1994-05-10 Parks and Rec Comm Agenda PacketCITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA
AGENDA
PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION
MAY 10, 1994 - 6:30 P.M.
** 6 :30 o'clock p.m. **
1. Call to Order.
2. Roll Call.
3. Approval of April 12, 1994 Parks and Recreation Commission
Minutes.
4. Capital Improvements Plan for Park System
* Discussion of Preliminary CIP List
* Determination of Priorities and Funding
5. Discussion of Draft Dakota County Park Policy Plan
* Executive Summary
* Public Meeting - Tuesday May 10 - 1:30 p.m.
Library Conference Room, Western Service Center
Apple Valley
6. Reservation Request for Kensington Park
* Shelli Morgan, Recreation Programmer
7. Verbal Updates
* Tree City USA
* Mendakota Park and Baseball
* North Urban Trail
* North Kensington Park
8. Adjourn.
Auxiliary-aids for disabled persons are available upon request
at least 120 hours in advance. If a notice of less than 120
hours is received, the City of Mendota Heights will make every
attempt to provide the aids, however, this may not be possible
on short notice. Please contact City Administration at
452 -1850 with requests.
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
MEMO
May 4, 1994
To: Parks and Recreation Commission
From: Kevin Batchelder, Administrative Assistant
Subject: Capital Improvement Planning for the Park System
DISCUSSION
At the April 8, 1994 Commission meeting, the Commission began
reviewing the preliminary list of capital improvements, including
infrastructure and replacement needs. Priorities and funding
recommendations were made on a number of system items and the
Commission began to discussions on individual facilities and
improvements.
Policies recommendations were established on:
1. Port-a-Pottie Enclosures
2. Modifications to Play Equipment to meet ADA standards
3. Concrete Bleacher Pads
4. Park and Trail Maps
5. Park Signage
6. Seal Coating of Trails
7. Seal Coating of Parking Lots
New facilities that were discussed for establishing
recommendations include:
1. Tennis at Hagstrom-King Park
2. Handicapped Play equipment schedule
3. Lighted Tennis Court
4. Ivy Park Landscaping
5. Top Dressing Kensington Park soccer fields
6. Wooden Bridges at Wentworth Park
7. Friendly Hills Bridge/Culvert
8. Friendly Hills Ice Rink lights
Please see the April 8, 1994 minutes for the details on the
above listed items. In my absence on Tuesday evening, Guy
Kullander, Parks Project Manager, will be prepared to continue the
discussion of priorities, funding and scheduling of the remaining
items on the preliminary list.
A preliminary list, on 11" x 17" sized paper, was distributed
at the April meeting and is not being reproduced, except for those
members who were not present. If you have misplaced your copy, or
need another copy, please contact Guy prior to the meeting on
Tuesday. The other preliminary list that was used last month is
attached.
ACTION REQUIRED
Discuss the remaining items on the preliminary list and
provide direction to staff for recommendation on priorities,
funding and scheduling of the items on the preliminary list.
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
MEMO
April 4, 1994
To: Parks and Recreation Commission
From: Kevin Batchelder, Administrative Assistant
Subject: Preliminary List of Capital Improvements
Parks System
IVY PARK
1. Modify Play Equipment to meet ADA Standards $6 - 7,000
It will be necessary to have a long term plan in
effect to make all play equipment accessible. The
law requires that all programs and facilities be
evaluated and that a plan be developed to make services
accessible.
2. Relocate Warming House
No determination made by Commission. Needs to be
prioritized.
3. Dedicated land addition
$2 3,000
Low cost, low maintenance bushes and grass on north
and east boundaries.
4. Grade Swales to drain skating and field
Park maintenance crew project. Commission inquired if
pond contractor could also regrade ice area.
5. Resurface Tennis Court
Evaluated and scheduled in general fund park
maintenance budget.
0
$1,750/court
6. Remove Lights 0
General fund park maintenance budget.
7. Resurface/Overlay for Trail $1,000
Schedule sealcoat for 1999 in general fund budget.
8. Restripe Parking Lot $ 100/lot
Schedule for 1995 in general fund budget.
9. Maintain/Reseed Wildflowers $100/year
Follows storm water construction and is
anticipated to be annual general fund budget item.
10. Benches near Pond
Commission must decide funding source and priority/year.
11. Concrete Pads for Bleachers $ 700
Schedule one a year to be constructed by Park
crews. Schedule and prioritize for each park.
12. Rock Wall Berm by Pond $2,000
Attempt to get included in storm water pond
project. Stacked boulders and fabric on butt
end of berm.
WENTWORTH PARR
1. Resurface Tennis Courts $1,750/court
2. Modify fence/tennis court for ADA $2,000
3. Sealcoat Trail $1,500
Include in 1999 general fund budget.
4. Modify Play Equipment for ADA Standards $7 - 9,000
The price could double if Wentworth Park is
chosen in plan as the accessible park to serve
a northern geographic area of the city.
5. Construct ramps to warming houses - ADA $2 - 3,000
Needs to be prioritized and consider if warming
houses are relocated.
6. Replace Three Wood Bridges $26,000
Questions about proper funding source during
earlier discussions.
7. Restripe Parking Lots $ 100
General Fund budget for 1995
8. Picnic Shelter, grills, fire pits $6 - 8,000
This item needs a funding source, and priority
assigned to be scheduled.
9. Concrete Pads for Bleachers $700/each
Schedule one a year to be constructed by Park
crews. Schedule and prioritize for each park.
10. Enclosure for Port-a-pottie $2,000/each
No determination made yet, but discussion indicated
eventually every neighborhood park. Schedule on
a yearly basis. Prioritize each park, if needed.
11. Drinking Fountains $7,500/each
No determination made yet to include this item.
VICTORIA HIGHLANDS PARK
1. Wildflowers $ 100/year
To maintain and reseed. Annual general fund.
2. Update Play Equipment ADA Standards $3,650
3. Regulatory Signage $200/park
Standard sign for all parks. Referendum fund.
4. Port-a-pottie enclosure $2,000
See above.
MARIE PARK
1. Update Play Equipment to ADA Standards $4,000
It will be necessary to have a long term plan in
effect to make all play equipment accessible. The
law requires that all programs and facilities be
evaluated and that a plan be developed to make services
accessible.
2. Bituminous Trail to Warming House - ADA updates $1,000
3. Regulatory Signage $ 200
Standard Sign for all parks. Referendum fund.
VALLEY PARK
1. Modify Play Equipment to ADA Standards $3,500
It will be necessary to have a long term plan in
effect to make all play equipment accessible. The
law requires that all programs and facilities be
evaluated and that a plan be developed to make services
accessible.
2. Wildflower Plantings
Analyze success at Ivy Park and possibly plan for
future.
3. Way side rest area $2,000
Two benches at $1,000 each. No decision made on
this item. Consider sponsors who may pay to install
a bench.
ROGERS LAKE PARK
1. Replace wooden bridge with bituminous walkway $1,500
The Commission did not prioritize this or choose
a funding source for this item.
2. Install Fire Pits $3,000/each
The Commission indicated a desire for 2 stone/
concrete fire pit/grills to accomodate picnics.
3. Additional Horse Shoe Pits $ 750/each
Two additional pits to complement existing pit.
4. Repaint Hardcourt $ 100
Add to general fund maintenance in 1995.
5. Regulatory Signage $200/park
Standard sign for all parks. Referendum fund.
6. Port-a-pottie Shelter $2,000
No determination made yet, but discussion indicated
eventually every neighborhood park. Schedule on
a yearly basis. Prioritize each park, if needed.
7. Modify Play Equipment to ADA Standards $6,000
It will be necessary to have a long term plan in
effect to make all play equipment accessible. The
law requires that all programs and facilities be
evaluated and that a plan be developed to make services
accessible.
8. Replace Benches $1,000 /each
Five old benches, two destroyed by fire.
Determine priority or necessity. Park crews desire
concrete pads to ease mowing.
9. Reroof Shelter
Cedar shakes. Determine priority.
10. Resurface Tennis Courts
Evaluated and scheduled in general fund park
maintenance budget. It was determined this park
should receive first resurfacing.
11. Sealcoat Trail
Include in 1999 general fund budget.
MENDAKOTA PARK
$1,500
$1,750 /each
1. Sports Lighting for Playfields $185,000
Long discussion, no decision. This figure includes
$10,000 for maintenance buidling if lights are installed.
Expensive project, but cheaper than building new fields.
Priority, funding and schedule still to be determined.
2. Resurface Basketball Court
$ 2,000
Includes paint marking. Could be included in tennis
court schedule in general fund budget.
3. Restripe Parking Lot $ 150
1995 maintenance project out of general fund.
Overhead Netting in Ballfield Hub $10,000
Recommended to Council in 1994, still being
considered.
5. Convert Grass Volleyball to Sand $ 5,000
An upgrade to sand court with borders. Would
allow more organized programs by City. Priority,
funding, and schedule still to be determined.
FRIENDLY HILLS PARK
1. Modify Play Equipment to meet ADA Standards $10,000
It will be necessary to have a long term plan in
effect to make all play equipment accessible. The
law requires that all programs and facilities be
evaluated and that a plan be developed to make services
accessible.
2. ADA Improvements to Warming House $3,000
3. New Lights for Ice Rink $8,000
4. Expansion of Free Skating Area
5. Bridge Replacement $5,000
6. Tennis Court Resurfacing $1,750/court
Evaluated and scheduled in general fund park
maintenance budget.
7. Park Signage $2,000
Sign includes concrete base with roof/kiosk.
Referendum funding if priority is determined
8. Restripe Parking and Hardcourt $ 300
General fund budget for 1995
9. Resurface Bituminous Trail $1,500
General fund budget for 1996
FRIENDLY MARSH PARK
1. Reshape Gravel Trail $2,000
Anticipated for 1995 maintenance budget.
2. Repair Target Bales as necessary $ 100
COPPERFIELD PONDS
1. Wildflower Plantings $ 300
The western area of this passive park was
considered appropriate for wildflowers. Would
require annual maintenance after initial planting.
2. Reshape gravel trail
General fund budget for 1995.
HAGSTROM-KING PARK
$3,000
1. Tennis Court Construction $35,000
During discussion of North Kensington Park this
was put into CIP. Priority and funding need to
be determined.
2. Replace Play Equipment Borders $3,000
To meet safety fall zone guides.
3. Resurface Bituminous Trail $ 500
General fund budget for 1995.
KENSINGTON PARK
1. Topdress Soccer Fields $10,000
Determine necessity and funding source.
2. Install Soccer Bang Board $2,000
No determination made on inclusion of this item.
3. Park signage map and signs $3,500
Referendum funding.
4. Resurface Trails $3,000
Not anticipated until 1998.
OPEN SPACE AND TRAIL SYSTEM
1. T-Ball Fields at Public Works Garage
2. Trail Maintenance and Upgrade Policy
A policy is needed for annual trail maintenance.
3. Valley Trail Cross Country Skiing Track
This would include costs for grubbing and clearing
a trail that could be groomed for cross country skiing.
4. Trail Sign System $5,000
Referendum funding for comprehensive sign system.
Needs to be scheduled.
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
MEMO
May 4, 1994
To: Parks and Recreation Commission
From: Kevin Batchelder, Administrative Assis
Subject: Draft Dakota County Park Policy Plan
DISCUSSION
Dakota County has recently been engaged in updating their
County Park Policy Plan and have delivered a copy of the Executive
Summary to us. (Please see attached.) Also, a public meeting has
been scheduled for comment on the proposed plan at the following
time and location:
Tuesday, May 10, 1994
1:30 - 4:00 p.m.
Library Conference Room
Western Service Center
Apple Valley, Minnesota
While there is not much detail provided in the Executive
Summary, the Parks and Recreation Commission should discuss this
item for the purpose of providing any direction or input to Dakota
County regarding their efforts.
On a related issue, at the recent Joint City Council -
Planning Commission workshop, the idea of approaching Dakota County
about a possible County park (on the western Resurrection Cemetery
site) in Mendota Heights was discussed. Staff was to begin making
contacts regarding the potential of a County park in this location.
Commissioner Linnell attended the joint workshop as a guest and can
provide some detail on Tuesday evening.
Some member of City Staff will attend the announced public
meeting and any Commissioners who might be interested are
encouraged to attend.
ACTION REQUIRED
Discuss the attached Executive Summary Draft County Park
Policy Plan and provide staff with any appropriate direction.
DAKOTA COUNTY
DIVISION OF PHYSICAL DEVELOPMENT
14955 GALAXIE AVENUE
LOUIS J. BREIMHURST, P.E.
DIRECTOR
(612) 891 -7005
FAX (612) 891 -7031
APPLE VALLEY, MINNESOTA 55124 -8579
DEPARTMENTS OF -
• ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
• HIGHWAYS
• PARKS
• SURVEY
• OFFICE OF PLANNING
Kevin Batchelder, Parks Director
City of Mendota Heights
1101 Victoria Curve
Mendota Heights, MN 55118
Dear Kevin:
April 29, 1994
We are pleased to provide your community with the enclosed copy of the Executive Summary from the
DRAFT Dakota County Park Policy Plan. This is a continuation and refinement of park planning
which began in 1970 when the County's first park was adopted. The original plan was expanded in
1975 and refined as part of the County's Comprehensive Plan which was developed in the 1980s.
While park plans have been developed for specific parks in the interim, the proposed Park Policy Plan
is the first major revision proposed to the County Board in 12 years.
The proposed Park Policy Plan provides the opportunity to reconsider and define the directions for the
future of the Dakota County Park System. It also provides the opportunity to make long - range,
strategic decisions which will guide the future acquisition, development, protection, and use of the
County Parks.
A meeting to discuss the draft Park Policy Plan has been set for:
Tuesday, May 10, 1994
1:30 - 4:00 p.m.
Library Conference Room
Western Service Center
Apple Valley, Minnesota
Complete copies of the DRAFT Park Policy Plan will be available for review at the meeting.
We hope you are planning to attend the meeting. It is helpful for us to have your input in order for the
County to maintain policies which compliment those of local units of government.
If you have any questions, please contact the Office of Planning at 891 -7030.
Sincerely,
Evenso , ' onmental Planner
Office of Planning
Enclosure
cc: Dakota County Board of Commissioners
Brandt Richardson, County Administrator
Jack Ditmore, Deputy Director, Physical Development Division
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
DAKOTA COUNTY PARK POLICY PLAN
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This Park Policy Plan defines the overall policy and direction for growth of Dakota County Parks, based on a
mission to "provide for the protection and preservation of land in its natural state while providing for outdoor,
natural resource oriented recreation activities". The Policy Plan is an update for a park planning document
originally completed in 1970, expanded in 1975, and refined in 1982. It sets general policies that apply to all
County Parks and to County - administered Regional Trails which are regarded as linear parks.
The County Park System provides only a portion of the recreational facilities in the County. The State, cities,
townships, schools, private operators, and other groups also provide recreational opportunities. Local park
system's service areas tend to be population -based and focus on traditional activities to serve the particular needs of •- • - -
a neighborhood or a community County parks are natural resource -based and focus on providing facilities and
recreational uses that are suited for large- acreage, natural resource settings .and focus on activities of regional.:...
interest.
Dakota County currently manages the following parks and regional trails:
Lebanon Hill Regional Park
Lake Byllesby Regional Park
Spring Lake Park Reserve
Miesville Ravine Park Reserve (undeveloped)
Thompson County Park
Regional Trail System (undeveloped)
The Policy Plan describes the development, acquisition status and bikeway linkage for each park. City park
facilities are then linked with County Parks in a trends and needs assessment. The assessment identifies a future
need for swimming, camping, and fishing facilities.
Strategic issues for policy formation are portioned into eight categories, each with an accompanying strategic issue
question.
1) Park System Finance Policies - The increasing use of the County Park System is placing pressure on
existing financial resources. This issue is compounded by current efforts to encourage more usage
of County Parks and attempts to complete the development and acquisition of parkland. With
increasing pressure on financial resources, what approach should be taken on future funding?
Park Development Policies - What is the appropriate level and type of development for Dakota County
Parks?
3) Park Design Standards - The standards for parkland and facility development may be based on
differing expectations and objectives. These differing standards may result in conflicts regarding
developmental type, extent, compatibility and quality. The establishment of comprehensive design
standards will insure quality of service while optimizing both development and operational costs.
Should the County establish fundamental standards for parkland and facility development?
4) Parkland Acquisition Policies - Approximately 20 percent of County parkland has not yet been
acquired. What approach should the County take to acquire the remaining parcels within the
County Park System?
5) Park Security & User Assistance - What elements are necessary for the Park Patrol to effectively carry out
its duties?
6) Natural Resource Management - What natural resource management components are important in County
Parks?
7) Performance Measures - How can the effect and quality of service provided by County Parks be effectively
measured and monitored?
DAKOTA COUNTY PARK POLICY PLAN
8) Inter - governmental Cooperation - What needs to be done to improve the coordination of park services with
cities, townships, and other government agencies?
Strategic Issue Policy Recommendations are summarized as follows:
A) Park System Finance Policies
In tight budget situations, priorities for funding are as follows:
Maintain park user safety
- Maintain existing park facilities and natural resources
- New acquisition
New developments and natural resource enhancement initiatives
Provide new recreational services /programs.
County property taxes will remain the primary source of funding for operation and maintenance of the
.Dakota County Park system. However, Dakota County must aggressively evaluate fee and other sources of
'funding which will supplement property tax revenuesln order to keep up with the growing demand .tit park
services. The County will also aggressively seek regional funding for acquisition and development of •
regional park facilities. Finally, it is recommended that the Board of Commissioners fully fund the Park
Acquisition and Development Reserve at the level of $1 million, transferring $775,000 from the .
undesignated balance of the Park Fund for this purpose. This action would increase the flexibility of the
Board for new acquisitions and developments.
B) Park Development Policies
Park development efforts will be focussed only on development within the boundaries of existing parks and
proposed trail corridors that are compatible with the County park mission statement.
C) Park Design Standards
Dakota County will embark on an effort to establish design standards to be used for parkland and facility
improvements. These standards will incorporate elements to promote user friendliness, high quality of
service, operational and maintenance efficiency, appropriate visual image, and compatibility with the site
and the overall natural environment.
D) Parkland Acquisition Policies
If Dakota County wishes to complete parkland acquisition within the next 10 to 20 years, a three -part
strategy is recommended:
- Purchase land from willing sellers or use of eminent domain to acquire land holdings that interfere
with park development, use, maintenance, or security.
Establishment of a sunset date for each County Park, wherein all land within the park boundary will
be under County ownership within 10 to 20 years.
More effective control of future development with tools such as an official mapping ordinance
which would require Zoning Board of Adjustment approval for building pernuts within the park
boundary.
It is further recommended that additional County Parks or park facilities outside of existing park boundaries
or proposed regional trail corridors not be established until acquisition of land within existing County Parks
is completed.
E) Park Security and User Assistance
Dakota County will strive to protect life and property of park users, County Park property, and natural
resources within parks. County Park Patrol responsibilities will include user assistance, enforcing the
County Park Ordinance, deterring crime and maintaining order. Law enforcement in County parks will be
the responsibility of appropriate law enforcement agencies (local police, County Sheriff).
F) Natural Resource Management
Dakota County is committed to the protection of soils, water, and significant landforms in its parks. More
active management of park vegetation will restore native landscapes and preserve vegetation diversity. The
DAKOTA COUNTY PARK POLICY PLAN
County will work with natural resource management organizations on improved fish and wildlife
management, and to make natural resource education an important focus of the park activities program.
G) Performance Measures
Performance measurement tools such as, household surveys, user surveys, and trained observers will be
utilized to monitor the performance of Dakota County's provision of recreational services to the public.
The County desires to measure how well it is making uses of funds and meeting public expectations.
H) Inter - governmental Cooperation
Dakota County shall strive to cooperate with its communities to provide recreational facilities that are
complementary to those provided by other levels of government and in accordance with the stated mission
of the County Park System.
Finally, strategic analysis of policy interrelationships reveal the following major conclusions:.
-
Since the County has little direct control over how regional park funds are allocated, the County must
be prepared to increase local support of parks if it wishes to have high quality parks in the future.
The recommended development policy is pivotal to how most other park policies are implemented, and
reflects the Park Mission Statement, focusing park development on natural resource oriented facilities,
which the County has the most skill and experience at providing.
An accelerated schedule for arkland acquisition will provide long -term savings, ensure the integrity
of park boundaries, and enhance park development and security.
Continued inter - governmental cooperation is a key element in future park security and the overall
quality of recreational opportunities in Dakota County.
The system plan is based on commitment to providing a high quality level of service to a rapidly
expanding user population. Increased user needs require increased funding and staffing.
Background information and the rationale for these recommended policies are contained in the complete Park Policy
Plan. You, the reader, are encouraged to review the entire planning document to gain a thorough understanding of
the issues. The County Park and Recreation Advisory Committee was extensively involved throughout the process
of plan preparation and review. The Park Policy Plan represents a positive step toward focusing on County Park
issues and setting a more clear direction for the future acquisition, development, and management of Dakota
County's parks.
Reviewed and recommended for approval by the Park and Recreation Advisory Committee on April
12, 1994.
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
MEMO
May 4, 1994
To: Parks and Recreation Commission
From: Kevin Batchelder, Administrative Assistant
Subject: Reservation Request for Kensington Park
DISCUSSION
Shelli Morgan, Recreation Programmer, has received a request
to reserve Kensington Park for a graduation party on Tuesday, June
14th. She is seeking a recommendation from the Parks and
Recreation Commission on whether or not to issue this permit due to
a number of concerns that have arisen regarding this event. The
reservation policy includes a clause that states "The Parks and
Recreation Commission, with City Council approval, reserves the
right to waive fees or to limit or deny reservations at their
discretion." (Please see attached reservation request.)
Shelli requested that Police Chief Delmont review this request
because of concerns with potential noise and parking problems to
nearby residents. Chief Delmont is concerned with possible noise
and nuisance citations due to the live band, with the possibility
of uninvited guests and the inability to control the size of the
crowd, with parking for this size of a crowd and with the mixing of
high school students from rival high schools. (Please see attached
comments.)
The current park reservation policy allows crowds of up to 200
people, but this may have been with Mendakota Park in mind. Having
this event at Mendakota Park does not remove all the concerns of
the Police Chief. He has suggested the hiring of off duty police
officers to help control the event.
The parents group has indicated their willingness to cooperate
and be reasonable about steps necessary to control the event or
mitigate potential nuisances. Staff is seeking direction on the
issuance of this permit and any reasonable conditions.
ACTION REQUIRED
Meet with the applicants and the Recreation Programmer and
make a recommendation to City Council.
caeg_ /9vil
itcz'e-tca
Air -e-,1/
1
(1121-e-dd.-1 &,1..eawd4r---
0-60.1 ,efec9 4./ cr.;-1
A '
,.4Ptildina
Mendota Heights Police Department
MEMORANDUM
May 5, 1994
TO: Kevin Batchelder
FROM: Chief Delmont 071A
Subject: June 14 park reservation
You and I have spoken recently of a request by Ms. Sue Stillman to reserve the
entire Kensington Park area for a graduation party attended by adults and
students from St. Thomas and Sibley High Schools. I am reducing some of my
specific concerns to writing for your information.
1. Access to the park is through a neighborhood. There is no direct route
from a main collector street. This is going to create a large amount of
traffic on neighborhood streets and most likely will generate complaints. The
parking in the area of the park is insufficient to handle as many people as
can be expected, and that will most likely create more complaints from
neighbors.
2. Security. Historically, we have problems with uninvited guests at nearly
every graduation party. With a large number of students invited to this
party, the word will get out throughout both high schools and surrounding
schools as well. I would conservatively estimate that there will be one
uninvited guest for every invited guest at the party. It will be virtually
impossible to control access to this park, and I doubt very much that the
people who are sponsoring the party, will be able to tell the difference
between a young person who was invited and one who was not invited.
Obviously, along with uninvited guests comes uninvited provisions. At other
parties, our experience has been that alcohol will end up being present, even
if it is not being provided by the hosts. Because the party will end up being
attended by students from many different schools, the chance of fights or
other unruly behavior is very likely.
3. It is my understanding that there are plans to have a live band at the
party. I think you are aware that we have been going through an awful lot of
grief in the police department over noise complaints from different areas of
the city that involve things as minor as normal street traffic and the
neighbors' air conditioning unit. I would expect that a live band in a park
located in a residential area will cause a great number of calls to our
department. One person's music is another person's noise, and we will have to
be prepared for a large number of noise complaints.
I admire the courage of the parents to attempt to schedule an event this
large, but I am extremely concerned about the resulting effect on the
community. As I have mentioned, we have serious problems every year with
graduation parties that are held in homes and involve much fewer people than
this party. I have no doubt that the motivation of the families is pure, and
that their outlook is optimistic. I only wish I could share that optimism. A
party this size should more appropriately be held indoors in a school
auditorium or gymnasium, where it can be better controlled and better
coordinated.
My recommendation is that the park commission not approve the permit for the
June 14th graduation party at Kensington Park.
Note: When I spoke to Richard Spicer, he indicated that he would have the
coordinators of this party contact me so that we could discuss their plans in
detail. To date, no one has made that contact.
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
MEMO
May 4, 1994
To: Parks and Recreation Commission
From: Kevin Batchelder, Administrative Assnt
Subject: Verbal Updates
DISCUSSION
There are a number of items this month for your attention.
1. Tree City USA
The City Council considered the recommendation to seek Tree
City USA status at their April 19, 1994 meeting and directed
City staff to obtain samples of Tree Ordinances from other
cities. This information would then be provided to City
Council for their review at a later meeting. Council is
concerned about potential budget increases to meet the
requirements in a "typical" tree ordinance and they desire to
further quantify what the obligations of this program would
be.
2. Mendakota Park and Baseball
City Council did not approve the request from staff and
Commission to install overhead netting at Mendakota Park to
allow baseball play and directed staff to deny permits for
baseball tournaments. Unfortunately, one of two requested
tournament permits had been issued to Mend- Eagan, and Mend -
Eagan was already registering teams for both tournaments.
Mend -Eagan appeared before City Council on May 3rd and were
granted approval to continue with the requested baseball
tournaments with the conditions of insurance, spotters to
watch for baseball and the installation of warning signs by
city staff. Council's decision on the netting was based on
aesthetics and the desire not to force the design of this
softball park.
3. North Urban Trail
The City council agreed with the Commission that the Highway
110 Frontage Road was the least negative route for the North
Urban Trail and that no front yards should be impacted.
Please see attached letter for more details.
4. North Kensington Park
Staff received one application from the University of
Minnesota Graduate School of Landscape Architecture for the
project of designing the landscaping in North Kensington Park.
Staff is attempting to schedule an interview with the
individual the week of May 16th to discuss their
qualifications and the project.
If the decision is made to hire this landscape architect, it
is likely that staff will arrange meetings between a volunteer
from the Parks Commission and from City Council to meet with
staff and the architect to begin the design process. Any
contract that is entered into will include appearances before
the Commission throughout the design and approval process.
ACTION REQUIRED
No action required, these items are simply for your
information.
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
MEMO
April 29, 1994
To: Mayor, City Council and City Administ
From: Kevin Batchelder, Administrative Assist
Subject: Baseball Tournaments at Mendakota Park
DISCUSSION
At the April 19, 1994 City Council meeting, public safety
concerns regarding the use of the softball fields for youth
baseball led to a City Council decision to not allow baseball play
at the park. Council instructed staff to deny any reservation
requests for baseball tournaments at Mendakota Park, under the
assumption that reservation permits pending for baseball
tournaments were not yet approved.
Based on the scope of such tournaments, Mend -Eagan Athletic
Association must begin planning in March of the year and,
therefore, City approval of a permit requested for a baseball
tournament on June 17, 18 and 19th was issued on March 21st. Mend -
Eagan Athletic Association had also been accepting registrations
for another baseball tournament they had requested for June 3, 4
and 5th. Mend -Eagan Athletic Association was quite concerned that
these tournaments that they had been planning for were going to
have their permits revoked or not issued.
Mend -Eagan has sent a letter to City staff requesting to
address this issue at the May 3, 1994 Council meeting. (See
attached letter from Dick Arnold, Baseball Commissioner.) On
Thursday, Mayor Mertensotto spoke with Judge Richard Spicer and Mr.
Michael Bazal, President of Mend- Eagan, to discuss their concerns.
The Mayor will recommend that City Council allow these two
scheduled tournaments to be held, as plans are well under way and
Mend -Eagan has received numerous registrations for both
tournaments.
Mayor Mertensotto is not recommending that netting be
installed or that any assurances be given regarding future baseball
tournaments at Mendakota Park, only that these two tournaments be
allowed in June.
ACTION REQUIRED
Meet with Mend -Eagan representatives and provide staff with
appropriate direction regarding the permits for Mend - Eagan's
tournaments on June 3, 4 and 5th and on June 17, 18 and 19th.
April 28, 1994
To: She Ili Morgan
From: Dick Arnold
Mend-Eagan
Athletic Association
Subj: Baseball Tournaments
Would you please place the Mend-Eagan Athletic Association on the agenda for our
May 3rd city council meeting.
We would like to discuss the two weekend dates for our community youth baseball
tournaments.
Thanks.
City of
Mendota Heights
April 21, 1994
Ms. Chantell Kadin, Planning Associate
Dakota County Western Service Center
Environmental Management Department
14955 Galaxie Avenue
Apple Valley, MN 55124 -8579
Dear Ms. Kadin:
As requested in your March 14, 1994 letter, the City of Mendota
Heights has reviewed the trail route alternatives for the North
Urban Trail, as presented in the Location Alternatives document on
March 9, 1994 by your consultant at the Wentworth Library. Both
our Parks and Recreation Commission and our City Council have
reviewed these alternatives.
While our official bodies agree with staff that the Highway 110
Frontage Road route appears to be the most favorable route, their
agreement to this alternative is from the perspective that this is
the least negative route of the three alternatives that have been
explored.
Both the City Council and the Parks and Recreation Commission
strongly expressed the concern that any disruption of front yards
for County regional trails would be unacceptable and would be
something that they could not support. They suggested, that should
this trail be located along front yards, that significant plantings
and landscaping would be necessary to minimize the impacts.
Our City Council suggested that locating the trail between the
frontage road and Trunk Highway 110 should be re- explored as a
possible trail location in order to avoid going through the front
yards of residents along the frontage road. The City Council is
also concerned about the level of bicycle traffic that would be
routed through Valley Park as the City has already received
numerous complaints of bicyclists traveling too fast in this area
and frightening pedestrians.
As previously conveyed, our City Council is unable to offer
conceptual support for the North Urban Trail until such time as
more details are known about the specific locations and connections
of the trail and what impacts these choices may have.
1101 Victoria Curve - Mendota Heights, MN - 55118 452-1850
Ms. Chantell Kadin
Page Two
April 21, 1994
The City of Mendota Heights appreciates the opportunity to provide
input and desires to be kept informed on any decisions or
directions that the County is taking with the North Urban Trail and
its location. We would especially appreciate an opportunity to
review and comment on the draft plan that is being prepared. Thank
you for your time and consideration.
Sincerely,
Kevin Batchelder
Administrative Assistant
cc: Bill Craig, City of West St. Paul
Randee Nelson, City of South St. Paul