Loading...
1i. Park & Rec Commission Minutes Dated 10/28/97 ii- CHANHASSEN PARK AND RECREATION COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING OCTOBER 28, 1997 Chairwoman Lash called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. MEMBERS PRESENT: Jan Lash, Jane Meger, Ron Roeser, Fred Berg, Jim Manders, Rod Franks and Mike Howe MEMBERS ABSENT: None. STAFF PRESENT: Todd Hoffman, Park & Rec Director; Jerry Ruegemer and Patty Dexter, Recreation Supervisor; and Ann Ellwood, Facility Supervisor (Taping of the meeting began at this point in the discussion.) VISITOR PRESENTATIONS: RE9UEST FOR SKATING FACILITY.<SUNSET'RIDGE PARK (VERBAL). Christi Nordby: We were at a party this summer and a lot of patents stated these facts. That it would be a good idea. Physical activity keeps your body healthy and sometimes it's something to put into habit at an early age. I mean we.can slide and we can build snowmen but we luive long winter months here. It's a cheap activity that introduces children to ice skating and with more free ice time for them, they practice more often and therefore as a result we have many more great ice hockey players, figure skaters and at an earlier age. I love to ice skate. I'm from the upper Peninsula of Michigan and so we had adversities just as yoU had mentioned, and we made ice. We didn't need a warming house. I spent a lot of hours after school, and I met a lot of really nice friends. Kept us out of trouble. Gave us apurpose and there's a lot of really good hockey teams, hockey players and figure skaters that have come about that That's about all I have, thank you. Lash: Thanks Christi. This would require a motion wouldn't it Todd? Hoffman: Yes. Lash: So we would need to table this until the next available agenda? Okay. Howe: Well you still have time. Berg: We still have time in November. Lash: So are you saying we can act tonight orwe can't act tonight? Hoffman: Sure could, yeah. Park & Rec Commission ~eetii1g~ October 28, 1997 Lash: Okay, y.rell _ I'U Qp~,~tupforC4)mmissioners comments. Jim. Manders: I~$ oneq~u~~,ia,Jnten1l$.~ftb.elocationofother skate facilities, would be the elementary'School~~,~.}I~. ..~~~,~otbertwo.. prox~ty locations. And they're about how far? .... .', .... .... . ..' . Hoffman: Oveta rt1ile.1'he~onvenience to the elem~ school would be much better with older driving... . Lash: There's warming hOuses. - "~<"; , ~h" _ -'_'. )"., ' ..-. Manders: I guess my r,eaL~oncero, and I woUld agree, with the comments though that too frequently, I ~e~.... . .tiie,:'&ilTf#nditwas one oftliQsedrings where you went outside and you were out there uritiJ. .' ftozellJ1c;l$'ta~itiusy . '., . dn't need the warming house and you make a baUtieldout 6f~bat"~d~ts forbaSes:,-.n4 you do it. But in terms of usage of this facility,,{ ~stb~t~bnhas a little bit of~t1Cer:njbat it's a little bit harder to get to. That's probably by bi~tconeern; . . ,., , Roeser: You know one p(~e tJ1in.. that we've ~hearing about the skating rinks that we've put up, you knoW,th~'s'a)veat'~ of ~~,rig~t ~t the be~~~i~g and then December and Januarycotne$ alqng , "gulS8J'eout , " ". :~,~rii1ks and they don't have a track on them.Y 'kn~w, ne's'~'e4.thein~. .~red be no lighting out there, you know which means you,' .uarytt~f:datk at 5:00. I like little comer rinks too but I think we have to thit1k ,t. ""tfl8nthis:'And with the access being as it is to keep it in shape. You know" , . '. dsWillshovel it off and they'll clean it up and things like that, but , t,couple"Weeks that you're out there but it just doesn't corttinue. thls. ..good acc.~s to it. Lash: Okay. Berg: .. .access too because I,,d,9l1~tlQ1owthf,lti~: ~ what we used to ~o and go out and just play on th~ rink~.. It s~,l~ev~~tij) have'somethi~g that's organized. The other concern is,.pareritshave gritto~'QUHh ,. '/lfthere's little kids going skating, I'm not sure how long the parentsare.~olng:totlstifthe~cat?tbe anywhere near that rink. To be sitting in their cars. rnireallycoDC.~ .aboUt:a~ I guess. Wha~ ar.e we taIl<ing about in terms of cost? A ballpark figure. .,'" , ' " - - ' Hoffman: It's a considerable, sum to rnaintai~ On. an annual basis we flood every day. Sweep them every day.~~s asig~itl~ddJ~~()U11!.,,'\V~~_ate toinvestabout $35,000.00 to $45,000.00 per y~, .<.... ."~o~tif()v~~e.wepufin, into the eight rinks that we currently maintaintll~: ~ity,~eYQU;~~~YOll're tall9ng$3,OQO.00~$4,000.00. . ',' , Berg: That's all I had. ., 2 Park & Rec Commission Meeting - October 28, 1997 Lash: Okay. I would agree with all of the comments so far. I'd have concerns over the accessibility issue and the maintenance and the damage to the trail. With Coulter in, I think that you'll have better access to Bluff Creek, which will be a nicer place to go anyway. Not that I have a problem with neighborhood rinks, I don't but the other thing is I don't think we want to set a precedent that we're going to have a rink in every neighborhood. We need to start looking at that as far as location and having a service area. Otherwise we'll be flooded. Rod. Franks: I would agree too. It's also a concern of mine about the lack oflighting for the. Again we're already seeing it getting darker and darker and that's not going to change for a while. Of course the kids getting off to school or having parents available for supervision would already be, mostly dark except for the weekends so. I know that the Chanhassen Hills is supposed to be putting up a light. That'd be another lighted facility with off street parking that's fairly accessible. Those would be my concerns. Lash: Jane. Meger: I don't think I really have much to add other than, as to the comment about necessarily needing something organized to go out and skate. I guess I would disagree with that. I'd watch my son, I mean ifhe can get out there and just skate around, he will.. . organized so I certainly understand the want for something closer by that.. . fairly quickly and we go out there and trudge with him too and skate until we're cold but I'd be interested in seeing this on a list and also seeing if it would be... talking about it further. Lash: Mike. Howe: This is a pretty big neighborhood, isn't it? This is a good size, the area? A lot of houses? Hoffman: Yes, big neighborhood. Howe: It is? Hoffman: Oh yeah. Howe: And we're scheduled to build one anyway in 5 years right, but that was the thinking is that that road will be extended? Hoffman: Correct. The trend as of late has been to add an open skate light so you can skate in the evenings. Monday through Friday night. You get home from school and your parents get home and you have dinner and it's dark and there's not a lot of skating that takes place during those hours of the week. And we're also going more towards the installation ofa temporary warming houses also. We're just trying to get more bang for your buck. If you're going to put $3,000.00 or $4,000.00 or $5,000.00 into...you want to be able to allow the residents to use it as much as possible. So at the time when you can add a portable house and a skating light and have 3 Park & Rec Commission Meeting - October 28, 1997 reasonable access to it, people can drive to a facility, that makes good sense to do that and to intersperse those throughout the community. Howe: What is this park getting as part of the referendum? Do you remember that? Hoffman: It's not included. Howe: I guess I'd have to be leery too at this point based on access and. It is a big neighborhood though. I can see some points there. Roeser: Is it possible there will be access before 5 years though? Hoffman: Dh sure. Roeser: Yeah see. I think you certainly can consider moving the date up of development and doing it as soon as it's accessible. Hoffman: Five years ago I would have told you it would have been within 5 years but it seems like it'd be developed. Lash: Okay. Is there someone willing to make a motion on this? Anyone? I'd be willing to make a motion that not for understanding what we would consider to be lack of need, but I think due to the issues that were brought up, lack of access, that I would move that we would deny this request at this time but be willing to look at this as soon as there is road access available. Roeser: That's a good motion. I'll second that. Lash moved Roeser seconded that the Park and Recreation Commission move to deny the request for a skating facility at Sunset Ridge Park at this time and look at it when there is road access available. All voted in favor and the motion carried. Lash: Christi, will you make sure you keep this in mind and as soon as we know that something is happening, move on this I think fairly quickly. As soon as that road goes in. Okay. Are there any other visitor presentations at this time? APPROV AL OF MINUTES: Berg moved, Franks seconded to approve the summary Minutes of the Park and Recreation Commission dated September 23, 1997. All voted in favor and the motion carried. PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO CHANHASSEN RECREATION CENTER POLICY. Patty Dexter presented the staff report on this item. Lash: Anyone with comments or questions for Patty? 4 Park & Rec Commission Meeting - October 28, 1997 Manders: Sounds good. Roeser: No. Lash: Does that require a motion? Hoffman: Please. Lash: Is there a motion? Howe: I move that we adopt the new Recreation Center Policies as written. Meger: Second. Howe moved, Meger seconded that the Park and Recreation Commission adopt the new Chanhassen Recreation Center policies as submitted by staff. All voted in favor and the motion carried. CHANHASSEN RECREATION CENTER MONTHLY REPORT. Nate presented the staff report on this item. Manders: What's the Holiday Kids in the Kitchen thing? Nate: That's basically, we have our child care coordinator, Kelly VanReeson, she coordinates that for us. She comes in kids, it's a kids in the kitchen basically which they come in and they learn safety and cooking. Learn how to cook different things in the kitchen and this specifically is for the holidays. Learning Christmas cookies. Lash: Is this for preschoolers? Nate: No. This is for. Lash: I'm just kidding Nate... Okay, any comments for Nate? Roeser: Do you advertise this 50% off thing in the paper or where do you do it? Nate: We advertise it in a couple of different places, didn't we? Dexter: The advertisement was part of our two year anniversary ads.. . and as an add on, an extension of that anniversary. Roeser: Yeah, I was just wondering how people found out about it. 5 Park & Rec Commission Meeting - October 28, 1997 Dexter: That will be it for promoting that in the newspaper. However we have flyers at the Rec Center. Lash: Did you have a good response to that? Dexter: To the 50% off? Lash: I mean did you pick up some new? Nate: We have so far a real good response. Lash: Just so you know, I had someone at work out in Prior Lake come and ask me for directions to the Rec Center here because she has to come to a workshop so someone from, it's out anyway so they know about it. Great. Thanks. PUBLIC HEARING: RECOMMENDATION TO REMOVE NO PARKING SIGNS ON UTICA LANE. GREENWOOD SHORES PARK. Public Present: Name Address Dick Lynch Patty & Jim Hastreiter Judy Christensen Greg Blaufuss Jim Rosendahl 7120 Utica Lane 6990 Tecumseh Lane 7100 Utica Lane 7116 Utica Lane 7090 Tecumseh Lane Todd Hoffman presented the staff report on this item. Lash: Can I ask one quick question first? From looking at the map I'm not exactly sure where it says approximate no parking area. I'm confused as to where that begins and ends and maybe some of the residents are too. Is there a way we can do that on the overhead? I can't tell. Hoffman: The no parking area on this overhead goes well beyond either side of this curve and what we would ask is our engineers to take a look at the turning and just how far past this curve we would want to sign no parking either side and just study the traffic patterns and those type of things so I don't have the exact diagram of where those would be but they would be back a sufficient distance to allow for. . . Lash: Okay. Thank you. Berg: Safety for pedestrians and bikers on Utica? Hoffman: Yep, and people who are accessing the park. Walking to and from it. 6 Park & Rec Commission Meeting - October 28, 1997 Lash: I would also say for safety, emergency vehicles to get through because it's narrow. Okay. We'll open it up for public comments. If you have comments or questions regarding this issue, I'd ask that you come to the podium and state your name and address for the record. Is there anyone wishing to address the commission? Dick Lynch: Good evening. My name is Dick Lynch and I live at 7120 Utica Lane. Just moved in there about a year ago and when I first read the proposal, I'm looking at this and having some difficulty in seeing how this is really addressing the issues that were brought by the commission that did the study on the park. It didn't do anything that I could see that was going to help any handicap person really use that park by taking the no parking signs off of Utica Lane. The street is very narrow. It's a very sharp curve. 90 degree curve at the bottom of the hill where the access to the park is. A fairly steep grade going up past my house and pretty much up to probably.. .or the next street up there. I don't see where this is addressing the issue and is really, appears to me to create some conflict in having vehicles parked. I certainly don't relish the idea of having people park in my front yard. Whether that happens or not happens, it's hard to determine but it seems that there's a better way to approach this than just arbitrarily taking those no parking signs down and thinking you'd solve the problem. It doesn't provide van access or a ramp type of thing that would be involved with a wheelchair. All of those vehicles that I'm familiar with have that access on the right hand side so people would park on the street would have to unload into somebody's yard. It just doesn't make a lot of sense. I don't think it solves a problem and I think it creates a situation for the people who live in the neighborhood immediately adjacent to the park that would not enhance their lives at all so I would ask you to consider that, or reconsider your motion to either really provide what they're looking for. Some sort of ramp or access that a vehicle, a van could be parked and a wheelchair could be gotten out of and go from there and not just arbitrarily think that you've addressed the problem or solved the problem or really have taken care of the issues presented by taking those no parking signs out of there. Plus the fact that they must have been put up there for some reason. That's all, thank you. Lash: So Dick would you be. Dick Lynch: If you have any questions I guess yeah. Lash: 1'd be interested, would you be more in favor of taking the gate down and allowing cars to drive down into the park? Dick Lynch: That wouldn't bother me, no. Lash: Okay. (There was a tape change at this point in the discussion.) Lash: .. . anyone else from the audience? 7 Park & Rec Commission Meeting - October 28, 1997 Greg Blaufuss: Greg Blaufuss, 7116 Utica Lane. I guess my concerns are similar to Dick's in that the street is narrow and if we're going to talk about taking down no parking signs, we need more specifics than pointing to the overhead there. Certainly if taking down no parking signs is going to satisfy the request for handicap accessibility, I don't think we should be looking at taking no parking signs down on both sides of the street. The street is narrow, like Dick pointed out, and I think it would cause some problems. If you ask me if! think that it would be better to open up the parking area, I would say no. I think you'd probably say the same if you gave it some more thought. It hasn't been there very long but. . . so as a matter of fact, some of the other neighbors and I talked about the fact that 30 mph might be a little bit fast for the speed limit in that area. Even prior to this request being made so we actually were going to approach the Commission to see if we could get some children playing signs or reduce the speed limit at least around that curve, on Utica because it seems a little fast. When they start going down the hill next to our house they're going pretty fast by the time they get to the park. Those are my concerns. Thank you. Lash: Thanks Greg. Audience: ... tremendous amount of bicycle traffic and people walking. Lash: Okay. Anybody else? Judy Christensen: .. .most of the neighbors right" around the park tonight. I'm Judy Christensen at 7100 Utica and on your map, I'm the house on the bottom left, or the middle left. My house, the full length of my property runs right across, or right next to the park. Both Greg and I happen to have very young children and that particular curve, if anyone's gone down it, is a blind curve. 30 mph on a blind curve with any kind of slope, which virtually when I'm on my bike... when you get to the bottom of the hill, as someone experienced what, 3 months ago? Driving late at night, they went to the bottom of the curve and ran into someone's front yard, into their great big pine tree and actually snapped the pine tree down. The pine tree was. .. I guess one of the things that I'm thinking about is that certainly if someone has a need where they want to access the park, I do think that they do have adequate access and quite nicely laid out being a new resident, to this particular community, at the other end of the lake. I'm not saying that people shouldn't be, and aren't entitled to have access but I do think that it... If someone is proposing that they want to be able to park closer, I think one of the things that should be noted in the 3 months that we've now been there, there are people that do in fact, they go ahead and ignore the no parking signs. There are people that go ahead and blatantly park in front of the gate and leave their vehicle there and if you want to open it up, that's fine but then I think there's going to be an enforcement issue and there's going to have to be cost along with that. I think removing the no parking signs again for the speed is not recommended. However, I can understand that if someone lives in that particular neighborhood and has either a parent, a spouse, themselves, whatever that wants to access it, I can understand that there would be more of a concern. Unless it is someone that just happens to have found that particular park and they like it, which I can understand many people would. It's a very friendly park. I'd like to see that it remains that way by not having a, and not encouraging a tremendous amount of parking because my understanding that that particular park has had a lot of activity that has been very negative, such as a lot of 8 Park & Rec Commission Meeting - October 28, 1997 parties and a loud raucous and what not. The park in and of itself, I can sit out on the front porch and watch and every 15 minutes someone comes and goes. And it's not by car, it's on foot. It would be nice if there was some way that those individuals that come and go could have some kind of sidewalk or something that's more, you know sturdy ground or something for them, but the park is, there's just a tremendous amount of people that come and go. If you, I would recommend for anyone, before you take the no parking signs down, that you actually go and drive the curve. And I think that you would readily see on this blind curve that some kind of reduction in speed or sign or something needs to happen. The other thing is that I don't know what kind of lighting there is for that particular park. When you're going down the hill, it's again as you access into the park, it's a little steeper. It's not quite the same pitch as you would have as you're on the road. But as you're trying to enter into the park it's pretty steep there. IF you are going to put in some kind of path for someone so that it's hard surface, I would certainly recommend that you also have a light. .. I don't know if that then poses problems with ice and all of those wonderful Minnesota winter things that we have to deal with. I think that's all that I have... I think those are the concerns that we have. We did try to pull together a couple of different people to voice their issues prior to, and I guess that kind of a representation without being able to, a change of notice and we were actually going to have a neighborhood meeting tomorrow night but then we, well anyway. Any questions at this time? Okay, thank you. Lash: Thanks Judy. Anyone else comments? Okay. I'll open it up. Jim Rosendahl: Ijust wanted to add one thing. My father-in-law's handicap. We live on Tecumseh and actually the signs in, right at the comer of our house. He's confined to a wheelchair and we have no problem getting him down to the park. Even up to the picnic tables. And actually he'd have more problems on the hill, you know parking closer. Getting out of the van and then backing the wheelchair and you know. And I don't think removing the signs either is going to, you know I'd look into it before we did that. And I don't know what the laws are for the handicapped, you know for parks. I know like right now Canada's going through a bunch of stuff with that. They're actually closing the parks because they can't afford to make them accessible so then everybody ends up suffering that way so, but I just wanted to say we don't have any trouble getting him down there. Lash: Can you state your name Jim? Jim Rosendahl: Jim Rosendahl. Roeser: He doesn't come in a van though? Jim Rosendahl: Yeah, he parks at our house in his van. Then we get him out in the driveway. Go down Tecumseh. Then down Utica because that hill is a real bad hill. Actually the hill down to the park. . . Roeser: I know the hill. I've ridden it a hundred times. 9 Park & Rec Commission Meeting - October 28, 1997 Jim Rosendahl: Okay, yeah. Yeah. So actually it works out better getting him up on top where it's flat and then you know down and around. Roeser: I think the concern was that the park was almost closed with all the no parking signs. No one can use that park that doesn't really live in the neighborhood. I think that's part of the problem I think too. It is, and I don't think we've ever considered taking all the no parking signs, particularly on the side where the houses are. That never, if any no parking signs came down, they'd be on the east side. Lash: It'd be up at the top. You know I think what we were thinking of was like in front of Carol Watson's house. Do you know where Carol lives? Jim Rosendahl: Yeah. Lash: Up by Shawnee and I don't know who lives in Ways house anymore. There's somebody new there. And down along Utica where it straightens out along the lake, you know in front of Mr., well you won't know their names if! say them anyway. He's dead anyway now but I don't know some of the new names. Jim Rosendahl: He's not going to care. Lash: No. He's not going to care anymore. Anyway, I think what we were talking about is the ones on the straight aways and after you're at the top of the hill, you know in my opinion, anywhere around the curve or on the hill I'm quite sure public safety and engineering would not recommend taking any of those signs down. I can't imagine that they could. You know parking there, it would just be a nightmare safety wise for people using the park and even for safety vehicles, emergency vehicles that couldn't get through because the street's so narrow. But that's why I asked to get a little more clear picture from the overhead of where it's going to be and I think before I would even send this to City Council, I would be wanting to see exactly where this IS. Jim Rosendahl: Okay. Lash: Anybody else in the audience. Okay. We'll open it for commissioners comments. Jim. Manders: I guess my primary concern is general access, although the complaint was one that maybe suggested handicap access. As we know that if somebody is very handicap that they're not going to be able to get in there by themselves anyway, so it's one of proximity so they have someplace to park. Otherwise you end up parking you know, down here at City Hall to get into that park basically because there isn't any room there. So to have some place, if somebody wants to use that, and to the extent that Ron is talking about just general access, I think as a city we're negligent in that way to provide general access to all facilities to everybody. And that's I guess my VIew. 10 Lash: Ron. Park & Rec Commission Meeting - October 28, 1997 Roeser: That's the same way I feel. I don't think we've got to put a whole bunch of parking spaces down there or anything like that. I think that on the east side of that street there is room probably for 4 or 5 cars that could be parked there. If people can use the park other than those that just walk in. I don't think we should open it up to, we're not going to try and turn this into a Lake Ann Park. This is a little park you know but if people want to use it, if I want to drive out there and sit on the dock, I should be able to do that. That's why I think we just have to provide some general parking for people. Berg: Because it is reasonable to open up the park for parking... I don't think it's a good idea to open the park. There just isn't that much there. You already are getting all kinds of problems. I'd like to go to the expertise of the public safety department on the public safety and engineering department. I think I honestly thought that I think putting up signs about children crossing or whatever would be appropriate, would be very good to alert people to the fact that there are kids around. I'd like to see that. Roeser: And if you're successful in getting them to slow down the traffic, let me know. Audience: Well I thought maybe like blind children or blind and deaf child, something like that. Roeser: Yeah, you might get something about children but I doubt if you get anybody to slow it lower than 30 mph... Manders: Speed bumps are the one thing that I know that slow things down. Lash: I would agree with the comments, however before I would like to see it go to City Council I'd like to see the more clear recommendation of public safety and engineering as to what they're considering. I do think that they'll probably do a fine job in my, I'll agree with what they have. I'm confident but I'd like to see it before I would send it to City Council. And I think some signs there would be good. We couldn't really do anything about the speed limits. That would have to go to Public Safety. Hoffman: There are no speed limits lower than 30 mph. Lash: Okay. Rod. Franks: I would agree. I feel somewhat at a disadvantage without seeing an engineering report on exactly the safety issues on the curve and where they would recommend the signs being taken down and where they feel that they. .. I would also like to see that report before we make. Lash: Jane. Megers: The only thing that I would add in, it's kind of in addition to Judy's.. .park being across the way, great accessibility and concern about that original.. .access fee.. .you know we had talked about signage and I don't know that that would be... 11 Park & Rec Commission Meeting - October 28, 1997 Lash: Mike. Howe: I said when we spoke about this a month or two ago, this is a thorny issue and I understand the concerns of residents. Jan, you live there. I understand you would take a lead on this but as far as access to that park, you can still get into Lake Ann and park down at the boat launch. Is it a third of a mile, a quarter mile if you walk on that trail to that little beach? How far do you think that is? Not far. Lash: From the main beach to the little beach? Hoffman: Probably a third. Howe: You have access to it over there. Yeah, it'd be nice to drive but, and it's easy for me to say because I'm fairly mobile and I'm not disabled or anything at this point in my life but I don't see the need to open it up for everybody because to me it is open. You can get there. It's available. Signs are a thorny issue. I agree. I'd like to see a study and just a few spots open up along that safe side but I think you can still access that from a I think fairly easily from the main Lake Ann parking lot. Lash: Well you can access it from anywhere in the neighborhood too you know. It'd be interesting actually when we had this debate several years ago I did measure how far it was from the closest spot to the park and I can't remember now what it was. Hoffman: 600 feet. Lash: 600 feet so. Roeser: From where the no parking signs are? Lash: The closest place you could park to the park. Roeser: You mean all those.. .no parking signs from there. Lash: From the parking or from the turn around? Audience: From the turn around, that's... Lash: Actually I think it's farther. That was sort of my point when this got brought up before is that it's actually closer to park at Greenwood Shores and get to the beach than it is at Lake Ann. Howe: A much straighter walk or ride... Lash: Well it's accessible at Lake Ann. It's flat. At Greenwood Shores no matter what we do to it, we've got the hill... So it really does boil down more to a safety issue as far a having the 12 Park & Rec Commission Meeting - October 28, 1997 hill and the curve. I think just so that the neighbors know, the whole point of this was there was a resident who had concern about the accessibility and brought it to our attention and we needed to do this study on it. So just so that you're aware of where this all came from and it wasn't necessarily just a vision of ours to just open up the whole park and have parking in there and all of that. So does somebody want to make a motion on where to go with this now? Hoffman: We do have a motion that the commission has already made and if it goes to the City Council what I would propose to do is attach the study from the Public Safety and Engineering department and mail that back out to the residents and invite them again to come to the City Council. .. do that and let me know. I'll present it to the City Council. What I'd like to explore with them is again so we'll create a diagram showing road configuration, the lots and where the signs would stop and start. And explore with Public Safety getting a sign, be it a park or playground is forthcoming on the road. Take a look. . . then mail that out and take this to City Council. Lash: Okay, so what would be the Council date, just so we can tell people? Hoffman: I believe it's noted for the 10th. Is that a Monday? Berg: Yeah there is one the 10th. Lash: So do you plan that that would be on the agenda then? Okay. So this item would go onto City Council at their November 10th meeting if any of you are concerned and all of the residents interested in this issue will be mailed a diagram showing the proposal. So then if you have further comments, go to the City Councilor call one of the Council members. Manders: One question. It'snot that this is a Park and Rec question but street. What's the policy on speed bumps? Hoffman: No speed bumps. They slow people down for 10 feet and then they speed up for the next 150. Manders: It will slow them down for that curve though. Roeser: It just makes them angrier and they'd tear around the comer after they hit it. Manders: Well I was just wondering what it is. Hoffman: And it's a really curious fact that speed limits are designed by the section of the road so speed limits are signed based on how fast people tend to drive an individual road so it really doesn't matter. The State of Minnesota guideline, if people want to drive 45 or 50 mph on a road section, ifit allows those type of speeds, and that's your average speed, that's where they'll sign it. So the City, the County, the State exists, trying to artificially pull down those speed limits on road sections through signage just doesn't work. It gives people a false sense of security and they don't drive any slower than they tend to on. . . 13 Park & Rec Commission Meeting - October 28, 1997 Lash: Okay. Thanks for the comments. REVIEW PROPOSED 1998 PARK ACQUISITION AND DEVELOPMENT CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT (CIP). Todd Hoffman presented the staff report on this item. Lash: Well I'm going to share my stupidity because I'm totally confused. In this paragraph it says the creation of the Lake Ann Park expansion, $50,000.00 and the arts theater reserve, okay. So we kept that in, right? Hoffman: Yep. Lash: Then we discussed raising the general reserve from $300 to $400, but with our current $850,000.00 on hand, what's the $850,000.00 on hand? Hoffman: Cash in the bank. Lash: Okay. This goal cannot be attained. The $400,000.00 can't be attained? Hoffman: No. If you take your $400,000.00 reserve plus your $320,000.00 in expenditures, what you're looking, when we book those expenditures, we are predicting that we're going to get $400,000.00 in revenue but we don't know that. The accountants are not going to allow us to go into the hole with our reserve and our projected expenditures for 1998. You add up $400,000.00 plus your $320, excuse me, your $512 plus your $320, you're up to $832. $832,000.00, you have $850,000.00 cash on hand. That's where we want to be. To raise it, then it's really saying that we have $932,000.00 in cash, which we do not. We certainly hope to have that but we don't know that those revenues will come in. Lash: My recollection, one of the things that we discussed was wanting to make sure, I think the purpose of increasing the reserve, if we could, was for future land acquisition. Ifwe had all ofa sudden Prince came. . . to move or whatever so. Hoffman: Lake Ann Park expansion addresses that. Lash: Is that, okay. I wasn't sure where that was supposed to be. Okay. Hoffman: Originally, so that all commissioners are aware, the reserve account was established at $100,000.00 back in the 70's when we had LA WCON grant opportunities. Some federal money would become available but you had to match it so the commission wanted the matching funds set aside so if one of those grants was approved, you could have that cash allocated. Then it was raised to $200. Raised to $300. It's simply a way of safety being cash in the bank, some over zealous park commission and park director spent all the money. 14 Park & Rec Commission Meeting - October 28, 1997 Roeser: This City Center thing, $100,000.00 for redevelopment. Now how does the acquisitions coming from the outside? Hoffman: Good. Roeser: Is it? Hoffman: Yeah. Roeser: What's going to happen? Hoffman: We hope so. We're talking to them. It's all about price right now. Price and appraisals and negotiations.. . and that's an expensive piece of property. Manders: My question is on this, the $850,000.00 or whatever that number is. Hoffman: Cash in the bank? Manders: That's what's been accumulated over however many years to date. Hoffman: Yep. Manders: Right, and so we've got that. And I guess I'm confused about this too. I want to understand it relative to what we have and what we expect to generate this year and what we expect to spend this year. So we have the $850. That's over here. Hoffman: Correct. Manders: What we bring in is estimated to be. Hoffman: $400,000.00. Manders: $400,000.00. And what we expected to spend was? Hoffman: $320. Manders: Well no. What we had planned? Wasn't it originally? Hoffman: Oh, $470. Manders: Was we planning to spend $470? Hoffman: Yes. 15 Park & Rec Commission Meeting - October 28, 1997 Manders: And we were only going to bring in $400? That's the problem right there, isn't it? The $70,000.00 deficit spending and not being able to add to this $850? I mean that's where I'm losing this whole process here. Hoffman: Yeah, a couple of different ways to look at it. We want to be safe in our allocation of cash. You're correct, $850,000.00 in the bank, we think we're going to make $400,000.00. Manders: So if we're making $400 and we just, we wouldn't be out, with spending 320 we'd be able to add $80,000.00 to that $850, right? Hoffman: Correct. Manders: And that's what the goal is, to be able to add to that $850 and not subtract from it so to speak by spending more than we would bring in. Okay. Hoffman: The City Council also gets nervous when you deficit spend. Lash: Well I would too. But okay, say we bring in $400,000.00. We spend $320,000.00. That's an extra $80,000.00. Hoffman: We hope. Lash: Okay. If everything goes according to the history and that's the way it's gone, then why couldn't we add that extra $80,000.00 into the reserve and make it $380? You know if our goal was to make it $400, but there wasn't enough money to do that. Hoffman: You established another $100,000.00 in reserves for Lake Ann. Manders: But what's the $380. Where are you getting $300? Lash: General reserve is $300,000.00 now. And we had said we thought we wanted to try and increase the general reserve from $300 to $400 but there wasn't enough. Manders: That's different than the $850 number? Or where does that $850 number tie to the $300? Hoffman: It's part of it. Lash: Where is that $850 anyway? I mean is it on here somewhere? Hoffman: The $850? Manders: Yeah. (There was a tape change at this point in the discussion.) 16 Park & Rec Commission Meeting - October 28, 1997 PROGRAM REPORTS: SUMMER SOFTBALL: (Taping of the discussion began again at this point.) Lash: ... people who don't live here, and then the people who do live here can't play. Roeser: That's happened once Jan. I don't know if necessarily that's going to happen again. You know the town is pretty much filled up. This is when you had a lot of people coming out here and I'd have to go with opening it up. Meger: You know if I could share some of my experience in my former place of employment. In Apple Valley they have approximately 170 teams and they broke it down, they had a resident, non-resident fees and so however we wanted to establish the fees is completely up to us. But then what they had was a priority classification and it was the same every year and you fell into, it could have been broken down into six priorities. First one being returning resident teams, across the board. No discussion on that. The second is a new resident team, would be the second one in. And then the third would be a returning non-resident team. The fourth would be a new non-resident team. That always put your resident team up front and every year, teams knew where they were classified so it wasn't an issue. Lash: But is that a whole team or what's the percentage of? Meger: You could do it however you want to. Lash: I would go for that. Roeser: But do we have any teams that are fully composed of all residents? Howe: The fire department team. Roeser: Not even the fire department is all, you know. Hoffman: There's a lot oflying going on. Howe: A non-resident team is whatever we decide is resident. Lash: Because you know if one person who lives here can't play because someone from Shorewood is playing, to me that's just wrong. Somebody moves to town and they can't play because we're full, that's not right because we have people from all over the city playing. Roeser: I can't argue with that Jan. Meger: It may not be right but I can't see not looking at expanding just because. 17 Park & Rec Commission Meeting - October 28, 1997 Lash: Well if we can set up a thing like that so if someone moves to town they can join a resident team or they can join a team and they'd have you know a priority. That's the word I'm looking for, over non-residents, that would be okay with me as long as I know the residents have first crack at it. Meger: I mean theoretically if you're a new resident in town, you're not going to have necessarily a whole team that you're bringing with you to play either so you may be wanting to contact one of these other teams to get onto their team so I don't know. It just seems like it's very unlikely that we would run across that situation. Hoffman: In '86-87 we had three fields at Lake Ann. That was it. You have increasing desire to use those for youth so we were backing down times for adults. We also had the, we were at the peak of softball in Chanhassen with the existing residents and we were having 1,000 new people move into town every year. So we were at a crunch time there.. . softball people by nature are very competitive so they brought their competitive spirit onto the City. . . public meetings long to be remembered so... I'm not sure we're quickly headed back to that type of situation. And if we were, we could. Lash: I don't know if it would be quick. I just don't ever want it to happen. Not while I'm here. Roeser: Just be out of town for that meeting. Lash: So who wants to make a motion. Can we just table this to, and then you can bring us more so we can go over this all again. Hoffman: Sure. Lash: Okay. FALL SOFTBALL: Ruegemer: A lot of the same issues. But we had. . . fall softball. In the fall we do have more, the fields are a little bit more open to that. We do use Lake Ann #5 for a football field.. . and we also then used #1 for a soccer field. So we're trying to use a lot of those multi-purpose fields and incorporate those fields.. .Does anybody have any questions? Taping of the meeting ended at this point in the discussion. Submitted by Todd Hoffman Park & Rec Director Prepared by Nann Opheim 18