150 acres will be developed as resid ntiallots. He submitted a sketch dated 3/20/03
which showed the larger park parcel along 85th Street and then extending up to a smaller park area
midway through the plat. It was thought the p, -k site abutting 85th Street could possibly be used for
bal/iields sincc it abutted three streets. The pI' osed development consists of 197 single family lots,
67 quad units and 48 row units. florst Grazer f It that unless there was a lot of space between the
'"l
_J
.
.
.
9.
Parks Commission Minutes ~ 3/20/03
rear yard and the trail, homeowners did no like trails running along the hack yard. Host (i-razer
stated that rather than concentrate all the p rk land in one area they extended the park land to be a
corridor extending through the plat. Ada Hawkinson stated that the City requires the park
property corners he marked. The park lay ut shown is irregular and would require a number of
markers. The experiencc has been that hOlleowners tend to encroach on park land if it is not
marked. Horst Grazer stated he has contI" cted with a fence company who would install 4" white
posts to mark the park land location. The ark markers would go in as the development goes in.
Mr. Grazer is planning on doing a planting along the park boundary line using a specific tree species
which should help to delineate what is pub ic property.
EARL SMITH MOVED TO APPROVE TIE GOLD NUGGET TRAIL AND PARK LA YOUr
AS SHOWN ON THE ORA WING REVIE ED DATED MARCH 20, 2003. RICK TRAVER
SECONDED TIlE MOTION. MOTION C RRIED UNANIMOUSL Y.
lefrO'Neill stated that ifthe trails are inter al they are installed by the developer. Iftheyare
external they are installed by the city. Hors Grazer stated there are sidewalks on all streets except
the cui-dc-sacs. It was discussed whether xtending the trail to the edge of the Gold Nugget
property was an internal or external trail. It was suggested leaving the trail out of the middle section
of park because there was access to the park by sidewalk. This plan will go befixe the Planning
Commission in May and it is anticipated th, t home construction would begin in September. There
was some discussion on number of townho es heing constructed in the City and if too many
town home units are heing developed.
7.
Park Maintenance Items.
Adam I Jawkinson updated the Commission Hl the maintenance work completed. The Parks
Commission complimented park staff on the clean up work that was done in the park area by the
Ilans Hagen development.
8. Alternative areas for use b outh footbal .
The committee of Adam Hawkinson, Rick T aver and Earl Smith had not had an opportunity to
meet regarding youth foothall. Although it as the feeling that the softball fields should not continue
to he used for youth f()otball, the Parks Coml ission did feel that some alternatives should he
provided for youth football. Adam Hawkins n stated that there is a liahility issue to consider when
you change the use of a facility. The ballfielc s are not city owned parks but rather land leased from
Xcel Energy. The Parks Commission want a Ian to help youth fiJotbal1 find alternatives and also
clearly defined reasons why youth foothall Ci. nnot continue to the use the softball fields.
Final location la out for Well #5 and urn house at Fourth Street Park.
The inf()rmation from Public Works Director. .John Simola, concerning the layout for proposed well
4
.
.
.
Parks Commission Minutes - 3/20/03
and pumphouse #5 at the Fourth Street Park w s reviewed.
EARL SMITII MOVED TO APPROVE THE LOCATION PROPOSED FOR THE WELL
AND PUMPHOUSE TO BE LOCAI'ED AT" 'liE FOURTH STREET P ARK. NANCY
MCCAFFREY SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
There was no information available on agenda item # O. Agenda items #11 and #12 were covered as part
of the review of Carlisle Village.
13.
The Parks Commission reviewed a list of goal and projects to be submitted for Council
consideration. They selected four goals as priorities: I) Update Comprehensive Park and Pathway
Plan; 2) Acquisition and development of land 'or ballfield complex; 3) Development and
construction of pathway far Bridge Park; and ) Annual tree planting program.
14.
Updatcs. if any.
Groveland Grant Application: Adam Hawkinson had a copy of the grant application available fl.)r
Parks Commission review.
Land Salc: Adam Hawkinson was approache ahout the City at one time wanting to purchase a
one acre parcel of land by Minnesota and Vin Streets in the area of Ruffs Auto site. This area is
being proposed for development in the near fu ure. Adam Hawkinson also stated that the park
equipment at the Country Club park should be removed or replaced. Earl Smith stated that the plan
was to take the fence down and make this a pa'sive park with a tot lot.
Entrancc Signs: Nancy McCaffrey showed a 'ketch of the proposed location for the entrance
signs. Adam Ilawkinson and .lohn Simola arc in charge of the installation of the signs.
Xeel Ballficlds: Earl Smith infarmed the Park COlnmission that Lori Pagcl is the contact person at
Xccl Energy f(Jr lease of additional land for bdlfields. She is awarc of what is proposed but is
reluctant to act on leasing the land until hdl si ce it is currently being fanned. Xcel also has concerns
that a portion of the land will be taken for the 'reeway ramp. Parks Commission is asking for an
additional 150 yards adjacent to the present b -11 ficld boundary. Earl Smith suggested regular
contact with Lori Pagel. The Parks Conuniss on felt that this site provided the quickest and least
expcnsive way to get additional ballfields. If he City could acquire the land, they should considcr
trying to seed it yet this fall.
Walk & Roll: The Parks Commission felt th It they should have an updated park and trai I map for
distribution to Walk and Roll participants.
5
.
.
.
Parks Commission Minutes - 3/20/03
Other: There was a brief discussion on he website and how it could be improved. This will be an
ongoing project for staff. Parks Com ission also discussed the need to have the Park
Superintendent involved at the staff leve in reviewing developments when they eo me in.
Recol!nition of Earl Smith: This is the ast Parks Commission meeting for Earl Smith who will be
leaving the area. The Parks Commissio presented Earl Smith with a certificate of appreciation for
his service to the Parks Commission an to the City of Monticello.
14. Adjourn.
NANCY MCCAFFREY MOVED TO DJOURN AT 6:57 P.M. RICK "I'RA VER
SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTlO CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
~"_."--'-"'.'~-'~-'-
Recording Secretary
6
.
.
.
--~---------'------ -------.---.-.---.-.--
PARK AND TRAIL FEE INV NTORY OF MONTROSE AREA
------ ------__Jebr~~003_~_______ ______
Single Family Residential Commercial/Industrial
- Park Dedicati~!_Jpe,-:_~!.nit)~ _~--Eark Dedication__.
Land Cash Land Cash
---,- ----~_. ---------., '---.----- -"--'~.-._,~,
1 0% $ 1 ,500 10% $5,000 per acre
Cit
---~--
Albertville
_~Lak~
Buffalo
---"-'-"
Clearwater
__pay ton_
Delano
-------.'-~~-
Iloward Lake
Maple Grove
--'.-"-.'-"-
Medina
-"-----"--
Monticello
Montrose
--'-'-'-'.
_....2tsego_
__.!1ynlout~
Rogers
St. Michael
10%
--'-
One acre
per 75
persons
2l~,-~J20~
10%
10%
--'--.
10%
--._"-
10%
10%
10%
10%
10%,
10%
._-._'~,-
10%
-'--'-
10%
10%
'---'-'--
__$1,400__
$1,000
-~"-._~~
Estimated value
of I 0% land
dedication
'-'-"-.-.---
$1,500
~-'._"-"--.
$1,000
-'---'-'-
Estimated value
of 10% land
dedication
-'-'-.-'-'--
$2,600
-"--"-'--"-'-'-
I 0% of pre-
developed land
valuc or $3,300
per un it
whichever is
"reater
-~----
$875
--,.~-_.,',,-
Fee eqUld to
value of land
dedication
-'--'-'-"-'
$2,085
._"-'---'-
___~600__
$825
-'--'-'0_'-
$2,000
-'--"--, -"_.._'--,-"'-~-,--
None
--
None
.~~-.-
None
-'_..,-,-.._~
Nonc
10%
-._~.~.'-
10%
Estimatcd value
of 10% land
dedication
~'-~,---
-..J3,000 Eeracr~_
~OOO pcr acre
Estimated value
of 10% land
dedication
-..--.-.-----,
Commcrcial
$6,500
Industrial $5,000
__per ac~_
10% of pre-
devcloped land
value
10%
~~
10%
.~._~-
10%
10%
Trails as
required by plan,
dedicated from
nark fees
~-----I:::....::_._,_~,
None
-'---.-.,-
Sidewalks on
one side of
street
._~'~_._~"-
None
'-~-,--
None
~"-'-~~-'-
None
.------.._'------.._~
None
~._._~..._..-
.---'.---'-'-'-.
None
None
None
---".--.'--"- --.---'.-'-.
$250 plus
sidewalks 011 one
side of street
_..._.._-.-._-~-_..-.._,-
Fee eq ual to Sidewalks on one
value of land side of street
dedication
.~._--._.~ .-"-'--.-.-
_~3,500 per ac~
$6,50(L12.er acre.
Commerc ial
$5,000
Industrial $2,500
_~r acre _
Commercial
$3,000
Industrial $2,000
__~ aCI~_ ______._.
10'%
10%
10%
10%
0%
Source: Northwest Associated Consultants Inc., Pcb, 003
~--'-~.-.-
$200 for
residential
/ '\" "'\ \~;'1I' '-( I
~ I~ .. "'~''''~b/ ~ ~ / "-
Iii ~ '~)_~,{ / I~~~ ~
Ii! U/,} '~1~~::,,~~ ~/ -\ '\ It -r II '...
. I a '1/'103 Ir.:~ " ""~ / I ..1'- f''''(~ . _~
; ; ; ~IJJlr";:l' '~';:"( / ~ ) /1/ I I l>->- ~
'H 111:WI- 1'1' ,~, "e.{/- -./( I /( i:,\
) )11!~rrJ]\--liJI ~. 0. ~: ~" 0.} J< \ \ '- \,' ~'v <"f-
1""J'Q'~fllS! .~ ". ~ ~,~ / /, --; '-"'r\,*,'--
I.. 'rr]) I. 01~' '~', ~ - ~~I \.."" ....,\ i 'r~
p;.~~.. -~---_!j ~~,~~ ~\ I>(}~~~ ~\~"'.~ ./ """ rr I':>' \\,-
I~(r- ~t-l-A~ :/ r ~ ,[1--" ~,~, /_" \ \'-- '~H -~. %\
\vJ)C,~~ "~~.'-~ ~ _ } ~~'V"A.-)Iy ..1 -~:;""'\--(' fr
\ \ f~":'llfl I J. ~~~'~,I\ I, 'I
I i/~J ~ ) \I~/ -- } I (~- -- ~_ ~'\ ' t~ h=<~: -t-/ f)!
I J I ~ 1\ I I r"'~ I~/ .-" - ~ 'Y "'" 1<-. i I
// ~IL~ f (' ~-~ J f ~ I ~\ II ~d ~<\~ / 'IIi
/ / It Jr"r- / t'~--~":: ").\\ ' '" / /.... " \ ~'~~~~~~ /; jI
-''-; \ 1 I) I ~, \.- X. ("
/ './",/ (.'~~' -_/; , ...."'iI. "'~.~'~~~.
~_~_I=-<,"!l! ,,~ if/. ~ rt. --JC'~~~j~,'~
~ =~~g/ ~'", -""-iJiJ5. 4- 'A;~ ~ ~!1! :>,.::-,... - -
~ :prr -c,9 ~'~u',)ooJh ii(~~~ ,&~~~ ~"- .~~
Q, ~ A'J ~ ? / 1;, '~:J':' '~~ ...,.. .',.h<J'7[ >1!1 ..,
~ cI\ f' l,) F r // :Ii'~ ,""'L... r..//, .....1) ~
E .)\ r,...... &' I ~~ . -M~ . ~ III"
<' r t /Q 'l~fcrc:.- '~ lii.n,...' ~.
>- S).. ~' ........- rl .:, ., ... ';~.p. -Y\\II.m;] \ - ~
F ~ ~,. '}"""~II ~ :;~" ,It ~~ ~ L-:
q (f) ~ E. ~!'"4. 1/1/ · c,/ 'I ~~ ~~ ft~" ~ .1
,J ~ v' ~ ' ( 1'" f .( . r--r.... ~"- ~~:y~J~ --=-;._
.' ,,-l.^..... :5 -- --= j1rl-J II . 'I~\ . ~-": "till ~.
If!!i; !:ij Ii i lil/limii Iii Ij B =--~ ~ /~' \ ~::~\ ~~ ~~~. , .~. ~._. ~."i '~~.'..'.
~x Nd ~d~ i, i ~~lli~~~~h! R~!! ;~ i \J .J~f-.:: lI' 1 _m~\Y ~ ~ ~..
~efx: Rile t;~ ~ "Fillfj!iQ"F~ ~!;l~ ~ ...." f\.J "'_~ -~ J I ." ___~\i --. . i!l ~ ." IJ'
QR dS ~~!~ ~" 11 ~R;Ri~ .ya~ I~~ ei '1t'"1 '9 '{fA . '" -. ~~:.~.~::_- ".' 'I,fm :njl (':
'!i~:~ i~;~ !! I ~j~~i~~U~~ :~i ~~ -fw · JCr'1~~"~- . .'.;(~:' :';~~~:~~..!. . _. "
r'i!il iUi !i ! MiliJ:i,llii " li~ '. ?i.~.~~" ~ · ~p '~(l 1k~~ft" \~::: ~ 'O,r~{~
li8MR~ ~ III ~~ ~ ~dilfia~1 ~S~ i~ F \~., ~~ri ~...." .iI I /
~ai~~! ;U ~ ~ ~i~~h~Ui pi:~ (. J. .. .!{~ .,~~~~~ ,I. ,.: '~~~ ~ - ;;.
I!:;:: il; I! li!mj:il !li!i -) .'~~.;/;jt-~.~.~ ~.i. ~r ~~fl)~)\0 (~'
i~f!~ ~~ i i !dt;~ ~li~ ~a?; it: ('" .~a~~~ '\~ .~';:tf ~I · "'. .......1) " '"
8~";!~ ~!l!~ ~ m ::l ~n;J~F~ j!G U J t ) r....~ '!(~?-.v't.i". A'~ III '" N\., _.... ' .
~f/'-;1I ~~~ X b~ ~~~~ I;j ~~ GO I';..-...Ny ./~,.._'~\i ... ~ .. I /
liiW !:l d lii::i,!: ~~ill ~,,->') g~-e -d'" ~-= .- "_' ~": ~~" '"\,JJ: "r
~<li1Q~~ ~~~ ~ ~ ~~~h~ fS.. I~.. rn<l 'Q ()' /;L,- - ;1JS;~ ~ " . '-_ .~"'.......:-. J_ ---,--,- .
-~
~,
~I! }I '
-;;:r
, J WI;
~ 'i II
i .11
\~
,',\
\
\
a!:J
;~ '
-q .
?id
~
:1'
:/ !
..
it
.,
';
"
........,
~, ~~
~ j
~~
~-
s
L,-;~
gj
g
o
z
t.\L.
('\
or
~ "'f'-
~ ~
~~
...
J )
;J
.
Parks COmmission Meeting - 04/17/2003
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
ild Meadow. (I.S.)
At previous meetings, the Parks COmmission ha considered taking portions of the open space in
Wdd Meadow for parkland or green space. That POrtion of green space in the northeast Comer of
the plat at the COmer 0 fHang Avenue and 95Th Str et is generally lower sloping land and has two ga<;
lines running diagonally through the property. T e size of the area is approximately 5 acres. It is
believed to be drained by a portion of a drain tile hich is the beginning of County Ditch 33. The
property drops from an elevation of approximatel 944 SOme] 6' to the east to an elevation of928.
Access to the park is from an internal roadway and here is a 14 percent grade a<; you enter the park.
Access from any other direction other than back y ds is extremely poor a<; there are no shOulders
whatsoever on 95th Street or Haug Avenue.
.
Much of the area is low and wet while the rest 0 the property is sloping. It Wa<; recently noted
during an on site inspection that a culvert exists acr ss 95Th Street approximately 600' west ofHaug
Avenue. This culvert drains many acres of the TyI East Plat which would keep this area wet for
all but the driest times of the year. A POrtion of the n w streets for this development pIaee significant
amounts of Iill OVer the gas line. However, it is beli ved that the gas company would not allow 10'
to ] 5' of Iill across the entire section of this open spa e containing the gas line easement, so it would
be difficult to fill this property.
Approximately three weeks ago the City Engineer an myself attended a County Board Meeting in
hopes of the County removing this green space from t e Ditch 33 assessment rolls. This was before
we knew that severa1acres of the Tyler East Plat dr in into this area We requested the County
exempt this area as the City was taking the major po ion of this Wild Meadow development and
draining it into a stonn sewer that goes down Gillard the Mississippi River, thereby eliminating a
great deal of water from reaching Ditch 33. We were old quite 1irmIy, however, by COmmissioner
Pat Sawatzke that they Would not exempt this roperty from any future assessments for
improvements to the ditch which is badly in need of repa s. Mr. Sawatzke also infurmed us that most
of the assessments for Ditch 33 were for lands that we e "drained by the ditch" which would mean
this green space would most likely be assessed in its ent' ety. It is POssible that portions ofT yler East
may not be assessed eVen though the water drains fro there and flows into this basin. Ditch laws
are vel}' complicated and difficult to deal with as they are outdated, difficult to change, and often little
pieces of property have big assessments while large acre of liumIand discharging into the ditch have
few assessments.
Since this new infonnation came to light regarding the ulvert draining a Portion of Tyler East and
the fuet that the County Would not exempt this property om assessments for future improvements
to Ditch 33, we fult it necessary to bring back this it m to the Parks COmmission for further
consideration. AdditiOnally, there is also another Portion f wetland down in the fur southeast Portion
o fthe property which is a similar situation. However, that POrtion is a delineated wetland and cannot
be filled either.
Parks Commission Meeting - 04/17/2003 .
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
Since I do not bave all of the background on how this open space or parkland was originallY accepted
by the Parks Commission, it is better to discuss the alternatives at the meeting rather than try to state
them here.
A. ST AFF RECOMMENDATION:
It is clear that this 1and is really a drainage pond with drainage swales and low wet 1and that rarely
dries up. In addition, it is crossed by a double gas line and very IittIe of the property is fit for use as
a park, and it would not meet the definition of acceptable park based upon the Parks Commission's
policies. Add to that the possible future liabilities fur this land in paying assessments for downstream
improvements for Ditch 3 3 (while still baving to accept drainage from Tyler East) make this property
questionable as baving any benefit to our park system. Therefore, it is the Public Works Director and
the Parks Superintendent's recommendation that we thoroughly discUSS any alternatives or other uses
fur this propertY and look at ways to remove the City from the liability path for future assessments
and continued maintenance of this area.
SUPPORTING DATA:
.
B.
Copy of the latest plat with wetland mitigation plan; Copy of the latest wright County aerial photos
of the area; Minutes of past meetings dealing with this issue. In addition, Dawn Grossinger will also
bave some comments in regard to its past history as told to her by a local furmer. Pictures of the area
taken by Adam Hawkinson.
.
MIN TES
REGULAR MEETING - ARKS COMMISSION
Thursday, February 20,2003 - 4:30 p.m.
"To enhance community pri e through developing and
maintaining city parks with high standard of quality."
Members Present:
Fran Fair, Larry Nolan, Nany McCaHrey, Rick Traver, Mayor Bruce Thielen.
Memhers Absent:
Earl Smith
1. Call to Order.
Chair Larry Nolan called the meeting to ord rat 4:30 p.m. and declared a quorum present. Chair
Nolan welcomed those students present who were attending the meeting as a class assignment.
2.A A rove minutes of .Janua
3. Consideration of addin
RICK TRAVER MOVED TO APPROVE T E MINUTES OF THE JANUARY 15,2003
SPECIAL MEETING. FRAN FAIR SECn DED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED
UNANIMOUSL Y.
. H. A rove minutes of Januar
.
RICK TRA VER MOVED TO APPROVE T IE MINUTES OF THE JANUARY 16,2003
REGULAR MEETING. fo'RAN FAIR SEeO OED TI IE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED
UNANIMOUSL Y.
None.
4. Citizen Requests
None.
5.
Review of
Mark Gergen representing MW Johnson was . resent at the meeting to review the park and
pathway layout for the Wild Meadow develop lent. Mr. Gergen noted that this had come hefore
the Parks Commission at their last meeting. ased on feedback tram that meeting, certain
changes were made to thc plat. The Parks Co 1mission had requested the elimination of three lots
adjacent to the proposed park in order to open he park area and give it more strcet frontage. For
those students present it was noted that the dev lopment was located in the area of Gillard and
.
Parks Commission Minutes - 2/20/03
I-faug A venues. The developer in the revis d plan did eliminate two lots and that resulted in a hetter
alignment of the trail corning into the park. The developer is proposing to change the lot frontages
from 80' to 76'. The park frontage would e 498 feet instead of 530 feet. The developer stated
that 75' lots are common in many cities and still could accommodate a nice size house. The
developer stated they had met with MnDO regarding any impact to their property by the
realignment of the interstate.
2.09 acres of the proposed park land lies wit in a gas line easement. Although a structure could not
he placed in the easement area, it would still be usable for hallnelds or open space. The developer
was requesting partial park credit for the Ian under the gas line casement. If credit was given f(x
the area in the gas line casement, the total p< rk dedication would be 8.4 acres. The developer
pointed out that there will he a trail running long 95th Street. Adam Hawkinson asked about the
pathway from the wetland areas and whethe it would be an easement or owned by the city. The
developer stated that has not yet been deten ined. Adam Ilawkinson indicated the City would
prefer to have it as an casement. The trail ill be 10' in width.
Fran Fair asked with the new configuration f the park land, would there he adequate room for the
placement of the play structure. The gas line easement is approximately I no' in width so the
question was if there was adequate land outside the easement area for placing the play structure.
.
In viewing the drawing, the Park Commissio recOlllmended squaring up the lots adjacent to the
park (Lots 1 &2, Block I). The developer als poi nted out that the park land extends down to the
wetlands area. At this time Jeff O'Neill ente 'ed the meeting. He reported that the city staff had
reviewed the plan earlier and was okay with tle concept. Jeff O'Neill stated that even with the
changes the developer was able to keep the s'me number of lots in the development, approximately
280. City Planner, Steve Grittman, had sugg'sted transferring some of the park land hack to the
developer so that the developer could have 8 'lot frontages. Bruee Thielen stated that from a
Council perspective they would prefer to see 0' lot frontages. The City has had some difficulties
with small lots and small homes and for that I' ason would like to see larger lots. Jeff O'Neill
recommended that enough park land be gi ven; back so that the developer could have 80' frontage.
Larry Nolan liked the trail alignment and felt hat it was an overall hetter layout, however he still had
concerns about the park land within the gas IiI. e easement. Mayor Thielen at this time briefly
explained to the students the City's park dedi ation policy. There was some discussion on the
amount of street frontage needed for the park rea. Presently it is proposed to be 496 feet and
Larry Nolan was not in fi1Vor of reducing the f ontage because they need maximum space for the
play structure. The developer stated that lots I akcn out of the single family area were replaced in
the townhome area. They did not lose densit but more of the units were in townhomes. Mayor
Thielen stated he was not as concerned with }( t frontages as he was with the quality of the homes in
the development.
.
RICK TRAVER MOVED TO ACCEPT THE ROPOSED LAYOUT fOR WILD MEADOW
WITHOUT CHANGING THE LOT FRONT GES FROM 76' AND SQUARING OFF THE
2
.
.
.
Parks Commission Minutes - 2/20/03
LOT ADJACENT TO THE PARK. NAN Y MCCAFFREY SECONDED THE MOTION.
.IefrO'Neill mentioned that the engineer h questioned the grading in the area. 'fhere is a 4 to 1
slope coming into the park and the enginee wanted to know if that was acceptable to the City as he
had concerns about the water heing directe to the park. With the grading proposcd the water will
bc directed towards the park but the develo er stated the water will not he standing in the park but
will drain away. Larry Nolan stated that th park lands needs to be fairly flat for the play structure
and also noted that any trails would have to meet ADA requirements. In response to how far the
trail should be extended into the park, Larr Nolan felt it should be brought up to the point where
the play structure and ballfield would be located.
RICK TRAVER AMENDED HIS MOTIO TO INCLUDE ADDING THE TRAIL FROM
THE SIDEWALK INTO THE ENTRANC, OF THE PARK SUBJECT TO APPROVAL BY
THE PARKS SUPERINTENDENT AND ITY STAFF. NANCY MCCAFFREY
SECONDED TI-IE AMENDED MOTION. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
6.
Park Maintenance Items.
Adam Hawkinson submitted a list of the wo k completed. It was noted that the /loor was poured at
the Pioneer park shelter and the electricians ould be out within the next week or so.
7. Review of estimated 2003 costs for Rivers de Ccmete 0 erations and consideration of
fee adjustments, if any.
This item had he en discussed at the last mee ing and the Parks Commission directed staff to get
additional information on what other cemete ies charged. Adam Hawkinson submitted the survey
information and the recommendations of .Iohn Simola, the Public Works Director, regarding the fee
increase. Irthe fee increase is approved, R verside would have higher lot costs than most of the
other cemeteries. It was noted that the incre -se was necessary to take care of the capital
improvements which are needed but have no been done because oflack of funds. Bruce Thielen
stated any fee increase would have to appro v ' d by Council but he felt that if the understanding was
that the increase in revenues would be used fi l' capital improvements that would make it more
acceptable.
RICK TRAVER MOVED TO ACCEPT TH RECOMMENDATIONS OF TI IE PUBLIC
WORKS DIRECTOR AND TO FORWARD THE RECOMMENDATION TO TilE
COUNCIL FOR APPROVAL. FRAN FAI SECONDED 'fI IE MOTION. MOTION
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY
8.
Wildwood Ponds/Hermes Property.
.lefT O'Neill stated that he and Adam Hawkin on had not yet met regarding development in this
"l
-,
.
.
.
/
Purk Commission Minutes - 4/] X/02
meeting when this plat was being considered to nuke ccrtain the Plullning Commission wus a\vure or the
Pmk Commissiun's position, Discussiun or the oncepts ell' neighborhoud/commullity parks made the
Parks Commission Il'C] that the comprehensive pi III should revisited.
The Pmks Commission then discussed a prelimine ry luyout orthc Bruggeman devclopment. Adam
II,hvkinsoll stuteel he did nut like having the trail lUll between residences noting tlwt it generates a negative
response rrom humeo\\iners ~tnd can create probleJ lS. Earl Smith questioned the drainage in the area noting
since there was no outlet the area could be too we. The Parks Commission also questioned having to
construct a trail across what appeared to be pondil g areas. They noted that again the trnil and open space
were placed within LJ P A and Northern Natural Ga' easements. 'fhe Parks Commission felt the only
reason the trail/park lanel was being given was tha the developer was lJnable to utilize it ('or anything else.
'fhe Parks Commission had serioLls reservations at out the suitability of the land proposed for park/trails and
again emphasized the need for the Planning Comn ission to know the position of the Parks Commission on
this.
10. AdjI)UJ'n.
RICK TRAVER MOVED TO ADJOURN
MOTION. MOTION CARRIED UNANI
Recording Secretary
T 7:30 P.M. EARL SM]TH SECONDED THE
OUSL Y.
6
.
.
.
MINUTES
REGULAR MEETING PARKS COMMISSION
Thursday, Janua 16,2003 - 4:30 p.m.
"To enhance community I) ide through developing and
maintaining city parks wit a high standard of quality"
Members Present:
Fran Fair, Larry Nola ,Earl Smith and Rick Traver.
Members Absent:
Nancy McCaffrey an Council Liaison, Bruce Thielen
Staff Present:
Adam Hawkinson, Pa ks Superintendent and JetfO'Neill, Deputy City
Adm inistrator.
1. Call to Order.
Chair Larry Nolan called the meeting to order at 4:30 p.m. and declared a quorum present.
2. A rove minutes of December 19 2002 re ular Parks Commission meetin .
EARl, SMITI I MOVED TO APPROVE TH ~ MINUTES Or: 1'1 IE DECEMBER 19,2002
REGULAR PARKS COMMISSION MEET! G. FRAN FAIR SECONDED TIlE MOTION.
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
3.
Consideration of addin items to the a en
Greg Schlink of Bruggeman Homes requeste to be on agenda for review of the plat of Wild
Meadows for park and trail layout. Adam Ila kinson, Parks Superintendent added review of
changes to Uroveland Park layout and sites fo ball fields to the agenda.
At this point the Parks Commission determin d to deal with those agenda items where individuals
were present to make presentations.
Wild Meadows. The Parks Commission had looked at a plat f(Jr this area previously. At that time
the Parks Commission expressed their cone en s about the park land being within utility easements and
the park land and trails encroaching in wetlan areas. The developer redesigned the plat and was
bringing it back again fiJr Parks Commission r view. Greg Schlink stated that the design of the plat
was driven by the location of wetlands and uti ity easements. The proposed park is located in the
northeast corner of the plat bounded by Gillar and 95'11 Avenue and would be a public park since,
according to Jeff O'Neill, this area is under se ed by parks. The park area is approximately 6 Y:
acres including the area of the gas line easeme 1. The park area was sketched out to show a
soccer/ballficld area, play structure, shelter, ha d court and open area. It is the City's policy not to
accept land within utility easements as park de ication. Adam Hawkinson stated that if the City were
to place any equipment or play structure within the easement area, it would have to be removed and
.
Parks Commission Minutes - 1/16/03
replaced should the utility company to any ork or repair to their lines. In addition there may be
restrictions as to how elose to the line a stru ture could be placed. The developer felt the layout of
the park provided good access to the wetlan s area. An 8' bituminous trail is proposed within the
development. Jeff O'Neill stated that if the rail is internal, the developer picks up the cost of the trail.
If the trail serves area outside of the develop nent, pathway credit is given. Rick Traver asked about
elevation of the park land area noting that th area appeared fairly Hat and could easily accommodate
ballfields. The elevation of the trail area w s also discussed and the Parks Commission was
concerned about the trails close proximity t( the wetlands area. Jeff O'Neill stated that the plan has
not yet been reviewed by planning stafr. La ry Nolan asked about sidewalks. Greg Schlink replied
there are 5' sidewalks on at least one side oi'all streets within the development. Mr. Schlink statyd
the streets will be public streets but the right-or-way will be narrower than the typical street.
Larry Nolan questioned whether they would want parking area for a park of this size. Adam
Hawkinson responded that it would probabl only be 10-12 stalls. Earl Smith asked about
accepting easement area as park land as he as concerned about the City getting land that they may
not be able to utilize for parks but would ha e to maintain nevertheless. Adam Hawkinson suggested
that if I,ots 12-18 located southeasterly fron the park be included in the park area it would provide
the park with sufficient area not impacted b the utility easement. Greg Schlink stated that was too
much area to give up for park. It was sugge 'ted that perhaps the westerly area of the proposed park
where the sketch showed plantings and play structure could be utilized for lots. The developer did not
think that would be appropriate since it wou d require those lots to have driveway access off of 95th
Avenue instead of from the streets within th plat.
.
The Parks Commission again expressed their concern about accepting land under an easernent for
park dedication and noted that would be an ssue they would face again when looking at the
development of the Ken and James Shultz p'operty. This development will contain approximately
280 homes and consists of approximately 9 acres. Based on 10% of land area, the park dedication
fi:)[ this development should be about 9 acre. Greg Schlink stated that the property owner, Gene
Bauer had been given park dedication credit! for an casement he had given and that amount had been
deducted from the 9 acres of park dedicatiOl for this area.
The Parks Commission needs to respond to wo issues on this proposed plat; 1) Whether to accept
land within utility easements for park dediC-lion and 2) Whether the layout for park and trails was
acceptable. Rick Traver liked the layout ut better than the previous plan but did not fecl credit
should be given for the easement area. Sin e they could not build in the easement area. it would
make the placement of play structures and () her facilities more difficult. It was not known how much
of the park land area was easement. The d veloper stated he did not believe the City would be
prohibited from placing the trail in the case ent area. JellO'Neill stated that if the Parks Commission
was comfortable with layout it could go for. ard to the Planning Commission and city staff would
work out the park dedication fees. Earl Smlith stated that he didn't feel the area proposed was
adequate in size to meet the 10% land area edication and he didn't feel the easement area should be
accepted as park dedication. However, he as comfortable with the concept plan. Larry Nolan felt
.
.
.
.
Parks Commission Minutes - 1/16/03
the land within the easement area could be onsidered green space but not park dedication. Earl
Smith asked ifthe land was accepted as gre n space how would it be handled and who would
maintain it. Adam Hawkinson stated he Ii ed the idea of in eluding Lots 1-3 on the west side of the
proposed park as part of the park. This wolld make the area more open. Earl Smith also
recommended that the developer stake the t ail and park out immcdiately as that shows residents
where trails and parks arc going to be locate and they know ahead of time which lots abut trails. It
was noted that with the combination of trail and sidewalks that are proposed all areas of the
development can access Gillard Avenue. G eg Schlink said they would like to get some credit fi.x the
trail if it is put in up front.
EARL SMITH MOVED TO ACCEPT THE CONCEPT PLAN FOR WILD MEADOWS WITH
SUPPORT fOR LOTS 1, 2 AND 3 BEeO ING PART OF THE PARK LAND WITH THE
TRAIL LAID AS SHOWN HEFORE RESI ENTIAL CONSTRUCTION OCCURS SO TIIA'r
RESIDENTS KNOW WHERE THE TRAIL AND PARK IS LOCATED.
./elHrNeill asked about the land along the e sement. Parks Commission stated land along the
easement would not be part orthe park or pa k dedication. Jeff O'Neill stated that if the land in thc
easement area is not taken the amount of the _ ark dedication fee paid in cash is greater. If the City
accepts the land as grecn space (not park) the City would still have to maintain it which would he a
cost for the City
FRAN FAIR SECONDED TIlE MOTION.
OT'ION CARRIED lJNANIMOlJSL Y.
8,-9. Review u dated ark and trail hm for Hi Iside Farms and S irit Hills subdivisions.
Mario Cocchiarella and Rohert Pearson were _ resent to discuss the develoPlnent plans for II illside
Farms and Spirit lIills (property owned by Ja es and Ken Shultz). Jeff O'Neill reviewed the
proposed trail layout for these developments. Portions oFthe proposed development abut Fenning
A venue and stan feels there is a need J(W trail 'llong this road. However, at sOlne future point it is
proposed to improve Fenning Avenue so no tr il would be added until the improvements to the road
are complete. It was Felt that this trail along eIming A venue should be shown on the plat even
though it may not he built for some time. In a ldition to the trail along Fenning Avenue, the Spirit Hill~
development shows another trail coming betw en Lots 7 and 8 as shown on the sketch and extending
through Ken Shultz property (10 acre parcel), 0 the City water tower site and ending at an open area
adjacent to the water tower site and behind the Methodist Church site. The developer ofllillside
Farms changed their layout so that the trail did not run along back property lines. There will be
sidewalks that will provide the access to the tr ils.
There was discussion of the trail connection point between the two devclopment. The drawing for
Spirit I hIls showed a trail connection to the ea" t between Lots 12 and 13. It was suggested in lieu of
that connection, there should be a trail running between Lots 10 and 11 which would align more
elosely with Outlot A of Hillside Farms.
3
.
MONTICELLO piS DEPARTMENT
Work list April17lh ,2003 March 21"1, thru April17lh , 2003
.
. Pioneer building
. Sweeping of sidewalks and pathwa .. s
. General park maintenance
. General equipment maintenance
. Routine cleaning of restroom facilit es
. Playground inspections
. Pulled in all the winter signs and sli ing hill protection
. Pruning of honey suckle along Co. d. #25
. Core aerated ballfields
. Box is being installed on the Dodg 1 ton (still)
. Spring clean up of parks
. Salvaging what we can from the lib ary
. Start setting up irrigation
. Ballfield preparations
. Skidsteer tryouts ( employees can ick what they like)
. Painting library letters and Pioneer oors
. Setting up vehicles for summer
. Maintenance of vehicles (AI is gon , he had surgery - doing good)
. Chipping orders
. Sealed block on Pioneer building
. Started pavers at Otter Creek
. Mulching trees and planting beds
.
.
Monticello aseball
Lights Pr posal
High Scho I Field
Cost: $100,000 - $120,000
Company: Musco Lighting
Teams: Monticello Polecats, Legion,
Program
s us to be in an ideal location for
s, press box, and a fenced in area
SSlOn.
W teams, and High School
Why: We have a quality field that enabl
baseball. We have concessions, restroo
that makes it convenient for charging ad
.
City Fields: If we get lights, the fences ere could be moved in for another
softball field and the Sandy Koufax tea s could use the field as well. This
would leave us with 2 regulation baseba 1 fields in town.
Funding: The baseball program can ma e a $10,000 down payment. We
will be able to make annual payments 0 $5,000 to the city over a ten year
period. Our money would corne from th signs on the field. This would
bring our contribution to $60,000.
We are asking the city to appl for a bond to help get the project
done sooner and to save interest. We fe I the financial commitment from
the city would be minimal considering t e use the field would get by all the
teams and members of our community.
Scheduling: The high school coach wou d meet with all the teams to set up
a master schedule.
Concession money: Would help make i provements on the field.
Tournament profits would go to the tea nmning the tournament.
.
~ ~~~r~t~~~f:. ~.~;::;,.; ~~':"'''~,~>-~~':.f:',~~~~.~''~.'.'~':'' '. )'" ,_:.... '
..
. !Ui,,--i"{
.-=.___:-':k~1~~.~tIF
_ :.1._\ ..'.,}~
t __. _ . ,..,'~, ,:~,~
.
PARK DEDICAi ION FEES
SURVEY 0 4/15/03
Albertville 763-497-3384 $1,500~ nit for residential/ $5,OOO/acre for comm. & indo
$875/p r unit; 10% land value - Council makes determination
Becker 763-261-4302 on cas land
Big Lake 763-263-2107 $1,400/ er lot residential; no charge on comm. or indo
One ac of land for each 75 people. A single family lot is 3.5
people; a-family lot is 6 people; Cash in lieu of land is
$250/si gle family lot, $500 for two family lot; $125 for a one
bed roo unit plus $75 for each additional bedroom. In
addition there is a $250 surcharge per unit which is above and
Buffalo 763-682-1181 be ond nd land or cash dedication
$2,200/ nit residential; $10,OOO/acre commercial/$8,OOO/acre
Champlin 763-421-8100 industri I
$1,615/ nit residential; $3,000/acre commercial; $2,OOO/acre
Elk River 763-441-7420 industria
. $2,600/unit residential; $5,OOO/acre industrial; $6,500/acre
Maple Grove 763-494-6000 freeway. ommercial
$800/pe unit; on apartments $800/unit plus $50 for all
Rockford 763-477-6565 bedroom over one
No com ercial or industrial park dedication
$825/uni residential; $2,500/acre commercial; $5,OOO/acre
Rogers 763-428-2253 commer ial
$2,000/u it residential; $3,OOO/acre commercial/ $2,000/acre
St. Michael 763-4997-2041 industrial $2,000/acre public/institutional
.
P.Ol/0Z
F-058
T.Z80
~.
+7634975306
FROM-CITY OF ST ~IKE
APR.07"03 11 :04
3150 Lander Avenue NE
pO Sox 337
St Michael, MN 55376
Phone: 763-497-2041 (X104)
Fax; 763-497.5306
clT\Olil: cbeall@d.st.miehaGl.mn.us
City of
t. Michael
Fax
Carol Beall. City Clerk
To: Dawn Grossinger
2, induding cover
Fax: (763)295-4404
April 7, 2003
Phone:
CC=
Park Dedication Fees
Re=
o Fot' Review !:I Please Comm t 0 Please Reply !:I pl..- Reeycle
o Urgent
.
Dawn: Here are our latest park de ication fees - Call if you have any
questions.
.
.
.
.
APR-07-03 11 :04
FROM-CITY OF ST ~IKE
+7634975306
T-290 P.02/02 F-059
ORDINANCE 0.0101
City of St. Mithael, County of rieht, State of Minnesota
The City of St. Michael ordains:
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CODE OF 0 INANCES 2001 FOR THE CITY OF ST
MICHAEL, MI NESOTA
SECTION 1: ~ lS4.091(A)(1) of St. Michael C de of Ordinances, Ordinance No. 2001 . is
hereby amended to read as follows:
(1) Any person requesting subdivision or rep
dedicate to the public use, a percentage of such I
nails or open space. The city, in its discretion
dedicated. or a combination of land and cash.P
development are as follows: .
ning of land shall convey to the city. or
for the public use as parks. playgrounds,
may require cash in lieu of land to be
k dedication requirements for residential
Subdivision Density
De . cation % or Cash Amount
o to 1.00 units/acre
1.01 to 3.49 units/acre
3.50 to 5.99 units/acre
6.00 units/acre or more
Commercial development
Industrial development
Public/semi public1i1lstitutional
development
of land or $2,000 per unit
of land or $2,000 per unit
12 of land or $2,000 per unit
14 ~ of land or $2,000 per unit
10 rI of land or $3,000 per acre
10 Il'.I of land or $2,000 per acre
10 rI of land or 52,000 per acre
SECTION 2: fi 155.009, MOTOR FUEL ST TION, is hereby amended to add to the
definition as folldWS: For the purposes of this defi 'tion, the tenn automobiles shall mean any
motor vehicle not exceeding twenty-six thousand (2 ,000) pounds gross weight.
S~CTIQN 3: This Ordinance shall take effect units passage and publication according to
law.
Passed by the City Council of St. Michael on Decen ber II, 2001.
CITY OF ST. rCHAEL
.) .'
By'. '. / . 1 .. ., /
.' "1.--' _ //' /.
-Wayne essler,lts Mayor
ATTEST;
By:
" ....,...
- .. ,.. ~ , . '/ ~-. _, . i I'
._- L '-.(,{..'-<.....~.......I.:.<(
Carol Beall, City Clerk
-
~...C..-_.
t..kfjSW 0/'" J./-O z..
{Ro-07'03IMONIIO:49
.
CITY OF ROCKFORD
TEL:6124774393
P. 001
SMITTAL
.1
City ot A ckfard
6031 Main treet
Rockford, 55373
763-477-6565 F : 763-477-4393
E-Mail: m h ci frockford.org
TO:
Dawn Fax # 763.29 4404
Mary HUettl' TOTAL # 0 PAGES: 4 (Incl. Cover)
FROM:
DATE:
April 7. 2003
.
REGARDING: Park Dedication Fees
For your Infonnation
For your Approval
Other
x
Per your Request
FOT Review & Response
COMMENTS:
Have a good day!!!
Mary
.
APR. -07' 03(MON) 10:50
CITY OF ROCKFORD
TEL:6124774393
P. 003
'.
..............
and in many ways improves the he 1 th, safety I welfare and morale ot
the citizens of the City of Roc ford. In order to facilitate such
improvements, the City of Rockfo d finds that parl< land, playground
areas, green and open spaces are necessary in all new developments,
lot divisions, subdivisions of and within the city. In order to
provide uniform benefit to all r sidentlS of said areas, the City of
Rockford requires subdivider and evelopers of land to dedicate land
to the city or at the city'3 opti n, to make a cash donation for the
city to acquire land and park equipment and for other related
purposes.
The city requires that a reasonable portion of any proposed
subdivision be dedicated to the p blic or preserved for public use as
street, roads, sewers, electric, 9 water facilities, storm water
drainage and holding areas or and similar utilities and
improvements.
land, or any combination thereof)
il upon recommendation of the Park
upon need and conformance with the
The form of contribution (cash 0
::lhall be decided by the city
and Recreation Commission and
city's Comprehensive Plan.
The amount of land/cash shall be d termined as follows:
.
TYPE OF USE! SUBDIVISION (Land ded'cation ; 10% of gross land area)
Cash Cedicaeion:
"-'
Single family:
Townhouse:
Apartment:
~800.00
!;i800.00 per unit
$800.00 per unit
($50.00 per bedroom above the
first bed.room)
TYPE OF USE: NEW CONSTRUCTION/PREV OUSLY PLATTED
Cash Dedication:
(Amended by Ordinance 02-09,
$800.00
$800.00 per unit
$800.00 per unit
$800.00 pax unit
($50.00 per bedroom above the
first bedroom)
assed May 28, 2002.)
Single family:
Two family:
Townhouse:
Apartment!
Subd. 4. Re ired Developers shall be
responsible for making certain im rovements to their developments for
park, playqround, and public open pace purposes:
.
(1 )
Developers
all park,
development
must provide fi ished grading and ground cover tor
playgxound, and public open ~paces wichin their
contract or si e plan approval responsibilities.
'-..,-
APR, -07' 03(MON) 10:51
CITY OF ROCKFORD
TEL:6124774393
p, 004
.
fo~ fg~k, playg~o nd, public open spac~ (ur cash
concributions in 1 eu of such dedication) be ,reduced
by an amount not to exceed 20%.
\~
(4 )
The c1ey may perm't easements to be dedicated for
trail corridors wh' ch are identified in the city's
Trail Corridor Plan thereby allowing the developer to
include the land ar a in the determination ot setbacks
and building dens ty on the site; however, park
dedication credit ::; all not be given in such cases to
the easement.
(5) Exceptions to these provisions shall be reviewed and
recommended by the Recreation Commission.
.
Subd. 3. Residential De ication Re uirements. A person who
desires to 5ubdiv~de property for p rposes of urban development shall,
as a preraquisite to approval of 10 division or final plat, dedicate
to the public for use as a par, playground, or open space, a
percentage of the land being pla ted or aeveloped as hereinafter
specified. In the alternative, the subaivider shall at the option of
the city, pay to the city a sum of money based upon the fair market
value of the undeveloped land in lieu of dedicating p,raperty, which
'the city shall use in the acquisit on, development or maintenance of
public parks, playgrounds or debt etirement in connection with the
public Space. Any such cash payme t received shall be placed in a
separate fund maintained by the cit and used only for those pUrposes.
In establishing the percen~aqe of ana to be dedicated, or 'the cash
value to be donated, the city council shall take into account the open
space, park, recrea'Cional or corom n areas or facilities which the
subdivider proposes to reserve to the subdivision. These parks,
playground and open space areas sha 1 be independent of and distinct
from the areas dedicated to the p blic for U!e as streets or for
utility easements, sewers, water acilities, storm water drainage,
holding ponds, run-off improvements, trails or other similar utilities
or improvements.
-'--'
'I'he city may choose to accept an e uivalent amount in cash from the
applicant for part or all of the portion required to be dedicated to
such public uses or purposes based on the fair market value of the
land no later than at the time of inal approval. Any cash payments
received shall be placed in a speci 1 fund by the city and used only
for the purposes for which the money was obtained. In establishing the
reasonable portion to be ded.icated, the regulations may consider the
open space park, recreational or co on areas and facilities which the
applicant proposes to reserve for th subdivision. The city reasonably
determines that it will seek to acq ire that por~ion of land for the
purposes stated as a result of appro al of the subdivision.
The City of Rockford find~ that pa ks, playgrounds, green areas and
open spaces improve the value of property in the city, provides
4It amenities and outlets for citi2ens preserves natural environment,
....-
-432
APR, -07' 03(MON) 10:50
CITY OF ROCKFORD
TEL:6124774393
p, 002
.
1008 . Par DedL:a clan
1008.01
\.- --,'
SUbdivision 1.. Intent. The c1 ty council recognizes that
the health, sa.fety a.nd welfare of all people depends greatly on the
quality and character of thei~ environment. Thus, preserving and
enhancing the quality and importa ce in the pla.nning and development
of the city,
Dedicating a portion of land to t e city for parks, playgrounds, and
pUblic open spaces at ths tim of residential, commercial and
industrial development is an esse tial means to provicie and. maintain
ehe hi9"h quali 'Cy environment toda 's ci ti zens demand and to en5ure
that it will continue to exist for uture residents.
.
Furthermore, the city council ecognizes that new residential,
commercial and industrial developme ts contribute to increased de~and$
for parks, playgrounds and pUblic open spaces by new residents,
workers and visitors and that the e demanda are directly related to
the density and intensity of deve opment which is permitted in any
district. Therefore, it is the pol'cy of the city that the following
standards and guidelines for th ded.ication of land for parks,
playgrounds, and public open spaces, or cash contributions in lieu of
such dedication, shall be direc ly related to the d.ensity and
intensity of each subdivision and ev&lopment which occurs within the
city.
"-'"
$ubd. 2.
Public Purposes.
Dedication ot Land for
(1)
Land proposed to
shall meet identif
Comprehensive ~ark
dedicated for pUblic purposes
needs contained in the city IS
Trail Corridor Plans.
(2) To be eligible fa park dedication credit, no less
than 1000 of the land dedicated shall be located
outside Of drainwa s, flood plains or ponding areas
after the site ha been developed unless specific
purposes for land propo~ed to be dedicated tor pUblic
purposes shall be i entified in the city Comprehensive
plan for ParKs and Trails Corridor Plan. (Amended by
Ordinance 88-8, pas ed June 28, 1988.)
(3 )
In those cases wh re subdividers and. developers of
land provide significant amenities, such a.s, but not
limited to, swimmi 9 pools, tennis courtS, handball
courts, ball fields etc., within the development for
the benefit of tho! residing or working therein, and
where, in the jUdqm nt of the city adrniniserator, such
amenities si9nif~ca tly reduce the demands for public
~ecreational facili ies, he may recommend to the city
council that the required amount of land to be
dedicated.
,,'.
'-"
-43 -
Dawn Grossin er
To:
.Ubject:
Adam Hawkinson
RE: Draft Parks Agenda
-----Original Message-----
From: Adam Hawkinson
Sent: Monday, April 07, 20034:17 PM
To: Dawn Grossinger
Subject: RE: Draft Parks Agenda
I din't know if I should add Groveland park or not I have a ock up of what I think the park sign should look like. I also
have a recent bid for the playground structure and we need to decide on a plan for the citizens so we can invite them
to the meeting There may be enough there for an agenda i em. What do ya think??? ( Other than I shouldn't become
a writer.)
-----Original Message-----
From: Dawn Grossinger
Sent: Monday, April 07, 2003 10:22 AM
To: Adam Hawkinson; John Simola; Jeff O'Neill
Subject: Draft Parks Agenda
Attached is a draft of the parks agenda for the April 17t meeting. Because there is also a council and DA T
agenda going out this Friday, please get your additions nd revisions to me as soon as possible. Thanks Dawn
<< File: DraftAgenda.wpd >>
.
.
3:
o
z~
~1J
(\'\<
..~ ~
~o
-
~~
g~
~
=-
PJ!~
cnZ
. ..)It
... -(I).
~)It
"z
.
.
.
.
,
,
,
,
,
,
-- " ,
- "
\\...." "\,
I ,
I ,
,
,,'
'-
,~... -- :...- - -
'-- " .-
--.- \
-
I
"
(
,
\
~ ....".....,\
/
"
"
/
(
1
I
I
~
~"
,-
,/,....."
=
)
/"
---
/
/
/
_. _ ---../ .If
~, ,-,~/
/
F
~,
/
v
(
r__
---
(
"
"
"
"
"
"
')
l,
"'
)
)
/
(
/
"'
"'
'-- _. .,. ../
" -
FT,:-\\AGA N
SALES. I;\C
I~'; L,,,~,."i ('(.\t.NTr P'(,H,f) 'I'
q I"t.Vl.. htlo< '}.')H~
~'~', .:.1:);. :~\'!'i,'
~H
Lm':"=ni,,--
,,-,~-- --
'.
I
I
I
I
-"
V
" ~\
,
,
,
\
,
,
"
,
,
,
!!'5=r '
-:II}=- >
-._- "
(
)
,
\
,
,
,
\
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
}
(
/'
/
"
(j
"
"
",",. -', "'.....
,
)
/--
)
/J
.. "j
~'~.........
"' /"'
'-- - -----'
j
--
--