Mound council narrows scope of Lost Lake Commons Phase 2 after months of public input and debate

MOUND CITY — Councilmembers on June 24 reviewed a near-final design for Lost Lake Commons Phase 2 and asked staff to pare back amenity spending while preserving the infrastructure needed to finish the park so it is usable next year.

The council’s decision came after a long presentation from Brian Simmons, senior city engineer, and extended public and council debate over costs, the role of public art, accessibility and maintenance.

Simmons said Phase 2 work will include “lighting elements, landscaping, art installations, concrete paving, seating and the fire pit,” and that the $781,400 cost estimate in the city’s packet covers primarily infrastructure such as sidewalks, utilities and stormwater treatment. “The bulk of the costs have to do more with infrastructure,” he told the council.

Why it matters: the project converts a former roadway and underused shoreline into a public plaza, promenade and a performance/green space at the city’s lakeshore. Council members and residents said the park should both provide everyday green space and include signature features that make Mound distinctive — but they disagreed on what that should cost and how soon to add art or fixed amenities.

What the council did: After more than two hours of discussion, the council directed staff and the design team to return in July with a revised plan and updated cost estimate that: keeps core infrastructure (walking surfaces, promenade lighting conduit and basic plaza paving); installs trees; delays or makes optional several higher‑cost elements (permanent public art, a gas fire pit and some permanent picnic installations); and bids alternates for decking replacement and repaving. Councilmembers said permanent furniture and the “fire pit” concept can be deferred or provided as portable features for events.

Councilmember McEnany pressed for a stronger, signature element at the site, arguing the project should yield a landmark that draws people to downtown. “I want something that excites everybody and isn’t just… any park in the U.S.A.,” McEnany said. Several other councilmembers and residents said they preferred a simpler, lower‑maintenance scheme to preserve green space and reduce ongoing maintenance costs.

Design and accessibility: The plan removes the existing boulder wall along the lakeside and replaces it with lower, seating‑friendly modular block and concrete seating so the area will be ADA‑accessible. The design team also proposed a smaller plaza footprint for Phase 2, with turf left in parts that will be finalized in a later Phase 3 shelter/structure.

Art and engagement: The city collected about 180 survey responses and many open comments. Residents were split: the survey’s top choice favored rotating public art, but several commenters wrote “no art” and urged more open green space. Simmons and staff said the project includes bases and allowances so permanent art or rotating pieces can be added later; commissioning funds were included in the current cost estimate as an optional line item.

Timing and next steps: Simmons said staff will modify drawings per council direction and return in July seeking authorization to bid. He emphasized that moving underground conduit and other electrical and stormwater infrastructure after final paving would be costly, so those items should be decided now. “If we run conduit without bases, we run the risk of having stuff in the wrong place and incurring cost later,” he told the council.

Community reaction and maintenance concerns: Multiple speakers warned against overly complex plantings that will strain the city’s public works capacity; others urged the council to prioritize shade trees, seating that is comfortable for older residents and other low‑maintenance materials. The council agreed to stage the work, install trees now and bring back a trimmed set of amenities and alternates for bid.

Ending: Staff will return in July with updated drawings and a revised cost estimate that reflects the council’s direction to emphasize infrastructure, add trees and postpone or bid as alternates larger amenity items such as permanent art, a built‑in gas fire feature and permanent picnic assemblies.

Speakers quoted in this article may be found in the meeting transcript and are attributed below.