HomeMy WebLinkAbout03142006
920 W lothSt
Hastings,MN 55033
.Ph: (651)480-6175
Fax: (651)437-5396
'W"'W\v.ci.bastinp"<::..tnn. us
Aquatic Center
901 Maple St
Hastings, MN 55033
Ph: (651) 480-2392
Fax: (651)437-5396
Civic Arena
"'801 Redwing Blvd
\. l.stim.s, MN 55033
. Rh: (651)480-6195
Fax: (651) 437-4940
o
Natural Resources and Recreation Commission
Agenda
Tuesday, March 14,2006
6:00 PM
1) Call to Order:
6:00 PM
2) Roll Call:
6:05 PM
3) Approval of Minutes from February 2006:
6:10 PM
4) Setting Agenda:
5) Open Mike:
6:15 PM
6:20 PM
Tonics of Discussion:
Departmental Updates
6:25 PM
8) Park Dedications
6:30 PM
Xeel Energy Light Poles
6:35 PM
6:40 PM
11) Mississippi River Dock
7:15 PM
12) Riverwood Security Light
7:20 PM
13) Larson - Trail RepairlMaintenanee
7:25 PM
l~ ~oneerB~kst~-VBrnAL
7:30PM
IS) New Business
7:40 PM
16) Old Business
- mm Dryfloor Update - VBrnAL
- Skate Park Task Foree Recommendations (Draft)
7:45 PM
17) Next meeting: Tuesday, April 11, 2006
18) Adjourn:
All times are approximate
NRRClNRRC agenda fur Mar2006.doc
o uS\- c... ~€."-\.\~. - .
Page I ofl
Kristin Behrens
From:
\nt:
Kristin Behrens
Tuesday, March 07, 20062:51 PM
AI Vandehoef (avandehoef@ci.inver-grove-heights.mn.us); Brian Schommer (schom4@ao1.com); Harold
Christenson (haroldechriste@ao1.com); Mark Vaughan (mvaughan@arenaconcepts.com); Mike Brown
(mebrown@pressenter.com); Russ Rohloff (russellisa@juno.com); Walt Popp (walter.popp@dnr.state.mn.us)
Cc: Barry Bernstein
Subject: FW: NRRC interview questions
To:
Hello everyone,
Barry would like to have Suzi McNamara from the cable 1V station join the NRRC at the beginning of our next meeting (3{14) to
do a brief (10-15 minute) interview with the NRRC. I have included below a list of questions Barry was thinking of having you all
cover at that time. Thought we would give you a little advanced warning so that you could collect your thoughts! Any questions,
let me know.
Thanks!
Kristin
From: Barry Bernstein
Sent: Tuesday, March 07, 2006 2:44 PM
To: Kristin Behrens
Subject: NRRC interview questions
H!!re are a few questions I thought of for the NRRC:
)
. Who is the NRRC Volunteer? Or paid?
. Who serves on the NRRC?
. How does one serve on the NRRC?
. What is the NRRC's role in city politics/decisions?
. How often does the NRRC meet? Where?
. Can any resident attend a meeting?
· What are some issues facing the Hastings park system now and in the future?
. Are there any solutions?
. Why did you join the NRRC?
Barry Bernstein
Parks and Recreation Director
City of Hastings
920 W. 10th street
Hastings, MN 55033
P) 651480-6176 Fax) 651-437-5396
bbemstein@CLhastings.mn.us
.We are working hard, so you can play.
o
3/9/2006
City of Hastings
Natural Resources and Recreation Commission Minutes
February 14,2006
6:00 pm
.1
!
)
o
1) Roll Call at 6 pm: Commissioners Christenson, Brown, Rohloff, Schommer, Vaughan and Vandehoef,
Parks and Recreation Director Bernstein and Superintendent Smith.
Absent: Commissioner Popp
2) Approved January meeting minutes. Motion by Brown. Seconded by Schommer. Passed unanimously.
3} Director Bernstein handed out departmental updates to the NRRC members for their review. He
mentioned that the Hastings Hockey Boosters have requested ice hours at the arena during the summer-
from June to September. Staff has concluded that we would need a guaranteed 23 rental hours each week
just to pay the bills. Director Bernstein proposed a compromise to have the arena open for the Boosters in
August and September. Commissioner Vaughan voiced concern over the structural issues (rust) that can
occur with high heat/humidity in the summer.
Superintendent Smith informed the NRRC that the warm temperatures so far this winter have made it
difficult to keep the ice rinks open. This past week we saw colder temps and the Parks & Recreation Staff
was able to flood the rinks at Pioneer and Wallin. Staff is also focusing on repairs and maintenance before
the busy spring/summer season begins and has attended some various training.
4)
Greten Park Uodate: Director Bernstein met with the Park & Recreation Committee of Council and
expressed the NRRC's recommendation to give this project a lower status on our list of priorities. The
Park & Recreation Committee of Council requested that Director Bernstein bring this issue before City
Council and request $16,000 to cover the additional playground equipment. The funds will most likely
come out of park dedication fees. Commissioner Brown wondered about the demographics of the
neighborhood. Are just a few residents pushing this project? Another concern is that some other projects
that have been approved for this year would get cancelled because of this project. Director Bernstein
reassured the NRRC that no projects wiU be affected, as far as he is aware. Commissioner Christenson
stated that park dedication fees must be used to increase the parks due to an increase in residents. It cannot
be used for maintenance. Concern was expressed that in the future, where will the money come from for
maintenance? Director Bernstein mentioned that he had informed the Park & Recreation Committee of
Council that if this request is approved, it could cause a chain reaction in other parts of the community.
The NRRC would like it on record that they are concerned about the decision of the Park & Recreation
Committee of Council in this matter due to the fact that it breaks from the long-term park plan that was
established and that priorities should be set based on resident needs, not resident wants.
5) Veterans' Roadside Sien~: Director Bernstein started out by stating that he is meeting with Tom Schmitz
of the Veteran's Group on Wednesday and will have new details at that time. The American Legion and
the VFW did not like the idea of pavers in Levee Park, due to the fact that they provide the bricks for the
fee-based memorial wall that already exists within the park. Commissioner Schommer wondered whether
having the memorial wall and the pavers wouldn't attract more people to the park and therefore bring more
honor to the fallen veterans. Director Bernstein said that the issue is that people may not pay to have a
name on the memorial wall if the City is providing it for free nearby. Other possibilities that were raised
included doing something out at Veteran's Park or the Soldiers & Sailors Cemetery. Roadside Park was
also mentioned, but the names are already on the memorial that is currently in the park.
6)
Hockev Boosters Drv Land Practice Area: Director Bernstein informed the NRRC that the Hockey
Boosters have approached the city about turning the upstairs mezzanine in the east rink of the arena into a
dry land practice area. It would consist of plywood and sheetrock walls and a synthetic ice rink. The
Boosters will build the rink and buy all the equipment necessary. Director Bernstein thinks we should
have an agreement with them similar to the one we have with the HastingS Hawks. He also has a list of
questions for the Boosters before we can move forward. Superintendent Smith mentioned that one concern
is that the storage area for the IIrtificiRl turf is located bebind the structure. The Arena Mgr feels that the
turf rolls will still be able to be lIluvtltl in that area without bindrance. Commissioner Schommer wondered
if there would be ventilation issues. The area will have an open ceiling, so ventilation won't be a problem,
but it will be warm in there during the summer. The estimated cost of this project is between $10,000-
$12,000. Commissioner Vaughan wondered how they would get in the building (they won't be allowed in
unless staff is present during regular hours) and also mentioned that there will be a lot of noise for anything
located underneath the area. The NRRC requested to be kept informed of any progress.
(
7) Year-End Report: A copy of the 2005 Annual Report for the Parks & Recreation Department was included
in the materials for each commissioner. Director Bernstein mentioned that this report was created to give
the City Administration some solid information and key resources regarding the department. It is difficult
to quantifY what the Parks & Recreation Department does for the community, and this report was an
attempt to reflect that information to the City Administration.
8) New Business
Director Bernstein is looking at department software for use in scheduling, reservatious, field use,
online registrations, etc. The software will be web-based to keep the costs down.
A trail grant application is currently being worked on by Director Bernstein for a trail that would run
from Millard north through Vet's Park to Vermillion Falls Park. Estimated cost for the project is
$160,000-$200,000. An outdoor recreation grant application for improvements to the Vet's Park
soccer fields is also in process. Already submitted to the DNR are grant applications for fishing piers
at Lake Isabel and Mississippi River Flats.
Superintendent Smith would like to have a report by the WHEP team presented to the NRRC at the
next meeting. It was brought up that this might be a good time to invite Cable TV in to record our
meeting.
13) Old Business
Barr Engineering presented us with a 2-part proposal regarding Lake Isabel. The first part is for a
lake diagnostic study and the second part presents actual costs to upgrade the access.
The pool business plan is coming to a conclusion and Director Bernstein hopes to have it completed
by late February - early March. )
The last skate park meeting was not very well attended. The next meeting will be on Feb. 16th to
discuss plans for the 2006 season. Director Bernstein recently had a discuSsion with the YMCA and
the possibility exists of relocating the Skate Park there. The general feeling of the Skate Park Task
Force is that the skate park needs to be located by at least one other amenity to attract people.
The next Levee Park Redevelopment meeting will be Feb. 21 st at 6 pm at City Hall.
The Softball Leagne registration packets have been sent out. Commissioner Schommer wondered if
the concession area would be used for these games. Director Bernstein will not be staffing the
concession stands, but would like to see vending machines in these areas instead.
Commissioner Vaughan wondered who owns the land by the Vermillion River on Cty Rd 46. He
expressed his concern about the need for a trail in that area, as the current situation is dangerous.
Commissioner Christenson asked about the status of the Mississippi River Dockage project. Director
Bernstein, along with Dave Osberg and the City consultant, had a meeting with the Corps of
Engineers and came away with the feeling that they are not in support of this project. The US Coast
Guard had sent a letter stating that this dock would be a severe safety issue, and the Corps of
Engineers stated that based on that letter, they would not approve the project.
Commissioner Brown mentioned a possibility to put a floating boom at the old fueling dock station
for use as a fishing pier.
MOTION to Adjourn.
Next meeting is scheduled for Tuesday, March 14, 2006.
Adjourned at 7:27 p.m.
o
Minutes submitted by: Kristin Behrens
City of Hastings
Parks & Recreation
Department
920 W loth St.
Hastings, MN 55033
Ph: (651) 480-6175
Fax: (651) 437-5396
www.ci.hastmgs.mn.us
Aq_tic Center
901 Maple St.
Hastings, MN55033
Ph: (651) 480-2392
Fax: (651) 437-$396
f) Civic Arena
2801 Redwing Blvd.
Hastings, MN 55033
Ph: (651) 480-6195
Fax: (65\) 437-4940
o
Natural Resources and Recreation Commission
Departmental Updates
Parks Maintenance Activities
· In the past month we had only 2 snow incidents where the staff was used
to clear City Hall, HRA property sidewalks& the City trails.
· The maintenance staff has been very busy with the tree pruning program
in the parks & trails.
· We have been overseeing the inspections contract for the RPZ valves and
will continue this when irrigation systems are turned back on.
· Crane & Hoist inspections have been done.
· We have been getting in orders for ball field maintenance tasks including:
chain link fence top protectors, field marking chalk, marking paint and
recreation supplies.
· We finished the outdoor skating rink maintenance after February 20th. It is
interesting that the number of times the crew flooded the rinks this year
was very high. The rinks at Pioneer Park were flooded 85 times. (Average
over the years is only 42) This is probably due to the extended warm
temperatures and the amount of opportunity that we had to make ice.
· Staff has now converted the Wallin Park shelter back to use as a picnic
shelter.
Warmino House
· Closed on February 26 for the season.
· Open a total of 52 days
· Total attendance was 4916, in 2005 attendance was 4610
· All rinks closed on January 25, with the exception of Wallin and Pioneer.
Hastinos Familv Aouatic Center
· Have started hiring and re-hiring process
· Have bids coming in for shade structure and caulking of pool floor.
· Will need to replace heater exchange in pool water heater. . Have
proposed to use ERF funds.
· Have been in contact with Kinematics on the progress of the coping stone
project.
City of Hastings
Parks & Recreation
Department
920 W 10th S1.
Hastings, MN 55033
Ph: (651)480-6175
Fax: (651)437-5396
www.ci.hastings.mn.us
Aquatic Center
901 Maple S1.
Hastings, MN 55033
Ph: (651)480-2392
Fax: (651)437-5396
Civic Arena
2801 Redwing Blvd.
Hastings, MN 55033
.Ph: (651)480-6195
Fax: (651) 437-4940
MEMO
Date:
To:
From:
Subject:
317106
NRRC Commission Members
Barry Bernstein, Parks and Recreation Director
Park Dedication Information
Bac.k2round Information:
As per the NRRC request, I have enclosed information pertaining to the use of
park dedication as explained by the League of Minnesota Cities and also the
City's own park dedication ordinanee.
In addition, I have enclosed a survey from the archives of the Minnesota
Recreation and Parks Association that was completed in 2004.
Action:
1. none
REF: Pad< dedic:ationfee aud s1rudule 1 2006
)
LMC
r-".. 0/ w...."", c-.....
""""_"".,.,.JJ..,,,.
League of Minnesota Cities
145 University Avenue West, St Paul, MN 55103-2044
(651) 281-1200 . (800) 925-1122
Fax: (651) 281-1299 . TOO: (651) 281-1290
www.lmnc.org
Establishing Park Dedication Requirements
Introduction
Minn. Stat. Sec. 462.358 subd. 2b and 2c autborizes and governs tbe park dedication requirement
of cities.
Parkland dedication requirements rest on tbe tboory that new development occurring within a
community places additional burdens on existing city infrastructure, and in particular, park and
recreation facilities. Minn. Stat. 462.358 subd, 2b and 2c, are premised on tbe assumption that
new development (and not existing taxpayers) ought to pay for tbe additional park and recreation
facilities needed to accommodate tbe demands created by the new development.
Statutory Authority
The relevant statutory autbority for municipal park dedication regulations is as follows:
Subd. 2b. Dedicatian
to)
(a)
The regulatians may require that a reasanable partian 'Of any prapased
subdivisian be dedicated ta the public 'Or preserved far public use as streets,
raads, sewers, electric, gas and water facilities, starmwater drainage and halding
areas 'Or pands, and similar utilities and impravements,
(b) In additian, the regulatians may require thata reasanable partian 'Of any
prapased subdivisian be dedicated ta the public 'Or preserved far canservatian
purpDses Dr far public use as parb and recreatianal facility, as defmed and
'Outlined in SectiDn 471.191. playgrDunds, trails, wetlands, Dr 'Open space;
pravided that (1) the municipality may chaase to accept an equivalent amaunt in
cash fram the applicant far part 'Or aU 'Of the portian required to be dedicated to
such public uses 'Or purpases based an the fair market value 'Of the land na later
than at the time 'Of finalllPp~aval, (~'1lIl6If4!.lOlme.l!~~c.~iV(frJ"~,,,g!!JJgJ1./llced
~in'~ial1'Ultd'bJ1' thiYmtiiiicijfdlttjrriYerbinIJrYi1'f'tltejiifij"isesjb.,.'Whiebothu;.....
m/!fJ.e:y.wm;.abtained,and'ifltij!"wt'beused:/Ot<ongging,ope,.aW!fJ..f!l' ....
ItI,fIilA!I!J}JlIuieF(.g) in establishing the reasanable partian ta be dedicated, the
regulatians may cansider the 'Open space, park, recreatianal, 'Or camman areas
and facilities which the applicant prapases ta reserve far the subdivisian, and (4)
the municipality reasanably determines that it will need ta acquire that partian 'Of
land far the purpases stated in this paragraph as a result 'Of appraval 'Of the
subdivisian. The basis far calculating the amaunt ta be dedicated 'Or preserved
must be established by 'Ordinance 'Or pursuant ta the pracedures established in
sectian 462.353, subdivisian 4a.
o
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY/AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER
(
Establishing Park Dedication Requirements
Page 2 of4
Subd. 2c. Nexus
(a) There must be an essential nexus between the fees or dedication imposed under
subdivision 2b and the municipal purpose sought to be achieved by the fee or
dedication. The fee or dedication must bear a rough proportionality to the need
created by the proposed subdivision or development.
(b) If a municipality is given written notice of a dispute over a proposed fee in lieu of
dedication before the mun;cipality'sfinal decision on an application, a
municipality must not condition the approval of any proposed subdivision or
development on an agreement to waive the right to challenge the validity of a fee
in lieu of dedication.
(c)
An application may proceed as if the fee had been paid, pending a decision on the
appeal of a dispute over a proposed fee in lieu of dedication, if (1) the person
aggrieved by the fee puts the municipality on written notice of a dispute over a
proposed fee in lieu of dedication, (2) prior to the municipality's final decision on
the application, the fee in lieu of dedication is deposited in escrow, and (3) the
person aggrieved by the fee appeals under Section 462.361, within 60 days of the
approval of the application. If such an appeal is not filed by the deadline, or if the
person aggrieved by the fee does not prevail on the appeal, then the fUnds paid
into escrow must be transferred to the municipality.
)
The statutory requirements can be summarized as follows:
I) The parkland dedication requirement and the methodology used to arrive at the
requirement must be established by ordinance.
2) The city may accept either land or an equivalent amount in cash, based on the fair
market value of the land.
3) Any cash payments I'eceived must be sepanilely accuunted COI' and used only fol' the
pllIposes for which they were obtained.
4) Any cash payments may not be used for ongoing "operation or maintenance."
5) The city must ''reasonably determine" that the land or cash payment is needed to meet
the increased demands of the new subdivision.
6) There must be an "essential nexus" between the fees or dedication and pUIpOse
sought to be achieved by the fee or dedication, and the fee or dedication must bear a
''rough proportionality" to the need created by the proposed subdivision or
development.
o
')
Establishing Park: Dedication Requirements
Page 3 of4
Recommendations
In light of the statutory obligations we offer the following recommendations regarding the
establishment of parkland dedication requirements:
I) Review parkland dedication requirements to make sure there is a logical connection
between the amount of the dedication requirement and the purpose for which it is
used. For example, there should be able to demonstrate that each new lot that is
approved, necessitates X amount of new parkland. (See, Methodology below)
2) The city should separately account for parkland dedication fees and make sure they
are not used for ongoing park "operation or maintenance."
Sample Park Dedication Methodology
Step 1.
The city should first undertake a pmks study to arrive with a general idea of what it would like to
see in their community in the way of parkS, recreation, trails, and open space. That study should
look at the question of whether current facilities are sufficient to meet the needs of current
residents. If there is a deficiency, the city should calculate what additional expenditures would be
necessary to meet that city's desired parkS plan.
)
Step 2.
The city should calculate the total amount of city parkS, recreation, trails and open space, plus
any additional amount to meet current, but unmet park goals.
Step 3.
The city should undertake some evaluation of the use of city parks, recreation, trails and open
space. The intent would be to arrive with an estimate of what percentage of these facilities exist
to serve residential landowners and what percentage exist to serve the needs of commercial
development. In arriving at these percentages, it is probably helpful to consider such matters as
the use of park facilities by businesses and their workers and the use by sports teams that maybe
sponsored by businesses. From this analysis, the city will arrive at a: determination of what
percentage of its park needs should be meet by residential development and what percentage
should be met by commercial/industrial development.
Step 4.
The city then will use the results of step 2 and step 3 to arrive at a calculation for parkland
acreage, per resident or per employee. The following examples may be helpful:
Per Capita Residential SharelPer Capita Commercial Share
Existing Park Lane and Trail Acreage
500 acres
o
Establishing Park Dedication Requirements
Page 4 of4
Residential Share
90% X 300 = .270 Acres
Per Capita Residential Share
270 acreasll5,000 residents (population) = .018 acres per Resident
Commercial Share
10% X 300 = 30 acres
Per Capita Commercial Share
30 acres/l000 employees in city = .03 acres per Employee
Step 5.
Establish park dedications by ordinance. The amount of land to be dedicated as part of residential
subdivision or plat will be equal to the per acre residential share (determined in Step 4) times the
number of residents expected in the development or subdivision. To arrive at an amount in lieu
ofland dedication, take the per acre value of undeveloped land times the amount ofland the city
could have required to be dedicated.
Step 6.
To calculate the amount to be dedicated as part of a commercial development, multiply the per
.. acre commercial share (determined in Step 4) times the number of employees expected in the
development. To arrive at a cash payment in lieu ofland dedication, take the per acre value of
undeveloped commercial land times the amount of land the city could have required to be
dedicated.
)
Step 7.
Make provisions in your ordinance to provide that these are the maximum amounts that the city
can chaIge and give the council discretion to vary from these requirements as a result of unique
attributes of the development or to account for parks or open space that may already be included
the development. (Note, the city is not required to take any of these considerations into account
when arriving at the park dedication amount.)
o
')
ORDINANCE NO. 517,SECOND SERIES
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF HASTINGS, MINNESOTA AMENDING
CHAPTER 11, SECTION 11.07, SUBD. 4 OF THE HASTINGS CITY CODE
PERTAINING TO:
CASH IN LIEU OF LAND. PARK DEDICATION FEE REQUIREMENTS
BE IT ORDAINED by the City Council of the City of Hastings as follows:
Section 11.07, Subd. 4 of the Hastings City code is amended as follows:
SUBD. 4. Cash in lieu of land. The City may at its discretion require the developer to make
a cash payment to the City in lieu of land to meet public land dedication requirements. The cash
amounts shall be determined as follows:
A Residential Develonment
1. $1,SQR9Q per l:tftit fer plBts reeehiftg fiftaI. appFeVill aD ar aft<< August 14, 2Qm.
2. $2,2QQ.OO per umt for plats reeeiviflg fiIIlIi aJlllfEF.'6l eD er after JlHllHllY 1, 2QQ1.
3. $2,5QQ.QQ per l:tftit fer plBts reeebiBg final apjlra7al aD er after JIHIBiUy 1, ZQQ5.
(-)
1.
2.
3.
$2.200.00 per unit for all single family d~hed units.
$1.650.00 per unit for all twin homes and two (2) unit buildinlls.
$1.100.00 per unitfor all buildinllS containing three (3) or more units.
B. CommerciallIndustrial Develonment
.i,,, 1. $1,200.00 per gross acre of industrial development.
, 2. $1,500.00 per gross acre of commercial development.
f C. Any cash so obtained shall be used by the City only for the acquisition ofIand or equipment
~~, for parks, playgrounds, public ~en space, trails or debt retirement in connection withIand previously
,/ " acquired for sueh pwposes. The City Council may, upon request of a subdivider, delay time of
'i\'~_'4$_ payment of cash in lieu of land beyond the time of final plat approval by the City no later than
f,~commencement of construction of public improvements. Any delayed payment in accordanee
;l herewith shal1 bear interest at 8% per annum from the date of plat approval to the date ofpaym6)rt.
'1.
,;;(!.'i)}:::"i'
ALL OTIIER SECTIONS SHALL REMAIN UNCHANGED
ADOPTED by the Hastings City Council on this 21" day of June 2004.
Is!
Michael D. Werner, Mayor
o ATTEST:
ORDINANCE NO. ~- SECOND SERIES
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF HASTINGS AMENDING
CITY CODE SECTION 11.07 BY
CHANGING PARK DEDICATION REQUIREMENTS
)
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCil OF THE CITY OF HASTINGS AS FOllOWS:
I. Hastings City Code Section 11.07 Subdivision 2 is hereby deleted in its entirety and
replaced with the following new language.
Section 11.07 Subdivision 2. The amount of land to be dedicated in accordance
herewith shall be as follows:
A. Residential Deve/oDment. The amount of land that all new residential
subdivisions shall dedicate for public parks, playgrounds, public open space
or storm water holding areas or ponds, as required by this chapter, shall be
a percentage of the gross land area being platted based upon the proposed
density per gross acre as shown below:
ProDosed Density 'units)
Per Gross Acre of Plat
0.0-1.9
2.0-3.5
3.6-5.9
6.0-10
10+
PercentaGe of Gross Area of
Plat to be Dedicated
9%
11%
13%
15%
Add 0.6% per
unit over 10
)
B. CommercialRndustrial DeveloDment.
The amount of land to be dedicated in accordance herewith shall be 10% of
the gross land area to be platted.
II. Hastings City Code Section 11.07 Subdivision 4 is hereby deleted in its entirety and
replaced with the following new Subdivision 4.
Section 11.07 Subdivision 4. Cash in lieu of land. The City may at its discretion
require the developer to make a cash payment to the City in lieu of land to meet
public land dedication requirements. The cash amounts shall be determined as
follows:
A. Residential Deve/oDment.
1.
$1,800.00 per unit for plats receiving final approval on or after August
14,2003.
o
)
)-
o
2.
$2,2000.00 per unit for plats receiving final approval on or after
January 1, 2004.
$2,500.00 per unit for plats receiving final approval on or after
January 1, 2005.
3.
B. CommercialHndustrial Deve/o"ment.
1. $1,200.00 per gross acre of industrial development.
2. $1,500.00 per gross acre of commercial development.
C. Any cash so obtained shall be used by the City only for the acquisition of
land or equipment for parks, playgrounds, public open space, trails or debt
retirement in connection with land previously acquired for such purposes.
The City Council may, upon request of a subdivider, delay time of payment
of cash in lieu of land beyond the time of final plat approval by the City <no
later than commencement of construction of public improvements. Any
delayed payment in accordance herewith shall bear interest at 8% per
annum from the date of plat approval to the date of payment.
This ordinance was adopted by the Hastings City Council on this 4th day of August, 2003.
CITY OF HASTINGS
Michael D. Werner, Mayor
A TrEST:
Melanie Mesko Lee, Administrative Asst:/City Clerk
o
ril
N
'"
...
'"
C ~
.. l!!.
: .;!
OU!;1)
~~I()
.Oz
~~~
g~=
.08.
&:0 m
=~.~
a.~"
.
.A
."."il
~
....
p
...;
a.
Gl
fI)
.
:
~
::I
fI)
C
o
i
u
'6
Gl
Q
i!:
III
D..
~..
.11:
Jii.:!
0..
..
....
i!s
.-
....
...
:z:o
... .
..
..
Me
N.a!
..
..
0"
_e
...
e-
- ..
..
.
L
"'0
0_
in!
fl6
o.
E"
E
o
u
~-
....
~~
....
.
i:~
-Gl
.5
.
i! e
. .
~!
8
g ~
w !
~ i!! '5
.0
..0
~
i
'll
5
o
..
.
o
.c
o
-"
~g-r::il
MO'"
==-0:0
So.....
o~ 0
:CL
_0
~
."
o 8. . a
~ N S"J2
r-- co o.c
(") ~~'O
o
o
~
~
"'i!l
-g ~~&
..!!! o:Di!
'i' ~.j2
oJ!!.
~Ec
.9"0 !
g..!l6
~ 11 ~g
'C ~ e;g
~ ~~~
" ~ 'j! 0
'5
l!!
~ fiI
g:D
I<
..
....
o
...
~
o
~
I<
~
o
~
o.
0"
0"
~~
!~
",,,,
.... .
lJlii
o
8
'"
8
..
'"
o
o
:ll
o
;j/
o
o
I<
o 0
o 0
:i6 ~
'5 '5
"C~ ~
c:.....m m
.!!!,aese
o '(iJ! 'ii.1!
~ &~ g.!j
~~~'2g!
ti"gJi"g
s-;:.!!!~.!!!
e~ ii
~ = lJ
M.
"
111
o
o
...
N
111
'5
;II.
....
B
-0
. .
g~
...1!
JjJ!
~
.c
~
o
o
!il
o
o
!:?
o
o
!:?
~
o
o
!il
~ -
. ... 0
c.
.~
:::..
o.
~ !;t;'
~.s5
BE..
~ 'il.E
::::J~=
lis ~. ~
-!I'm
~ 0 m
"0 =~
~ U g!
o
&:: .e -
:8'2-c -gC;-gai~ t!!
~ ::::J li mg..!!!:l:I"c a. ~
.g.=i ~~'O!~~ ~~
.ci5~ ~"I:J~~.g 8. ::::J;!:
~~o om~+"'....s:t::'ia,
<.>'t)..-m....u _oEc;;~;-
.... '5 S e.e IS III "'CI ::::J~:;;
glD~-;~.s!i.fi)j[~
~ 16~li"i5g-3i!!~1;:-~
a~-g>~-;-ge~.s."O'O:B
"D s.!!! .!!! !!.!!!.2 &'2 S c
"Cas'- '-aII'-mo::::J '1f~
j.;;~ ~!~ l!~ ~ B/~
I~H ~Hj:S! ~
~
J
'E
Jl
..
g8 ~
...,.~ N
08
~~
00
00
.....
~N
00 8
:ill< ..
N N
c
.QI~
=!l.i!!
..0
c
!I! c
i'! E
c III
B 8
f
e
'"
I
'5
ili
".
Be
o
aiGi
. .
i.
...'
c'"
. 0
-.
~.-
.c
.
11
<0
~
N
~
N
...
c
E
c'" .
~1ili!
~8jaf
:::
'"
....
o
...
..
....
'5 ...
'i' c
2 .
. III is
.s l! ~ CIS
CD iii ~ co e
a &! .s~
c::: .:: ~ 11.2
r:::"C u ~
..1!! c ~
oj! ~
ii ~
11
.!!!
o
o
~
N
'"
~
o
.,
N
~
~
o
lil
ril
N
o
~
N
o
.
g~
~~
-;
f
i
!
...
~ 0
'" .c
.
11
o
ril
,.:
o
ril
,.:
.!!!
o
o
o
..
N
8
..
N
o
:il
N
o
o
..
N
-
o
'i'
o
~ .
Bl!!
- .
.
.
0-
m
...
c
'"
m
'0
.~
a.
c
o
...
w
.
~
!
'j!
1!
'"
'5
~
S
"
...
c
~
::!
.
I
i!!
~
'5
'i'
~
.s
"!e
~.
ij
'"
~
ii
.
.
'5'ill ...
~~ K j
.9 5 i '0
m~-o e!;t<:
&OJ5i~~~l!
:~~"j~.sg
.i~ ~ S:J
oial l!
~~!. -g
~ffi.9l ~
-E
m
l!!
m
j
'5
'i'
~
S
'ii
.
i
...
c
'"
.
o
.c
m
.
.
.
o
!!l,;
~~
1!'g
"''''l!!
'E'O~
~t;g
. .0
N.g
-g 8._
11 JB S
-gt! t!
n 'il
~ '" .l!
,5
!
'5~o
o~ c
SO
Z
li;::>
~
;;:
~
ill
c
.s
~
c
!!
If
"
~
o
00-
:o:!:!!
~~(!l
o
o
~
o
o
~
ril
...
o
~
o
~
...
g
...
0..
~cc
~
c
~
m
c
o
c
o
~
N
~
N
o
~
N
m~
. c
1! .
.!!!~
'6'1
'i'...
~'5
U
. .
~i!l
'gJ!!
. E
;:...
om
-5;~
.
.
.l1
3
E
.
:c
.
.
e E
"'.
g.
~
l!!
.
.
.
e
..
o
~
1!
'"
'5
E
.
.
!l
J!!
E
j
..
M
l?/
,
.
1
)
o
~
~
o
~
ril
~
o
o
N
N
111
~
o
.
~
J
...
'5
~
.
.
~
J!!
E
...
.
.l!
.c
:0 I ~
~.J~o
-;!#~
.2...cooor
caS II II
'. .
c:wl:il<G-J.
.!!~mmN
~ gq;~ II
g..ElIilblil
o.!l..~o
olll'Joti,N
~~7."f.
~ s Ii: Ii:
f~~lll
(5!....:t
.
~
o
t
1!
o
~
Ii
:c
)
)
o
"
0
i
0 "
:5 "
N .
r::: ~
'" 0
C N ;;
SP ~ :se 8 0 Ie 0 0 0 0 0
0 ~ . 0 ~ 0 0 0 0 ~
OJ! g N ~ ~ N 00
. .~ ~ N N <0
cUlill ~-
I- ~'"
<<IGiz
~.i:::! ;;
~~3i 1!e 0 0 ~ 0 0 0 0 0
"08. h 0 ~ .... ~ 0 0 0 0 0
0:0 ~ 0 N ~ ~ N 00 :5
Eiii ~ ~ N N <0
i!OC <3
.;O.E
..~::.
'" .- ... <fl.
0'" 0 - m 0 g.zo II o~ .
",e 0 0 -go I u ~ -g olIE.....ca
;; '" '" '" ,,'" '" C sasJ5! -oE;J1i ~...:t:i:
i au 0 0 0 " oilS
....~'t:J ~" -. ~ -~. -" 0 'Ceo j.!:::.~ ~ s~.~
o C s~ C s!!! s!!! !; . os!!! 0 Se -m~~
Uo _'OJ!:! -. a-m "i~ ~Ci-!! -. e ~>.~"':.~ ~Ai
Il'll !(i'O 0" .0. .", ~!i . . g 2:::1lQ ~~ ~u; c-
o. S-.2 ie . ~. ~c C C ::Iii ...
" 0 i~~ i~ I~ Q)'iij li"- 0 0 ~ ~> DHD-S- 0') g~'O
'G=ti u~ > 0 u> " . u~ C C 0. .u =lS~.E~~ u 0
" . -g"" u u" ...cu i!t
"" cu cu Iii-g ~ UC'" C "
~ .5!!~g " C " C C e" C i.!!! i!! /IJ.-.c (J co !1,~
-" - " " " " ~ i5.s!! l-:'!:~ " .
o'j! 0- 0- 0- ~oi
0 u~ j 0;;
<3 ~ ~ 'Ii .!!lj j ~ '0 m",C">o ~~~
ou 0 '" . 'Ii .l! . "$.il~~ .u
rJ.i 8 8 "' 0 C " C
0 8 0 o _x 0"
C _"0
~.. 8 0 " "' 0 0 0
,,- ~ ~
_ C "' C <0 0 ~ ~ 0
- 0 0 N g ~ g ~ ~ <0
"'-
o~ N N N
lE
"-", 0 ~ "' "' 8 ~ 0 0 0 ~
:.IIi ac 8 E ~ ~ "' 0 0
,,~ :ii 0 ~ ~ ~ ~
N '" '" N
... "' "' '" u-
8 ~ 0 0 :55.9182 0 0 0
" c E ~ <0 0 0 0 0 ....
. 0 !'l ~ g .... 00'0 ~u ~ ~ ~
...- '" N ....~c:~ cu
~
..
0: 0 :; ~ :g 8 0 0 0 ~
.\l c 0 ~ "' :5 ~ :5
;i !'l ::: <0 g ~ .... oo
~ N N
"-
.0: 8 J! l(! "' "' ~ 0 0 :5 0 ~ 0 ~ 0 0
_C ~ 0 0 0 0 ~ ~
~;i 0 C 1ll g .... ~ :l ~
N N N
'OJ' iii
0 . .,;x
- . u m", uO
~ ;;", "'-
uo u U :t:i: '2 '" 5 .~ '" C '2 ~!iL
C " 1i c 5 I: u C > C C " = j!!
~~ " C = u' = 0 ~a!:3
lD c 1; 1; ~~ " m jg ~.E m ~
II) 0 0" 1; I I '" g~d o~
i ",i!t '" '" I ;". 1;= r o " "'0.
I ~.a~ 0 0 "l ul B.~ ..~" ~S==
~ ~ H B ~ u u"'"
sei 0 -so 0 0_ 00 0 ceo ii~ ,gi!s
0_ ~ -0
i:: ;;'ll 1i~ ! ~.. ! Sl!, " " .% ~~I~ - 0"' !l~
;; ::J!= g.:! gj ~= ;;'" ~ . i!0.00 giI:'i
::s 'E iu! 'l!~ " ...~~ ~ H " " ~ 3iii ... i!t~;;;
II) ! uc 'l!> " "Iii " " i >Il!: g'o~ l!'5"-li
C" 0.
i -!"lll " " ... ...- ~ -g~ ...... ~ u ~ :;;z . .-
c eo C -"
0" !; !; e " ee " ll~1!l !; e
0 ~1 'Ii ~ u u'li J "'ll Uu J !; u ~i
:;:; " ~ !l! ~.l! ~~ .ll '01:......
III 8- tl tl ~ "-~ 'Ii .. " "'u B-
~ :;- 8 C ~
U 0 0 0:2:
:s z mU
lD . " C
C ~ ~ . 'lil . e ul~ " 3 "
C " m j!
of ,!!! . x ~ G ~:f! .'C 0. e " 0 ~
u ~ 0 .
G- o 'S: 0 ~ ... ~m .. ;; ~ ~
"~ . u
III H l! j! ~ 0 ~ 0. l~ 8i ~ ~ x t .g
II.. 0 . 0 ~ II
, ~ ~ ::; ::." ::'z z z .. ..
~
'l;
N
.
Iii'
..
o
i5
~
~
'"
c N
.. <0
'ii ;:
~W;
-g018
IUaiZ
~~::2:
i~.
is g.
i!O ~
.f~~
-
-
~
"'4
'Ot
o
."
o
5
.
"
~
g
..
i ~ 8 ~
.ss. ..,. ;;
.5
..
1! l! 0
I~~ g
E..
o
"
c
c
o
'"
g J!
Ii' c
8 J!!
Ii' c
~
u.
~
~
." ..
. . .
.." e
~ c '"
(j..!! 2:
::!!o CD CD a.
r:..! a 5 .s
~ ~ t: C ~
_ 2-
i ~ l!
:i; g
.
.
o
'5 '5
{! ~ ~
1i ......o:a....m
.;c S~s!!
.5~lDai~ii-m
:=uC:~:::J:::J:::II
.!!_ g i'iii g"iij
211 1!~"g~
I Q III C CII c
E ~.!!~.!!
o ~ ~
u 8 5
:<
.!!:e
I~
"
~
o
:;!
'"
o
~ ~
8
O!
g IUCO
~ c~
u._
:ec
i!
8
lil
o
:;!
'"
o
c
O!
c
c .!J!
~ c
:~
>;~
.....
c
8
'"
o
:;!
'"
u
@
8 J!!
~ c
..
~c
oi
co
c
lil
u
~
8
O!
~
o IU(J) 6_
o .",r.o ~"E
~ ";::!.:::J
..
u.
.:!: 0
'iilc~ 0
.E! c: ~
"'
o
:;!
'"
c
CII 'i'E 0
't:J '0 "2~ en::J C ~
ji -g .!! CL .! g 1= 8.
c _ .!! _.i!:' lD= Ii::
o 0 _ 0.... :::J'ii = ~
'ti ~ ~H~_~~ ~
1 ~H~l~~H~j'5 3 8-
cog!Gi.s....gr'i.s'a SCD I
:i!c...,-~..ol!'ii""~C
1: CD aJ CD'" CD'D ~o!l ... '0
f -a>&.e"Cc,o....... lD!!
C Q)UCQI ~J!! ~
CD .!! "2 al~ m .. i! S ~
lit: 0 m Om "g"CI (!!
Xl Ii H ~~ l-
(,) .c U III ItI C lL lii
:= :> 1! 0 .c
o 11
~
GI
I/)
I
>.
~
:s
I/)
c
o
i
u
:s
GI
Q
~
..
l'lI
D.
B~ i!
ti &
ii: ~
c
~
o
E
=
{i
..
i
{i
'5
.
0-
"';'0 ...
& (I) 2: ~
~ ~o a.
b1 c8tiS rZ
,Eg .
U).....l.l;
~'5C1}
...
.
~
o .
mIL:
,",
J'o
a~
'ill
Ii",
~c
~~
..,
- 0
""" 0
~~~s~~~.!!
~aill ~-g~"'~ .
~ a<9"C g.oo!:s..!!
~ II ~1l.!6J!1 ~
o ~""" ." '!l J'
"C C')o;O;c'OC)
Q) Cll.......... ~ co-<"I t
li"c::....-!i.8
."c:3J!!~,,;Eo;.
.i~*!!~gj~!
'5~"-l1",'5":;c
.... coo
& "';:=~- ~El!;j'5!
S"'l!!'" C:::);)
Iii ~u- .~llJ!l
~~.1'.!~'fi.sO'"
8.5~~ fB g.;;:1
~~ '"
{1i!
c..
H
'O.=~ lP
~Si -g ~
~ 5'5 l!! g
gi:li '0 10
- = J!! "" lI! f:
~.r;' = i: M 5
at cu OW)::J Gi !
-g l!!: 8 1U
.!!!~.2 S :>
6.2 ~ i!-g
J:!2'm 'C J!!
="2~ ~ '0
OJ!! E ~
c
g
c
g ~
'"
c
g
c
g ~
'"
..
@
o c
g ~
'" ..
o g 0
~ :;: 16
'g'O "2 ~
CUID ::J::J
lSg ~ ~
~ 8-., ~ !
sI5'O'ti
1!]~I~ ~
!_~ I~ l;
c" ,- ~
.!!! ~ s.s
15~ i! I!
J:::J 'C 'C
in ~ ~
'5
8!.
m
~
~
.
~ .
.0'"
8~~
::::s
."
C
. "
:a-i
",,>
~
c 0
c c
c ~
'" oj
c 0
C 0
C ~
'" oj
C
g ~
'"
s
co
..
..
~
.=
..
-
'"
co
:Ii
l;
'"
c
~
8-
5 =
'i./l
: e
;ell
u ~
liB.
'0
&
E
~
.
ill
ii
. !
~a
E 8-
b~
u:
" c
;!~
-8-
o
.5
~'i
.
~
.'l
~
o
o
..
..
l'!
u
.
~
.
B
~
oj
-
o
~
c
.
~
E
"
~
...
~
e
.
>
.
c
.
"
.
E
~
.
.
0(
~
~i
g,
If
,
)
~
~
~
.
"
0;
II
'!l
."
C
~
l"
=
'"
u
~
..
C
C
'"
;;
~
~
0(
.E
~
~
c
;;;
.E
.
.
=
u
O!
~
.
.
.
~
~
~
.
o
~
City of Hastings
Parks & Recreation
Department
920 W 10th St.
Hastings, MN 55033
Ph: (651)480-6175
Fax: (651) 437-5396
www.ci.hastings.mn.us
Aquatic Center
901 Maple St.
Hastings, MN 55033
Ph: (651) 4S0-2392
Fax: (651) 437-5396
Civic Arena
2801 Redwing Blvd.
Hastings, MN 55033
,Ph: (651)480-6195
Fax: (651) 437-4940
MEMO
Date:
317/06
To:
NRRC Commission Members
From:
Barry Bernstein, Parks and Recreation Director
Subject:
Xeel Energy Light Poles
Back..round Information:
As I have indicated to the NRRC, it has been difficult to have Xeel Energy
execute replacing the trail light poles that have been vandalized throughout our
trail system.
I have enclosed a letter from Xeel outlining their position to no longer maintain
the trail light poles and trlli1sfer the system to the City of Hastings. This
transfer would include all of the maintenanee and repairing the existing poles
and fixtures that are broken.
Action:
1. none
REF: Xcel fight pol.. 12006
II Xcel EnergYSM
~ OUTDOOR LIGHTING
February 24, 2006
825 Rice Street
Sl. Paul, MN 55117
City of Hastings
Attention: Barry Bernstein
920 W. 101h Street
Hasting, MN 55033
Dear Mr. Barry Bernstein:
I am writing in response to your request for written confirmation of Xcel Energy's decision to not replace
or maintain the leased/group 5 streetlights along the City of Hastings trail system.
( ')
Xcel Energy's decision to not replace the 12 streetlight poles that are currently down due to vandalism is
based on historical streetlight data collected from 1996 to 2005. The data shows that vandals damaged
96 streetlights in the Lions Park, Riverwalk, and Vermillion Falls trail systems during this time.
Also, Xcel Energy representatives Colette Jurek and John Olson discussed the repeated incidents of
vandalism with Police Chief McMenomy and Parks and Recreation Director Marty McNamara during the
timeframe 1999 - 2001. During a June 2002 city council meeting, council members passed a resolution
accepting financial responsibility for damaged poles from that date forward due to the repeated acts of
vandalism along the city's trail system.
Effective 4/30/06, Xcel Energy will no longer maintain the streetlights located along the trail system in
the fOllowing areas;
~ Mississippi River Trail- Lock and Dam Road to 1 st Street and Tyler
~ Vermillion Falls/Old Mill Trail- 21st Street to 181h Street
~ Lions Park Trail- State Street to Pleasant Avenue
~ Vermillion Street Underpass - West of Hwy 61 to Vermillion Falls
Effective 5/1/06, the City of Hastings will own the streetlights along the trail system and will be required
to meter and maintain them. Xcel Energy will provide the City of Hastings a list of all affected lights in
these areas.
Xcel Energy is willing to work with the City of Hastings on obtaining the necessary information for
replacing the poles and fixtures. Xcel Energy is committed to providing the City of Hastings with
exceptional customer service and we regret the inconvenience this decision may cause.
o
further questions, please feel free to contact me at 651-229-2400.
leging Jr.
nergy Business Support Analyst
INTRODUCTION TO THE WETLAND HEALTH EVALUATION PROJECT
Since 1997, citizen volunteers involved in WHEP have been monitoring the
health of wetlands throughout Dakota and Hennepin Counties. They provide
important information to city and county planners, engineers, resource
managers, and others. The data is also used by the Minnesota Pollution
Control Agency to track wetland health throughout the Twin Cities
metropolitan area.
This is a valuable service and we rely on volunteers to collect data during
each field season. Volunteers are typically recruited and asked to register
between the months of February and May each year.
WHEP has continued to grow and now combines the efforts of volunteers
with those of numerous local, state, federal, and non-profit agencies to
monitor and improve wetland health. Currently 16 out of the 17 communities
involved in WHEP are located in Dakota and Hennepin counties. One team is
located near Sauk Rapids as part of the Green Lake Improvement District.
As volunteer interest continues, additional teams are added each year.
WHEP has received national recognition from the EPA, has received a
National Association of Counties Achievement Award, and has been a
Minnesota Environmental Initiative Award finalist. WHEP serves as a model
for citizen wetland monitoring around the country. Because of the program's
strong protocol design and training, WHEP has been extremely successful at
providing quality data and a unique educational experience for volunteers of
all levels. Cities involved with WHEP are using volunteer collected data for
water resource and city planning decision-making. In turn, these cities
support the costs for team leader stipends, sampling gear, and professional
level QA/Qc. MPCA staff is responsible for training volunteers in field
sampling techniques and laboratory identification of invertebrates and plants.
o
City Staff Responsibilities
It should be noted that the evaluation of monitoring data is dependent, to a large extent,
on the background data provided by the City. Information about the wetland size,
wetland type, watershed area and watershed land use are critical to providing context for
the data evaluation. All oftbis data is required on the Site Identification Form (Appendix
D), which should be completed by City staff prior to sampling a new wetland through
WHEP.
The wetland sites chosen fur sampling should be reevaluated each year.
Recommendations for a 8"1l1pling rotatl.o.n are provided in sections 4.0 Dakota County
Wetland Site Evaluations and 5.0 Hennepin county Wetland Site Evaluations of this
report. This information is provided in the SlDnm."y for each wetland evaluated.
Questions regarding the need for additional sampling should be directed to URS.
BMP Installation
BMP installation has successfully beeninlplemented at the ~.Pond site in Eaglin
'1"hus far, the WHEP evaluations for this site. indicated substantial improvement in the
vegetation community, With little to no change in invertebrates. This site Will continue to
be. monitored to evaluate the success ofBMP installation.
several cities have expressed an interest in developing a BMP instaJIation project for a
wetland in their jurisdiction. The following recomm"udations. are based on the WHEP
experience:
)
Mmm.sota WHEP
20114~ Rqx>rt
URS Cmp.
Mareh29,2005
Page 11
. Choose a site on public land that is visible to the public for demonstration PUlpOses
. Wodc closely with city natural resource, parks and engineering staff to develop a
concept plan
· Identify funding sources early and apply for grant funds as appropriate
. Consider the potential to show improvemen1s to wetland health, based on
iden1ification of the cause for degradation and potential to correct the problem
. Minimize the potential for vandalism by engaging local residents in the project, such
as an "adopt a weiland" program.
While it is difficult to show dramatic improvements in wetland health with limited
funding, BMP projects can illustrate alternative stonnwater management pmctices that .
can be installed by locall'esidents. Additionally, an education component illustrating yard
waste disposal, teI1iIizer practices rain ba1Tets and other homeowner BMPs may be
effective at improving water quality, one homeowner at a time.
o
, )
o
)
The Report from 2004
Hastings Evalnation
Team Leader: Joe Beattie
Table 4.5.1 presents the metric scores and the quality rating for each individual wetland
assessed within the City of Hastings during the 2004-sampling season. The chart
presented in Figure 4.5.1 illustrates the consistency between the ffiI scores (in percent
fonn) for each wetland sampled.
Table 4.5.1. y"",. 2003
HASTINGS
- 1_ Leech Taxa
2. Corixidae P ortion
3. Dra -Damse
4. ETSD
5.SnaiI
6. Total Invertebrate Taxa
Site Score (Max. 30)
Wetland Quality
Percent Score
5
1
3
3
3
5
20
Moderate
67
3/3
3/3
III
3/3
515
5/5
20120
ModIMod1
67/531
3
3
1
3
1
3
14
Poor
47
L Vascular Genera Count 5 . 3/515
2. Nonvascular Taxa Count 1 1/3/5
3. Gtasslikes Count 3 311/1
4. Carar Cover 1 l1I11
5. UtricuJarin Presence 1 11111
6. A tic Guild Cover 3 111/1
7. Persistent Standin Litter 3 515/1
Site Score (Max. 35) 17 lSJ17 /1
Wetland Quality Moderate PoorIMod1IPoor1
Percent Score 49 37/541137'
Farmington Team Spot Check: Second sample (replicate) for wetland.
Icity Team Spot Check: Second sample of vegetation plot.
5
1
3
1
1
1
3
15
Poor
37
Figll,.e 4.5_1. HtlSlingllllits _IS
(perunl form) for the i1nI!rt.t!bnrle
Illtd vegetation ml (llfa~
thIring tire 2004-8tu1fJ1litt;g setIIIon.
Hastings
11111
i: 8U
l! 611
g 40
fI)
iD 211
-
o
IU
lU
Wetland Site
H-3O
Stonel!ate Treated (H-4)
Stonegate Treated (H-4) is the second cell of a two-celled stonnwater management
system that was created as part of a residential development. The wetland is 1.02 ~
within a ten-acre watershed that is 30 to 40 percent impervious. Surface nmoff is lreated
in the first cell (H-3) before entering this wetland. According to the citizen's data sheet,
the fringe of this wetland was sprayed with herbicide in 2001. The southeast side of the
pond was recently (20031) planted in native species using a DNR grant. Residential
housing, mowed turf and open space SUJI'Ound the wetland. This is the fourlh year of
monitoring on the site.
Invertebrate illI
Year 2004 (Table 4.5.1): The wetland's health was rated Moderate based on the
invertebrate sampling effort, with a site score of 20 points. The Leech and Total Taxa
metrics each scored five points; all other memcs received scores of either one or three
points. The invertebrate sample inch1ded foW' kinds of leeches, many bugs and beetles
(97% corixids), one kind of dragonfly, two kinds of damselflies, two kinds of 1Dl!YfIies,
three kinds of snails, midges, ampbipods, clam shrimp and fairy shrimp.
Yeal'3' 2001-2004 (Figure 4.5.2): This site has consistently resulted in Poor ratings for all
previous samp~. The 2004 sample contained a substantially more diverse invertebrate
population, particularly in the number of leeches, snails and dragonflies.
Figure 4.5.2. Stonegme TretJted
(H-'I) Bite SCOre8 and trends fro'"
2001 to 2fJ1J4.
Stonegate Treated (H-41 2001 - 2004
tla
80 Exc
l .......f_.......,....~.f~._........
5 60 _~:::==1 Mo
.s 40 =.s";if ~........;:c:;,...""......,, U if- f.. II'
!! POD
20
a
.aoot 2002 2803 2lI04
I . -~ . Vtlgl!dlltln I
_T..... - -"...
f)
Veaehllion illI
Year 2004 (Table 4.5.1): The
wetland's health was rated
Modemte based on the
vegetation sampling effurt, with a score of 17 points. The native planting has been
completed and are beginning to become established. A number of the plants identified are
upland species, indicating that the sample plot was placed high on the landscape. The
plot included two woodies, fOW' grass-Iikes, two submergent/floating forbs and eighteen
emergent furbs. The most dominant plants were cattail and pondweed, with 25 to 50
peroent cover.
Years 2001-2004 (Figure 4.5.2): The toW' years of evaluation have resulted in Poor to
Modemte vegetation ratings, with a sligbtly improving trend. The 2003 and 2004
evaluations were very consistent in the types of species identified.
o
)
nonvascular, three woodies, one grass-like and 19 emergent forbs. This plot was
dominated by duckweed (75 to 100% coverage).
The Hastings team's spot check resulted in a Moderate rating, 17 points. Vascular
Genera and Persistent Standing Litter each scored five points. The genera identified in
the sample plot included one nonvascular, seven woodies, one grass, two floating forbs
and six emergent forbs. The overall rating and scoring was consistent with the City
team's samples.
Site Summarv
The site has been sampled fur two years. Vegetation has been sampled five times, and
has resulted in consistent Poor to Moderate ratings (15 to 19 points). Invertebrates have
been sampled four times and have resulted in consistent Moderate ratings (16 to 20
points). This site should be monitored on a rotational basis (every three years) based on
activities occWTing wilhin the watershed and City priorities.
Sand Conlee Pond (H-30)
()
Sand Coulee Pond (11-30) is designated as a storm water detention pond by the City.
This one-acre shallow IIlllI'Sb (Type 4) is located wilhin a 100-acre watershed.
Apprw<imately 20 to 30% of the watershed is impervious surface, with mostly
COIlIIJIfiI'Cial development. The site is located near a native prairie that is actively
m,,"RgP.d. The City would like to enhance the quality of this wetland by restoring native
species in and around the pond. This is the first year of monitoring on the site.
lBvertebrate mI
Year 2004 (Table 4.5.1): The wetland's health was rated Poor based on the invertebrate
sampling effort, with a site score of 14 points. None of the metrics scored more than
three points. The invertebrate sample included two kinds of leeches, many bugs and
beetles (49% corixids), one kind of caddisfiy, one kind of snail, fingernail clams,
mosquito laIvae and amphipods.
Vetretation mI
Year 2004 (Table 4.5.1): The wetland's health was rated Poor based on the vegetation
sampling effort, with a score of 15 points. Though the Vascular Genera scored five
points, the sample team noted that this metric included a numbl::r of weedy species and
may be exaggerated. All other metrics scored three or one points. The plot included three
grass-likes, one submergent forb and nineteen emergent forbs. A number of these forbs
are upland species, indicating that the sample plot was high on the landscape.
Site Summary
The vegetation and invertebrate ffiI evalnations have provided Poor ratings, as would be
expected fur a stonn water pond. This wetland should be sampled at least one more year
to obtain additional baseline data.
o
Improvements to this wetland may be difficult to achieve because of the high watershed
area to wetland area ratio. In order to obtain improvements, the City should evaluate the
existing hydrology to detennine how much water flows through the wetland and how
much the water level changes during storm events. Establishing native vegetation ts
more difficult to achieve in wetlands that have a lot of water level fluctuation. The
recently completed improvements at Cedar Pond in Eagan may provide a good
comparison for this wetland. City staff is encouraged to discuss their plans with water
resource staff in Eagan. A recent publication, Plants for stormwater Ponds Design (Shaw
and Schmidt), would be a good .resonn:e for identifYingapproprlate plantlngs.
Site SwnUl/lrv d
The vegetation and invertebrate IBI evaluations have consistently provided Poor ratings
and low scores. This wetland should be sampled annually once the native planting is
c.ompieted to evaluate the success of the wetland restoration/creation.
Lake Rebeet:a Emergent Marsh (H-6)
',,-
Rebecca Emergent Marsh (H-6) is a 19 acre wetland within a 56 acre watershed. The
wetland is located on public land that is not developed. Only one percent of the
watershed is estimated to be impervious. The emergent marsh is part of the Mississippi
River flats area, which includes Lake Rebecca, a floodplain forest and the Mississippi
River banks. The Mississippi River Flats Natural Resource Management and Restoration
Plan was adopted by the City in December 2002. The City's goals are to maintain native
species dominance and diversity by reducing nearby invasive species problems, restore
native vegetation on a nearby dike and to continue to maintain and monitor the site. The
vegetation in this wetland was sampled twice by the City team. west st PaullMendota
Heights/South Sf. Paul conducted a second sampling (spot check) for both invertebrates
and vegetation. This is the :first year of data collection on the site.
)
InveJ.1:ebrate IBI
Year 2003 (Table 4.5.1): The wetland's health is Moderate based on the invertebrate
sampling effort, with a site score of 20 points. Two metrics sCored five points, including
the Dmgonfly-damselfly and Total Taxa. The overall sample included two kinds of
leeches, bugs and beetles, two kinds of dragonflies, two kinds of .b,,,,,,,,lflies, three kinds
of snails, amphipods, fairy shrimp and isopods. Eleven taxa were counted for the Total
Taxa metric. This wetland appears to have a relatively diverse invertebrate comm1mity.
The West Sf. PaulIMendota Heights/South st Paul team spot check also resulted in a
Moderate rating, with a 16-poiot seore. Individual metrics varied somewhat from the
City team's evaluation. The spot eheck sample included one kind of leech, a few bugs
and beetles, two kinds of dragonflies, four kinds of snails and erayfish. The spot check
team noted that the site was difIieult to sample because of extremely mucky conditions.
o
) Veeetatioll IBI
Year 2003 (Table 4.5.1): The City team conducted two vegetation samplings on this
wetland because of its large size. The first evaluation resulted in a Poor rating, 13 points.
None of the metrics scored more than three points. The sample plot included four
emexgent/erect forbs, one floating forb, one woody genus and three grasslikes.
Duckweed dominated the covemge (50 to 75 percent) followed by Sparganium (25 to 50
percent).
The City team's second vegetation evaluation resulted in a Moderate rating (19 points).
Vascular Genelil and ~ Cover metries each scored Jive points. As compared to the
first plot, the releve included a larger variety of emergent/erect forbs andlIeavier
coverage with Carta. 0vemIl, the second plot included Jifteen emergent/erect forbs, one
floating forb, one woody and four grasslikes.
One scoring error was noted Oil the City's data sheets: the number of grasslikes was
transferred incorrectly. The correction increased the Grasslikes metric score by two
points.
The West Sf. PaullMeodota Heights/South Sf. Paul spot check resulted in a Moderate
rating, 17 points. Vascular Genera was the only metric scoring five points. The genera
identified in the sample plot were very similar to that identified in the second evaluation
conducted by the City team. Overall, the plot included 14 emergent/erect forbs, one
floating forb and four grasslikes.
)
Site Smnmarv
The two invertebrate samples for 2003 resulted in Moderate ratings. The three vegetation
samples resulted in Poor to Moderate ratings. This site should be monitored for at least
one more year to gather additional baseline data.
o
I
)
I
I
,.
!)
o
Wetlands Monitored in 200S
Dakota Countr WHEP .. . Macroinvertebrate Vege1ation
. Score Quality Scolll
. Apple VaDev Team Leadel': Dan Bale
AV-I Hidden Vallev 22 Moderate 27 Excellent
AV-6 BelmontParl< . 18 Modemte 23 Modemte
AV-8 Pond 14. Poor 21 Moderate
A V-9 Wa1rud Pond 26 . Excellent 25 Moderate
H-6 Rebe<:ca EM 8. Poor 23 Mod-.:
Bumsvllle Team LIlader: DiaJme Rowse
D-I Crystal West Pad<: 20 Moderate 27 Excellent
B-3 KraemerNP 18 Moderate 13 Poor
B-6 Af East 20 .Modemte 13 Poor
B-ll Valley VieW 16 Modemte 21 Moderate
E-I0 Cedar Pond . to Poor 15 Poor.
Eagan .
Co- Team Leaders: Tom Goocl'lrinll8De TunseCh.
E-I0 AP-3 (cedar DODd) 8 Poor 23 Moderate .
E-19 FP-4.1 12 . Poor 21 Moderate
. E-2O ShanahanLake . 18 Moderate 25 . Moderate
B-1 Crystal W!lSt .. 12 Poor 21 Moderate
FanniD2tun Team Leader: Katie KoelI-Laveen .
F-l Pine Knoll Pond 20 . Moderate 13 Poor
P-3 Krait Pond 10 Poor 13 Paor
F-4 Lake Julia 10 Poor 15. Paor
.F-5 Pilot Knob RA IS Poor
R-l Kelly Marsh
~,^.,.". ....... .~, '-'''~ - .--,".
'",,-,.,,<'
"'.,",;;" -.....'"',.
. ",,-,' ,^'
.,. -
~ - ,"'~i';.
.'."" "'0; st;; ,;". rrt
;-~. .',
~,_,,,~,,_c .. ~ .
e eam. er: e&!u
L-7 DNR387 20 Moderate 29. EltI:ellent
L-4. Water TreaIi1lent Wetland Bank 24 .Exce.llent 21 Mod-.:
L-8 DNR 393 22 Moderate 17 Moderate
L-9 NCS4 22 Modemte 19 Moderate
MH-2~ld 22 Moderate . 23. Moderate
Mendota Heights Team Leader: Darcy Talh_
MH-2 Copperfield 24 .Excellent 27. . Excellent
MH-II I.ockwood Pond 18 Moderate 19 Moderate
48W Thomnson Lake .14 Poor 17 Moder3te
L-7 ONR #387 22 Mod-.: 25 Moderate
Rosemollnt
Co-Leaders: JaDe PortoerlieldlQen.ise WilkeIlS
R-I Kellv Marsh .. .. 24 . Excellent 15 Poor
It-12 Avalon 12 Poor II Poor
R-14 WMP#379 20 Moderate 23 Moderate
R-15 BimerPond , . 20 Moderate 17 Moderate
F-1 Pine Knoll Pond - 26 Excelleat 15 Poor
. Maeroinvertebrate Seale
. 23-30 Excellent
15-22 Moderate
6-14 Poor
Vegetation Seale
26-35 Excellent
16-25 Moderate
7-15. Poor
""*These are the raw Scores; URS is currently analyzing the data; more analysis and
futher discussion will be inclued in the final report.***"
Wetlands Monitored ill 2005
Hennepin County. WHEP Macroiilvertebrate . Vegeiation
Score . Quality . Score Quality
Bloomington Team. Leader: Ceee Cope
BL-4 Nine Mile Creek * reference 18 Moderate 17 Moderate
BIA Nine Mile Creek (cross-check bY MD" team) 24 Excellent 21 Moderate
BL-6 Wanda Miller Pond 20 Moderate IS Poor
BL-7 Mt. Curve Pond 28 . Excellent IS Poor .
BL-8 Runnim, Pond (27'()() 16 Moderate 29 Excellent
Eden Prairie .Team Leader: Jeremy Duehr
EP-S Nesbitt Preserve Park 18 . . Moderate IS . . Poor
EP-7 DuckPond(8-12-A\ . 26. Excellent 19 Moderate
. EP-8 IS-23-E (by water ulant\ *reference 20 . Moderate .25 Moderate
Ep.8 IS-23-E,fcross-check bv Minnetonka team\ 22 Moderate 21 Moderate
EP-9 Round Lake~West(8-23-A\ .. 12 Poor 23 Moderate.
Maple Grove Team #1 Team Leader: Teddie Seibring .
. .
MG-2 *reference . . 24 Excellent 21 Moderate
MG-2 (cro....check bY Plvmilth Team) 2.2 . MOderate 19 Moderate
MG-3 22 Moderate 31 . Excellent
MG-6 20 Moderate . IS Poor
MG-7 18 Moderate IS Poor
Maple Grove Team #2 Team Leader: Joa Oag
MG-I. *reference 30 . Excellent 21 Moderate
. MG-l (cross-check bv Maule Grove Team #1\ 22 . Moderate 19 Moderate
MG-4 26 Excellent 21. . Moderate
MG-S 24 . Excellent .17 Moderate
MOo8 18 Moderate 17 . Moderate
MinneapoliB Team Leadu: Debbie Cash
MP-3 DiamondLake , . 14 . Poor 7 Poor
MP-7 Robert's Bini S *reference 22 . Moderate IS Poor
MP-7 Robert's Bini S . cross-check by Bloom tl;am). 24 Excellent 23 MQilerate
MP-&Cedar Meadows . 18 Moderate IS Poor
MP-9 Solomon Park Wetland 22 Moderate IS Poor
Miapetoaka 'J'e'!m Leader: Bethaay Kvlak
MT-4 StoneRd 26 Excellent 21 Moderate
MT-S Mtka Hilili School 81" ~ 22 Moderate 13 Poor
MT-6 Whited Marsh 28 Excellent 25 Moderate .
MT-7 Mtka Hillh School Tamarack bee: *.reference 16 Moderate 23 .Moderate
MT-7 Mtka Hi.2h SchoolTamarack ~ (cross-check: EPTeam) 22 Moderate . 31 EXcellent
Plymouth .. Team Leader: Steve Merten .
PL-4 Medicine Lake *referenee . 8 Poor. 21 Moderate
PL-4 Medicine Lake {cross-check bv MO Team 2\ 26 Excellent 23 Moderate
PL-S Jonauil LnJScbmidt Lake\ 18 Moderate 19 Moderate
PL-6 Bass Lake WetJand ,10 Poor . IS Poor
PL-7 Pfvmouth Creek, near.Fembrook nark 14 Poor II Poor
. Maeroi.nverteb....te Seale
23-30 Excellent
15-22 Moderate
6-14 Poor
Vegetation Seale
26-35 .Excellent .
16-25 Moderate
7-15 Poor
o
City of Hastings
Parks & Recreation
Department
920 W 10th SL
Hastings, MN 55033
Ph: (651)480.6175
Fax: (651)437-5396
www.cLhastings.mn.us
Aquatic Cuter
901 Maple St.
Hastings, MN 55033
Ph: (651)480-2392
Fax: (651)437-5396
Civic Arena
2801 Redwing Blvd.
Hastings, MN 55033
Ph: (651)480-6195
Fax: (651)437-4940
MEMO
Date:
To:
From:
Subject:
3/7/06
NRRC Commission Members
Barry Bernstein, Parks and Recreation Director
Mississippi River Dock
Back2round Information:
I have enclosed further information relating to the proposed Mississippi River
Dock that was to be located close to downtown.
As you will notiee, these emaiIs are from Dave Osberg, City Administrator
outlining meetings and other correspondence the City has had relating to this
project.
Action:
1. none
REF: Misaissippi River Dock 1 2006
Page I ofl
')
Barry Bernstein
Dave Osberg
Monday, January 23, 2006 1 :52 PM
alongihastings@comcast.net; TravelingrammaCC@cs.com; Hazlet, Turney E.; Danna Elling;
Danna Elling; Werner, Michael D.; Moratzka, Lynn; Paul Hicks; Paul Lisa Hicks
Cc: Barry Bernstein
Subject: Public Dock Project
From:
Sent:
To:
The City Council may recall from a December 19th, 2005 memorandum information regarding the provisional
permit received from the Army Corps of Engineers relating to the public dock permit that had previously been
submitted. There were a variety of conditions attached to the permit, many of which I outlined further in the
memorandum. Some present significant concern to City Staff and our consultants from the Polaris Group, while
others are less problematic, and can be easily addressed. In an effort to gather more information regarding the
conditions of the permit, a meeting has been scheduled with representatives from the Army Corps of Engineers
on Wednesday January 25, 2006. Parks and Recreation Director Barry Bernstein and I will attend, along with our
representative from the Polaris Group, Joel Toso. The outcome of the meeting will be shared with the City
Council.
Dave Osberg
)
o
3/7/2006
Page 1 of2
Barry Bernstein
J
Dave Osberg
Wednesday, January 25,200612:35 PM
Werner, Michael D.; Moratzka, Lynn; Paul Hicks; Paul Lisa Hicks; Danna Elling; Danna Elling;
TravelingrammaCC@cs.com; Hazlet, Turney E.; alongihastings@comcast.net
Cc: Barry Bernstein
Subject: Army Corps of Engineers Meeting, RE: Public Dock Permit
From:
Sent:
To:
Mayor and Council: On Monday January 23, 2006 the Mayor and City Council were advised of a meeting
scheduled for Wednesday January 25111, 2006 at the Army Corps of Engineers to discuss the public dock permit. A
few logistical items are in order, to assure full understanding of the current situation, based on the results of the
meeting today.
A public notice and comment period was issued by the Army Corps of Engineers on May 20111, 2005, with Iihe
comment period expiring on June 19111, 2005. The intent is to allow the ACOE to reeeive all public comment from
citizens and other State and Federal Agencies, on the Cities application for a permit to construct the public dock
in the Mississippi River. As you may recall, the process took considerable time to review and gather information,
with the ACOE ultimately issuing a provisional permit received on December 13111, 2005.
On December 15111, 2005 the Army Corps of Engineers received a letter from the United States Coast Guard,
which became the primary topic of discussion during the meeting today. As I recite several portions of the letter,
please bear in mind the obvious, that receipt of Iihe letter on December 15111, is well after Iihe review and comment
period closing date of June 19111, 2005, and a few days after Iihe City received the provisional permit on December
) 13111, 2005.
Key points/phrases in the letter, which was signed by Captain S.E. Englebert, include the following:
". .. have strong reservations with the proposed dock and issuance of this permit."
"The construction of a recreational boat dock in this location would create an unreasonable risk of collision,
allision and/or hazard to navigation."
"Given the proximity of the tow to the proposed dock, Iihis wash would create a significant risk to small vessels
moored at Iihe dock."
"The placement of any docks.....would create an unreasonable hazard to this navigation....as Captain ofthe Port
for this section of the Mississippi River, I request you deny this permit."
During the meeting, I asked ACOE Staff of the significanee of receiving comments from the Coast Guard well
after the review and comment period, and it became clear with his answer that additional information or
comments from other Federal Agencies is considered any time during the process, regardless of any procedural
deadlines.
o
ThArA are Significant references in the letter to turning movements, channellacption and dook location that arc
need of clarification. The City's consultant will be working with ACOE Staff to submit further information and
clarification to the Coast Guard. Unless, the Coast Guard changes significantly Iihe content of their letter, the
permit will be denied by the Army Corps of Engineers. There may be some misunderstandings by Iihe Coast
Guard Iihat we will attempt to clarify and correct.
While Iihe ACOE Staff was very understanding and respectful of the frustration I shared regarding Iihis last minute
attempt to undermine our permit and ability to construct the dock, the message was loud and clear, that unless
the Coast Guard changes significantly Iihe content of the letter, the ACOE will deny the permit.
As stated earlier, the City and other ACOE Staff will be submitting furliher information to the Coast Guard by
3/7/2006
City of Hastings
Parks & Recreation
Department
920 W 10th St.
Hastings, MN 55033
Ph: (651)480-6175
Fax: (651)437-5396
www.ci.hastings.mn.us
Aquatic Center
901 MapleSt.
Hastings, MN 55033
Ph: (651) 480-2392
Fax: (651) 437-5396
Civic Arena
280 I Redwing Blvd.
Hastings, MN 55033
,Ph: (651) 480-6195
Fax: (651)437-4940
MEMO
Date: 3/7/06
To:
NRRC Commission Members
From:
Barry Bernstein, Parks and Recreation Director
Subject:
Riverwood Park
Background lnfonDation:
During the neighborhood meetings the City conducted last fall, one of the
issues that were brought up from Riverwood Park was the amount of loitering
in the park late into the evening. As this issue was discussed, the topic of
adding a security light to the park was brought up. The residents at the
neighborhood meeting felt that the addition of a security light would be
beneficial.
Kevin Smith, Parks Superintendent and I met with Sue Pariseau from Dakota
Electric to discuss the possibility of adding a security light to this location. It
was also discussed that we have a need to not shine light to the north due to the
intnision oflight onto the existing homes. Dakota Electric is confident that a
three way fixture that will distribute the light to the south with no light spill to
the north would be added to any light fixture and therefore eliminating concern
of the homeowners to the north.
Action:
1. none
REF: riv<l'WOod pad< light 1 2006
Page I ofl
Barry Bernstein
)
From: Pariseau,Sue [SPariseau@dakotaelectric.com]
Sent: Tuesday, February 14, 2006 1 :04 PM
To: Barry Bernstein
Subject: park light
Barry,
Sorry I didn't get this out to your earlier.
I've prepared estimates for costs on a few different options for at light in the location we discussed in the park in
Riverwoods.
. Green aluminum pole with green acorn style fixture
· . Black fiberglass pole and black coach style fixture (same as neighborhood)
- · Green aluminum pole with black coach style fixture (hybrid of two above)
· Wood power pole with cobra style fixture (like at major intersections)
$2,602.27
$1,800.59 ,d
$2.092.17 - :J;-~I"'tt.<.L
$1,740.01;- 'd.:r G.
Please let me know if you'd like to proceed with the installation of a light at this park and if so, what option you'd
prefer.
Thanks and again, sorry for the delay getting the estimate to you.
~I
tA . '"._.13
t,t~1
~6.d!
451~
)
Sue Pariseau
Dakota Electric Association
651-463-6373
fax 651-463-6256
o
2/14/2006
City of Hastings
Parks & Recreation
Department
920 W 10th St.
Hastings, MN 55033
Ph: (651)480-6175
Fax: (651) 437.5396
www.ci.hastings.mn.us
Aquatic Center
901 Maple St.
Hastings. MN 55033
Ph: (651)480-2392
Fax: (651)437-5396
Civic Arena
2801 Redwing Blvd.
Hastings, MN 55033
Ph: (651)480-6195
Fax: (651)437-4940
MEMO
Date:
317106
To:
NRRC Commission Members
From:
Barry Bernstein, Parks and Recreation Director
Subject:
Trail Repair and Maintenanee
Baclc!:round Information:
Some of the findings from our bituminous study that was completed last June
identified some areas of trails that are in need of both repair and general
maintenance. In 2006, we have entered into an agreement with Larson
Engineering to oversee the restoration and maintenance work to the trail
system this year.
The City Council on March 6th approved the agreement without much
discussion.
With the addition ofa future Assistant City Engineer, it is my intention to
research the possibility of bringing the oversight of projects like this internally.
Action:
1. none
REF: trail ~"IV'-e and repair 12006
)
)
o
Larson Engin_r1ng of Minnesota
3524 Labore Road
While Bear Lake. MN 55110-5100
651.481.9120 Fax: 651.481.9201
WWW.larsonengr.com
~ Larson -
February 15, 2006
Mr. Barry Bernstein
City of Hastings .
Park & Recreation Department
920 West 10lh Street
Hastings, MN 55033
RE: Pavement Rehabilitation Construction Documents and Contract Admini.stration for
Selected Park and Recreation Pavement Projects
Dear Mr. Bemstein:
In accordance with our recent conversation, we are pleased to submit the following
proposal to prepare construction documents (plans and specifications) and perfOrm
constructiona~mii1istration for selected pavement projects to be constructed in calendar
year 2006.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The project assignment consists of parking lot, basketball courts, and trails rehabilitation in
the Hastings Park and Recreation system.
SCOPE OF SERVICES
Constructi(ln Documents
. Plans and specifications will be prepared for parking lot and roadway, playground, tennis
court,. and athletic track construction or rehabilitation under the following bids:
Engineers
Construction Estimate
Proiect .
Parking Lots
· Old Mill Parking Lot
Pavement repair, crack seal and seal coat.
· Roadside Park Parking Lot
Reconstruct and raise elevation two feet.
· Vermillion Falls Linear Parking Lot
Repair damaged curb and gutter, crack. s8al
and seal coat the lot.
$ 3,000
$35,000
$ 2,500
Basketball Courts
· Cannon Park
Level depressed areas, crack seal, color coat and stripe.
. Cari Park
Level depressed areas, crack seal, color coat and stripe.
. Crestview Park
Level depressed areas, crack seal. color coat and stripe.
· Sunny Acres Park
Level depressed areas, crack seal, color coat and stripe.
· Wilson Park
Level depressed areas, crack seal, color coat and stripe.
Trails
· #2 - Mississippi River
Crack seal and apply Liquid Road.
· #4 - Mississippi River
Repair distressed pavement, crack seal and apply Liquid Road.
· #23 - Roadside Park:
Repair distressed pavement, crack seal and apply Liquid Road.
· #24 - Roadside Park:
Crack seal and apply Liquid Road.
Estimated Total
Altemate #1
. #27 - Veteran's Trail
Crack seal and apply Liquid Road.
· #28 - Veteran's Trail
. Crack seal and apply Liquid Road.
Estimated Total
Alternate #2
.. #29 - Veteran's Trail
Crack seal and apply Liquid Road.
Estimated Total
Combined Total
Page 2
$ 1,000
.
$ 1,000
$ 1,000
$ 1,000
$ 2,000
$ 1,000
$ 3,500
$ 3,500
$ 500 ~')
$55,000
$ 9,000
$ 1,000
$10,000
$ 5,500
$ 5,500
$70;500
Plans and specifications will be prepared for each type of maintenance required, i.e., seal
coats, repairs, resurfacing, color coating and striping. Each lot or facility will be specifically 0
measured and accurately dimensioned to determine the estimated material quantities.
Page 3
)
Simultaneously, specifications will be developed along with your assistance concerning
insurance, performance bonds, construction schedule, and other items relevant to the
project. Prior to construction bidding, a pre-bid meeting will be conducted to inform all
bidders of the general intent of the plans and specifications and to answer any project
questions. At the bid opening our personnel will assist and provide bid tabulation forms.
When the low bidder has been determined, our personnel will check references and make
recommendations to the Owner or Owner's representative concerning the history and
reputation of the firm under consideration.
Construction Administration
When the project is authorized by the Owner, we will conduct and document the pre-
construction conference, review submittals, verify payment requests, prepare a
construction photo log, provide intermittent inspection as needed and full-time inspection
during bituminous plant mix placement. We will also conduct the pre-final and final
inspections, and obtain a signed and dated guarantee. At completion, the project progress
book, which includes both the Construction Documents and Construction Administration
records, will be presented to the Owner for future reference.
ENGINEERS FEES
We propose to prepare the Construction Documents and perform Construction
Administration services for a fee of $7,000.
')
REMARKS
We appreciate the opportunity to have met with you to discuss the proposed projects for
construction. Please review this proposal and if satisfactory, sign and return a copy as our
authorization to proceed. We appreciate your interest in our services and look forward to
working with you. If you have any questions concerning this proposal, or our services,
please call.
ACCEPTED BY:
BY:
TITLE:
DATE:
o
City of Hastings
Parks & Recreation
Department
920 W 10th St.
Hastings.A1N 55033
Ph: (651)480-6175
Fax: (651)437-5396
www.ci.hastibgs.mn.us
Aquatic Cenler
901 Maple St.
Ji[astings, MN 55033
Ph: (651) 480-2392
Fax: (651)437-5396
CiVIc Arena
"~Ol Redwing Blvd.
lstings,l\1N 55033
Ph: (651) 480-6195
Fax: (651)4374940
)
MEMO
Date: 2/27/06
To:
Dave Osberg, City Administrator
From:
Barry Bemstein, Parks and Recreation Director
Subject:
Skate Park Task Force
As you well know, the Skate Park Task Foree has been meeting for the past
several months to best determine an outcome and future of the Hastings Skate
Park.
The membership of the Skate Park Task Force involved community youth,
NRRC members, Council Representation and City Staff including myself.
This group has met monthly for the past five months.
During the meetings, the task force attempted to break down the skate park into
pn individual set of issues. Although each issue may be related, it was our
feeling that attempting to cure all the issues at onee would be counter
productive. Therefore, it was decided to break: down issues and address them
individually.
During the first meeting of the task force, we first examined a couple of issues.
I wanted to find out what the skate park is to our residents and some responses
were:
. New and experimental
· Hangout
. Outlet
. Challenge
. Big
. Cool
I then presented a question to the task force, the skate park was not? Here is
what was said:
· Easy to get to
· As negative as pereeived
. Used to its potential
Lastly, the question was presented, the skate park could be?
· Great Asset to the City and residents
. Success story
. Gathering spot
· Bigger and better
The Skate Park Task Force over the next several meetings focused its
discussion relating to the listed topics.
Services
Unorganized programs/services
Open user's boarders/in-line skaters and bikes
Organized programs
Camps
Clinics
Oril!:ination Structure:
Staff
Number ofstaff
Knowledge and skill of staff
Maintenance
Garbage
Maintenanee oframps
Fenee repair/vandalism
Location
GoodIBad
Isolated
Hard to get to
Quiet
Lots of room
Financial Performance:
Operation cost
Staff cost
Shelter rental cost
Income season pass/daily admission
Minimal season pass purchases
Minimal daily admissions purchased
Facility Rental.
Discussed, but no rentals have been pursued
~
Competition
Other skate Parks
Most other skate parks in the vicinity are tier 1 - do not have a fee
Private skate parks
Pay vs. free skate parks
Other Competition
Other activities
/ .
)
After discussing these topics, the Skate Park Task Foree decided to focus its
attention on the biggest issues oflocation and marketing which seemed to be
the overwhelming topics of all the task foree members.
2005 attendance fieures:
· Total attendance 466 (closed early)
· Approximately $1000 in revenue
If kept at same location:
· The possibility of utilizing Track bus to transport participants to and
from Skate Park.
· Place a servieeable building at this site that could offer shade,
coneessions and space to "Hang out".
· Promote, promote and promote
· Adjusting the atmosphere to attract participants (music)
· Moving equipment around to better facilitate the room within the park
· Minimize vandalism by video surveillanee of facility
· Lighting the skate park to maximize hours spring and fall
If the decision is to relocate the Dark:
· Evaluate/re-evaluate locations (YMCA, Lions Park, Con Agra and
school dist. Facilities). Attached is a letter from Hoisington Koegler
Group Inc.
· Do we not operate in 2006 to further examine the skate park operation
and location?
· Do we relocate Skate Park with tier 1 equipment and sell current
equipment?
· Discussions are in progress with the YMCA to possibly relocate the
skate park to the future YMCA. No particulars have been worked out
with the YMCA. The discussions have been very preliminary.
)
Opportunities:
· Possible new location (further examination needed)
Con Agra, Tom Thumb old site, Cooper school, YMCA, and
other sites?
· Service building to get out of heat and hang out or even teen center
There is room to the south of the equipment that possibly could
accommodate an adjacent building
· Light existing park for evening use
This could be done with limited costs
· Cover the existing park for more shade
Could be done, but would be expensive
· Use of security cameras to decrease vandalism
This would minimize most ifnot all issues with violations
· Using track bus to get younger people to park
Intriguing idea, but may mix ages of users
Obstacles:
. Funding for any improvement at skate park
. Investment cost for upgrades/possible relocation
· Uncertainty if improvements will attract more participants in current
location or potential new sites
Skate Park Task Force Recommendations:
After deliberating these issues for some time, the Skate Park Task Force would
like to make the following recommendations:
· Continue to explore the relocation of the current skate park to the future
YMCA and enter into a joint power agreement with the YMCA if
possible.
. l:or the 2006, season, remove and store the tier 2 equipment and have
j:R \i..v-tlothe tier 1 equipment available to use free of charge. The tier I .. .
f'o~-\i equipment could either be left in the current location or pref8f8ll1y ~1oLv1
[; moved to the hockey rink at Lions Park. I
· If the YMCA possibility does not proceed, continue to research other
opportunities for the future skate park.
. Sell the tier 2 equipment and purchase tier 1 equipment to be placed
around town.
Other nossibilities:
. Keep the skate park where it is and build a building adjacent to the
skate park to act as a teen center? Operate the park as it currently
operates with these enhancements.
. Enhance the existing facility with some sort of shade over the ramps.