Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutApril 5, 1979 / '\ \.J o 0 CITY of ANDOVER ~J 1685 CROSSTOWN BLVD, N.W, ANOKA, MINNESOTA 55303 (612) 755,5100 PARK/RECREATION COMMISSION MEETING - APRIL 5, 1979 AGENDA 1. Menkve1d Sketch Plans 2. Larry Bross - Sodervi11e Athletic Assoc. 3. Fence Purchase 4. Valley View Tree Removal 5. Park Commission proposed ordinance -, , , -.../ o o o 0 ~ 01 ANDOVER o ,. o PARK/RECREATION COMMISSION MEETING - APRIL 5, 1979 MINUTES The Regularly Scheduled Park/Recreation Commission Meeting was called to order by Chairman Mand at 7:30 p.m., April 5, 1979, at the Andover City Hall, 1685 Crosstown Blvd. N.W. Commission Members Present: Commission Members Absent: Also Present: Anderson, LeFebvre, Longbella, Meyer & Nichols Rogers Mayor Jerry Windschitl Harley Pritchett - Valley View Estates Jack Menkveld - Menkveld Sketch Plans Larry Bross - Soderville Athletic Assoc. VALLEY VIEW TREE REMOVAL Mr. Harley Pritchett presented slides showing the tree removal during the street construction in his area. The majority of the slides showed the lot next to him in which trees were buried; the slough where trees and brush were dumped and later removed upon order by the Conservation Dept., and where trees were buried at the base of the road. Mayor Windschitl expressed concern over whether or not trees were buried in the roadway surface. He did not have any closeup slides showing the park area before the trees were removed but stated there were quite a few large cedars in that area. Chairman Maud asked Mr. Pritchett if he knew how many trees were removed from the park. He stated he didn't know but it was a substantial number. Mr. Pritchett also mentioned they re-routed'a spring which eventually will revert back to its original course. Gary Longbella asked what price should be set on the lost trees. Chairman Mand stated it would be difficult to set a price as there are so many variables, ie., specie of tree, height, size, condition, etc. Sharon Anderson thought possibly 1/2 to an acre of solid trees were removed. Mayor Windschitl asked Mr. Pritchett to meet with the City Engineer prior to the soil borings in the road surface to show him where the trees were buried. At this time the Engineer could estimate the number of trees removed from the park, possibly with the use of aerial maps of the area. He also cautioned the Building Inspector not to issue any building permit for the barren lot (Lot 7, Block 5, Valley View Estates 2nd Add. ) until soil borings prove the soil conditions are stable. JACK MENKVELD SKETCH PLAN - GREEN ACRES Mayor Windschitl advised this area was given a blanket variance by the Town Board in 1970 or 1971 to change it from R-l to R-4 zoning. However, he was not sure this blanket variance included the area Mr. Menkveld plans on platting. Mr. Menkveld stated this area was considered unbuildable until city sewer was made available. Mayor Windschitl told the Commission that Mr. Menkveld tried to rezone this area to an R-3, but a previous City Council denied his request. Mr. Menkveld stated his father donated the existing park land before park dedication was required and asked that this park serve as park dedication for this area. Whether or not additional park land could be requested for an ~ddition to an old subdivision will be researched. If it is found that park dedication is required, lIT. Menkveld stated he would prefer to donate cash in lieu of land. The Commission felt, since this area is between two existing parks, Green Acres and Northwoods West, cash in lieu of land would be the best alternative. iO Park/Recreation C~~ssion -~'ril 5, 1979 Page #2 ;') \......; o JACK MENKVELD SKETCH PLAN - BUNKER. LAKE BLVD. AREA o This area is south of Red Oaks and zoned for multiples. Mr. Menkveld plans on building four-plexes and eight-plexes in this area. He advised the maximum population density would be 292 persons, but 150 - 225 would be a more realistic figure. Steve Nichols questioned the proposed park elevation since it is north of the ponding area for Red Oaks. Mr. Menkveld stated that location was selected because it contains oak trees - children like trees, the rest of the area is relatively free of trees. There' will be some soils relocated. Also, the City will be doing some dredging in the ponding area, according to Mr. Menkveld. Since multiple dwelling units tend to attract young families with small children, the Commission thought it best to place the park in a centrally located place and suggested the park be placed on the four northern interior lots of this sketch plan. Mr. Menkveld seemed very agreeable to this and stated he will redraw the plan. SODERVILLE ATHLETIC ASSOCIATION Larry Bross presented the Commission with a copy of their 1979 baseball-softball registration form which has a map of the area they cover on the back side. Each child is furnished a shirt and a hat. They had 850 children registered last year, 216 were Andover residents. As they are expecting a 25% increase in registration this year, they are requesting the use of Andover's playing fields. Unlike some other organizations, no one is denied; every- body gets a chance to play. They are also looking for help. Mr. Bross stated last year he spent 4 nights a week coaching. He then presented their 1978 financial statement and said 95% of the registration fee is put back into the program. The receipts and disbursements with regard to the Coaches dinner and picnic was explained to the Commission's satisfaction. They are all volunteers coaching many nights without pay and deserve a picnic and dinner. With a 25% increase in registration, they estimate they will need 25 parks, Monday through Thursday from 6:00 p.m. to 8-9:00 p.m. The season starts May 21st, the playoffs are July 16th with the championship games being held on July 18th. If enough parks are available, they would split into a north division and a south division which would result in time and gas savings. Mr. Bross was advised Northwoods East park has an existing backstop. Maintenance was then discussed. If, due to lack of City personnel or equipment failure, the Association would be more than willing to arrange to maintain the field. The existing Exclusive Use Procedure was then discussed. The only time the Lions Club is mentioned is where the user fee is waived. The Soderville Athletic Association could use the City Hall ballfield and Northwoods East Field under 3 A. - "First come, first served"... However, as a matter of courtesy, the Lions Club should be informed that the Soderville Athletic Association has requested the use of the City Hall field. Mr. Bross mentioned there is no beer involved since the Association is dealing entirely with minors. MOTION by Meyer, seconded by Nichols, to recommend the City Council allow the Soderville Athletic Association to use the Northwoods East Park and the City Hall ballfield for their softball and baseball program. Motion carried unanimously. Discussion: The Commission felt portions of Section 5 of the Exclusive Use Procedure is too restrictive and should be rewritten. At this point in time, some of the existing athletic organizations cannot afford the user fees. One suggestion was to put in a clause that organizations involving players under the age of 18 will not be charged a user fee. The present Exclusive Use Procedure is more suitable for highly populated areas such as Anoka where they have an actual Park Department and many tournaments. Also discussed was improving Northwoods East ballfield by adding crushed limestone on the playing surface. ~-) FENCE PURCHASE - CROOKED LAKE BOAT LANDING Chairman Mand advised Mr. HelIum told him this winter people used his drivewaYtwhich was plowedjand drove across his property in order to go ice fishing. Some of his trees were damaged. In the summer they drive on his property in order to turn their boat trailers around and also litter. It was thought the existing fence on the west side of the boat Park/Recreation c~ssion -C=;ril 5, 1979 Pag"e # 3 r '\ V o o landing was 42" high, 9 ga. Ray Sowada will be asked to check this out and then obtain three quotes from fencing companies. The length of the boat landing parcel is 250ft. Chairman Mand further stated Mr. HelIum was willing to empty trash barrels if they were placed in the boat landing, if the City provided plastic liners. Also mentioned was the barrels should be strongly secured to discourage theft. LAND ACQUISITION Chairman Mand advised three of the property owners at the north end of Crooked Lake were willing to sell their property at any time to the City on a Contract for Deed basis. Mr. Sloth does not plan on moving in the near future but, if and when he decides to relocate, he will give some consideration to selling his land to the City. The letter from the owner of the parcel north of City Hall was read to the Commission. He is willing to sell the 10 acres for $60,000.00. The Commission felt this price was exorbitant for landlocked property and decided to drop the matter at this time. ORDINANCE 10D Chairman Mand stated the City Council at their April 3rd meeting recommended many changes in this proposed amendment. The secretary offered to retype the amendment once the City Council minutes are available. PARK TOUR It was decided to hold a park tour sometime in May when the weather gets better. MOTION by Meyer, seconded by Anderson, to adjourn. Meeting adjourned 9:50 p.m. Respectfully submitted: ~q~ft!~ Secretary ~J to o o .." o o r- o o LAW OFFICES OF Burke and ..Hawkins 625 HIGHWAY 10 N.E BLAINE. MINNESOTA.. 55434 PHONE (612) 784-2998 JOHN M. BURKE WILLIAM G. H....WKINS April 11, 1979 \ Mr. Wesley G. Mand 3457 NW 141st Lane Anoka, Minnesota 55303 Re: Crooked Lake Land Purchase Dear Wes: I have contacted the real estate agent who has listed the property located on Crooked Lake and occupied by Mr. Ron Mehle. The background information supplied to me indicates that Mr. Mehle several years ago was purchasing this property on a contract for deed from a third party. That he defaulted in the payments with the contract being cancelled and the ownership remaining with the third party. Mr. Mehle thereupon requested DeGardner Realty to acquire the property from the third party, which they did. Certain improvements were made to the property and financed by DeGardner through a first mortgage with Knutson Mortgage Company. Mr. Mehle is merely renting the property, however DeGardner has indicated upon sale they would turn over to him all profits in excess of the mortgage and cost of sale. The current outstanding mortgage on the property is $37,900.00. DeGardner has indicated to me that they do not have sufficient funds at this time to payoff the mortgage in order to sell the property to the City on a contract for deed which is free and clear of all encumbrances. It would appear at this time that it would not be feasible for the City to acquire this piece of property without paying the total purchase price upon the closing. If you have any further questions, please contact me. Sincerely, William G. Hawkins COpy FOR YOUR ItIFORUADOU WGH/bm o o 0 ~ 01 ANDOVER o o PARK!RECREATION COMMISSION AGENDA - APRIL 5, 1979 1. Valley View Tree Removal 2. Menkve1d Sketch Plans 3. Larry Bross - Sodervi11e Athletic Assoc. 4. Park Commission proposed ordinance 5. Fence Purchase Valley View Trees - Someone will be present tonight to show slides of before and after. Dave Pil1atzke, engineer, stated they are waiting for it to get warmer before doing soil borings in the roads, the ground is still frozen in some p1acff; also he would like to see the slides and take the soil borings in these locations. Fence purchase - Wes quoted a price of $4.00 a foot, I think, the length of the parcel is 250 ft. CETA help - In order to obtain an adult CETA person to help work the streets and parks, the City must have an existing person being paid out of the City payroll at $3.21 per hour (not $3.50 or $3.15). The summer youth program is still going on. However, from past experience 14-15 yr. old kids usually do not want to work if they qualify for this program. Also, legally, they are not allowed to run any machinery, such as the tractors or chain saw. More on Valley View - Aztec and 172nd Ave. will not be blacktopped. They were constructed before blacktop was required on one acre lots. o " '\ \.J (J /~~ . c-) . --(Ie It S 'e. !:,(f-'J j e 1i e r- -fa tv e ~ <l- S -f e" €- I A., " e J IJ ,~is --fo PI'<fT:,J '\ N c (' tl. c s:- (6 ~') ~ ~ (( - ( , \.....) () o (0 /17-e nlbe f S 0 SS Art N c{ (Oo/n />1; Ii 'f . , " , ) '-~ -(.., ,,( 0<:; d { 's )I- @o 1'1 0 &' Ie lYe r ==::r e ("f' ~ G (' e e ib' {' e C' 'l? cue f -!Sf' () /)1 /}1/, [d cu id' c:l ~(, s f /~.j (IE r' 0 cu,v 6;C:Y ,to ~er e 1A r(le ( No r rA 0 ~ CE (-tl-., ~~ll t -r ~Cs~usseJ. pu rr:>hl).se 6~ 1t-\ 's ~A- I' (& ~ ( lu ~-rJ.\ /ll (' C r ~ c rJ 0 t: G\- e € 1'-- ~ ~ '?- ( t ~ it f~ J /1.e f' ere (~ eA-. l-e ~ e '\ 0 i\-+ e. IIz A )" ~ l\. l i) R 7 9 ~ I' C /VI 11'1 (' ~ p " "v d L~. V' /tv J l' ~ A- + I ~ j 'P c.J (' Q 1\ Ii S C( P r, l ~ ~ f\, -\-- , ~, ~ () I 0 6~ c. -'\. ~{~ \~ /Yl. () r ~ d. \$ e \.) b S (0 ^-.J lA..J (tl /ll r- c: (' e e /'..J /fs , 00, <!:l\I~{lV",. hi "s (" I ~ fl is , Iv 0 + LV ,o--H\ J ^"' I'"' -e fJ So >\.J IJ- 1'1..-1 J .5 j I (f le/ e. () I\., s,;.l ~,t' c (I I~ Nee. '- <s ~ (j r If c.!c~-/;c ~ (A- fJv J' . ff +- Q tt J /i tl- (( u-' J t ^-' )..l <? OJ J QUe.. L~, f 1'2 lile iV T -J- 0 7h-=e ;"-/ ,7 / 17f If I' ( P d.r'L.(j f ~ s e. J. Lie.&: r, ;) (6hl}l~/>!tJN '\ G'leA/ ;Loqet" " .\ '--J , ) u r '\ V ~---------_. --.," ," !lr. JC.r.33 J. G::eon Ib.J.l ty (Uo=1d Green r.~~lty . 420llic::' -!-iain Street-'.'.. 'Anolm, llinneGot:l.5530) Ib.rch 17, 1979 u () ..\' -." . , - 0" ....1.--:.... !E: 10 acra prcal 1ocitod ['.djac~::t to Andc':er C~ty Hall'" .Andovc=, l1innccota . ,. [':::a:: 11r. Green: ?hia in in rcnponS3 to yo~r intc~c~t in p~r~h~ning the 10 acre parcel citttJ.tci in !mo!n Cel1nty, C!:ty of ".:cdover, r::.r:nezota. r,:l.te1y, there npp::3.r::; to bo c:,~::;ic1o:':1ble interect.and activity in i1entif.;:in~ lar:i thJ.t i3 fo::: ::2..10 <::.'d. c:lit2.bJe for'iuilding. The 10 c.cre3 tha.t. <:ro aV.:l.2.blo fer c:110 fJ.ll in thic catogory, ! en prcpJ.rci to offer 7hin offer i3 cood for 12:00 oidnight. thin land for c:J.lc at the price of $60,000. 21 d~YG and !:ill m:plroon Ap:-il 6, 1979. ~aru~ you for your interect in thic natter. . / . ( \ '" ~jv _ ' ).P.\ Z;"\ Sir::crely YOl.\f' V . "\\ b- (l.k . rf1 \ Q.-r;_~~ \7' X1~1('~Ml \ I::lI,:>.rJ h. Sp~ndlcr \ n... 1 E v 01, ~ I H.. .. :J.\. V-r I Dee::.- P2.r:~, I?a.shington 99006 .----_._-'-,- - ..--- /' / / I ,. , u ('-' J (I.-iT ollJ.fNlf!JO VIER (, v o MEMORANDUM ,'-, '-...j TO: Mayor and Council COPIES TO: City Attorney & City Clerk FROM: Assessment Clerk DATE:: 4-3-79 REFERENCE: Assessments on Crooked Lake Property - Sanitary Sewer Mary Clark - 2938 Bunker Lake Blvd. N.W. - Plat #66092 - Parcel #250 Total Assessment: $2750.00 Due with 1979 Taxes: $199.78 Pay-off Balance: $2639.27 Merl HelIum - 2930 Bunker Lake Blvd. N.W. - Plat #66092 - Parcel #100 Same as Mary Clark's Ron Mahle - 2944 Bunker Lake Blvd. N.W. - Plat #66092 - Parcel #50 Paid in full 3-7-78. Same as Mary Clark's. Arthur.Sloth - 13624 Gladiola St. N.W. - Plat #67500 - #2810 Total Assessment: $8815.00 Due with 1979 Taxes: $640.40 Pay-off Balance: $8460.02 The above figures are good until 11-15-79. ~ , '-..j Metropolit.Q. Paf~ and Open Sp~~e eommission ~4'{1 !m 300 Metro Square Building Seventh and Robert Streets Saint Paul, Minnesota 55101 612/291-6401 April 2, 1979 To: Interested Parties You are invited to comment in person or FY 1980 local park grant applications. the Land and Water Conservation program Commission on Minnesota Resources. in writing on the review criteria for These include federal funding under and state funding from the Legislative The Metropolitan Council is responsible for approving or disapproving acquisition grants according to priorities of the Regional Recreation Open Space Policy Plan. This year, as in the past, the Council will rank all projects as its recommenda- tion for funding to State Planning Agency. As an advisory body to the Metropolitan Council, the Metropolitan Parks and Open Space Commission is in the process of developing project review criteria. A copy of the proposed criteria is attached. These will be discussed at the Commission Meeting on Monday, April 16, 1979 in: Metropolitan Council Chambers 300 Metro Square Building Seventh and Robert Streets St. Paul, Minnesota 3:00 p.m. The criteria concerning the eligibility and priorities of applications from the general rural use and commercial agricultural areas will not be discussed by the Commission. This Development Framework Policy issue will be discussed by the Physical Development Committee at its meeting on May 3, 1979, with Metropolitan Council adoption of recommendations on May 10, 1979. We welcome your comments and recommendations at the Commission meeting on April 16, 1979.' If you wish to appear in person, please call in at 291-6401 and you will be listed on the agenda. If you wish to send written comments, please address them to the Metropolitan Parks and Open Space Commission, 300 Metro Square Building, St. Paul, Minnesota 55101. After considering all inp11t, the Commission will forward its recommendations on project revie~ criteria to the Metropolitan Council for adoption May 10. The State Planning Agency will send these criteria, along with an information packet on application procedures, to every local unit of government in the Metropolitan Area the week of ~my 15. Encl. t;;;i,~ Elliot Perovich Chairman ~) Established by the Minnesota Legislature as an agency of the Metropolitan Council ... o o o o C) METROPOLITAN COUNCIL 300 Metro Square Building, Saint Paul, Minnesota 55101 ME M 0 RAN DUM March 28, 1979 TO: Metropolitan Parks and Open Space Commission FROM Parks and Open Space Staff, Phyllis Hanson SUBJECT: FY 1980 LAWCON/LCMR Schedule and Criteria I. Authoritv to Review Applications for federal Land and Water Conservation Funds (LAWCON) and state Legislative Commission on Minnesota Resouro:es (LCMR) grants fall under the provisions of Office of Management and Budget Circular A-95. This circular requires that applications by the local governmental units for federal cate- gorical aids be submitted to the regional clearinghouse for review and comment as to consistencv of the local application with regional plans. Th~etropol~- tan Counc~l has been designated as the A-95 review clearinghouse in the Metropolitan Area. The Metropolitan Council Act of 1967, Chapter 473.181, Subd. 2, has expanded this A-95 review and comment authority to approving or disapproving acquisition contracts according to plan and priorities of the Regional Recreation Open Space Policy Plan. II. Process/Schedule The LAWCON/LCMR grant program is the only federal and state categorical funding source for local parks. The Council has the responsibility to approve or disapprove acquisition grants. In addition, the Council ranks all projects and makes recommendations for funding to State Planning Agency. State Planning Agency has the responsibility for administration of the grants. A coordinated approach is taken becwe~n State Planning Agency and the Metro- politan Council for this process. A brief summary of this approach is: * The Metropolitan Parks and Open Space Commission recommends grant appli- cation review criteria, * The Physical Development Committee recommends and the 11etropolitan Council adopts grant application review criteria. State Planning Agency and Metropolitan Council receive applio:ations. Joint agency staff site visits, independent agency ranking, staff joint recommended ranking. Metropolitan Parks and Open Space Commission,Physical Development Committee recommends and the Metropolitan Council adopts project rankings. Recommendations sent to State Planning Agency for funding. * * * * This year State Planning Agency is proposing to mail applications ~AY 15 with applications due on June 29. With these proposed dates, staff recommends the following schedule: * April 2: Commission review of criterta. * April 16: Public meeting by the Commission for applicants' input, * April 30: Commission adoption of the criteria. 0 * May 3 : Physical Development Committee action on criteria, * May 10: Metropolitan Council action on criteria. o o o o - 3 - o What should priorities be for funding of "eligible" rural applications? 1) Rural town centers have priority over general rural use or commercial agriculture areas. 2) Rural town centers and passive general rural use con- sidered together have priority over active general rural use and commercial agriculture. 2. Investment Framework/Allocation by Planning Area: For the past four years the available funding has been allocated by the four planning areas (Fully Developed, Area of Planned Urbaniza- tion, Freestanding Growth Centers, and Rural Areas. This allocation has been based o~ a formula of 601. population and 401. fiscal effort/ tax base. The f~scal effort/tax base factor includes average assessed val~tion per capita of each planning area, target assessed value, and m~ll rates for each planning area. The policy area shares, based on the population/fiscal effort formula have fluctua7ed a g:eat deal in the four years it has been applied. ' The formula ~s par7~cularly sensitive to changes in average assessed values for the pol~cy areas and to changes in the target assessed value, Table 1 shows what the shares were for 1976 through 1979 based on the formula. (The Metropolitan Council modified the alloca- tion shares from the formula last year, 1978.) The rural area was allocated 6% or a_maximum of $100,000 for each of the years with its share taken from the Freestandin~-9~Qw~n_Centers.. B, TABLE 1 FORHULA DISTRIBUTION OF LAWCON/Lcmt FUNDS BY POLICY AREA Policv Area ('78 Adopted 1976 1977 1978 Allocation) Fully Developed 38% 491. 46% ( 49%) Area of Planned Urbanization 38'7. 30'7. 37'7. (34%) Free-standing Growth Centers 24'7. 21% 17'7. (17%) 1979 49'70 28'7. 23'7~ In 1976 there was a 1arl;e shift to the Fiiily'Oevelo-ped. Area 'beca:~-=- new property base data indicated significant increases in assessed values in all areas. This necessitated the choice of a new target assessed value per capita for the region, Small changes in this target value can cause significant shifts in the policy area shares, In 1978 policy area definitions were changed, adding six communities to the fully developed area and subtracting them from the area of Planned Urbanization. In 1979 the Area of Planned Urbanization share was reduced significantly because assessed values in those communities grew more rapidly than in the other t'NO, (This may be largely due to new construction being assessed at full value.) The fiscal portion of the formula seems to cause too much fluctuation in policy area shares and, therefore, does not appear to be the best tool for the policies for which it was designed. It was intended to be used to account for differences in need and/or fiscal ability between policy areas. A more direct measure of park needs is prefer- able and should replace the fisca~measure in policy area share determinations. o The result of the fiscal formula (assessed value/capita and mill rate) is a function of historical trends. Older o:ommunit1es developed their financing plans before levy limits, etc., and thus placed a much greater reliance on the general ad valorum levy. Newer communities are faced with financing services within the o:onfines of general ad valorum levy limitations imposed by the Legislature, The result is that general levies in the Area of Planned Urbanization are substantially lower than in the older community policy planning areas (Fully Developed Areas and Freestanding Gro'iilth' Centers)., o o o o o - 5 - In 1978 (FY 1979), of the nine projects funded in the Fully Developed Area, one grant was for $200,000 with the average being $134,454. Of the ten projects funded (FY 1979) in the areas of Planned Urbaniza- tion, six were over $92,000 with the average being $84,932. Of the four projects in the Freestanding Growth Centers, only one grant was $100,000, with $48,000 being the average. . It is staff opinion that the $100,000 grant maximum should be increased to $150,000 in the area of Planned Urbanization. The grant maximum has not increased in the past four years while land and construction costs have increased dramatically. The result is projects being cut in Area of Planned Urbanization and phased over more years without completing the park. Staff opinio~ is, based on the type, size, and financial resource available to match grants, and historical overview of applica- tions, that the $100,000 is adequate in theFreest~ndin~~~wth Centers and R11ral Areas. 5, Quality of Projects: Staff recommends the criteria relating to project quality be retained for this year. This recommendation is: That a project must receive 60% or more of the available project'review points to be considered for funding. (60% is the suggested "quality threshold",) The staff will review the suitability of the 60% after reviewing the applications and may recommend appropriate adjustments. 6. Lake Access: Staff of State Planning Agency, DNR, and Metropolitan Parks and Open Space Commission have been jointly working on a water ao:cess strategy, As part of this program, responsibilities are beinll: identified for providing access to the various lakes. Included in this are priority lakes for which LAWCON/LCMR funds should be used for the development of water access. Therefore, staff is recommending that any application for boat launches on these lakes be given priority for funding in the appropriate planning areas. B. Project Review Criteria It is staff opinion that the project review criteria utilized for FY 1979 addresses the major areas that should be evaluated. However, the criteria should be weighted differently to better reflect the priority or importance of the elements. Basically, the FY 1979 criteria are in four areas: * Need o * Site Suitability/Design * Ability to Utilize (local ability to maintain and program the facility) * Other Factors (Special Emphasis: Community Planning, Fiscal Effort, etc.) These four areas were "weighted" differently in 1978 according to planning area. It is staff opinion that the affect of this varied weighting was minimal, if any. Staff recommends that 1) The points of various criteria can be a more effective method of ranking projects and 2) A stronger emphasis (more points proportionately) on need and site suitability/design. Also, it is staff opinion to delete criteria which result in the same number or relatively little difference of points for each community in a planning area, Therefore, these criteria in the past have reflected no variation in the ranking. A breakdown of the FY 1979 criteria and staff recommendations for FY 1980 for commission and public input is attached. o o o o () - 6 - RECOMMENDATIONS 1. That funds be allocated by planning area based on: Fully Developed Areas Area of Planned Urbanization 49'7. 34i. lli. 6i. (Max. $100,000) Freestanding Growth Centers Rural Area 2. That housing performance be applied as one-third weight in the final staff rankings. 3. That there be a grant maximum of $200,000 in the Fully Developed Area, $150,000 in the Area of Planned Urbanization, and $100,000 in the Freestanding Growth Centers and Rural Area. 4, That there be a limit of one grant per community in all areas but the Fully Developed Area. S. That in the event any Policy Planning Area has unused funds after all quality projects (over 60i.) are funded, the excess shall be redistributed to the other planning areas in proportion to the Policy Area Allocation Percentages (No, 1 above). 6, That the recreation criteria be applied and that a project must receive 60i. or more of the available points to be considered for funding. * 7. That the recommended project review criteria in this staff memo serve as the basis for the recreational criteria ranking, 8. That suitable applications for boat launches on lakes or rivers with inadequate access be given priority for funding. (Note: The list of lakes or rivers with inadequate aco:ess is being prepared by a joint Metropolitan Council-DNR-State Planning Agency Task Force, together with appropriate guidelines for development and operation of boat launches. This list and the guidelines will be provided as part of the pre-application package to be mailed to potential applicants in mid-May. ) * Sixty percent is the suggested "quality threshold", Because this is a new factor, the staff will evaluate the suitability of the sixty percent "cut-off" after reviewing the applications and may recommend appropriate adjustments. o o c,9y of ANDOVER 0 o o M E M 0 RAN 0 U M TO: Mavor and City Council City Clerk CO PI ES TO: FROM: Park/Recreation Commission DATE:: April 12, 1979 REFERENCE: Soderville Athletic Association The following motion was made at the April 5th Park/Recreation Commission meeting and is for your consideration: MOTION by Meyer, seconded by Nichols, to recommend the City Council allow the Soderville Athletic Association to use the Northwoods East Park and the City Hall ballfield for their softball and baseball program. Motion carried unanimously. The Lions Club signed a three year lease for the City Hall ballfield in 1976 which expires this year. Please refer to the Park/Recreation Commission's minutes for details. ?~ 7;1~6V',.0 Wes Mand, Chai man Park/Recreation Commission rb o . o o o 4C\--,Q , . TO: Members of the And~ver.City Council FROM: Soderville Athletic Association (0 SUBJECT: Andover City Park ball field and Field at 140th and Yukon We are in desperate need of ballfields to play on. We had over 800 children playing ball last year and approximately 200 of them are from Andover. We are projecting an increase in total participation of 25% or 1000 children. Last year we played on 22 ball fields {public and private} 4 nights a week {Monday - Thursday} from 6:00 P.M. until the game is finished. With the increase in participation we are asking the city council to give us anl"exclusive use" permit for Andover City Park Ballfield and the field at 140th and Yukon for Monday - Thursday/ 6:00 P.M. until games are completed. The fields will be used from about May 1 until the season ends about July 28. If we are allowed the "exclusive use" permit, we would like the City Councilor the Andover Lions to help us in the following areas: 1. 140th and Yukon field/no problems other than cutting the grass on the field. Will attempt to install a lock box for bases/umpires equipment. Could use a litter barrel. 2. Andover City Ballpark a. Install or have available a "lock box" or place to store the bases/umpires equipment for field. b. A portable satellite. c. One or two 55 gallon litter cans/barrels. d. Monitor/cut the grass as needed. e. Bleachers/place for parents to sit. We will make use of the fields 4 nights a week. We will pick up after every ball game and keep fields clean of litter. We will provide the routine maintenance. We will attempt to have teams from Andover assigned to play majority of games on the fields. Attached is a copy of our financial statement, a registration form and on the back, the area the S.A.A. encompasses. Also a tentative schedule of the fields being used, teams playing on them, and who has direct juris- diction over the fields. The Andover Park Committee gave us their approval to use the fields on Andover Lion's approval. We hope we have your approval also. Thank You, ~ G"--Sl U~\<:" ~ Larry Bros~ Soderville Athletic Association /ah 5 (.) '\ A U~'l . (;) D\..:. rz. \J 1l.-.(---tE. TH /" E?T I c n-ys It/ . /'1? 7 - -----r ~\ ~~ B,4 S-'G e,..q, (. - so pr 8 A '-'t... S e:;. /,II!!U~ U l, e c.oo=: .. "\ ,-~j F/Gl.-.C f ~ '3 G..o05f'5 ~ 1-1- CI~'t 0' ~I'IWJ t..!l-Mtr E - C l"t'! t:JI,r 611"1 t36TH& I. ,0) Go lory or- t111J 00 tlB1t. 0'- ,-o~AJ'HI P Oft' (QI11L '(;. fl()1J6 $_- ~ eHcoL p P'lZ-f V~;-e fCf G LI> ~ X - 1lJ~ p., tEe.. () S fl. ~/rz."S' c.,n" p p c::; I rt '- S P ~ IR.c..S Px S N oT"e' p".1t'''f'~iI $T,4/1)1 ../., J n. Boy,) - / a- ,6 fll"Il , s,y", ~ON ~TI'J."" ~ I~I ,,(t. C /fl,(, S - It. 7"'s 19M s ~el't~oN ~NOS "/~1 f1 S ' NO ~IJ,"~~ gCY,) 0 PT ~^ Co L.. ~ Tr$lIms ;1IJ /'r 'f _ .... ,.. 52 G.ffZ.C.S.~T6ItntS Vl.Jt.V-'1 3ft. B-oys- !"Tce"ms :t N'S71tuc:.7/ON,9' lIo,,/s- J3 ~""'S ZN" TfJueTION"'- C:'rus ..~ "V"..s P.S. Ray is ~ to getf;day quotes on fence for Boat ~r---linr'1e end of May to save money by the ~ insta~ ~. ~e ~~al is for the Cit~ h~a replacement for Bob. ~I .,.. 01 ANDOVERHe can't erect fence alone. d'Arcy is redoing Ord. #lOD ,-- , , J ......- M E M 0 RAN DUM TO: COPIES TO: FROM: DATE:: Park/Recreation Commission R. Bakke April 30, 1979 Miscellaneous REFERENCE: 1. Minute approval - March 1 and April 5 minutes need approving. 2. Scandanavian sketch plan - this developer will be present. He won't have copies of the sketch plan until tomorrow, Tues. He is proposing 1 acre lots directly across Pine Hills, east of Hughes Industrial Park. This will have to be rezoned, etc. Believe he is a bit premature on this but he wanted to be on agenda anyway. 3. Hawk Ridge park lease - Enclosed is a request to lease the park by a different person. Have received no request from 1IT. Linton to grow alfalfa on it this year. Most of the lots have been sold surrounding the park, possibly you might feel this is the last year it can be leased. 4. Needed equipment now are: 1. 2. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. A spare tennis court net in case the one we have is vandalized or stolen. A set of bases, especially if Northwoods park is going to be used by the Soderville A.A. Lock boxes for bases. A gas weed eater, cost shared between building maintenance and park, approx. cost of $225.00 A small power mower would be nice in addition to weed eater. Sand pointspurchased and placed in Northwoods, both parks, and near tennis court at City Hall. If the fire department decides to use Northwoods as a well site, the sand point can be removed and relocated. Toilet rental - here at City Hall and if Soderville A.A. uses Northwoods West, one there. 5. Committee reports - if any. Wes has talked to some people re grants, etc. 6. Summer school - Nancy Hagman will be here about 9:00 to report on the summer school program. 7. Proposed Park Ordinance - P & Z has sent it back to Park/Rec. They feel it is o.k. and it is up to the Park Board to decide whether or not to spell out the exclusive use procedure. I am definitely against spelling it out. It is absolutely unworkable. Somehow I became the field scheduler the last couple of weeks. It says ') nothing about practie.e. A Brownie troop is using the softball field Thurs. from '-~ 6:30 to about 7:30, they are playing a mother/daughter kick ball. Need a break to get bases back in garage. Suggest a committee be formed to redo the exclusive use so someone can understand it. Can't see charging a Brownie troop money to play kickball for one hour. Then it gets referred to the City Attorney.