2012.05.09 PRC Minutes
Crystal Parks and Recreation Advisory Commission
Minutes
May 9, 2012
Twin Lake Shores Park Neighborhood Meeting
The Crystal Parks and Recreation Commission meeting was called to order at
7:25 pm by Acting Chairperson Lynn Haney. Commission members in
attendance were: Ms. Merriam, Ms. Sodd, Mr. Moewes-Bystrom, Ms. LaRoche,
Ms. Hillenbrand and Mr. Lehnertz (arrived late). Also present were: Ms. Deshler,
City Council Liaison; Ms. Moore, City Council; and Deputy Chief Fealy, Mr.
Burks, Mr. Rauen and Ms. Hackett from the city staff. In addition members from
the Cavanagh Oaks neighborhood were in attendance.
Introductions were made. Ms. Haney gave the purpose of the neighborhood
meetings.
Mr. Rauen opened the discussion on the draft park land shoreline maintenance
policy by giving an overview. Generally the policy allows for maintaining a buffer
zone along the shoreline but allows for vistas. The buffer zone width will vary
depending on the property. Ms. Hackett reviewed the public input process.
The following comments were made:
· The plan lists Gaulke Pond however the city comprehensive plan lists it as
a wetland. A silt fence is needed at the Public Works garage to protect
Gaulke Pond.
· Why are there no mow signs – the no mow zone is too wide. 10 feet
should be adequate.
· The buffer zone doesn’t do any good when the storm drains are flowing
straight into the lake. The storm drains bring silt into the lake and make
the lake bottom mucky. Even in small rains, the water gushes into the
lake. Are the grit chambers doing the job they are supposed to do?
· The lake had a beautiful sandy bottom and now it is muck because of the
storm drains. The muck goes out 10 feet from the shoreline.
· The current buffer zone has trash in it – the city does not clean it up. The
city did not clean up after the dead carp kill.
· Overgrown trees along the shoreline look terrible – they are 10 feet tall. Is
this what a buffer zone should look like?
· The buffer zone is only in front of 8 lots – it will not do any good to filter the
run-off.
· The homes along the park want a lake view.
· City does not maintain the current area in either the buffer zone or the
planting beds along the border fence. The planting beds are full of weeds.
Park Department dumped woodchip in the beds killing the plants that were
there.
· Park Department swept pathway and left the grass clippings.
· Security issues with the tall vegetation in the buffer zone especially in front
of 4934. Vagrants have been found in there. Kids hang out there. It isn’t
safe. (Deputy Chief Fealy had the crime statistics for the area and said
there was little crime.)
· Penn State study says mowed turf is best to filter for run-off.
· The city needs to have an effective street sweeping program and more
and better catch basins to filter the run-off.
· Why are the weed trees allowed to grow – they block the lake view and
make it a security issue especially in front of 4934.
· Why doesn’t the city maintain the area? Residents were informed about
the Memory Lane project where neighbor volunteers are doing the
maintenance. Staff offered to help them get a group organized.
A few residents commented that they would be willing to maintain
mowed turf down to the lake.
One resident said she would help with the plant beds if more
volunteers could be found.
· The city should not start a new project if they can’t maintain it. The
residents are willing to maintain it if they could cut down the trees and
mow to the lake.
· Don’t like the look of the buffer zone – it is too weedy.
Discussion turned to the moving the fishing pier to Twin Lake Shores Park. The
following comments were made:
· Where would the pier be located in the park? Staff indicated that
discussion is open on that. Resident at 4948 offered to have it there.
· Lake view residents want to have docks on the park property. If they were
allowed docks, they would become stewards for the park property and do
maintenance.
· The pier should not be in the park – it will be crowded and create more
litter that would go into the lake.
· Would like the pier at the park – it would be more useable by the
neighborhood. Didn’t think it would be overused and create problems.
· Should be kept at Bernard (resident stated that he lives near Bernard and
likes having it there).
· Position pier where the water is the deepest.
· Position pier where it is easy to get it in and out of the water.
· Want the pier in the park so it would be better used.
· If there wasn’t a buffer area, the pier would not be needed. Kids could fish
from shore.
· If it was in the park, canoeists could use it to launch from.
Comment was taken on other park issues:
· Dog waste bags were removed – would like them back.
· Need for trash barrel at the park.
· More benches are needed.
Ms. Haney closed the public comment at 8:45pm
The Commission held a brief business meeting following the public comments.
The April meeting and April Tree Board meeting minutes were approved.
The Commission discussed the weed trees in front of 4934 and thought that
something could be done about them and still preserve the buffer area. This will
discussed next month when there should be more meeting time.
The meeting was adjourned at 8:55pm
Gene Hackett
Recorder