Loading...
11-24-2003 (Joint meeting with Environmental Commission)r 03 alley OPEN SPACE & RECREATION COMMISSION and GOLDEN VALLEY ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION Joint Meeting Golden Valley City Hall, 7800 Golden Valley Road Council Conference Room Monday, November 24, 2003 7:00 PM CALL TO ORDER Sandler called the meeting to order at 7:02 p.m. and asked those present to introduce themselves. ROLL CALL Present: Open Space and Recreation Commission - Jerry Sandler, Chuck Cahill, Liz Elder, Jim Johnson, Roger McConico, Tom Kuelbs, Tom Zins, Lance Ness; Environmental Commission — Rich Baker, John Giese, Sue Hess, Dawn Hill, Alan Kuentz, Sara Peterson; Others — Sherri Buss, Bonestroo, Rosene and Anderlik, Jim Abbott Ladner, Ken Huber, Clare Huber, Bob Provost, Jeff Scherer, and John Wiese City Staff: Jeannine Clancy, Director of Public Works; Rick Jacobson, Director of Parks and Recreation; Jeff Oliver, City Engineer; Al Lundstrom, Environmental Coordinator; Tom Klatt, Public Works Maintenance Manager Absent: Environmental Commission — Joel Wessman; Open Space and Recreation Commission — Jim Vaughan Joint Meeting INDIVIDUAL COMMISSION APPROVAL OF MINUTES — October 27, 2003 EC No Changes. MOTION: Moved by Kuentz, seconded by Peterson, to approve the minutes of the October 27, 2003 meeting as submitted. Motion carried unanimously. OSRC No Changes. MOTION: Moved by Kuelbs, seconded by McConico, to approve the minutes of the October 27, 2003 meeting as submitted. Motion carried unanimously. TRAIL PAVING POLICY DISCUSSION - Presented by South Tyrol Hills Neia_hborhood Association Sandler stated that the plan for the meeting was for the South Tyrol Hills Neighborhood Association to present information regarding the City's trail policy, followed by a question and answer session, and discussion by both Commissions. 1 J .lp Jim Abbott Ladner, President of the South Tyrol Hills Neighborhood Association, addressed the group regarding the City's trail paving policy. He stated that the Association decided to comment on the policy because of their opposition to paving a trail in their neighborhood (originally scheduled for this past fall). Ladner distributed two handouts. Bob Provost spoke on behalf of Bruce Tabor. Provost stated that Tabor is concerned about the costs associated with paving and maintaining a trail versus alternative procedures. Ladner commented that, in speaking with the experts the Neighborhood Association had contacted, usage of trails should be considered. Ken Huber stated that he surveyed residents in his neighborhood affected by the proposed trail. He noted that the results of this survey had been submitted to City Hall, and that he had brought additional copies if anyone wished to look at them. Huber listed his survey findings: ➢ citizens desire to be involved; ➢ residents want to be notified of what's going on in their community; ➢ accessibility is not an absolute (i.e., people may be satisfied with a given level, and are willing to compromise); ➢ people want a natural setting; ➢ people want choices; and ➢ residents want to know details about costs. Jeff Scherer spoke about erosion and aesthetic options to bituminous trails. He referenced a report from the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources that states that gravel is less expensive than asphalt over the life of a trail. He continued that the State of California has requested gravel trails for three of their projects to reduce dependency on foreign oil and to reduce the "heat sink" from asphalt. Scherer stated that ambience is important, and shouldn't have a dollar value placed on it, as well. He asked Commission Members to incorporate provisions to account for aesthetics when considering policies. Ladner distributed out three additional handouts. Sandler thanked the Association for their presentation. He stated that it should be clarified that the Commissions make recommendations to Council, but do not make policy decisions. He continued that a lot of the topics presented by the Neighborhood Association have already been considered and discussed in the past. Kuentz asked Ladner if the Association had reached a conclusion as to what they would like to see done with their trail. Ladner responded they had not because they are unsure what the trail policy will be. Scherer added that the Association does not want to be construed as a "lobbying effort," but are looking for a broad enough policy to take into account community interests. Hill said she thought that paving is considered to be the City's policy, and that this is a "done deal." She asked for clarification on whether or not this policy is firm. Clancy responded that it has been staffs practice to discuss trails and paving with the Open Space & Recreation Commission. The Council subsequently makes a decision on the Capital Improvement Program, which has included funding for paving trails. She continued that the City's sidewalk policy had been amended to include trails. Sandler asked for clarification on the contradicting cost analyses. Clancy replied that the City looks at its own cost analysis based on what the City has experienced in the past. She asked Tom Klatt, Public Works Maintenance Manager, and Sherri Buss of Bonestroo to comment. Clancy continued that it is difficult to take a document from a different state without looking at how it relates specifically to your situation. Buss noted that at the end of the Wisconsin study (reference page 35), there is a discussion about what the State will pay for, and how costs will be funded. The discussion also states 2 t that limestone will be used in rural areas, but that trails in urban areas will be paved because pavement provides for a wider spectrum of users. Buss continued that costs have to be weighed along with user access. Scherer asked if this trail would be plowed to allow for four -season access. Buss asked if he was referring to trails in general or the trail in his neighborhood. Scherer re -stated, asking about plowing the trail in his neighborhood, as an example. Klatt responded that trails with points connecting one area to another area are regularly plowed. Scherer asked if this trail qualifies. Klatt stated that it would be considered because the trail connects two neighborhoods to a local park. Clancy added that the City's experience has been that after a trail is paved, several walking clubs in the community have specifically requested that the trail be maintained in the winter as it is utilized to walk through parks. Klatt listed additional trails as examples. Ladner commented that trucks (for maintenance) cause more damage to paved surfaces than gravel surfaces; and stated that gravel surfaces can be repaired easier, quicker and more cheaply than asphalt surfaces. He continued that the pros and cons of any given trail can be debated, but that the point of this discussion should be on whether or not the City's policy should have flexibility for individual situations. Buss stated that there are two types of impervious surface; one that connects to the storm drain system and one that does not. Regardless of what surface is decided upon, runoff will be created. Typically, park trails do not have to be connected to the storm drain system. Buss continued that one thing that could be added to the City's policy is to include a recommendation that park trails not be connected to the storm drain system. She added that trails can be designed so that runoff is infiltrated by the dirt on either side of the trail. McConico addressed Scherer's comment about all Golden Valley trails being the same 20 years from now, and thus this means that the City's trail policy did not work. McConico said that the City's trail policy does work, by Scherer's definition, because all trails in Golden Valley are not the same. Oliver discussed storm water erosion. Scherer stated that a large portion of the erosion that would occur in the South Tyrol Trail area would be diverted by the heavy tree canopy and new curb. Oliver responded that, when calculating storm water runoff, there is no difference in the amount of runoff from a treed site versus an open site in residential areas. He continued that an 8 -foot wide gravel trail with steep slopes has far more potential for erosion and sediment transport. Kuentz asked what type of erosion is currently happening. Klatt replied that ag-lime trails (in the City) with steep grades will sheet drain for a while, but then begin to channelize and create deep ruts. Klatt expressed concerns about the City's potential liability with these types of conditions, and other issues related to maintenance of ag-lime and gravel trails. Ness called attention to the City's draft sidewalk/trail policy and two subsequent revisions. He asked if these revisions were staff recommendations. Clancy responded that this is correct. Ness asked the Neighborhood Association if they have seen this draft. Ladner replied that they have. Ness asked if the Association has a problem with certain sections of the draft. Ladner responded that they do; and that they recommend that the policy be broader and include additional criteria. He added that the Association had come up with their own recommendations. Jacobson noted that the Association's recommendations were included in the Commissions' packets. Ness continued, asking if he was correct in understanding that, with the exception of perhaps including more public input, why the Association couldn't live with Section 5 of the proposed policy. Ladner answered that the Association could live with the policy if it were adopted; however, they think it's better for the City if additional criteria were considered. He continued that historical and cultural concerns should be considered. Wiese stated he did not want the South Tyrol Trail paved. He feels maintenance concerns did not warrant much credence, as there have been no problems with the non -paved trail in the past. M 1 1 1 Peterson felt aesthetics are a valid point, and different options should be considered. She asked if staff has had feedback about trails in the City. Clancy stated that support has been positive, and has not heard any negative comments. Klatt added that he had not received any negative feedback about any of the trails the City has paved in the last four years. Clancy mentioned receiving positive comments from people pushing children in strollers, those who walk with elderly relatives and those with visual (and other physical) impairments. Ladner stated that his blind brother would rather have a natural trail for aesthetic reasons. Scherer stated that the South Tyrol Trail is too steep for people with disabilities to utilize. Clancy replied that staff is aware that requirements for disability access are not met as regards the South Tyrol Trail, but that the discussion on access by those with disabilities pertained to the trail policy in general, not this specific trail. Scherer stated that if the South Tyrol Trail is paved, the City is setting an expectation that the trail will be available for its intended purpose. Baker asked what the City's responsibility is pertaining to liability, and if the City has ever received a claim. Klatt replied that he had spoken with the City's insurance adjuster about this matter. The adjuster stated that if the City offers a service such as a trail, it is the City's responsibility to maintain that service. Clancy stated that the City has likely had a claim in the past. Zins stated he would feel better about the discussion if he didn't feel that it was so driven by the Neighborhood's concerns about paving their particular trail, and instead was more general in context. He continued that he prefers to keep all of the City's parks and trails as accessible as possible to the majority of the people. Zins added that sometimes this thinking does not sit well with a particular neighborhood. Zins said that the suggestions from the Association were appreciated, but that the (Open Space & Recreation) Commission's concerns should be driven by making the best possible surface for the larger community. He continued that he does not see the down side of paving this trail with asphalt, and feels the Association is trying to discourage, rather than encourage, trail use. Ladner responded that the Association would like to encourage trail use, but would also like having variety in trail surfaces (i.e., natural versus asphalt). Scherer stated that the Neighborhood actually bought the park, so it should be noted that the park is wanted. He was offended by, and disagreed with, Zins' comments. Giese feels that the Commissions have an opportunity (with this discussion) to accept neighborhood input towards setting policies. He continued that the City should be willing to have variances to enable neighborhoods to have choices that differ from set policies. McConico responded that the City has trails that are not asphalt, so variances obviously already exist. He addressed Scherer, stating that at a previous meeting, the Neighborhood Association had in fact said that they did not want teenagers partying in this area, or vagrants walking through this area. Scherer retorted that this is a universal statement. McConico said that the meeting was supposed to discuss environmental and aesthetic aspects of this policy, and asked why these topics were not brought up at the first meetings regarding this trail. Scherer did not respond. Baker restated that the Council had asked the Commissions to comment on staff's recommendations as regards the trail and sidewalk policy. He said that the Commissions have not been asked to comment on this particular project, and as such, will not be commenting on this project. He thanked the Association for their comments related to the trail policy, but regrets the extent of the discussion that dealt specifically with South Tyrol Trail. Baker added that he would like variety in the trail policy. Final comments were made, and the discussion was wrapped up. Id IV. UPDATE ON TH 55/1300NE AVENUE FLOODPLAIN MITIGATION EAW Clancy said that the final draft of the Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) for the TH 55/Boone Avenue project has been prepared and presented to the City Council. The Council authorized staff to distribute the EAW for comments. Copies are available on the City's website, at the Public Safety Building, from the Public Works Department and at the Golden Valley branch of the Hennepin County Library. If any Commission Member wishes to review or receive a copy, please contact staff in the Public Works Department. Written comments are due by December 26, 2003, and should be submitted to Jeannine Clancy. The Public Hearing will be held on January 20, 2004 at 7 pm. All questions should be directed to Clancy. Sandler asked what the timeframe is for Commission comments on the trail policy. Clancy replied that a specific date was not given, but that it was hoped that the discussion would wrap up so that the current Council could consider the matter. Jacobson added that originally early November was to be the deadline, but this ended up being too premature to allow adequate time for comments. He continued that this date has since been pushed back, and it was hoped comments would be available for the December 16 Council meeting. Clancy stated that Buss had prepared a memo responding to the Neighborhood Association's materials, and distributed it to the Commission Members. The Commissions broke into their own respective groups at 8:50 pm to continue individual commission agenda topics. Individual Open Space and Recreation Commission Meeting 1. TRAIL PAVING POLICY Kuelbs explained that as a City, he feels we need to be more specific about when and where to use asphalt, such as when the grades become excessive. Kuelbs feels that it's best for overall use to construct these areas with a harder surface, rather than one that could wash out. In reference to the alternative materials that were discussed, Zins asked Oliver if there were practical alternatives to asphalt. Oliver explained that they have looked at alternative materials and taken them into consideration. Oliver explained that there are pro's and con's to all of them. Oliver also explained that a lot of the alternative materials discussed, require well drained soil beneath them, which is uncommon in Golden Valley with so much clay. The commission then discussed the suggested criteria from the South Tyrol Neighborhood Association memo dated October 27, 2003. McConico expressed that he feels that the topographic language should be incorporated. McConico asked Oliver how he thinks the item should be worded. Oliver stated that he would word it similar to what the pavement management programs says, which is a maximum and minimum grade. Jacobson pointed out that Buss also discussed grade levels in her document dated November 24, 2003. Klatt added that he feels the policy should address grade levels. He feels that it's truly an issue. Klatt also said that sloped ag-lime and gravel trails with a 12-15% grade require a lot of regular maintenance, especially when it rains. He's not aware of any stabilizers that work on slopes of such grade levels. Klatt added that asphalt is the most common material used for trails and is the most cost effective. Klatt said that if they went with an alternative material, they would have to contract out the maintenance because Golden Valley doesn't have the appropriate resources to maintain them. Elder said that the current Sidewalk and Trail Policy doesn't distinguish between nature trails and park trails. Keulbs agreed. Discussion then focused on appropriate wording for the sidewalk and trail policy, on which the Council requested input from the commission. After much discussion, the commission agreed upon the following changes and/or additions to the policy: PRIORITIES: 5) Trails within parks aFid natUFe aFeas should be paved surfaced based upon the Reed feF yeaf feuRd use expected usage of the trail and to provide access for all users. Paving Surfacing priority shall be placed on trails with connections to the existing pedestrian system, between neighborhoods and between parks and nature areas. 6) Trails within nature areas should be surfaced based upon expected usage of the trail. CONSTRUCTION STANDARDS: 5) Paved paths leading to or within parks and natUF9 area shall be a minimum of eight feet wide with bituminous surfacing. suFfaGed with w9ed Ghips, gFavel, ag 10FRe OF etheF FnateFials based upon safety, use Consideration should be given to cost of installation and ongoing maintenance. Park trails should be designed to be disconnected from the City's storm drainage system. Trails should be designed so that storm water runoff is infiltrated by adjacent soils. 6) Paths may be left unpaved in nature areas with consideration given to unique circumstances such as landscape, terrain, and soil conditions. MOTION: Moved by Ness to accept the changes and/or additions as agreed upon by the commission, and seconded by Kuelbs. Motion voted on and passed unanimously. Sandler concluded the discussion by expressing his appreciation for the commissions input and thoughts that were expressed. II. ENVISION GOLDEN VALLEY Jacobson explained that he was asked to announce the need for facilitators for Envision- In -A -Box meetings and the upcoming event in February. He explained that those interested can contact Jean Andre. III. FEES & CHARGES Jacobson explained the fees and charges for 2004 and discussed the increases that were applied. MOTION: Moved by McConico, seconded by Johnson to approve the 2004 fees and charges as prepared by staff. Motion carried unanimously. Ce, IV. ADJOURNMENT MOTION: Moved by Cahill, seconded by Ness to adjourn. Motion carried unanimously.