Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
2012-05-02 Joint Board Packet
Stillwater City and Town Joint Board Wednesday, May 2, 2012 AGENDA 1. CALL TO ORDER 2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA 3. APPROVAL OF APRIL 4, 2012 MINUTES 4. PUBLIC HEARINGS 4.01 Case No. 2012 -07. Special use permit request for an off -leash dog park located east of the City of Stillwater's Public Works Facility (3325 Boutwell Rd) in the PROS (Parks, Recreation and Open Space) District. Allison McGinnis, President, Friends of Stillwater Area Dog Park, applicant. Hearing closed on April 4, 2012; discussion continued to May 21, 2012. 5. ADJOURNMENT Item 3 Joint Planning Board Meeting Minutes April 4, 2012 Present: Dave Johnson and Linda Countryman, Stillwater Township; Ken Harycki, City of Stillwater. Staff present: Stillwater Community Development Director Bill Turnblad. Chair Johnson called the meeting to order at 7:03 PM. Approval of Agenda Board Member Harycki moved to approve the agenda. Board Member Countryman seconded the motion, which passed unanimously. Election of Officers Mr. Johnson was nominated to serve as Chairman. Mr. Roush was nominated to serve as Vice - Chair. On a unanimous vote the two nominated members were elected to office. Public Hearings Case No. 2012 -01 A request by Joe Jablonski of Lennar for approval of Millbrook 6th Addition. The plat would include 10 single family homes and 22 townhouse units within three buildings. Mr. Turnblad summarized the planning report of February 22, 2012 written by City Planner Mike Pogge. He also gave an update on the progress of improvements to the main park in the development. Chair Johnson opened the public hearing. There being no public comments, he closed the public hearing. Board Member Harycki moved to approve the plat of Millbrook 6th Addition. The motion was seconded by Board Member Countryman and passed on a 3 -0 vote. Case No. 2012 -07 A request by the Friends of Stillwater Area Dog Park, Inc. for a Special Use Permit to develop and operate an off-leash dog park on City property located at 3111 — 80th Street North, currently referred to as the "Boutwell Cemetery Property ". Mr. Turnblad summarized his report of March 29, 2012. Chair Johnson opened the public hearing. Allison McGinnis, President of the Friends of Stillwater Area Dog Park, Inc. (FSADP), addressed the issue of dog barking. Her points: 1. Nature of location — few houses in the immediate vicinity; five of seven abutting homes are more than a football field away. 2. Hours of operation between 8 am and sunset. 3. St. Paul Dog Owners Group states "Generally speaking, you just don't hear much barking at a dog park; and if one dog starts to bark at others, the owner is always there to quiet the dog down." Joint Board Minutes April 4, 2012 Page 2 of 4 4. Incorporated into posted rules: "Dogs that bark excessively must be removed." 5. Informal survey of city dog parks conducted by City Park Department indicates that barking dogs are generally not a problem at off -leash dog parks. 6. Minneapolis Park and Recreation's Support Services Manager, Anne Olson, says Mpls has six off -leash dog parks, two of them are small and have houses across the street. None of the dog parks has significant issues with barking. 7. According to the "Guidelines for Establishment and Maintenance of Successful Off - Leash Dog Exercise Areas" by the Program in Veterinary Behavioral Medicine Center for Animals in Society, located in Davis, California, barking problems are relatively infrequent. 8. Reassess after a year. Chair Johnson asked Ms. McGinnis if FSADP has considered other sites. She responded that they have and that all had potentially more conflicts and challenges than Boutwell Cemetery. Board Member Countryman stated that the dog park would be popular and asked if there was any room on the site for expansion. Ms. McGinnis responded that there is no room on the site for expansion. Following up on her comments Countryman asked if FSADP could buy land somewhere further out where residents would be further away from the park. Ms. McGinnis inferred that the group was not interested in purchasing property. Steven Nelson, 7770 Minar Lane said that his concerns are summarized in the letter he has submitted for the record. He continued by stating that dogs simply bark - even when content. If barking becomes a problem the neighbors could call the Stillwater Police Department, but dog complaints are not a very high priority with Police. Moreover, by the time a squad car arrived, the dogs could have stopped barking. It is hard to verify this kind of complaint. "Excessive barking" is a relative thing. To a dog owner it might be much different than to a neighboring resident. Resale of a home next to a dog park would be impacted because a smaller share of the market is interested in having a home next to a dog park. A dog park detracts from the natural setting of the area. Curt Warren, 7750 Minar Lane said he was opposed to the dog park because of the potential for nuisance barking. JoAnna Tom, Secretary for FSADP, testified that barking of dogs should not be a problem. Two of the principle reasons a dog will bark is to defend /protect its territory and to get attention. On neutral ground, such as an off -leash dog park, defensive /protective barking does not occur. And the dog owners will be with them at the park, so barking for attention is not an issue. Board Member Countryman asked if FSADP have sufficient funding to complete the proposed improvements. To which McGinnis responded that they have suspended their fund raising efforts until a specific site plan and cost estimates are approved. But, that they believe they can raise the funds privately. Countryman asked McGinnis if her group has made contact with all the neighbors. McGinnis responded that they have reached out to all the neighbors but that most were not available and they have not attempted again. Countryman asked if a dog park will negatively impact the surrounding property values. Joint Board Minutes April 4, 2012 Page 3 of 4 Larry Hansen, City of Stillwater Administrator, stated that part of the controversy may be his fault. He suggested the Boutwell Cemetery site to the FSADP because all other sites that were investigated by the group had more conflicts and challenges than the cemetery site. It was not his intention to create conflict for the neighbors and Town Board. Chair Johnson closed the public hearing since no more testimony was offered. Chair Johnson mentioned that the demand for the dog park use would be from City residents with small lots. Township residents have large properties. He also mentioned that though the benefits will be realized by City residents it is the Township residents that must live with the inconveniences of increased activity in Boutwell Cemetery. And since the park would be improved with private money, the expectation of the donors will make it more difficult to close the park if barking becomes an unresolvable problem. He said he was concerned for those who would be asked to accept this change in their back yards, especially since it represents a change in the Master Park plan from a passive to an active use. Board Member Harycki said he has never seen an acre and a half dog park personally and does not know what to expect is terms of barking and other potential impacts. He therefore asked if a tour of existing dog parks in the region could be arranged. Rather than making a decision based upon fears of the unknown, let's get to know existing similar dog parks first. Board Member Countryman said she understands that barking from an off -leash dog park is not as bad as a kennel. But would like to have an understanding of potential property value impact before she makes a decision. She also wanted the applicants to communicate better with the neighbors before a decision is made. Therefore she asked that the matter be tabled to gather this additional information. Chair Johnson said he was in favor of the use, but wants more information to decide whether this site is appropriate. The item was tabled until May 2, 2012. Turnblad stated that he would arrange a "self serve" tour of similar dog parks and distribute the information to the Joint Board, City Planning Commission and City Council. He would try to have the tour information available and on the City website by April 13. New Business Building Permit Activity Report Mr. Turnblad presented the 2011 permit report. 44 permits were issued for residential units in the Orderly Annexation Area. The total number of residential permits issued from 1996 to 2011 totals 1,245. During that time, at a rate of 120 permits allowed annually, 1,920 permits could have been issued. Therefore, a positive balance of 675 permits exists through 2011. Murphy Annexation Discussion Turnblad presented his memo of February 14, 2012. City staff and the City Parking Commission are requesting the Joint Board to comment on a suggestion to create a policy Joint Board Minutes April 4, 2012 Page 4 of 4 limiting the boundaries of properties that could in the foreseeable future be detached from the Township and annexed to the City. The suggestion is that Orwell and Fairy Falls Road serve as this boundary. There was agreement amongst the Joint Board members that it would be beneficial for the Town Board to meet with the City Council, probably at a City Council work session, to discuss this policy. Town Board Supervisor Untied suggested that three items ought to be discussed at such a work session: 1) Fairy Falls Hill area detachment/annexation policy; 2) Status and future of property recently detached from Lake Elmo and annexed to Stillwater Township; and 3) status of Orderly Annexation Agreement - its pending milestone dates - as well as longer term boundary and Joint Board issues. Turnblad stated that he would check with the City Administrator to see if the Joint Board could meet with the City Council at the May 1, 2012 work session. Adjournment Board Member Harycki moved for adjournment. Board Member Countryman seconded the motion, which passed unanimously. Meeting adjourned at 8:55 PM. Respectfully submitted, Bill Turnblad Acting Recording Secretary Item 4 • 1 Ilwater THE BIRTHPLACE OF MINNESOTA PLANNING REPORT DATE: April 27, 2012 CASE NO.: 2012 -07 APPLICANT: Friends of Stillwater Area Dog Park, Inc. Allison McGinnis, President LANDOWNER: City of Stillwater REQUEST: Special Use Permit for Off -Leash Dog Park LOCATION: 3111 - 80th Street North ZONING: PROS - Park, Recreation or Open Space PUBLIC HEARINGS: April 4 & May 2, 2012 (Joint Board Meeting) May 14, 2012 (Planning Commission) REVIEW DEADLINE: May 13, 2012 (extended to July 12) PREPARED BY: Bill Turnblad, Community Development Director, City of Stillwater The Joint Board held the public hearing for this case on April 4. Testimony was received and the hearing was closed. The Joint Board then discussed the case, but continued until May 2, 2012 to allow time for members to tour similar facilities in the area. Attached are: 1) the tour map, 2) four new emails related to the case, and 3) the planning report from last month. DOG PARK TOUR MEMO DATE: April 10, 2012 CASE NO.: 2012 -07 APPLICANT: Friends of Stillwater Area Dog Park, Inc. Allison McGinnis, President LANDOWNER: City of Stillwater REQUEST: Special Use Permit for Off -Leash Dog Park LOCATION: 3111 - 80th Street North ZONING: PROS - Park, Recreation or Open Space PUBLIC HEARINGS: April 4, 2012 (Joint Board Meeting - Continued to May 2) April 9, 2012 (Planning Commission - Continued to May 14) PREPARED BY: Bill Turnblad, Community Development Director, City of Stillwater The Friends of Stillwater Area Dog Park, Inc. has submitted an application for a Special Use Permit to develop and operate an off -leash dog park at 3111 80th Street North (Boutwell Road). This is the Boutwell Cemetery site just east of the Public Works Facility. The case requires public hearings from the Joint Board and City Planning Commission. In addition the City Council and Park Commission will consider amending the Master Plan for Boutwell Cemetery Park. The Joint Board opened their public hearing for the request on April 4, 2012, heard testimony from neighbors and closed the public hearing. During discussion the Joint Board members agreed that they would benefit from seeing and listening to similar dog parks before making a decision on the request. Especially since the primary concern of neighbors is potential noise from the dog park. Therefore, the Joint Board tabled the case until May 2, 2012 and asked City staff to organize a self - guided tour of similar dog parks in the metro area. The materials for the self - guided tour are attached together with a Planning Report that reviews the request (at least given information as it exists today). I would suggest that City Council, City Planning Commission and City Park Commission members wait until after May 2nd to take the self - guided tour. If the Joint Board denies the Special Use Permit on May 2, 2012 it will not be necessary for the City to consider the application. If they approve it, then taking the self - guided tour may be helpful. Good website for additional info: www.cvm. umn.edu /vmc /forclients /offleash Go. g1e sego ; Rogers Ramsey Ccrstante Ham Lake Andover Self- Guided Tour 122 mi — about 3 hours 24 mins Page 1 of 6 East r'armir Ion Anoka Champlin Corcoran iedina Elm Creek Park Blaine Os eo Brooklyn Maple Park -y Grove Brooklyn; -} Cent:." Columbia f,. Heights Bn New Hope Cryst Plymouth Lino Lakes Carle Pines ex ratan Mounds is r • ong Lake to Wayzata Shoreview White !r Bear Lake ,Grant Vadnais Heights Lithe Canada Mahtomedi StiWwet Gold "n Valli` Park Deephaven a &a, Shorewood Oslo!, Ho Mtnneto a Minneapolis Falcon,. Heights. St Paul `3 Maplewood Oak West 53 Si Paul South Y, St Paul inhassen Eden Praise Shakopee ska Richfield Men�ota Fors Snelling . ate Park # Bloomington Eagan Savage lebanr Burnsville Reg*nal Apple a ey Mendota Heights Inver Gro "e Hei • ht -€ Woodbury Newport Cottage Grove Mississippi ♦ National River and Recreation Area on Oak Park Heights Nosh Hurison Hudson (35) Afton Somerset Wow River State Park • ake St ;;roix Reach • Afton State Park Port ('_5,1 :Jacgla5 — Hastings Prescott C3 Rom PnorLake # Murphy Hanrehan Park Reserve Lakeville Farmington Coates Vermd: on D2O12 Google - Map data ©2012 Google - iliwater "Of B`R4HP.411 ;t Ot MINNbSQ I A PLANNING REPORT DATE: March 29, 2012 CASE NO.: 2012 -07 APPLICANT: Friends of Stillwater Area Dog Park, Inc. Allison McGinnis, President LANDOWNER: City of Stillwater REQUEST: Special Use Permit for Off -Leash Dog Park LOCATION: 3111 - 80th Street North ZONING: PROS - Park, Recreation or Open Space PUBLIC HEARING:April 4, 2012 (Joint Board Meeting) PREPARED BY: Bill Turnblad, Community Development Director, City of Stillwater SPECIFIC REQUEST Friends of Stillwater Area Dog Park, Inc. is requesting the Joint Board to approve a Special Use Permit for an off -leash dog park at 3111 80th Street North (Boutwell Road). BACKGROUND The Friends of Stillwater Area Dog Park, Inc. (FSADP) would like to develop and operate an off -leash dog park on City owned property just east of the public works facility on Boutwell Road. Use of the park would be open to the general public. The site is zoned PROS - Park, Recreation or Open Space and is currently used for a natural surface trail loop and the historical cemetery of the Boutwell Family. Dog Parks are allowed by Special Use Permit in the PROS Zoning District. FSADP proposes to install a five foot tall chain link fence around a 1.55 acre portion of the site. (See attached site plan.) Entrance to the off -leash fenced area would be through a triple gated area that allows dogs to be taken off their leash without running at large. The gated entry area would be connected by a bituminous walkway to a ten space parking lot. The driveway to the Dog Park SUP Page 2 parking lot would access Boutwell Road about 145 feet west of the current driveway to Boutwell Cemetery. A rain garden would be constructed to treat surface water runoff from the parking lot. Any needed restroom facilities would be provided by portable toilets. No lights are to be installed. All of the improvement costs will be the responsibility of FSADP. In addition the group would: 1) maintain the rain garden, 2) perform basic repairs on the fencing and signage, 3) perform basic maintenance of Boutwell Cemetery together with the Washington County Historical Society, and 4) keep the area clean of litter and dog waste. The City is being asked by FSADP to help with "soft costs" of the park, namely: 1) assist with the installation of the parking lot and path connecting it to the gated area, 2) assist with installation of the fence, 3) remove snow from the lot and connecting path, 4) empty waste receptacles, 5) continue to mow the natural pathway around the fenced off -leash area, and 6) assist with maintenance of the rain garden. The City's Public Works Director believes the necessary personnel resources are available to assist with some of the requested soft costs, but not all. The specific items that Public Works agrees to help with from the above list are: 3) remove snow from the lot (but not from the path connecting the lot to the gated area), 4) empty waste receptacles, 5) continue to mow the natural pathway around the fenced off -leash area. The Park Commission considered the Boutwell Cemetery request on January 30, 2012. With a split 4 -2 vote they approved the concept of an off -leash dog park on the property. However, they requested the FSADP to discuss an alternate location with the Stillwater Township Board of Supervisors. On February 2, 2012 the Stillwater Township's Board of Supervisors considered an FSADP request for use of land near Otto Berg Park. The Town Board did not support use of that particular property for a dog park. If the Special Use Permit is approved by the Joint Board, City Planning Commission and the City Council, then FSADP will raise the funds necessary to make the dog park improvements. The starting date for construction will depend upon how quickly funds can be raised. EVALUATION OF REQUEST The Zoning Chapter of the City Code states that a Dog Park is allowed by Special Use Permit in the PROS Zoning District.2 Since the proposed Boutwell Cemetery site is zoned PROS, a Special Use Permit may be granted for an off -leash dog park as long as the following standards can be satisfied.3 1 The proposed dog park requires an amendment to the adopted Master Plan for the Boutwell Cemetery Park. The amendment requires approval by the City Council. 2 City Code Ch 31, Sec 31 -325 3 City Code Ch 31, Sec. 31- 207(d) lists the SUP review standards. Dog Park SUP Page 3 (1) The proposed use conforms to the requirements and the intent of the Zoning Ordinance, the Comprehensive Plan, and any relevant area plans. Zoning Ordinance The City's Zoning Code recognizes special uses as those that have the potential to create greater land use conflict within a neighborhood than uses that are simply permitted by right of land ownership. These types of uses are required to go through a public hearing process to determine the impact and potential mitigating measures. If those mitigating measures can be implemented, the Special Use Permit could be approved with related conditions. If they cannot be satisfactorily mitigated, the specific use could be considered incompatible with surrounding land uses, and the City may deny the requested Special Use Permit. Items that may cause negative impact by an off -leash dog park include (but are not necessarily limited to): 1. Noise of barking dogs a. The noise issue causes the greatest concern amongst immediately abutting neighbors that have spoken with City staff. b. Friends of Stillwater Area Dog Park representatives will need to satisfy the Joint Board, City Planning Commission and City Council that barking can be controlled satisfactorily in this large lot residential neighborhood. c. The attached neighborhood map shows proximity of the proposed dog park to surrounding homes. d. At very least, the hours of operation should be used as a regulator of quiet hours for neighbors. The City's Public Works Department recommends that the hours of operation should be 8 am to sunset. e. City Code provides for review of Special Use Permits if substantive complaints are received. Typically this would trigger another public hearing and potential revisions or additional conditions. Under extreme circumstances, the review could result in the revocation of the Special Use Permit. 2. Dogs running at large a. This likely will not become a problem. b. Dogs are required by the FSADP to be on a leash between the parked car and the triple gated entrance to the fenced off -leash area. Details of the gated entrance are attached. c. The leash rule, and all others associated with the park use (see attached rule sheet) will be posted by the FSADP on metal signs. 3. Cleaning up dog waste a. The City will empty the dog waste receptacles several times a week, but placing the waste in the waste cans will be the responsibility of the dog park users and the FSADP. 4. Facility maintenance Dog Park SUP Page 4 a. Except for mowing the grass trail around the outside of the fenced off - leash area, removal of snow from the parking lot, and emptying the dog waste receptacles, maintenance of the facility will be the responsibility of the FSADP. 5. Parking a. No parking is allowed on Boutwell Road (80th Street North). So all parking for the dog park will have to be on the site. b. A ten space parking lot is planned by the FSADP. The group would be responsible for financing the construction. c. Overflow parking is available a quarter mile to the west in the City Park next to the Public Works Building. 6. Aggressive dogs a. This is not an issue of concern for neighbors if leash rules are observed. It can be an issue for other users of the dog park. Therefore, the FSADP rules address proper handling of dogs exhibiting aggressive behavior. 7. Lights a. There will be no installed lights for the dog park. Comprehensive Plan The future land use map of the City's Comprehensive Plan guides the use of the City property as PROS - Park, Recreation or Open Space. The proposed dog park is an allowed use within the PROS classification. The Park Chapter within the Comprehensive Plan identifies the subject site as a future park. A Master Plan for the future park was approved by the City Council on November 1, 2005 (Resolution 2005 -246). That Master Plan called for a "very passive park ", which is to say that the park was envisioned to be used for walking along natural paths in a setting of natural grasses and plants. The site plan for this planned park is attached. The dog park plans are not consistent with the Master Plan. Certainly any adopted plan can be changed. And since the City Council adopted the Master Plan, the City Council can change the plan. But quite clearly a dog park is not a "very passive park ". So, if the Joint Board and City approve the use permit for the dog park, the City Council will also have to approve a change to the approved Master Plan for the park. (2) Any additional conditions necessary for the public interest have been imposed. A. Immediately south of the proposed off -leash area lies the fenced cemetery of the Boutwell Family. It can be seen in the attached site plan. This cemetery has suffered from lack of maintenance over the years, especially since purchased from the Washington County Historical Society. (As a side note, the Board of the Historical society sold the land to the City based upon the plan to use the property as a passive park.) If the dog park is approved, the Dog Park SUP Page 5 FSADP and the Washington County Historical Society have agreed to help each other improve the care that this cemetery receives. B. If the dog park is approved, one of the recommended conditions of approval would be that if the dog park falls into disuse, misuse or disrepair, the Special Use Permit would become null and void. (3) The use or structure will not constitute a nuisance or be detrimental to the public welfare of the community. City staff is not aware of issues other than are addressed earlier in this report. JOINT BOARD JURISDICTION The Orderly Annexation Agreement states in Section 8.04(b) that in annexed areas the Joint Board has the power to "approve the initial adoption of ... official controls relating to the Orderly Annexation Area ". Moreover, the City Attorney advises City staff to consider a Special Use Permit to be an "official control" for purposes of the Orderly Annexation Agreement. Therefore, the Joint Board has the authority in this land use case to approve or deny the requested Special Use Permit. ALTERNATIVES The Joint Board has the following options: 1. Approve the Special Use Permit with at least the following conditions: a. Rules of operation shall be posted and maintained in good order and visibility by the Friends of Stillwater Area Dog Park. b. Hours of operation shall be between 8 am and sunset. The hours of operation shall be clearly posted. c. The off -leash area shall not be used until after a ten space parking lot is funded and constructed by the Friends of Stillwater Area Dog Park and found satisfactory to the City Engineer. d. The City will be responsible for mowing the grass trail around the outside of the fenced off -leash area, removal of snow from the parking lot, and emptying the dog waste receptacles. All other maintenance of the facility will be the responsibility of the Friends of Stillwater Area Dog Park. e. Dogs on the site are required to be on a leash whenever they are not within the fenced area of the dog park. f. Though the dog park is to be improved and maintained by the Friends of the Stillwater Area Dog Park, the facility shall be open for use by the general public. g. Upon receipt of verified complaints of substance, the City would schedule a public hearing to review the Special Use Permit. The Friends of Stillwater Area Dog Park and neighboring property owners would be notified of the review Dog Park SUP Page 6 hearing, and upon cause conditions could be modified or added, or the Special Use Permit could be revoked by the City. h. Should the dog park fall into disrepair, lack of use, or misuse, in the City's sole opinion, the Special Use Permit would become null and void. 2. Deny the Special Use Permit. If the Joint Board finds that the proposed use is incompatible with surrounding uses and cannot be made compatible through mitigating conditions, it could deny the request. Findings of fact substantiating the denial must be provided. 3. Table the request for additional information. RECOMMENDATIONS Park Commission The Stillwater Park Commission recommended conceptual approval of the dog park on a 4 -2 vote. City Staff If the Friends of Stillwater Area Dog Park can demonstrate to the Joint Board that barking can be satisfactorily controlled, and the City Council amends the Master Plan for Boutwell Cemetery Park, then staff would recommend approval of the SUP with the conditions listed above. If not, staff would recommend denial of the SUP. Attachments: Zoning & Location map Neighborhood Air Photo Site plan Future park plans Dog Park Rules Application Materials cc: Allison McGinnis 411 Iwa ter The Birth prof Minnesota.) Proposed Dog Park Neighborhood Map WIC E 5 va ter The rib') D:: o• V1111:setaN,I, Proposed Dog Park Site plan \J! FUTURE INTERPRETATIVE MARKER aARGE SUGAR 21fAPLE FROF'OSED PARKING CONTNUE TRAIL TO PUBLIC WORKS FACILITY ALTERNATE BOARDWALK ta. G AREA WITH PLAY STRUCTUS SUCH'A5 TREE NOUSE OR "ANIMAL PLAY STRUCTURES" WILD FLOWER PLANTINGS BUFFI=R WETL ANt i 1 1,14 PATEN A:) E.XiSTING NEW TRAIL CREATE UETLAND BANK WETLAND- REGULAR BURNS TO RESTORE QUALITY. OPPORTUNITY FOR ANNUAL CELEBRATION SAVANNA RESTORATI. SCATERED OAK TREES on p; �� STONE SEAT,AND \I NTERPRETATIVE SIGNAGE 14 TORIC CEMETERY FRAIRIE FIRST FP STONE PATH- PIONEERS / FOOTSTEPS PRAIRIE STONE SEATING, WILDFLOUFR PLANTINGS, AND INTERPRETATIVE SIGNAGE PF OI A EXISTING SPRUCE BUFFER Friends of Stillwater Area Dog Park Proposal Mission Friends of Stillwater Area Dog Park (FSADP) is an organization open to all dog lovers and is guided by the fact that well-exercised dogs are less likely to engage in nuisance behaviors such as constant barking, are calmer, and tend to have better social manners. Focus Our focus is to create and sustain a fenced, off-leash dog park in the Stillwater area and to promote responsible dog ownership through community based recreation and education. After the park is established, our long -range goals include hosting educational and recreational events that benefit all animals and the community. Friends of Stillwater Area Dog Park organized in April 2009 and collected hundreds of signatures supporting the creation of a dog recreation area. Support has also been demonstrated via an online survey at our website, httn://sites.google.com/site/friendsofstillwaterdogpark In August 2009, we registered as a not-for-profit organization in the state of Minnesota. Early in 2011, we gained our 501(c) (3) status. What is a dog park/off leash recreation area (OLRA)? The ideal size for a dog park is three acres, but any fenced acreage with accessible parking is acceptable. A double gated entry allows safe entrance to and exit from the park. FSDAP Proposal to City Council, 2011 Page 1 Designs range from simple fenced area, with a minimum fence height of five feet, to elaborate parks with many amenities such as watering sites and playground equipment for dogs. The park surface depends on usage and overall size of site. Surfaces can be natural, for example grass, or man-made, such as decomposed granite. The site should be designed for handicapped accessibility per 1990 Americans with Disabilities Act, allowing elderly and disabled clog owners an accessible place to exercise and socialize their dogs. Community benefits OLRAs provide people with places to socialize, build a sense of community, and exercise dogs in a safe environment. In addition, they can promote responsible pet ownership via pet education, and behavior training, Also, they promote disease control through proper vaccination, and licensing. Dog parks enable dogs to legally run off-leash, making them less likely to run free through parks, farms, fields, neighborhoods, wildlife reserves, and other natural areas. The controlled environment in a dog park reduces the risk of person/dog conflicts and automobile collisions by keeping dogs and other recreationists separate. OLRAs can improve public health by confining dog waste to a designated area and self-policing waste cleanup. Moreover, socialized dogs are less aggressive and better mannered than dogs that remain isolated in yards or on chains. Lastly, the license requirement would bring in additional money to city; after the park is built and maintenance costs are determined, funds obtained from potential fees could go towards other city purposes. FSDAP Proposal to City Council, 2011 Page 2 Statistics According to the Humane Society of the United States, on average, 39% of the households in any given community include dogs. Therefore, per the 2009 census information in Stillwater, 2,823 households out of 7,240 own dogs. This amounts to 4,799 dogs or roughly 39% of Stillwater households (the actual number of dogs is estimated to be higher than reported). According to city records, only about 260 of these dogs were licensed in 2010, and per the 2009 census information, only 34.4% of households in Stillwater include children under the age of eighteen. To exercise and socialize dogs in a safe and regulated area, the nearly 40% of Stillwater residents who own dogs currently have to travel outside the city of Stillwater. This takes business away from local merchants rather than bringing in more visitors to our city. In the Twin Cities metro area, 43 dog parks are currently in operation (www.minnehahamedia.com). Nationwide, the number of OLRAs is over 4,000, an increase from only 700 in the U.S. five years ago. The creation of OLRAs is a growing trend in the United States. Management of dog park/OLRA After the completion of construction of a Stillwater Area dog park, the FSADP will continue to play a significant role in park maintenance and management. However, OLRAs are typically self-policed. Patrons of the park would be alerted to rules and etiquette by posted signs, and waivers of responsibility would relieve the City of any legal responsibility for the actions of individuals and dogs using the park. City laws and ordinances would apply and be enforced by peace officers as needed. FSDAP Proposal to City Council, 2011 Page 3 A fee and permit system could be enacted sometime in the future and would supplement funds raised by FSADP for maintenance of the park. Any surplus created by the fee system could be put back into the city's general fund. Common Concerns • Waste /Smell By providing a central area for dogs and owners to congregate, waste will be confined to the park area rather than on public streets or walking trails; OLRA users will keep the park clean so as to enjoy its use. Also, those who do not pick up their pet's waste will be subject to city fines. Barking Most dogs using the park will be too busy playing to bark. The exercise they will enjoy at the OLRA also will make them less likely to bark at home. • Fighting Park design is meant to reduce the likelihood of fights among dogs. The position of the gate as well as the double gated entry make the OLRA seem "neutral" to dogs, so territorial disputes are unlikely. Dogs deemed "aggressive" will be prohibited from using the park per posted rules. • Dereliction A "Sunset" clause can be included in the initial charter so that the land can be repurposed in the event that the OLRA is not managed properly or used sufficiently. FSDAP Proposal to City Council, 2011 Page 4 As in all new ventures, unforeseen problems can be dealt with as they arise. FSADP's Commitment After the successful completion of the OLRA, FSADP will continue to work with the community to maintain the dog park. As a not-for-profit organization, we will continue to raise funds for amenities and maintenance. Volunteers from our group will also monitor and police grounds to ensure waste clean-up on a scheduled basis, perform basic repairs (e.g. fencing), and enforce rules, including permit use and license when and if implemented. As with other metro area OLRA's, law enforcement will be called if/when there are users that do not comply with the rules. In addition, we will promote "Canines for Clean Water" and other environmental stewardship practices, and will host educational and recreational events that benefit all animals and the community such as rescue organization presentations, training seminars, wildlife demonstrations, and Humane Society functions. City's Role While FSADP will continue to shoulder the majority of management responsibilities, we do ask a minimal commitment from the city of Stillwater and the Parks Commission. The city would-be responsible for snow removal and trail/path maintenance if needed. As expected at any city park, enforcement of city laws and codes would fall on the community peace officers. Sanitation, trash removal, and the processing of permits and licenses would also continue to be handled by the city. FSDAP Proposal to City Council, 2011 Page 5 Potential Sites Our wish is to concentrate all of our efforts on a single site with the blessing of the City Council so we can facilitate fundraising and support with a clear goal. The sites attached to this proposal (except Lily Lake) were suggested by Tim Moore, Assistant Public Works Superintendent for the city of Stillwater, for FSADP to explore as a home of the OLRA. While we have explored the positives and negatives of these sites, we would like to focus our efforts on the Boutwell Avenue site. Boutwell Avenue Site: Boutwell Ave. /80th Street North The site is a rectangular field, approximately 1.5 to 2 acres, with native and non-native plants, few trees, and a mowed grass trail surrounding the area. At the South end of the field, a historic cemetery is fenced in separate from the proposed OLRA. Positives • Good location; accessible to Stillwater residents • No major adjoining residential housing • Reduces conflict with other recreational trail users • Diminishes negative impact on wildlife such as nesting game birds • Easy to fence due to existing dimensions of field FSDAP Proposal to City Council, 2011 Page 6 • Lawn maintenance within OLRA most likely unnecessary • Cemetery is already fenced and protected • No setback requirement per Brown's Creek Watershed (Karen Containment and clean-up of waste at designated locale will reduce waste on trails and lessen levels of phosphorous in area water supply Challenges • Development of paved parking lot needed; Brown's Creek Watershed District will need to approve surface and run off design Proposal With the collaboration between the city and FSADP and utilizing funds donated to FSADP, we would like to combine an OLRA with the historic Boutwell Cemetery and natural area. We will enhance and maintain all aspects of the three components of this site. • Install a five foot discrete fence with a double gated entry around the OLRA • Provide historical and natural interpretive sign and benches at the cemetery • Set up two waste receptacles near parking area • Post OLRA signage with rules • Provide benches and a small structure for shade within the OLRA • Perform routine maintainance of the cemetery under guidance of the Washington Co. Historical Society. FSDAP Proposal to City Council, 2011 Page 7 Future potential goals In the future, we would like to provide a paved path from the parking area to the OLRA gate consistent with Americans with Disabilities requirements. We also anticipate starting a permit /fee system for OLRA patrons to assist with ongoing costs. We propose to include small native gardens along the perimeter of the area with subtle informational signs about this unique native ecosystem. We would like to plant trees for an oak savanna at the South East corner of the site and provide an observation dock that would extend into the wetland. Our website includes a forum in which OLRA patrons can discuss concerns and praise. In conclusion... It is our vision that we will maintain and promote a historic, natural, and recreational site that can be enjoyed by patrons and their pets. FSADP is dedicated to making an OLRA a reality for Stillwater residents and their dogs. We ask the city for a commitment to the Boutwell Avenue Site so that we may focus our efforts and support on an attainable goal. If the city has other land to recommend or pledge to OLRA use, FSDAP will be happy to review it with council members and the parks commission. Thank you. FSDAP Proposal to City Council, 2011 Page 8 References Formula for dog ownership from Humane Society of the united States. Stillwater population numbers provided by Mike Pogge. Allen, L. (2007). Dog Parks: Benefits and Liabilities (Master's thesis). Retrieved fromhttp : / /repository.upenn.edu/mes capstone /18/ www.DogPark.com "Supervised free-roaming dogs aren't a threat to public safety; unsocialized ones are" Ted Kerasote, author of Merle's Door — Lessons from a Freethinking Dog FSDAP Proposal to City Council, 2011 Page 9 4 LEAGUE OF MI NNESOTA CITIES CONNECTING &. INNOVATING SINCE 1913 RISK MANAGEMENT INFORMATION OFF LEASH DOG PARIC,S WHO LET THE DOGS OUT? Definition The term "dog park" is generally used where the purpose and design ofthe park is such as to invite dogs, often in an unleashed environment. Some dog parks require membership or charge fees; others are free and open to the public. In general, private parks tend to be those that require fees to assist in the costs of operating the park. Why have Dog Parks? Dogs are popular and people want a safe place to socialize and exercise their dogs. Off-leash parks offer substantial benefits as a way for dogand owner to get exercise and meet new friends Dog parks are relatively inexpensive to maintain, have no significant - of claims; and have generally been thought to be successful where they have been created. Features Dog parks vary in size and amenities, but the following represent some things to•consider. Barriers Consideration should be given to manmade or natural barriers to encourage the dogs to stay within the designated area. Small areas in busy neighborhoods may necessitate a fence around the park with a gated access. Larger areas may allow for .natural buffer zones. Nearby property owners and traffic should be considered to determine what level of barrier might be necessary. Rules Rules should be posted at the entrance to the dog. park. Indicate the purpose of the parr the hours of operation, and a phone number to report problems and emergencies. General rules include: , Picking up feces, • Keeping control of aggressive dogs. Leash requirements, if any. Off-leash parks should emphasize that dogs kept on leashes within the off - leash boundary will cause tension-and should be avoided. Cities should require that dogs be licensed and vaccinated to be allowed in the dog park. Children should be supervised while in the dog park because playing dogs can run into children and running children may trigger the dog's instinct to chase prey. Any special information about the use of the dog park should be displayed at the entrance. This material is provided as general information and is not a substitute for legal advice. Consult your attorney for advice concerningspecific situations. EAGUE OF MINNESOTA CITIES ■1SURANCE TRUST 145 UNIVERSITYAVE. WEST PHONE (651) 281 -1200 FAX: (651) 281 -1298 sr. PAUL MN 55103 -2044 MU. FREE (800) 925 -1122 WM WW 11 tcoRe Trash Containers It may take some time to cultivate good habits, particularly for picking up feces. By providing containers and even bags, if possible, compliance will improve. Dog owners must be reminded that good stewardship will ensure the continued availability of the facility. Parking Adequate paring will be necessary to prevent clogging streets or the parking lots of others with dog park patrons. Some cities have found that use of the park greatly exceeded their original estimates,, extra parking had to be added. The location of parking should minimize any detours from the most direct route into the park. In general it is a good idea to require the use of a leash in parking areas until entering the off -leash area. Parking leading to a gated entrance provides an opportunity for placing advisory signs that are hard to miss. Water Source Dogs drink plenty of water during play, and some dogs enjoy. swimming. Therefore natural ponds or streams may be desirable. On the other hand, if there is mud around, a.dog.will find it Some owners prefer to avoid this problem. Owners should be encouraged to bring plenty of water with them if none exists at the park. Design Some parks are specifically designed for smaller dogs. e er do do not usuall . attack small dogs, but small dogs maybe injured engaging in play wr o much larger • • gs. In most cases, dogs properly supervised' will socialize easily in the neutral turf of an off leash exercise area. Maintenance Primary maintenance issues include trash removal, snow removal, grass cutting; and wear and tear to. walkways. Parks with enough area can fence offportions to allow for vegetation to reestablish itself in over -wom areas. Wood mulch may be applied to walkways to reduce erosion and improve traction Other Items Some parks have bulletin boards to provide feedback on park use and to report problems. Many parks also have picnic tables, benches, and park shelters for shade and protection from the elements. Conclusion Off leash areas, or dog parks, provide . great benefits to dog owners. Current statistics indicate almost one in tbur people own a dog. Dogs and their owners are . happiest and healthiest when they have opportunities for exercise and meeting others. Dog parks have not proven to be a significant Bab' ' ! risk or source of I C. LMCIT Loss Control 05/09 Learn More Following are some web sites where you can find dog parks or information about dog parks: http: / /animal.discoverv.com /features /dognarkimanistates/MN.html http : / /www.ecoanimal.com /doafun/ http: / /www.doepiay.com /Activities /d oRpark.html http: / /www.theba rk.com /community /advocacy doaParks /dogParks.htmi OLRA Rules and Etiquette 1. Park hours are from .. aOf2en to 119 :631i)/1 _6 h f'� I1 ,- slo 5/Ar 2. Dogs must wear collar with license, vaccination, and permit information at all times. 3. Dogs must be leashed in parking area and when entering or exiting the OLRA. 4. Dogs who exhibit aggressive behavior must be immediately leashed and removed from OLRA. Individual dogs known to have a history of aggression may not be permitted or may have permit revoked; this includes but is not limited to dogs classified as dangerous or potentially dangerous in any city. 5. Owners /handlers are responsible for the actions and behaviors of their dogs, any damage or injury caused by dogs will be the liability of the owners. 6. Owners /handlers must remain in control of dogs at all times; this means dogs must be under voice or whistle control, in view, and owner /handler must have one leash ready and available per dog. 7. Children under the age of 12 cannot be responsible for dogs in OLRA. All other children in OLRA must be supervised by an adult for safety reasons. 8. Dogs in heat, sick dogs, and puppies under four months old are not allowed in the OLRA. No other type of animal is allowed in the OLRA. 9. No food or glass bottles allowed in OLRA. Owners must bring own water for dogs. 10. Owners /handlers must clean up after their dogs. Owner /handlers should bring their own waste bags and must fill in any holes dug by their dogs. 11. All other city park rules and city laws are enforce. safety gate for dog run to prevent dogs entering from interacting with dogs leaving. in only no exi gate only opens in- cannot open from perk dogs entering wait here while owners remove Goes ARC ' w dog run dogs to exit wait here Exit only .41 gate opens gate *I from both sides CITY OF STILLWATER PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION JANUARY 30, 2012 Present: Linda Amrein, David Brandt, Scott Christensen, Rob McGarry, Solveg Peterson, Don Stiff and Councilmember Mike Polehna Absent: Sandy Snellman Staff present: Assistant Public Works Superintendent Tim Moore Chair Amrein called the meeting to order at 7 p.m. Approval of minutes: Mr. Brandt, seconded by Mr. Christensen, moved approval of the minutes of December 19, 2011, as presented. Motion passed unanimously. OPEN FORUM No comments were received ACTION ITEMS July 4th Fireworks Display City Administrator Hansen reviewed the responses to the six Request for Proposals (RFPs) the City sent out and his recommendation for the selection is RES Specialty Pyrotechnics. Two of the six vendors, he said, have done displays for the City in past years and are known commodities to the City. Mr. Hansen spoke of the difficulty in analyzing the responses and said basically reputation, references and past experience are the determining factors. He said someone in the industry had also reviewed the RFP responses and concurs with the recommendation of RES Specialty Pyrotechnics. Mr. Hansen spoke briefly about the fact that the City does have a current contract for the fireworks, a contract which has been suspended. Pending the resolution of that matter, he said the City cannot award a second contract. He said should the Commission make a recommendation; it should be contingent on the resolution of the issue with the existing contract. He said the intent is to award the contract for this year's display no later than February 29th. He said there is an alternate plan should the legal issues not be resolved by that time. Ms. Amrein asked if someone had already been contacted to do the 4th of July fireworks. Mr. Hansen said he did not have that information but said the City would be very cautious of that potential. Mr. McGarry asked what action was being requested of the Commission, suggesting that evaluating bids /proposals was a function for City staff. Mr. Hansen said he would like the Commission to approve the recommendation. Mr. Hansen apologized for not providing the RFP responses to Commissioners, but noted some of the information is proprietary. Mr. Polehna pointed out the recommended vendor is the only one who provided a listing of exactly the number and size of shells that would be included in the display; he said he had spoken with a friend in the industry who agreed with the recommendation. Mr. Christensen asked how much the City spent on fireworks last year. Mr. Hansen said for many years, the City has given a contribution of $40,000 for both shows, 4th of July and Lumberjack Days finale. Mr. Hansen said the vendors have told him their costs have been $28,000 for the show; he said there have been some indications of support from other entities. Ms. Amrein moved to accept the recommendation provided by Mr. Hansen. Ms. Peterson seconded the motion; motion passed unanimously. Eagle Scout project Jonathon Osafouyia, a life Scout from Boy Scout Troop 114, working on his Eagle Scout project, proposed that Troop 114 design and build a canoe rack for Lily Lake for seasonal storage of Park and Recreation Board Minutes January 30, 2012 Page 2 of 3 canoes. He said Scouts would also be able to store some of their canoes there and teach canoeing and do other activities. Mr. Moore said there have been similar request in the past and said it was decided that a better use of an Eagle Scout project would be to work on kiosks; he said there are two Eagle Scout projects committed to the kiosks. The Eagle Scout candidate said he had some concept plans from the proposed project. On a question by Ms. Amrein, he said the rack(s) could be put in the ground permanently or removed after the canoeing season; he said the rack would accommodate 4 canoes. Mr. Moore noted there is a rain garden between the boat launch and the dock at Lily Lake and asked whether the plan would be to place the rack north or south of the dock; Jonathan said whatever location would be most convenient. Mr. Moore noted the area to the north is wooded and fairly limited in access. Ms. Amrein explained that normal procedure is for the Eagle Scout candidates to work closely with City staff on their projects. Mr. Polehna suggested another possible location might be at the south end of Long Lake. In discussion regarding a potential location, it was noted that Lily Lake likely has more traffic than Long Lake as well as the availability of parking. Mr. Brandt, seconded by Mr. Stiff, moved to have Jonathon work with staff on the details of the project proposal. Friends of Stillwater Area Doq Park Mr. Moore noted that after the November presentation, the Commission asked that the group do some additional research about maintenance of a dog park at the proposed Boutwell Cemetery site and other issues, such as liability. Sarah Jaycocks said research indicates that annual operating costs to the City would be trash pick -up four times at week at an estimated cost of $1,800; snow plowing estimated at $350 for a total of $2,150 in soft costs. She said the organization's out -of- pocket costs would be for sign maintenance; satellite toilet (if desired); fencing; parking lot, estimated at $28,000; possible rain garden work in conjunction with the watershed district; and benches and shelter. She said the dog park would be covered under the City's existing liability policy and, according to the League of Minnesota Cities and no additional liability insurance would be needed. She said the League also indicated that there has been no significant history of claims or significant liability risk associated with dog parks. Regarding the size of a park, she said Minneapolis Parks and Recreation staff have indicated that there have been no significant issues with smaller off -leash parks, similar to the size proposed; she noted there are more than a dozen dog parks in the metropolitan area that are about 1- to 2 -acres in size. Ms. Jaycocks provided comments regarding other potential sites mentioned by the Commission: the dump site, which would need to be resurfaced with gravel and would require additional fencing; the Aiple site, which might be subject to annual flooding and is already designated for other uses, including the bridge staging area, boat launch and trail system; and the dome site, which is smaller than one acre and would require complete excavation. Ms. Jaycocks noted that Brent Peterson of the Washington County Historical Society has suggested that the proposal would be a good use of the land and the park would increase public awareness of the historical significance of the cemetery and deter vandalism; she said he also indicated that the Historical Society would assist in the maintenance of the historic cemetery. She concluded that the Boutwell site is still the best choice as the size of the site does work for an off -leash park; increased care for the site would honor its historical significance; the land could be maintained as a natural area with additional plantings to improve the area; the proposal has support from a number of individuals and organizations; and a sunset clause would allow the agreement to be terminated if things don't work out to the satisfaction of the parties. Ms. Jaycocks reviewed what the organization would propose as improvements: a five - foot fence with gated entry around the park area; historical and interpretive sign and benches at the cemetery; two waste receptacles near the parking area; signage with dog park rules; and benches and small shade structure within the dog park area. Park and Recreation Board Minutes January 30, 2012 Page 3 of 3 Ms. Amrein asked about the comments regarding the dump site — that it would be "inconvenient" for the City, according to Mr. Hansen. Mr. Hansen explained that the City needs a snow deposit area. He said if the dog park were to be located there with fencing to maneuver around when dumping snow, it would be inconvenient. Ms. Amrein asked about the comment that there would be no legal impediment to using the Boutwell Cemetery site, noting that the Comprehensive Plan states there is to be no dog park. Mr. Moore stated the Council felt the Comprehensive Plan didn't need to be so detailed to specifically state the City would have a dog park, so the Plan does not include any language related to a dog park. Ms. Amrein asked what action was requested of the Commission. Mr. Moore said he was seeking a recommendation regarding this proposed site. Mr. Christensen noted the Parks Commission is just the first step; the proposal will also have to be reviewed by the Planning Commission where different concerns likely will be raised and then it will go to the City Council. Mr. Christensen suggested it would be appropriate to take action and send the proposal on to the next level where a different group of people will have different questions. Ms. Peterson expressed her concern about the size of the Boutwell site and the potential for the need for additional land if the park is successful. Ms. Amrein noted the original consultant's plan for this land was to leave it as a natural, open area; she said she did not think a dog park was a great use of this land. Allison McGinness said she didn't think there should be a concern about possible expansion due to the nearby wetlands, but said it could be made clear in an agreement with the City that there would be no future expansion of the use. Mr. Polehna suggested there is a potential 3 -acre site in Stillwater Township, immediately adjacent to the City; he said the two chair persons of the Township's park board have indicated they would be willing to talk with this group about the possibility of having a dog park there. Mr. Hansen said he had been working with the dog park proponents and he had recommended the Boutwell site because the proposal would not be in competition will any other proposed users; every other space in the community, he said, there was competition from other users. Mr. Hansen said he had indicated to the group that he would support their proposal; however, he said he thought this new site mentioned by Mr. Polehna ought to be explored, suggesting that another month's delay wouldn't hurt. Ms. Jaycocks asked whether the group would have to come back before the Commission a third time should the Township location not work out. Mr. McGarry agreed that the group deserved some direction from the Commission at this point and should either approve or disapprove of the Boutwell site. Mr. McGarry said he would have no issue with the Boutwell site, noting it is a park and it is the Commission's function to promote use of public space; however, he agreed that the Stillwater Township site should be explored and would be much better as it has more space. Mr. Brandt moved approval of the concept of the Boutwell site as proposed by Friends of Stillwater Area Dog Park. Mr. McGarry seconded the motion. Motion passed 4 -2. INFORMATIONAL ITEMS No informational items presented. COMMISSION ITEMS /TOPICS No items discussed. The meeting was adjourned at 8:02 p.m. on a motion by Mr. McGarry, second by Mr. Brandt. Respectfully submitted, Sharon Baker Recording Secretary New email Bill Turnblad From: Sent: To: Subject: Dear Mr. Turnblad: Denise Stephens <d.m.stephens @comcast.net> Monday, April 23, 2012 9:13 AM Bill Turnblad Support of Proposal by Friends of Stillwater Area Dog Park I am writing to support the request by Friends of Stillwater Area Dog Park to build an off -leash pet exercise area in the park area near Boutwell Cemetery. I am in favor of this proposal because dog parks promote responsible dog ownership. As a resident of the Stillwater area for the past 37 years, I recognize the need for dedicated pet exercise areas in this community. As an officer of the Settlers Glen Single Family Homeowners Association from 2007 -2010, I recall many complaints from residents about dog droppings in Prairie Park, on the walking paths and sidewalks around the development — even in their yards! I have seen people drive to Prairie Park, park their car on Macey Way, bring their families and dogs into Prairie Park and let the dogs run off leash. I think a regulated dog park would help prevent this illegal behavior in our community. I also understand that dog parks provide many other benefits for pet owners and communities. For example, well - exercised dogs are less likely to engage in nuisance behaviors such as constant barking, are calmer and tend to have better social manners. Dog parks foster community building through regular social interactions of pet owners and assist local governments with the enforcement of dog - control laws. Dog parks also give disabled members of a community and senior citizens an accessible placeto exercise their pets. I hope this information is helpful as you advise the Joint Council for its meeting on May 2 "d. If you would like further information, please feel free to contact me or access the Friends of Stillwater Area Dog Park website: http: / /sites.google.com/ site /friendsofstillwaterdogpark /. Very truly yours, Denise Stephens 1337 Macey Court Stillwater, MN 55082 (651) 430 -9071 1 New email Bill Turnblad From: Michell Baumgartner <emridwlf @gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, April 24, 2012 9:19 AM To: Bill Turnblad Subject: Friends of Stillwater Area Dog Park Dear Bill Turnblad: Please vote "YES" to the Friends of Stillwater Area Dog Park proposal on May 2, 2012. If you would like further information, please feel free to contact me or access the Friends of Stillwater Area Dog Park website: http: / /sites.google.com/ site /friendsofstillwaterdogpark /. Sincerely, Michell Baumgartner Owner of a Boxer and a Mastiff who need a great deal of exercise and socialization A dog park would benefit not only dogs and dog owners, but also the community at large. Some of the benefits include: For Dogs • • Exercise. This is especially important when for any reason; the human cannot walk their dogs. For example, when the sidewalks are icy and humans are afraid they may fall. In addition, dogs will exercise more when they are off - leash. • • Socialization. A well- socialized dog is a better - behaved dog around other dogs and people. They are less likely to be aggressive, to bark a lot, or to participate in obsessive and destructive behaviors like digging. • • Fun. Let's face it; it is much more fun to explore a park with new sights, smells, dogs and people than it is to spend time in the backyard. Again, troubling dog behaviors usually manifest themselves when a dog is bored (digging, barking, etc.). • • Safety. If a dog park is designed correctly and monitored correctly, it provides a safe environment for humans and their pets to play and exercise. Dangerous cars, cliffs, or other hazards can be avoided. 1 Dog behaviorist like Dr.Ian Dunbar, Dr. Jean Donaldson, Ceasar Milian and the list goes on, all agree dog to dog off leash play is critical. For People • • Fun! It is fun to watch dogs interact and play. • • Exercise! Or better yet, humans can exercise with their dogs, walk the park or play ball. • • Get outside! Enjoy the great outdoors. • • Meet dog owners! You get to meet other dog lovers and share ideas regarding training, dog products, and dog friendly activities. • • Train! The dog park provides an opportunity to train your dog in a new, more challenging situation. For The Community • • Well- socialized dogs are friendlier dogs. This means fewer dog attacks and less annoying behavior. • • Parks designated for dogs keep other parks and beaches dog free. • • Every dog parks should have a bulletin board where the Humane Society can list the pets they have for adoption. • • Dog park bulletin boards can promote membership in the Dog Park Community. Members of the dog park can also use this to post information and announcements for fellow dog park users. • • The ability to meet fellow dog lovers and to post information on a dog park bulletin board might ensure that pets find new homes before they are surrendered to a shelter. • • A dog park can ensure the exercise and socialization necessary to decrease destructive behaviors which would otherwise cause owners to give up their family pet. • • A dog park would provide a place to hold dog friendly events: Bark in the Park, Agility Training, and Canine College all in a safe, dog - friendly environment. • • An accessible dog park provides disabled and elderly people a place to exercise their companions. A dog park might tempt people who are traveling with pets. Several travelers plan their meal breaks and overnights stays around the presence of dog - friendly places. This could mean more business for towns with dog parks. Finally, a dog park promotes responsible pet ownership. This benefits the dog, the dog owner, AND the whole community! 2 New email Bill Turnblad From: DarleneRossow <darlenerossow @comcast.net> Sent: Monday, April 23, 2012 6:56 PM To: ken @payrollcps.com; linda. countryman @stillwatertownship.com Cc: Bill Turnblad; david jouhson @stillwatertownship.com; Jim Roush Subject: Fwd: Dog Park help. Subject: Dog Park help. Hello, I am writing to support the request by Friends of Stillwater Area Dog Park to build an off -leash pet exercise area in the park area near Boutwell Cemetery. I am in favor of this proposal because dog parks promote responsible dog ownership. I urge you to vote in favor of this proposal. As a resident of the Stillwater area and a dog owner, I know that dog parks provide many benefits for pet owners and communities. For example, well- exercised dogs are less likely to engage in nuisance behaviors such as constant barking, are calmer and tend to have better social manners. Dog parks foster community building through regular social interactions of pet owners and assist local governments with the enforcement of dog - control laws. Dog parks also give disabled members of a community and senior citizens an accessible place to exercise their pets. Please vote "YES" to the Friends of Stillwater Area Dog Park proposal on May 2, 2012. If you would like further information, please feel free to contact me or access the Friends of Stillwater Area Dog Park website: http: / /sites.google.com/ site /friendsofstillwaterdogpark /. Very truly yours, Darlene Rossow 1152 Bergmann Dr Stillwater,MN New email Bill Turnblad From: Rochelle Jacobs <rjacobs @snapfitness.com> Sent: Monday, April 23, 2012 11:24 AM To: Bill Turnblad Subject: PLEASE vote to approve I am writing to THANK YOU for your service to the Stillwater area and asking that you please approve the request by Friends of Stillwater Area Dog Park to build an off -leash pet exercise area in the park area near Boutwell Cemetery. I am in favor of this proposal because dog parks promote responsible dog ownership. A Dog park is extremely important as it allows a safe place for people to take their dogs and encourages cleaning up after dog messes! Hopefully, we can keep the other parks in Stillwater cleaner because people will have a better place to take their dogs. We can also encourage dog license sales and gain additional revenue for the City of Stillwater and the Township. I understand we are losing funds every year because dog licenses are not obtained and having a City owned park would promote and encourage responsible ownership and licensing of pets. The dog park benefits all residents, not just dog owners. Please vote "YES" to the Friends of Stillwater Area Dog Park proposal on May 2, 2012. THANK YOU Rochelle Jacobs 3460 Gadient Way Stillwater MN 55082 651- 724 -5381 CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail, and any attachments, are intended solely for the use of the intended recipient and may contain information that is confidential, proprietary, copyrighted and /or legally privileged. Any unauthorized disclosure, distribution, or use of this information is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, and have received this message in error, please notify the sender immediately by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message and any attachments. Your compliance is appreciated. 1 Bill Turnblad From: Sandy Weber <stillweber @hotmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, May 01, 2012 11:06 PM To: Bill Turnblad; david johnson @stillwatertownship.com; linda. countryman @stillwatertownship.com Subject: Dog Park I am writing to support the request by Friends of Stillwater Area Dog Park to build an off -leash pet exercise area near Boutwell Cemetery. I am in favor of this proposal because dog parks promote responsible dog ownership. I, as a Stillwater Township resident and dog owner, urge you to vote in favor of this proposal. I would frequent the dog park even though I live in the country on a 2+ acre lot. I enjoy the camaraderie of meeting other like minded dog owners. I also like the idea of the park being located in a neighborhood that folks could walk to and not have to drive. Yours truly, Sandy Weber 10671 Penfield Ave Cir N Stillwater, MN 651 -439 -1938 stillweber @hotmail.com 1 Mr. & Mrs. David Plante 7880 Miner Ave. North Stillwater, MN 55082 (612) 439 -3817 April 30th, 2012 City of Stillwater & Stillwater Township Joint Board C /O: Bill Turnblad 216 4th Street North Stillwater, MN 55082 Reference: Special Use Permit for a Dog Park Case No. 2012 -07 Dear Board Members: My name is David Plante and I wanted to let you know that my wife and I are NOT in favor of having a dog park adjacent to our backyard. The added traffic and sound of dogs barking would be very disruptive to this beautiful residential open area that all of us here have come to know as home. We love dogs and have had a dog since moving into our house in 1992, but having a dog park so close to residential is simply wrong. We can not believe that a dog park is even being considered in a residential area and we strongly request that you do not consider this proposal. Respectfully, David and Anne Plante Bill Turnblad From: christine woolery <cawoolery@gmail.com> Sent: Monday, April 30, 2012 4:31 PM To: Bill Turnblad Subject: in support of a dog park at the Boutwell site Dear Mr. Turnblad: I am writing to support the request by Friends of Stillwater Area Dog Park to build an off -leash pet exercise area in the park area near Boutwell Cemetery. I have looked over this proposal and it looks like a win -win situation for dogs, their owners, and the community. The site has great potential to provide a wonderful community outdoor space that will encourage members of the community and visitors to get outside and enjoy some exercise and socializing. I urge you to vote in favor of this proposal. I am a resident of the Stillwater area and I appreciate all of the wonderful amenities Stillwater is famous for. I also know that dog parks provide many benefits for pet owners and communities. I have friends who visit from the Twin Cities and they often bring their dogs. I know they would truly appreciate having a dog park where they can spend time with their pets and meet other dog owners from the area. Please vote "YES" to the Friends of Stillwater Area Dog Park proposal on May 2, 2012. If you would like further information, please feel free to contact me or access the Friends of Stillwater Area Dog Park website: http: / /sitesoogle.com/ site /friendsofstillwaterdpark/. Very truly yours, Chris Woolery 1920 Pine St. W Stillwater, MN 55082 651- 246 -5294 cawooleiy@gmail.com 1 Bill Turnblad From: Eric and Brenda Aarness <ebaarness @msn.com> Sent: Monday, April 30, 2012 9:26 PM To: Bill Turnblad Subject: Dog Park Support Dear Mr. Turnblad: We are writing to support the request by Friends of Stillwater Area Dog Park to build an off -leash pet exercise area in the park near Boutwell Cemetery. We are in favor of this proposal because dog parks promote responsible dog ownership. We urge you to vote in favor of this proposal. As a resident of the Stillwater area and a dog owner, we know that dog parks provide many benefits for pet owners and communities. For example, well exercised dogs are less likely to engage in nuisance behaviors such as constant barking, are calmer, and tend to have better social manners. Dog parks foster community building through regular social interactions of pet owners and assist local governments with the enforcement of dog - control laws. Dog parks also give disabled members of the community and senior citizens an accessible place to exercise their pets. We have taken our dog to other dog parks and it is a positive experience for the dog, the owners, and the community. Our kids love going to spend time in a big open area and our whole family takes advantage of the exercise with our dog, Bently. Please vote "YES" to the Friends of Stillwater Area Dog Park proposal on May 2, 2012. If you would like further information, please feel free to contact us or access the Friends of Stillwater Area Dog Park website: htt.: sites .•oo•le.com site friendsofstillwaterdo•.ark Sincerely, Eric and Brenda Aarness Tayler and Ashlyn Bently (the dog) 14240 55th St. N. Oak Park Heights, MN 55082 651- 430 -0161 ebaarness©msn.com