Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2008-09-17 Parks Minutes CITYOF MAPLEWOOD PARK COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Wednesday, September 17, 2008 6:30p.m. Council Chambers - Maplewood City Hall 1830 County Road BEast I. CALL TO ORDER II. ROLL CALL: Present: Commissioner Binko Commissioner Fischer Commissioner Christianson Commissioner Peterson Commissioner Roman Commissioner Schmidt Commissioner Sonnek Commissioner Brannon Staff - Ginny Gaynor, DuWayne Konewko Other Mark Gernes Absent: Commissioner Yang III. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Motion approved by Commissioner Binko and Seconded by Commissioner Christianson, all ayes. IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES July 2,d DuWayne Konewko explained there was a change to the front page, a commissioner was listed as present, who wasn't actually there so commissioners received the first page to reflect that change. Commissioner Fischer also requested two other changes; he requested that his name be spelled correctly throughout the minutes. The second is to have it noted that in regards to Gethsemane, there were 5 ayes and 3 nays and the nays were Commissioner Sonnek, Commissioner Binko and Commissioner Peterson. Motion to approve the July 2 minutes by Commissioner Christianson and seconded by Commissioner Roman, all ayes. July 16'h 2008 Same name and spelling corrections motion to approve by Commissioner Srannon and seconded by Commissioner Schmidt, all ayes with one abstention. V. UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA CAPSTONE PROJECT Ginny Gaynor reported on the University of Minnesota Capstone Project. Students are doing nine projects for the City of Maplewood based on the theme of sustainable Maplewood. The projects include; parks, stormwater and surface water management, public area vegetation, green workplace models, connectivity with adjacent neighbors and environmental education. Ms. Gaynor introduced the students form the University of Minnesota and explained that they are going to look at Maplewood's neighborhood parks to get a better understanding of park use. They will investigate how residents are using the parks and whether the parks are meeting the needs of residents. They will also look at if there are areas in the parks that can be transitioned into natural vegetation. One of the students asked for the commissioners' opinion on whether they would like a survey of information on who uses the parks, why they use them, or if they prefer some other medium such as a public discussion. He also asked the commission whether certain areas would be suitable for dog parks. Questions and Discussion: Commissioner Sonnek asked how long the will students be working with the city. Ms. Gaynor answered the project will be completed in December. Commissioner Sinko likes the idea of a survey. We have talked about the changing demographics of Maplewood. She would like to hear from the students about park use and what residents are using and not using. One of the students stated that their focus would be on usability. If residents are not using some parts of the park then those parts might be converted to vegetation such as prairie grass cover or rain gardens or volunteer community gardens to beautify the park. They will also look at demographics. Commissioner Sonnek asked what kind of methodology they are considering. The students are open to suggestions. They have looked at several options. VI. CONSERVATION EASEMENTS Ginny Gaynor reviewed the memo that was prepared for meeting. She asked the commission if they supported the city entering into conservation easements for Jim's Prairie and the Priory Neighborhood Preserve. She also discussed the management plan for Jim's Prairie. Commissioner Christianson asked for an explanation of the comment on the Jim's Prairie easement that "the site will be managed for habitat for wildlife." Ms. Gaynor responded that means if we cannot manage the site for its biological diversity, we would have discussions with Minnesota Land Trust (ML T) and make a joint decision on whether to change the management goal to just managing for wildlife habitat. Ms. Gaynor estimates managing Jim's Prairie will cost the city $500-$1000 annually. In addition, it would be nice to put some money up front for improvement on buffers. The maintenance and stewardship fee for the easements (for enforcement of the easement) is $25,000 for the two sites combined. Ms. Gaynor mentioned that another change regarding Jims Prairie is that the easement will be written to allow for trails. Ms. Gaynor discussed what would be covered in the Acts Sevond Owners Control section. Ms. Gaynor stated if the Comprehensive Plan passes, we will have more protection for our open space sights than we currently have. She asked the commissioners if these two sites deserve even more protection. If the commission wants to ensure that these particular sites are never developed, conservation easement is the tool to do that. Ms. Gaynor asked the commissioners to review, discuss and make a recommendation for each site individually on whether there should be a conservation easement on these sites. In addition, she mentioned that Mark Gernes from the Open Space Advisory Panel was present to participate in the discussion. Commissioner Fischer asked what other Open Space Advisory Panels members thought about the easements. Ms. Gaynor indicated that advisor Jack Frost commented he did not think conservation easements were necessary. He would prefer that the money be spent on site restoration and management. Mark Gernes, member of Open Space Advisory Task Force, stated the biggest threat for Jim's Prairie and Priory is lack of management. We need to put money into the preserves. Ms. Gaynor stated that if we only do one easements, the $25,000 fee would be reduced but not cut completely in half. Staff is requesting a recommendation for each of these preserves independently. Commissioner Sinko asked if there would be a guarantee for maintenance on the prairie. Ms. Gaynor responded when we send this to City Council we will be making a recommendation on what budget the $25,000 is taken from. A suggestion was made that if money is appropriated to protect the Priory, whatever is remaining, should be put in an endowment so it is tied up and is generating money for long-term management. Mr. Konewko explained that general levy monies are being used. Funding for open space management is subject to budget discussions each year. The CIP plan allocates $50,000 a year for open space improvements over the next few years. Commissioner Srannon responded that future taxpayers will be paying for this decision without any possibility for a vote. How we spend our city money will be a right given to someone else, without a way to vote them out. Commissioner Christianson stated that we are still a democracy. His concern is that Maplewood has one of the premier park systems in the U.S. We were one of the first to set aside money for open space. To take a premier open space, the Priory, and give it to someone else to control, to give our privilege to make decisions on it to someone else forever seems like we are giving up our duties on this property. We are giving up a right to these properties. Control would be taken away from citizens and the City and City Council. Decisions made by an outside party may be counterintuitive to ours. Commissioner Schmidt thinks the Priory and Jim's Prairie do deserve more protection. Our money is a limited resource and she wonders if it would be better to put it into management. What's the best way to spend our money? If we don't buy the easement do we get to use the $25,000? Mr. Konewko responded that the City Council would make the decision on the funds. The City Council has approved $50,000 in the CIP targeted for improvements to open space sites. Ms. Gaynor commented that the two sites are very different. She is not worried about the city being able to comply with the easement for the Priory in terms of management. It comes down to commission and council's desire to restrict the use of that property forever. Commissioner Peterson commented that she would like to tour Jim's Prairie. She agrees with what Ginny is saying regarding putting the preservation easement on the Priory. She does not believe Jim's Prairie would be in danger of development. Mr. Gernes commented that Jim's Prairie ecologically is a wet prairie. He wondered if the conservation easement is only going to protect the area within the property boundary. He questioned off-site impacts. Ms. Gaynor responded that acts beyond the owners control are covered in the easements. The land trust added a second clause enabling us to manage for wildlife if we are not able manage for a diverse wet prairie community. Mr. Gernes feels we do not gain additional protection if the feed supply business to the west sells their property. Redevelopment of that site has the potential of impacting Jim's Prairie and it doesn't sound like a conservation easement would give us further protection from those offsite impacts. Mr. Konewko responded that Mark Gernes is correct. The conservation easement does not control the land around the perimeter around Jim's Prairie. Commissioner Fischer asked if we think the city will be able to maintain the property or if we think we need to pay an outside group to force the city to make sure the sites are maintained in a proper way. He does not know what it is going to be like 20 years from now. Is this the best use of the money we have right now? Commissioner Peterson commented that it was the voter's intention to preserve the Priory forever. Mr. Konewko responded it is City Council's decision to ultimately decide where those proceeds will come from. Commissioner Fischer stated that the PAC funds used for this project ($33,000) would be better used to take care of the property, instead of turning the rights over to someone else. Commissioners commented on various concerns including lack of future open space opportunities, money issues, and there being few undeveloped parcels left in the city. Commissioner Peterson stated that there is little undeveloped land of size left except Carver Crossing in South Maplewood. She also indicated that the community paid for open space bonding. The intent of the referendum was that the sites be protected forever. Commissioner Roman commented that in the long term there will be considerable change surrounding Jim's Prairie. It cannot be sustained as it is today. Ms. Gaynor responded that even if development occurs, Jim's Prairie will still be a natural area owned by the City of Maplewood. It might be lower ecological quality but it would still retain some value for habitat. Commissioner Fischer asked if the commissioners were ready to make a motion on Jim's Prairie and the Priory. Commissioner Sinko made a motion that the city should enter into a conservation easement for Jim's Prairie, seconded by Commissioner Fischer. Ayes - 0, all nays. Parks Commission recommends the city does not pursue a conservation easement for Jim's Prairie. Commissioner Christianson made a motion that the city not subject Priory Preserve or Jim's Prairie property to a conservation easement, seconded by Commissioner Srannon. Commissioner Sonnek aye, Commissioner Peterson nay, Commissioner Schmidt nay, Commissioner Roman nay, Commissioner Christianson aye, Commissioner Sinko nay, Commissioner Fischer aye, Commissioner Srannon aye. Tie vote, motion fails. Commissioner Sinko made a motion that the city should enter into a conservation easement for Priory Preserve, seconded by Commissioner Schmidt. Commissioner Srannon nay, Commissioner Sinko aye, Commissioner Fischer nay, Commissioner Christianson nay, Commissioner Roman aye, Commissioner Schmidt aye, Commissioner Peterson aye, Commissioner Sonnek nay, tie vote, motion failed. Commissioner Sonnek stated that she does not like to tie our future hands on this. She supports preserving this land but does not want to speak for the next generation. Commissioner Fischer said they would not be able to come up with a recommendation for the Priory site. VII. LION'S PARK Staff member Steve Kummer gave a presentation on the preliminary engineering study for Lion's Park and concerns about drainage. This development dates back to the 1950s and does not have a storm sewer system. Today Lion's Park is the lowest point in a 24-acre drainage basin that is fully developed. Current equipment includes youth ball diamond, playground equipment, and a basketball court. This area is very wet, water spreads out across the park, concentrates in the ditch area and goes under Century Avenue. The surrounding neighborhood is developed, making it impossible to bypass drainage into another area. The soil tests indicate no potential for infiltration. o Stormwater is an issue that should be handled in conjunction with park development, balancing park use and drainage requirements. o Management of surrounding neighborhood drainage with Lion's Park should be incorporated into a future development plan for the park but we should also look at the neighborhood holistically when we design this park. o Staff is looking for direction from the Parks Commission on the stormwater issues at the park. o Lion's Park is in the Capital Improvement Plan. o Staff would like a motion from the Parks Commission for moving forward with the formal parks planning process for Lion's Park. Commissioner Srannon asked if we raise the level of the park, and neighbors are having turf problems, won't we be creating a bigger problem for residents? Mr. Kummer responded that we would grade the park so it drains to a certain point. The problem now is that the park is very flat, there is no real grade. If we raise the park we may ask residents if we can add additional fill to their yards. Mr. Kummer stated that there is an issue with digging down into the ground water table. Mr. Konewko commented that if there is not yearly maintenance then there will be problems. We need to be more diligent in maintenance. We are required to visit and maintain all of our stormwater sites each year. Mr. Konewko said staff is proposing that we begin the process sometime in November so we can begin to determine when the neighborhood meeting will occur and who will be invited. Staff is looking for a directive from the commission to continue this process. Mr. Konewko stated that staff will bring something back for the commission to work with so we can decide if this area will in fact support these amenities. After the commission's directive, staff can do some additional surveying of the area and come back with conceptual drawings. Commissioner Schmidt is wondering if 10% of the park is enough to handle all the water for 24 acres. Mr. Kummer responded that 10% would be appropriate for treating it. Commissioner Peterson would like to see the results at the October meeting. Commissioner Roman would like some ballpark costs. Commissioner Peterson would like some idea of costs. If the stormwater is not just a park problem, maybe there needs to be a shared cost. Commissioner Christianson made a motion that the city engineering staff come to the October meeting with preliminary plans for what they feel can be done at Lion's park to address the problem and give us some idea of what we can expect for land use. Seconded by a commissioner, all ayes. VIII. QUARTERLY UPDATES FROM NATURE CENTER, NEIGHBORHOOD PRESERVES DuWayne Konewko presented Nature Center updates; He mentioned the buckthorn targeted neighborhoods, Sunset Ridge Park, and the neighborhood from Maryland to upper Afton. IX. LAKE LINKS TRAIL UPDATE DuWayne Konewko hopes to have the feasibility report back to the commission before the October meeting. The commission will need to come up with an option to bring to city council. X. LEGACY PARK - DISCUSS PARK PLANNING PROCESS/UPDATE - OCTOBER AGENDA ITEM DuWayne stated that this issue is regarding the climbing wall area. This will be put on the October agenda. Commissioners would like a drawing showing how much space we have. DuWayne Konewko will email the drawings to the commission. Commissioner Fischer commented that the two parcels have not been officially named. DuWayne Konewko will provide the parameters of the areas. XI. OBSERVATIONS/DISCUSSIONS REGARDING THE DOG PARK TOUR Commissioner Fischer reviewed the dog park tour. Commissioner Sonnek gave a summary of each of the four parks visited on the tour: o White Bear Lake area, off Lake Street at Manitou. o Otter Lake Park o Dog park at Larpenteur and Dale; in Roseville. o Arlington/Arkwright dog park in St. Paul. Commissioner Sonnek discussed advantages and disadvantages of various amenities in each park such as type of fencing. She also encouraged commission members to go to the Battle Creek Park dog park. It would be nice to have a water system for dogs. She noticed empty water containers lying around. A dog park needs to have parking. Commissioner Schmidt shared her observations of the tour. She said everything seemed used and eroded. She was concerned about the physical condition of the park. Commissioner Roman thought the tour was very informative. There was a nice variety of dog parks and various types of locations. He was most impressed by the one by Otter Lake and commented on the lack of wildlife at that dog park. He saw a lot of erosion on a couple of the parks. People in the neighborhoods need to be asked whether they need or want a dog park in their neighborhood. A comment was made dog parks in Minneapolis they are maintained well because people pay to use them. Commissioner Fischer commented that we can learn from what we have seen and what has and has not worked in the other parks. He has heard input from residents that it would be nice to have an alternative for those who want to let their dogs go unleashed. This may reduce friction between neighbors. Commissioner Binko is an advocate of dog parks. She explained that dogs make better pets when they are socialized well. Commissioner Christianson asked if all the dog parks had human bathrooms? He feels Joy Park would make a great dog park. It would bring more people to the park. Commissioner Sonnek commented that people who walk their dogs legally on leash do a poorer job of cleaning up after their dogs than those people who take their dogs to dog parks. Pet owners need to be educated. At these dog parks dog owners educate each other through experience. Commissioner Christianson wondered if the dogs chase out the wildlife as he noticed little wildlife in the dog parks. Commissioner Fischer stated that he is hearing strong support from some while others need more information. There needs to be more discussion and clarification on this matter. He asked if staff can highlight some of the concerns that were brought up. Commissioner Binko asked if we could use the university students' survey to help with this dog park issue. Commissioner Fischer said that this will be added the November meeting agenda for further discussion. XII. ADJOURN - (9:55 P.M.) NEXT MEETING - OCTOBER 15,2008