HomeMy WebLinkAbout12B - Sand Point Park Parking Report
MEETING DATE:
AGENDA #:
PREPARED BY:
PRESENTER:
AGENDA ITEM:
DISCUSSION:
4646 Dakota Street SE
Prior Lake, MN 55372
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
JUNE 21, 2010
12B
LARRY POPPLER, ASSISTANT CITY ENGINEER
LARRY POPPLER, ASSISTANT CITY ENGINEER
CONSIDER APPROVAL OF A REPORT ON THE SAND POINT PARK
PARKING AND A RESOLUTION DIRECTING STAFF TO INSTALL
PARKING ON THE SAND POINT PARK SIDE OF CREST AVENUE
Introduction
The purpose of this agenda is to discuss parking issues at Sand Point
Park, and to consider the installation of additional parking on Crest Avenue.
Due to the popularity of the beach and park during the warm summer
months, park users park their vehicles on nearby streets either to avoid
paying the Sand Point Park parking lot fee or during periods when parking
within the lots is not available.
Historv
In 1995, the City constructed the parking lot at Sand Point Park. As a way
to manage parking in that area, and to offset the costs for having parking
staff to supervise the park, the City began collecting parking fees for the
parking lot. The Sand Point Park parking lot has 90 stalls for vehicles and
15 additional stalls for vehicles with trailers. The Department of Natural
Resources lake access also has 42 parking stalls for vehicles with trailers.
On busy weekends these parking stalls are fully utilized.
Many of the nearby streets have parking restrictions. These parking
restrictions include no parking on one side, no parking on both sides, and
no parking with trailers. The attached exhibit shows the parking restrictions
in this area. Many of the parking restrictions currently in place are a result
of neighborhoods petitioning the City to help manage the overflow parking
from Sand Point Park that was migrating into their neighborhoods.
The Traffic Safety Committee reviewed the parking issues on Shady Beach
Trail and Shore Trail in 2009 in response to requests from residents living
in these neighborhoods. A resident did provide a petition for no parking on
Shady Beach Trail; however, the petition only included 8 of 23 property
owner signatures. The petition did not meet the required minimum of 51 %
of all households in the affected area. A resident has suggested that the
City post "parking by permit only" signs on Shore Trail to stop the excessive
parking in this area. These residents complain about speeders, noise,
emergency vehicle access, and litter associated with the additional activity
on their streets.
R:\CoLlncil\2010 Agenda Reports\06 2110\Sand Point Park parking agenda report.doc
Current Circumstances
In 2010, the City received a petition for no parking at the southern end of
Shady Beach Trail. The petition met City requirements and was reviewed
by the Traffic Safety Committee. The committee agreed to install no
parking signs on the resident side of the end of Shady Beach Trail. These
signs have now been installed.
In addition to Shady Beach Trail the City has received parking restriction
inquiries from the Birchwood Avenue and Shore Trail areas related to park
users parking on their streets. The DNR has also seen park users without
trailers parking at the DNR access. When this occurs, this reduces the
available parking spaces for vehicles with trailers.
On Memorial Day weekend of this year, vehicles with trailers were parked
on the City water tower property at County Road 42 and Crest Avenue.
Vehicles with trailers were also parking on the Vierling property and County
Road 18 right of way north of County Road 42.
The Parks Department reports that they are constantly running out of
parking. They have witnessed parking on grassy areas of the park as well
as parking on the park access road. People with shelter reservations
become upset if they have no place to park. Police enforcement of these
parking-related issues can become a low priority when police forces are
dealing with other calls.
A number of different options to relieve some of the neighborhood parking
concerns were reviewed by the Traffic Safety Committee at their most
recent meeting on May 20, 2010. The options considered were:
1) Additional No Parkina Sianaae
Residents in these areas may petition the City for additional no
parking signage. The petition must include 51 % of the households
in the affected area. While these residents have this option like any
other resident in Prior Lake, further limiting parking simply changes
the location of the problem. During peak times, the people parking
for the Sand Point Park will simply park on other streets and walk a
little further to get to the park.
2) post "Parkina Bv Permit" On Iv Sianaae
The City does not currently use this type of sign. If the City were to
use this type of sign, the City would have to administer a permit
system for the permitees. If this were allowed in these areas, other
neighborhoods would likely request this type of sign. Managing the
parking by permit would require additional staff time to keep up with
ownership changes, new permittees, lost permits, or other permit
requests.
3) Remove Parkina Fee for Sand Point Beach Parkina Lot
The City collects $5 per vehicle and $20 per vehicle with trailer at
the Sand Point Beach parking lot. Seasonal parking passes are
also sold for $25 for residents and $50 for non-residents. This
amounts to about $30,000 in revenue from parking fees for the
Sand Point Park parking lot. Removing this fee for the parking lot
could decrease the weekday parking on adjacent streets, but during
weekends or summer holidays these parking issues would still
R:\CoLlncil\2010 Agenda Reportsl06 21 10\Sand Point Park parking agenda report.doc
2
occur once the parking lots are full. Eliminating the fee also
eliminates the parking staff. In this case, the City would have no
presence at the park or way to prohibit vehicles from causing
damage from parking on the grass or wherever else they could find
a spot.
4) Build Additional Parkina Lots
The City could build an additional parking lot in some open green
area of Sand Point Park near Crest Avenue to allow for additional
parking. To construct a 50 car stall parking lot in this area would
cost approximately $125,000. This is a preliminary estimate
assuming favorable soil conditions and considers a fair amount of
retaining wall to deal with topographic challenges on the site. Parks
Advisory Committee and neighborhood involvement would be
necessary to proceed with construction of a parking lot in this area.
A funding source for the design and construction of a parking lot
must be identified to pursue this option.
5) Perform Additional Studv of the Parkina Issues
The City could hire a consultant or dedicate staff time to review the
parking issues and provide additional options or recommendations.
The study could monitor the weekend, weekday, or holiday parking
issues by periodic site visits. Weather, time of day, events, and
high school schedule are factors to be considered in the study. The
study could involve a neighborhood meeting to discuss the issues
more extensively. The work load of current City Staff members
would need to be re-prioritized if the City Council wishes to dedicate
City Staff time to the review of this issue.
6) Re-strilJe Crest A venue to Allow Parkinq
The City could re-stripe Crest Avenue to allow for parking along one
or both sides of Crest Avenue. This would mean a change from two
travel lanes in each direction to one travel lane in each direction. At
intersections the parking lanes would be eliminated to provide turn
lanes. Restriping both sides would provide an estimated 80
additional car parking stalls along Crest. If the City chose to only
restripe the east side of Crest along Sand Point Park the re-striping
would result in an estimated 40 stalls.
7) Do Nothina Alternative
The roadways in this area are public city streets and the park users
visiting Sand Point Park have the right to park on these streets.
Most of these streets are wide enough to handle the overflow
parking for Sand Point Park and provides the most cost effective
method to overflow parking.
The City Council must weigh the neighborhood inconvenience, park user
inconvenience, and public good in making a decision on any of these
options.
The Traffic Safety Committee (TSC) discussed the topic and recommends
that the City re-stripe Crest Avenue to allow parking on the Sand Point Park
side. The City crews have budgeted for re-striping of Crest Avenue this
summer, changing the striping from the current condition to a parking
condition on the park side requires a small additional expense for removing
R:\CoLlncil\2010 Agenda Reports\06 2110\Sand Point Park parking agenda report.doc
3
some of the existing striping. Approximately 40 car parking stalls can be
achieved by allowing parking on the park side of Crest Avenue from Shore
Lane to Cedarwood Trail. The TSC did not agree to additional parking on
the north/west side of Crest Avenue because there is no crosswalk at the
park entrance. Allowing parking on the north side would increase mid-
block pedestrian crossing of Crest Avenue. Also during the heavy boating
season, vehicles towing boats trying to turn left into the DNR access will
back up onto Crest Avenue. If parking were allowed on the north side of
Crest Avenue, a bypass lane would be needed to allow vehicles to pass
thus reducing available stalls on the north side.
Conclusion
City Staff agrees with the Traffic Safety Committee's recommendation to
allow parking on Sand Point Park side of Crest Avenue. If approved, re-
striping could occur this summer during the regularly scheduled
maintenance striping on Crest Avenue.
ISSUES:
Parking in this area seems to be a growing issue. While re-striping Crest
Avenue may relieve some of the pressure on nearby local streets and the
DNR access during the week, busy weekends will likely continue to have
parking issues in this area.
FINANCIAL
IMPACT:
The additional estimated expense is $400.00 for equipment rental and eight
hours of City Staff time to remove the existing pavement striping. These
costs would come out of the street budget if additional parking were
approved by the City Council.
AL TERNATIVES:
The alternatives are as follows:
1. Accept the report on the Sand Point Park parking issues and approve a
resolution directing staff to install parking on the Sand Point Park side
of Crest Avenue.
2. Accept the report and direct Staff to pursue a different alternative
regarding Sand Point Park parking.
3. Defer this item until a future date and provide staff with direction.
RECOMMENDED
MOTION:
R:\CoLlncil\2010 Agenda Reports\06 2110\Sand Point Park parking agenda report.doc
4
4646 Dakota Street SE
Prior Lake, MN 55372
RESOLUTION 10-xxx
A RESOLUTION DIRECTING STAFF TO STRIPE THE SAND POINT PARK SIDE OF CREST
AVENUE FOR PARKING
Motion By:
Second By:
WHEREAS, Sand Point Park is a thriving park with many users on fair weather days,
weekends and holidays; and
WHEREAS, Park users and DNR access users fill up all available parking lot stalls during
peak times; and
WHEREAS, Public Works intends as a part of regular maintenance to re-stripe Crest Avenue
in the summer of 2010; and
WHEREAS, The additional cost for striping parking stalls on the Sand Point Park side of
Crest Avenue is estimated at $400.00 and eight hours of City Staff time; and
WHEREAS, The Traffic Safety Committee and City staff recommend the striping of parking
stalls on the Sand Point Park side of Crest Avenue.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF PRIOR LAKE,
MINNESOTA as follows:
1. The recitals set forth above are incorporated herein.
2. City Staff are directed to install parking on the Sand Point Park side of Crest Avenue.
3. The additional cost for striping parking stalls shall be taken from the Street Department
Budget 43100-412.
PASSED AND ADOPTED THIS 21st DAY OF JUNE, 2010.
YES
NO
I Myser
I Erickson
Hedberg
Keeney
Millar
Myser
Erickson
Hedberg
Keeney
Millar
Frank Boyles, City Manager
R\CoLlncil\2010 Agenda Reports\06 2110\Sand Point resolLltion b.doc
~
[3\
~~ 0 ~L9\
~; ~ ~r~
.~ ~~. r-
~:~J:~,. cC~ [~I) J
('_ <) ~ 0
~='-1- .~ !hl? 0
:~~~~l3 1:0
~" Fr;~D. ~ ~
_ _ _ ~~I ]
I l~=L 0 .. .
LU=f 14'~---b ~f\
~) . LX gc l ~
n
/1. ',- \ \0
J I \\~ ~f-' ' /mb~wo~d 0(.
o ~
o ~
~
o [.
o
r..
. (
;0
C-
l
00
~
-~
City of Prior lake
Minnesota
/
2003
+
__ __D900
'I \ ,-- ---I '\\\', \ lirl-~ fi
I~L~\.'I/ -. /\, I \, \.-.--. ~
: -_"ll'i,.. \ \..,'.':',-t- ~11l.T-~TiIT-.I'
--.{-~,~-'~~~_..~, .-.-. ,:,~ . \\\ ( l 'j ill 1 ! /~-c,7It~~.
---- .-.. i '- \ " \ \_ \ "._.u I~_ LJ / (--z I. l
- _un, I ---LJ ~ \ --', '\ \ " '- ........"'1-,- -_' \ =,r--r ---iJ
- ! ! / \ ',- '\ '., \ \ \ \ U / ,~ ' 2"' '<: '/'
--._.~//\\_\~ \\'\\ 1/, ;
- -,' -. .\, - - \ \ \' I -- / I " /
.' r " \.l. ,\ -- , ,
: - l · H ' ,. i - -,.~ I !'" ' , , ,/,
~ - , ~---- --~ [---I - ;/",' ,
II L _ 1- I ~ - ---; r- - '" ! \/ -,_ /. < ',/
I~- 1-1 If--- \ ;---JL-u,:"",/t< '/
I I . ..~/\ \-/\ "'~ "', '"
1~-1- II; I //~,~",\ . /,/",>~<"/
;'. h L _ \ ~-~,. ~ \ \~\ ~'A." ,...,<<;-\, ',)'/I,r!, ---',:i
/ :-- ~\ \: /\ \ \ \ \." /7\\. \ \ ~'~\ '" I
",,"~ n'- \ ~ ~ '\./. ,~ \e/ / \ \\.'/, ',I
,'" ,\-\ i rl__i \ , '__. '/,- \ " .u".. \ \.\ \ ..---C;
>, \.--- ~,;;.L_;- '''-\'' \. I.-C"\\.\>\, t--
.----'!' "~, ~I ,-.-\ T-II\: '.. - " \---,.:, \ \,1~\-\" '-_ I / --
I ---ur' \ \ \ U_L---.'. \ _ 1 r _- -\ . /~--/ I \ \ '-,/\~.' _; ----,,'
1- 1'1L- I L.L,-,-'-o-" iI'---" I , ,\, ii, " I )-/., , .J'
'i - I ~C~ \ \ \ \ \ \__) )---! .\1 \ /\, .":'. .._~_J-_.'Y 1~-~-'/'-)'>---?---7.i
,r-= - ,-, -.' c__~___e' . / "" ,-- .-----T-.'. , , , '
] - I~l - --I --";';',"'W, -,--re:; / / rT I ' I.... ./ / " /__
.--- - J.fr - C~{: \ \ '. \ \ ,. /! i I! _.,' "
n~i~f~~j:,\~!: \':t:',' \ .. Ln ..! C.lLJj...i<
I . , . ,_JJ----LL-______'----l : , \_.1. . , ,
I. J - ,. , ..' , _ i.i. ',t.:.... :
~iJJ[i~Lirr'Tni(.r :. i i\\\. i
---:------II-.--J'T~/; II i il :,) \ I: i: ; i-.
\ ,'. lY II II! \ 15\ \ \ \ i I I
I ,;, \ I \ ~ I \ ! \ \ I I .
-::\\\;~
[--1\~!
NEIGHBORHOOD
PARKING
RESTRICTIONS
-- SAND POINT ACCESS --
J~ PUBLIC BOAT ACCESS
-.
2500' BUFFER ZONE
PROPOSED "NO PARKING" SIGNS
. "NO PARKING VEHICLES
WITH TRAILERS"
EXISTING "NO PARKING" SIGNS
. ANYTIME
THIS BLOCK
. VEHICLES WITH TRAILERS
"I
8. ,
~~
~: :