HomeMy WebLinkAbout2010-10-12 Park Board Minutes 1
Minutes of the
Edina Park Board
October 12, 2010
Edina City Hall, Council Chambers
MEMBERS PRESENT: Todd Fronek, Dan Peterson, Rob Presthus, Ellen Jones, Jennifer
Kenney, Austin Dummer, Felix Pronove, Randy Meyer, Joseph Hulbert, Keeya Steel, Louise
Segreto, Bill Lough
STAFF PRESENT: John Keprios, Ed MacHolda, Janet Canton, Doug Bauman, Tom Shirley,
Ann Kattreh, Todd Anderson
I. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES
Dan Peterson MOVED TO APPROVE THE SEPTEMBER 14, 2010 PARK BOARD
MINUTES. Louise Segreto SECONDED THE MOTION. MINUTES APPROVED.
II. NEW BUSINESS
A. 2011-2015 Capital Improvement Plans for Enterprise Facilities - Mr. Keprios asked
each enterprise facility manager to give an update on the new items that have been added
to the Capital Improvement Plans.
Mr. MacHolda informed the Park Board that the flow rider is not a new CIP project. He
noted that it has actually been proposed and approved three times but has not been bid or
advertised. He indicated that after it was passed in 2009 they made a giant poster board
advertising the flow rider as a coming attraction. Mr. Peterson asked will they need extra
liability insurance to which Mr. MacHolda replied no, it’s his understanding that it’s a
very safe amenity.
Doug Bauman, Braemar Arena Manager, informed the Park Board that recently one of
the city engineers inspected the parking lot and the main road, Ikola Way, in front of the
ice arena. He noted that it was the city engineer’s recommendation that the parking lot
and Ikola Way do need some repairs. Mr. Bauman pointed out that he has broken this
down into three separate years so that they don’t incur the entire cost in one season.
Secondly, he has added a new floor scrubber to the 2015 CIP.
Tom Shirley, Centennial Lakes Park Manager, informed the Park Board that in 2015 they
will be replacing their 4 x 4 pick-up truck which at that time will be ten years old. He
noted the second item is $20,000 for paver replacements in 2015. He commented that
they have found they have to go through the park and do a lot of paver replacements.
Ann Kattreh, Edinborough Park Manager, informed the Park Board that in 2011 she has
the addition of an outdoor storage shed for maintenance equipment, lawnmowers, snow
blowers, etc. Currently they have no outside storage for these items. She indicated that
there is now the addition of the Great Hall wall matting, the current wall matting has
jagged edge stone and is the original to the park from 1987 and needs to be replaced. Ms.
2
Kattreh pointed out that in 2015 she is adding the remodel of the upstairs restrooms. She
stated her other change to the 2011 CIP is to convert their existing park office to a
concession stand and then add a new guest services counter across the walkway to
replace the current park office.
Todd Anderson, Braemar Golf Course Manager, informed the Park Board that the only
change they have on their CIP is the replacement of the golf dome building in 2012. He
indicated that with their debt service and their cash position that they can’t replace it at
that time but want to make sure everyone is aware that the building is in really tough
shape. He explained that the dome was built in 1983 and that there’s a major design flaw
where the dome is actually attached to the building so that all of the stress actually moves
the building. Mr. Anderson stated that he thinks this should be their number one priority
once they are in a position to start replacing things. Mr. Fronek asked if the dome itself
would stay the same and that it would just be a new building. Mr. Anderson replied that
basically they would put up a support over the building that would anchor the dome. The
footprint of the dome and the lobby of the dome would stay the same. He stated that they
need a solid building with concrete block versus wood.
Mr. Lough commented just so he understands correctly the total expenditure would take
place in 2012. Mr. Anderson replied it’s more symbolic because they won’t be able to
afford to replace it until 2015 or later. He explained that their debt service goes away in
2013 but their cash position is still tough as far as the actual funding of something like
this. Mr. Keprios added that they may end up in a position where structural engineers
will tell them they can’t wait another year. He stated that is why it’s shown in 2012 in
case they get into that scenario and then they are going to have to find some creative
financing to do it because if they don’t have the structure they are out of business.
Mr. Peterson asked Mr. Anderson what is the difference in revenue between the summer
practice area and the dome in the winter. Mr. Anderson replied there is some vacillation
but between the range and the dome it’s approximately $600,000 to $700,000.
Dan Peterson MOVED TO APPROVE THE PROPOSED 2011-2015 CIP FOR THE
ENTERPRISE FACILITIES. Louise Segreto SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
B. 2011 Fees and Charges – Mr. Keprios informed the Park Board that in the economic
times they are facing he thinks his staff has done an exceptional job keeping their
expenses down. He noted that they try to keep their programs, facilities and services
affordable and accessible to the public which is why the majority of the fees have not
increased this year. Mr. Keprios pointed out there are a couple of circumstances at the
golf course where in order to remain competitive in the market place they’ve actually
decreased slightly.
Mr. Dummer asked Mr. MacHolda with the addition of the flow rider in 2012 is the
season pass or a daily admission going to go up. Mr. MacHolda replied that the flow
rider amenity is actually going to be the first amenity that will not be included in the
season ticket or the daily admission. He explained the way it is currently being proposed
3
is you would buy a wristband to use if for the day, or there would be an add-on charge to
your season ticket to use it for the season. He noted that the season ticket prices have not
gone up since 2005 and daily admission has not gone up since 2007. Mr. Keprios added
that the reason the flow rider fee is not included in the fees and charges is because it will
not be built in time for the 2011 season.
Ms. Steel indicated that she is struggling processing this without seeing budgets and
knowing how much revenue is coming in and being able to compare that. She noted that
in the future she would hope that they would be able to see that information. Mr. Keprios
responded that typically they have not gone down that road as far as the amount of
revenues for each and every budget. He noted that it will become a bit cumbersome but
they can certainly do that if you want to get into each and every program and what their
revenues and expenses are. Mr. Keprios commented that he thinks they are heading
closer toward that with their enterprise facilities because he thinks there’s a desire on the
City Council’s part to do that. He added it is all public information and if this is
something the Park Board would like him to do in the next budget cycle process he would
be happy to do so.
Mr. Fronek asked Mr. Anderson to explain why the non-resident patron card was reduced
$20.00. Mr. Anderson explained that last year was the first year they offered a non-
resident patron card and for the first year they sold 258. This year they only sold 209.
He added that the overall high number of resident patron cards sold was 2,500 and this
past year 1,271 resident patron cards were sold. He noted that in talking to the people
and the reactions at the counter they could see a lot of people were calculating and
deciding that it didn’t make sense for them to do it. He indicated that the biggest benefit
of having a patron card was being able to get advanced reservations; however, with the
golf market the way it is that’s no longer the case. He commented he felt he needed to
reduce the fee in order to bump up the sales.
Mr. Hulbert noted that he would entertain a motion to approve the fees and charges as
outlined. Louise Segreto MADE THE MOTION. Dan Peterson SECONDED THE
MOTION. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
C. Nine Mile Creek Regional Trail – Kelly Grissman, Senior Manager of Planning from
Three Rivers Park District, gave a power point presentation. She indicated that the Park
District and city staff are requesting the Park Boards’ assistance in reviewing the three
different options of the Nine Mile Creek Regional Trail through the community of Edina.
She pointed out that the three options include predominately a creek-based route, a road-
based route as well as a no-build option.
Jonathon Vlaming, Chief of Planning at Three Rivers Park District, talked about the
regional trail system as well as their recently passed vision plan. Mr. Vlaming noted that
there are over 100 miles of regional trails throughout Suburban Hennepin County and
that they are looking at over two million visits annually on the hundreds of miles of trails
that are currently open. He indicated that the trails serve both a recreational function as
well as a transportation function but primarily the focus is on the recreation portion. Mr.
Vlaming pointed out that their trails connect to neighborhoods, to schools, to parks, to
4
greenways or linear parks, and connect to grand rounds. He added that you can bike
downtown from their trail network as well as past downtown and into St. Paul.
Mr. Vlaming informed the Park Board that last summer Three Rivers passed a vision plan
that had five actionable goals and three directly relate to why they have regional trails in
the first place. Mr. Vlaming indicated that first they are in the business of inspiring
people to recreate and they have found with regional trails that if you build it they will
come. More specifically if you build a regional trail they will come in mass from the area
within about a half mile of the trail. He noted it’s about convenience and proximity, as
people will take advantage of amenities when they are near where they live. Mr.
Vlaming pointed out that people go to these trails for health reasons, exercise, to talk to
their friends, to develop community and simply to play and be outdoors. Mr. Vlaming
stated that the second goal relating to trails is to connect people to nature because very
few people will walk out into the woods unless there is a path to walk on and the regional
trails serve that function. It’s an introduction into the woods for many people because it’s
a safe, secure type of environment.
Mr. Vlaming indicated that regional trails are also important for creating vibrant places.
He pointed out that the “Star Tribune” recently ran a series of articles on the aging baby
boomers. He noted that retiring baby boomers will create a new challenge; however, to
meet that challenge they need to maintain a balanced economy which includes retaining
and attracting entrepreneurs, retaining and attracting innovators and retaining and
attracting young workers. Mr. Vlaming pointed out that one thing young workers are
going to be looking for are alternative transportation networks in developed biking
systems.
Mr. Vlaming informed the Park Board that it was recently proclaimed that Minneapolis is
the number one city for biking in America and that part of that success was the regional
trail network. He stated that if you put together a network that crosses cities, crosses
communities and ties communities together what it is doing is creating a critical mass for
marketing to a much needed younger generation to come in and continue to stay. Mr.
Vlaming noted that with that vision plan it recognizes the importance of regional trails
throughout the plan. It recognizes the importance of providing regional recreational trail
facilities within the developed cities, Edina and other first ring suburbs in Minneapolis, as
it also recognizes the Nine Mile Creek Regional Trail as one of the primary capital
projects in the ten year capital forecast within the plan. He noted that the Park District
has a very strong interest in this project and has been very supportive in moving it
forward.
Ms. Grissman informed the Park Board that the Community Assessment Team (CAT)
was compiled about a year ago and it included representatives of every route/section that
was under consideration at that time. She noted that it also included Edina City Staff,
Park District Staff, Watershed District, a representative from the Edina School District,
Joseph Hulbert from the Park Board as well as a representative from the Edina Task
Force. She explained that the role of the CAT was three fold. First, identify the
constraints and opportunities of each route under consideration. Second, provide design
5
suggestions and considerations for each route under consideration as well as the entire
route through the city, and third to convey information back to respective neighbors.
Ms. Grissman indicated that as of June their work was done and they concluded with a
document. She noted that the document included social, technical and economic
assessments for each route design suggestions and the entire route. She added that it also
provided an opportunity for CAT members to include a narrative on their thoughts of
their route as well as the process. Ms. Grissman commented that in respect to the social,
technical and economic assessment what this included was for the social part how many
people live adjacent to the this trail, how many backyards there are, how many front
yards there are and how many destinations do the different routes serve. For the technical
it was things like how many road crossings, how many driveway crossings, is road
construction required and is design deviations required in order to accommodate the
regional trail where a public right-of-way may not be as wide as anticipated or where
there are other constraints that would limit typical regional trail design. She noted that
the economic assessment is how much the different routes are going to cost. Ms.
Grossman went through the feedback of the 30 day comment period and noted that they
received over 200 correspondences from the community members sharing their
preference.
Ms. Segreto asked on the creek-based route there are roughly 243 residential homes that
will be adjacent to the property and to the trail and asked Ms. Grissman to talk about
buffers that Three Rivers has offered to home owners to help shield the trail. Ms.
Grissman replied that they have worked with local communities and adjacent property
owners and have done things with split rail fencing, vegetative screening and dirt berms
that would be vegetative. She indicated that they will also look at how close the primary
residence is to the trail and work with the city to determine what criteria should be
considered in offering those amenities so that it’s consistent with the city and the type of
regional trail that the city is hoping to obtain through their community. Ms. Segreto
asked who would be responsible for that expense to which Ms. Grissman replied the Park
District.
Mr. Fronek asked why the CP rail line was not considered because it seems every other
community where Three Rivers puts bike trails they are along rail lines. Ms. Grissman
explained that the reason CP has not been implemented is because it is still an active rail
line and Canadian Pacific at this time is not interested in entertaining any conversations
regarding an active rail and trail corridor. She noted that in other locations where they
have used rail corridors for regional trails it’s generally because the rail operating
authority has abandoned the corridor, therefore making it available for regional trail
construction and operation.
Mr. Hulbert asked approximately how many acres of parkland is the trail going through if
it’s going to be a creek-based route or a road-based route. Ms. Grissman replied that for
the creek-based route it would be 685 acres of existing park land and for the road-based
route it would be 530 acres. It’s approximately a 150 acres difference.
6
Mr. Lough asked Ms. Grissman if they have gotten any reaction from the School Board
or the School administration. Ms. Grissman replied that they have worked with a School
District representative throughout the project and they are very excited and supportive
currently of the trail route. She pointed out that the creek-based route would utilize
school district property and will provide access from the school district to Bredesen Park.
She noted that the school district is looking at the opportunity of cross country skiing,
high school running teams, expanding their environmental services program to do water
sampling and vegetative analysis in Bredesen Park as well as the parkland and the school
district property on the south side of Highway 62.
Ms. Segreto asked what are the federal financing deadlines that they are being faced with
in continuing on with the decision making process so that they can meet those deadlines.
Ms. Grissman replied that June 2011 is the federal solicitation deadline for federal funds
available in 2015 and 2016 and that is predominating what the Park District is looking at
funding for this project. She noted that in order to meet that June deadline they need to
have a route approved and established in very early March so that they can put the
application together and submit it timely.
Mr. Lough indicated that he would like to think that the working relationship between
Three Rivers and the City of Edina and the residents of Edina would at all times be
exemplary. However, if legitimate disagreements arise and they become nettlesome is
there an established process for resolving the differences that might arise. Mr. Vlaming
responded that it would go back to a standard trail way agreement which is whenever
they develop a trail they sign an agreement with the city. The agreement lays out the
agreed upon rules for moving forward in the project. It also describes how in the design
phase if they are to do the design work how it essentially needs to go before the City
Council for approval before they actually break dirt. He noted that in some cities the city
itself does the design work and then that design work goes to their Park Board for
approval before they break ground. Mr. Vlaming stated that in either case it continues to
be a mutually agreed upon outcome that they are working towards.
Mr. Peterson asked how other cities have handled boardwalks and if any other cities have
creeks that overflow every spring. He also asked if there are boardwalks in place or are
there boardwalks planned in Minnetonka and/or Hopkins. Ms. Grissman replied there are
no boardwalks planned in Minnetonka and Hopkins and as far as their regional trail
system they do not have an identical situation to what they have on routes 9 and 11. She
noted that they do have very similar situations to route 2 and that is south of Medicine
Lake along the Luce Line Regional Trail. Ms. Grissman stated that in working with other
communities they have been very open to design solutions that maintain a useable trail
yearly or just spring, summer and fall. They are interested in providing a safe means to
their community members to use the trail. She added this is a unique situation and is
something that their engineers as well as the environmental assessment work has
indicated that a feasible solution is possible.
Mr. Peterson asked Ms. Grissman if is it her professional opinion that if the trail was a
hard surface at essentially creek level and was not useable for a couple three weeks each
spring is that a big problem. Ms. Grissman replied that she thinks the big problem having
7
it at grade through a wetland is that you have to then mitigate for the wetland impacts.
She noted that the wetlands along the creek corridor are generally considered high quality
wetlands and for every one acre of wetland that is impacted they would need to mitigate
or create nine additional wetland acres. She pointed out that there is not space available
in the City of Edina, at least not that she is aware of, where they could construct a trail at
grade through a wetland situation and then do the mitigations in close proximity to where
the wetland was impacted.
Mr. Hulbert asked; in the event of a flood, who would be responsible for cleaning up
along and around the pilings? Ms. Grissman replied that she believes in that situation it
would be the Park District’s responsibility to assist if not take complete ownership of the
operation of maintenance and the cleanup associated with the flooding. Mr. Hulbert
asked when a boardwalk is constructed is it not constructed in a fashion that it can be
submerged for three weeks. Ms. Grissman replied that depending on the design it could
be underwater but cannot speak to how long it could be underwater; however, they can
continue to study and provide information back to the Park Board if it’s something they
are interested in learning more about.
Mr. Dummer asked if there is any overhead lighting on the Dakota Trail and Elm Creek
Park Reserve Trail to which Ms. Grissman replied no. Mr. Dummer asked if there would
be an exception for the Nine Mile Creek Trail in Edina. Ms. Grissman responded that at
this point they are not proposing lighting but if it is something the City is interested in
entertaining they could certainly work together on addressing it.
Mr. Fronek indicated that he has participated in the bike race “Purple Ride” that is held at
the Elm Creek Park Reserve trail which Three Rivers has been very gracious to offer that
spot. He stated that doesn’t know if events like that, with thousands of bikers, are
necessarily appropriate per se in a fully developed suburb. Mr. Fronek asked is there a
Three Rivers policy in terms of races and events. Ms. Grissman replied that they do not
have a policy in place currently that would restrict that kind of activity. She noted that if
it is something that Edina is not interested in hosting within the community, then it’s
something they could work into the agreement that would exclude those types of
activities or activities that have a certain threshold of participation. She pointed out that
in most cases activities are very short lived, it may be on a Saturday from 8:00 am to
noon so that the impact on the community is very minor in that respect.
Mr. Hulbert asked who pays for the cost to police the trails and in the winter when the
trails are shut down are the residents responsible for snow removal such as a sidewalk.
Ms. Grissman replied that the public safety costs are included in the $185,000 annual
anticipated operation maintenance costs, it would be the park district’s burden to bear.
She noted that in terms of snow removal they currently are not removing snow in the
winter; however, she believes the city does have an ordinance about snow removal. Mr.
Keprios pointed out that there is not an ordinance that applies to the trails within Edina’s
park system, but there is an ordinance with regards to sidewalks. He noted that Three
Rivers is offering the City the option to maintain it during the winter months and if they
so choose to do that it would be at the city’s expense. Mr. Hulbert asked would the law
enforcement be at the expense of Three Rivers on a yearly basis. Ms. Grissman replied
8
that their officers are available all of the time but that patrol might be less frequent during
the winter because they are not operating and maintaining it, but if there were an
emergency or complaint they would certainly respond.
Mr. Lough asked Mr. Keprios would there be any difference in approach to snow
removal between a creek-based trail and a road-based trail. Mr. Keprios replied that
decision would be left up to City Council essentially on an annual basis whether they
would want to continue to maintain it during the winter months.
Mr. Dummer asked about the residential yards adjacent to the trail, if those residents
would have a private access to the trail or would they still have to go through a public
access point. Ms. Grissman replied she doesn’t know what type of ordinance the city
currently has on whether residents have to stay on trails through a natural corridor or is
the city amendable to people walking out their backyard and accessing the trail. She
asked Mr. Keprios what type of access the city would prefer. Mr. Keprios replied if this
gets built he thinks they would encourage that the access points be either easements of
the city or publicly owned property.
Mr. Keprios gave a presentation to the Park Board and indicated that on September 29th
at the joint work session with the elected bodies of the City of Edina and the Board of
Commissioners for Three Rivers it was suggested by staff to propose the three options
that Ms. Grissman just went over. He stated that the City Council has asked that the Park
Board deliberate on these three options and make a recommendation.
Mr. Keprios stated that the City Council will be holding a public hearing on Tuesday,
December 7, 2010, in the City Council Chambers. He noted that everyone who would
like to speak to that issue that evening will be given an opportunity. He indicated that if
the City Council makes the decision to move forward with one of the options it would
then go to the Nine Mile Creek Watershed District and from there on to the Edina Public
Schools, since it is partly on their property.
Mr. Keprios went over the benefits of a walking/biking trail and noted that in this case it
would add 7 ½ additional miles of new biking and walking trails, currently there are just
over nine miles of trails within Edina’s park system. He noted that it equates to
approximately an additional 14 acres of new park amenities if they were to add all the
land it would take. Mr. Keprios commented that it would connect Edina to the greater
regional trail system and will connect to the Minneapolis Grand Rounds. He added it
would promote and offer get fit activities, it would promote a healthy lifestyle for people
of all ages and it would give residents more access to enjoy nature and the outdoors. Mr.
Keprios indicated that it would provide additional safe off-road biking opportunity versus
more on-road bike lanes regardless of the route. Also, it would provide regional
recreational facilities within the City of Edina which is something that has been asked of
since 1998. Mr. Keprios informed the Park Board that staff would recommend to the
Park Board to consider a creek-based option.
Mr. Keprios pointed out that the 2006 community attitude and interest survey was very
clear in the result and that it validates the need and desire for walking and biking trails.
9
More walking and biking trails were the number one most requested amenity by
residents. He noted that the survey also validates why residents of Edina want more
trails; to exercise, get fit, enjoy the outdoors and enjoy nature. He indicated that a creek-
based option is safer than a road-based option as well as the creek-based option is likely
to be used more than a road-based option. He noted that the creek-based option is
obviously more aesthetically pleasing for walkers and cyclists. Mr. Keprios commented
in his view its excellent use of public land for a public good and the whole route is
accomplished without having to use private land to either purchase or condemn.
Mr. Keprios indicated that the engineering phase is a complex phase which they would be
very engaged in should this go forward. He noted that Three Rivers would have to do a
very complex balancing act with the homeowners, the environment, the wetlands, water
quality, natural resources and construction costs. He stated that it all plays a role when
you are trying to find exactly where the trail is to be placed which is done during the
engineering phase and the City would be very much involved in that process.
Mr. Keprios stated that he recommends the creek-based route but under several
conditions. He noted that he would agree that it would be nice to minimize the amount of
boardwalks, but again that would to be determined through the engineering phase. He
pointed out that the nine to one mitigation pretty much dictates where they are going to
have to build boardwalks. He added that he would also like to offer the condition that, if
it is decided to build a creek-based route, homeowners should be provided some buffer
options like they have done in similar situations in other regional trails either by
landscaping or fencing options.
Mr. Keprios commented that the easement deadline restriction idea was born out of the
joint work session on the 29th and he suggested that we should work with the attorneys to
establish the proper language. The easement deadlines are needed to protect the City of
Edina’s interests in case unforeseen factors occur and the trail doesn’t get built in a
reasonable time frame.
Mr. Keprios pointed out that he would like to see Route 2 be a little more fine-tuned. He
would like to see it go back to the original recommendation of going through the south
side of Walnut Ridge Park as opposed to the north edge because it would still end up at
the same starting point and ending point within the Park. He added that he knows there
are some issues with possibly some wetlands and flood issues; however, Ms. Grissman
has informed him that it is something they can work together on.
To sum up his recommendation Mr. Keprios would like for the Park Board to recommend
to the City Council to approve a creek-based option with the stated conditions and use
that as a basis for the City Council to conduct a public hearing, which is scheduled for
Tuesday, December 7th.
Mr. Keprios informed the audience that they have received well over 300 letters, e-mails
and various files from the public and as of tonight they are now available for viewing on-
line in a PDF format through the Park and Recreation Department section of the City of
Edina website.
10
Bob Schwartzbauer, 6107 Waterford Court, indicated that he is a member of the
Community Assessment Team and represented Route 3. He showed the map of Route 3
and explained how he would like to shorten it and reinforce what Mr. Keprios and Three
Rivers said about safety concerns caused by road crossing and driveway crossings. He
highlighted the area where it starts and pointed out that it creates centrally a triangle and
the interesting thing about the triangle is that there are no streets or automobile bridges
anywhere along this section of the creek which means everyone who lives or works
within that triangle in order to leave must use either Lincoln or Vernon. He explained
that the proposal is that the trail would go along the north side of Vernon and on the east
side of Londonderry which means that anyone who lives or works in that triangle in order
to leave their homes or work are going to have to cross the trail every time they leave or
go back. Mr. Schwartzbauer noted that inside that triangle is United Healthcare’s World
Headquarters and he was told that they have 1,100 cars parked in their parking lot every
week which means that on average they will have about 2,200 road crossings going
across the trail in that section. He added that in addition there are approximately 800
residents that live in that area and assuming they leave their house on average once a day
and are going to cross that trail. Therefore in effect there will be 1,800 – 1,900 trail
crossings or automobile crossings the trail every day for a total of 3,000 to 4,000 trail
crossings. He indicated that the Park District realize this is unsafe and are proposing to
deal with it by putting up stop signs for the bicycles at various points so in effect bicyclist
will have to stop 8 times through this entire section and noted that isn’t going to happen
and the bicyclist will not want to do that. He commented that instead he thinks they ride
right onto the street or not use the trail since a lot of time . . . he was cut off
Bill Westerdahl, 5912 Walnut Drive, indicated that it has always been assumed that
Three Rivers would pay the maintenance and security on the regional trail. He noted
however, that information from Three Rivers indicates that they may not have the
financial resources to pay for maintenance and security which are paid from their
general/operating fund. He pointed out that Three Rivers currently has approximately 30
miles including the Edina section of the Nine Mile Creek Trail, a regional trail in the
active planning stage and approximately ten miles of trail scheduled for construction in
2010 which is an addition of approximately 40% of the existing trail network. Mr.
Westerdahl pointed out that Three Rivers 2010 Operations Budget indicate that Three
Rivers is approaching its statutory limit of 300 of 1% of total market value of property to
fund their operations. He noted that Three Rivers has frozen its employees’ wages in
2010 and 2011. Also, Three Rivers is dependent on the property value levy to provide
84% of its operating revenues. He indicated that in the last four years property values for
which they depend on these revenues in their levy limit have declined over 10%. He
added that their operational expenses have increased 25% or 7 million dollars in the last
four years. Mr. Westerdahl pointed out that if the property tax levy as it exists now is
barely sufficient to fund present Three Rivers Park District operations which include
maintenance and security how will they be sufficient to cover a plan that is a 40%
increase in the trail system as well as an additional Scott County Park. He asked if Three
Rivers is not able to fund maintenance and security in the future then who is going to be
responsible for maintenance and security on this trail. The City of Edina is being asked
to cede control of 13 plus acres of prime parkland contained in 7 miles of trails of Three
11
Rivers. He noted his question is if Three Rivers is not able to raise the funds to maintain
the maintenance is this going to fall back on the City of Edina over the long run. He
stated that he would like to hear Three Rivers respond to that, what they are going to do
about this difference between their levy limits and the amount of money it’s obviously
going to cost to continue to maintain their system.
Michael Lilja, 5809 McGuire Rd, informed the Park Board that his wife and he started
biking a few years ago and they would put their bikes in the back of the car and go to
Hopkins to get on the Three Rivers Trail, which is a tremendous trail system. He
indicated that people in cars don’t pay very much attention to bikes so bikers need to pay
a lot of attention to cars. He stated that right now they have the ability to build a premier
trail because they have this public corridor along the creek that would be safe for kids and
people walking, roller blading, etc.; it’s a multi-use trail, not just a bike trail. They have a
chance to put in a high quality trail and it’s not just about the people here today but it’s
about the long-term for their community because people come and go so what they are
doing is creating an amenity that will last in time and will signify something about their
community and he hopes something they can be proud of.
Fritz Corrigan, 6509 Biscayne Blvd., indicated that his house immediately backs up to
Walnut Ridge Park that they built over 26 years ago. He noted that as a family they run
on the basis of what they need every day versus what they would like to have and they
don’t do things they can’t afford to do. He noted that he thinks this approach to how they
manage their family would be a good one for this case. He stated that this is not
something that is required but it is something that would be wonderful to have someday,
but it’s not required today. He pointed out that today this country is broke, the State of
Minnesota has a 5 billion dollar deficit, the Three Rivers Park District has no money and
is going to have to issue bond financing to put this in and now they are talking about
spending 20 million dollars on a bike path. He commented it would be wonderful if they
could afford it but they simply cannot so they should wait until they can afford to do it
which is not next year.
Andrew Heyer, 5717 Deville Dr., indicated that he is for the creek-based trail and also
founded a Facebook group that supports the trail and currently there are 201 members in
this group. He showed the Park Board some photos of different trails that might address
some of the concerns that have been raised. He noted that in summary he urges the Park
Board to support the regional trail.
Dianne Plunkett Latham, 7013 Comanche Court, informed the Park Board that she is
chair of the Edina Environmental Commission and that their recommendation to support
the creek-based trail was approved at their August 12th meeting. She noted that the trail
offers many benefits to the community for all ages and would make biking safer and
more accessible to all. She commented that Edina currently is deficient in bike trails for
its citizens in comparison to surrounding communities. In addition, it would allow access
to public land that is currently inaccessible to the vast majority of residents. The trail will
provide a crucial part of plans that have been developed as part of the city’s
comprehensive plan and also part of the international council for local environmental
initiatives of which Edina is a member. She noted that it also supports the green step
12
cities programs which Edina will hopefully soon be joining. Ms. Plunkett-Latham
indicated that obviously there are some concerns about the impact of the trail along the
creek; however, the trail will be routed through an area that has already been impacted by
years of urbanization including chemical runoff from the lawns and road salt in adjacent
streets. She commented that the project will open the possibility of reversing some of
that damage as the Nine Mile Creek Watershed District will be improving the creek. She
indicated that promoting and building bike and pedestrian trails, especially regional trails
is a great action item in helping Edina go green and make the community less dependent
on auto transportation.
Richard Griffith, 7009 Comanche Court, informed the Park Board that he has been a
member of the Edina Bike Task Force since its inception. He noted that he is here to
explain why he believes the creek-based route is really essential for the growth and
development of our community. He pointed out that it costs the school district a lot of
money to bus kids to school and the new walkways that are going to be put in will allow
kids who live less than a mile from major schools to walk. He added this will make
everybody healthy and save money from bussing. Therefore, he would like the Park
Board to consider not only the quality of life but the economic aspects of providing a
transportation alternative to driving your kids to school when they can walk. He feels
the creek-based route would be wonderful.
Harvey Johnson, 5505 Valley Lane, indicated that he is a member of the CAT team and is
also involved with the protecting Nine Mile Creek. He noted that there are
approximately 500 members that are concerned about the environment of Nine Mile
Creek. He stated that from his point of view he doesn’t feel that Three Rivers has done
an adequate job of giving Edina the information it needs to make a decision about the
trail. He commented that this is the largest project that Edina has had in a long time that
will affect Edina residents. Mr. Johnson stated that there are many open issues that need
to be discussed and there are many things that are clouded in the whole decision making
process. He pointed out that one that was asked is if community members or other
groups been involved in the process to which he will tell you no. He stated that he has a
couple of documents and one is the resolution from the elected members of the CAT
Team that states that they did not endorse the Community Assessment Report. He noted
that the Community Assessment Report went to press without the support of the elected
members. He explained that his group to protect Nine Mile Creek gave a very detailed
response to the environmental assessment with information that they would like
answered, but didn’t really get answers so they asked an environmental attorney what he
thought about their response. He read one sentence from that attorney “The Park District
largely ignored the comments in most cases, the Park District utterly failed to respond to
the comments as it must under the Minnesota Environmental Protection Act.” Mr.
Johnson stated that they don’t think the Park Board has enough facts to make a decision
and would recommend that the Park Board get the facts before they decide where the trail
should be.
Ray O’Connell, 4612 Valley View Road, indicated that they all pay property taxes
included in the provisions to allocate a number of dollars for the Nine Mile Creek District
that has been in place for the last 20 years. He noted that during that time there have
13
been a significant number of dollars allocated to Hennepin County in budgeting for Nine
Mile Creek District and it’s a big number. He stated that Three Rivers is also responsible
for all of the planning and protection of the Nine Mile Creek corridor which includes not
just water but the land that borders the creek. Mr. O’Connell pointed that the corridor
belongs to all of the taxpayers and, even though there are some groups who are for this
while others are against it, they have to look to natural law and the common good and
consider where all of these other people that are not talking. He noted that he wants to
make that point because there should be no covenant enacted that would be detrimental to
benefit the few but would be detrimental to the whole. He stated that the proposed trail is
not only needed but will be historic.
Jed Hepworth, 5509 Valley Lane, indicated that about a year ago they (Save the Nine
Mile Creek Task Force) sent a letter to the Park Board talking about some of the issues
that they think need to be dealt with and are still on the table. He commented that he
thinks one of the big ones for this group to think about is what a 16 foot wide trail down
the Nine Mile Creek Watershed means to the parkland that this board is responsible for
administering. He stated that essentially it means that not quite two acres of land per
mile are going to be turned into pavement and rock siding. Therefore, he thinks it really
is important they acknowledge what’s going to happen if they build a trail down the
watershed. He noted that in building a trail down a narrow watershed doesn’t just change
the area under pavement but what it does when you cut a narrow ribbon like Nine Mile
Creek into two very much narrower pieces is you eliminate the ability of the wildlife to
continue to sustain itself in those narrow corridors so it will have an impact and he would
like for the Park Board to consider that.
Amanda Simons, 5725 Olinger Drive, informed the Park Board that she and her husband
are new residents of Edina. She noted that they are young professionals and are avid bike
riders who use the greenways and grand rounds almost daily for exercise and often for
transportation to work. She added that many of her peers and colleagues also use these
trails. She pointed out that one of their sadness about living in Edina is that there is not a
connection to the greenway through Edina which means they have to use the roads. She
stated that although Edina may have a share the road program it does not always protect
her from cars coming too close. She indicated they think that the creek-based route
would be better for safety with all of the trail crossings. For example, trail crossings in
Hopkins and St. Louis Park that go through stop signs that while bikers often stop the
cars do not often see the bikers that may already be in the trail. Ms. Simons stated that
she would like the Park Board to think about young professionals like herself who are
interested in moving to Edina but are also interested in the transportation and exercise of
the regional trails.
Paul Ratelle, 5521 Valley Lane, stated that he is vehemently against the creek-based
route. He noted that he lives in Section 9 which is going to be directly affected by the
creek-based bike trail. He indicated that it has not been easy for residents to work with
the Three Rivers, they have been uniformly dismissive of the concerns that they’ve tried
to raise to them. He stated that it’s important to the residents to know what they intend to
build through the creek and where they intend to build it. He indicated that when they
talked to Bonestroo they were put off with the comment “we don’t really know where the
14
placement is going to be, we weren’t asked to consider that when we evaluated and
prepared our environmental assessment worksheet.” He noted Ms. Grissman made a
reference to a 2003 study on the negative impacts on property values where a bike trail
occurs next to or adjacent to a particular property. Mr. Grissman pointed out that 2003
study has been in the Three Rivers files since it was prepared. He noted that the
conclusion that was reached by Ms. Shilcox, who prepared the study, shows homes that
are adjacent to these types of trails their values go down. She knows it and Three Rivers
knows it, it isn’t a matter of debate and it isn’t a question of dollars and cents per foot
from the trail. He stated that his concern is they need to work with the people about
what’s going to be built and where it’s going to be built because the trail is going right
across their backyards. He commented if they can’t work cooperatively with Thee
Rivers, as has been evidenced so far with their contact with them, it’s going to be a big
issue in the community and he urges the Park Board to take that into consideration.
Diane Fansler, 5709 W. 66th Street, indicated that she is a 30 year resident of Edina and
lives in the Route 7 area and feels like it is a route from nowhere to nowhere. She stated
that it’s supposed to be starting at Tracy Avenue heading south along the east side of
Valley View Road and Route 7 ends at Antrim Road. She noted the cost they were given
for 5f, which is where it’s supposed to be connecting to the north side is $2,600,000,
Route 7 is $600,000. She pointed out that she was very surprised tonight when she heard
Ms. Grissman say they’ve added Antrim Road to Route 7. She noted there is no funding
in that $600,000 for Antrim Road which is supposed to go along the east side of Antrim
Road and connect with Route 8, which is 70th Street. She noted that Antrim Road has 7
houses on the east side; it has Calvary Lutheran Church with at least two commercial
driveways and has at least two or three hydrants which would have to be changed and
give driveways. She added that six houses would be within 25 feet of the route of the
trail. She explained that if you go to the north end, 5f which was incidentally added after
the CAT assessment, it ends where you cross the ramp on highway 62 and it’s just
supposed to magically join up with Valley View there. She noted that in that section
there is a .4 mile gap that has not been considered in anything. She commented that they
are supposed to be building a ten foot wide trail with three feet of green space on each
side by eliminating a six foot sidewalk at Valley View and eliminating the shoulder/park
lane. She stated we have to do the winter plowing in there because that’s the main
pedestrian route for the students to get to the High School and Valley View Middle
School. She pointed out that all of the snow, construction and maintenance would be on
private property because they are proposing to take it to the very end of the right-of-way.
She stated that the section, the .4 mile that’s missing between the on ramp of Highway 62
up to Valley Lane or West 66th Street wherever you happen to take it, that’s missing there
is no six foot sidewalk there, there is no parking/shoulder lane that is the, there are two
lanes going north bound. She also has safety issues.
TG Clifford, 6500 Creek Drive, showed the Park Board photos of the connection of
Route 9 and Route 11 near Heights Park. He also showed photos of the creek level in
March of 2010 and in August 2010. He pointed out that the water level in August was
actually higher than in March. He commented that he wanted to show photos from
March because without the vegetation you have a better view of the actual water level.
Mr. Clifford pointed out that in this case you have a floodway where water rushes down
15
and needs to be drained from the area and is going to be a difficult place to put a trail. He
stated that he assumes the Park Board members volunteered not to debate regional trails
but to look at park programs, playground equipment, ball fields, etc., things for the
community. However, what’s happened is you’ve ended up being involved in a
discussion and decision about a regional trail. He indicated that he feels the primary duty
of the Park Board members is to be stewards of our parks. He noted that he specifically
wants the Park Board to consider what’s going to happen to Walnut Ridge Park and
Heights Park if the trail goes through. He noted that Height’s Park serves two
neighborhoods, both on each side of the creek and if the regional trail goes through one
of those neighborhoods will be disconnected from the neighborhood playground with
bicyclists. He stated that two million cyclists a year on 100 miles of trails translates to
about 21,000 visits per mile per year for an additional seven miles of trails. He noted that
he thinks we need to ask ourselves can kids safely visit their neighborhood park if that
trail goes through sections 9 and 11.
Laurie Chapman, 6420 Aspen Rd., stated that she lives about 25 feet from the creek and
she will be sacrificing her privacy and her quality of life in the interest of the greater
majority. She indicated that all of the residents that live on the creek side will be living
with the pictures previously shown of the boardwalks. She knows others want this but
she will have to live with it 24/7. She noted that this is about property values and showed
photos of her current view and what it will look like. She stressed that she has a very
hard time believing that her property values will not go down. Ms. Chapman explained
that every time it rains she goes out to collect all of the junk that collects just trying to go
through the creek. She noted her concern about all of the junk that will collect in all of
the pilings that are going to support a 12 foot by 12 foot wide wooden bridge across the
creek and questioned who will take care of that. She pointed out that it’s not even
accessible so she wonders how they are going to get to the creek to clean it up. She noted
that she also hopes that the Park Board would consider the idea of building a ten ton
bridge through valuable wet lands for over 20 million dollars in these economic times
that will steal the privacy and the quality of life of those people who live on the creek
side in exchange for 8 months of recreational use. She commented that there are so many
questions that are unanswered that this may not be a good idea to build this bridge at this
time.
Alice Hulbert, 7221 Tara Road, indicated that she has been a member of the Park Board;
she is currently a member of the Bike Edina Task Force and has been participating with
the CAT team as well. She noted she would like to thank the Three Rivers Park District;
they have done a wonderful job, answered every question and have been extremely
professional. She added that they have been one of the best organizations that she has
worked with. She stated that now is the time to do this and that the trail system has
expanded since she saw the first tier regional trail abstract in 2002. It will actually
connect to something where before it couldn’t get across the rail road tracks. She noted
the first regional trail system helped Edina connect to Hopkins but it really didn’t add too
much. However, now with the explosion of the trail system we have now it’s going to
add greatly. Ms. Hulbert commented that one thing that hasn’t been mentioned is that
this is going to be a combined project to improve the environment of the creek as it
currently exists. She noted that it’s her understanding that when the creek restoration is
16
done the flooding will improve and there won’t be the issue of water running all over and
debris washing up and causing dams. She indicated that the trail is going to let the rest of
the residents of Edina access to that area. She stated that the bridges they may be able to
construct across Highway 62 and Highway 100 for pedestrians and bikes to be able to
cross without traffic is going to be a tremendous addition to the community. She
indicated that she believes Three Rivers put in a grant application last year for a bridge
and it was denied because it didn’t hook to anything; however, with the trail approved
and an alignment there is a much better chance of getting the money. She explained that
the funding for this is going to come from grants and the potential for getting the grants
approved have to do with the quality of the project.
Dorothy Kerzner, 5828 Jeff Place, indicated that she is kind of neutral, she has two avid
bikers in her family and she lives across Bredesen Park. She stated that she did attend a
meeting at South View this summer and was at a planning Commission meeting. She
noted that apparently she lives in section 5f and they seemed to not have had a
representative to answer questions because she has a lot of questions about where the trail
is going. She commented that she also thinks now is not the time, they can’t afford it and
right now there are too many things going on in Edina that are still unresolved. She
stated that they need to save and wait. There needs to be more community participation,
send letters out to people within 1,000 feet. She added that she never heard anything
about this bike trail until seven months ago so if that could be addressed they would
appreciate it in their neighborhood.
David Thompson, 5517 Valley Lane, asked the Park Board to recommend against using
the Section 9 alignment which is the creek-based route. He noted that they believe the
section 9 alignment will destroy their privacy, their quality of life and their property
values. He indicated that he hopes the Park Board has taken the opportunity to walk this
very small area so you know how incredibly destructive a boardwalk would be in this
area. It is not an issue that fence or some vegetation can remedy. He commented that the
residents are going to pay dearly and while Mr. Keprios alluded briefly to these facts in
his recommendation letter he later mentioned that property owners have no right to
expect that the city will not develop the land in a manner it sees fit. He noted that they
strongly disagree and that neighborhoods are built on the premise that each of us will
keep and use our properties in a manner that will not undermined our neighbor’s quiet
enjoyment of their properties. He pointed out that even though they own their homes
they are not free to convert them into retail stores, hotels or health clubs because to do
that would be detrimental to their neighbor’s quiet enjoyment and their property values
and therefore the city would not allow it. However, now the city is considering changing
the use of a completely natural area within the neighborhood into a greater metropolitan
thoroughfare that will funnel an estimated 500,000 users’ just feet from their decks,
patios and swing sets. He commented that in effect the city is saying it has the right to be
a bad neighbor, it’s saying that it has the right to harm our privacy our quality of life and
our property values to which they disagree. Mr. Thompson stressed that they believe that
the city should abide by the same land use conventions that protect the rights of the
residents in the neighborhood. He noted his final point is they don’t have to argue about
property values, the Park Board should ask Three Rivers Park District to commission an
17
appraisal, an independent appraisal of what will happen to property values along the
creek.
Gene Persha, 6917 Cornelia Drive, indicated that he would first like to give a vote of
confidence to the Three Rivers Park Planning group. He indicated that he didn’t quite
agree with the setup of the CAT team in how it was put together, but he has absolute
confidence in the objectivity that Three Rivers has done to come up with the facts. He
stated that it was their job to come up with interpretations that would be the most fitting
for the terrain and the job of the city is to make decisions based on what they found.
Therefore, he has no fault in the thoroughness which they have done and he has been
watching this for a very long time. He informed the Park Board that he has biked most of
the major bike trails in Minnesota and added that some of the trails come very, very close
to people’s properties. He indicate that this past summer he biked the entire length of the
Chicago Park Forest Preserve, which is one of the most densely populated areas in
America and homes are very close to the creek. He noted that in all of the years and
places he has biked he has never heard a negative comment about neighbors and homes
being too close to a bike path. He pointed out that he has never seen, even in the Chicago
area, graffiti, trash or anything else that would detract from the neighborhood. Mr.
Persha stressed that he thinks this is the most opportune time to make a bike path because
the Nine Mile Creek Watershed District is repairing the land with a restoration project.
Therefore, it’s a chance to save hundreds of thousands of dollars if the two projects are
done together. He commented that if it’s not done he doesn’t think this project will ever
come again to Edina. He asked for the Park Board’s support for the project from a safety
standpoint, a user standpoint and to treat the communities that are adjacent to us as a unit.
Bob Lubar, 6619 Londonderry Dr., indicated that he thinks they need to take a serious
look at the engineering aspects of building through the creek and what it could mean and
have they done the due diligence necessary so that they can make a recommendation
going forward. He noted that if the creek-based route is developed as proposed it would
result in approximately 6600 linear feet of wood deck timber boardwalk, this is
equivalent to a bridge that is 1 ¼ miles long. He added that much of the boardwalk will
be constructed within the hundred year flood plain and/or the Nine Mile Creek flood
plain. He stated that the boardwalk will be approximately 10 to 12 feet high and 12 feet
wide with the enclosed railings and pilings every 12 to 20 feet and has a ten ton capacity
bridge suitable for supporting vehicle traffic. He commented it will be built parallel to
the stream which is very significant; the intended design is similar to building a bridge
above a stream rather than across a stream. He explained that a structure of this nature
with its entire length in the current of the water when it’s flooding can be expected to trap
debris during periods of heavy water run off which will increase the level of flood water
and increase maintenance costs. He pointed out that when the creek is running right next
to it, when that water is flowing, it’s going to catch on one piling and if it misses that
piling it’s going to catch on the other and the likelihood of creating a dam and creating
collateral damage due to the flooding is huge. He stated as a homeowner whose property
backs up to the wetlands he has a vested interest in assuring that the proposed bridge
along the creek performs as intended. Mr. Lubar asked what experience Three Rivers
have with building a wood deck bridge located in a stream floodway because it is critical
that there is no incremental risk of flood damage resulting from the implementation of
18
this project. He asked how will Three Rivers protect the elevated trail and surrounding
wetlands from accumulation of debris and how are they going to remove all of the debris.
In addition, how will the bridge be maintained in the winter because he knows the
traverse decking and rail system will prevent efficient plowing and given the railings on
the side it will be virtually impossible to get a traditional plow system down the lumber
as well as tearing up the lumber. Therefore, the next question becomes will it be
incumbent upon the city to buy additional capital equipment so that they can maintain
this bridge work. Mr. Lubar asked does Three Rivers Park have sufficient operating
funds to support this high maintenance project well into the future and what actions will
the city take to guarantee performance now and in the future.
Dan Atkins, 6812 Chapel Lane, quoted Theodore Roosevelt “Unite People in connection
with the heartbreakingly gorgeous land they share”. He noted that the last word he thinks
is the key “share” this land we all “share” and we all want to be able to use it. He stated
that he thinks everybody needs to consider being on the right side of history and not
what’s the right decision for now or December or November elections but for next year
or even 10, 50 or 100 years from now.
George Rerat, 6620 Londonderry Dr., informed the Park Board that they are putting
together a Parkwood Group to support Walnut Ridge, if you look at the neighborhood in
Parkwood Knolls as it exists today it is a great community asset that is used by everybody
who lives around that park. He stated that when you are talking about this trail you are
talking about the users coming from a small distance to enjoy it for exercise, for nature
and for community building. He indicated that Walnut Ridge already does this and if that
trail is brought in you are going to get rid of that. He pointed out that the current trail is a
nice circle and if you go there any night after work you are going to see kids riding their
bikes, parents walking their dogs and stopping to talk to neighbors and it’s disheartening
to think you want to disrupt Walnut Ridge Park the way it is. He noted that the kids play
tennis, hockey, lacrosse and softball; these are all of the different things the park is
currently used for by all of the neighbors and nobody wants to see that changed. Routing
the path through that park just disrupts what’s already good and they don’t have to spend
any money to change it and therefore doesn’t like the idea of it going through the park.
He noted that the neighborhood is putting together a petition that they will bring to the
City Council that will have a lot of signatures on it stating that they don’t want the trail to
go through Walnut Ridge Park. Mr. Rerat stated that the other thing is he doesn’t know
why they are in such a hurry, if they miss the deadline for 2015-2016 there will be
funding available for 2017-2018; it’s not like funding is going to disappear. He
commented why don’t they let Richfield and portions of Lake Minnetonka as well as
portions of all of these other areas get built so we could learn from them what the best
practices are for design, building, maintenance, etc. They could learn from their mistakes
rather than us jumping in now when we don’t have all of the facts, we don’t know what
we are doing. He indicated it might be prudent to wait and learn what works and what
doesn’t and then have Edina step in knowing the best practices. He stated that he thinks
they are rushing to a decision for Three Rivers Park, not for the benefit of Edina.
Bruce Jackson, 5716 Continental Dr., stated that he has three general comments. First, he
thinks the road versus creek-based option is sort of a false choice and that they should
19
have the ability to select the best route for any particular segment. He noted that while he
may be opposed to Route 2 he may like the bridge over Highway 62 from Bredesen to the
High School and thinks that might be a valuable addition to the community. Second, the
community survey does not provide the data to justify this trail or the selection of the
creek versus the road-based option or any particular section on this trail because the
survey instrument is flawed; it is not designed to answer those questions. Finally, he
would challenge the assertion that Edina not be connected to the Regional Trail system if
we chose not to do this project. He noted that he thinks the community has made
tremendous progress in building up its bike trails locally and he is sure that they can
continue to do so even if they do not participate in this project.
Joseph Hulbert MOVED TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC COMMENT IF NECESSARY.
Todd Fronek MOVED, Dan Peterson SECONDED.
Ms. Steel asked Mr. Keprios to talk about why he would prefer the route of the trail to go
along the south side of Walnut Ridge Park when the north side had been proposed to
avoid flooding issues. Mr. Keprios explained that when he looks at the impact on the
park both the entrance and the exit would remain the same. He noted that having it go
along the south side it would keep it further away from the hockey rink yet close enough
to the building so that people will still have access to the restroom facilities. He added
that’s also a shorter route and it’s the shortest distance between two points so he suspects
that a lot of people using the trail will take that route naturally so therefore in his view it
makes more sense.
Mr. Hulbert indicated that he thinks he is speaking for everyone when he says this has
been a long and emotional process. He noted that all of the neighbors want what is best
for the parks, but ultimately he thinks the number one issue in his mind is if we were to
consider some sort of a trail, safety is a major issue for him so in his mind a creek-based
alignment is the safest option. He stated that he realizes this is not going to be a popular
opinion with a lot of people who feel like they are losing privacy. He commented that he
also sees the formation of a trail through Edina as a way to encourage our neighbors to
get outside, enjoy the parks and connect with the community. Mr. Hulbert pointed out
that they have received hundreds of e-mails and letters and one that stood out and kind of
separated the emotion from the decision was from former City Council member Scott
Johnson. He wrote “the proposed creek-based route is a logical and wise use of public
land for a healthy environmentally sound project which will be of enormous benefit to the
community and all who use it. The project involves no taking of private land, and while
understandably of concern to those joining the path, it is a predictable public use of
public lands for the public good”. He stated that is where he stands and thinks it
ultimately would be a good amenity for our community and, although not popular with
everybody, any decision that is made is not going to be popular with everybody.
Mr. Fronek stated that he thinks this presents our community with an amazing
opportunity and they have heard a lot of the benefits of trails. However, he thinks they
need to have some more careful thoughtful planning. He indicated that to him the rail
line is the way to go and he understands the CP is not playing ball right now and it is
certainly a frustration; however, if they are looking to connect to these regional trails
20
that’s where it’s got to go. He added that is where Three Rivers has the most experience
in building these trails. Mr. Fronek explained that looking from the comprehensive Bike
Plan and at the demographics; the Edina population is more densely concentrated in the
northeast quadrant. Those people are going to be able to utilize a trail along the CP line a
lot more. Also, to the extent that you want to encourage commuting he doesn’t think that
the Nine Mile trail necessarily encourages that. He thinks the CP rail provides the best
connection for Edina. He stressed if it’s not the time now, then we should get CP to the
table and figure it out.
Mr. Dummer stated that he thinks what’s important to note here is that no matter what
decision it is whether its road or creek as Mr. Keprios stated that if we build it we will use
it. He noted that we have to take into account that high school kids are going to be able
to utilize this to get to school and to navigate through the City of Edina. He indicated
that he thinks it’s important to see how it will be a positive effect on Edina.
Mr. Pronove stated that in addition to what Mr. Dummer said is that he has actually
joined several classes that go outside and use the fields and explained that it’s kind of
tough to get out of the premises from down below. He noted that basically you have to
go up either stairwells or back into the parking lot back outside or you have to go out
bushwhacking. He noted that with this he thinks they could actually go out for other
studies like science and such things. He stated that he also thinks it might help with some
of the traffic congestion around release time because it would help more kids have the
ability to walk to school.
Ms. Steel pointed out that she had an eye opening experience at the last Park Board
meeting when they were looking at the CIP. She noted that she didn’t realize how
expensive it is to repair the asphalt paths. She indicated that looking at the Needs
Assessment Survey and seeing how many residents want new bikes trails and walking
opportunities that she doesn’t know if as a city they can really provide the amount that
the community needs. Therefore, she sees this as an opportunity for the Park District to
step in and address our needs. She added that the Edina taxpayers have been funneling
money to the Park District and she thinks it’s time they benefit from what they have put
in.
Dan Peterson MOVED TO RECOMMEND THAT THE PARK BOARD PROPOSE TO
THE CITY COUNCIL A CREEK-BASED REGIONAL TRAIL WITH THE
ADDITIONAL RECOMMENDATIONS AS PROPOSED BY STAFF REGARDING
THE TRAIL ALIGNMENT THROUGH WALNUT RIDGE PARK, EASEMENT
RIGHTS, BUFFERS AND THE ISSUES INVOLVING BOARDWALKS AND TO
WORK IN A LEGAL TIME FRAME FOR A START AND FINISH OF THE
PROJECT. Louise Segreto SECONDED THE MOTION.
Mr. Peterson commented that what he found interesting at the joint meeting was when the
chairman of Three Rivers stated that if Edina does nothing and passes on a trail there will
be bike trails coming through Edina. They are just not going to be particularly safe
because people who ride their bikes want to come from Minnetonka, Hopkins, Richfield,
Bloomington, etc., and Edina happens to be right in the middle of it. Mr. Peterson stated
21
that they might as well do it and they might as well do it right for the future of the city
and the future of our families and they might as well do it safely.
IN FAVOR: Jennifer Kenney, Louise Segreto, Bill Lough, Joseph Hulbert, Keeya Steel,
Ellen Jones, Dan Peterson, Rob Presthus
OPPOSED: Todd Fronek
ABSTAINED: Randy Meyer
MOTION CARRIED.
D. Community Advisory Team Report – Member Ellen Jones – Ms. Jones indicated that
they are continuing to create their report and they will be submitting that to the City
Council when it’s done.
III. UPDATES FROM STAFF
A. Off-leash Dog Park – Mr. Keprios informed the Park Board that Ms. Segreto was able to
attend the off-leash dog park meeting last night to listen to some of the issues and
questions that users had. He asked Ms. Segreto to share with the Park Board what she
witnessed. Ms. Segreto indicated that the group had a lot of issues ranging from
inadequate signage to enforcement issues to requests for lighting to a request for
maintaining the trail going around the perimeter of the park to licensing fees. She noted
that she thinks the bottom line is that the signage is being evaluated and new signage will
be put up to help with enforcement in the park. She commented that some of the other
capital improvement issues staff will need to look at solutions if they’re possible. Mr.
Keprios stated that he was very pleased at how it played out and he thought they had
some really wonderful constructive comments and it didn’t turn into just a complaint
session. He noted that they came forward with some excellent ideas, a very long list and
all very positive. He stated that, if resources and money weren’t an issue, they would do
more of them sooner, but at least they are able to get them on a list.
Mr. Meyer pointed out that last year there were some severe issues with snow and ice
accumulation. It was actually quite dangerous getting in and out of the space. Mr.
Keprios responded that they did hear that last night and Vince Cockriel, Park
Superintendent, was there and did make a note of that.
IV. PARK BOARD COMMENTS
Mr. Hulbert stated that he would like to commend Austin and Felix for doing an awesome
job in their second Park Board meeting because it was a little bit of a pressure cooker
tonight.
MEETING ADJOURNED