Loading...
1d. Carver Beach Park Vehicle parking 1 toe__ , CITY OF — I , 1 4 CHANHASSEN 1 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937 -1900 • FAX (612) 937 -5739 1 MEMORANDUM I TO: Don Ashworth, City Manager FROM: Todd Hoffman, Park and Recreation Coordinator 1 DATE: August 18, 1992 SUBJ: Carver Beach Park Vehicle Parking I The concern over the lack of accessibility via motor vehicles to the northerly portion of Carver Beach Park was initially brought to the Park and Recreation Commission's attention on May 19, 1992. A person or persons in a vehicle can obviously drive by the park; however, the absence I of a legal parking area prohibits access to and use of this park when arriving by motor vehicle. The Park and Recreation Commission conducted a site visit on May 19, prior to formally addressing this item. The report presented to the Commission that evening and the resulting I minutes are attached. As can be seen, the Commission elected to table the item and to call for a neighborhood meeting on June 23 to allow for resident input on the issue. The report prepared for the Commission and the residents in the area and the resulting minutes are attached. I Residents attending the meeting that evening were Mr. & Mrs. Gunderson (Keith and Pat), 6660 Lotus Trail, and Mr. Roger Byrne, 6724 Lotus Trail. Both the Gundersons and Mr. Byrne addressed the Commission and me that evening. Upon conclusion of the discussion, the 1 following motion was approved for recommendation to the City Council: Schroers moved, Koubsky seconded that the Park and Recreation Commission 1 recommend the City Council approve the construction and signage of four parallel parking spaces covering 60 feet on the south side of Lotus Trail for Carver Beach Park, with one of the four spaces for persons with disabilities as specified and I shown on the attached maps, and that the Planning and Engineering Departments take a very close and careful look to ensure that there is no damage done to any I existing trees in the area. All voted in favor except Lash who opposed, and Andrews who abstained. The motion carried with a vote of 4 -2. I As you are aware, in scheduling this item for Council review, it was determined that the Commission's recommendation was routine and conformed with the approved Park Master Plan for this area of Carver Beach Park. As such, the item was included as an informational item 1 dated July 9, 1992, in the administrative section of the July 27 City Council packet (attached). to, PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER 1 Mr. Don Ashworth August 18, 1992 ' Page 2 Upon receiving no comments on this item, staff was prepared to begin planning for the signage needs to designate the four parking spots. Prior to commencing this action, however, I received ' a call from Mrs. Pat Gunderson. The results of this conversation are detailed in the attached memo to the Park and Recreation Commission dated August 4, and presented to the Commission 1 on August 11. The resulting action taken by the Commission that evening was to rescind their previous recommendation of June 23, 1992, and to instead make the following recommendation: ' The Park and Recreation Commission recommends the construction and signage of three parallel parking spaces on the south side of Lotus Trail at Carver Beach Park consistent with the Park's Master Plan, one of the three for persons with handicaps, and that this project be carried out with the assurance that no damage will be done to any existing trees in the area. This motion was made by Commissioner Lash and seconded by Commissioner Erickson with all voting in favor. ' ATTACHMENTS 1. Memo to Park and Recreation Commission dated May 15, 1992. 2. Park and Recreation Commission Minutes dated May 19, 1992. 3. Memo to Park and Recreation Commission dated June 10, 1992. 4. Park and Recreation Commission Minutes dated June 23, 1992. ' 5. Memo to Don Ashworth, City Manager dated July 9, 1992. 6. Memo to Park and Recreation Commission dated August 4, 1992. 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 C I TY o F 31 CHANHASSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937 -1900 • FAX (612) 937 -5739 , MEMORANDUM TO: Park and Recreation Commission FROM: Todd Hoffman, Park and Recreation Coordinator DATE: May 15, 1992 SUBJ: Carver Beach Park - Vehicle Parking 1 We will be conducting a site visit of this area prior to the regular meeting. See agenda for details. The attached retouched Park Master Plan for Carver Beach Park depicts the parking 1 restrictions, parking availability, and recreational facilities at the park. I was not involved in the events that led to all streets abutting the park being posted No Parking ", but I presume strong support for this posting by the majority of adjacent homeowners, in addition to the road's narrow width, was the catalyst for this action. The only parking available to allow use of this park by persons arriving by vehicle are the four spots at the main beach to the south. This spring, as is with the case throughout the summer, people utilize the park to fish from the dock and shore, and to experience other recreational activities. Parking appeared to be allowed due to the absence of three of the no parking signs which had been removed by construction and snow removal activity. Due to the presence of parked vehicles, a complaint call was received from a neighboring resident. It should be noted, as confirmed by the caller, that parking of vehicles by people wishing to use the park does occur on a routine basis, but for the most part is tolerated. However, when a complaint call is received, Public Safety is required to issue a warning or citation due to the no parking status of the streets. Additionally, we must now consider the mandate of ADA, Americans with Disability Act, to provide handicapped accessibility to all public facilities (the park, dock, canoe rack, beaches, etc.). The city is currently in violation of this act. A community service officer was questioned in this regard upon informing two elderly women fishing from the dock, who identified themselves as handicapped, that 1 parking of their vehicle along the street was not allowed. This confrontation occurred as 1 ist PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER 1 Park and Recreation Commission May 15, 1992 . Page 2 a result of a separate complaint call received by the Public Safety Department. The city also provides a canoe rack at this location with no parking available for its users. It is the opinion of staff that by maintaining a park containing facilities in which to be reasonably used, need to be accessible by motor vehicles, and then choosing not to provide parking, is unacceptable. It is further recognized that by providing recreational ' facilities which are unaccessible by persons with handicaps, due to the absence of parking, we are in violation of the ADA. Staff fully understands the position of residents ' in this area, but I also identify their concerns as self interests, not representing the universal interests a Park and Recreation Commission and city park system need to provide for. The development and use of this park is debated on nearly an annual basis. ' Residents of the area have been very interested in this process, and the commission has accepted their input and continue to improve the park. However, by not providing some access by vehicles to the developed north side of this park. the city is not allowing for • reasonable use of the park. RECOMMENDATION 1 It is recommended that the Park and Recreation Commission hold a public hearing to discuss vehicular parking at Carver Beach Park on Lotus Trail. It is recommended that ' 3 parking spots be identified with one of the 3 being designated for persons with handicaps. This parldng to be facilitated by the construction of a widened shoulder, for a distance of 60 feet, on the south side of Lotus Trail, as depicted on the attached diagram (the absence of residences across the street from this location makes it the most desirable location). Upon conclusion of the public hearing, it is recommended that the Park and Recreation Commission make a recommendation to the City Council in this ' regard. 1 1 1 1 1• 1 1 ■ 1 I / / 1 /c / 0 L // f / . 44. 1 ,2 14 / , /' . ' L , ,/ CANOE RACK I , . :. — FISHING DOCK ,,, 1 --,L ' 1 0 cn i 1 in l i .0 I F . • ••7 , • , 1 t C ' n 0 `: > < Z m ••• i l , ' m g : 1 .> 5( ■••• Z • a0 C1) if ) / / -c - / - r / I , I . a • • 1 , i V i \ ! ----- ; 1 ,. x ; 1 I I II i 1 ) . . t . 1 1 1( \ E ' O m . , • I ---.--• ; ! • HI i 1 E ■ • • i g \ 1 x I ! I - \ I s i PROPOSED PARKING -' i \ 1 \ ' \ ..... NO PARKING 1 1 ! . , PARKING (4 CARS) I ._, \ NI,... .... , . --- i - I E Z , .. \ • il j I , -; el I " $ i I .........4Lit , D4 1 / 1 / i / 1 1 1 1 /‘ / , 1 I '0 .... 1 ; ! .11 1 i i 1 1 CARVER BEACH PARK Oty of Chanhassen, Mknesota reI 1 .... I i E MASTER PLAN ••#* , _ ...... . - ., .,... . , . thfanDarE6 zaidAStalrulgs 1 ii . I Chanhassen Public Safety Complaint Form Date Received 3(2 -; I Received By___myy _ Review Date COMPLAINANT 1 1 - 1 Location of Complaint 1-04-u 7 (`. S � #, C iNez,-t 44 s sr*c--. 1 Type of Complaint A kin / ��� 1 Animal Debris Storage Bldg Code Fire Code Criminal Complaint Parking Traffic Nuisance Noise — Other 11 VUBJECT: Last (...M...)‹ First Middle DOB 11 Street Number Street Name APT# 1 City State Zip Phone Phone I „&e. _,? (,2,,,;IL_ :7)6,...,4_ Action Taken /Comments (INCLUDE DATE) �•.3( 9.2: , . (4/4 c -t-a r „dz.. 07' eh, 7 T v--e -'Lc j /A, o,,K� i _e_c_Lfet_kai. mac) P v e �e- 4-t ,,..„,' ,t- A i fie,--.__, a,e,:-. r r #1,,- 0 c,,,,,-t.,:,<-e / A . - 7%, L ..l,.. „ . I Action Taken: 1. Advisory Letter 8. Referred to: Disposition: 2. Certified Letter Carver County Sheriff Comlaince II :. Certified Notice Engineering Department p . Phone Call � Action Pending U i t ' - - nt __- No Further Act. 1 5. In- Person Meeting - - . . - ___ Ir. 6. Warning Issued � ” - . _ Court Referral Citation issued (�.� - Other i PN n CP7f Other 1 11 Park and Rec Commission Meeting May 19, 1992 - Page 5 1 way to generate revenue for us as well. As long as we can meet the service!' needs of the area. Erickson: Has there been any consistent policy in terms of taking that money and developing the parks that are closest to that development? Schroers: No. That wasn't really identified. It's more like city wide. What are the most pressing needs at the time. ' Lash: When is Power Hill in line for? Hoffman: Potential development? Currently they are working on Flamingo 1 Drive which skirts the, just about the entire eastern border of the park. The developer in that location is bringing in the parking lot for the park and then the city will follow with final restoration work and begin mowing the sliding hill over the next 2 to 3 years. I don't recall specifically in the 5 year CIP but the play equipment does make it in that time span. Schroers: Any other questions? Can I have a•motion? Well I will make a II motion then. First on park property. I'll move that the Park and Recreation Commission recommend to Council to require full park fees be paid as a condition of approval of Bluff Creek Estates and the fees are to II be paid at the time of the building permit approval in the amount of the park fee in force at•the time of the building permit application. Secondly on the trail, I move that we recommend to the Council that we acquire ownership of Outlot A allowing for continuation of the Bluff Creek preservation corridor and require the installation of an 8 foot bituminous trail surface from proposed Road E to the rear of Lot 1, Block 1 and Lot 1,' Block 3 as a condition of approval of this plat. In consideration for this, it is recommended that the City give full trail fee credit to the applicant. Is there a second? Koubsky: I'll second. Schroers moved, Koubsky seconded that the Park and Recreation Commission II recommend to require full park fees be paid as a condition of approval of Bluff Creek Estates and the fees are to be paid at the time of the building permit approval in the amount of the park fee in force at the time of the ' building permit application. Secondly on the trail, recommend to acquire ownership of Outlot A allowing for continuation of the Bluff Creek preservation corridor and require the installation of an 8 foot bituminous trail surface from proposed Road E to the rear of Lot 1, Block 1 and Lot 1,' Block 3 as a condition of approval of this plat. In consideration for this, it is recommended that the City give full trail fee credit to the applicant. All voted in favor the motion carried. ' CARVER BEACH PARK; VEHICLE PARKING. Hoffman: Item 3 has to do with the vehicle parking at Carver Beach Park. A portion of the members of the Commission toured that site this evening. I believe the ones that did not have either been there in person or have been there during other Commission tours as well. The map which is included in your packet that picks the current situation down at Carver Beach in that 1 Park and Rec Commission Meeting May 19, 1992 - Page 6 the entire road sections abutting the park are currently posted no parking. This has been an ongoing issue but one which I feel necessitates some further review. Essentially due to ADA but then again it's due to being reasonable as a city providing services to it's residents and other park ' users. To briefly review the scenario which has led us to this point. This spring, again as is always the case, persons started to utilize the park for fishing, recreating in the spring. Getting out of doors. Shaking ' out cabin fever. Those types of things. Many times you'll notice, you'll witness cars parked in the no parking zone and for the most part, the residents in the area tolerate that activity until it exceeds a certain level or until they just decide to go ahead and give a call either to the Park and Recreation Department or to the Public Safety Department to come down and have those persons informed officially that they cannot park in those locations because of the street designation. That was the case this ' spring. On at least 3 occasions that I'm aware of, that persons received warnings that they were parked illegally and they would have to pack of their gear and move because the area was posted no parking. One that ' stands out is the two elderly women brushed into the CSO on duty that day that was called out to this location as to their rights under the new ADA Act. Identified themselves as handicapped and questioned the officers as to where they should park for utilizing this public facility. He did not have an answer. In fact this was a Saturday afternoon and gave me a call at home. I had the same answer back for him. We do not offer any parking, either handicapped or non - handicapped at that location in the city. I believe it behooves us to take a look at this. To consider installing some parking, although it be minimal at this park location. To offer utilization by persons arriving at the park by motor vehicle. I do not believe it is reasonable to expect the use of that park to occur without access by motor vehicles. As the map shows, there are currently 4 spots which were developed within the past 5 years at the south main beach location. Those are off street parking. Pull in, pull out type of parking off the street. It's currently a gravel lot and recommending to our street maintenance and park maintenance crews that we go ahead and invest the time and material to blacktop that. To stripe the lot into four spots and to mark one of those handicapped parking as well. 5o we have that end of the park cleared up. What remains is the issue down on the north end in the area between the mini - beach, the so called mini -beach and then the existing ' dock. The fishing dock which was purchased 2 years ago and canoe rack which as well as recently was installed and is utilized as well. We as a city and a Park and Recreation Department offer the service of a canoe rack where you would presume for a person to get their canoe there, they would ' have to drive a vehicle, unless they're very close to the canoe rack and then if they want to come down and use it, would drive and park their vehicle to go ahead and utilize their canoe on the lake. So again this evening it is my recommendation that the Commission hold a public hearing inviting the residents of that area. Discuss this issue and then for the Park Commission to go ahead and make a recommendation in this regard to the City Council. Whether that be for 3 parking stalls or 4 parking stalls. In referring to stalls, it's just the widening of the shoulder 4 to 6 foot Class V aggregate shoulder and then posting it parking between signs and then designating the handicapped stall. That would be all we are recommending. Forward that type of recommendation up to the City Council for consideration. 11 1 Park and Rec Commission Meeting May 19, 1992 - Page 7 Schroers: This would then be parallel parking basically? Hoffman: Correct. Schroers: And it would seem to make sense then that the handicapped II designated parking spot would be the closest one to the facilities. The canoe rack and the fishing dock and at that point I realize that there is quite steep topography along this area. When you get down that close as ill graduated to the point to where a handicapped person could actually negotiate from that parking spot to either the dock or the canoe rack? Hoffman: It's flat. We discussed while we were there the distance issue II and it is. It's right at the edge of being reasonable. But if we move parking farther up the street, then it would be directly in front of homes which would be more controversial. 1 Schroers: I'm wondering why staff feels it's necessary to have a public hearing. Hoffman: Simply because of the. Schroers: To keep peace? , Hoffman: That's one way of putting it. Schroers: Might as well get right to the bare bones. Lash: Well if it's been a controversial issue, you hate to go ahead with ' this without telling people what's going on. Hoffman: In my view, the entire development history, just going ahead and looking back into the file, this park has been perhaps not controversial is l the word but residents in that area are certainly interested in what's going on there. Schroers: They are interested and they've been receptive and interested in' the past to work along with the city on projects in that area. I guess just as an information thing to let them know what's going on without kind II of surprising them is a good idea but I think it's unreasonable for us to develop new facilities like this and not provide parking. I mean that doesn't seem reasonable. Lash: Well we're not developing a new site. This is an old site. Schroers: This portion of the is actually pretty new. There used to , be an access there and now we took out that access. We put in a canoe rack. We've put in a fishing dock. We designated that area as a mini - beach and did some work in there. 11 Lash: We haven't...money lately but it's not a new site? Schroers: No, it's not a new site but it kind of, it is and it isn't. , Lash: We've been investing money into it. 11 1 Park and Rec Commission Meeting 11 May 19, 1992 - Page 8 Schroers: Yeah. We've had the property for a long time but like within the last couple years we've started to do something with it. Lash: I guess I'm going to admit my confusion a little bit. When we were ' doing all of this, I thought it was at the one farther south and that's where I thought the canoe rack was located, which then would have had parking by it. And then a question I have about the ADA, just for my own clarification. Does this apply to all existing park sites or is to new park sites and one that we are remodeling or whatever? Hoffman: That's to all park sites. All public facilities. Schroers: It's a State mandate right or a State law that applies to everything. Lash: It makes it kind of difficult when you have an existing site. Say you had Bluff Creek or say it was Power Hill and say Power Hill was ' basically just a sliding hill and the topography just would make it difficult for a handicapped person to negotiate it no matter what. What do you propose to do with something like that? ' Hoffman: You're supposed to find a reasonable compromise. At this site it's reasonable that we could provide both services and access for persons with disabilities. If you're at a site or a building or a facility which it is not reasonable to assume that a person with handicaps is going to want to participate in and if it's not reasonable from a financial standpoint to retrofit that facility, then you're not mandated to do so. Lash: Okay. Schroers: This is a little bit off the particular subject here but for ' many organizations this ADA is just more than extensive. Doors have to be widened. Pay phones have to be lowered. Electrical things have to be rerouted. It's really extensive and it's going to hit lots of agencies real hard right in the pocketbook. Lash: I guess I don't understand why we put the canoe rack down there to start with. Koubsky: I think the canoe rack is on the southern one. ' Hoffman: No, it's at the northern location. Canoe racks were scheduled for both the north and the south. The canoe rack was put at the northerly location simply because of the ease of getting to it. Albeit the lack of parking in the other location... Lash: ...but you could launch your canoe at another site and get into the canoe rack. Schroers: You could but you know if everything was at the main facility there, then that 4 cars parking lot wouldn't serve the needs of that either. That was another reason for kind of spreading things out there and not trying to cram everything into one spot. Because there really isn't room there to develop more parking. 1 Park and Rec Commission Meeting May 19, 1992 - Page 9 Lash: Well I don't have a problem with it. Are you looking for a recommendation to have a public hearing? , Hoffman: Correct. Lash: 5o we're not voting on the actual action. , Koubsky: I guess one thought I had Todd. When the people call in, are II there 3 or 4 cars down there? I guess I'm wondering how many people are parking down there. It seems to me you could put 4 cars in there without getting too far in front of the resident's home there. Hoffman: I would say 4 cars would be an extreme in it's current use. 11 Koubsky: You mean too much? Hoffman: No, that would be an extreme of the current use that you would see. I'm not saying that's too much but more likely that there's one or two cars presently parked there when we receive calls. Lash: Well I can understand the no parking signs on the road as it exists now. Being down, having gone down there, it would be a safety hazard I think to have cars parked on the road. But if we can widened it into a safe, to make it accommodate cars and still make it be safe to drive down the road, I don't see a problem with that. Schroers: It should be safe because it's not on a curve there or anything. Visibility should be good. Koubsky: It's a very easy fix. , Erickson: Todd, would it be appropriate to maybe consider 4 spots and then, if we need to compromise we could say, okay we'll go with 3? Hoffman: Sure. I Erickson: That way it looks like we're giving in but if they'll go with 4 and they think 4 is fine, that would just make that much more room for more people to appreciate the park. ' Hoffman: The thing you need to consider is if we're looking at 3 spots or we're looking at 2, with the handicapped we only have 4. We're looking at 3 with a handicap. Now keeping the cars out of the handicap stall is another story. Koubsky: We can always expand another parking spot too. It's just a matter of pushing some Class V over there. Hoffman: I would prefer once you go through a public hearing to put in 3, II you're going to have to do the same type of issue to expand it to 4. Schroers: I agree with Randy that we should for 4 and push that issue and say, and just explain it at the hearing that we need one spot for 1 Park and Rec Commission Meeting May 19, 1992 - Page 10 handicapped and that just leaves 3 additional. It would hardly be worth it for less than that. Erickson: The handicap would be on the end and that would be the one used ' the least so that would most often be open anyways. So the one that kind of, the one that you are down there by the one house that would have the sight of that, there normally probably wouldn't a car there anyway. I 1 would assume. I mean most handicapped spaces aren't utilized as often as the other spots so that may be one way to approach it and mention it to. Koubsky: I'd go for 4. Good idea. I think there's room for it. ' Schroers: Okay, then if someone would like to make a recommendation in regards to having a public hearing regarding parking at the north end of Carver Beach Park. Lash: I make a motion that the Park and Rec Commission hold a public ' hearing for the residents of Carver Beach regarding the parking at Carver Beach Park on Lotus Trail. Berg: Second. Lash moved, Berg seconded that the Park and Recreation Commission hold a public hearing to discuss vehicular parking at Carver Beach Park on Lotus Trail. All voted in favor and the motion carried. Lash: How far will you be notifying people regarding this? Hoffman: As it exists, it's 500 feet. I'll make a judgment whether or not that brings in everybody that's potentially a real interested party. Koubsky: We'll indicate on that too that we're recommending 4 spots instead of 2? ' Hoffman: Correct. • Lash: And make sure they have ample notification of the meeting. LAKE SUSAN PARK TO RICE MARSH LAKE PARK TRAIL CONSTRUCTION. ' Hoffman: This is essentially an informational item and one which is pretty exciting. Hopefully if all goes well, within a month we'll have that piece of trail constructed in the city without hardly an ounce of controversy in the recent arena. It has taken 2 1/2 years to get all the easements associated with this piece of trail cleared up. Now that that has taken place and then in coordination with that Market Blvd., TH 101 extension of south leg, we raised the question whethevor not we should go ahead and construct this piece of trail along with that project. Underneath the funding of the road project. Those questions were answered to the positive so we are again moving forward with this project. Schroers: Question. What about extending that trail along the north side of Lake Susan to connect with Lake Susan Park? I have ridden along that 1 /0y. 3 i C ITYOF CHANHASSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 ( 612) 937 -1900 • FAX (612) 937 -5739 ' MEMORANDUM 1 TO: Park and Recreation Commission FROM: Todd Hoffman, Park and Recreation Coordinator 1 DATE: June 10, 1992 1 SUBJ: Neighborhood Meeting, Carver Beach Park, Vehicle Parking 1 Following a motion by the Park and Recreation Commission at the May 19, 1992, meeting to call a neighborhood meeting in regard to vehicle parking at Carver Beach Park, the attached notice was sent to the residents listed. A copy of the staff report presented to the commission in May is attached for your use in addressing this item. To reiterate, the installation of four parallel parking spaces, with one of the four being designated for persons with a disability, is being recommended. This action is needed to bring the city into compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), and to provide reasonable access to a public park facility. These parking spaces are to be accommodated by a widening of the shoulder of Lotus Trail (a gravel road) for a length of approximately 80 - 100 feet. The location of the parking is to be just north of the small beach on the east side of Lotus Trail. This design has been discussed with the city's Engineering and Planning Departments. The placement of' signage designating the parking spaces will be coordinated with the Engineering and Public Works Departments. Recommendation • 1 • It is recommended that the Park and Recreation Commission recommend the City Council approve the construction and signage of four parallel parking spaces; one of the four for persons with a disability at Carver Beach Park, as specified in this document and as shown on the attached maps. 1 1 1 1 1.4, PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER CITYOF • Ob 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESO 55317 (612) 937 -1900 • FAX (612) 937 -5739 June 12, 1992 Dear Residents: With the intent of providing reasonable access to a public park facility, and in order to comply with the mandates of the Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA), the Chanhassen Park and Recreation Commission will be making a recommendation to the City Council to construct and sign an area at Carver Beach Park near the north beach for vehicle parking. The need to address the issue of accessibility was recently reaffirmed by events occurring in the area of Carver Beach Park. Specifically, there have been a number of occasions when persons using the park have parked along Lotus Trail, resulting in a report of illegal parking being called in to the city or Sheriff's Department. In one instance, the persons using the park (the fishing dock) identified themselves as being disabled. It is my understanding that residents in the area typically tolerate the parking of vehicles along Lotus Trail to a certain degree; however, if the city is notified, we are forced to issue citations if the persons will not move their vehicle. Obviously, the solution to the lack of access via motor vehicles to this park can only be addressed by making appropriate accommodations for parking being sensitive to the site limitations. The attached diagrams show in some detail the location for the parking spaces. These parking spaces are to be accommodated by a widening of the road shoulder of Lotus Trail (a gravel road) for a length of approximately 80 to 100 feet. The location of the parking being just north of the small beach on the east ' side of Lotus Trail. The placement of signage designating the parking spaces will occur. This location has been chosen for two reasons: 1) its proximity in relation to the facilities maintained at the park, and 2) the lack of direct residential contact on the opposite side of Lotus Trail. This letter is being sent as notification that the Park and Recreation Commission has scheduled time at their upcoming June 23 meeting to allow residents to comment on this item. Both the Park and Recreation Commission and the Chanhassen City Council freely welcome citizen comment. The commission would be glad to hear from you prior to making a recommendation to the City Council. An agenda for the meeting is attached for your information. This item will be discussed shortly after 7:30 p.m. If you cannot attend and would like to submit written comments for the commission's review, pleasemail them to the City of Chanhassen, Park and Recreation Department, 690 Coulter Drive, Chanhassen, MN 55317; or if you would like to speak personally to me, I can be reached between the hours 8:00 a.m. and 4:30 p.m. at 937 -1900. Sincerely, Todd Hoffman Park and Recreation Coordinator TH:n 1 � 4/ PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER 1 CITY OF CHANHASSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937 -1900 • FAX (612) 937 -5739 June 16, 1992 1 Dear Residents: This is a follow up to my letter dated June 15, 1992, regarding the upcoming informational meeting on vehicle parking at Carver Beach Park. Attached please find the diagrams that were referenced in that letter, and mistakenly not included in the mailing. I am sorry for any inconvenience this may have caused you. On an unrelated matter, you may be aware that trees were recently cut illegally in Carver Beach Park. The story of this incident has appeared in the Chanhassen Villager newspaper, and recently on WCCO Television's Community News series. I would like to remind all residents that the cutting, trimming, or removal of trees from public park property, and the dumping of yard waste into the park are unlawful activities. As stated in my previous letter, the Park and Recreation Commission informational meeting will , be held on Tuesday, June 23, 1992, at 7:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers at City Hall. I look forward to seeing you then. Sincerely, Todd Hoffman 1 Park and Recreation Coordinator TH:k 1 Enclosure • 1 t e PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER ii /• ;1 - . �/ ., ' 1�� / •' CANOE RACK • ■ FISHING DOCK 1 . imili C Pa f £ • yi, Tarr ; T 1 . r, 1 clit // .Li ! i ) � i^ ( i S 1 = t 1 li1 It 1 I1 : .._ 1 I I i E • 1 f 1 ti • I \i g , •'- 11 1 E s F =r 1 \ 1 I \ \ I ii 1 , �� Tr - PROPOSED PARKING • I ‘ - \ \. -' \ 1 ' . NO PARKING 1, r.� - -� , 1 '�ti M I 1 I `' ., _`` I in PARKING (4 CARS) 1 1 I i t 1� t 1 1 • °. ' . t /, i / ! i 1 I Fit d , . . I ' 1 • 1 ill 1 , i i i CARVER BEACH PARK ` MASTER PLAN t.«t, t�Ar.,.soea . , 4 , 4 ., , , -Thim , ,.., - . _ -}Irk -„-,4,-_,,.;_;.., ' 'a • -.if. kii- mow` *.--,---=',4"-r-4, St 1 %IP • 1 / Z. 'ICANOPut I . • . Ism ...•.- ,.•„.....: .. -$ , ., • •..... ; .t4r...0..-.1.•..promprviimoailk. fr, autosuarptiorgoorkomosstuoi.a..........t $1...• - t I . • ) • . 1 * t '... .4 ,,„.. T „ .• ,t,. • , • ,.. .. •, ,• • ••■ ■•••••• ,.. - •••• • •,•;,.. :" . e :. •., .... 1 .,„( • - I.'' ...,?•4‘' .5..311 • !• ,„•-„;■%. iriteamprer, .1' . ' , .. . • -.‘ r ) I .56 . V/ rt. 41 , 1 t •• c 1 p• t • ••• il , "n . , i',, • • ' .., 0 .. • c v. ITO • . I - •*: ' . I% b. In \ _.• , ,,... .. . , 0 " \?\ / / .4, rt . / ....., L CI , Z 1:. \\ \\ s ‘ . 01.8 ..- •-•• —. - xf , • - . \. \ \ . t-- 21 ....:_.. ...,..;$ < •; - ' • --- •C \ • ....)(% \ ■ \ ‘ -- - -0 ' - - - .* '' rn 1 ,.. w ' ,••' ', \ . , to, ill / 1/ # .. 4 : • . . , . r. rn • !,.) qi a) . ‘‘)(\\\\ • • El) , .1 • ......_ _ _ _ . _........_ n . • . toatt4"ivoop a b , • . 0 1 3, " 1.- or.5", • ---- r--, .>•.‘ •\:,•:, - 4 0 PI . -• r. I: c - • " • ; ' ■' - a7 ' :. rri .1 /O 0/i•iv . I •• _.. 21 _,.. .. :::; vial . • I I - 2 \6\ :411 ••••• et, 4 or 'o li gr i 113 " .., .i. r • r -•• , a' (,) . • •'. .1" I, I - ••••• .." 40 00 001: 41/41., . 4 4/ 1\ , . \ W - - , - 1 i Vlillielliillgt: .e• .,-, , ii. ;.- , , I 31 \ • • ' Vir vo,00•00 , 1.1.• .... • . 21 v AN - tv, - ..--.-- - 4)61 - 110,411111111111, %SIN Al* e t l ie* L , . ..• - s , p t " : ,,:i 1 r ''‘,... • , I:I 1.1111.11111 is $ 1 ‘?.. ...., opi liti \Ok%\11111(°+.11110111:1106.1.010 initr ifiliti le0 ill gis 11,1 ;ill : 40 1111..- ■111 11111 = F 11032 se 2 iiiii P• f 1 I .W118, \ Ty , 10,. LEIVIIIII R • w f / f DO • . • 1414 / I t 1 o . 0, * . /Ns Vt.: 1 * ‘s$Y.° 0°' • 1% . , 44 , 4., , , \It, .11 vfl. oe..e 0 0 --- ••' --, - 13 44 64` . t • Illt . ---- , 0 - ' . Pio , % e ft-' a .,r ...,_ r . JR, • .: • t A ro illubt im. I) 4.. • ..--- \1 0 I 61 * i lk ° il I 11 ,......r 6.-- . . .= w 0 a .... _ 6 • _ _. .. 4..0 Aliticiu„, '•• 6.1 , Alflic Ilk 1 • ..., 0 . e ... #( ..4. t I " •' ' 0 . . .6- lit -ma ow ma No am EN all MI IN NM • :.-:: MI WO NIP 1111111 . ,. .. 1 JMS. MARIE SCHROEDER VNORTHLAND CREATIVE SERV. /MR. GORDON TOOK 6600 LOTUS TRAIL 6630 LOTUS TRAIL 6640 LOTUS TRAIL 1 CHANHASSEN MN 55317 CHANHASSEN MN 55317 CHANHASSEN MN 55317 0 /MR. ROBERT NYGREN 4 / MR. KEITH GUNDERSON MR. TED FAVORITE 6650 LOTUS TRAIL 6660 LOTUS TRAIL 6680 LOTUS TRAIL CHANHASSEN MN 55317 CHANHASSEN MN 55317 CHANHASSEN MN 55317 ' ROGER BYRNE ✓MR. BRETT DISCHER 4MR. STAN CRONISTER 6724 LOTUS TRAIL 6728 LOTUS TRAIL 6730 LOTUS TRAIL CHANHASSEN MN 55317 CHANHASSEN MN 55317 CHANHASSEN MN 55317 I f / MR. STEVEN OIEN /CURRENT RESIDENT V MR. KURTIS ANDERSON I 6780 LOTUS TRAIL 6860 LOTUS TRAIL 6870 LOTUS TRAIL CHANHASSEN MN 55317 CHANHASSEN MN 55317 CHANHASSEN MN 55317 1 /MR. JOHN LENSEGRAV JMR. RONALD ROSTAD V MR. PATRICK MCRAITH 6880 LOTUS TRAIL 6890 LOTUS TRAIL 6900 LOTUS TRAIL 1 CHANHASSEN MN 55317 CHANHASSEN MN 55317 CHANHASSEN MN 55317 / MR. DAVE TILLMANS - . MR. ERIC MEESTER ✓ MR. MICHAEL WEGLER 6940 LOTUS TRAIL 6610 MOHAWK DRIVE 6630 MOHAWK DRIVE i CHANHASSEN MN 55317 CHANHASSEN MN 55317 CHANHASSEN MN 55317 1 JMR. VERMONT ISAACSON /MR. DOUGLAS ROOD v MR. DAVID G. HOLUB 6640 MOHAWK DRIVE 6650 MOHAWK DRIVE 6670 MOHAWK DRIVE CHANHASSEN MN 55317 CHANHASSEN MN 55317 CHANHASSEN MN 55317 1 4 MR. DONALD SENNES /MR. PETER LUSTIG 1,/1fR. TIMOTHY D. SMITH I 6680 MOHAWK DRIVE 6699 MOHAWK DRIVE 6701 MOHAWK DRIVE CHANHASSEN MN 55317 CHANHASSEN MN 55317 CHANHASSEN MN 55317 I ✓MR.ELDOND DEGLER 6711 MOHAWK DRIVE 7JO RESIDENTS ON NAPA DR CYl CHANHASSEN MN 55317 AO P j�1 f� �� 1 i)g S /(//'/ 1 CHANHASSEN PARK AND RECREATION COMMISSION 11 REGULAR MEETING JUNE 23, 1992 If Chairman Schroers called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m.. MEMBERS PRESENT: Larry Schroers, Jan Lash, Wendy Pemrick, Randy Erickson, II Jim Andrews and Dave Koubsky MEMBERS ABSENT: Fred Berg 1 STAFF PRESENT: Todd Hoffman, Park and Rec Coordinator; Jerry Ruegemer, Recreation Supervisor; and Dawn Lemme, Program Specialist Schroers: Since we have quite a few people in the audience here tonight and some things to attend to, we're going to move ahead to items 3 and 4 first and get those taken care of and then we'll move back to the rest of the agenda after that. So we'll start with item 3. NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING, CARVER BEACH PARK, VEHICLE PARKING. 11 Public Present: Name Address Pat & Keith Gunderson 6660 Lotus Trail Roger Byrne 6724 Lotus Trail Hoffman: Chairman Schroers and commissioners. Following a motion by the Park Commission at their May 19th meeting, to call a neighborhood meeting in regards to vehicle parking at Carver Beach Park. The enclosed II notification in your packet was mailed for that neighborhood. To reiterate the installation of four parallel parking spaces with one of the four being designated as handicapped parking is being recommended. This action is needed to bring the City into compliance with the ADA, the American with II Disabilities Act and provide reasonable access to a public park facility. These parking spaces are to be accommodated by a widening of the shoulder 0 1 of Lotus Trail, which is a gravel road, for a length of approximately 80 t 100 feet. The location of the parking is to be just north of the small beach on the east side of Lotus Trail. This design has been discussed with the City's engineering and planning departments. The placement of signage , designating the parking spaces will be coordinated with the engineering and public works department. Again, following the comment by the neighbors who are here this evening, it is recommended that the Park and Recreation Commission recommend the City Council approve the construction and signage II of four parallel parking spaces, one of the four to be for persons with handicaps, at Carver Beach Park as specified in the documents and shown on the attached maps. Over to the exact location. North being directly up, we have the length of Carver Beach Park with the main beach and the four parking spots currently existing at the park in this location. Then traveling to the north, the mini -beach is located in this location. Fishing dock and then the canoe racks are down in this location. Again as I/ stated in the letters, parking does occur down there and is tolerated to a certain degree. However, the City does receive a call, a complaint call, I Park and Rec Commission Meeting June 23, 1992 - Page 2 11 to enforce it and then you go down, because it is currently signed no parking. Either write a ticket or give a warning and inform those persons that parked there that they must move. Obviously they're confused many times because they parked there previously and nobody in the neighborhood has chosen to call and report that the vehicle is parked there. They're receiving mixed signals from the city. This would rectify the situation in placing four stalls in this location. That dashed line does show the extent of Lotus Trail which is posted No Parking all the way along the lakeshore in that location. This recommendation is to place four parallel ' parking spots in that location.• On a little larger scale, this shows you the parking as it would fall just to the north, I mean to east of Lotus Trail. Directly across from this parking... Schroers: Okay, thanks. At this time then we'll entertain any comments from the residents of the Carver Beach area or any other residents of the city that wish to comment on the parking there. If you'd be so kind as to come to the podium and state your name and address for us please and we'd like to hear what you have to say. Roger Byrne: My name's Roger Byrne. I live at 6724 Lotus Trail there. Right across from the mini - beach. I don't know if I've got too much for comments. I've got some questions. I'd be interested to know why that location was picked for the parking, for one thing. It seems there's some better spots probably. I don't know if anybody, I don't know who was down there and who looked at it. Who decided what, where. What was best or what. For one things there's a lot of trees there. Some are going to have to be removed to facilitate this deal. And we've got a problem with trees out there right now it seems like. And to cut anymore down doesn't seem to be just the right thing to do at this point in time really. Another thing is, there's the park actually goes a lot farther than what it shows on that map there. I mean there's a lot of land down past Lotus Trail that isn't even on a road which would be a lot better for parking. That could be used you know. I don't know if anybody even took that into consideration. Schroers: Down where the old access used to be? Is that where you're talking about? Roger Byrne: Right, past the old access. That's all parkland down there too. That's the same as what, from the access to the mini- beach. On down the other way from the old access down is parkland also. And there was something else I can't remember right now but. Oh, as far as the handicapped thing, I don't know. From what I heard, they said that somebody was using the dock out there and they said they had to park there because they were handicapped. Well to put a handicapped parking spot down there by that dock, you don't want to encourage any handicapped people to use that dock because that's not a handicapped dock. They'll end up in the lake. If you try to roll a wheelchair or something out there, that's not. I don't think that's a good idea. If you take a look at that dock and then take a look at what handicapped people need, that's not a handicapped dock. You don't want to encourage anybody handicapped to be down there on that 11 thing. I don't know, I just wondering. I'm just looking for some answers to them questions. That's my deal. 11 1 Park and Rec Commission Meeting 1 June 23, 1992 - Page 3 Schroers: Okay. Todd, do you know if the site further down, past the old II approach was looked at in regards to parking? Hoffman: The parkland which would be farther to the north, once you turn II up and take Lotus Trail onto, is it Mohawk? Is park property. It's not on a city street so it would be somewhat more difficult to go ahead and install parking in there. They would be backing up and turning around. Roger Byrne: That is a city street. Doesn't the street up through there? It's all gravel just like Lotus Trail. In fact it must be part of II Lotus Trail. Hoffman: That site would not be as clean to develop. Would not work as II well as the site which is being proposed this evening. To go ahead and address Mr. Bryne's question, the reason why this site was chosen and as the Commissioners who were that evening noticed, there's an absence of a 11 residential homefronts just opposite this location. It's a hillside. If you were to move the parking farther to the south or the north, you would be installing parking stalls in front of homefronts. The issue of removing trees. No trees will be removed as a part of this project. Currently we're thinking probably the shoulder would be widened by an extent of 4 to II 6 feet with additional gravel. The issue of what is handicapped accessible. It's simply not the city's position to designate what is and what is not a handicapped accessible piece of city park equipment or a cit That is really left up to the individuals who choose to use each park site within the city. Schroers: Okay, I think that maybe to help clarify. As well we're talking' about here is not a full scale parking lot. All we're talking about is a little widening in the road so people can get out of the way so other traffic can continue to pass by without a hazard and we don't anticipate that it's something that's going to be busy or heavily used either. It's just going to be a little widening of the shoulder so a car can safely pull out and park. Koubsky: I don't think we were anticipating taking any trees down either were we Todd? It's just a matter of putting some Class V on there so if people did pull off, they wouldn't get stuck if it started raining or something. Roger Byrne: If you extend the curb 4 to 6 feet out from right where 1 you're talking about there, you're going to be hitting those trees. Now you can maybe put the rock around the trees and leave them there. One way or the other the trees that are going to be there are going to die. I really think that if you insist that that's where it's going to be I thin you should have an environmental impact study on it because it's awful close to the lake right there. It just seems to me there's a lot better II places on down the line or maybe back up the other way...we're going to lose some trees there one way or the other if you insist on placing it there. I'm sorry but that's, apparently 'you people haven't looked at it 11 very closely because I live right there and I've lived there for 20 years and I know how wide it is there. If you extend the curb out 4 to 6 feet, you're into the trees. And there are some pretty . good sized trees down there too...but that's exactly the way it is. • i Park and Rec Commission Meeting June 23, 1992 - Page 4 Schroers: Okay, thanks. Keith Gunderson: My name's Keith Gunderson, 6650 Lotus Trail. I'm just north of the site Proposed site. I've got a couple of questions I'd like to have answered. The dock that we have down there right now, in the past 2 years has changed locations twice and right now it still is not in the 11 location that it was originally proposed for. So I'd like to know where the dock is going to stay. Okay. From what I understand, Rocky touched on a couple points here as far as not a handicapped dock. And I think there is a regulation as far as it should have a ramp. It should have rails and it should have a better access. This is not safe at all. Then your map on the proposed parking. The grayed in area really leads a person to believe that there's a lot of room down there and Rocky's right. There's just not 1 a lot of room down there. If you're going to make this wider, to make this safer for handicapped parking, you can go into any handicapped parking stall and you can measure out and find out how wide it is. It's got to 1 have access on both passenger and driver sides. And if you're going to get into this kind of distance, I just think that possibly there's going to have to be a retaining wall put in. There's going to have to be trees cut down. I think this should be measured out a little bit closer. And is it going to be paved or is it just going to be like you say a Class V going to be put in there? It should be checked out a little bit more. Okay, I've had several conversations with the officers in the area because of the 1 trouble in the area. I'm sure you're aware of the swing that was down in the park area for quite a while. That is now since been removed. The officer that I did talk to said there was over 70 arrests down there and none of these are local people. Now if we're going to be putting in more parking, and it's just going to be inviting more trouble. I think 4 parking spots is totally out of line. At the south end of the beach, the large beach which you call it, has got 4 parking areas. You're calling this the north beach. Mini - beach, which is a lot less than a third of the size and you want to put in the same amount of parking. If you're going to put any kind of parking in at all, it should maybe be one space for handicapped. One space for other people. This beach was put in years and years ago for the local people in the surrounding area and I think that's probably the way it should stay. The public beach on the south end, again has a bathroom location on there. Is the north beach going to have a bathroom in it? Where is that going to be located at? Is that going to be handicapped equipped? I think the whole issue here is get something for the handicapped and make it safe for the handicapped. I think the better location for these parking areas is the area that Rocky talked about... North of the pump house. It's in a dead end street. It's safer. There's ample room to fill. To make parking spaces. To put in a bathroom. The dock can be moved over there. It's out of the way. It's easy accessed and it's easier to turn around in and you're off the road. You're off the main stream of traffic. It's not going to cost anymore. There's going to be a lot less maintenance. I don't'think you have to put any kind of retaining II wall in. It's just a better location all the way around. There's no problems. No cost and little or none maintenance. I think we should look at this a little bit closer and if any on all of these answers can't be, or 11 questions can't be answered, the only other solution is just take the dock out. That will alleviate all the problems totally because again, the main thing here is the city has received several calls on handicapped parking 11 for the use of this dock which is not handicapped equipped. Take it out. 1 Park and Rec Commission Meeting June 23, 1992 - Page 5 Get it out of there. Put it on the north or on the south beach. The 1 bathroom's already there. The parking's already there. Thanks. Hoffman: Chairman Schroers, if I could address those issues. This recommendation is more than just to adequately address needs, facilities o residents or persons with disabilities. There's been a number of occasions, not only this year but on previous years where again, parking tolerated to a certain degree. I think if you ask the people who speaked tonight, they'll let you know that on certain days, there are vehicles who are parked there. Who are there using the beach. Using the canoe rack. Utilizing the dock or fishing from shore and many times that is tolerated. However again, when it is not tolerated, when we receive a call, we're forced then to go ahead and inform that person that they must move their vehicle or they will be ticketed. A distance of 4 to 6 feet can be accommodated in that location. That was measured out. Park Commissioners II were there that evening. You can respond to that issue as well. No retaining wall is necessary. No trees would be cut to accommodate this parking. The area will not be asphalted. Four parking stalls do exist at II the south beach. Or excuse me, at the south of the larger beach and that is just simply a beach location. There is also a Satellite, portable restroom there. The north beach or the mini -beach also has the fishing dock and the canoe rack. There are six spaces on that canoe rack so parking needs to be made available to that as well. Portable restroom cannot be installed on the north site because of it's proximity to the lake. If there was a spillover or runoff into the water, is what we need to stay away from. The issue of moving the parking lot to the north of the old access or the current pump house there, just does not make any sense. II In my thinking it over, if you drive in there, then you're going to have toll necessitate or allow for back -up and turn around. You're going to have to take and improve a much larger surface into a gravel turn around type of situation. I'm not sure if this is just an issue of moving it farther dow� the street. It is not my belief that that would make a better location for parking. Schroers: What about cost of developing parking down there? Do you think II it would be roughly the same? Hoffman: Costs are insignificant. The maintenance in this type of thing I is insignificant. It's simply you would have to drive into that location. Park. If you park parallel there you're going to have to turn around and exit traveling the opposite direction from which you traveled into there. You're going to have to do a full 180 degree turn around. Lash: Where, if we have the parking on the street, how are the people who II are parking on the street supposed to get turned around? Would they have to go down to that area, turn around and then get out? Hoffman: Well presumably they would go up, whichever direction they came II from. If you're parking on the right hand side of the road, if you came down Lotus Trail, then you would exit on Mohawk. Lash: Is Mohawk not shown on this map? 1 11 Park and Rec Commission Meeting June 23, 1992 - Page 6 Hoffman: Not on this map, no. It's just off the picture to the north. So again, that area's in the residential homefronts abut that property directly. The area being recommended for parking in that regard is the only area on this side of the park. Which lends itself to being out of the way. To not being visible from the front of homes. Koubsky: That was one of our major concerns too when we went down to look at that area is that we select a place that people aren't going to be looking into. Instead at a high bluff on the west side. Our intent here isn't to make a three lane highway down there. It's just to give enough people to pull off the side so cars can pass. Roger Byrne: What I hear is they're more interested in what's somebody view is then what the impact has on the environment. The big problem we've got right down there right now. That's the crux of the whole thing when somebody cut some trees down there. But you were the other way around on 11 that. Now this one, you're flip flopped around. You don't care about the environment. You just care about what somebody's going to have to look at. You don't worry about what the other way around. I don't understand. Schroers: That's not all we're saying. We're saying that we don't intend to cut down any trees in order to do this. Roger Byrne: But you haven't looked at it then. Even if you don't cut them down, you fill around then, they're going to die. If you fill around trees, they die. It has to have... If you have cars parked there, there's oil leaking down there. When it rains, gravels going to wash down there. You're going to ruin that whole stretch of trees right there. You've got land right on down just a little ways where there is no trees. They've already been cut down. It's closer to the dock. I don't understand what his problem is with moving this parking down. I'm all for parking. I think people should access to that park. I've always said that for 10 -15 years. I've been trying to get you people to do something with that nice piece of land down there so people can use it. If I was you I'd move it. But let's do it right. Why wreck some more of it just to accommodate so somebody don't have to look at cars in front of their house you know. It doesn't make any sense. You people are flip flopping back and forth. Everytime you turn around just to accommodate what, I don't understand. Resident: How about our driveway that accesses onto that road? If we're 11 not so worried about that. Our driveways go out that way too. Now only that Mr. Hoffman, can you tell me how many calls are received every month for parking down there? You tell us that we okay it. How many are received actually per week down there for parking? Hoffman: I could not respond to that without going ahead and checking with Carver County Report record. Resident: It's a bunch. We've talked to,the officers. There is problems down there and there are big problems down there. How are you going to patrol this? Who's going to maintain it? Keith Gunderson: We've talked to the officers in the area that have made 1/ some arrests on the swing and I think parking's going to just add... The 1 Park and Rec Commission Meeting June 23, 1992 - Page 7 officers said they can't even catch these kids because they're literally in the middle and bottom of the park and you just can't catch these kids. Resident: He said that they lay down. They can't even see them. The swing back there. Keith Gunderson: ...pump house. You already conceded the fact that you 11 can have...and they're very easy. It's like getting in and out of a parking stall... Schroers: Did staff say that the City Engineers have looked at this 1 project? • Hoffman: Correct. The City Engineers and City Planners were..to that areal and neither department had a problem with this proposal. The area in question is located up in this area? If we were to install parking in there, there are 3 homes which directly front this piece of property. You'd be taking lake frontage which is currently maintained...and pull that up and fill it with gravel to make that a parking area, turn around which would then be situated right in front of those homes. The area which is I being recommended down here, you'd do much less damage to the park. You need to rip up much less turf. In fact all you're doing is widening the shoulder in the area where there is a sloping area down to the tree line which is in question there. Again, it's not our intent to kill trees. I do not believe that we will be killing trees...establishing those 4 parking spots. That 4 to 6 feet of gravel to the addition of the shoulder area is simply a precautionary measure to make that parking safer. Parking currently takes place on the shoulder as it exists. Any widening that we II can do is simply making this a better situation. Keith Gunderson: If I could address the houses. , Andrews: Could you go to the mic please just so we can have this for the record. Otherwise we have no way to refer back to what you're saying. 1 Keith Gunderson: The houses in front of, north of the pump house. If there's 3 houses up there right now. One has got a dock in there at this II time. Tuck's I believe has that which nobody else can have a dock. I don't know why he does and the next door neighbor I noticed for the last month or so, 11 they've got a big dump truck parked on this land here also. Now this is park property. This should be used as public land. This guy is using it for his own parking lot. I'd like to see somebody address that also. I think a better look should just be taken at the proposed site. Because right now there is parking going on right now but when you open up the trees, or open up your door, it's right in oak trees. So yes, there's going to have to be fill put in and if you take a closer look at it, I mean just over the side it drops down about a good 5 feet. So where is this fill going to go when it rains? Where's it going to wash? Erickson: Would there be room near there for one head in spot that we could make wider for like a handicapped van? Are these large enough for that? 1 11 Park and Rec Commission Meeting June 23, 1992 - Page 8 11 Keith Gunderson: Sure. You can make all the room you want if you cut trees and put in fill and put in a retaining wall. I/ Erickson: Without taking out trees or changing the shoreline. Keith Gunderson: I don't know what the regulations are as far as what you have to have for footage on each side of a vehicle on a handicapped vehicle. But as far as a van, some of the vans that I have seen, they're 8. feet wide. Your door swings open on either side a good 3 feet and right now there's not even close to any kind of room like that. Lash: Part of our perception problem here might be in everybody's mental 11 image of handicapped. For some reason when we talk about handicap, people assume a person is in a wheelchair. I don't know for sure the people, the women who were down there before, my impression of the memo that we got, it was not a wheelchair bound person. I can relate personally to my mother - in -law who has a handicap sticker on her car. She was not in a wheelchair. She was just, her lung capacity was such that she couldn't park way out far away from Target or something so she had the right to a handicap spot. Now I haven't even seen the dock but I trust your word that it would not be the kind of thing a person in a wheelchair would want to go onto and I don't even know if that's what we are intending by saying that we think that there should be a handicap spot there. It's just basically the law that it's supposed to be there and if the dock doesn't accommodate a wheelchair and there's no access for a wheelchair to get to the dock, I really rather doubt that someone in a wheelchair would be going there. But it could be someone else with some type of a handicap that gives them the right to a handicap sticker with the right to a handicap spot. So I just want to clarify that I think everybody gets real hung up on the fact that handicap ' just assumes that a person's in a wheelchair and I think we need to look at a bigger picture here of what that definition is. Schroers: That's exactly the point when we discussed the issue previously. What we were going to do was make one handicap spot available at the front edge of the parking so that anyone that has some degree of a disability would have less of a distance to go to get to the lake. But this has not been designed as a full handicap accessible facility down there and that's not what we're advertising. All we wanted to do is provide some parking. We stuck money in the park. We developed the park, which is what the 11 neighbor said that they would like to have, and if we invest money and develop a facility and not provide parking, that's ridiculous. I mean we need a couple of places to park there and we're not talking about a great big elaborate parking lot here. We're just going to widen the shoulder a little bit and try not to hurt anything in so doing. And we don't anticipate that it's going to attract a lot more people to the area. Only people that know about it now. It would just give them a place to park 11 whereby they would not be ticketed for parking there. And that is our only... (There was a tape change at this point.) Andrews: Todd, was the intent to more aggressively enforce no parking if we were to provide spots there designated as legal parking? r Park and Rec Commission Meeting June 23, 1992 - Page 9 Hoffman: Parking is currently enforced, from my understanding, pretty 1 routinely down there currently. Andrews: Well it sounds like it's on a complaint only basis rather than an"' actual what I'd call enforcement by patrol at least. Hoffman: I can't respond to the patrol schedule down there but certainly once we install parking, to see to it that it doesn't get abused and they don't start parking additional vehicles there past the 3 normal stalls and then the handicap we can ask the Sheriff's Department to do those. Schroers: As far as problems with teenagers and that sort of thing down in the park, that's really not our jurisdiction at all. That's law enforcement and all you can do, if you bring it to Park and Rec, all we canll do is request to the law enforcement people that they, that we can just notify them that we've had concerns from the citizens and ask them if they could step up their efforts in the area but we don't have any authority as far as law enforcement is concerned in the park. Keith Gunderson: In either location, whichever one you choose, when you do put up the signs, are there going to be any kind of hours posted at all? II Because I know when you get into any other parks in the state here, there is always hours. You've got boats running across the lake at 10:30 and 11:00 at night. 1 Erickson: Todd, aren't all the lakes posted to 10:00? Hoffman: Park hours are 6:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m.. 1 Erickson: And that one sign is at the mini -beach which would be near where the parking. They're supposed to be closed at 10:00 as it is. , Keith Gunderson: Okay, and that will be patrolled on a regular basis I would imagine. 1 Hoffman: Again we would make that request to the Sheriff's Department that they patrol that portion of the city. The Department did respond to the issue of the rope swing. We received two calls on that issue directly to the department. The swing was probably 40 -45 -50 feet in the air. Keith Gunderson: A lot of fun. Did you get on it? 1 Hoffman: The park department crews did go down there and remove the swing. Remove the steps to the swing and the other trash which had accumulated in 11 the area due to that swing being in that location. Schroers: Okay. And did you note the personal property that is being parked on park property right now? He mentioned that there was a dump truck and stuff parked there. In the beginning when we were starting to develop this area, there was a lot of boats and things that were tied up down there to the trees that did not have a right to be there and we pursued that and got them all removed. We appreciate you bringing that to II our attention because we do not want private property parked on the park property. 1 Park and Rec Commission Meeting June 23, 1992 - Page 10 Roger Byrne: I guess I've got an idea Todd. If you insist on having it there, which I have no personal problem with per se. Parking being right there in that location. Why not just take down a few of the no parking signs there. Let them park there. Why do you have to widen it? They've been parking there anyway. Let them park there. You don't have to widen it and kill them trees and stuff... Just take a couple signs down and let them park there. Put up one at the end where you want to and I mean they've been parking there now. Why do you have to wreck something so they can park there when they're already parking there? I'd go along with that. If you don't want to move it down. If you want to put gravel and stuff, put it down there where it belongs. If you want to just have them park there, just let them park there. Schroers: Your point is well taken and I guarantee there's nobody sitting here that wants to see any trees be killed. We don't want that. 11 Roger Byrne: I don't want to see stuff wrecked down there you know and that's what's going to happen. If you insist on widening it out there. Erickson: The only thing we want to do is if we allow people to park, right now if you give people an area to park that is now dirt and grass and sod and they get down there and it gets rainy. It's going to get mucked up and I think there's going to be a lot more damage to the side of the road than if we put a dumpload of Class V down there and spread it out. Roger Byrne: I could see it spread out from what it is right now you know but he's talking, he keeps saying widen it 4 to 6 feet wider you know and you're into the trees. Schroers: I'll recommend that we have the City Engineers to look at it again and specify that we definitely do not want any damage occurring to the trees there. But we also would like to create as safe a situation as possible and try to get the cars off the traffic lane if we can. Roger Byrne: I guess that's all I'm looking for. I still think it's safer and better down farther but you know. If you have to put it there, you know, just don't wreck anything, that's all. Schroers: I think we can modify our recommendation to accommodate that. We'll try. Lash: I have a couple of quick questions that I want to ask just so I get my bearings since I wasn't able to go down there and look. Is there parking up on Pawnee? Hoffman: Pawnee? Lash: Or on Mohawk? Mohawk has just been... Hoffman: Mohawk contains no parking. Pawnee farther up, I'm not sure if that's signed or not. I believe it may be. Schroers: Most of those roads in there are really pretty narrow. 1 1 Park and Rec Commission Meeting June 23, 1992 - Page 11 Lash: They're all so narrow that I just can't see putting anything on there. And then this other area further north, is that closer to the dock than what we have? Hoffman: Depending on where you install the parking there, it could be closer to the dock by some certain amount of feet. Lash: And I'm assuming from the map that there's no parking on either side' of Lotus Trail? Hoffman: Correct. ,1 Schroers: Do any of the other commissioners have any specific thoughts regarding this issue? 1 Erickson: Just to reassure the residents a little bit. If you didn't, weren't already aware of this. We're also the Tree Board for Chanhassen soil we spend a fair amount of time talking about saving trees and putting trees up so your concern really hits home with us about the trees so we want to make sure that, like Larry said. The City Engineer's know for sure that 11 the trees aren't going to come out when the parking is widened a little bit. Keith Gunderson: At the start of all my paperwork here is, I asked where 11 the dock is going to stay. Is it in the location where it's going to be from now on? Or is it going to go closer to the beach? Hoffman: The current location of the dock is where it will stay. , Keith Gunderson: Going to stay, okay. Resident: Was that the original proposed site? Hoffman: As shown on the map. 1 Resident: The one that we all voted on. I don't think that was the proposed site is where you have it right now. Down by the old beach, just a little ways away from it. Somehow it ended up way at the other end. Hoffman: The master plan was developed off of the neighborhood meetings and then recommendation by the Park Commission and it shows the canoe rack II is located here and the fishing dock is located here. Those are currently where those two facilities exist. Schroers: And they exist where we had wanted them? 1 Hoffman: Correct. There certainly may have been discussion about other locations at the site. I have no reason to believe that it was shifted for some reason in final development anyway. Resident: When it's installed, is it something that's removed each year? 11 Hoffman: Correct. 1 1 Park and Rec Commission Meeting June 23, 1992 - Page 12 Resident: So when the maintenance people go to reinstall it, how do they know where it's supposed to go? Do they look at it. Hoffman: They'd know where it was from the previous year. Resident: ...never stayed in the same spot, okay? Schroers: I mean does it matter if it's 10 feet one way or the other? Resident: Well if you're voting on parking and all that. I mean this wasn't the original spot it was supposed to be in that we voted 2 years ago when... Keith Gunderson: It was supposed to go right next to the mini - beach. Resident: This was not the original spot. I don't know... Roger Byrne: We were supposed to have a Satellite down there too. We never did get that. I don't know what happened to that. Resident: Somebody shifted here from the original plan. You know like I said, I don't know how long it's been or I don't think it's been very long but this is not the original plan that we all voted on and we came here for and they were going to. Schroers: You're saying that this was 2 years ago? Resident: Well 3. 3 years ago. Schroers: Okay, I've been here that long and part of the thing is, when we ' make our recommendations and then it goes, the job gets out and the actual contracting takes place. Like Todd stated previously, the proximity to the lake made it not suitable for putting another portable toilet there. It was too close to the lake. Some of these changes that occured during the development, happen after they leave here and they're due to a variety of things. Usually it's not something that really greatly alters the plan a lot. It may move the dock a little bit one way or the other but if it was changed from original, there was a reason for that. Roger Byrne: ...the reason for the Satellite was, everybody was whizzing in the weeds down there so, you're worried about the Satellite tipping over, well they don't even have to tip it over because everybody's going on the ground already. Same thing. So why not take a chance with a Satellite. Lash: They don't have to tip it over but trust me, they do tip it over. 11 Roger Byrne: I know but even if they don't, everybody's going on the ground anyway...so what are you going to do? Resident: Why can't you take the dock and put it down at the nice beach, at the nice public beach that you have down there? There's a spot right there that there's no swimming there... You have 4 parking spots up there and you could have a Satellite. Why does that dock have to be down at the...beach that can't facilitate, can't handle it? Park and Rec Commission Meeting June 23, 1992 - Page 13 Lash: I don't imagine it does have to be down there. I thought this was," my impression was that you people were the ones that wanted it. Roger Byrne: Well we did but we also wanted it with the Satellite and with the other stuff that we were going to have. But then all of a sudden, one thing gets put in and everything else gets left out. That just doesn't work out. It doesn't seem right. Resident: And you're not facilitating us. We don't need parking spots. II We live there. Obviously you want to facilitate other people. So when you say, you thought that's what we wanted, well you're not dealing with we. You're dealing with the public... As far as I'm concerned, it should go t the big, beautiful beach that we have down on the south end or put it where your public access is. Schroers: I was at that meeting and several of the residents from Carver 11 Beach told us that that is where they always have fished. Fishing was good there and they liked to fish there and that is why we put the dock there II and it wasn't anybody else. It was people who lived right in that area told us that. Roger Byrne: Right, but we were also told we'd get the Satellite too... 1 Then you don't, and then you've got a reason why. Because it might tip over. I don't know why you put them trash cans but it just goes on and on and on and on and we're really frustrated. 1 Schroers: There isn't a why... Roger Byrne: ...come down and look at it. Where these engineers went to II school to say that that was 'the best place to put in parking. Sure, best place if you're looking at the people that don't have to look at the parking. I'm sure you'd get less heat there but environmentally, for that... It's not the best place. I don't care. I didn't even go to engineering school and I can figure that out. It's common sense. All you've got to do is look at it. I know what these people are doing. All II they're worried about is who's going to cry because they have to look at this car parked out in front of their house. Well, put them here, nobody's going to have to look at it. So let's just go on from there. You people 11 just keep doing the same thing over and over. You know what you're doing, why do you do it? Why do you keep doing it and then sit there and say, well this is the best from safety. From this and from that. I tried to get something for that park...peopie down there and all you people do is II give us the run around. Bad plan. Bad ideas. When you do give us something, you take half of it back and leave the crummy stuff down... I'm sorry. I'm sorry, but this really frustrates us. It's a great park. It's" a beautiful park and people could use that park. I've been telling you people that and you just. Hoffman: To respond to the issue of the Satellite. I believe at the time" that it was reviewed that it was the City's intention to install that Satellite there because there was not a concern or an ordinance in place restricting the installatin of Satellites within that proximity of the II lake. After the fact, after that time, there was an ordinance passed and approved by the City of Chanhassen restricting the distance from a lake for the installation of a portable restroom. Park and Rec Commission Meeting June 23, 1992 - Page 14 Schroers: Okay and as we have it right now, we can't meet those requirements anywhere in that area. The entire area is too close to the lake to install. Okay, there's a regulation. Roger Byrne: ...if you can't put the Satellite in, how can you encourage people to come down there by putting up the dock and putting up the canoe racks and doing all the other stuff there? If they're just going to be going in the weeds all the time like they were before. It's like walking on the deck and there's guys standing there whizzing in the weeds. You wouldn't want it out in front of your house would you? I don't mind people using it but you know, it's either the dogs or the guys or there was a gal off a pontoon boat went over there the other day. I mean I'm standing up there on the deck. Schroers: I guess that's something that we don't have control over. We'd like to think that people would have a little more, what's the right word? A little more discretion but unfortunately that's not under our control. I apologize for all these frustrations but there are a lot of issues to deal with here. I think that in general, my opinion is that the area has gotten better and we'll continue to work at it to try to make it better still. I 11 don't see why we can't have a garbage can there. We should have a trash container there and we will ask in our recommendation that one gets placed there. We can't put in a Satellite if there's an ordinance against it. I mean we just can't do it and it's not a perfect world. I'm sorry. Lash: Were there other things that you thought were going in that have not gone in yet? Roger Byrne: Well I thought there was going go be a path put in there. That never materialized. 11 Erickson: Part of that trail system? Or just a path? Roger Byrne: No, they were talking about wood chips and stuff. Somebody came through about 10 years ago, the Boy Scouts were down there and cleaned it out and put some wood chips in but it's got grown over. You can't hardly get down there... Lash: Are there benches or picnic tables or anything like that there? 1 Roger Byrne: Well they were talking about picnic tables too but that never did materialize. Schroers: Okay well, I think at this point we're kind of whipping a dead 11 horse because there's not a whole lot we can do about some of those thing at this point. It's hard to remember exactly but we at one point were considering installing a limestone path from the north to the south. What ' happened with that? Hoffman: The trailway which exists there. is over grown. It's used by some people in the area. The tree cutting which took place blocked the trail for a period of time. I would recommend that tree trimming and clearing of the area be the best solution. I'm not sure that installing Class V aggregate in that area would make it any more pleasant of a trail or 1 Park and Rec Commission Meeting June 23, 1992 - Page 15 useable. The packed black dirt which currently exists is quite useable. II It just could use a clearing out. Schroers: Okay, I think that we have discussed this issue before and decided that just periodic clearing of that trail would be better than I/ going in and trying to build a formal aggregate trail in there. Lash: I think when we looked at that there were a lot of areas that we thought would be wash outs didn't we? With wood chips or anything there. Schroers: Yeah. We thought we would have a problem with either wood chips" or limestone and that the anticipated use would not justify the cost in paving it so we just thought that we would use volunteer groups. Scout projects and that sort of thing to try and keep the area clear so that there was a walking path. Hoffman: In closing, I would encourage that the residents that are in that area, if they notice things which are deficient or which need attention, simply to call the department and we will take every measure to respond to II their request. Schroers: Okay, thanks. Anything more from any of the Commissioners on II this? Okay. I would like to ask for a recommendation then that would include paying special attention and special care as to not damage trees and also to ask for proper waste receptacles in the area along with the normal recommendation. Lash: Would we like to possibly re- evaluate the number of spots...? 1 Schroers: It seemed like the area, the idea that I'm getting is that the mental picture we're receiving of this is a lot bigger program than it actually is going to be. I think that what we intend to do is going to be really hardly noticeable. All we wanted to do was expand the shoulder a little bit for that distance. Remove the no parking signs in that area so that people wouldn't be ticketed for parking there and that's basically it. � We're not going into a great big elaborate thing here. I think that to, it's not going to make a difference if there's 3 spots or if there's 4. Andrews: I have a question or comment and that would be, by putting in an II aggregate or a Class V or whatever, are we then going to be, have this brought back to us with a request for paving and a path so it be further accessible? Are we really solving a problem or just starting to scratch the surface? Schroers: We certainly wouldn't be paving that unless the road was paved. II The road itself was gravel and we wouldn't be paving a little parking area on a gravel road. Andrews: Does the Federal law state anything about what'd be require as 1 far as a base goes? Hoffman: It states make reasonable access and again it does not define what reasonable is. And Jan was correct, under 3% of persons labeled with disabled are in wheelchairs. Park and Rec Commission Meeting June 23, 1992 - Page 16 Schroers: Okay. Is anyone ready to make a recommendation? If not, then I will. I'm going to recommend that the City Council, or that we recommend to City Council 3 parking spots with 1 being designated or assigned as a handicap parking spot. That we are also going to ask that when this is facilitated, that the Planning and Engineering take a very close and careful look to insure that there is no damage done to any existing trees in the area. And that also upon completion we would like to have proper ' waste receptacles at that location. The parking is to be facilitated by construction of a widened shoulder for a distance of 60 feet on the south side of Lotus Trail as depicted on the attached diagram. That is my recommendation. Do I have a second? Erickson: You said 3 spots Larry. Did that include the handicap spot? Schroers: Yeah, 3 spots includes the handicap right? Hoffman: The recommendation on the floor this evening is for four stalls with one being a handicap. Erickson: One of those being a handicap. Schroers: Okay, I stand corrected. There will be three designated parking spots and one additional spot designated as handicap for a total of 4. But it will still, they will all be within that 60 foot distance on the south side of Lotus Trail. Koubsky: I think we can put the garbage can at the earliest convenience 1 instead of at the completion of the project. Schroers: Okay, well that's something. I don't even think that that has to be on the recommendation. We can just ask staff to request maintenance to get a receptacle down there. Okay, now do we have a second? Kousky: I'ii second. Schroers moved, Koubsky seconded that the Park and Recreation Commission recommend the City Council approve the construction and signage of four parallel parking spaces within the 60 feet on the south side of Lotus Trail for Carver Beach Park; one of the four for persons with disabilities, as specified and shown on the attached maps; and that Planning and Engineering ' take a very close and careful look to insure that there is no damage done to any existing trees in the area. All voted in favor except Lash who opposed and Andrews who abstained. The motion carried with a vote of 4 to 2. Andrews: I'm going to abstain. 'I have to see that site better before I can make a decision. Lash: I'd be interested in getting more information on the other, further north location. Schroers: Okay, what do we have? Hoffman: A carried motion with 4 votes. 1 1 Park and Rec Commission Meeting June 23, 1992 - Page 17 II Schroers: Okay. Thank you very much for coming in and for your interest I t in this. Okay, let us move on. Lash: Before we move on can we...signs designated. To let people know II that it's only open until 10:00 like the rest of the parks. Koubsky: Parking hours? Schroers: Do we have those signs available Todd? II Hoffman: Yes. They will be incorporated. We intend to do a very thoroug job in signing that so it is clear where the parking begins and where it ends and the inclusion of park hours on those signs or on a separate sign can be accommodated. VISITOR PRESENTATIONS ON MOSQUITO CONTROL: II A. ERIC RIVKIN. RESIDENT. B. ROSS GREEN. METROPOLITAN MOSQUITO CONTROL. II Public Present: Name Address II Ross Green (MMCD) 2380 Wycliff St., St. Paul ' il Dave Neitzel (MMCD) 2380 Wycliff St., St. Paul Renee Wagner (MMCD) 2380 Wycliff St., St. Paul John Thompson (MMCD) 6100 Sunny Road, Minnetonka Susan Palcheck (MMCD) 2380 Wycliff St., St. Paul II Ernest Wermerskircher (MMCD) 7757 Valley Drive, Jordan Harold Trende (Carver Co. Comm) 9010 Co. Rd. 140, Cologne Al Klingelhutz (Carver Co. Comm) 8600 Great Plains Blvd. Chanhassen 4 c Sih//�s z ` 64'82 sre/ , /"ei eeger.9 II Hoffman: We'll take a couple minutes to set up and then we'll get rolling" from there. Ross Green: Okay, thank you. My name is Ross Green. I'm a Public Information Officer for the Metropolitan Mosquito Control District. At II this time I'd like to introduce some of the people that came with us just for in terms of questions that may be asked. Just so you know who these people are. In the back is Ernie Wermerskirchen who is the supervisor in II the Scott /Carver Operating Division of the Mosquito Control District. Sitting next to him is Dr. Susan Paichick who is the Aedes Program Manager for the Metropolitan Mosquito Control District. In front of Ernie is Dave Neitzel who is the program leader for the LaCrosse Encephalitis Prevention Program and the Lyme Ticks Surveilience Program. Sitting next to Dave is Renee Wagner who is a foreman in the Chanhassen area for the Scott /Carver Operating Division. And next to her is John Thompson who is our Data II Processing Manager, who happens to live near the area and he was with us this afternoon, or this evening. So if you have some questions, at least you know who we are and you can address those that way. I'd like to II basically give you, I'il be very brief if I can, about 15 minutes to go through what mosquitoes and their control is all about here in Chanhassen. I'll try to address specifically the park issues as to what our involvemen 1 CITY OF 1 r CIIANIIASSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937 -1900 • FAX (612) 937 -5739 -.-, MEMORANDUM 111 TO: Don Ashworth, City Manager FROM: Todd Hoffman, Park and Recreation Coordinator / DATE: - July 9, 1992 SUBJ: Vehicle Parking Plan, Carver Beach Park Consistent with the adopted -Carver Beach Park Master Plan dated January 10, 1992, an area for vehicle parking will be designated at the north end of Carver Beach Park. The Park and I _ Recreation Commission reviewed this item at their May and June meetings. The Commission conducted a site visit in May, and held a neighborhood meeting at their June 23 meeting to allow for citizen comment on this addition to the park. Upon conclusion of the discussion on June 23, the Park and Recreation Commission approved the designation of four parallel parking spaces, with one of the four being for persons with handicaps. This action is consistent with the approved Master Park Plan; however, the number of spaces are being increased by one regular and one handicapped space over the original designation. Park Maintenance/Public Works crews will perform the necessary work associated with this project. • 1 i 1 1 1 is %a PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER C ITYOF CHANHASSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937 -1900 • FAX (612) 937 -5739 1 MEMORANDUM TO: Park and Recreation Commission FROM: Todd Hoffman, Park and Recreation Coordinator DATE: August 4, 1992 SUBJ: Carver Beach Park Vehicle Parking Upon receiving the Commission's recommendation in regard to the designation of four (4) parking spaces at Carver Beach Park, I consulted the City Manager prior to forwarding this item to the City Council. Finding the Commission's action consistent with the Carver Beach Park adopted master plan, the Manager suggested I include the item in the July 27, 1992, City Council administrative packet as an information item. If no comments were received, I would then move ahead with the designation of four (4) parking spaces at Carver Beach Park. No comments or questions were heard from the Council, but prior to moving ahead with this project, I received a call from a resident of the area. This person stated that they did not believe all their questions had been addressed satisfactorily at the Park and Recreation Commission meeting. In talking with the individual, I could not resolve their concerns, and they voiced their desire to speak with the Mayor. The Mayor, upon receiving this call, talked with the individual at length. Mayor Chmiel then took the time to arrange a site inspection with me, after which a meeting between all parties was scheduled to discuss their concerns. This meeting was held on the morning of July 31, 1992. The result of that meeting is this recommendation to reconsider your previous action of recommending a total of four (4) parking spaces be designated, instead, designating a total of three (3) parking spaces for Carver Beach Park. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the Park and Recreation Commission rescind their previous ' recommendation of June 23, 1992, recommending the City Council approve the construction and signage of four parallel parking spaces on the south side of Lotus Trail for Carver Beach Park, one of the four spaces designated for persons with disabilities as specified and shown on the attached maps, and that Planning and Engineering take a close and careful look to ensure that is v.of PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER 1 1 there is no damage done to any existing trees in the area; and to instead make the following recommendation: 1 The Park and Recreation Commission recommends the construction and signage of three (3) parallel parking spaces on the south side of Lotus Trail at Carver Beach Park consistent with the park's master plan, one of the three for persons with handicaps, and that this project be carried out with the assurance that no damage will be done to any existing trees in the area. 1 Action taken by the Commission at the request of Mayor Chmiel will then be forwarded to the consent agenda of the Chanhassen City Council's August 24, 1992, meeting for City Council approval. 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1