Loading...
2 Bids of Fox Chase Trail C OF CHAN EN 690 City Ce, ter Drive PO Box 147 ~anhassen, Minnesota 55317 Phone 952.937.1900 General Fax 952.937.5739 ~ngineering ieparmumt Fax 952.937.9152 Building Department Fax 952.934.2524 Web Site www. ci.&anhassen, mn. us TO: Todd Gerhardt, Acting City Manager FROM: Todd Hoffman, Park and Recreation Director DATE: July 5, 2001 SUB J: Approve Plans and Authorize SOlicitation of Bids, Fox Chase On May 29, 2001, the City Council tabled action on this item and directed staff to provide lake access with a 10-foot easement and 5-foot trail. The attached plan portrays a 5-foot bituminous trail on the "top side," a six-foot stairway leading to the lake, and a 6-foot bituminous trail on the "lake side." The proposed easement widths remain unchanged from their current state. Faced with the reality that additional temporary and/or permanent easement width will likely be required in some areas to accommodate grading, staff cannot support reducing easement widths. A stairway is proposed in lieu of a paved hillside trail due to the severity of the slope. The trail is proposed to extend along the Carver Beach Park frontage, terminating at Napa Drive. The estimated cost for the project is $57,234. This cost is higher than originally anticipated due to inclusion of the stairway and extended route. Although this project has bounced on and off the City's Capital Improvement Plan over the years, it is currently not included in the 2001 CIP. Therefore, in the event the council approves the project, a budget amendment authorizing the expenditure of the park and trail dedication funds will need to be approved. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the City Council approve the Fox Chase Trail Connection Plan as presented, approve a budget amendment allOcating $57,234 from the Park and Trail Dedication Fund, and authorize staff to advertise for bids. C: Teresa Burgess, Public Works Director/City Engineer Kate Aanenson, Community Development Director Bruce DeJong, Finance Director Dale Gregory, Park Superintendent g:\park\thLFoxChaseTrailMemo A erowin~ community with clean lakes, tlualitv schools, a charmin~ downtown, thrivin~ businesses, and beautihd oarks. A creat o/ace to live, work. and 0 X 'd/q 'l!~.l .. f snou!u~nl!8 .g ... .. / ssaooV I[~.L-~ " ..... · .. _ .... ~ ~ ]UOUJ~S~ : "': ..... lueU~e'seB-i~m.L ,0 I,-;: . ., ...... Chanhassen Fox Chase Trail 7/3/01 Concept Cost Estimate Hoisington Koegler Group Inc. Description Grading 6' Bituminous Walk Recycled Timber Stairs with Class 5 tread Handrail Turf restoration Silt Fence 15% Contingency Total Qty. 1 980 1 7 1 705 Unit LS LF LS EA LS LF Unit Price 2,000.00 20.00 27,000.00 200.00 500.00 1.80 Totals $2,000 $19,6oo $27,000 $1,400 $500 $1,269 $49,769 $7,465 $57,234 Page I City Council Meeting - May 29, 2001 Resolution ~r2001-32: Councilman Labatt moved, Councilman Peterson seconded to approve Addendum No. I to Feasibility Study for Century Boulevard Improvement Project 97-1C, to include the 2001 Sealcoat Project No. 01-05. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously 4 to 0. PUBLIC HEARING FOR VACATION OF PERMANENT EASEMENT FOR TRAIL PURPOSES OVER AND ACROSS THE EASTERLY 15 FEET OF LOT 20, BLOCK 1, FOX CHASE AND THE SOUTHERLY 10 FEET OF LOT 19, BLOCK 1, FOX CHASE. Public Present: Name Address Barbara & Jerry Kreisler Nancy F. Hoopes Carolyn Nyman Chuck Peterson Rod Franks 764 Lake Point 6511 Fox Path 6341 Fox Path 708 Lake Point 8694 Mary Jane Circle Todd Hoffman: Thank you Madam Mayor, members of the City Council. This thing's been around for 12 or 13 years. I kind of think of it as the sleeping giant. It just never has, it's been awoken and talked about a number of times over those years but it's never been settled so hopefully this evening we can take one more step towards settling this little trail connection. I guess I'll start, well we'll start with this. This is the existing easement as it is in place today and again it's a trail easement for trail purposes. It is not developed. The neighborhood, both neighborhoods I would say routinely use it, at least those who know about it routinely use it today to get to and from recreational activities. Lake Point is one of the access areas. It's out of the Fox Chase development. And then it's connecting to the Carver Beach neighborhood in that location. So the existing easement travels inbetween these two lots, and tums 90 degrees and heads directly towards Lotus Lake and Carver Beach Park at this location. Previous to this there was an easement, proposed easement that wrapped around the front of these lots, but that one was not moved forward with. Little history about how we came to this, to tonight's meeting. We weren't even talking about the trail easement issue. We were talking about a separate issue down in Carver Beach. Sent out a neighborhood mailing informing the residents of that particular discussion, and somebody called and said, how about that trail easement into Fox Chase. When is the city going to do something about that? We'd like to see that improved so everybody can have the benefit of that connection. So we sent out a mailing again to talk about this in more specifics. That meeting was held here January of '99 I believe it was. January 26th of '99. At that time you have all the letters and e-mails that came in at that point. The discussion centered around these two lots at this location, and I'll give you a close up view of what we're talking about as far as the permanent easement. So it's titled close-up of the trail easement proposed to be vacated. Kreisler's are in Lot 20. Hedlund's Lot 19. Wegler's on the other side in Carver Beach and Schroeder's here. Existing easement is 15 feet of permanent trail easement on Lot 20 at this location. And that again tums that 90 degrees and it's a 10 foot permanent trail easement on the Hedlund's at this location. Generally what the Kreisler' s were opposed to is the loss of privacy on that side of the yard and along with a variety of other issues and they will speak to that this evening. So the park commission attempted to strike a compromise, not really hearing from other people that evening between these two lots, and generally what it's talking about, this compromise would be a horse trade to trade, get rid of this easement on the Hedlund's. So you would do away with it and in return for that, the Hedlund's would accept the trail on their side of the property and it would leave the side of the Kreisler's. So there's still a little bit of permanent easement on the Kreisler's but the trail would move over into the other side of the lot. 18 City Council Meeting - May 29, 2001 So this is the proposed compromise as we have it today. The Kreisler's have signed this proposed permanent easement. The Hedlund's have signed it but they're holding it until the vacation would be approved. So in order to move forward we need a public hearing with a compromise position. We need a public hearing to vacate these two easements before we would then go ahead and secure the new easements to construct the trail connector between those lots. So that's the basic scenario, but obviously there's other issues here that we'll hear about this evening from the neighbors. Why should we change it? Now we're talking, if we change it the traffic pattern would change. Would now come out of the public road here, Mohawk instead of going down into a park. This is a little bit cleaner. It' s just a straight cut through, but the folks down here always anticipated that it would indeed take a different configuration. I'll accept any questions from council before you move on with your public hearing. Mayor Jansen: Any questions for staff at this time? Councilman Ayotte: What kind of traffic goes up and down there right now? Joggers? Bikers? Can you tell me a little bit about. Todd Hoffman: Joggers mainly but we' ve heard about motorcycles and bikes as well so, it's intended to be a pedestrian bikeway path. Councilman Ayotte: Okay, now. Mayor Jansen: And it would be signed accordingly, correct? Todd Hoffman: yes. Councilman Ayotte: Okay. Has public safety, has Carver County Sheriff or-our public safety department cut on this in terms of implication? Todd Hoffman: There' s many of these around the community. 30, 40, 50 of these neighborhood cut throughs. Councilman Ayotte: I understand that but nonetheless, if we've got traffic going through people's areas, whether they're joggers and have an occasional motorcyclist, get me excited. And if we have a traffic pattern now of people using it, just because you improve part of it, what do we do to deter people from still doing it the way it used to be because we've had this alive for how long? Todd Hoffman: Dozen years or so. Councilman Ayotte: So is it reasonable to suspect that they'd still use the old way even though we would. Todd Hoffman: I think most of the cut through traffic today is using the proposed new way, and not coming up. This is a longer route and heads down through the trees and the neighbors can speak to that but I would think a greater percentage of the traffic currently goes through this route and then some of the people would turn and go down along the lot lines to this location. Councilman Ayotte: Is there anything that can be done structurally to like those pipes and so on that would keep a motorcyclist out or snowmobiler out. Can something be done in that fashion to ensure that the 19 City Council Meeting - May 29, 2001 ingress/egress to those areas would be limited to what would be acceptable by the folks that live in that area? Todd Hoffman: Probably not at this location. I think the larger concern would be, this is coming down a fairly steep grade and if you place those things down at the bottom, children could not have control of their bicycles, may in fact find a hazard at the bottom in those posts. Councilman Ayotte: It would cause a hazard rather than, okay. Mayor Jansen: And I'm trying to recall when I went out and looked at this. There isn't signage there currently, correct? Is there a sign that says no motorized? Todd Hoffman: No. It's not an improved trail. Mayor Jansen: Okay, and typically you would add that to a segment like this, wouldn't you? Todd Hoffman: We offer a variety of signage. No motorized vehicles. Or trail abuts private property. Please stay on trail, depending on the situation. Mayor Jansen: Okay. And that's been rather effective in other areas? Where you put the signs as far as. Todd Hoffman: Well a person who wants to take a snowmobile or motorcycle on a public trail that knows they shouldn't be there, typically are not inclined to follow a sign. It may prevent a few of those that would think it would be okay to do that, and they'd look back and read it but then on all of our trail connections' and all of our trails in the city we have the occasional violation. .'. Mayor Jansen: Sure, okay. But there would be at least signage that would go up. Any other questions for staff at this time? Councilman Labatt: No. Mayor Jansen: Okay, thank you. We will open this up for public hearing. If we could have representatives of the opinions. Actually present the case the best way possible. Certainly don't want to have anyone now feel heard. We realize that this has been an emotional, long term effort for all of you but let's try to keep it just a little bit contained and I'll go ahead and open it up for the public hearing. If you'll approach the podium and state your name and address for the record. Thank you. Chuck Peterson: Chuck Peterson, 708 Lake Point. We've been there for 10 years. I think just to address the safety thing. I'm sure at some point in time somebody showed up with a motor scooter or something but I don't really believe that there's somebody beating a path with a motorcycle very often. I think in 10 years you'd probably be able to speak to the maybe once or twice it might have happened. Snowmobiles, never. The thing that you've got at the other end of this trail, you've got 2 boulders about this big that really are very dangerous today and if they could get out of there and some posts put in, those would be more safe than what we have today. If you try and take a bike up over that with a trailer, to get into Chanhassen you can cut off about 3A of a mile going that way. So it would really be nice if a stroller and a bike carrier would be able to get through on the end to get right onto the road because I think this easement butts right up to the road itself. The other tiring I think I'd start off by saying, just as a neighborhood, I think we've got 40 out of 47 households that have said, you know here's a real logical solution that ties in 20 City Council Meeting - May 29, 2001 with really what's there today. What we're saying is that, I know that there's this fancy 15 feet that's needed but in the grand scheme of things everybody's kind of beat a path today. We've living with about 8 inches right now and so if we could get something that's 42 inches wide that's right along the side there, that would be sufficient for the neighborhood and I think you're talking about the people that practically use it because the drawing card really is Carver Beach. And the people that are on the other side, while they may come to visit, they really don't have anywhere to go because as you know Pleasant View, you've heard enough times, there's no place to walk there safely and it's just not a path that people choose to take. So this route kind of solves bikes and families having to get onto Pleasant View and being able to take a straight shot into Chanhassen. It's a better spot to go. I'm a person that I've ran that trail. I cross country ski it in the wintertime and mountain bike it on Lot 19 and Lot 20. And I can tell you for the last year or so there's been a tree down and it's not the funnest thing to have to get through there but it'd be nice to have a nice trail to get down there. And I think the number one thing in that neighborhood, if you'd kind of look at the demographics, you know a lot of families. Strollers. It's been 10 years it would have been nice to make it a little bit easier to get down there. And then Todd would probably come up with another thing. We' ve had a conversation about this. One of the things that you have on Carver Beach is kind of a side light to this is that the folks that live there today have a fire pit that what I believe is probably on public property, which you know they enjoy that. We want to share that with therrr Everybody, it's their public land as much as it's anybody else's but the practical thing is that if you give up that Lot 19 getting down to the lake, people are going to have to take the path, down the road. All the kids have to now be on the street versus taking a trail to that path, and I think that everybody also agrees that Carver Park, from that point all the way over to that development is a real gem for the city and to cut off that last piece to make it a practical step for those people to walk through and make it safe, it just isn't logical. I mean that's just kind of our way of looking at it. So our conclusion I think you'll see is a logical conclusion. I think there may be some discussion about maybe how wide it is. Whether it's 42 or 48 inches, but I think generally speaking you're going to see a neighborhood that would have no problem with that being right on the lot line. And then the Hedlund's don't have anything on their lot. You know on that western side that they're proposing right now so, I think that's it. Mayor Jansen: I just want to make sure I'm clear on what you're in favor of. The staff recommendation is jusL Chuck Peterson: The staff recommendation, well the staff recommendation to just go straight, we're saying no. Mayor Jansen: You want the L? Chuck Peterson: We absolutely need the L. We bought the L. The L is the lake access for that whole development. And to give up that L, I'm not sure what public value that would give to anybody. The only thing that I could see is it provides the Hedlund's with more privacy. That's the only value that's given in that particular scenario. Mayor Jansen: Well it also pushes the trail back towards the other home. Give me the last name. Yes, because they would, the Hedlund's then would not be allowing the trail then to be built on their property, correct Todd? From what I gather. Todd Hoffman: Not the first part. The second part then would be back on the Hedlund' s. Mayor Jansen: Correct, but it would shift back over onto the previous property. Okay. 21 City Council Meeting - May 29, 2001 Chuck Peterson: That particular one right there, that L is what we, you know everybody signed up for and everybody wants. I mean there's no reason, there's no reason not to have this piece right here down to the lake. Even in the, you know I'm not into this easement thing because I know you' ve got to have all these wide, wide things but the reality of it is, is that the practical issue is that the path that's there today is right over the Hedlund's property...toward the Kreisler's 42 inches. I'm understanding also is that even in the straight line one there is a solid 60 inches that was going onto the Kreisler's property. So we're even saying.closer to the lot line, Hedlund's don't have to give us anything on their western side of their lot, and the easement then on the back side or south side of Lot 19 would stay there. Mayor Jansen: Okay, thank you. Chuck Peterson: And that's 40 of 47 neighbors saying that. And the other ones were on vacation. Mayor Jansen: Thank you. Nancy Hoopes: Good evening Madam Mayor, Councilmen. We really appreciate you taking the time. My name is Nancy Hoopes. I live at 6511 Fox Path. And I just want to clarify a little bit of what I think just got lost here. We received the letter from the city 3 weeks ago saying this was what they had come up with in regards to a modification to the plan of where the trail easement should go, and at that time neighbors started talking and said, wait a minute. We understand it got tabled for 2 years but we never in a million years thought the tabling was going to be to just have the easement go straight down into the end of the road instead of continuing down the path down to the lake. And so then the Kreisler's put out a letter saying we want our neighborhood to know, because we are trying to work as a neighborhood, why we have concerns about not wanting to have this path so wide on their property. And they staked it out and as neighbors they set up a time for us to come and meet and talk with them and see what they were talking about, and I have to be honest. I was flabbergasted at how much their property was being taken over by the path that would be there based on the width..As were many neighbors. So what occurred this past weekend, after we got their letter and we found out this was all coming up in a quick period of time is, the neighbors said to the Kreisler' s, what would be acceptable on your property? Would you accept you know, we said this is so wide it is under your window. Would you accept 42 inches? And they looked at it and said, wow. 42 inches. That won't take us under our bedroom window. Under our dining room window. And yes, we would be happy to go with a 42 inch path that would continue down their property and then what I want to point out too, I want to make sure you understand. The other lot that the Hedlund's, you keep hearing about, currently there is no home built on that lot. It is a vacant piece of property currently. Now they might be building on it but currently it is vacant. And so we said well gosh if you keep it 42 inches, continuing down to the lake on the proposed property of Hedlund' s, that might keep them happy. Let's work together here as a team. So in a period of a day and a half on Memorial Day weekend I went door to door with 2 other of our neighbors and said hey, this is what's going on. Most of you had gone up to the Kreisler's home and had talked to them and said you know we're neighbors. We can't ask you to give up all that property on your home by a misunderstanding of when you bought the home that this easement was there. But the Kreisler's have agreed to do a 42 inch path if we can get the City Council to say sure. Let's work as a neighborhood. Let's make it, I have 4 little boys. I took my stroller up and said, this is wide enough for my double stroller. This is wide enough for bicycles. This is wide enough for a Burley. This is wide enough for a running path. Out of the 48 homes in our neighborhood, 40 of the homes have signed. 6 of the other homes are not home and 2 of the homes are people who are involved with the property themselves so I think that's real important to know. And then the two other things that I just wanted to address was that, currently in our little neighborhood there are 60 children under the age of 22 City Council Meeting - May 29, 2001 13 that walk down to the lake, 4 of which I said are mine, with fishing poles and it would sure be nice as a morn, as a parent, because when we bought our home we thought we can't afford to buy the home that's on the lake but gosh, you know. Chanhassen promotes the use of the lakes and last summer my little boys were walking down the man made path that dumps into the street that Mr. Hoffman pointed out, and the garbage trucks were backing up beeping and one of my little boys dropped the fish and tackle box. Well at 8 years old he saw his life ending and I don't mean by the garbage truck. I mean his lures were there and he was going to save then~ So I guess the bottom line for us is, we're trying to work as a neighborhood together. I think that we showed support. We're not asking for palm trees and lights anymore or whatever. We're asking for please, please don't let this easement end in the street where it' s unsafe. Where motor vehicles are. We're asking you to please reconsider taking it down the original and best walkway that takes my children down to the lake. I live for Chanhassen. We got, this year it was Christmas in May. We got one of the canoe rental spaces at Carver Beach. Then I found out the cost of canoes so that's another problem but, but my children are children. The children of Chanhassen are supposed to be able, along with the adults, to enjoy the lake. It' s not just for the people that can afford to have the home on the lake. We would like a safe walkway and we'd like that trail to go all the way down to the lake. And like I said, the Kreisler's are here. They agreed to this smaller walkway. We're asking you. It's not city code at the moment. Or city standards of how wide. Please, please reconsider a narrower walkway that would not be obtrusive to this family' s home, to their property value but also would keep all of us safe and happy walking down to the lake. We can see the Lake Ann fireworks from there. It's great. Thanks for your time and thank you for all you do for the city of Chanhassen. Mayor Jansen: Thank you. If we can try to just. Nancy Hoopes: Oh, I have a petition. Mayor Jansen: Okay. No, that's fine. That's fine. Sure, you can maybe pass them to staff would be great. Thank you. If we can just try to keep your individual comments to 5 minutes, I would appreciate it. Thank you. Jerry Kreisler: Madam Mayor, Council members and good neighbors. It's been kind of a strange turn of events. I'm Jerry Kreisler. I'mLot 20. My wife Barbara. This has been a real painful issue. I won't give you the whole sorted history but the bottom line is that when we bought the house there were disclosure laws broken and all kinds of, just very messy things. Bottom line is, when the path was surveyed, the easement was surveyed, we were surprised to say the least. Notwithstanding we have a problerr~ We have this path easement that's in a very bad spot. I'm going to show you a very brief video on it just to make it real. Unfortunately the line, albeit accurate, really doesn't do justice to what it really is. But the amazing thing about what's happened recently is, our typical 2 years up until this Past weekend. The neighborhood has been pretty much at odds in terms of what shall we do with this development and path easement in particular and we did come to an agreement and it requires, it requires a compromise on everybody's part. Our's, the neighbors, and now we're asking the city to consider a compromise as well. We know the path size is a little smaller than what the city's typically used to approving but that we've got near unanimous support, 40 out of 47, we think speaks very loudly to this as a solution. I'm prepared to withdraw primarily my support for the option presented today in favor of giving the neighborhood the path directly down to the lake, which they have argued passionately that would be a good thing, and I happen to agree. That ultimately it would be under a nice compromise like this, my wife and I see absolutely no reason why we shouldn't do it. Let me know you the video which was prepared before we reached a compromise and the good news is that there was nothing really bad in it anyway. So if we could just roll that thing. 23 City Council Meeting - May 29, 2001 A short video prepared by Jerry Kreisler was shown at this point in the meeting. Jerry Kreisler: You can cut it off right there. As you can see it's a problerr~ The path would actually not take up the entire area of course but the easement is there and part of the easement being there is the fact that it remains there for at the will of the city and the council, the neighbors, potentially be expanded and this is sort of a secondary concern. Obviously the house is not going to be very marketable with this kind of option sitting out there so when all said and done, if we had to go where the straight path is proposed, that would certainly be okay for the Kreisler's I guess but now we're saying that the Kreisler's would prefer that we have some path on our property that does serve a larger good for the neighborhood, so I would make that my primary plea and in doing so I withdraw support for Plan B. Part and parcel with this would be the notion that the city would ask, consider removing any opportunity to extend that path once it's in at 42 or 48 at the outside I suppose. And that way when it would come time for us to sell the house, we would not have this burden of trying to sell a 15 foot easement in the front of our yard, which frankly is not very sellable. Mayor Jansen: Okay, thank you. Jerry Kreisler: Thank you very much. Mayor Jansen: Appreciate it. Anyone else caring to address the council on this item. Mike Wegler: Mike Wegler. I live at 6630 Mohawk Drive. I've been waiting a long time for this trail to be put in where it is originally proposed from in the developmental contract. The 42 inch we discussed with the neighbors there. It seemed like a very good option. You could go a 5 foot when you got down to the corner but I would recommend going 42 inch by their house. Exposed aggregate was because that's what their front sidewalk is. It would look nice with their house and it would work for everybody. Running a trail into my driveway, the letter is there. Kind of explains it. You're running these people down my driveway. Down to Napa. All down streets. It doesn't make sense. That's all I have. Mayor Jansen: Thank you. Okay, I'm wanting to bring this back to council. I don't want to cut anyone off if anyone has anything besides what's already been said that you care to say, certainly step up to the podium. Otherwise I will bring this back to council. Thank you. Okay, council. Any discussion around this item please? Councilman Ayotte: Yeah, one of the things that I, I know that surprises you Councilman Labatt but I would submit to the neighborhood that we ought to consider performance specification that would allow the L shaped approach. And instead of saying 42 inches or 48 inches, something to the effect, let's make sure passerby's don't look through the bedroom window. I'm not saying write that into the spec, but what I'm suggesting is that the city has to do things like maintain the path so we have certain types of equipment to do certain types of things. So if we put performance parameters, a design option and then have the design come back to say yes or no to the design, but I like the idea of, it's wonderful that you' ve come to a compromise and I think that there's room for the council to in fact deviate from ordinance if we have a look see at a design. So that's how I would see going forward. In short order. Not a long time. In other words, let's get to it and put it down. Mayor Jansen: I'd like to have staff address for us please the width of the path. I know that you are proposing a 6 foot and now I'm hearing a 4 foot would be acceptable. What do we lose in that 2 feet and what would staff' s concerns be? 24 City Council Meeting - May 29, 2001 Todd Hoffrnan: Sure. Thank you Madam Mayor, members of the council. First off, let me say that I'm pleased with the compromise, or at least the start of a compromise that we've, the neighborhood has come up with. Planning for the city does in fact utilize that shoreland as the first speaker talked about and so maintaining the L shape is a good planning move for the city' s park syster~ The width of the trail was a concern when we moved through and attempted to negotiate, or when we did negotiate on this amended plan. Our typical standard width for pedestrian trail in Chanhassen is 8 feet wide. Many of, we have 8 foot concrete sidewalks. There are neighborhood sidewalks which are narrower than that. The trail connectors or trails are either 8 foot bituminous or 8 foot concrete. There are some places, you will find them along the trail system where it does narrow down to approximately 6 feet to avoid trees or get around a barrier, something like that. I worked, or we all worked with Attorney Joel Jamnik from the city attorney's office on this and when we talked about going from 8 to 6, the biggest issue was 2 way traffic going down an incline. And so if you have traffic going down the hill, a bicycle or some other mode of travel, having people have to jump off the trail if you're at 41 inches or 48 inches to allow a bike and a bike trailer, it's not the best planning that you could propose in this situation so that's why we maintained the 6 feet. In regards to 42 inches or that's 3 ½ feet or 48 inches, that's 4 feet, again that's a compromise that we would all have to recognize. Increases potential for hazards with traffic meeting each other on that trail. Regarding the aggregate surface. I would not advocate that or support that. If we do a concrete trail there I would advocate a heavy brushed finish for traction. Aggregate tends to be a slippery surface. It gets sealed with a sealer and it tends to be slippery in wet conditions and I just could not see that at this particular location. Mayor Jansen: The question that occurred to me when we were looking at the 15 foot easement line being right at the edge of the house, to build a 6 foot trail and hug it to the property line, how much easement do you still need to have and can we put that trail and abut it to the edge of the easement on the property line, instead of centering it? Todd Hoffman: Yes. We've always talked about that .... picture, this is from the last meeting. It's in the snow. I think you can pick up on the stakes there. The light pole would be generally about the start of the lot line between the two, then it would follow back and hit these two last as you see them go down. So initially here given these utilities would have to be moved. Or you'd just have to start a slight jog but then you can follow right back in generally on the property line and you go down...particular location. You don't have to stay over or veer out to the right. Mayor Jansen: So the track that you're showing in the snow here from I gather the snow blower, would that be the edge of the bituminous? Is that where the. Todd Hoffman: Approximately. I can't scale that from the picture but you go 6 feet and that's approximately 6 feet right in that location. Mayor Jansen: Okay. And would the city be losing anything significant if we reduced the size of the easement then instead of maintaining the 15 feet that's designated currently? Where he's saying, of course if we kept the 15 foot easement, there's always that possibility of the city coming in 10 years from now and saying it's our 15 feet. We're now going to put in an 8 foot trail. Do we reduce that easement or do we leave it at the 15 feet? What's the recommendation? Todd Hoffman: Well you always want to, I can't see having a 6 foot trail on a 6 foot easement. Permanent easement or a 8 foot permanent easement. You need that protection in the future. Our standard 25 City Council Meeting - May 29, 2001 easement width for all other trail easements in the city is 20 feet. So 15 feet is already reduced from there and just to allow for issues of construction or improvements. When we run maintenance equipment up and down that, if we do not have a permanent easement there and the property owner maintains improvements~ the sprinkler system or plantings and we damage them, then we are at risk for paying for those into the future. So currently we have that easement because it's public space. The public is there. We're there maintaining it, cleaning it and we routinely hit irrigation heads and fences and other improvements and people call us and say, we'd like you to pay for that. And again that's their risk to put those private improvements out in that easement so I think to protect the city as a whole you want to maintain a reasonable easement and I think 15 feet's a reasonable easement there. We talked at length about this, you know what is going to happen in the future? Well we' ve waited a dozen years and if we get a 6 foot trail built after all this and it goes in, I don't think we're going to see somebody turning around and advocating for an 8 foot trail going in at any time in the near future. Mayor Jansen: Sure. We didn't have the detail at least in this packet as to that L configuration. That L, is that an 8 foot or does that also remain 6 feet? Todd Hoffman: The proposed path? Mayor Jansen: Yes. Todd Hoffman: 6 feet. Mayor Jansen: That does stay at 6 also? You don't widen it as you get down to the bottom there? It's just 6 consistently. Todd Hoffman: All the way and for your information, that easement does go down to 10 feet. For whatever reason it was taken only at 10 feet so there you have, on a 6 foot trail you have 2 feet on either side to work with. Again for tree clearing and other things like that, you know that's about as small as you would ever want to go. Mayor Jansen: Okay. Thanks for clarifying that. Councilman Peterson: Can you get snow equipment down a 6 foot trail? I mean that's got to be the minimum for snow equipment, isn't it? Todd Hoffman: Yeah. I don't know that we would remove snow on this particular trail. And we have, I don't know that we have a trail at 6 feet that we remove snow on. You would just continually be busting up the edge. Councilman Labatt: Todd, what are the sidewalk widths in downtown here? Todd Hoffman: 5 feet Mike? 5 feet, yeah. Downtown sidewalks. Mike Wegler: 5 feet along Carver Beach Road is 5 feet. Most are 5 feet. Todd Hoffman: Yeah, some of them are 8 feet in the downtown. Councilman Labatt: And the sidewalks along Powers, or Kerber north. 26 City Council Meeting - May 29, 2001 Todd Hoffman: 8 foot trail. Councilman Labatt: So we're able to maintain the 5 foot sidewalks in downtown with a Bobcat, right? You clean those off. Todd Hoffman: With a Bobcat, yeah. They're in those narrower sidewalks. Mike Wegler: We were pretty much told we weren't going to do this. It's a 3 season anyway... Councilman Labatt: Yeah, if you had to maintain it you know. This is obviously a hard situation, a tough one and I think it comes down to reasonableness and the neighbors have struck up a compromise here where they're saying no more than 48. I can see Todd's point on two way traffic and I'm wondering if we bump it up to the standard sidewalk with the downtown sidewalks. If that would be amicable to the neighbors. If they could go 5 feet, 60 inches. And then make the easement all of it just 10 foot on that one L is akeady 10 foot easement. Why does this one have to be 157 Councilman Peterson: What kind of maintenance would you be doing off winter then that would induce issues with that stronger easement? I would assume the easement issues happen mainly in the winter when you've got the blade or the blower in there. Todd Hoffman: Tree removal. Those type of things. Councilman Peterson: But that's only once right? Todd Hoffman: Would be the summer issues. Inherent'in the design of this easement is a 90 degree turn. There's going to be some traffic control. You hit the bottom of that hill you've got to make a hard 90 so there's some, you know the width of the trail. It's not an ideal situation to begin with. Councilman Labatt: What' s the overall length from the end of the circle to the 90 degree? Todd Hoffman: It's the lot width. Let me see if I know... Councilman Labatt: Is it 110 feet? Todd Hoffman: Yeah, probably less than that. Audience: 165. Councilman Labatt: 165 feet. Todd Hoffman: I have 138 feet. 140 feet from cul-de-sac to the back of the lot, and then it probably goes about 200 feet to the lake at that point. - Councilman Labatt: I'm not worried about the 200 foot one. It's 138.4. 27 City Council Meeting - May 29, 2001 Todd Hoffman: If it helps to get an idea, this is the view around the point of that 90 degree turn towards the lake so it gives you an idea of what's there today with the trail aligmnent. So that's standing at the back of the corner. Councilman Labatt: And that's about the 10 foot easement right there? Todd Hoffman: That's 10 feet, yep. Todd Gerhardt: Do you have a picture going up the hill? Todd Hoffman: Yep. That's standing at the same location but then looking back towards the front of... the flagpole is standing up there. So this is right at the location where you're coming straight down the hill and then it takes a 90 towards the lake. Councilman Peterson: You're going to get some speed coming down that hill definitely. Mayor Jansen: Yeah. Councilman Labatt: We'll put speed bumps in. Mayor Jansen: No, actually we have closed the public hearing at this point° I'm liking what I'm hearing as far as Councilman Labatt's comment about maybe standardizing the easement width. If the lower part of this is 10 feet, I don't see where it makes more sense to have them both be 10 feet. If we're doing a 6 foot trail and butting it as close to that property line as we can possibly get it right on the 'property line. Councilman Labatt: On which, are you talking on the Hedlund's of the lot line or are you talking on the Kreisler's? On Lot 197 Mayor Jansen: The one that's in question. Because at this point if we, I'm gathering and correct me if I'm wrong. I'm making an assumption here, that if we go ahead with the trail as it was proposed, and we do the extension down to the lake, we lose then the agreement to push the trail over onto the Hedlund's for this upper connection. Todd Hoffman: Correct. Mayor Jansen: Okay, because that was the compromise. So now it goes back onto Kreisler's. Todd Hoffrnan: Kreisler's were talking about taking that from 15 to. Mayor Jansen: From 15 down to 10. And then having the 6 foot start at the property line. Not be centered in the 10 foot easement, but that 10 foot easement would be consistent with the 10 foot easement that's along the other segment. Councilman Labatt: That still puts them only 8 feet away from their house. Councilman Ayotte: See what I don't like about that is, I'm going back to my point about, if we ask them to come up with a design that avoids encroachment on the people's privacy, and I go back to the bedroom example. Without getting wound up in the detail of 6 feet versus 40 some inches, to come up with a design 28 City Council Meeting - May 29, 2001 to see if it works. You may have a variation in width from one point to the next. You may...of things and if you have our engineers look at it to see whether or not there' s too much of an incline as part of the road, path to see what can be done about that. I'm saying let's take a performance approach rather than trying to design it here at a council meeting to see if we can meet the requirements. Mayor Jansen: I'm assuming that after 2 years that this has been looked at as far as any engineering. Councilman Ayotte: I'm not going to make that supposition. Todd Hoffman: The issue of performance standards to make the situation with the Kreisler's home more palatable, the best way I can describe it is if we move it, if I stand on the trail as we were building it today, and then I move myself over 6 feet and I look at that same bedroom window, my view really didn't change much. And so it's, I don't think we can do any better than we're currently doing. The argument or the debate over going from one side of the lot line to the other is just who is accepting what responsibility for what easement. What the compromise says is we will accept what is currently on the books for the easement. Let's just make sure it's reduced down a little bit. Put up to the lot line. I think they would be more, the property owners would be more pleased with a narrower trail but again that's a decision. We have a standard in place we're already deviating from so how far down are you going to deviate? Mayor Jansen: We're down 2 feet and I heard you say that the 2 way traffic concern was an attorney's concern, so now you' ve got your risk factor that you like to evaluate and the liability on the city's side which was why that was brought up. Councilman Ayotte: I understand that and that's why I say if we had a design that had public safety take a look see at it. Todd Hoffman: We would never design a trail with a 90 degree T in it and so, we're just stuck with a situation that we have to make the best of. Councilman Ayotte: So we're already outside the envelope is what you're saying? Todd Hoffman: Absolutely. Mayor Jansen: In the easement width and in the size of the pavement, and we own the property. We own the easement on the Kreisler' s. We do not own it on the upper segment on the Hedlund' s. Todd Hoffman: Correct. At this point. Mayor Jansen: Okay. I mean that's why it ends up shifting off the compromise and it ends up back onto the Kreisler's. Councilman Labatt: But we weren't going on the Hedlund's on the lake portion? Todd Hoffman: Correct. Mayor Jansen: Correct. Councilman Labatt: So in order to get that leg we've got to. 29 City Council Meeting - May 29, 2001 Jerry Kreisler: There's a permanent easement on both properties to get to our...right now. Scott Botcher: Well I guess just a couple things. First of all understand that Joel, and I don't know if Joel gave a legal opinion as to liability or not but Joel certainly didn't give an opinion as to legal liability as he doesn't represent our insurance carrier. My guess is given the amount of trail that's out there and the other things we' ve got going on, and when we' ve talked to our insurance carrier about other things including a skate park, that you would be surprised to know, and I would be willing to bet an expensive lunch at Subway. That's how cheap I am. That there would be no change in terms of our premium and the exposure that we would face would probably be negligible if you went to a 42, 48 as opposed to a 6. Councilman Ayotte: If we went to what? Scott Botcher: A smaller trail width. I agree with Todd. You don't build 90 degrees for a reason. They're just a pain. In this case I think this is, and Todd's talked about this, it would be a low maintenance trail, and the neighborhood's accepting of that. They probably want that. I mean it makes, I mean I can see why you'd want that. The other thing Todd said that I think is right is, and I guess I'll state a little bit stronger, I don't think I would ever, ever give up the access to the lake. I mean you own it. I mean it's your's right now. You have the easements. There's all sorts of real estate issues it sounds like with the home and wish it didn't happen but we could also say well it's really not our problem. You own the easement. I think that the compromise that's been worked out is okay but I wouldn't give up the access to the lake. I mean I think that's the starting point. You're not going to give it up. It's important as Todd said and somebody said that that lake, or that park was a gem. And I think it is. I mean I see kids go down there and go fishing and do different things and I think you want to maintain that and enhance it and if that provides enhancement to the neighborhood. Mayor Jansen: But the compromise. Scott Botcher: But 42's pretty narrow. I've got to tell you, 42's really narrow. And I wish there was a simple answer to the home location, but at some point we're just kind of, you know there's not a great one, because I don't think there is. I mean Steve's idea is not bad. I agree with Todd on the aggregate. I think that's problematic and those are all design things you can deal with later, but again stay big picture. As Bob said, don't design it at the council meeting. What do you want out of this deal? You akeady know what you have. You've got the easements now, but if the lake access is critical then say okay, that's number one. We want the lake access. Two, we're willing to negotiate down perhaps off our standards which are there, but one size fits all standards. You've heard me say this about streets before. The same rule applies for trails. One size does not fit all, and I think we need to recognize that and we need to be creative enough to do it. Then if there' s another process that we need to continue discussions to go from 42 to 48, maybe have some stakes put, I don't care. Whatever we need to do to make you all buy into it, then we just need to do that. Mayor Jansen: What I'd like to avoid having happen is drag this out too long, so I would be inclined to direct staff to evaluate and bring us back the recommendation as to keeping the lake access and then what can we do then on the width and the easements and bring back a proposal to us that gives us those components so that we can see it. 30 City Council Meeting - May 29, 2001 Councilman Peterson: Yeah I agree. I think I'm in that 5 foot range. I think going less than that is problematic. I'm not adverse to lessening the easement so those are my humble thoughts. We're presuming that the Hedlund's won't still negotiate so I think... Mayor Jansen: They may. Yeah, good point. Councilman Ayotte: This will give you a design to look at. Or give you something to look at. Mayor Jansen: Okay, then I'm looking for a motion to table with direction to staff. Councilman Peterson: So moved with the points I mentioned. Mayor Jansen: The? Councilman Peterson: 5 foot. Mayor Jansen: With being able to go. Councilman Peterson: ...as a recommendation. Councilman Labatt: 10 foot easement, 5 foot trail. Councilman Peterson: Yeah. Scott Botcher: And just for inclusion in the motion, is it fair to say that the access to the lake is critiCal9. Mayor Jansen: Yes. Okay, second? Councilman Ayotte: I'll second. Mayor Jansen: I have a second from Councilman Ayotte. Councilman Peterson moved, Councilman Ayotte seconded to table vacation of the permanent easement for trail purposes in Block 1, Fox Chase with direction to staff to provide lake access with a 10 foot easement and 5 foot trail. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously 4 to 0. Mayor Jansen: Thank you for your patience while we work this through. Appreciate it and I'm sure staff will, Todd be sure to keep the neighbors in the loop on this. I'm sure you will. Thank you. Appreciate it. PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER REAL ESTATE AGREEMENT TRADING 0.044 ACRES OF CITY LAND FOR 0.055 ACRES OF LAKE OWNED BY DAVID STOCKDALE AND JANE ANDERSON TO ACCOMMODATE A PRIVATE DRIVE, SUGARBUSH PARK. Todd Hoffman: Thank you Madam Mayor, members of the City Council. There shouldn't be nearly as much discussion on this one. It's just a little bit of housekeeping to do. Back in the mid 1990's the City of Chanhassen acquked a small portion of Sugarbush Park through the park dedication requirements and then we purchased the remainder of the property for that park. Small problem occurred however in that the lot line for the park included a portion of Mr. Stockdale' s driveway. So the driveway you can see in this 31