2008-09-03 P & R Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Parks & Recreation Committee Meeting Minutes August 6, 2008 activity after dark? The resident was not specific about where and what kind of light. Committee Member Selander suggested soliciting feedback from other residents in the area and to consider some residents may object to more lights. The committee discussed sending postcards to abutting property owners, but decided to wait until the committee members had an opportunity to view the park in the dark to take any further action. Committee Member Harris suggested perhaps the light that is currently there just needs to be moved or adjusted. It was suggested the Police Department be asked their feelings on whether they thought additional lighting was necessary at this particular park. Ms. Stephan will forward this to the Police Department. Trail Priorities Vice-Chairperson Amundsen had talked to Mr. Mark Statz, City Engineer regarding trail options F and I which cross CSAH 14 with a proposed underpass. Mr. Statz said the underpass was part of the Safe Route to School Grant, which the City did not receive, and the underpass was not economically feasible without the grant. Vice-Chairperson Amundsen would like these options (F & I) removed from the plan as without an underpass or a light, this would be a dangerous trail crossing. It was suggested option F be moved west to the back side of cemetery following creek. Mr. Larson had asked Ms. Stephan to inform the committee that the options which were noted as concrete on the Trail Priority List probably could not be included with the grant project as the grant was for trails not for sidewalks and concrete were sidewalks. The committee had some discussion as to the difference between sidewalks and trails; sidewalks were not as wide, were concrete and were for foot traffic, not wheeled traffic such as roller blades and bicycles. Sidewalks are typically maintained by the abutting property owners while trails were maintained by the City. Council Member Lee stated that a few years ago City Council had determined policy would be any collector streets in new developments would have sidewalks. The committee discussed whether the options that were concrete on the Trail Priority List could be changed to Bituminous, but as they reviewed each one there were specific reasons why they were concrete Such as connecting to an existing sidewalk or width constraints. Each committee member has walked or bicycled Mill Road and talked to people doing the same regarding the necessity for a trail on this road. Each member continues to feels strongly that a trail is necessary on Mill Road because it is a safety issue; the road is too narrow, has a large volume of traffic and it is currently difficult at times to even meet another car on the road if there are vehicles parked on the street. The committee felt the Mill Road Path Alternative with the Road Centered on R.O.W -10' Bituminous Path, as presented by Mr. Mark Statz, was the least invasive alternative to the Mill Road property owners and would like to recommend City Council consider this option also. Vice- Chairperson Amundsen stated with this option there will be no need to remove any trees. Committee Member Haiden stated some of the residents he has heard from are still concerned they will be assessed for this trail. Committee Member Branch still has concerns over forcing a trail on residents who do not want it, but the overall opinion of the committee is there are approximately 17 homes affected on Mill Road and while the committee hears their concerns, it still feels this is the best option for the City as a whole. The question was raised are we doing these trail at this time just because we have the grant money? Council Member Lee stated that while if the money was not available this project would not be done at this time, but all the options on the Trail Priority List have been being discussed for over 10 years and are included in the Comprehensive Trail Plan for the City 30f5