Loading...
120997 PK MINCITY OF SHOREWOOD COUNCIL CHAMBERS COUNCIL/PARK COMMISSION MEETING 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD TUESDAY, DECEMBER 9, 1997 7:30 P.M. MINUTES CONVENE CITY COUNCIL/PARK COMMISSION MEETING Chair Colopoulos called the meeting to order at 7:32 p.m. A. ROLL CALL Present: Chair Colopoulos; Commissioners Puzak, Dallman, Arnst, Packard and Bensman; Mayor Dahlberg; Councilmembers O'Neill and Garfunkel; Administrator Jim Hurm; Engineer Larry Brown Absent: Commissioner Wilson; Councilmembers Stover and McCarty B. REVIEW AGENDA Chair Colopoulos read the Agenda for December 9, 1997. The agenda was accepted as presented. 2. DISCUSSION OF PROCEDURES FOR CONTINUATION OF REVIEW OF THE CITY'S TRAIL PLAN Mark Koegler, Hoisington Koegler Group, Inc., was present to facilitate the discussion. He began with a brief explanation of his background and the service he provides. Mr. Koegler explained the objective of the meeting is to determine whether there is an interest in proceeding with a trail plan. He noted the scope of the Park Commission is to determine the level of community support for a trail system in the City of Shorewood. This scope is broad and not specific to a particular area. Mr. Koegler explained his expectation the meeting will result in direction to proceed or not proceed. If there is a decision to proceed, he felt it should be accompanied by a commitment to abide by the outcome. Mr. Koegler did not want to see the Commission and the Council agree to things they are not committed to following through on. He noted this is not meant to predetermine the outcome in any way. Mr. Koegler felt a process could be structured by which to determine the broad issue of a trail system in Shorewood. Mr. Koegler explained the handout including the objective to be accomplished, the process to be followed as well as a list of tasks to be completed. CITY COUNCIL/PARK COMMISSION MINUTES DECEMBER 9, 1997 - PAGE 2 Commissioner Bensman stated the intent of the Commission to be that once a final report is completed, the end result would be respected by the Council. Mr. Koegler clarified if there is support, that support will be documented and a recommendation made to the Council. At that point, the recommendation would be considered by the Council for their final decision. He noted the Park Commission is attempting to provide the Council with a comfort level that the community either does or does not support a trail system. CITY COUNCIL/PARK COMMISSION MINUTES DECEMBER 9, 1997 - PAGE 3 Mayor Dahlberg asked how the conclusion can be arrived at without actually knowing the specifics of the plan. Mr. Koegler stated this process is geared toward determining whether there is community support for a trail system. Councilmember Garfunkel noted his agreement with Mayor Dahlberg. They felt the community would need a concrete plan to review in order to be able to express an opinion one way or the other relative to a trail plan. Mr. Koegler felt there must first be a determination whether or not there is support for a trail system within the community. Mr. Koegler explained the working group referenced in his proposal would consist of community members and not councilmembers or commissioners. This group would attempt to look at specific issues the residents may have. He explained the detail issues could be addressed by this group and depicted in computer graphics to demonstrate how a trail could fit into a particular type of landscape. Mr. Koegler stated an entire list of specific issues will result as a part of the process. These issues will include personal property concerns residents may have as well as general safety concerns, aesthetics and the cost involved. Commissioner Bensman suggested looking at this as a trail system presupposing one trail is connected to another trail. She felt there would always be individuals in favor of a trail as well as opposed, however, the trail needs to be addressed as a system with which to move through the community. Mayor Dahlberg pointed out each part of the system must be viable to be connected. Commissioner Bensman stated she would want to avoid going through the entire process, leading people to believe a trail system will be developed and then it is halted by several citizens who are opposed to a trail system. Mayor Dahlberg felt one of the factors which will need to be addressed is whether residents would be in favor of exchanging some property rights for the construction of a trail system. Commissioner Puzak referenced a survey which was completed a year and a half ago asking whether the community wants a trail system. He noted a significant number of residents expressed an interest in a trail system, however, he felt there to be a lack of confidence in the survey given the fact an abstract question was asked and there is some question relative to the answer which was given. Commissioner Puzak explained this is a very costly design process which would require the Park Commission, Planning Commission and Council work together on this issue. He noted the Commission does not want to expend the time and funds on this issue to find the Council is opposed to a trail system. Councilmember O'Neill stated there is significant interest in a trail system, however, this interest wanes when a property owner is made aware how close the trail will be to their front door. He felt the difficultly to be retro - fitting a trail to a city which is already substantially developed. CITY COUNCIL/PARK COMMISSION MINUTES DECEMBER 9, 1997 - PAGE 4 Commissioner Puzak felt there to be two major barriers to proceeding. He noted no one has a great deal of confidence the community wants a trail system. There is an issue of the immediately adjoining property owners. He did not feel an entire trail system would affect more than 10 or 12 percent of the community. The second issue is the detail and the potential for encountering barriers and how they can be addressed once they are encountered. Mayor Dahlberg felt the process could be shortened by presenting alternative plans. Commissioner Puzak noted the Commission was unable to shortened the process, however, he felt with the cooperation of the Council, this may be possible. Mayor Dahlberg suggested the Council could assist in shortening the process. Councilmember O'Neill suggested rather than a citywide trail system, creating a trail system for one neighborhood at a time. He suggested speaking with the residents first and then proceeding. He inquired whether this would be a viable option. Mr. Koegler explained anything the community does must reflect the needs and the interests of its residents, however, it must be in balance with what the community as a whole is attempting to achieve. Mr. Koegler related his belief there is a benefit to people of different neighborhoods coming together to discuss the issue. The process being presented is geared toward a grass roots level. Mayor Dahlberg stated a top down management approach would be rejected. He explained Shorewood is a diverse city with very different neighborhoods and one way to keep peace is to empower neighborhoods. Commissioner Puzak remarked the nature of trails is that of an interconnecting pathway between communities, neighborhoods or housing developments. He stated the value of a trail system is that it does bridge the neighborhoods. Mayor Dahlberg stated he is unsure the community feels it is essential to ensure the entire community is interconnected. Commissioner Puzak felt two different plans may be appropriate. One would be a west side plan which would focus around the LRT. There may be a very different concept for the east side. Commissioner Puzak felt it would be beneficial to work with Excelsior in developing a link. He also suggested a pedestrian bridge over Mill Street to cross Highway 7. Commissioner Puzak pointed out the island area is not included in either plan. Mayor Dahlberg suggested pressure could be taken out of the trail plan if it were not looked upon as a transportation solution for people to move through the community. Commissioner Puzak commented that the trail may be three distinct pieces, but expressed concern that breaking it down into very small neighborhood pieces, the entire concept may be lost. Councilmember O'Neill stated it is the job of the Council, the Commission and the engineers to assure the various trails all flow together. He commented he is also opposed to utilizing a top CITY COUNCIL/PARK COMMISSION MINUTES DECEMBER 9, 1997 - PAGE 5 down method of allowing a majority of the city decide for everyone there will be a trail system throughout the city. Mayor Dahlberg stated in some regard there is a property rights issue involved which will probably be a Council policy related issue. Commissioner Puzak noted there are barriers to proceeding which indicates the City must utilize a fair, open and creative process in either breaking through the barriers or in going around them. Councilmember Garfunkel inquired what happens when an obstacle is encountered with no technical way around it. He asked whether the trail would be put in regardless of the feelings of the residents. Mr. Koegler asked what threshold of resistance the Council is willing to tolerate. Mayor Dahlberg felt creativity to be a tremendous key to the issue. Commissioner Puzak expressed concern that opportunities are missed as time goes by. He felt the Planning Commission should also be involved in this planning. Councilmember O'Neill stated if a neighborhood is opposed to a trail through their neighborhood, the Council will not force a trail through. Mr. Koegler stated this process will attempt to gain a better understanding of some of those issues, wherever they happen to occur, so the City can be in a position to create a solution around a particular issue. He pointed out this is a grass roots process as opposed to a top down process. Councilmember Garfunkel felt it would appear to be a top down process to the neighborhoods. Mr. Koegler felt with sufficient publicity of the process there will be a better understanding among the residents. Commissioner Packard asked what option is available if Mr. Koegler's plan is not utilized. Councilmember Garfunkel felt the alternative would be to drop the plan. Engineer Brown questioned whether a survey could address the personalized issue of whether there would be support for a trail which comes through a property owner's front yard. Mayor Dahlberg felt most residents would not be in favor of the trail coming through their property, however, they would be willing to compromise. Brown asked how the plan would be adapted to go around a neighborhood which chooses not to participate. Councilmember Garfunkel commented this does not have to be an all or nothing issue. Mayor Dahlberg stated if the overwhelming majority of the City wants a system, the Council would not stand in their way. Councilmember O'Neill felt each area must be addressed independently. CITY COUNCIL/PARK COMMISSION MINUTES DECEMBER 9, 1997 - PAGE 6 Councilmember Garfunkel commented on the issue of stability which a resident expects when they move into the community. He stated changes must be approached seriously and cautiously. Chair Colopoulos felt there to be an issue of degree of support and the number of opposition could be reduced through creativity in addressing the issue. Councilmember Garfunkel stated the first step is to find out if the residents really want a trail system. He felt a survey should come before a community forum. Chair Colopoulos inquired in what priority this matter should be addressed. Councilmember O'Neill felt if a citywide trail system is something a majority of the citizens want it could be handled as a priority, however a definite plan needs to be presented. Councilmember Garfunkel felt the outcome of the survey can depend on how the questions are asked. Mayor Dahlberg stated the residents need to be asked, through a survey, how they feel about a trail going through their own property. Mayor Dahlberg stated he would like to review this matter further. He noted there is a safety issue which has been raised relative to a potential trail on Smithtown Trail given the close proximity to higher speed traffic. There is also an issue of whether or not bicycles will be permitted on the trail. Mr. Koegler stated the set of issues which are ultimately determined may lead the City to believe early on there are areas of the community were a trail simply cannot be accomplished. He explained the Commission's intent was to utilize a grass roots approach to determining the issues. Mayor Dahlberg and Councilmember O'Neill stated they cannot commit to abide by the outcome. Mr. Koegler stated the intent was for the Council to have a comfort level that this is the right approach to obtain answers relative to a citywide trail plan. Chair Colopoulos felt, based upon his experience with the Snowmobile Task Force, the contentious nature of debate and discourse will yield a more complete outcome than would otherwise be achieved. Councilmember O'Neill felt the Commission should proceed through the survey and public forums and then re- evaluate the issue. He felt there to be sufficient interest to proceed. Chair Puzak questioned whether the Council is comfortable with the Commission proceeding on this issue. Mayor Dahlberg stated he would like to review the matter before coming to a decision. He would like specific ideas on how this can be accomplished. Councilmember O'Neill noted the Park Commission will be getting the citizens involved in the process. Councilmember Garfunkel was in favor of obtaining information, but would like there to be Council check points along the way. Commissioner Puzak suggested the survey which is sent out be approved by the Council. Mr. Koegler noted this to be standard procedure to obtain Council's approval of the survey. CITY COUNCIL/PARK COMMISSION MINUTES DECEMBER 9, 1997 - PAGE 7 Mayor Dahlberg commended the Park Commission on their work in inviting the Council's participation to discuss the viability of the process and giving the Council management oversight of the project. Mr. Koegler commented Council involvement is essential at each one of the steps. Commissioner Puzak summarized there is consensus among Mayor Dahlberg and Councilmembers O'Neill and Garfunkel that the Commission will proceed with the caveat there be management oversight by the Council. He requested another open forum be held between the Commission and the Council before the Council reaches a final conclusion on this matter. It was agreed that if a dispute arises, there will be a resolution meeting between the Commission and the Council. Councilmember O'Neill noted there is a Council Liaison at the Park Commission meetings and did not feel the Council would need to meet with the Park Commission at every step. Councilmember Garfunkel inquired relative to the cost which is involved in this process. Mr. Koegler explained the process, including the survey, will cost approximately $10,000. The survey will cost from $4,000 to $5,000. Mr. Koegler summarized implementation of the process will begin. The Council will be kept informed and will have oversight capacity. The format will be formulated relative to the community forum. This will include a communication plan. 11. ADJOURNMENT Dallman moved, Puzak seconded adjourning the meeting at 9:15 p.m. Motion passed 6/0. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED Cheryl Wallat Recording Secretary TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc. City of Shorewood Derinitions WEBSTER Issue: "A point, matter, or question to be disputed or decided." 0 HOISINGTON KOEGLER GROUP Public Issue: "A matter where public opinion is divided and agreement on a direction or course of action has not yet been reached." 0 City of Shorewood EXPECTATION • City of Shorewood to • • City of Shorewood 9: • Objective: To determine the level of community support for a trail system in the City of Shorewood. Process: Hold a public meeting "event" focused on trails but including other related recreational interests. Following the public meeting, structure a series of three Citizen Review Group meetings, each emphasizing a different aspect of the decision process. Tasks: 1. Conduct an initial workshop meeting with the Park Commission and City Council regarding the process. (December 9, 1997) 2. Develop a communications plan, conduct publicity and mail invitations (HKGi and City Staff). 3. Conduct a parks and trails community forum for approximately 100+ people representing the public at -large and various recreational interests. The outcome of the meeting will be the tabulation of a set of trail and park issues that are important to the community. • 4. Conduct an updated community survey providing information on trails and other park and recreation needs. The survey should be a telephone survey with a representative sample size (approximately 400). The results of the survey would serve as another barometer of the community's attitude toward trails and other park issues. This task is optional but recommended. 5. Summarize the results of the community forum and survey. 6. Appoint a balanced Citizen Review Group of not more than 15 people to meet and explore the trail issue in more detail based on the information received from the community forum and the telephone survey. 7. Conduct Citizen Review Group Meeting #1, the purpose of which is to define the issues and problems. 8. Conduct Citizen Review Group Meeting #2 to propose and examine alternatives to resolve the issues. 9. Conduct Citizen Review Group Meeting #3 to formulate recommendations to the Park Commission and City Council. 0 10. Prepare a final report summarizing the results of the process.