The URL can be used to link to this page

2c. Minutes CHANHASSEN CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING OCTOBER 28, 1991 ' Mayor Chmiel called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. . The meeting was opened with the Pledge to the Flag. COUNCILMEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor Chmiel , Councilman Mason, Councilman Workman, Councilman Wing and Councilwoman Dimler STAFF PRESENT: Don Ashworth, Roger Knutson, Scott Harr, Todd Hoffman, Paul 11 Krauss, Todd Gerhardt , Charles Folch and Jo Ann Olsen APPROVAL OF AGENDA: Councilwoman Dimler moved, Councilman Wing seconded to approve the agenda as presented. PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENTS: Mayor Chmiel : We don't have any. I wish I would have thought of it sooner but we should have some kind of a proclamation for the Minnesota Twins. CONSENT AGENDA: Councilwoman Dimler moved, Councilman Workman seconded to approve the following Consent Agenda items pursuant to the City Manager's recommendations: a. Resolution #91-101: Accept Utility Improvements in Lake Susan Hills West 6th Addition, Project 91-7. b. Resolution #91-102: Accept Street Improvements in Lake Susan Hills West 4th Addition, Project 90-14. 11 f. Resolution #91-103: Resolution Authorizing Participation in the Southwest Metro Drug Task Force for 1992. ' i. City Council Minutes dated October 14, 1991 Planning Commission Minutes dated October 2, 1991 Park and Recreation Commission Minutes dated August 27, 1991 j. Approval of 1992 Meeting Schedule. k. Approval of Accounts. 1 All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously. ' G. APPROVAL OF GAMBLING ORDINANCE FINAL READING. Councilman Workman: Mr. Mayor, is this accomplishing, I'm not sure if this is going to be accomplishing what we want it to accomplish. You know I think the ' people who contribute the most input on this has been the Legion and we probably have less to fear from the Legion than anybody. But what are we basing dropping it from 75% to 50k? ' 1 1 City Council Meeting - October 28, 1991 Mayor Chmiel: My understanding is that there was a discussion between the Legion and ourselves to see if they felt comfortable with it . Don Ashworth: Scott is present . Mayor Chmiel: Scott , maybe you'd like to address that . ' Scott Harr: Well after a number of meetings with the Legion in particular as well as consulting with the Chaska Lion's who's been the other primary donater to Chanhassen, the Lion's simply didn't have a concern and the Legion felt quite strong about the issue as set forth by Chuck Dimler at the last meeting that it was discussed. I met with the Commander and the Gambling Director and they said they'd feel more comfortable with the 50% with the possibility of increasing it if a problem arose as opposed to starting higher and decreasing it if a problem didn't arise. So that was a basis for returning it with the 50%. Councilwoman Dimler: If I might add to that too, I think one of the concerns was that when they looked at their budget they discovered that if they wanted to even give to something on the National level for the veterans they couldn't do it because 25% is operating budget and then 75% would have to stay within the local area so they couldn't even send to the National Veterans Administration if ' they wanted to make a donation. Mayor Chmiel: Yeah, that 's true. Councilman Workman: SQ that makes sense. That I didn't know. Who's going to argue against the Veterans? Not this year. No, that makes sense because that was one of the primary reasons we went into this and I didn't really have an explanation as to why we were coming down. But Ursula are we not , a 50% or 75% is based on after expense or in other words it 's based on the net? Councilwoman Dimler: I'm not sure. Did you discuss that with them? I just remember they said about 25% for operation and then 75% if it had to stay within the local area, they couldn't make a contribution to the National Veterans if they wanted to. I didn't feel that was right in case some project came up that they wanted to donate to. Scott Harr: They were just concerned about additional controls over their money and really it 's just 50% is what they felt comfortable with. And we talked for several hours about it at the Legion. ' Councilman Workman: Okay. Well I guess I'd like to make maybe one change. It was very, very minor on page 2, Section 10-152. Each organization licensed to conduct gambling within the City of Chanhassen shall contribute to the City for distribution by the City for lawful purposes an amount equal to 10% of the 11 organizations net profits. Can we inject in front of that to say in an amount equal to at least 10%? ' Mayor Chmiel: Equal to 10% is saying that it's there and you're saying at least? Councilman Workman: At least . In other words they can give more and we prefer they did. 2 City Council Meeting - October 28, 1991 1 Mayor Chmiel: Well that doesn't change the intent of it . Just leaves it open for a little more additional contribution. Yep. Roger Knutson: They can give it all to the City. Councilman Workman: Yeah, I don't want the 10% to be construed as something gee, golly we have to do that but rather. Councilwoman Dimler: You don't want the 10% to be the ceiling? Councilman Workman: Right . Councilwoman Dimler: You want it to be the floor. I Mayor Chmiel: Roger or Scott , Subsection (b) indicates to that 10% contribution required in subsection (a) above shall be considered as part of the 50% expenditure. Councilman Wing: Doesn't that kind of cover it? I Councilwoman Dimler: I thought it did but I can see his point too. Councilman Workman: No. ' Councilwoman Dimler: Explain. Why doesn't it cover it? Councilman Workman: Well the 10% is a contribution to the City. The 50% is a contribution to organizations within the City. Mayor Chmiel: We're not contradicting ourselves by doing that are we? I Roger Knutson: No. I think we can clean up the language. We're not requiring it.. If they wanted to, we certainly will accept it . ' Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Councilwoman Dimler: And the 10% is considered part of the 50%? I Roger Knutson: Correct . Or if they give 15% or 20%, whatever they decide to give to the City, that will all be included as part of the 50%. Mayor Chmiel: If you'd like, why don't you make that into a motion. Councilman Workman: Okay. Approval of, the gambling ordinance, final reading with the change as specified in Section 10-152, paragraph (a), at least 10%. Mayor Chmiel: At least 10% of the organization's net profits. Okay. Derived from lawful gambling. Just keep it as such? Councilman Workman: Correct . Just adding the at least . I Mayor Chmiel: At least . Is there a second? 3 I City Council Meeting - October 28, 1991 Councilman Mason: Second. ' Councilman Workman moved, Councilman Mason seconded to approve the final reading of the Gambling Ordinance as amended in Section 10-152(a) to add the words "at least" in the phrase, "an amount equal to at least ten percent (10X) of the organization's net profits derived from lawful gambling." All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously. Mayor Chmiel: If you could just bring that to the Legion's attention. VISITOR PRESENTATIONS: None. PUBLIC HEARING: CERTIFICATION OF DELINQUENT UTILITY ACCOUNTS. Don Ashworth: The Council regularly goes through, or the staff looking at our utility accounts. At this time of the year we have the opportunity to certify any delinquent accounts. Those delinquent accounts would then become payable with that property owner's taxes in the following year. Approval of the certified list is recommended. Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Is there any other discussion? Councilwoman Dimler : I move approval. Mayor Chmiel: We'll have to close the public hearing first . Is there anyone wishing to come forward on this? This is a public hearing. If seeing none, can I have a motion to close the public hearing? Councilman Workman moved, Councilwoman Dimler seconded to close the public hearing. All voted in favor and the motion carried. Councilman Workman: I would move certification of delinquent utility accounts. ICouncilman Mason: Second. . Resolution #91-104: Councilman Workman moved, Councilman Mason seconded to approve the certification of delinquent utility accounts as recommended. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously. PUBLIC HEARING: AMENDMENT TO CHAPTER 10, ARTICLE II, LIQUOR ORDINANCE. Paul Krauss: Mr. Mayor, very briefly. During a recent review of a liquor i license at the Seven Forty One Center, it became clear that our public notification process, or lack of one for liquor licenses, was something that you asked to have rectified. What we've done is basically I brought a draft up for ' public hearing notice requirement . . .so we mail notice to everybody within 500 feet of the request . In a related matter too, we got a consideration of an ordinance amendment specifically. . .liquor licenses in neighborhood business districts. That 's a separate ordinance that 's now before you tonight . The City ' Attorney has drafted for one for review by the Planning Commission. We're holding off on that to try and coordinate the Public Safety, Scott and I have been talking about Public Safety wants to examine the. . . So I hope this 1 ' 4 I City Council Meeting - October 28, 1991 responds to your immediate concern. From now on this. . .any liquor license request will have public notice requirement. Mayor Chmiel: Good. Thank you. As I said, this is a public hearing. Is there anyone wishing to address it at this particular time? If seeing none, can I have a motion to close the public hearing? Councilman Workman moved, Councilman Mason seconded to close the public hearing. All voted in favor and the motion carried. The public hearing was closed. Mayor Chmiel: Any discussion on this? Councilwoman Dimler: I think it 's a great idea. I Mayor Chmiel: I think Paul has explained and is covering the concerns that we had with the square footage of which we will see in a short period of time. Can I get an approval of the first reading of the attached ordinance? Councilwoman Dimler: So moved. Approval of the first reading of the ordinance of Chapter 10, Article II of the City of Chanhassen Code concerning liquor licenses. Mayor Chmiel: Is there a second? I Councilman Workman: Second. Councilwoman Dimler moved, Councilman Workman seconded to approve the first 1 reading of Ordinance Amendment to Chapter 10, Article II of the Chanhassen City Code Concerning Liquor Licenses. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously. 1 ADOPT ASSESSMENT ROLL FOR FRONTIER TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 89-10. Mayor Chmiel: This is something that we have reviewed for the past several , Council meetings. I guess that unless there's something someone has in addition to what we've already previously discussed, we'd be more than happy to listen to it at this particular time. But if it 's going to be repetition from what we've already discussed previously, we have the Minutes before us and everything contained in here. I'm sure that everyone has had the opportunity to go over it so I'll throw this open for discussion. Some time that you might want to say something regarding this, just raise your hand and I'll recognize you. Tom? Councilman Workman: Have we found the $50,000.00 yet? Mayor Chmiel: Not to my knowledge. Councilman Workman: There has been some discussion on how beachlots were being treated and were they being treated fairly. I guess I would ask the question of the Attorney how are beachlots treated in a legal sense in other communities or statewide on an assessment basis like this? Roger Knutson: For assessment purposes, there's nothing unique about recreational beachlots or any other property. That improvement benefits the 5 i 1 City Council Meeting - October 28, 1991 II property, the street serves the property, it 's assessed. ICouncilman Workman: I guess I don't have a whole lot to discuss on this. I guess I've stood by the 60/40 split on a futuristic and hopefully fairness basis. I guess the staff report further delves into that and I don't know if IIthere's a whole lot we can do on that . That 's all I have. Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Richard? IICouncilman Wing: I thought the staff report was rather -thorough. I don't have any additional comments. IIMayor Chmiel: Ursula? Councilwoman Dimler: Well I've got a lot of comments. I guess in order to get IIthis settled, like I said last time, I thought we should have put it to bed but I really do want to put it to bed this time. I know that the citizens are really tired of it as we are, I'm sure we all are here too. Concern the 1 beachlot and I don't know if this was ever made clear but apparently I have been told that the City owns the front footage on the beachlot in the fact that Mr. Scholer did own it and we got it for back taxes. In that case then, if the City owns it , the City should pay the assessment. The beachlot then does not have IIany front footage. Yeah, that 's what I've been told. Mayor Chmiel: We're having some high level discussions behind here. ICouncilwoman Dimler : Okay. While they're settling that though, I guess after having analyzed everything I am in favor of staying with the front footage 1 assessment . I believe the petition is still valid. Using the unit basis as was proposed would increase 38 properties and only lower 13 so I would guess that the majority would want to stay with the front footage basis. I do believe that we are later in this agenda considering a pavement policy as we have seen on the I back of the agenda. To me that is establishing a policy for repaving our streets and it does cover reconstruction. It covers all kinds of street maintenance and clearly now Frontier Trail is before us, before this policy is I before us so therefore I would still maintain that we should not make Frontier Trail the example but that we should go on our existing policy which is case by case and as I stated in my discussion last time, in this case because the street II was never resurfaced, it was sealcoated 2 or 3 times in the years I've lived there but it's never been resurfaced. Therefore I believe that because of a lack of maintenance, that it would qualify in this case for a 70/30. Finding $10,000.00 for the next 5 or 6 years does seem to be difficult but I guess II when I think about it , I'd rather give our citizens a break on their assessment than to purchase anymore city vehicles or seasonal equipment at much higher costs. Those are just my priorities. And I still don't have the question II answered as to Outlot 1 and 2 it 's not assessable but who 'is paying the assessment? I'm sure that somebody has to pick this up and I'm wondering if the neighbors are doing that . And then the beachlot I brought up and I think we're going to have that clarified in just a few moments here. But those would be my IIfinal comments. Mayor Chmiel: Maybe we can have some input on that beachlot as to what Ursula IIindicated that the City owns the frontage of the beachlot . I'm not sure what the 6 II City Council Meeting - October 28, 1991 I/frontage is. If that 's the basic boulevard section 'or what but maybe you can answer that Roger. Roger Knutson: If I understand the beachlot has only one access out into the world is on this street . Between what is understood to be the road right-of-way and the beachlot was another strip that the City acquired. My thinking. . . acquisition by the City of the strip doesn't make any difference- whatsoever. It's just like we have a wider street now. More boulevard. The benefit , the use has not changed. It 's like we don't assess the street project. We wouldn't assess this little strip which we now own which functions as part of the street . I Councilwoman [limier: But are we charging the beachlot for it? Roger Knutson: We're charging the beachlot for their frontage along the road. I Mayor Chmiel : Just for the frontage. Not anymore than what the width or the depth is. I Roger Knutson: They're not going to be charged more because of this strip, or less. I Councilwoman Dimler : Mr. Scholer, did you want to address that? I guess I don't really clearly understand. I spoke to Mr. Jenkins about that . I Robert Scholer: I'm glad I don't own it . Councilwoman Dimler: You don't own it but the City owns it . Well, if the City I/ owns the frontage to the beachlot , then the beachlot has no frontage that it can be assessed for but the City should pay that portion. Robert Scholer : I think you've got a legal question that I would prefer not to answer I guess. I've got a conflict of interest here as well so I think I'll defer to your legal counsel on that one. It 's true that I did own that lot at one time and I had absolutely no use for it . Paid taxes on it for a number of years to sort of control the access to be sure that everybody had equal access from m; subdivision. When it became apparent that everybody did have equal access in all of the subdivisions 1, 2, 3 and 4, I could see no reason to I continue paying taxes and I just let it go. But the rest of your question I have to defer. Councilwoman Dimler: You think that 's a legal matter, thank you. , I Mayor Chmiel: Thanks. Okay. Michael. • Councilman Mason: I usually can get my brain and my heart in sync on these things and I can't on this one. I've used this analogy before. In negotiating contracts for the teachers, and as I'm learning in trying to help govern this city, there are pockets in the city or teachers that you agree with. Unfortunately we have to sit back and look at the overall picture. I like the idea of 70/30. With all the information I have in front of me, I'm afraid that the damage that would be done to the city now and into the future outweighs what would happen to the Frontier Trail and that's a tough one for me. With what we have this pavement management needs report coming up I think addresses some of 7 i l.11y I.UUHUli lleell.11y - UCLUDer 4b, 1771 IIthat . I hope we can do a better job of educating people in the future on what needs to be done. I would much rather see the 70/30 and I think I could go I along with that tonight and then I could say well, I voted for it even though it didn't pass or whatever but I think in the best interest of the city, I think probably the 60/40 is the better of the two. And it does not help the Frontier Trail people at all but I guess I think the 60/40 is the best for the City. IIMayor Chmiel: Okay, thank you. As I looked at the same situation, we talked at that time was the 50/50. We didn't think that was quite to the point where we 11 thought it should be. We did move it to the 60/40. In looking at the long term commitment that we were making for the city and putting that into deficit over the long haul , to me it just doesn't make sense. Sure, you'd like to give everybody something for free but there's no free lunch unfortunately. I am at II least still sitting in a position of the 60/40 split on this. 60 City, 40 for the residents. And I think that 's about where at least I'm at with it right now. I know it 's not a very popular thing to do but we have to watch out for I the city's interest at heart and I think if I were there I probably wouldn't like it but nonetheless I didn't like the assessment I had on mine and mine wound up at $10,000.00 for my piece of property as well. So with that I'd like Ito ask for a motion, or is there discussion? Tom. Councilman Workman: In the staff report it says the front , and it 's talking about the outlot in question. It says the front footage for Outlot 2 and Lot 9 I were added together and qualified for the large frontge curved lot reduction. Are we still using reduction? I Charles Folch: That 's correct. The latest addition of the assessment roll contained in your packet still includes the accommodations made for the large foot frontage lots on curve. IICouncilman Workman: But was that an original part of the agreement? I thought that was a deviation and one that hadn't been approved? So those who have a larger lot are being subsidized on the front footage rather than by the other 1 residents? Charles Folch: No, they're not being subsidized by the other residents. We II maintain the same per unit front foot cost rate if you will. The additional amount will be picked up by an increase to the city share but not directly to the other property owners on the Frontier Trail assessment . II Councilman Workman: Is that something we're going to be able to pattern the next time we do a road? That 's a method we're going to be able to use in the future and we're going to be able to apply just as equally in those situations? ICharles Folch: I think we'll be able to. It 's a method that we've been applying to corner lots if you will and it works very well in applying to these II curved lots which basically are sort of functioning as a corner if you will so I think it 's very logical and prudent and I think we can continue to employ it in the future. I . Councilman Workman: Well we know what a corner lot is but a curved lot can be kind of deceptive so what are our criteria to decide whether somebody's in that hardship situation or not? II 8 II II Cit.; Council Meeting - October 28, 1991 I/ Charles Folch: Well in this particular case we looked at what was the average frontage if you will for a residential lot on the tangent or straight section of the road. That appeared to be 110 feet . Most of your properties fall within that category of 110 feet plus or minus, give or take. There are some that are somewhat smaller and there's about half a dozen that are larger that end up falling in the 220 foot category. The lots may not be in total square footage any larger than one of 110 foot of frontage and therefore it was brought to our attention that maybe we should look at this as far as applying a fair method of assessing the difference between the two types of parcels and therefore we developed this method and it appears appropriate. Councilman Workman: Okay, so 110 is the average. . .220, or whatever. Charles Folch: Well in this case. I would say in general most of the properties fell at well, 110 was the average size and I would say probably the majority outside of the handful that were the 220, were under 130. There were a couple I think 1 or 2 at about 150-155 but the ones we primarily dealt with were on Curve and were in the 220 range. The couple that were at about 150 were larger lots to begin with. If you look at their square footage, they've got , some pretty good size to them. Councilman Workman: I just get a little uncomfortable because now we've got a lot of little offshoots for the next time to try and figure that out . I've been trying to say all along I guess that I'd like to make it as uniform as possible and as fair as possible and clearly the people who have curved lots and lots that are no bigger than anybody elses are in a unique situation. I don't want to but I don't know that I see how that , I don't see that as a scientific formula that we're going to be able to apply everywhere. So the people with the 15C foot lots are kind of stuck in the middle. I Charley Folch: That 's not necessarily true. Councilman Workman: But they're maybe not on a curve. I Charlee Folch: Right . They're not on a curve and if it was their short side and in both cases it was their short side and there was no break given. If we do a street reconstruction on the long side, there would be credit given at that time Yeah it 's a policy we do apply to the corner lots and from our standpoint it seems to work fairly well here for the curved lots by establishing an average front foot . On a typical lot and block where you have all north/ south, east/west streets, if you look at them, pretty much all the lots will have the same frontage across the street . And so you really don't run into that problem but when you do have a curved type road, you will have lot lines that ' don' t go north/south, east/west and perpendicular to the road right-of-way. So then we have to deal with these cases. Mayor Chmiel : Okay, I'd like to come up with a conclusion on this. In fact I'm going to call a question on it . I'd like to even make the motion that we accept the front footage assessments and go with a 60/40 split . 60% city, 40; residents. Is there a second? Councilman Workman: I'll second it . 9 I City Council Meeting - October 28, 1991 Mayor Chmiel: It 's been moved and seconded. Any other discussion? Resolution #91-105: Mayor Chmiel moved, Councilman Workman seconded to adopt the Assessment Roll for Frontier Trail Improvement Project No. 89-10 based on a front footage basis and with a 60/40 split. All voted in favor except Councilwoman Dimler who opposed and the motion carried with a vote of 4 to 1. Mayor Chmiel: I think you've indicated your concerns. 11 Councilwoman Dimler: My position is well known. LUNDGREN/ORTENBLAT/ERSBO SUBDIVISION REQUEST, WEST OF POWERS BOULEVARD AND SOUTH OF LAKE LUCY ROAD: A. REZONING REQUEST FROM RR (RURAL RESIDENTIAL) AND RSF (RESIDENTIAL SINGLE ' FAMILY) TO PUD (PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT). B. PRELIMINARY PLAT TO SUBDIVIDE 30+ ACRES INTO 37 SINGLE FAMILY LOTS. C. WETLAND ALTERATION PERMIT AMENDMENT TO ALTER CLASS A AND B WETLANDS. Jo Ann Olsen: This was tabled after the last meeting after it was brought up discussion of parkland on the site. There were also some issues with the representative from Lundgren Bros. for the road width, 3 trees per lot and the position of utilities on the properties. The size of road width. . .only be 26 feet width near the wetland areas. That the rest of it remain at the normal width. The 3 trees per lot we feel. . .large caliper trees, that it justifies to have 3 trees per lot . Also for the cost of providing utilities. Typically the developer does provide that and pay for that share of the cost. . . Another concern was off site drainage. There's an existing off site drainage in the Greenwood Shores area. We are convinced that what they're doing with the ponding on the site will maintain the pre-development rate of the storm water runoff. It will not increase any off site drainage at all. If there is an existing problem we are recommending that that be a separate public works project . ' Mayor Chmiel: Jo Ann, when you say that should be a separate public works project . Meaning the City should pick up those costs? Jo Ann Olsen: It could be assessed back. Paul Krauss: Mr. Mayor if I could respond to that briefly. I think the City Engineer. . .some additional work on that drainage area but we're convinced that we're. . . There is no problem coming from this development . We're not certain there's an existing problem. We know there are some individuals who's i properties get real wet in very heavy rains but when you look at their yard areas, a lot of their lawn area is former wetland. There is an elevation established for the outlet for that ponding area. If that elevation was established too high. . .evaluated in a comprehensive way. . . ' Mayor Chmiel: Okay, thank you. 10 1 City Council Meeting - October 28, 1991 Jo Ann Olsen: . . .so as far as this development itself, the pre-development flow will be maintained. We also added a couple sections from the old staff report about the revised road alignment . Councilwoman Dimler and Councilman Wing were concerend about that the road should go back over towards the wetland to preserve the trees on the hill. So again we added where we did. . .the two different alternatives for the road. . . There was also questions about the wetland area for lot . . .net upland area is actually larger than what is required. The final issue was the parkland. We added a memo from the Park and Rec Director, Todd Hoffman who again stated that the reasons why they are not requesting parkland. . .the area is not parkland deficient . They'd rather have the money to support the existing parkland areas so they did not feel it was necessary to provide parkland for this development . . . So we are recommending approval as before with the conditions in the staff report . Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Is there anything else Jo Ann? Jo Ann Olsen: That 's it for us. Mayor Chmiel: Okay, thank you. Mr. Terry Lundgren. Is there anything you'd like to add to what staff has indicated at this particular time? Terry Forbord: Your honor, ladies and gentlemen of the City Council. My name is Terry Forbord, 935 East Wayzata Blvd. . I/ Mayor Chmiel: Terry Lundgren. Thank you. I appreciate that correction. Terry Forbord: We've been before you before and presented our concerns and staff has worked hard in an attempt to respond to the questions of the Council and we are here in the capacity this evening to answer any questions that you may have. The owners of the property are here if you have any questions for them. Mr . and Mrs. Ortenblat and Mr. Ersbo in case there were anything about the past or anything that maybe they could add that we aren't able to. So they are in the audience if you have questions of them as well. Thank you. Mayor Chmiel: Thank you. Is there any discussion that you'd like to carry through? Ursula.I Councilwoman Dimler: I do have a question of Jo Ann. In you conditions I didn't see the issue of the north watershed drainage addressed. They were proposing to plug it up. Do you see anywhere where you've covered that? I couldn't find it . Paul Krauss: Condition #4 on the preliminary plat . I Jo Ann Olsen: It 's also where it 's discussing raising the water level of the wetland. I Councilwoman Dimler: I see where you're talking about them raising the water level of the wetland there and protecting the road but does it say anything about shutting off the north? Jo Ann Olsen: . . .100 year flood elevation. That 's the one. 11 , I II City Council Meeting - October 28, 1991 Paul Krauss: Councilwoman Dimler, if I might . We're getting into, this is a 1 very complex issue. We sort of punt when we get to that. Councilwoman Dimler: When you say modify, you're talking about shutting it IIoff? Is that the word you're using there? Paul Krauss: We're saying we laid this out. . .we're saying that drainage plans have to be modified. . .there's a lot more that 's in the staff report and we're 1 referring back to that . Councilwoman Dimler: So that is the section that covers that? When you say 1 modify it could mean close it off? Paul Krauss: Could be closed off. . . ICouncilwoman Dimler: Yes. Thank you. Mayor Chmiel: Was that? ICouncilwoman Dimler : That was my question. iMayor Chmiel: Okay. Let 's move it right down that way. Councilwoman Dimler: Did you want me to address all the concerns? II Mayor Chmiel : Yes . That 's what I thought you had at that particular time or questions that you may have of the developer as well. 1 Councilwoman Dimler: Okay I say yes to the PUD with the conditions as outlined in the staff report . I do not favor the 26 foot road. For safety considerations I think we should go with the standard street size except for in I those areas where you felt it was necessary to preserve the environmental - conditions. I would like to see us get 3 trees per lot to replace the trees being destroyed by the development . I think that the developer should pay for the utilities to be extended because they're benefitting from the utilities that II arc there on Lake Lucy Road. So just to extend that further. And I do agree that there should be no increased off site drainage to the Lake Lucy or Greenwood Shores people south of there. And I do believe that their proposal I with the Walker Pond will control the drainage and that yes, there was definitely a problem down there in Greenwood Shores. Those people were allowed by former Councils to build in a wetland basically and that needs to be addressed but I think it should be addressed as a separate project. I wouldn't be opposed to the elevation of the water level in the Class A wetland to 976.5 to try to increase the water, the quality of the wetland as well as the wildlife and vegetation. However, I think it 's a good idea to get a financial security 11 for a 3 year period of the amount that you determine in case it does do something to the subgrade of Lake Lucy Road and then we're covered there. Basically that 's my comments. IIMayor Chmiel: Okay, Richard. II Councilman Wing: This has been hashed over at length and I certainly go along with other Councilmembers. Been out and toured the property and walked it and II 12 II City Council Meeting - October 28, 1991 • talked to staff and worked this through. I see two options. Either move not to develop and be illegal in doing so or approve what 's basically a pretty good ' project as I see it . In regards to the raising of the lake, it would be ideal if we could dredge the depth we want , remove the nutrients at the same time. I think that 's the only really possible way to do it is to dredge the nutrients out . Get the depth we want and go. With regards to raising, I kind of have to go along with staff and Charles, our engineer in saying that it may be a potential problem. He's concerned about the road. I don't have the expertise to make that decision or even question this so if the engineer's recommendation is not to exceed 975.5, then I have to assume that's a proper decision so I would be quite pleased at anytime to move approval as is. Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Tom. I Councilman Workman: This is a unique parcel with a unique wetland. I guess I'm concerned that what we've done is, it used to be if there was a Class B wetland and it just had maybe something that resembled a piece of wetland vegetation in it and there was no water there, it was sacred ground. I think we're doing, I think we're moving an entrance here by, I think you guys are all going with the filling of the wetland rather than, no? Councilman Wing: No, because we've been out and walked it and there's a list of what you're going to lose and you don't gain or lose anything. Councilman Workman: So we're going to leave the entrance where they want it? The developers want it . We're not going to be filling the wetland? I Mayor Chmiel: I would say not to. I don't like filling the wetlands myself. Councilman Workmur. It just sounded like we were kind of, somehow trees got 1 ahead of wetlands and I didn't want to think about filling and moving. I'd like to try with a development and I know that Terry and Lundgren have done, I'm impressed by what they've done up north. I don't have any reason not to trust that they' re going to do a good job here. I don't know how the question of road width should be addressed. I guess I'd be willing to go along with it . It 's going to be their neighborhood. Those people are going to be driving through it . Have we answered the question on the cost of providing utilities to the next parcels? No? Mayor Chmiel : Not at this particular time but Ursula indicated. , Councilwoman Cider: I said being that they're benefitting from what 's already there, that they could pass that benefit on and the next developer would be required to pass it on. Councilman Workman: Yeah and if that 's the way we've done it in the past , I don't know how we can deviate from that . Mayor Chmiel: That has been precedent previously. Councilman Workman: I would assume they're tapping into what Charles? Underneath from Curry or from Lake Lucy? 13 I City Council Meeting - October 23, 1991 II Charles Folch: From Lake Lucy, that 's correct . IICouncilman Workman: But we put that in? Okay. So I guess I don't really have a whole lot of problems with it . I guess I keep thinking that we're, I don't know if up in the eight additions up there for Near Mountain if we had all of _ II this stuff, revised landscaping and all the different things that we're requiring from them that I think they already know they would like to have and the future homeowners are going to want to put in and we've gone over this II discussion as part of our discussion on the landscaping ordinance. I think our discussions about requiring 3 trees per lot or one or none is relevant to this question too. Just because it 's a PUD you know, I think it 's some of the same I questions about what should be required and what shouldn't be. I don't really have any further questions. Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Mike. ICouncilman Mason: I don't have any trouble with the 26 foot width road with no parking on one side. It seems to me that 's kind of a compromise there. I II understand I think what Terry's saying about 26 feet there and I also understand the safety issue. I know the street I live on certainly isn't 26 feet wide and it is an issue but that 's essentially a closed loop there. I mean it isn't 11 So to be getting the Carver Beach, Nez Perce kind of traffic, I would guess. So I think if we're going to have parking on both sides of the street , I'd go along with what you're saying. I think if we would say no parking, I wouldn't have any trouble with it . I'm concerned about the pond. If the nutrients I aren't going to be removed from it , what will the City's liability be 10 years from now as the nutrient level increases and the runoff increases and it has to be cleaned up? It seems to me if we're not going to take the nutrients out of Ithat pond. Paul Krauss asked a question that wasn't picked up on the tape. IICouncilman Mason: Well the big one. I mean the one that we're saving. Paul Krauss: The big one is a wetland. It 's not going to be a managed water II body. We did investigate the possibility through the DNR of going in there and scooping out the muck on the bottom. . .and they were adament that they wouldn't let us mess around with a Class A wetland. . . So we're doing what we think is II the reasonable thing to do. There's an existing nutrient rich bottom in that thing but the bigger problem seems to be coming from off site. It 's drainage from the road. It 's the phosphate rich salt and whatever else is going into there and what we're going to be doing is intercepting all that. The water II that 's being introduced to flow through that system from here on out is going to be a lot cleaner than it was. I'm not sure if ultimately that means the wetland will purge itself but that 's basically the limits of what we're able to do with I what the DNR allows. . . We think we're going to get a much better system for it . Now those Walker ponds that we're constructing will have to be maintained and managed by the City. As we have to maintain storm drainage ponds. . .we're going II to have to go out there every 5 years or 10 years. . .and clean out the muck. That 's where the active management comes in. Councilman Mason: Council kind of seems, this financial security thing I guess III'm also concerned about . If we do go along with raising, letting them raise 1 14 II City Council Meeting - October 28, 1991 the water, who will be held accountable and I know we can't do it indefinitely. I'm not suggesting that but if something goes wrong with Lake Lucy in a year and we can prove it 's related to raising it , I don't know. Councilwoman Dimler: I believe they had a mechanism in there where we reverse it then. Did I read that in the report? I Charles Folch: That 's correct . I guess that was the thought I had. Given there appears to be differences if you will on what will or potentially could or could not happen to the road. There's nothing cut in stone that says the road will receive no impact if we raise it up the full 2 feet . A compromise to that would be if the developer's willing to provide some sort of cash escrow or letter of credit which would have to be in effect for let's say 3 years which is certainly ample amount of time to see some sort of impact . Detrimental impact to that portion of the road segment . Now we're looking at probably only about 100-150 feet of that road that would be impacted. Potentially impacted by that high water so it 's not a significant length along the road if you will. Councilman Wing: Mr. Mayor I just had one question. We're assuming this is a Class A wetland and where I live on Lake Minnewashta we're at an all time high. Fall of thr_ year and we' re at an all time high. We're assuming this is a Class 'A wetland with normal rainfall. Would there be anything in this lake that , we're talking about raising it a foot or two. In fact in normal rainfall years, would we be raising anything or would it just be a dry wheatfield? CharleF Folch: Well currently, well the normal water level is estimated to be at 974.5. Currently it 's at about 975.5 and it 's been that way throughout most of the summer. It 's been a foot higher than normal and that 's related to a couple of things. One being the downstream canal which is probably silted over and is holding the water back and the other is the culvert to the north. So there is the difference that the developer's proposing to raise it to above what 's currently out there is only a foot but after the development occurs, the man made control structures if you will that will be in place on the north and south end here will do a better, will serve to better function and control the water level and keep it at a more stable level throughout the year. Councilman Wing: Mr. Mayor, I think the water level in this lake is an issue ' and if more water would provide in actual water surface more of the year, I guess I would support raising that if you were in fact comfortable, which you haven't been to this point , that it 's not going to take care of Lake Lucy or this dollar amount being set aside. I've got to feel comfortable Charles that the decision we make is going to be a reasonable decision in regards to that road. Ideally I'd prefer to raise the water level just to provide open water more of the year. During more years. That 'd be the first thing. Then the other thing is the 26 foot road. If there's a majority of Council that would favor that , I think this is a delightful neighborhood and I'd like to see a 26 foot road. I don't see a safety issue on a loop like this. I think it would tend to make the neighborhood quaint and it 's worth looking at in this particular development . Councilman Mason: Just one more question. Terry, refresh my memory. It seems to me I read way back when when this all came up that you people were proposing putting, planting cattails in or am I just off somewhere right now? I guess the 15 1 City Council Meeting - October 28, 1991 reason I'm asking that is with that water ' g ater depth, I d be concerned that cattail., would take that whole thing over in 3 to 5 years or whatever. Terry Forbord: Your Honor, members of the City Council. Terry Forbord with Lundgren Bros. . We were not proposing to implant different types of species of 1 plant types into the wetland. The consultant that we used, Mr. Frank Svoboda who's here this evening and he can answer specific questions certainly better than I. He prefers to let things naturally occur in their own manner and the way that he believes that can be done is if we establish the water level. That things naturally will occur on their own and different types of aquatic plant material will develop there. Right now because the water level is so shallow, the only type of plant type that 's really predominant there is what is called a duck weed. What typically has is it creates a mat because it lives and then it has a dying cycle and it kind of keeps covering the water. The way I understand it the sunlight can't break through the mat that 's created by the ' duck weed so it 's our intent that cattails would grow around certain parts of the perimeter of that open water area. But I know Frank would be glad to speak eloquently about this because I'm not qualified to do so and he can tell you how that all works. If you'd like because he's here and I'm sure he'd be happy to tell you. Mayor Chmiel: Being that you have him here and he's sat here for such a long ' time and he hasn't had the opportunity, I think you'd better get your money's worth. Frank Svoboda: My name's Frank Svoboda. In response to your question. As far as the growth of cattails. One way to limit the intrusion of cattails into areas is to increase the water depth. The deepest that cattails generally will grow is in about 3 feet of water. So if you can maintain certain parts of a wetland with water depths greater than 3 feet , you're almost virtually insured of no cattail invasion into that . In response to your other question or inquiry about. whether or not we were going to do any planting. What I've learned over Ithe years and in fact there's two schools of thought here. One school believes that in order to re-establish aquatic vegetation, you plant . I prefer to subscribe to the other school of thought which is you allow natural conditions ' to occur. And the reason I believe that is that aquatic plants respond to the forces of the environment . Soil chemistry. Water chemistry and hydrology. And so it 's, you can make moss grow in the desert if you want but if you don't maintain those conditions, then after you quit creating that manipulated ' environment , eventually nature's going to re-establish some sort of balance and that 's what I see happening in wetland environments is that sure, you can force some sort of plans to grow in there but what the research has found is ' eventually it 's going to achieve it 's own balance and that's balance is going to be in response to those three things that I mentioned. Hydrology, soil chemistry and water chemistry. ' Councilman Mason: How will the purple loosestrife fit into that? Frank Svoboda: Well the purple loosestrife will, when an area is initially disturbed that 's when you're most apt to get purple loosestrife -showing up. So one of the ways that you control that is to maintain a fair amount of diligence the first couple of years and then certainly there's ongoing, because of the growth habits of purple loosestrife. It's very prolific so you still need to - 16 I City Council Meeting - October 23, 1991 I maintain, well it 's just like controlling any noxious weed. So you just basically have to monitor it from one year to the next and if you can keep it under control when there's only 1 or 2 plants, it 's a lot easier than when a clone nets established and starts going to seed. So what we would do is the first couple of years is monitor the site for any growth of new plants and spot control. I Councilman Mason: You will be doing that? Frank Svoboda: Right . , Councilman Mason: Okay. Thanks. Mayor Chmiel : Any other questions? Okay, thank you. Frank Svoboda: Thank you. I Mayor Chmiel: I guess I'm still looking at it from the water quality and the nutrient loading analysis that 's going to be on the site. I don't know, when you increase in the activity within the wetland, usually results in the acceleration of the aging process thereby causing changes within the area. Tropic status, which is part of it . Of course development can cause an increase in the two major nutrients which is nitrogen phospherous in the system and these two nutrients in excess amounts can accelerate aquatic plant and algae growth and cause some problems within that wetland. Eutrophication which would probably be part of it . And of course there again nitrogen coming back in can be transported in what 's termed as the gaseous phase within. And across the air/water interface or fixed transport to a biological useable form by blue green algae. That blue green algae in itself creates that and bacteria within it . The nitrogen environment is usually in the form of a nitrate and of course nitrate sources include the fertilizers that will be put on those lawns and I don't know what varying effect that 's going to be with 37 homes within that respective area. I think that 's correct . That could cause some problems within and I guess I'm wondering what reaction really occurs with it and how it sort of how this ammonia binds to the soil itself and gets into the wetland area as well as the pond. As you mentioned Paul we can't, the DNR won't allow us to get in there to take out what we feel we want to do. They're just saying no. Is that right? Paul Krauss: That 's what we've been told, yeah. I Jo Ann Olsen: I believe that if you wanted to dredge they would allow it but again it 's one of those things. . . I Mayor Chmiel: Eric? - Eric Rivkin: I have a question. ' Mayor Chmiel: Why don't you come up to the podium. Eric Rivkin: I got here late. Is this still a public hearing? Mayor Chmiel : Well it's not a public hearing but we're open for some comments. I 17 , City Council Meeting - October 28, 1991 IIEric Rivkin: Okay. I have a question for Jo Ann here. Related to your question here to the DNR. Did the DNR measure what 's in the bottom sediments as IIfar as nutrients are concerned or was it just a guess? Jo Ann Olsen: The applicant made a study of the wetland. IIEric Rivkin: Were the bottom sediments measured for nutrients? Terry, were the bottom sediments measured for nutrients? 1 Terry Forbord: Your Honor. I think we should let our wetland consultant answer that . I Frank Svoboda: Frank Svoboda. We had Braun Intertec Environmental go out and collect water samples and the water samples were analyzed for nutrients but we did not collect the bottom sediments because we felt that , our concern was more I with the quality of the water. That if we could improve the quality of the water, then we would be able to re-establish some of the more desireable plant species that we wanted out there. The other aspect of the project history is that , and one of the property owners could address this better than I could, but I as recently as I believe 1974 and perhaps more recently than that , that wetland was actually cropped as agricultural field and there was corn planted out there. I Mayor Chmiel : But the question that I've always had and no one's answered, what was it prior to that time as well? To it being corn. Being productive land. It could have been in a wetland stage as well. IFrank Svoboda: Right . We looking at the topographic features, it probably as a depressional area within the landscape. It probably did not look as it looks today with that much standing water in it but it was probably seasonally flooded I just based on the drainage area that 's feeding this depressional area. The fact that there is now a shallow ditch to the south. That ditch was not there so I think it was basically at a high point in the landscape and it collected very 1 localized runoff. Mayor Chmiel: Thank you. IIEric Rivkin: Is there going to be a public hearing? Mayor Chmiel: No. We've already gone through that particular process. This is IIbeyond the public hearing stage but if you wanted to make an additional comment . Eric Rivkin: Okay. Would this be a good time or after you're done? 1 Mayor Chmiel: Well , either now or later. Whatever you feel comfortable with. If you'd like to wait for a little bit until we finish some more of this, that I'm at least addressing, then I can have you put something into it if you'd II like. Terry Forbord: Your Honor, members of the City Council. Terry Forbord with I Lundgren Bros. . Your Honor, one of the difficult aspects of the drainage issue or this drainage basin is that , how many acres of land Charles do you know that is part of the watershed that goes into that DNR wetland? Do you have any idea? II 18 II II City Council Meeting - October 28, 1991 Charles Folch: I don't have an exact number but it is a fairly significant area that does contribute. Terry Forbord: Is it maybe 100 acres? 200 acres? Charles Folch: I couldn't even venture a guess actually. Terry Forbord: Rick, would you know? Rick Sathre: Right now before development occurs, it's about 20 acres drains I into that basin. After development it will be about 25. Terry Forbord: Okay, but how much of the surrounding area that is off site? ' Rick Sathre: About 4 1/2 acres. Terry Forbord: Okay, so that ONR wetland I believe, are you saying that the ' watershed just for that wetland is just site specific because I don't believe that 's true. The point I'm making I think is that a large part , because a lot of the water flow comes down Lake Lucy Road, and that 's been addressed by staff. And the point is that I'm trying to make is that as much of the contamination or the nutrient loading that is in that pond has not come from the site. And the existing problem that has occurred prior to development, the contamination or what 's killed the wetland is not necessarily just from the site. And so obviously this wetland we believe shouldn't be treated any differently than any other wetland in the city. If a watershed, let 's say there's 60 acres or 100 acres that have contributed to the decline of this wetland, maybe the fair way to deal with that would be that whenever the City adopts their storm water plan, is that everyone within the drainage basin of a wetland is assessed for what they did to the wetland so it can be fixed. But for somebody new coming in to develop it to be required to fix what somebody did prior to us coming here, we don't think that 's really fair whether the problem exists or not because the problem was there long before Lundgren Bros. came and probably certainly longer than the people who have even lived there on the property because it 's not just their property that 's been loading the nutrients in there. It would be like if you had a little pond in the backyards of your homes and it was determined that the nutrient level was a little higher than what is probably perfect and that you were required to fix it and pay for it yourself when it was determined that a lot of people had watershed into that . What we've done is we've tried to find out what was wrong with it and then we've tried to figure out, being that a lot of it comes from off our site, how do we establish a mechanism to try and control it so it doesn't get any worse than it is. And the way I've been explained by our consultant is that over time through the continual flushing of this, that the water quality will improve. However, the sedimentation that is in the bottom that exists there now will probably stay for perpetuity and I'm not trying to suggest that it 's going to change that. But the point I'm trying to make is it really fair or equitable for us to repair damage that 's been done by all the neighbors who live in the area? We don't think that that 's really a fair situation and besides, we have not been given any indication by the ONR that they would allow us to do it . It 's a lengthy permit process and we don't -know if they'd even allow it . I 19 1 City Council Meeting - October 28, 1991 Councilman Wing: I guess I tend to agree with Lundgren Bros. only because if we're going to discuss water quality, and that 's our real issue and choose to raise it to protect it , then I guess we ought to be buying that parcel and turning it into an experiment on the park and guard the land around it because not only are 37 homes going to go in here, that's not going to improve water quality in my opinion. But there's property to the east and the west that is soon to be developed. We'll assume it and this little pond is in the middle of a very large area of development . Whether Lundgren Bros. increases that water quality or the properties on the east or west , we're going to be draining a lot of homes and pollutants in there whether we like it or not . So this wetland thing gets beyond me because you can't have a wetland and surround it with high density homes and people and improve water quality and go hand in hand. Mayor Chmiel: That 's very true. That was one of the other points I was going to make as well. . .because of movement within a particular area, the roadway ' itself is going to increase those concentrations of flourides and salts and oil from the roadway which is also going to be going in there. That I have some real concerns with as well. But it is, it 's a very complex situation and it seems to me that I like basically what 's being proposed. I'm not overly excited ' with total numbers of lots that are there but nonetheless the project doesn't seem that bad. I still have some real concerns within the areas of the Greenwood Shores area. Making sure that there is not flooding that takes place ' for those people. They've not really had that problem but is it going to increase it with additional flows or more water? That 's one of the other concerns that I still have with it . And if I could be assured that that's not ' going to cause that problem, then I think I'd go along with it because I was in the same particular position, and I mentioned this before when I lived in another city. Water came into the backyard and just kept coming and coming and coming until it got to the door. And it 's just because those concerns weren't ' taken into consideration at that time by the City and I guess I don't want to cause that problem for the people as well. I know what I went through. It's not a fun thing. I've seen those situations happen within our community here. ' The water has come into the back door and people have flooded because of some considerations were not given, Two, I don't know what the City's liabilities are on this. I don't know if you have any answer for that either. Because I ' want to make sure whatever happens that we're not going to cause an encumbrance on someone else's property and for them to have that right to come back against the City to make that correction of whatever it is. ' Roger Knutson: That isn't exactly what happens but generally when the City floods someone's property because of what they do, the City's responsible. . . ' Mayor Chmiel: That 's one of my other concerns. Councilman Wing: I kind of feel Mr. Mayor that in this case, having walked each of those yards, I'm assuming that the engineer, City and developer have reviewed that liability. It seems to me the very worst that could happen here is accelerate necessary evil. If the backyards and the basements are at or below the wetland level, there's going to be a problem. The houses are on substandard ' soils. In a drainage area. When I looked at them I was startled to see them there and then when I hear that a neighbor is blocking the outlet to boot , I sort of can't put a lot on Lundgren Bros. for this issue. I think they've been very responsible and responsive to that problem. And if there should 20 City Council Meeting - October 28, 1991 inadvertently beyond the engineer's control increase the flow rate, I think the City's going to have to acclerate a public works project that 's really in the light into doing anyway. I don't see that being avoidable. Hopefully not on my term on Council because I don't want to go through the assessment hearing but certainly a real likelihood I believe. Councilwoman Dimler: Yeah. I guess I wanted to, you know Richard and I were out there and that was the conclusion I came up with. Those people should have never built their homes there but we can't change that now. A former Council allowed them to do that and those are existing problems. I'm quite satisfied that this may not add to it and if it does, a lot of the neighbors felt that it would only be in the length of the duration that their property was wet . Not necessarily increased level that the water would come closer to their basements.. And I feel badly about having a wet yard for a longer period of time because they'd like to use their backyards too but again I think that this is too big of a problem that we can't expect them to fix it . The City has to fix that . 1 Roger Knutson: I should just point out that in our standard development contract we do provide that as a result of development of the property, other property is flooded or damaged or whatever, that the developer, in this case Lundgren Bros. would have to hold the City harmless. . . They're asking you to approve the project and if you decide yes. . . Councilwoman Dimler: Would they have to prove it 's as a result of their development? Roger Knutson: Sure. Councilwoman Dimler: Yeah. Councilman Workman: I'm ready to make a motion. Councilwoman Dimler: Can I just address one more? One more issue here. Real 1 quick. I'm going to put in a plug for why I believe we need the 3 trees. I agree with Tom that in general I wouldn't but since this is a PUD. When I went out and looked at it and saw that probably using the existing driveway and going towards the trees was the better proposal than filling in the wetland, although from my perspective as I get more enjoyment out of those trees when they turn color in the Fall than I would out of that little corner of the wetland that does absolutely nothing for me. However, the DNR has certain requirements for the wetland and they also have a tree preservation ordinance and I think in this case their own rules and regulations are giving us something that is probably less desireable but I'm not going to argue with that. I was told that we would lose some of the trees anyway even if we filled in the wetland so I didn't feel that we were saving significantly. Again I felt that because this is a PUD and the City should get something back for the removal of those trees that I would in this case support the 3 trees per lot . Mayor Chmiel: Okay, good. Councilman Wing: Do we have to do the individual motions? 1 21 1 1 city council fleeting uctober Z8, i` i Mayor Chmiel: Yes we have to do that but I did say to Eric that if he wanted to have something to say. Hopefully it 's not going to be a long discertation. Eric Rivkin: Response is based on what I've heard here and I have a couple of comments about some things that you've said. I like what I hear so far. From • what I'm hearing there's a lot of talk about water nutrients and water quality and that 's great to hear that . If the City really wants to put water quality in the front seat , it would make sure that water quality predictions are sound. This is most important since what I've heard is that the City's going to be left holding the bag is water quality decreases even over a 3 year period. And to determine whether or not this project will increase or decrease the water quality, you need a good base to start from. That includes water chemistry and bottom sediment data outlined in the PCA's Class 2B handbook for water quality parameters. I didn't see, get a chance to review the proposal as it has been revised up to this point but you know water quality experts will tell you that most of the nutrients that are tied up in a muck type of water basin are tied up ' in the muck. I'd like to see some kind of second opinion here as to what proportions are tied up in the muck and which is in the water and which is going to end up in the predicted water runoff. It's especially important . They should be measured, the certain water quality parameters we're talking about . The nitrogen. The nitrates. The bottom sediment data as well as the water quality from top to bottom and the vegetation. As you said, past history revealed that this body of water seemed to me more like a water filled cornfield than a real bonafide wetland that would cause it to be classified as an A type wetland. It seems to me since somebody put a dam over it, it 's an artificial wetland. Well you can do it artificially right or you can do it artificially wrong. I think we have a chance here to do it artificially right . If we're going to go ahead and approve it , I agree with what some of you have said and find out what proportion of nutrients are in the muck. If most of it's in there, the best chances Lake Lucy has, and I speak from Co-Chair of the Lake Lucy Homeowners Association. The best chances they have of keeping the water quality improved in all our watersheds and this particular watershed is to remove nutrients at the source. If they're in the muck, get the muck out . You ' have of course as you mentioned, some benefits to that . The water level stays the same and not jeopardize the roadbed and the 4 foot depth can be maintained without having to as well. I think this solution will be acceptable to the Lake ' •Association. I'm sure the DNR can be made to understand this approach because there's many similar statewide wetland re-creation projects that fall under the RIM program and about a dozen other kinds of programs that are funded by public ' monies. It 's possible that the developer wouldn't even have to or the City would not have to foot any of the bill at all to recreate this wetland. Or make it into a real good wetland. I think that should be looked at very seriously and maybe with a different tact . With this 3 year liability window. I don't ' think that 's enough. You could have 3 years of drought or 3 years of completely super wet years and really not tell much. I think you ought to go to 5 to 7 years on that . With regard to the tree replacement. Since you are removing valuable native trees, I talked to the, I think you should replace, the ' replacement condition should be of native species and the list is free of native species. They should not be exotic species. Anything over the 3 trees limit is ' up to the owner's discretion. I talked to Bonnie Harper Lohr who's a Resource Director of the National Resource Wildflower Center. She is really resource for the native plant information clearinghouse for this region of the country and she would recommend to the City, free of charge, any advice to lead to resources 1 22 1 City Council Meeting - October 28, 1991 - for the developer or to the City in this matter and what natural vegetation should be planted. Councilman Wing: That's been done. It's part of the Landscape Ordinance. The University of Minnesota Arboretum supplied a native tree list . Specimen trees on down through hardwoods. Eric Rivkin: This could be listed then in the conditions. And I didn't review whether or not there would be any wetlands being filled in for lots but true to Mr. Forbord's statements in one of the first presentations he made back in July that they're not shoe horning in houses just for the sake of, without sacrificing wetlands, I believe true to that statement that there should be no lots or houses permitted to be filled. Wetlands filled just for putting in houses. I think they'll be making plenty of money without having to do that . Thank you very much. Mayor Chmiel: Anyone else? Any other discussion? Councilman Workman: Well Don you know, we've talked about this an awful long time and I think we've talked about this issue it seems like longer than any other development we've talked about all because there's this pond in the middle of it . I think we can sometimes get so extreme that it does, and maybe we're not as advanced in the treatment of wetlands. I think we are, I think the City is above it . Ahead of it 's time in sensitivity to these issues and I think that 's why it 's taken so long. I think there can be a point where we get so extreme that it becomes almost impossible to develop this site. I'm afraid that 's kind of where we're getting to the point where if I had to concern myself with every snail in this pond, I would sleep at night and there's going to be a few trees knocked over and there's probably going to be some impact to the pond. I think the sooner we get it over with the better because it's going to happen here sooner or later. I don't know how much more advance the City needs to be and I think we're learning and growing with the rest of the world on how to do this. I Mayor Chrniel : I guess I have just those kinds of concerns yet . The density within this bothers me and that has some of my concerns. Putting in this development , is it the best thing for the City? What are we really getting from it and I haven't really found out what are we getting from this? Or would it be best to have those two individual property owners develop it accordingly to how they'd like to see them and do something as they so choose as well. I think working with Lundgren Bros. is a lot simpler because they know what they're doing and they do stand behind what they've done. I'm not trying to talk out of both sides of my mouth but I still have those concerns. Is this going to be the best thing for us and what are we getting from this? Maybe Paul can tell me. Councilman Workman: I guess I don't know that we're always trying to, we stamp PUD on it and then what are they going to give us? Well I think they're going to give us a nice development and some more tax base. I'm building a home currently in a PUD and I have probably one of the larger lots and I don't think it makes 15,000 square feet . The upland areas on these, if they're correct, I don't know what the average is but I mean it looks like it 's probably around 17, 16, maybe higher. Just on the average so there's some rather large ones. That doesn't say anything about what the lot areas south of the pond and everything , 23 , I L1ly I.OUIHGll neeting - ucLOOer CO, 1771 IIelse. I guess I just feel like we're getting down to, like I said before, we're getting down to additional quaking aspen clumps and things that I know that this II developer wants to take care of. I think we have plenty of examples from this developer about how they choose to do things. I don't think he's ignored, they have ignored either the wetland issues or the neighboring or surrounding areas. I think the City's full, or there's a whole area that 's full of how they've done II that and it does look nice I think. I just think we've gone on and on here and I think with the proper securities like protecting the road into the future. I don't know how long that should be done but if we can protect the neighbors to II the south of the wetland or high water conditions, I think we've done that with other neighborhoods and we can protect the road with security, I don't see what other. 1 Mayor Chmiel: If we had that hold harmless clause in there. I don't want this to be put back onto the City. I think if we have that hold harmless clause contained in there, then I'd feel a lot more comfortable with it as well. II Councilman Workman: Well, we've got an engineering staff that's supposed to tell us whether there's going to be a wetland or a water problem downstream I Iwould assume based on the. . . Mayor Chmiel: You may have a 100 year flood or 1,000 year flood such as is happening all over and that 's what I'm concerned about. And that 's what we II still have to address. And to come up with that , sure they can do the calculations and come up with it but is it going to eliminate the problem. II Councilman Workman: I don't think anybody's got assurances against 1,000 year floods. That I know of. I'd like to. Mayor Chmiel: Have your rowboat ready. I Councilman Workman: I'll run that insurance company. IICouncilman Wing: But there's no controls now. Councilman Workman: I know what you're saying.' I'm saying if we get the proper 1 securities in there, then there's no problem. I just think we're kind of going on with this thing and when we're trying to get somthing from the developer, I mean they've. He. Terry Lundgren. I think they've provided. I don't know how II many developers show up with a hydrologist and I think they've gone and tried to provide for us maybe some unique ways of handling this thing but I think what we're getting from them. This is not that pretty of an area or wetland right now. This is not . IICouncilman Wing: Whoa. IMayor Chmiel: Eyes of the beholder. Councilman Workman: I mean it's a lowland. A wetland that I've driven by for 4 years that until this year has been a mucky, duck weed infested whatever. I did I pick up a big mud turtle and throw it back in there one day off the road. But groceries were tight . I thought about bringing it home. But this is a unique area and that 's why it 's a PUD. That's why the lots are changing. I just think 11 24 City Council Meeting - October 28, 1991 we've gone on and we're probably going to go on until midnight tonight talking about some of these points. Let 's either defeat them or get on with them because I think we've spent so much time on this it 's gotten. Councilwoman Dimler : I do think we should take it point by point though because I hear many different things. I Mayor Chmiel : Yeah, and I agree. I think what we should do is go through the process of this and take each one separately making sure that everything that's contained in here is as to what the Council is looking for. Let's take that one by one. The rezoning portion. And if there's anything in addition to what you see or what should be there, this is the time to put it in. Councilman Workman: Can I make a motion to approve the rezoning? Mayor Chmiel ' Certainly. I Councilman Wing: I'll second that . Mayor Chmiel: It 's been moved and seconded for the rezoning portion. Any diacuEsion? Councilwoman Dimler: Where should the concern that you had with the disclaimer go'' Should that go under here? Mayor Chmiel : That will be in the contract itself. ' Councilwoman Dimler: Good. So yeah. I'm fine with the PUD. Roger Kriutccn: The one subject to the conditions set forth in the planning ' report? Mayor Chmiel: Yeah. Each of those are contained within. Okay, we have a I motion on the floor with a second for the recommendation of approving the . rezoning. And that contains each of the three items as indicated in the staff report . ' r Councilman Workman moved, Councilman Wing seconded to approve Rezoning #91-2 property zoned RSF and RR to PUD-R with the following conditions: 1. The applicant shall enter into a Planned Unit Development Agreement containing all of the conditions of approval for this project and shall submit all required financial guarantees. The PUD Agreement shall be recorded against the property. 2. Compliance with setback standards established in the Compliance Table. ' 3. The applicant shall meet all conditions of the Subdivision #91-9 and Wetland Alteration Permit #91-4. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously. Mayor Chmiel : Preliminary plat . I 25 1 I City Council Meeting - October 26, 1991 II Councilman Mason: What about number 1? The parking. It 's a biggee in here 11 isn't it ? I mean the 26 foot . Mayor Chmiel: Well it 's either 26 or 28. IICouncilman Wing: I would propose the 26 with no parking signs posted on one side. II Mayor Chmiel: Can I just inject something on that? With no parking signs on one side. Of course this is not going to just have them in and out . It 's not going to be connected to anything that we're aware of at this time. The only II concerns I have about that is with children within the area. And you're going to have a sidewalk. But still when kids play there's not a place for them to play. Lot depths is not going to be there because of the wetland. So II consequently they're going to be out there playing in that street . From a safety aspect is 26 sufficient? And I guess I'm just throwing this out for discussion more than anything else. I'm not comfortable with that . Where do the kids go? ICouncilwoman Dimler: I have a question too and I don't know if this is even, will the curb be surmountable or insurmountable because that makes a lot of II difference on the parking. If it 's surmountable the car can kind of pull up onto the grass a little bit and provide more passage. If it's not surmountable, that makes a huge difference because now Frontier Trail is not surmountable. When people park there I notice a decrease in the road width even though we I widened it . Charles Folch: Our standard includes surmountable. However, I believe from the IIsection that was supplied by the developer, they are proposing a barrier type curb. Correct me if I'm wrong on that Rick. II Rick Sathre: We're proposing surmountable. Charles Folch: Okay. It 's shown on. II Councilwoman Dimler: It would be surmountable? That 's better. Rick Sathre: Because we don't know where the driveways will be. . . II Terry Forbord: I just have one comment . Terry Forbord with Lundgren Bros. . I do not know which way the Council is going with this but I thought it might , at I least appear fruitful. Lundgren Bros. , or home buyers that would like to live in our neighborhoods based upon surveys that we take of everybody that comes through. If the Council desires to have a 26 foot wide street and a sidewalk, then we would rather go to the full sized street and not have the sidewalk II because our home buyers do not want sidewalks on their property. They don't want to maintain them. They don't want to be assessed to replace them. And so I'm not sure where you're going with that but I did want to let you know that 1 because this is something that we've probably talked about before. Our home buyers do not want to have them. So I wanted to let you know that . If you're thinking of putting the sidewalk in, we'd rather have the wider street. IICouncilman Workman: Terry, could you stay there? 1 26 II City Council Meeting - October 28, 1991 I Terry Forbord: Yes sir. Mayor Chmiel: Just a second. I'd like to have Paul respond. 1 Paul Krauss: I guess I'd like to get a clarification. . .26 foot in the most critical sections where we need to put the road between environmentall sensitive areas. Sc those areas we've got a sidewalk. . . There's no other sidewalk we propose here. I heard one of the options was going 26 foot throughout . Possibly putting a sidewalk or possibly. . . The other alternative is to go the full width street . But even if we go with a full width street , we still. . .26 foot sections in those environmentally sensitive areas. . . Terry Forbord: We wouldn't be opposed to what staff is recommending but I did hear some other comment of a 26 foot street width. A circuitous sidewalk through the entire. Mayor Chmiel : As it reads here, it 's a 6 foot wide concrete sidewalk shall be provided over the boulevard in the staff recommendations. That 's item 1 under preliminary plat . I Paul Krauss: We should clarify that because in the text you find that only occurs where we've narrowed the road width down. So yes it is where the street is narrow. ' Terry Forbord: Counseler, did you have a question? Councilman Workman: No. I just throught if we're going to go through these indi,,iduall;', it might be easier for you to address them as we go through. Maycr Chmiel: Okay. Councilwoman Dimler: I guess my other comment would be, I agree with the Mayor that we're no+ talking about big back yards here. We're not and what is, a lot of it is wetland. I don't think kids play in wetlands. I don't know, maybe ttv ,' do bu4 it 's a danger . We're also talking about not having a park. So where do the kids go to play in the street . ' Mayor Chmiel: Across the street . Councilman Wing: The same as Lake Lucy, Nez Perce, Minnewashta Heights. ' Mayor Chmiel: It goes down to Greenwood Shores Park. Councilwoman Dimler: Those are wider roads. Councilman Mason: But now Nez Perce, Carver Beach, that area is now only 26 feet . Mayor Chmiel: That 's the problem within that area. They've lived with it too long and that 's one of my concerns. Councilwoman Dimler: That 's something we can avoid here. That was something done in the past . 27 I City Council Meeting - October 28, 1991 Councilman Wing: Is there anyway to poll the Council on this issue? If the majoity says 28` let 's move on. Mayor Chmiel : That 's the point I'm saying. Councilman Workman: I would so move ' Councilwoman Dimler: I would be in favor of 28, without a sidewalk. Councilman Mason: So condition number 1 as it stands then? Councilwoman Dimler : No. -- Mayor Chmiel : Condition 1 with the 28 foot wide road without a sidewalk. Councilman Mason: Without a sidewalk except in these particular areas? Paul Krauss: Condition l' ' -the way it is right now because the way it is right now, we have a full width street everyplace except those two areas where the curve is. Mayor Chmiel: Okay. ~~ Councilwoman Dimler : Oh, you're saying only where it 's reduced to 26 and it 's 28 everywhere else. Paul Krauss: So that condition is correct and it reflects what you. Councilwoman Dimler: Does it make sense to have just small sections of sideualka? Paul Xrauc»: That was always the diaouoaion' . .They"re around tight curves and it ma�ea i4 somewhat unique. . . . . Councilman Mason: But hey. If I'm a 9 year old kid and I'm walking down the street , I'm not going to hop on the sidewalk. You know. Paul Krause : ' ' 'where that tight curve goes around the Ersbo property, a sidewalk is kind of neat because it drops down. . . -- Mayor Chmiel: I see that on Laredo right now. The sidewalk is there. Councilman Workman: But the sidewalk would be on the wetlands side? Mayor Chmiel: Yeah, but kids are on the street rather than the sidewalk as well. Councilman Workman: But I thought we were narrowing it to 26 feet because of the sensitivity to the wetland? Mayor Chmiel: Right . Jo Ann Olsen: And the boulevard. 28 City Council Meeting - October 28, 1991 Paul Krauss: ' ' See you're not putting the sidewalk in the same elevation as the street . It 's going to come down the side slope. . . Mayor Chmiel: Contours within the respective area is what you're saying is happening. Okay. So does everybody feel comfortable with it? Councilman Workman: Not yet . So I guess I don't understand. So we're going_ from 28 with it reduced to 26 feet and 6 foot wide concrete sidewalk in the areas where it 's 26 feet? I Jo Ann Olsen: Right . Councilwoman Dimler: Yes. 1 Councilman Workman: I guess I don't see where we're gaining anything with that . Councilman Mason: Well isn't the whole point those are sharp curves? There will be access, to get onto the sidewalks there. That 's fine. Mayor Chmiel : You don't have any drawings showing anything like that? ' Paul Krauss made a statement that wasn't picked up on the microphone. Mayor Chmiel: Alright . Because I see some confusion here and not really understanding. Paul Kraur� : It did work and it did work without impacting the wetland. The r critical thiig was with that full 28 foot boulevard, you can't do your side slope grading and you wind up pushing dirt into the wetland. The 26. . . further down t h(i, slope and it fits. Councilman Mason: With the sidewalk will there be an access to get onto the sidewalk or are they going to have to hop the curb with their strollers? Paul Krauss : Well it . . .around the curve. Mayor Chmiel: It 's right there. Right adjacent . 1 Councilwoman Dimler : Okay, so I move approval of condition 1 as is. Mayor Chmiel: Okay. 2. Revise landscape plan. Councilman Workman: Are we going to vote on these separately? Mayor Chmiel: I think you should go through them. If what you suggested at the time, we'll be here all night . I don't see any problems with some of the ones we have here. 5 was that the applicant shall enter into a development contract and provide necessary financial security, which we had some concerns with. Councilman Wing: Mr. Mayor, number 4. Did you decide to go with the raised level? 1 29 II ' I City Council Meeting - October 28, 1991 Councilwoman Dimler: That 's why I think we should go with. I heard different ' things from different people. Mayor Chmiel: Each one that you have a concern with is the one that you pull off and address. Those that you have a concern on, and I'm sure you've looked at this. Just take each one that you have concern with and address it and then go from there. t Councilwoman Dimler: Mr. Mayor, I move approval of condition 2(a), (b), (c), (d) and (e) . ' Councilman Wing: Second. Councilman Workman: For discussion. I guess I would. ' Mayor Chmiel: Let 's go through all of these and then we'll get done and approve it with what has been added. Isn't that right Roger? We don't have to go through each individually. Tom. ' Councilman Workman` I guess maybe with 2(d) , the 2 trees. I guess again you've heard my discussions on that . Mayor Chmiel: Yeah, except in this particular location with removal of the trees that will be going, to make up for the loss of those. You get the 37 at 3, that brings you. . . ' Councilman Workman: I guess my point here is, it 's a development and to develop. Mayor Chmiel : That 's one of the pluses you get out of a PUD then. ' Councilman Workman: I will vote against it . _ Council_man .Wirg: I'm going to vote for it Mr. Mayor. Councilwoman Dimler: I'm going to vote for it . Councilman Wing: Thank you. Councilman Mason: I'm going to vote for it . Mayor Chmiel: Me too. Councilman Wind: Any other discussion Mr. Workman? ' Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Let's keep going with it or we're going to be here all night . Item 3? ' Councilwoman Dimler: Approved. Mayor Chmiel: Okay, item 4. Someone had some concerns with this. Dick, you did? 1 1 30 City Council Meeting - October 28, 1991 Councilman Wing: Well I'm relying on staff. I think I heard the Council being content with the higher water level here. If it ever attains that level so I would favor raising it if Charles would approve that recommendation to Council. Mayor Chmiel: Charles. Charles Folch: Well, as you mentioned before. I guess if I had my true choice 11 it would be to lower the, given the constraints with the road would be to lower. Actually to dredge the pond but if that 's not really something that would be feasible of going through the permit process with the 0NR, the next best thing I guess in order to achieve the water quality aspects that they're trying to do here which I think are a good idea, is to raise a level to what they ,need. But we should protect the road with some financial guarantee if we're going to do that . Mayor Chmiel : Yeah, and I don't disagree with that . ' Councilwoman Dimler : Okay. Shall we change that period of 3 years to 5 or 7? Councilman Mason: I certainly wouldn't want to go any longer than 5. Coun_ilworra.n Dimler: 5. Mayor Chmiel : Yeah, I think 5 would probably be sufficient . If you're going to see something that 's going to take place by that particular time. Unless it 's a dry period of time. Cc,:neilwoman Dicier: And who determines the amount of financial security? Mayor Chmiel That 's determined by staff what that should be. That should be 1 their responsibility. Okay? Councilman Mason: So we're at 975.5 then? ' Mayor Chmiel : We're at 975.5. Normal water level. Paul Krauss: That should go up to. . . , Councilwoman Dimler : 976.5. Councilman Mason: Right . Mayor Chmiel: Okay. 5. I don't see any problem. 6. I don't see any problem. 7. Don't sec any problem. 8. Those all look like they're in our interest . All the way through (h). Number 9. I don't find that as any problem. 10. Councilwoman Dimler: No problem. , Terry Forbord: Mr. Mayor? Mayor Chmiel: Yes. 31 ' City Council Meeting - October 28, 1991 Terry Forbord: I have a question about number 10. 10 foot clear space around fire hydrants. If that 's a 36 inch oak tree, would you like us to remove it? I'm just curious. Mayor Chmiel: I think you know the answer. 1 Terry Forbord: But I mean. ' Councilwoman Dimler: Place it where it doesn't . Terry Forbord: So it 's our understanding for the record that you would like us to put the fire hydrants in a location approved by the Fire Marshall however that would be sensitive to the existing conditions? Mayor Chmiel: Charles, are there any concerns or problems as far as rooting of ' those trees and what problems they can cause to those hydrants? Of course you have it all over anyway so if they're down deep enough, that shouldn't be a problem should it? ' Charles Folch: No. Typically where you do have your problems is after the line is in and you plant a new tree above it and the roots then migrate down and put pressure on it . 1 Mayor Chmiel : Okay. 11. 12. 13. The outlet at the south end of the Class A weltand. I don't see that as a problem. 14. Councilwoman Dimler: Do you want to put in there at the cost of the developer? Or is that understood? ' Mayor Chmiel : Yeah, that 's the norm. Okay, so we've gone through 1 thru 14 with revisior,. 1 Councilwoman Dimler: Did you want to add a condition 15 here then for that? Mayor Chmiel For what? ' Councilwoman Dimler : That other one that we were talking about . Mayor Chmiel : The hold harmless? ' Councilwoman Dimler : Yeah, the hold harmless. ' Mayor Chmiel: That 's going to be contained within the contract in itself. So that 's not necessary here. Councilwoman Dimler: Oh, we don't have to approve that . Okay. ' Councilman Wing: I would make the motion then approving Subdivision #91-9 as shown with I believe the only change was in item 4 allowing the level to raise to 976.5. Councilwoman Dimler: And for 5 years instead of 3 in the financial security. 1 32 1 City Council Meeting -- October 28, 1991 Councilman Wing: That 's right . Councilwoman Dimler: I move approval of 2. No 3. Well whatever. 1 Mayor Chmiel: 4. 4 with those respective changes. Okay. But I still need the full approval in acceptance of the balance of what 's here with those additions to it . There's a motion on the floor . Was there a second? Councilman Mason. Second. Councilman Wing moved, Councilman Mason seconded to approve Subdivision 191-9 as shown on the plans dated July 29, 1991 and subject to the following conditions: 1. Where the proposed street is reduced to 26 feet , there shall be "no parking" signs posted and a 6 foot wide concrete sidewalk shall be provided over the boulevard. The sharp curves located in the loop street shall be limited to a 10 mph speed limit and shall have "sharp curve" signage. 2. A revised landscaping plan shall be submitted providing the following: a. Our additional quaking aspen clump shall be provided directly north of the Class A wetland and east of the proposed quaking aspen clumps. b. Landscaping, acceptable to staff, shall be added to the area between the public road and the Class A wetland. c. The berm and landscaping on Lot 1, Block 2 shall be extended to the , edge of the wetland and the westerly access area directly north of the proposed pond area shall have increased landscaping to replace existing vegetation that is being removed, if appropriate. ' d. Three trees (2 hardwoods and 1 evergreen or ornamental) shall be required per lot . (Credit for each tree over 6 inches in caliper on the lot shall be granted. For the lot however, a minimum of 1 tree per lot shall be provided. e. A landscaped berm shall be provided on the north right-of-way Lake Lucy Road across from the westerly access to provide screening from traffic to existing homes. 3. The applicant shall submit a comprehensive drainage and erosion control plan prior to final plat review. Wood fiber blankets shall be required for all slopes steeper than 3:1. 4 . Drainage plans are to be revised as recommended by staff. Calculations shall be provided demonstrating that the revised Walker Ponds are sufficiently sized to provide acceptable nutrient removal. Drainage calculations must be provided demonstrating that runoff from the site maintains predevelopment rates. The applicant shall submit final road, drainage and utility plans and specifications for review prior to final plat review. The normal water level in the DNR wetland lying south of Lake Lucy Road should be maintained at a level not to exceed 976.5. Should a higher normal water level be approved, the applicant shall provide 33 City Council Meeting - October 28, 1991 appropriate financial security for a, period of five (5) years to repay any related damage to Lake Lucy Road. In addition, the downstream control ' structure shall be of the type to allow manual control of the water level, should the need arise. The developer shall modify the existing storm sewer outlet/inlet , located on the south side of Lake Lucy Road, to become a ' flood control structure constructed at the 100 year flood elevation. The proposed development will not increase off-site drainage to surrounding properties. 5. The applicant shall enter into a development contract and provide the necessary financial security. ' 6. The applicant shall acquire all necessary agency permits. 7. The applicant shall provide full park and trail fees in lieu of land dedication and trail construction. 8. Provide the following easements: ' a. Dedication of all street right-of--way. b. Conservation and drainage easements over all protected wetland and ' ponding areas. c . F.c.cess easements as required to service the "Walker Ponds" . d. Utility easements over all sewer, water and storm sewer lines located outside public right-of-way. ' e. Conservation easements over all designated tree preservation areas. f. Standard drainage and utility easements. 1 g. Provide a conservation easement over all established wetland buffer areas. Such easements shall be marked with permanent visible monuments ' • and the location of such easements shall be provided to city staff for approval. h. The final plat shall convey an additional seven feet of right-of-way on ' the south side of Lake Lucy Road to provide the total width of 40 feet lying south of the centerline. ' 9. The applicant shall indicate the allowable type of dwelling, the house pads and the lowest floor elevation on the grading plan. ' 10. The existing hydrant between Lots 2 and 3, Block 1 shall be relocated 75 feet to the south. The Fire Department must approve street names and a 10 foot clear space must be provided around fire hydrants. Additional hydrant" are needed at the intersections of Lake Lucy Road and the proposed ' public road. 11. The applicant shall meet all conditions of the Wetland Alteration Permit ' #91- 4 and Rezoning #91-2. ' 34 City Council Meeting - October 288, 1991 12. The applicant shall provide propoer restrictions (subject to city staff approval ) on those lots having entrance monuments and/or landscaping. 13. The outlet on the south end of the Class A wetland shall be a variable crest structure with stop logs and adequate outlet channel to allow the draw down of water levels to or below present outlet elevation (974.5' ). The developer be required to remove existing purple loosestrife from the basin and to monitor those sites and sites distrubed by construction for loosestrife invasion. 14. Municipal sanitary sewer and water service should be extended easterly to 11 the west line of the Ravis parcel and sanitary sewer shall be extended to the Coey property. i All voted in favor except Councilman Workman who opposed and the motion carried with a vote of 4 to 1. Councilman Workman: And the reason I am is because the developers aren't going to pay for any of this stuff. Trees, water . Mayor Chnicl : Property owner will . Councilman Workman: Property owner and the- future neighbors are going to pay for this . Mr . Mayor, if Mr. Workman's going to continue on this Coun._1T12r, W n�, anti-tree state based on bottom line dollars, then I'm really upset that we're 11 requirf-,c 1 tree. But more important , there are ways without impacting the buyer . M, intent with this whole tree issue to begin with was that it would impact ac minimally as possible. Wholesale. Retail hurts the buyer. No question about that . There are ways to go about this wholesale where the developer has to provide chitz for a nursery. Pick up x trees. $1,500.00 for three trees in 1 year or 2 years or 5 years. I couldn't put in a tree right now if I had to with 3 kids in .college. But if I could get 3 chitz up front on a development that allowed me to go to a nursery and pick up those 3 trees and put it on a 30 year mortgage, I'd approve that . I have got some comments if this is going to continue. And Mr. Workman's got some very valid points and I don't want to in any way put Tom down for his comments but the best time to plant a tree was 20 years ago and I'm really environmentally concerned and I think my position has some validity here. ' Councilman Workman: Well, I voted against it so I could state why I didn't and I did and I think my points are valid. It 's not just the trees. It 's every little thing that goes in for developers. We need to keep an eye on developers because there's bad developers out there. I don't consider Lundgren Bros. to be one of them. They could end up to be on this project . I don't like the tone that the city sets for not only the developer of a parcel but people who are going to move into the parcel. When we start discussing where a skateboarder's going to play and I think what we're doing is we're starting to get too far into the process and we're worrying ourselves with things that are going to work themselves out naturally. Whether it 's planning bushes or trees or where a kid's going to plan on their 20,000 square foot lot or other. I don't think that kind of stuff is really our concern to an extent . The safety of new 35 • City Council Meeting - October 28, 1991 residents obviously is. But a yard is a yard is a yard and so they're going to have to figure that out . And I just , I love trees and I'll say it again and III'll say it again but it does put another burden and the Mayor told me that he talked with somebody that had a quarter million dollar home and he made a comment that that tree thing tipped him over the edge. It can do that and I II just don't like the tone that we set that Chanhassen's going to be exclusive and if you can't afford to play here then get out . It 's not something we want to yell too loudly. II Mayor Chmiel: I think the point being here Tom, again as I mentioned before, this is a PUG. I don't think this goes for every other place that gets a new home going into the city of Chanhassen. This is something that we're able to II get by having 3 trees within each of those lots and that 's one of the pluses we get as a city. II Councilman Workman: But the developer , he's obtaining the PUD. He's not paying for those trees. IIMayor Chmiel : That 's right . I'll agree. Councilman Wing: It 's a difficult issue and I think we should address it . I Mayor Chmiel : Well unless you'd like to change the motion and say that the developer is responsible for putting 3 trees in each of those lots? I don't think you want to do that either. II Councilman Wing: But I think that needs to be addressed. Even if we. . . Mr. Mayor , I think that 1 tree should be addressed at that level because if we're that worried about the bottom line, that 's $250.00 may break someone's IIback. I believe that should be with the developer. For future discussions. Mayor Chmicl : If you have someone that feels strong enough to make that into a IImotion, we still have a position before we move on to the wetland. Councilwoman Dimler: When I ask about condition 14 at the cost of the I developer, it was assumed. I just assumed that (d). 2(d) was also at the cost of the developer. Mayor Chmiel: Well of course they have different ways of covering that Ursula and when you purchase a lot , the cost is there. Councilwoman Dimler: That 's why I voted for it . IMayor Chmiel : So if there is no other motion. There's no other discussion on it . We have accepted the item 1 thru 14 under the preliminary plat . We voted I on that . Move on to the wetland alteration permit . All wetland areas protected during construction with Type II erosion control. That 's fine. 2, I don't see any problem. 3, I don't see any problem. 4, the Walker Ponds that will go in. Does anyone have any concerns with that? 5, with the permits from DNR and Corps IIof Engineers. 6, all conditions of the subdivision. Any discussion? Councilman Mason: Number 2. Where was the figure of 10 feet picked out for the II buffer strip there? How was that arrived there? II 36 II City Council Meeting - October 28, 1991 I Paul Krauss: During the weigh out of the plat . . .shows a variable buffer strip. . . Councilman Mason: Okay, how was 10 feet decided upon though? I mean as opposed to 5 feet or 20 feet . Jo Ann Olsen: It was proposed by the applicant . Paul Krauss: Based upon the recommendation of the Wildlife Biologist . . .visit the area. . .to provide additional protection for water quality. . . Councilman Mason: Right and I understand that . I'm not going to argue whether it should be 5 feet , 10 feet or 20 feet tonight but I do have a concern in the future, I wonder if we do at some point need to get second opinions on things like this. Terry Forbord: Your Honor? I think I could probably easily answer that I question. That 's a good question. When we were looking at this, we were working with staff and staff had come to us and said we have a concern on that there isn't a universal agreement from the way I understand it. There is no set number that if you're this far from a wetland you have the perfect situation because a lot of, I think I talked about this before is determined by what is between the wetland and the structure. The slope, etc. . And so being that there was no perfect science to this, what we've tried to do is we went out on our own to come up with a minimum. Now how did we get the 10 feet? If you look at the wetland like Paul described, it meanders all over. The closest , the very closest point on the entire site that have our setbacks so we did have backyards and by the way, there are backyard spaces on these homes. We're not going to have decks right up to a preservation area. We have sized each lot for the largest home that Lundgren builds in it 's repertoire. Okay? We don't do it the other way. And there was one or two places in the entire development on all 37 lots that where the very closest part to a portion of the wetland., or excuse me the preservation zone to the wetland was 10 feet . And so that 's where we came up with that number. Now there is no scientific evidence that says well 5 feet 's better or 40 feet's- better but I believe there's maybe 2 lots. And I'm not talking the whole lot . I'm talking maybe where for 10 feet the preservation zone is only 10 feet but then it will expand and get wider . So we decided that we had to come up with a measurement for the city so we could put it in that table that staff worked on. The majority, the vast majority are greater than that . Some of them I think are as high as, pardon me. Oh they're even more than some of them. I know some of them are, on some of those longer lots that are around the west side. So that 's how we came up with that. We thought we should have a minimum and it was our suggestion. , Mayor Chmiel: I like some of the things you said but also you mentioned the fact of decks. Hopefully when these homes go in there's going to be sufficient amount of depth to the wetland so those decks can go in without them having to come in here for variances. Terry Forbord: Ursula and I spoke, excuse me. Counciler Dimler and I spoke ' about that and we realized that the City oftentimes is put in a compromising position where a future home buyer. Maybe not the initial home buyer but a future home buyer comes in and says well nobody told me so. That 's a difficult ' 37 City Council Meeting - October 28, 1991 IIsituation that I see oftentimes when I'm in the audience at various Council meetings. Unfortunately the Council is in a position where they have to deal 1 with these things. I'm not sure if that will ever change ever . I think the Council in every city is going to be in a position where people come in with variances and periodically they're going to say well nobody told me that I I couldn't do this. What we do when we design our neighborhoods is that we design . them, the homes are what we call the building envelope. That 's what we call them. We design the envelope to accommodate decks and to accommodate a three season porch under what are normal situations. Now that doesn't preclude a I future home buyer coming in and saying well geez I'm going to take the window out on the side of my house and put in a patio door and then want to put a deck on the side of my house because that could happen maybe 20 years from now and I they go to City Hall and say well geez, you're not supposed to put it on the side of your house. You're supposed to put it on the back of your house. Well those are the things that Councils typically end up having to deal with. See we 1 can't do that . So it 's impossible to design a buiding envelope for every possible situation, whether it be a swimming pool or something like that . It's literally impossible. However, we do size all of our envelopes for the largest home that we have in our repertoire of particular product line at that time. I Mayor Chmiel: Any other discussion? If not , let 's call a question. All those in favor. ICouncilwoman Dimler: Do you want me to make a motion? Mayor Chmiel: I thought we had one. IICouncilwoman Dimler : Did we? IIMayor Chmiel : No. Councilwoman Dimler: Okay. I move approval of the wetland alteration permit II #91-4 as shown on the plans dated July 29, 1991 with the following conditions 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6. Councilman Mason: Second. IIMayor Chmiel: It 's been moved and seconded. Any other discussion? IICouncilwoman Dimler moved, Councilman Mason seconded to approve Wetland Alteration Permit #91-4 as shown on the plans dated July 29, 1991 with the following conditions: II1. All wetland areas will be protected during construction by Type III erosion control. The erosion control shall be maintained in good condition until the disturbed areas are stabilized. I2. The proposed wetland setbacks and buffer strip shown in the compliance table for each lot will be recorded as part of the PUD agreement . No wetland I setback less than 40 feet will be permitted and the buffer strip may not be less than 10 feet wide. The buffer strip will be preserved by an easement . II 38 I II City Council Meeting - October 28, 1991 3. Alteration to the wetlands must occur when it results in the least impact to the wetland and not during the migratory waterfowl breeding season. , 4. The "Walker Pond" and wildlife wetland areas must be designed to the standards proposed in the applicant 's submittal packet dated July 30, 1991. 5. The applicant shall receive permits from the DNR and Corps of Engineers. 6. The applicant shall meet all conditions of the Subdivision #91--9 and , Rezoning 491-2. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously. I Counci] man Win,: Mr . Mayor? Can I just make a quick addendum comment on this? Mayor Chmiel: Yeah. I just wanted to mention something too Richard. The , reason I went through each of these as we did, it took a little more time. This is a number one for us within the city and I wanted to make sure we were going to follow accordingly to make sure we're going to get exactly what we were to get with this. Making also sure that each of the conditions were described as such and having the developer live up to that particular. So with that I think that that pretty much takes care of this particular item and we'll move on. Terry Forbord: Thank you Your Honor . I'd like to thank staff. The engineering department an the planning department for their cooperation with us in trying to help uc solve many of the problems that we were faced with with this proposal . CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AMENDMENT REGARDING THE FENCE SCREENING HEIGHT FROM 8 FEET TO 15 FEET, 7851 PARK DRIVE, LAKESHORE EQUIPMENT, STEVEN WILLETTE. Paul Krause: This has come up before you a couple times and it 's been kicked around in the city for almost a year now between Planning Commission and Council . I think you're all familiar with this so I'll skip the background. The las time it was on your agenda there was a desire to go out . . .some folks from the Council went out with staff to meet with Mr. Willette at the site and try and work out an accommodation that everybody could live with. One rainy day in September or August we did get out there and look at the site. . . .letter to Mr. Willette September 13 outlining the conditions that would be. . . Basically the fence section as it faces the public right-of-way to the west would be allowed to remain the full height . It was a well designed section that looked good and was screened from the lot . Around the south and east sides it was going to be requested that that top section of fence be removed. There were some other conditions that I put in that letter to Mr. Willette. I did ask him to take down the section of fence that . . . It looks like; I've not been out there. . .but I heard it was taken down several weeks ago. Mayor Chmiel: Yes. Two different sections. Paul Krauss: So what we're coming before you tonight with is --to resolve this matter. Hopefully finally resolve it and to go with a recommendation that basically consisted with the, I believe the understandings that we developed on the site that day. 39 City Council Meeting - October 28, 1991 Mayor Chmiel: Very good. Steve. You had an opportunity to review the comments that Paul indicated? Why don't you come on up here. Steve Willette: Yes I have. The only thing that I see as far as the fence goes ' is that if we go from vertical to horizontal it 's not going to look very good and in my best interest I'm better off taking the lower boards and dropping down the vertical part so the fence all looks alike and it holds to it all the way around instead of it looking hodge podge like I just threw some boards on the side over on the south side and on the east side. And the fence right now to the west is higher than 8 feet . We do have to try to conform to the contour of the land a little bit so what I would like is a little bit of flexibility there to make it look appropriate. Maybe 10 feet . I just want to reiterate for everybody's knowledge, if I do go down to those heights that you will be able to see in from the highway because of the difference in the elevations as well as I I will conform to the 8 foot . Stacking of docks no higher than 8 feet. You will be able to see some of them. I guess it 's not much different than the lumber yard down here or anything else so I do want it to look nice. And as far as replacement of the trees that I had in there, I don't see any problem with that . As far as the other landscaping that was proposed, when the height of the fence was going to be at 15 feet , I do not feel that is necessary if we drop the height down to 8 feet because I've already got more landscaping in there than ' what was required by when we went through the initial building process. Mayor Chmiel: That 's where you come from your approach right at your parking area? Steve Willette: Right . Well, the additional landscaping was going to be to the south and to the east when the height was at 15 feet . I don't see a need for ' vines and everything on the fence and all kinds of additional landscaping. I do have a few trees that did die and I do feel that those should be replaced. IMayor Chmiel: Okay. Thank you. Any discussion? We'll start with Mike. Councilman Mason: I'm okay with it as it stands. I guess I'm inclined to agree ' . that I think if Mr. Willette's willing to replace what's dead, maybe we should let it go with that . Mayor Chmiel: Replace the existing trees that have died? Yeah. There's also ' those piles of wood that 's out the fence line. Has that been cleared? Steve Willette: Those will be dealt with. ' Mayor Chmiel: Okay, because the last time I looked when I checked the 8 foot height , it was still there. And that will be moved. Okay, good. ' Steve Willette: I would like to ask one more thing. If I could have some time to do this. . . ' Mayor Chmiel: I don't see that as a problem. Steve Willette: Mr. Mayor. . . i 1 40 City Council Meeting - October 28, 1991 Mayor Chmiel: Okay, why don't we put it down as June 15th. Compromise between the 1st and the 30th. And that would be as condition number 7. Okay. Tom. Richard. Councilman Wing: We were the committee that went out and this is our recommendation. Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Ursula. Councilwoman Dimler: Pass. Mayor Chmiel: Okay, can I have a motion? Councilman Wing: So moved. Mayor Chmiel: With the addition of number 7? ' Councilman Wing: Number 7. Denying the conditional use permit 88-17 and with the seven requirements. Councilwoman Dimler: Second. Paul Krauss: Further clarification. You're not denying it . We're recommending , amended but also you would have to modify 5 for infill landscaping. If that 's your wish. Councilman Wing: That 's right , the infill. Paul Krauss: Steve, basically as I understand the Council's in agreement with you that additional landscaping won't be required. You just have to modify the condition. . . Steve Willette: How about the difference in you're saying 8 foot but the , existing fence of the west is higher than 8 feet right now. . .dropping down to something drastic. Mayor Chmiel: What I would like to see you probably do is work that out with ' Paul. Steve Willette: Okay, and then the other thing that I had was the horizontal ' board. You had that . . .in there. I would much rather see it be consistent and have vertical boards. Councilman Wing: The verticals are coming down. The 8 foot horizontals are staying. All we're asking is, the verticals are gone. Forget that: That 's what you're taking down. It 's the 8 foot of the horizontal that we're concerned about and those on the southeast corner need to be aligned coming around that corner so we don't have this awkward shape out there. Steve Willette: That 's great except for the only problem that I have with that is we've got the vertical boards in the remaining part of the fence and what I'm proposing to do is drop it down to -an 8 foot height and just . . .all the way around the fence and build the same style fence around the whole perimeter ' 41 1 City Council Meeting - October 28, 1991 instead of having two different style of fences because it 's oin to look g g o crummy. I want it to look nice. Councilman Wing: Take the whole fence down? Paul Krauss: So they all, all the boards go vertical then? Steve Willette: No. You're going to have, like on the other ones, you have ones that are horizontal. These are only 6 foot high vertical so you have 2 or 3 deep of horizontal boards and then you go. . .and that 's what they did when the architects designed the fence. . . ' Councilman Wing: Going back out? Mayor Chmiel : Okay. That too I'd like to be worked out with Paul to something that 's satisfactory. Any other discussions by Council. I'm getting lost here. It 's getting too late. We have a motion on the floor with a second. Councilman Wing: Amending conditional use permit 88-17 and changing item 5. Mayor Chmiel: And amending item 5. ' Councilman Wing: And item 7 with the June 15th timeline which I believe is for completion of the project or just the landscaping. Paul Krauss: That 's for completion of the entire project . Mayor Chmiel: Yeah, I would say for the entire deal. Is that alright Steve? ' Councilman Wing moved, Councilwoman Dimler seconded to amend Conditional Use Permit #88-17 and to require the applicant to reconstruct the originally approved fence to an 8 foot height meeting the following conditions: r1. Picket fence sections along the south and esat walls of the storage yard shall be removed. The existing picket fence sections along the west yard ' entrance and along the northern exposure adjacent to Lakeshore Equipment would be allowed to remain. The transition between the picket fence section along the west side and the proposed area along the south, where the picekts shall be removed, shall be acceptably faired. 2. All horizontal boards shall be realigned so that they are fully horizontal and in line with one another. 3. The applicant consider removing the southeast corner gate. 4. All materials stored inside the yard area shall be subject to the original 8 ' foot height limitation. The exception shall be dock canopy supports which would be allowed to extend over this height when they are attached to assembled dock sections. The outdoor material storage rack located near the building must be reduced in height and made to conform to the original conditional use permit approval. 1 42 City Council Meeting - October 28, 1991 5. The applicant will replace the dead material in the exterior landscaping on the east elevations and the southeast corner area to provide ample screening. 6. Remove the piles of wood that is dumped outside of the fence line. 7. All work on this project shall be completed by June 15, 1992. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously. I REVIEW RESULTS OF OCTOBER 14, 1991 LAKE ANN PARK PICNIC/RECREATION SHELTER BID_ OPENING, AND CONSIDER AWARD OF LAKE ANN PARK PICNIC/RECREATION SHELTER UTILITIES. Todd Hoffman: Mr. Mayor, City Council members. As you are aware, all bids received on October 14th for the Lake Ann Park Picnic/Recreation shelter were rejected. The low bid of $279,000.00 was $79,000.00 over the budgted amount of $200,000.00 initially approved on May 20th of this past spring. Speculation as to the circumstances which led to this discrepancy is endless. However, a large portion of this difference was attributable to the under estimates in the area of stone and masonry materials and insulation. It had been anticipated that a mansory contractor would bid this project . However none did for whatever reason. In addition 15% of the difference may be attributable to the season in which the project was bid. It remains clear that the community deserves and that the City Council has supported the construction of a shelter utilizing quality materials and construction methods. The plans and specifications prepared for the shelter paralleled this desire. However, there are areas in the construction and furnishing of the buliding which can be amended at a substantial cost savings to the the project . These alterations in materials and construction methods will not jeopardize the integrity of the shelter. Four areas of reduction which haven't been identified are using cedar shakes versus a metal mansard roof above the concession area. The substitution of Indian Creek Thin Wall stone instead of using the Indian Creek Ashler pattern. The Ashler pattern would be laid typically like bricks behind you. The thin wall is laid. . . The deletion of portions of the building's cabinetry and the use of the keystone or equal retaining wall in place of a stone faced retaining walls. 11 These changes account for an estimated cost savings of $37,500.00. When coupled with an anticipated favorable change in the bids, this may add up to $45,000.00 or $50,000. 00. As well a number of $500.00 to $1,000.00. . .look at to evaluate their corresponding value to the project . For the most part, deletion of these types of items is not in the City's best interest . We have at the Lake Susan building. . . The setting at Lake Ann Park is one which few communities that are availed. I think you're all well aware of that . Although most contain covered buildings of this nature. I'm aware of the City Council's position on expenditures within the city. With this knowledge well in hand, a recommendation is made to the City Council to. . .an additional $40,000.00 in park acquisition and development fund in reserve to accomplish this project . In doing so the budget and expenditure for the shelter would then cost $240,000.00. Again the $40,000.00. . . Mayor Chmiel: Okay. I guess I just have a couple questions. How many dollars are there in the reserve? 1 43 City Council Meeting - October 28, 1991 I Todd Hoffman: At this time there's over $500,000.00. IIMayor Chmiel: Okay. One of the questions I have, I think I'd like to leave it open. Is still rebid this for roughly the $200,000.00. See what the bids come II in and if it got to the point where that bid is not as such then we may go up with it accordingly to that additional 40 and take it out of the reserve. But I would like to just rebid it at that $200,000.00 or just keep that in our mind as to what we 're looking for because I think as I see spring coming next year, II there may be some people out there that are going to be a little hungier at that time then they were presently and therefore those bids should be much lower. At least I'm anticipating that and I see that happening right now. I thought by II having that vast amount difference betweeen what we had and what the bid is now, maybe we should have that come out of the consultants of the proposal. Councilman Mason: Mr. Mayor you're saying that what you would like to see is IIwhen it 's rebid to not do any of these changes? Just leave it as is? Mayor Chmiel : Right . 1 Councilman Mason: Okay. I Mayor Chmiel : But if those changes do come in with those additional costs, then that 's something we can then review and pass on and move in the direction that Todd's indicating. Councilman Wing: Are you suggesting we may have a better bid climate? Mayor Chmiel : I think so. The market is soft . IICouncilman Workman: So you're saying table this until spring? Mayor Chmiel : Well just keep this and let Todd proceed with it and put this bid IIout in spring and see what we get on it . Councilman Wing: It might put the bidders on guard too that we're looking for II an item here. We're not about to let them start . Mayor Chmiel: You bet . And it 's just that oftentimes they hear what these bids IIare and I'm not too happy when they come in with their prices accordingly. Especially from what we estimate out as to what they come out with their bids. They think you have deep pockets and I think our pockets are being sewn up by the State. Consequently we have to watch our spending. Okay, I think would you IIlike to follow through with that recommendation as to what I suggested. Councilman Workman: So moved. ICouncilwoman Dimler: Second. II Mayor Chmiel: It 's been moved and seconded. Councilman Workman moved, Councilwoman Dimler seconded to direct staff to send out for bids in the spring of 1992 for the Lake Ann Park Picnic/Recreation IIShelter. All voted in favor and the motion carried. I 44 1 City Council Meeting - October 28, 1991 Mayor Chmiel: 7(b). Award of bid for Lake Ann Picnic/Recreation Shelter Utilities. Todd. Todd Hoffman: The utilities portion of the Lake Ann Park Shelter were opened at 9:00 a.m. on Tuesday, October 8th. The low bid for the picnic shelter utilities were received from B & D Underground, Inc. of Maple Plain, Minnesota in the amount of $108,057.64. The second low bid was $113,465.75 and the highest bid was $231,357.00. The engineer's estimate was $133,480.00 so you can see the bids. . . Corresponding with tonight 's action and hopefully. . .summer of 1992, staff is recommending that you award the bid to B & D Underground in the amount of $108,057.64 se they can get on with the construction yet this year. We'll try to close it up and. . .in the°' spring so it's in some order prior to the season beginning. I Mayor Chmiel: I agree with that . As I look at the cost on utilities, the bid is not bad really. Ursula? Councilwoman Dimler: I guess I just have one concern. I was thinking we should hold off on this one too because what if we don't get a reasonable bid for the shelter and you've got the utilities out there? Mayor Chmiel: Well at least you always have. . . Councilman Wing: I think the utilities are, 20 year project as Todd brought up and even if we only put in one bathroom and one drinking fountain I think it 's a start and we've got to get going on this. Councilman Mason: I agree. Mayor Chmie Okay, any other discussion? Can I have a motion on this? I Councilman Mason: I will move approval of the award of bid for Lake Ann Park Picric / Recreation Shelter Utilities. Councilman Wing: Second. Resolution #91-106: Councilman Mason moved, Councilman Wing seconded to award 1 the bid for the Lake Ann Park Picnic/Recreation Shelter Utilities project to B & D Underground, Inc. in the amount of $108,057.64. All voted in favor except Councilwoman Dimler who opposed and the motion carried with a vote of 4 to 1. I Councilwoman Dimler : For the reasons stated before. If we don't build the shelter, don't award bids. We'll have utilities out there. Mayor Chmiel: Yeah. The only difference in putting utilities in now is that you're not going to goof up the park when it comes time for the useage of it in having a lot of problems having it at that particular time and it does make I sense from that standpoint . Councilman Mason: I'm firmly convinced that there will be a shelter there Ursula. It might not be quite what we have in mind but I think it 's going to be there . i 45 i City Council Meeting - October 28, 1991 PRELIMINARY PLAT TO REPLAT LAKE RILEY WOODS SECOND ADDITION TO CORRECT PLATTING ERROR. Paul Krauss: Mr. Mayor, we became involved in this last year. Lake Riley Woods Second Addition is a small single family plat on a cul-de-sac in a rural ' development area. Last year it became clear that part of the City's accepting the streets and. . .that due to a surveying error on the developer's part that the cul-de-sac was put in the wrong spot . . . At the same time there's one home that 's been erected there. After this problem arose we refused issuing building permits but there's one home and at that time the homeowner was quite upset that their home had been built essentially in the wrong spot because the street was not where it was supposed to be and it took part of their drainfield from their ' on-site sewer system was located on the adjoining property. When we made everybody aware of these concerns, the applicant 's engineers at first . . .we'll just give you the variance to make it good. We took exception to that solution ' and at that time the purchaser of the home was quite upset and was unwilling to accept that as a solution either . Since that time there's been a lot of discussions behind the scene. . .involve the City. Just between the developer and the existing property owner or homeowner and the engineer. And they seem to have reached some sort of accommodation. We tried to contact the homeowner ourselves and were unsuccessful in doing that . I spoke to Councilman Workman earlier tonight and he's been telling me that the homeowner now is satisfied ' with the solution that 's been proposed by the applicant . We still have a bit of a problem with the premise that . . .broke it so the City has to fix it by giving a variance. On the other hand, if all the individuals now are content with this arrangement , if the homeowner is comfortable that the settlement is a comfortatle one, you can ask validly is this going to hurt anything? I don't like the idea of variances being given out to fix survey mistakes but this is a 2 1/2 acre lot . . . It 's really not going to be. . .new home sites so while I'm not a real fan of this solution, it seems to be probably. . .opportunities to resolve this. So I'm not going to come before you and recommend approval of this thing but due to the fact that the homeowners are comfortable with it , we could live with it if you approved it . Thank you. Mayor Chmiel: Is the property owner here? Yeah, why don't you come forward and just state your opinion. Charles Frazer . Right now with the agreement that we've come to, I have no problem with a house over there on that lot. I only had one concern was more or less the location and that 's been resolved with the developer. We're worked it out and honestly I have 2 1/2 acres now. It 's plenty of land for me and I'd rather have a house next to me. I've been living on a cul-de-sac with nobody ' else there for a year and a half now so I'm totally pleased with the solution we've worked out . Councilwoman Dimler: Excuse me, the solution then that you're proposing is that the Lot 5 would be a variance to the 2.5? Paul Krause: Councilwoman Dimler, that 's not what we're proposing. That 's what ' has been proposed by the developer. Right . . . .vari`ance to give the. . .to that lot . 46 City Council Meeting - October 28, 1991 Councilwoman Dimler: Okay but now, can't m y question was, why can t we take from Lot 3 as was proposed earlier which I believe is 3 acres and could give to Lot 5 which then would not require a variance and would not affect the buyer . The home bu/er here. Paul Krause;: Councilwoman Dimler, Jo Ann Olsen mentioned that concern to me earlier this evening and to be honest I don't remember the exact answer. I know we did a review of that when this first came up and because it was owned by an individual . . . Councilwoman Dicier: I understand it 's not sold. Jim Peterson: Can I answer that . My name is Jim Peterson. I work for the developer , George Nelson Associates. We looked into the possibility of acquiring Lot 8. W_ sold Lot 8 to a private party who is not attempting to resell the lot ors his own. We no longer own Lot 6. Lot 8 contains 2.6 acres. It says 3 acres on the preliminary plat but I believe by the time they did their computation calculations it came to around 2.6 and so there wasn't enough land on Lot 3 to combine with Lot 5 to avoid the variance question. So it's one solution we did look at . Councilwoman Dicier: So it is no longer an option then is what you're saying? Jim Peterson: No. , Mayor Chmiel : Which is 1/10 of. . . Councilwoman Dimler: Well I was told it was 3 acres and hadn't been sold which seemed like a wonderful solution to me. Jiff Peterson: Well we tried. We looked at all the solutions that would help us out of this . Mayor Chmiel: Right . Anyone else have any discussion? 1 Councilm-r, Workman* Well I guess, you know in talking to the engineering firm about this and it really seems like the simplest idea. Met Council's current revamped status on density like this is as long as this platted piece of property average: 2 1/2 acres. I suppose all of these 5 houses could be all on one corner or; 1/? acre lots and they'd be okay so it 's sort of a variance I guess. To me tearing up asphalt and everything else based on well they made a mistake so now they should fix it isn't cooperating I think as far as we could. Or even going that way. ' Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Mike, do you have anything? Councilman Mason: I just basically agree with Tom. I think the only thing is that 's a pretty major mistake for somebody to do and in this situation, it looks like it 's working out to everyone's benefit and I don't have any trouble but you know, if people are, if surveyors are making that kind of mistake, that 's a pretty big deal. But that 's kind of water over the dam on this one I think, Mayor Chmiel: Richard, do you have anything on this one? 47 City Council Meeting - October 28, 1991 IICouncilman Wing: Mr. Mayor , I did not have an opportunity to go down there. IIMayor Chmiel : Ursula, you've indicated yours. Councilwoman Dimler : Yes, as long as that when that number 8 was no longer an II option I guess. I agree that we should do something to help the situation but I don't want to have this happen in the future that the City bails them out . Mayor Chmiel : Well once you establish precedent then of course you're there. II But it can be a case by case and consideration is looked at this and if the property owner's happy with what 's being proposed. il Councilwoman Dimler: See we may in the future may not be able to bail them out because not everybody would be happy. Mayor Chmiel: That 's right . ICouncilwoman Dimler: And that would put us in a real bad position. I Councilman Wir,g: Not necessarily. I would be happy to vote no. I think as long as people are happy hare. ' Mayor Chmiel : That 's right and I think that 's the key. Councilwoman Dimler : So this should not be precedent setting. ICouncilman Wing: Hopefully not . Mayor Chmiel: No, but it could be considered by the opposition to come in and Isupport their case. So can I have a motion? Councilman Workman: I would move approval of Preliminary Plat to replat Lake Riley Woods Second Addition to correct platting error . II Mayor Chmiel: Okay. And with this, Roger do you get involved in this? I Roger Knutson: This type of thing is done. I get involved when you come back with the final plat and development contract . Mayor Chmiel: Okay . Is there a second? Councilman Mason: Second. I Councilman Workman moved, Councilman Mason seconded to approve the Preliminary Plat to replat Lake Riley Woods 2nd Addition to correct the platting error. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously. IJim Peterson: Can I take this opportunity to ask you one more question? IMayor Chmiel : Yes, go ahead. Jim Peterson: One of the things that was beneficial and helped bring this to a head is the fact that we do have a letter of credit in effect with the City with II 48 II City Council Meeting -- October 28, 1991 regard to our current development agreement . With the replat a roved that PP now h t we know the road will remain in the same place we can go ahead and finish the road and hopefully get it inspected by the City this fall and clean this off the books. I believe staff is under direction from the City. We did have a time deadline that did expire with regard to the letter of credit and with, by an extension of the complete the work now we know the work can be completed to the original specs. - Mayor Chmiel: I don't see any problem with that . Do you? Paul Kraus- We don't have a problem. As long as the letter of credit remains. Jim Petcr;,on: I think it remains in effect until the end of the year. Okay, thank you. ZONING AND SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE AMENDMENT TO AMEND SECTIONS REGARDING LANDSCAPING AND TREE PRESERVATION REQUIREMENTS, FINAL READING; AND APPROVAL OF SUMMARY ORDINANCE FOR PUBLICATION PURPOSES. Mayor Chmiel ' So moved. ' Cour,cilmarn Mason: Second. Councilman Workman: I move approval of it . Councilwoman Dimler : Second. Mayor Chmiel ' Any other discussion? Counnilman Wing: Of what? Only what , that 's all I want to know. 1 Councilman Mason: The landscaping. Councilwoman Dimler: It 's been cleaned up. ' Mayor Chmicl : Any other discussion? I think we've already gone through this Paul a couple different times and that 's the only reason I'm saying this. Do you wan' to clarify something? Paul Kraus : No. I thought you approved this at a special meeting but . . . I Mayor Chmiel: Yes we did. At the meeting we had with the special Council meeting and we also had the budget was the night that we did approve it . To make it formal if it wasn't then. We didn't take Minutes and so consequently, all those in favor say aye. Mayor Chmiel moved, Councilman Mason seconded to approve the Final Reading of Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance Amendment to Amend Sections regarding Landscaping and Tree Preservation Requirements and to approve the summary ordinance for publication purposes. All voted in favor except Councilman Wing who opposed and the motion carried with a vote of 4 to 1. Councilman Wing: I think what we did was a grave mistake. 49 1 City Council Meeting - October 28, 1991 IIMayor Chmiel : We know your sentiments because you expressed it the other day. II Councilman Mason: Those Minutes are transcribed though Councilman Wing. You're going to look really poor on that . IRECEIVE PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT NEEDS REPORT. Charles Folch: Mr. Mayor, members of the Council. I would like to introduce to you Mr. David Mitchell, the project consultant engineer with OSM. Dave is here II tonight to give you a brief presentation on the basic theories behind pavement management . I David Mitchell: Thank you. Mr. Mayor , members of the Council. With your permission I'll do a very quick presentation. Primarily paraphrasing part of the report in that the City of Chanhassen has developed very rapidly over the I last 10 years especially which has only compounded the problem of I think some of the things that have been discussed already tonight at the Council meeting. What I've heard. I think what we're looking at here is a continuing growth within the city of Chanhassen which is only going to lead to more management 1 problem, for the rebuilding of the infrastructure that 's in place. I guess some of the theory that we look at between behind pavement management is that it 's cheaper and more effective to extend the life of the pavement if at all I possible. I think some of the reports state in here which is common practice within engineering is that typical life of pavement is approximately 20 years. This is a pavement life cycle curve that shows that typically 40% of the quality of pavement is lost over the first 75% of the life and that 's 15 years. The IInext 40% of quality is lost over the next 12% of the time which shows a very drastic decrease in that 15 to 1D year time range. The theory behind pavement maintenance, pavement management is to extend this curve out because if I can do II this, sealcoating and overlaying typically. . .this curve in terms of about the same pattern and. . .see if by giving it that boost the theory is that somewhere down here we do the same thing. We extend this out . I mean something that 's II very pertinent is that for every dollar spent back on the curve further, if that dollar is not spent , it's going to cost $4.00 to $5.00 down the line. If we can extend that out , it just gives us more options as far as finance goes. The City has a very good sealcoating program from what I've seen at this point . I guess I this is some of the areas that we want to see continue. These are typically some of the things that happen along that same life cycle curve in that we want to do routine maintenance and functional improvements over that first 75% of the 1 life. Routine maintenance again is the sealcoating. Functional improvements. Patching. Maybe some leveling. Structure improvements. That 's where we want to get into an overlay situation. Preservation. There's a point on the curve I where we cet into a very steep decline and at that point economics and it 's more efficient just to in essence say the heck with it . Let's do what we can to keep everyone satisfied until we can actually finance the reconstruction of the street . Getting into what we did for the City of Chanhassen, we set up some Ipriority or I should say California Pavement Management System sets up a priority ranging and I'll go through this real quick. Primarily all the streets that we surveyed within the city are less than 1,000 ABT. I guess to answer Ithat or to answer a question that might arise from that is we did not get onto some of the County State Aid highways. Apparently those are county roads and then I believe some of the State roads which are not at present actually IIsurveyed, but again this 11 being the highest priority that was found in the 50 II City Council Meeting - October 28, 1991 1 City of Chanhassen and what that points to is it 's a poor ride which then gets into a safety consideration. It 's got some serious structural defects. Some of the more, another area that 's a big concern is this Priority 13 which has some severe structural problems but it has a little bit better ride quality to it so it 's not as high of a priority as the Priority 11's. The data base system, we divided the city into 4 separate zones primarily for ease in making the computer I work faster than anything else. As you can see, Zone 2 is probably the heaviest developed area at this time and it 's going to continue to develop a little faster than any of these other zones. Some of the things that the report points out , if you can get into it and look at it and then Charles can summarize it in his report is that kind of shows some of the problem areas that we've got . The Priority 11 , 12 and 13 are primarily areas that are going to be taken care of by bidded projects. Some of the Priority 14, 15 and 16. . .will be handled by the cli y maintenance programs. Some areas of concern I guess are the Western Hills area and that 's a Priority 13 which is the green line. It 's kind of tough to read or a map of this scale and it 's Priority 11 which are again high priority areas. The second area of concern is the Chanhassen Estates area which is priu,a; ily all 11 and 13 areas which in the California Pavement Management Program that 's calling for a structural analysis for the reconstruction kind of mcd_ . THc--e are some isolated areas out in some of these other zones but again they are area: that can be addressed by residents that voice that concern to the City. I thini: some of the areas that the primary concern now are the Chanhassen Estates area and Western Hills area. The main reason that those are of concern is the financing that has to be done to accomplish this. And if you can kind of remember where the zones are, again as I stated before the 11, and this is all in the report too. This chart is but I'll just kind of briefly go through it . Priority 11 , 12 and 13 are items that would be engineer projects. The Priority 14, 15 and 16 in areas of city maintenance programs and as you can see there are some fairly hefty dollars involved in those Priority 11 through 13 areaa t.'ta.lin; in the neighborhood of I think $2.4 million or something in that neighborhood. As the report recommends and as Charles' report recommends, the Ci°t;' should look seriously at adopting a CIP program for the next 4 or 5 years that would address some of these higher priority areas. I can't stress enough the important of doing that because the Priority 14 areas are going to eventually move higher up on the list and it 's only going to get worse. It 's vP' : p- -d' n- that this be addressed at this time. I guess with that I'll turn it back over to Charles to see if he has any closing comments. I'm free to ' an �: any questions that you may have. Charles Folch: As you can probably tell from the findings of the report , they 1 indicate that the majority of our city's streets are in average or better condition. However there are a few problem areas as Dave has mentioned, primarily concentrated in the Chanhassen Estates and the Western Hills subdivision. As David mentioned, the need for reconstruction work in these areas is estimated to be about 2 million dollars worth of work, possibly undertaken over a 5 year span. In addition it is also apparent that the annual sealcoatirrg and maintenance operations need to significantly increase in order to properly maintain our street infrastructure. This increase would also be controlled b;, the annual funding source. Now this report is intended to serve as a guide to prioritize street rehabilitation programs. As I have noted, there ' is an inherent time window of validity for this report . There are many factors which affect the lifespan of a street and streets that are currently in what I would call a borderline condition may or may not worsen and move up the priority ' 51 ' City Council Meeting - October 28, 1991 IIladder within the next 5 years. Therefore I would also recommend that another repor+ be undertaken at the end of a 5 year term to re-evaluate all those IIstreets again and also implement any new pavement technology that has come about . It is therefore recommended that the attached pavement management report dated October 28, 1991 prepared by OSM be accepted as a management took for the city street infrastructure and that consideration be given to increase funding for the annual sealcoating program. And finally that staff be directed to develop a 5 year capital improvement program for which City Council could approve to accomplish the needed reconstruction projects. I Mayor Chmiel : Thank you. Does anyone have any questions? Richard. II Councilman Wing: How does this parallel the comments from a meeting or two ago? Trying to get the neighbors up front on these projects and the cost established so there's no hidden agendas here. If we're going to go to II Chanhassen Hills, they know we're coming. They know what we're going to do and they know how much it 's going to cost right now. Does this resolve that problem or is this just the start of your trying to put that together? 11 Charles Folch: Yeah. What this does is basically help us to determine where the problem° areas and which ones are worse than others and to hopefully establish li'e I recommended, a 5 year capital improvement program of projects I for which we could then approach the neighborhoods. Let them know the findings that we have basically generated and get some indication from them up front based on cost and based on the' scope of the work whether this is something II that 's feasible or not to do. If not , we could certainly move on to a next priority project on our CIP and attempt to accomplish that one. Councilman Wino: But if Chanhassen, do I have it Chanhassen Hills? IICouncilwoman Dimler: Chanhassen Estates. II Councilman Wing: Chanhassen Estates. If that 's a top priority and the roads are the worst in the city, wouldn't you as engineer and City Manager say this is a project we're going to do? Do we ask or do we just do it? II Charles Foich: Well, I guess there's a fine line there. It becomes a combination of need. How much concern is raised by residents. How many complaints w= get on the condition of the road. It 's sort of obvious, one of I the thinge that stands out too is the condition of the road in it 's present state that the routine sealcoating and street repair operations that we do. Any more investment of a street such as these is basically a waste of money. It II gets down to a matter of we either do the project and improve the streets or the residents live with what they have. Councilman Wing: This project in no way addresses the assessment issue or Iproblem? Charles Folch: No. IMayor Chmiel: No. Just basically where the existing problems are and how do we address them and what do we have to do to take care of that problem. II 52 II City Council Meeting - October 28, 1991 Charles Fetch: This gives us an idea of, a ballpark estimate as far as what we'rf looking at to do about 5 years worth of projects. And from here I guess we'd have to take a look at in the process of preparing the CIP, how we can fund these and support these programs financially. Mayor Chmiel: Basically some of these we can prolong the life of the street I just by having a maintenance program. We can extend them maybe 10 years, maybe even 20. By doing this it 's one way that we don't have to go back into those areas and do those re-assessments. I David Mitchell: Mr. Mayor, if I could add to that . I think the point it 's something you want to extend those streets at a very early age in that first 10 to 15 years. The Chanhassen Estates area is on that downhill slide already. When it gets into that point where you do what you have to do to get by until the residents in a sense scream loud enough that they want it taken care of or the City dictates that that 's what they're going to do is take care of it . I Mayor Chmiel: Good, thank you. Councilwoman Circler : I have a few concerns and that is, I want to know if we approve tt-le, is this going to be our Bible? That we absolutely have to follow this because as I see you having my street here, Kiowa Circle. The way I read that , you're saying it 's 13 which means it 's pretty high on the priority list . And under cost , what does that 44 mean? Is that multipled by 1,000 or something? So it would be estimated at $44,000.00? David Mitchell: Yes. Councilwoman Dimler: We have 4 residents there which would then come to 3.I1 ,C0^, 00 a piece . I don't think that 's feasible. I know ' you re going to. . . bu' again, very high costs. I would hate to approve this and then say well here it is and we've got to do it . That 's why I want to know is this going' to be ou:- Bib1e? I know that the comprehensive plan for the park was used to hold us, not ash, for parkland and I don't want to, I want to approve this and then have the, say wcil_ we have to do this and Council no longer has an option here with the public as th,y corn in with their concerns. 1 Charles Folch: As I indicated in my recommendation that this is a guide, if you will . A tool tc sort of get us on a track. Even a CIP is developed, 5 year CIP is. Once you develop a 5 year CIP, once you approve that certainly is not going to cast in stone that a certain project is definitely going to be done this year. There's still a lot of things that need to be accomplished and we have to go through all the hearing process and such. The due -process before we can even order a project to even take place. Councilwoman Dimler: Okay, but also again by putting a 13 on this, are we saying that it will never be sealcoated and it will not be .a bituminous overlay which is probably. . .Are we going to let it deteriorate to the point where a structural analysis has to be done and we have to spend this exorbinate amount of money for restructuring? Mayor Chmiel: I think as Dave said, until you start screaming. 53 • City Council Meeting - October 28, 1991 Councilwoman Dimler: Well I would rather see it then, put it as for a bituminous overlay for regular maintenance. ' Charles Foich: Basically an overlay, because of the inherent structural problems of that particular street , an overlay is not going to do more than get another year or two out of the existing surface. It 's not to say that we wouldn't go in and do anything in there. We certainly from a safety aspect would want to patch potholes, crack fill certain cracks if you will. We certainly can't take care of the severe alligatoring if there's any extent of 1 that but we do what we have to do to extend or to maintain the surfaceability I guess if you want to call it on a roadway if it needs reconstruction work and there's no support from the adjacent property owners to do the work. So we 1 certainly would do improvements from safety aspect but it would not entail a full scale overlay because it 's clearly not going to solve the problem. Councilwoman Dimler: But you're going to do routine maintenance then so you don't have to go to a huge construction project? Charles Folch: Well, we'll do what we have to do to keep it serviceable but ' that involves crack filling and sealcoating and such but probably nothing more than t h a t . ' Mayor Chmiel : We have to start somewhere and we have to have a plan. This is giving the direction as such. I Councilwoman Dimler: But let 's say now in Chan Estates if everyone comes screaming against the project and say no way am I going to spend $5,000.00 like we just did to our Frontier Trail friends, we're going to say okay. You don't want it . Just regular maintenance then. Don Ashworth: We've done that twice before on that in Chan Estates. There were two previous feasibility studies. Costs were $5,000.00. People did come in. ' Said they didn't want to spend $5,000.00 and we didn't do the project . 5 years later they came back in and said we need it fixed up. We did a feasibility study. $5,000.00. They came in and said we don't want it . ' Councilwoman Dimler: Yeah, but has routine maintenance been done? That 's my point . We just leave these roads go. Mayor Chmiel : That 's why we're setting this up. Councilwoman Dimler: But you've got it on a 13, you're never going to do the 1 routine maintenance. Charles Foich: Well actually, from visually looking at those roads in that subdivision, there's been actually an awful lot of patching, section overlay and ' such that has occurred throughout the years. You can see that . The road base is shot . There's a fine line in doing enough maintenance to keep it surfaceable and keep it from being a road hazard but you also don't want to spend money ' unwisely on something that you're pouring money down a drain when you could use it somewhere else and extend the life of a road that 's in the right condition. 1 54 1 1 Cif / Council Meeting - October 28, 1991 Councilman Wing: How's this paralleling our request then to get the assessment policy established? , Mayor Chmiel: It has nothing to do with assessments. Councilman Wing: Well I know. What 's the intent then on that request? Because it has a lot to do with this. This is our guideline to get moving. What 's your intent now? Number one to select projects but most important , what 's our assessment policy plan? Do we have headway on that request? I Charles Folch. Well, as you can tell, we've got a ballpark estimate as far as what the projects are going to cost . The next step would be to establish how we 11 could fund these projects. That 's part of that , how we fund that is what share is going to be assessed. So a policy is going to have to be developed for that . Don Ashworth: I'm hoping that will be a wintertime project and as we approach next spring that we will have in place a 5 year capital budget that makes sense to the Council and uses a report like this to make some of the decisions as to what items are going to be in .there. What will not and to have in place an assessment policy. Policy document . Councilwc„a-: Circler : Yeah. I want to get to the point where those residents know up front what their costs will be and they can base their decision on whether to approve the project or not approve it for what they want from us baccd upon that assessment . Not like Frontier Trail is handled where it became a surprise. ' Charles Folch: Oh absolutely. We certainly want to be up front . I would imagine are' of the long term residents in Chan Estates already have an idea of whLi 4j,at road improvement is going to cost from previous feasibility studies. Meyer Chn,iel Okay, any other discussion? If hearing none, can we get a motion just to receive the pavement management needs report? ' Coureilme.,, Workman: So mooed. Councilman Mason: Second. Councilman Workman moved, Councilman Mason seconded to receive the Pavement Management Needs Report as presented by OSM. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously. PROPOSED NOISE ORDINANCE, FIRST READING. I Scott Harr: Before you you have the draft of the Noise Ordinance. It's been interesting to develop to try to cover all the concerns and that 's why I sent out a copy of the draft to all of you 2 weeks ago to take a look at it to let me know if there were any specific concerns. The only things that have come up in consulting with the building inspection department and contractors is what will citizens, as they did ask to define the holidays that construction would not be permitted on rather than just public holidays. Specifically I'd like to submit the draft specifying that the following holidays would not have construction allowed. New Year's Day, Memorial Day, 4th of July, Labor Day, Thanksgiving Day 55 City Council Meeting - October 28, 1991 II and Christmas Day. There are some other public holidays that customarily I contractors are working. There was discussion about the hours of construction. As drafted, construction is permitted 7:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m. on the weekdays. 9:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m. on Saturdays with no construction permitted on Sundays or holidays. Obviously the contractors would like those hours expanded. I've had II suggestions from 6:00 in the morning until 10:00 or 11:00 at night but I've had residents concerned wanting to tighten it up even more. What we've reached here I think is a good compromise. The only other one that I heard seem particularly I good was sunrise to sunset . But again that could be awfully early during certain times of the year. So the 7:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m. weekdays and 9:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m. on Saturdays and no Sundays or the holidays listed seems to be the best compromise. IIMayor Chmiel: Very good. Thank you. I think that at least as I had read it covers a lot of the concerns that we've had and the phone calls and so on. Yet I we're taking into consideration people who plan on working on their homes and doing things as such. I think it was well done. At least that 's my approach. 1 Jean Burke: May _ speak. . .? Mayor Chmiel : Sure. Why don't you just come up and state your name and your address please. IJean BurkE : My name is Jean Burke and I live at 225 West 77th Street. Mayor Chmiel and Council members, I'm here because I've had irritations with noise II problems in Chanhassen I've contacted the Public Safety and been told that there is no ordinance for the issues that I'll be discussing and I would like the issue of bug zappers looked into in a particular ordinance by itself. I talked I to Bob at the Public Safety last spring and he told me to contact my neighbor about this problem. Well if you have a neighbor that likes bug zappers as mine does, he installed 3 last spring. These are on 24 hours a day. April when you open your windows, the neon lights are on and he has them installed and I operating through September and October. I can hear them in my backyard by the pool . In my kitchen. In my bathroom. In my bedroom. He has these installed because he likes to kill bugs. He has no recreation area outside of his home. I He does not have a deck. It is Mr. Gavert the place in the city that is a dump. The City's been after him for years to clean up his yard. He likes to kill bugs and I have an article here printed by the DNA that states that bug zappers actually are a' tracting bugs. They are killing the insects that our song birds IIneed and only 3% of the bugs, I'll leave this article here with you. YOu can read it at some future time. Only 3; of the insects killed by bug zappers are actually incest biting insects. So it 's altering our food chain. So I environmentally they're not . . .besides the aggravation it causes. Now I think this problem should be looked into when you have a neighbor such as mine who decides he does not want to take down his bug zappers. In fact he's got the I deluxe bug zappers. He's now installed a fence, I don't know next spring if this man, he now has put a wooden fence around his yard. I live in fear next spring he may install 50 of them. I don't know. The man, he said he loves to see thorn bugs on there and what can I say. Our city does not have a back up I ordinance. I would like to say our city has said in their ordinance that you can have your bug zapper on at certain hours or if you're in your back yard recreating. If you honestly feel that you're being biten less because this Ithing is on, fine. But the man is not even in his yard. I'm the one that has I56 II City Council Meeting - October 28, 1991 to eufrcr. Another issue that should be looked at for noise pollution is the leaf blower . Now I talked to Councilwoman Dicier and believe it or not she has never heard a leaf blower. Well praise God. I wish I were in your shoes. The leaf blower, in fact I just happened to have this magazine and it says in this article that a leaf blower is extremely loud. They are right along with the chainsaw. My neighbors and every year in our neighborhood, when I first moved here 7 yeare ago there was one leaf blower. I remember being outside thinking, someone's operating a chainsaw. Are they cutting wood here or what . I mean this man, and he blows leaves across his yard. He starts at one end of the yard. They can go as long as 4 or 5 hours at a time. When people use leaf blowers for the purpose of blowing leaves on a lawn rather than I think what they were created for, I don't really know but I think in rocky areas I can see the purpose of the leaf blower. To blow your leaves off of a rock landscape but to use it in your yard and start at one of the yard and just keep going continucuely. My neighbor across the street is a landscape person. When he moved there, bingo. He's out there with a leaf blower. Finally I went over to him. He has ear plugs in his ears. I'm shouting at my children inside my house across the street . He wasn't even aware that possibly this was disturbing his neighbors so I think until the City addresses these problems and makes people ar,are. If nothing else, put it in your statutes as an etiquette. As an etiquette to your neighbors, try to use your leaf blower as little as possible. Start there to make people aware of these nuisances that other people have to '_eve with. Thank you. ' Mayor Chmiel : I feel bad because I have a leaf blower . But I do have landscpaing that is all rocks and that is how I get the leaves out . , Jean Burke : You know if a leaf blower is actually easier to take than a bug Zrr., . , r because you know there's an end to it . But I'm saying in neighborhoods where man , many people are getting leaf blowers, it can be continuous. One persor, uees his leaf blower on Monday. The next person uses his on Tuesday and you ct, hear this noise. I mean all this fall I heard leaf blowers almost co-ntinuously in my neighborhood so I think it 's something that really can be looked into. Hollywood has banned them completely so some communities are starting to look at the noise pollution and take steps. I'd like to see Chanhassen do that . Thank you. , Councilman Workman. Jean you also in the past had a problem with outdoor concerts sponsored by the City, etc. . Is that still a problem? Jean Burke: That wasn't a problem this summer. You didn't have concerts. _Councilman Workman: Jerome Carlson wasn't crooning down by the. Jean Burke: They didn't have, unless I was out of town but I don't believe they had that Heritage Square concerns here did they? Because that was, yeah and that went on late. The rock music or the bass from that concert rocked our neighborhood until 11:00 at night . Coeecilwoean Dimler : But in this ordinance, Scott wouldn't they have to get a permit to do that? Sect' Harr : Yes. ' 57 1 City Council Meeting - October 28, 1991 Mayor Chmiel: Permits are given for that . ' Jean Burke: But there again that 's something, you know it was like a one night thing but I thought , if this is going to be a habitual thing once a month a concert , people should know it 's affecting the neighbors living in that area. Scott Harr: Now Jean are you talking about you called about the Fire Department dance too? ICouncilman Workman: No, the old Heritage Square Colonial Church. The concerts in there and then it would blow down. Jean Burke: I don't know and in fact I thought of that when I looked at this new proposal about music over by City Hall. I couldn't tell from that small map where the bandshell, where it was facing but that 's something that should be ' considered because there are residents that live close to the Fire Station in that area and they might not want to particular be at a concert some nice summer evening. So that 's something that you should look at . Don Ashworth: I think where we got into trouble, I don't think like the Jerome Carlson is a problem. It 's more subdued but I think we did one up like more of the hard rock Ines over there. They had a lot of feedback on that one. ' Councilmen Workman: You can't discriminate though. This brings up the issue and when we originally, I know Scott was gingerly bringing this up and he was ' amazed I think when some of us said yes because it was such a confrontational issue with the past Council and it kind of does get down to, what bothers one neigihe d- esr 't bother another and you can't pick your neighbors. Jean Errk.e: I will next time. Councilman; Wing: But you have the same problems. Councilman; Workman: Those bug zappers are irritating but you know, the reason ec 're talking about it was because of a barking dog in a cage and then when the -police came out and there was no barking dog and it 's a real problem and how do you jucln without restricting people but if at 9:00 or 11:00 on weekends you've got to turn off your bug zapper, I suppose it can be pretty simple. You know ' it does get to be kind of a question of, and I think I at the time gave the example of midnight one night I could hear Elvis singing somewhere off in the neighborhood. Councilman Mason: He's dead. Councilman Workman: No, no. He's somewhere in my neighborhood. Mayor Chmiel: And I had a saxophonist that did that . I also get calls from the citizens at 2:00 in the morning saying Mayor Chmiel? I say yes. I want you to know because I can't sleep, you're not going to either . We have a problem. We ' have noise. Of course those were situations that we corrected. This is something in itself a little bit different . It 's hard to say that what do we do in eliminating zappers or blowers because then you get the snow blower and lawn ' 50 I City Council Meeting - October 28, 1991 mowers and a lot of these other things that are used within the yards themselves. Councilwoman Dimler: Well I think on the bug zappers we could add a condition. Make (d)(e) and add (d) inbetween (c) and (e) then under the hourly restrictions on certain operations and just have the bug zappers to be used only when the people are recreating in their yard or something of that nature. When it 's actually keeping the bugs from biting them which it 's intended to do. Councilman Wing: In his case it will be from 9:00 in the morning until about , 4:00 in the morning. Don Ashworth: I think there's an additional problem, and I'm sorry I didn't I catch the name. But Mr. Gavert also has gone through periods where he likes to keep junk cars in his yard and we actually put through an ordinance that tried to address that particular. , JeeTi Burke: Yeah, I know what you're thinking. He'll go the other way. Don Ashworth: Oh yeah. There's no question in my mind. I mean we've had him 11 in Court enough times. That 's why I. . .even mentioning to him because I thought just to spite me and you know he says well I like them. He laughs. Said I've got the deluxe kind now. , Councilwoman Dimler: The point is though, we're not writing this for one individual and I think it 's going to be. 1 Jean Burke: No we're not . . .even on the Statute whether or not I would even confront him and say, here's what we did. My husband talked to his son and he unplugged that was the worst offender and the other two stayed on. And I. . . live with that much better but I think for everyone in Chanhassen, I'm sure there are other people who might like their neighbor and just feel embarrassed to say something unless there's something on the books. A lot of people are embarrassed to speak up. . . Councilwoman; Dimler: Okay, but like Richard was saying, if they're out at 4:00 a.m. in their backyard recreating then they can have it on. That isn't going to happen a lot but . Councilman Wing: I wanted to ask on Section 22, under General Prohibition. I What does that give us Scott? Does that give us, the CSO's any credibility at all to go in and say you're bothering someone? Scott Harr : It's really used to set the tone of the remaining Statute for the ordinance. Jean Burke: You could regiment the bug zapper on environmental issues from that standpoint . . .because it 's affecting the. . . You wouldn't even have to use that as . . .the research shows it 's doing that, you could make people comply from that standpoint . 1 Councilwoman Dimler: But you're right , the general prohibition does cover the peace, safety, welfare, comfort and it 's disturbing and annoying to you. But , 59 I City Council Meeting - October 28, 1991 I think we should name it in particular. iCouncilman Mason: The bug zapper, yeah. Councilman Workman: Is this a first reading? I'd move approval. Councilwoman Dimler: With the bug zapper in there under condition (d) and make (d) (e)? 1 Councilman Wing: What about hours for lawn, the blowers, the mowers, the chain saws? Perhaps we need to have an hourly restriction. Councilwoman Dimler: That 's in there. ' Councilman Wing: Under recreational vehicles. Mayor Chmiel: You have a time frame there that governs that . Scott Harr: Section 2(c) includes maintenance. Councilwoman Dimler: And it 's right after that that I'm proposing to make (d), ' bug zappers can only be operated when people are recreating. Councilman Workman: Well I guess I would like to pass it with the bug zapper but not just include that but maybe include a list of other things. Mayor Chmiel : I think what we should do is adopt this to what we have and have this reviewed prior to the next reading to come up with some kinds of words. ' Here we are legislating again what you can do and what you can't do and I know it becomes annoying. I Jean Burke: Can I read one more thing from this article from Family Circle? This article and you may be interested in reading it says that when stress like thi. from rciEe is put into your life, it goes beyond annoying. The blood pressure goes up. Your heart . Your adrenalin goes and you know, I mean it 's really a health thing and I've experienced that with the bug zapper so I don't think we should look at it as telling people what to do. I think we should look at it as improving the environment of Chanhassen so people can live here and ' feel healthy and be happy. I don't think telling somebody that their bug zapper is bothering you coming from the City Hall is going to upset them as much as it 's going to redeem somebody that 's in slavery to somebody's inconsideration. 1 Mayor Chmiel : Yeah it is basically that. Councilman Mason: You know I really do think that noise pollution is something ' that we deal with. You know we're dealing with water pollution. We're dealing with air pollution. We're not dealing with noise pollution and while Mr. Mayor I hear what you're saying about legislating those kinds of things, I think those ' of us who are concerned about noise issues also have just as much right to quiet . I hear what you're saying about we're putting all these laws on the books and that but there is the other side of that . When the person is running their table saw at 10:30 at night in their garage. Or the bug zapper is going off outside your window. I mean this weekend, I'll admit it . I heat with wood 11 60 City Council Meeting - October 28, 1991 so I had my chainsaw going. Yeah, maybe that 's an issue. The blowers are an issue but that bug zapper thing, I mean noise pollution is maybe something we should be looking at a little more carefully. I Councilwoman Dimler: But I think this addresses both sides in that it limits the hours. It doesn't tell you you can't use them. I Councilman Mason: Yeah. Councilwoman Dimler: So I'm inclined to go along with this. I think from what ' Tom referred to earlier, what we were dealing with years ago with a different Council , it 's really been cleaned up and I really appreciate that you've taken into consideration all the input that we've had. And I'm inclined to go along I with this because I think these are stressful times and people are entitled to some peace and quiet . Scott Harr: Councilwoman Dimler , could I make a suggestion as far as the bug I zapper . Lord knows I tried to hit on every possible noise there was and just as I thought I had it . Mayor Chmiel: I think you sort of covered it here. Councilwoman Dimler: I was going to call you last week. ' Mayor Chmiel: Because it says here, no person shall engage in or permit construction, maintenance, repair activities creating noise including, but not limited to the use of any kind of electric, diesel, pneumatic or gas powered machines or other power equipment . Now if we just had something inbetween there. Scott Harr: Well I'd like to suggest that we consider simply stating, and I can develop the wording that bug zappers are included within the definition of maintenance or something. That way there are hours. I don't think I could effectively enforce it by saying people could only use it when they're • recreating because. Councilwoman Dimler: That 's true but 9:00 p.m. and summertime parties in the ' yard might go until midnight or 1:00. Jean Burke : Well how many people have parties that often during the summer? I mean do you live next to someone. Most of these people that have bug zappers have them on round the clock. They never unplug them. Councilwoman Dimler: You could have a pool. You'd be limiting the pool , parties . Things like that.. Would they have to get a special permit . If you're going to have a wedding around your pool. Our neighbors did that. You want to keep your guests bug free. ' Councilman Wing: We're saying they don't work. From the articles I've read said they don't work. They attract the biting bugs. ' Jean Burke: Let 's educate people so. . . 1 61 City Council Meeting - October 28, 1991 Councilwoman [limier: But that doesn't mean they won't buy them. That 's like ' we've educated people on the hazards of smoking and there are still some people that buy them and smoke them. That 's what I'm saying. I don't think we can stop people from buying them regardless of what they know about it . So the best we can do is limit them somehow. Mayor Chmiel : Let us make a motion on what we're proposing at this time for the first reading of this. Councilman Workman: I already did. Mayor Chmiel : Okay. And then have staff review this and come up with something and bring it back down. . . Councilwoman Circler: To address our concerns, right . Mayor Chmiel : Okay, we had a motion on the floor. Is there a second? Councilwoman Dimier: Second. Councilman Workman moved, Councilwoman Dimler seconded to approve the first reading of the Noise Ordinance with direction to staff to review the issue of including bug zappers. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously. ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS: Mayor Chmiel : One other thing that I'd just like to have Don mention, under Admin Presentations which we didn't put on the agenda but I'd just like him to discuss it the coming up this coming week. Could you just read that to see if there's anyone interested in attending it . Don Ashworth: Accept for Thursday, November 7th and I think the Mayor had mention_c th,!t you were thinking of going. Councilwoman Dimler: I'll go. Do you want to make a reservation for me? Don Ashworth: I'll do that . It 's in your packet if you're interested in going. ' Mayor Chmiel : He'll take care of it anyone that wants to go. Don Ashworth: The other one was I passed out the expense forms so I'm assuming for like the trip to Las Vegas, you've already charged your airline and you want ' reimbursement . . . Councilwoman Dimler moved, Councilman Mason seconded to adjourn the meeting. ' All voted in favor and the motion carried. The meeting was adjourned at 11:00 p.m. . Submitted by Don Ashworth City Manager Prepares by Nann Opheim I i 62 I CHANHASSEN CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING NOVEMBER 4, 1991 Mayor Chmiel called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. . The meeting was opened with the Pledge to the Flag. ' COUNCILMEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor Chmiel, Councilman Mason, and Councilman Workman COUNCILMEMBERS ABSENT: Councilman Wing and Councilwoman Dimler STAFF PRESENT: Don Ashworth, Todd Gerhardt , Charles Folch, Jo Ann Olsen and Sharmin Al-Jaff APPROVAL OF AGENDA: Councilman Workman moved, Councilman Mason seconded to approve the agenda with the following addition: Don Ashworth wanted to discuss the TH 5 Corridor Task Force. All voted in favor and the motion carried. PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENTS: REQUEST FOR VOLUNTEERS, CAMP FIRE BOYS AND GIRLS. Mayor Chmiel: We received this letter in October. It says Dear Community Leader . Volunteers are needed by all organizations. Enrich your own life by giving to someone else. Please spread the Camp Fire message. Help us by promoting the volunteer, Camp Fire is a co-educational youth organization for boys and girls in grades K thru 12 and it emphasizes teaching self reliance skills and good citizenship behavioral traits in an enjoyable atmosphere that promote self esteem and success. They're asking us to please present this at our Council meeting. I have done so. If there's anyone who wishes to join the Camp Fires Boy and Girls, please do so. CONSENT AGENDA: Councilman Workman moved, Councilman Mason seconded to approve the following Consent Agenda items pursuant to the City Manager's recommendations: ' a. Resolution #91-107: Accept Utility Improvements in Trappers Pass 4th Addition, Project 90-6. All voted in favor and the motion carried. VISITORS PRESENTATIONS: None. ' REQUEST FOR GRADING PERMIT, 6691 HORSESHOE CURVE, THE CHANHASSEN BANK. Mayor Chmiel: We'll have a staff presentation first and then we'll go from there. Charles Folch: This item was brought before staff earlier in the past week. There were some concerns about this existing structure and surrounding retaining walls on Horseshoe Curve. It 's apparent that the retaining wall system in the rear yard of the home is failing. It currently at this point in time jeopardizes the structure itself. If there would be a complete failure of the wall, there's also potential for some erosion and such that would potentially affect Lotus Lake. The property has now been acquired through Sheriff's Sale by 1 City Council Meeting - November 4, 1991 II the Chanhassen Bank and the bank rese rep ntative, Mr. Kevin McShane and his II consultant have been working with staff over this past week to try and formulate a plan which would be able to address and possibly fix the retaining wall situation yet this year and allow them to do the needed improvements this year in order to quickly be able to turn around and resell the property. Kevin is IIhere tonight to give a presentation on this issue. Mayor Chmiel : Good. Kevin. IIKevin McShane: Thank you Mr . Mayor and Council members. My name is Kevin McShane with the Chanhassen Bank and as Charles stated, we're interested in a grading permit on the property on Horseshoe Curve. I just wanted to give you a I little history on how all this developed. As Charles stated, we acquired the property through the Sheriff's sale and it consisted of three lots one of which had a homestead; One resident property or a home that was basically abandoned II and was to be torn down and wasn't and then the structure in question, it was a new home that was built back in 1986-87. The original house permit was issued in 198E . Construction on the home was completed in 1987. One of the issues is II there was never a final inspection done and that the property has sat there. Was never occupied and has not been sold. Through the Sheriff's sale there's a period of 6 months redemption period to the previous owner whereby we had to let that period run before we could effectively try to market it . So we really II acquired the property in June of this year to the point where we could actively put it on the market , which we did. We basically had a number of people look at it and as soon as they saw the problems with the retaining wall and drainage, I basically we haven't had any offers. Our real estate agent recommended that to really be able to sell this property we should correct the situation. We started taking bids in September to do that. The bids did not give a detail drawing so we went back and listed Rick Sathre from Sathre and Associates out of II Wayzata to do a grading plan for us and then have been rebidding it since then. So the time frame has involved us trying to market it and realizing that we really needed to do something to correct the situation in the back yard. The II retaining walls that are currently there one is, the nearest one to the structure is currently about 1 inch away from it and it 's leaning into the structure and failing. It is a hazardous situation. As the original excavating II was done some time ago, there was never proper drainage and therefore we've had water problems in the basement . We've gone in and tried to correct that with some sump pump and putting that in and spending some money to do that . And we still have the problem that water accumulates and doesn't drain properly. So as I a part of our excavation plan, it would be to slope the back yard to allow for proper drainage. I believe the packet included our plan as to what we would do and it would be a 3:1 slope that we would be proposing in the back yard. We do 1 own Lots 1 and 3. Lot 2 we sold at the end of October and the existing owner, we're in agreement with them to allow for an excavating easement on part of Lot 2 so the plan that you see does cover basically 3 lots but it 's primarily for I the benefit of the lot with the spec home. What we would intend to do is correct the hazardous situations that exist there now including taking out the retaining walls that are now failing. Again improving the drainage. We would, as we remove those hazards, the 3:1 slope we feel in the long run is the best I situation. We've looked at several alternatives including additional retaining walls and it 's our, Mr. Sathre's opinion that this is the best solution for a difficult situation. In addition we would propose this late in the year we had IIintended to sod the slope. That appears to not be a good alternative now. The II 2 II City Council Meeting - November 4, 1991 next best step would be to rad et it g graded. Put the top soil down, seed it and then put a protective covering on it so that it would vegetate in the spring. And we would propose a wood fiber blanket for that as a cover on that backyard slope. We do have a contractor that is available to do this. Mr. Ron Lahti has given us a bid. He would be able to start this week yet , pending approval. There are a couple of sites noted in my letter to the Council regarding where this would be hauled to. One of them is across the street . That 's been determined as we discussed this with staff, not to be a good alternative because of some future considerations. The Minnetonka location, the individual that he 11 needed to firm that up with is stuck, was stuck in the storm and didn't get back and he intends to hear from him yet today or tomorrow. That is Parkwood Builders and the site would be on Minnetonka Boulevard and Fairchild. A third alternative, as I laid out , would be the property just west of the bank that we currently own that is now low and that is a third alternative for a fill site. Basically it 's really been a burden to all the people who have been involved in this and we realize it 's not a good situation. A burden to the City in the fact that taxes have not been paid on that property for some time. We corrected that October 15th by bringing all of those current to the tune of about $38,000.00 for the parcels involved in addition to what we would need to invest here. It would be, the bids we have are a little bit open ended because of some of the things you may find as you tear down the building. The two small, the shed and the existing home but it appears it will be about $40,000.00 to do this project as it stands. I Mayor Chmiel: Very good. Kevin McShane: Any questions? ' Councilman Workman: Kevin, you're finding out about another side of banking here that you, engineering degree and everything now. I Kevin McShane: I don't have one but I'm learning. Councilman Workman: There were quite a few things in our memo that hopefully ' were laid out to Kevin that were concerns of staff. And I guess I was wondering if any of those had been taken care of. Kevin McShane: We addressed I believe all of those and I believe you're on page 2 of the staff recommendations? As far as the property owners within 500 feet , because of the timing on this and with the onslaught of the weather and a relatively short time frame, we had proposed and discussed today that we would send a letter , the bank would to all those people within the 500 feet detailing what was going to be happening and why. That seemed to be one solution that we talked about with staff that would make some sense. The material to be excavated, that 's primarily clay soil over there. The timbers from the existing retaining walls would have to be taken to a normal dump site and then the actual fill itself would be taken to the locations we discussed. The timeframe, our contractor feels that he could have that within 2 weeks and probably shorter, again depending on interruptions with weather. The travel routes would basically be Pleasant View Road out to TH 101, either to the north to .go to the Minnetonka site or south and then West 78th in town to the site that the bank currently owns. In terms of number 5, we again talked with staff about coming . up with an agreement . If this were to be approved to fine tune that and we felt 3 1 City Council Meeting - November 4, 1991 that we could get that done in fairly shor t order. The watershed district approval , the discussion on that was if the site across the street was going to be involved, it would potentially involve more than one acre. If that 's not a dump site, what we're discussing is less than one acre and would therefore not require watershed district approval. The cost estimates of the work regarding a letter of credit , our number is approximately $40,000.00 and the bank would be willing, we can't issue a letter of credit on ourselves but if that 's a cash deposit with the City, we'd certainly work that out . ' Councilman Workman: The travel routes to and from the site. I guess I'm not concerned about that because that's going to have to happen sometime sooner or later anyway. I guess a lot of the memo kind of talks a little bit and maybe 11 our planners can tell me, can talk about the nature of the time of the season that we're trying to get this accomplished and it 's relationship to the' lake. That seemed to be a 'concern as to whether we were going to have a problem with pollution in the lake. In the spring? But I don't really see that . I guess I don't really see that in some of these 7 points that are laid out . And then when you go to the bottom on number 3, from page 2 on the bottom half, how do we keep somebody from putting fill somewhere when there's a lot of if's and if the City does develop a storm water system in this area, the property may be needed for a retention pond. How do we balance that with what they want to do now? Don Ashworth: I think that the, as Kevin noted, he's in agreement at this point in time that they're not going to pursue that lot that we were referring to. There's an existing drainage swale in there. There's a storm sewer pipe. ' There's trees in there. By the time that we started to place all the pluses and minuses on a sheet of paper , it became pretty obvious that if you were going to use that site it 's going to require a lot more time than basically Mr. McShane has and so accordingly the Minnetonka site is better or the one here. Kevin McShane: That 's correct . The time constraint is a big issue there with all the outstanding items and we've discussed that fairly thoroughly. ICouncilman Workman: I guess I, like I say, it obviously needs to be done and it 's going to be done sometime. I know there's a window of opportunity here that 's closing very quickly but to ask them to wait 6 to 7 months or whatever the problem would have to be seems pretty rough considering maybe there still is an opportunity to get it done. Mayor Chmiel : Plus the fact that there is an existing problem. If the so called retaining walls are going, we'd have more problems with this if this washed into the lake. A lot more given problems all the way around and I agree 11 with the concept . Michael. Councilman Mason: I'm concerned knowing what the roads are like today, if this starts up pretty soon, how is that going to impact the residents of that area with mud and dirt falling on the road? With what 's going on now. I mean I agree with what you're saying about the time. That 's paramount to you. These 500 people, my guess is they're going to get notified the day of or the day after these trucks start going in and out and I understand the logistics there but there are going to be some eyebrows going up and I would guess a lot of calls to City Hall. 1 4 1 City Council Meeting - November 4, 1991 Councilman Workman: That was my point . If we said no you can't do it . Wait until June, there's still going to be that amount of trucks. Councilman Mason: Well right , I understand that but hopefully there won't be 6 inches of compacted snow on the ground in June and the people in the area will know about it . Mayor Chmiel : What would we do if we had Mr. McShane write a letter to each of the residents indicating the given problem? They would like to start this 1 project at this particular time and that they would make sure, I don't want to put words in your mouth as far as the time frame of working it . It wasn't interfering with people in the area and their going to work and coming back home. Possibly that contractor- working inbetween those respective hours. Councilman Mason: I think if the people are notified before it begins and I think if using Pleasant View myself occasionally, if I lived on Pleasant View, if I knew that the road was going to be taken care of while it was happening. You know I worry, we've been accused from time to time and I think wrongfully so of pushing things down people's throats. Well I know it 's wrongfully but some people are going to construe this as the trucks are rumbling. What 's going on here? And that 's my concern. Now you sound like you're willing to put some kind of letter out to tell the residents. Kevin McShane: We realize and the City has been very helpful in working. City staff in working with us on this and there are no good solutions. We inherited a problem and to me I think we run a greater risk by not doing it and waiting until spring. If those walls fail, they fail in an uncontrolled manner. I mean here if we can get the work done and get it restructured, I think we improve the po:.sibility of it being done right and being done once and we've looked at numerous alternatives. One thing I did visit with the contractor about was the fact that given the current time of the year and the commuting time in using TR 101 , that we would look to restrict his hauling between 8:00 and 4:00- and he saw no problem with that . Not hauling on Sundays and he was fine with that and felt that he really wants. What happens is he'll have to get in there and get the trees dowr, first and get the lumber out . When the actual dirt hauling starts, it 's about a 7 to 10 day time frame. I Mayor Chmiel : What kind of trees are those? Do you have any idea? Kevin McShane: One is a pine tree on the right side and I tried to designate ' that separately. The others are oak trees. I should note that on the front of the house there are two trees along the driveway within the proposed retaining wall. The smaller one is already dead and the one up near the front of the house is probably half dead. The way these retaining walls were put in and their close proximity to the existing trees, I believe and Rick Sathre believes they're already at risk. They showed some signs of stress already and there's a potential to lose those anyway. Mayor Chmiel : Would there be a potential in putting trees back in? I know that 's going to be a couple more dollars. Kevin McShane: Well those are fairly, there's a fair amount of trees on all those lots currently and I think by the time you do the slope, the west side I 5 City Council Meeting - November 4, 1991 where the retaining wall is is basically trees and brush along there separating it from the other neighbor currently and taking these trees out doesn't disturb anything along the property line. Lot 3 slopes off towards the other street and that is currently, that whole hillside is currently vegetated with trees and shurbs. Councilman Mason: When did the contractor think he could begin hauling the fill out? Kevin McShane: This week. Councilman Mason: When? I guess I'd like to see a letter going out to the ' residents before the trucks rolled in there? Kevin McShane: Well I told them that 'd be subject to what we discussed tonight . Time is of the essence but I also understand that . Councilman Mason: I guess I think that 's really important . With that, and I had one other question. The house on the bottom of page 2. The house was never ' given final certificate of occupancy. What 's the deal with the three season porch there? Was there never an original site plan or does not meet setbacks. This will come back to us then at some point or not? Mayor Chmiel: No. I don't think so. Jo Ann, were you going to say something? Councilman Mason: It 's not her's. Sorry. ' Jo Ann Olsen: I haven't worked on it so I don't know exactly what it needs as far as the porch itself. Todd Gerhardt : He would have to come back for a variance. They can't give a final for a building permit . Don Ashworth: I thought there was a discussion this afternoon that they were within the setback area. I think there were some questions as to the plan that Rick had originally presented. I'm not sure if that 's an issue at this point in time or not . Councilman Mason: If that letter gets out and is in people's hands before the 1 trucks get rolling, I don't have any trouble with it . Kevin McShane: The variance issue as I understood it was a separate issue from the grading and if that needed some more time to discuss, we were going to do ' that at a future date. It's a little unclear as to what was in the original plan that the previous owner presented and how all that happened. So we were going to address that at a future time. Mayor Chmiel: Will we provide names of the property owners for Mr. McShane? Don Ashworth: I mentioned to him that in that area, our utility listing would be quite complete and he got his agreement. In fact we will go further than 500 feet and get all of the names on Pleasant View. The other point that I think Jo Ann or Sharmin brought up is if this is approved, we would enter into then a 6 City Council Meeting - November 4, 1991 contract with him that would provide again a letter of credit. It would be a requirement that they would have to clean the streets if there's any dirt as a part of this. Hours of operation and any of the other conditions that we basically have talked about so far this evening. Just so that everyone is aware, staff has the authority to issue a grading permit up to 1,000 yards. With the amount of dirt that 's being presented here, that 's the reason it 's coming back to the City Council. Typically there is a hearing process and the Council would be waiving that recognizing that this work has to be complete by November 15th to meet the Watershed regulations and you've got an emergency situation in that if those walls do go down this winter or next spring, you could be taking that entire house into Lotus Lake. Kevin McShane: I have pictures if you care to see in a little more detail. , Mayor Chmiel: I drove past it . Councilman Workman: I've ' move it . I'd mote approval of grading permit for Lots 1, 2 and 3, Block 1, Stevens Addition with the condition that, the neighbors within at least 500 feet are notified before excavating begins. I Councilman Mason And with a friendly amendment with the conditions. Mayor Chmiel : Plus the conditions that Don had indicated. The letter of ' credit , clear. the streets and hour of operation. Councilman Mason- I'll second that . , Councilman Workman moved, Councilman Mason seconded to approve the Grading Permit request Lots 1, 2, and 3, Block 1, Stevens Addition with the following conditions: Neighbors within at least 500 feet of the project be notified prior to excavation, letter of credit be provided, the contractor will keep the streets clean of mud and debris and hours of operation. All voted in favor and the motion carried. PUBLIC HEARING: WATERMAIN AND SANITARY SEWER IMPROVEMENTS IN SECTION 24 AND LAKE RILEY HILLS; AUTHORIZE PREPARATION OF PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS, PROJECT 90-10. Name Address 1 David Mitchell 0.S.M. , Consulting Engineer Lee Wyman 400 Lyman Blvd. Gene Quinn 532 Lyman Blvd. B.J. & Mary Lou Janssen 500 Lyman Blvd. Diane Riegert 520 Lyman Blvd. Karen Blosberg 530 Lyman Blvd. Leslie O'Halloran 550 Lyman Blvd. Richard Chadwick 420 Lyman Blvd. Charlc Folch: Mr. Mayor , members of the Council. Tonight we have the project 1 consultant engineer Mr. David Mitchell with OSM to give you a presentation of the findings of that feasibility study. 1 1 City Council Meeting - November 4, 1991 ' David Mitchell: Mr. Mayor, members of the Council. My name is David Mitchell with OSM Engineering. We were asked to prepare this study primarily because of 11 a petition prepared by Mr. John Klingelhutz the developer of the Lake Riley Hills property. We were asked by the City to prepare this study to determine the need for public utilities to the property.. As part of this study we held a public meeting 2 weeks ago, October 21st in which we invited all the property owners within the study area and the study area is outlined by this dashed line here. This public meeting included the individuals from Lake Riley Shores area, or Shore Acres area and as I stated earlier, all of the property owners in that area. The existing system that we would want to be pulling off of to provide service to this area is shown here I believe. The existing watermain that would be used to serve. This again being the development site area: here. Existing watermain comes out of the Chanhassen Hills area. Existing sewer in the area. There's currently sanitary sewer both shown by the red being a forcemain, the green being gravity lines serving the entire lakeshore area of Lake Riley. This gravity system comes into City Lift Station #18 which is pumped up into the gravity system that goes into a City Lift Station #17 which is then pumped up to a point in the area of the large apartment complex here which then goes by gravity through Rice Marsh Lake area. Then eventually into the Lake Ann ' Interceptor down through here. Proposed improvements to the sanitary sewer system, we actually looked at two different options. The first option being to provide a gravity line at Lyman Blvd. to serve this area down to existing lift station and then in doing so, in looking at this proposed alternative we noticed 11 that the life station is sized currently at I believe 100 gallons a minute which is insufficient to serve this entire study area. In finding this out we looked at some other alternatives to see which is going to be the most cost effective way of doing this. I guess this being one of the first alternatives we looked at , whe;t we were looking at is rebuilding Life Station #17, providing a new forcemain up through here and then this green line here is an existing gravity ' line which would be insufficient to carry the amount of loads that this entire area would develop. Another problem that arises out of this, and maybe it 's better shown by this previous map that I had up here is that the forcemain, or excuse mc . The gravity line through the Rice Marsh area is apparently a -line ' that 's in very poor condition. It was installed over very poor soils and is currently having a lot of infiltration and inflow problems which the City pays fo- th;-ounnh their Metropolitan Waste Control fees. Taking all of this into ' account and also taking into account that the City is also having a study done by another consultant that covers the 1995 study area as it 's referred to, we started putting some more ideas together to come up with an alternative that is ' going to be a lot more efficient or cost effective and would also help serve the rest of the city I believe a lot better. I should add that the reason for the cost effectiveness is that we would be looking at relaying the entire line through the Rice Marsh Lake area, Along with being more cost effective, there's also some environmental concerns and the cost impacts would be approximately 5 times or well over $100.00 a foot to relay that pipe through there. We're looking potentially at putting it on pilings. This would be to prevent ' settlement and to help alleviate some of the inflow and infiltration problems. This proposal here, which is the proposal that 's actually recommended in the feasibility study, is to provide a gravity line onto Lyman. Again this would be ' extended up into Lake Riley Hills at this point . This portion here would be constructed as these other areas develop. Also construct a gravity line up into the Lakeview Hills Apartment complex. At this time we're not proposing to reconstruct Lift Station #17. It 's found that the life station has capacity to I 8 i City Council Meeting - November 4, 1991 I handle this development and this development only. We're not saying this has to be done at this time but we do recommend that this be done in the near future so that it has a capacity to handle development in the area. And then the primary reason for the public hearing tonight I believe is to look at the proposed watermain. That 's really what we're requesting authorization for plans and specs at this time. The City and the developer is. The proposed watermain is to extend a 20 inch watermain down TH 101 and then a 12 inch watermain over to and up through the proposed Lake Riley Hills Addition. The 12 inch would be installed in the boulevard or the ditch section of both roadways, thereby reducing the amount of the cost and reducing any costs associated with rebuilding the roads. The proposed watermain assessment area, as we see it drawn here, are these areas crosshatched here which are the areas that show the benefitted properties of that proposed watermain. As you can see, we're not showing any benefit at this time to the Shore Acres or the residential areas along Lake Riley. The reason for that is we're only extending the trunk watermain into this area. It was presented at the public meeting on the 21st 1 that the residents of these areas down here feel the need for city water, that they should petition the City at this time and make this part of this project . Again this being more prospective. The larger the project the more prospective to all those individuals involved. What we're looking at here as far as the study goes in proposed assessments to the area, the study shows an estimated assessment of $830.00 for the watermain and an estimated assessment of $2,000.00 for the sanitary sewer . The total project cost area $350,000.00 for the watermain and approximately $660,000.00 for sanitary sewer. These again I should stress are estimated assessments. They would be finalized as soon as properties are determined as far as the actual benefit to each property. Things that we want to take into account are actual number of lots available to each property. Questions arose out of the October 21st meeting stating you know my property has wetlands on it . Are those assessed and that 's something that we want to look into further to determine final assessments and that'd be part of the final assessment hearing. Proposed project schedule, again we're not proposing to do anything with the sanitary sewer at this time. Proposed _schedule would be to order plans and specifications for the watermain either at tonight 's meeting or in the near future. The Council would then receive the plans and specifications and order them out for bid sometime in spring of 1992 with the actual bids being received and construction beginning in spring of 1992 and hopefully having construction completed by the summer of 1992. And this schedule is primarily dictated by how quickly Mr. Klingelhutz would like to develop this property. And I'll turn this over to Charles I guess if he has any further comments. Charles Folch: Yes Mr. Mayor, members of the Council. As Dave pointed out , at this time it 's now known which route would be the most, is the available route I should say to direct a trunk sanitary sewer line. It is hoped that the City can work with the Metropolitan Waste Control Commission to get approval to construct a line up TH 101 which would not only service this area but also in the future service the 1995 and Bluff Creek areas. At this time we estimate a trunk assessment of somewhere in the ballpark of about $1,500.00 to $2,500.00 per unit so for the feasibility study purposes we've estimated $2,000.00. Once we know which is going to be the route to take, we can determine more final numbers based on the final alignment . As Dave also pointed out, the estimated assessment for the watermain is $830.00 per unit . Units for raw residential land were determined based on one generating an ultimate density of I 9 City Council Meeting - November 4, 1991 II approximately 1.85 units per acre and the high density residential and 9 Y Commercial areas, their units were basically determined from the flow units 11 generated from those types of properties. So at this time we'd certainly open the floor up for questions and public comment . I Mayor Chmiel: Very good. Thank you. As I mentioned, this is a public hearing. Anyor.e wishing to address this at this time, please come forward. State your name and your address and position that you're taking regarding this. Anyone like to come forward? Leslie O'Halloran: My name is Leslie O'Halloran and I'm from the area that 's off of Lyman Blvd. . I'm here with my neighbors tonight none of whom I think ' need this project or want it . I'm wondering if Mr. Klingelhutz, the developer is the only one interested in this project . I'm at a loss for words. One thing I'm wondering about doing these two projects separately. I don't know anything about laying pipes but I know just the aggravation alone of having our places ripped up two times doesn't seem like a good idea and I wonder about the cost of doing them separately. Also the timing. There are few of us to carry the cost of these improvements and I'm wondering if maybe, I know this area is going to II - be developed down, the line and there will be a lot more people needing and wanting it . I ju:t question why it should be now. And another concern I have is if this project should not be completed, if the developer is not able to sell ' the homes or whatever , is not financially able to carry his part , then who pays for the sewer or the water that comes in? Thank you. II Mayor Chmiel : Very good. Maybe what we should do is to address each one individually at this time. Maybe you can address some of those questions that were asked. I Charles Folch: Sure. Certainly the cost in doing two separate projects may or may no' be a- efficient as doing one project ultimately. At this point in time though we can't and don't know the timing of the sewer project . We would hope I that you would follow suit . It could even possibly be incorporated with this project . We do have a little bit of lead time through the winter here to develop the project plans and specs and it is somewhat possible that we could lump the two projects together depending on Metro Waste Control action. As far IIas the questioe of who, if the developer was unable to sell lots and who would pay , would make up the cost . What 's typically done is the assessments, once they are levied, they're levied against the property themselves. Whether he II subdivide: the properties into how many lots or whatever , the assessment is on record as levied against the property and as an owner as such, he is responsible for paying those assessments. I think you may have had one other question that II missed as I w:: taking notes here. Leslie O'Halloran made a statement that wasn't picked up on the tape. I Charles Folch: Well of course as Dave pointed out , the City received a petition from Mr . Klingelhutz to initiate the project. We have had some other perspective developers come and talk with myself and the planning department in I general aheut what was happening out in the area and the possible timing of infrastructure improvements. No other commitments or direct requests were made from these people. They were just basically informal questions as to what was ihappenln; II 10 II City Council Meeting - November 4, 1991 Mayor Chmiel: Okay, thank you. Anyone else? Richard Chadwick: My name is Richard Chadwick. I'm one of the owners of some 11 of the property that 's involved in this proposal. I also feel that there's apparently just one person, or one developer that has an interest in moving this project through and I think that most of the people that live in and around that area that 's involved in it are opposed to having the project put through at this time. I wonder if we have any say, a group of individuals that do own the property or probably even more of the property than Mr. Klingelhutz that is involved in the property, would have a say or perhaps even just an equal vote with him individually as to what the project should be placed through at this time or put off until such time as it is more practical to develop all of the property in the area rather than just do it because one person is ready to move forward. I would be opposed to it being put through at this time. Mayor Chmiel: Very good. Thank you. Anyone else. This is your opportunity to come up and say something. k Richard Chadwick: I think there are probably a dozen people or more over in this area that just concur with the last two statements. If you want a show of hands or if you want everybody to come up and say the same thing, I'm sure they could do that . , Mayor Chmiel: Well I'd certainly like to have everyone at least have an opportunity to take a position on this. At least we get a little better feel sitting on this side knowing where your thoughts are. , Bailey Janssen: My name is Bailey Janssen. I'm also one of the homeowner of the area. I agree with Leslie and Dick Chadwick that there's one party in the area that wants this done. The rest of us don't. To my knowledge anyway. And if it is going to happen, I think it is a little premature right now for the area to be developed. Why not do the sewer and the water at the same time? It 's a big added expense to do them separately. And it's a big hassle for the homeowners in the area top. To do one now and then another one 2 years down the road. Mayor Chmiel: Good, thank you. Lee Wyman: My name is Lee Wyman and I own the adjoining property next to the addition and I'm opposed to it because I feel that the only personal gain is John Klingelhutz and I don't think all of us in the neighborhood should, at this time anyway, should have to pay because he wants to press ahead and develop it . So I'm opposed to it . I Karen Blosberg: I'm Karen Blosberg. I'm also a homeowner in the same area. Mayor Chmiel: Karen, could you please spell your last name? Karen Blosberg: Blosberg. And I am opposed to it also. I feel we've been homeowners there for many years. Paid our taxes. Taking care of our property and I feel that this is being shoved down our throats. Mayor Chmiel: Thank you. Anyone else? 1 11 1 City Council Meeting - November 4, 1991 ' Diane Riegert : My name is Diane Riegert and I have the same viewpoints p s as the others. We only own 1 acre in this area but my concern is for some of the 11 neighbors that do own lots of property and the fact that they're going to be either forced to develop it at this time and just the assessment on some of these people is just way too much than they can handle. Thank you. Mayor Chmiel: Thank you. Anyone else? Okay. Before I even close. the public hearing, I 'm getting sort of a feeling here that the need or want or desire is really not here. I'd just like to express an opinion, at least as discussion. I've got a couple questions too as well. We're going to have another larger capacity new lift station. Who picks up the cost for that? Does the developer pick up that cost or does the City pay for that cost? ' Charles Folch: Well, for this type of project where the lift station improvement would be in conjunction with a trunk facility improvement , the cost ' would be, or are proposed to be lumped into one project which would be assessed back to all the benefitting properties within the serivce area. Mayor Chmiel : What amount of contribution would the developer put into this? ' Charles Folch: it this point in time, based on the $2,000.00 and $030.00 per unit cost , you're looking at about $138,000.00 for sanitary sewer and a little ' over $5 ,000.00 for watermain. Mayor Chmiel : Okay. Good. Thank you. As I say, a little bit of discussion. ' I'm thinking seriously of probably what we should do is just table this. Councilman Workman: Carry the public hearing over? ' Mayor Chmiel . For right now, yeah. I'd like to see staff do some reviewing of this and come up with some additional dollars and numbers. I guess my major concern is what it 's going to cost the city to go through this process and as you well know, growth is something that eventually happens but yet I want to make sure that the amount of dollars that would be expedited would be taken care of so it doesn't put the city in a bind. I'd like staff to go back and be a little creative in this. I also want to, there's a conflict for those who want ' it and those who don't and I'd just as soon see that also be addressed. There's a lot of dollars involved in the project just like any given project. And when you come to assessments, it 's something that everybody has to pay and maybe when's the property time? When's not the proper time? I understand too, I think as you mentioned that the Lake Riley Hills subdivision will be included in this with that portion of it . On some of the variables as far as assessments ' for one service area and higher or lower than adjacent future service area, can you explain that a little bit? Charles Folch: Well that 's kind of a concept if you will that has recently come up to staff's attention and we thought we'd also bring it to the Council. In fact probably later on tonight with the budget work session. As you're well aware, one of the difficulties we run into with assessment projects are ' assessing, whether it be a street or a utility project or whatever the project might be, is assessing a certain dollar value or dollar amount to property owners in one area for one project and then within a year or two, three years down they road we have another project for which the dollars may be different . 12 ' • City Council Meeting -- November 4, 1991 Somewhat different . , a ferent . Sometimes significant . And you have the question as to fairness as to why I'm being assessed this amount when this area over here paid that smaller amount . So it 's an idea that possibly looking at what the overall system costs are going to be in a drainage area, if you will. And determining possibly how many potential units should be generated out of that area and determining from that a uniform trunk cost which could be adjusted on an annual basis if you will but that way it would insure that everybody within a drainage service area would be paying relatively the same amount . It 's an idea. Something to look at . Investigate further as the Council has directed us at the last meeting to look into establishing uniform assessment policies for these improvements projects. So it 's something we may want to take a look at as we go through the process of establishing these policies. Mayor Chmiel: I think it puts us in a very precarious position to come up with a conclusion as well, as it is a difficult one to come up with. And if we can get some direction clarification, that might clarify some things. But anyway, that 's where I'm at least coming from. Councilman Workman: Do you want to close the public hearing or not close the public hearing? Richard Chadwick: Could I ask a couple more questions? Mayor Chmiel: Sure. Richard Chadwick: First of all is it necessary and is it to include all of the property in that area in the assessment at the present time or could some of the property that is for instance not open to development immediately, that is not on Lyman Blvd. , away from it at some distance, be assessed later on when it is subject to development? The next question I guess fits in with some of the questions that have already been raised and that is, can we enlarge, maybe a year or two down the line, enlarge the area that is serviced by this and thereby lower the costs for everyone. And perhaps at the same time put off the water project until it can all be put in at one time to again lower the costs for everyone. I think the costs here are quite expensive for these as individual • units and it 's going to really hurt people. Don Ashworth: Mr . Mayor? Mayor Chmiel: Yes Don. I Don Ashworth: I'd like to address number one and I think the engineer should address the second. But what I heard the Mayor saying was exactly that . He'd like to see this item tabled to see if there's a way in which improvements potentially could be extended to allow those who wanted, primarily Mr. Klingelhutz to get the improvements while not creating an undue burden on the homeowners. As we're sitting here tonight, I don't have a magic solution to throw out in front of everyone but what I heard the Mayor saying is he would like to see it tabled or Council, would like to see it tabled to see if we can do that . Find a solution. ' Mayor Chmiel: Right . 1 13 1 I City Council Meeting - November 4, 1991 Don Ashworth: Number two, Charles. Charles Folch: Which was expanding the service area which is a very good question to ask. The service area which Dave presented to you tonight up on the screen is the largest area, if you will that could be served by gravity to this trunk utility so that 's the defined service area. There is the potential that if a joint project was done via the trunk line up TH 101, that line would also have another service area attached to it so there is a portion of that line where the cost certainly could be spread over a larger area but the improvements 1 along Lyman Blvd. would be specific to this service area. Mayor Chmiel : I'd also appreciate getting any of those drawings that would be 1 available that 's going to be presented so we at least have an opportunity to review those prior to the council meeting as well. Tom. I Councilman Workman: Yeah, I thought the report really, for the impact it was going to have on the area, I thought we could have added maybe some of the drawings and maybe OEM can provide us with that . I think it was Richard Chadwick right? ' Richard Chadwick: Yes . ' Councilman Workman: You kind of summed it up. It 's kind of a question of not doing it at all and really creating developers out of those who maybe don't want to develop and we run into this problem an awful lot . I've got a feeling it 's going to bt coming up on a lot more with the MUSA line expansion. I see some people on the list . I'm sure those with properties maybe thought at one point of development sometime in the future. Maybe just not at this point and everybody is maybe at a different phase of what they were thinking and Mr . ' Klingr,lhutz is the bad guy because he's calling the question. But it did kind of, I did kind of ask myself then, why do we not have the Lake Riley residents if ir, fact . . .Lake Riley were in here and we'd have a riot . I'm not sure if ' they'd want it or not . But those seem like a lot of big options that were not really studied. I know they were thrown out but not really studied. And you're saying maybe the study will take care of it . ' Charles Fol:!- . Well, we looked at what the people along Lake Riley and Kiowa had and basically those people are currently on city sewer . There was a special project done some years ago to get them city sewer. They all at this time are 1 still on wells . We do not know the status or condition of these wells but to, in a sense not force a project down somebody's throat if you will, we did notify these property owners of the neighborhood meetings so they could come and hear 11 about the project . We invited them to give us information, phone calls, whatever , if they were interested in being a part of this project , to let us know. So that was one of the big pluses we were hoping to gain from the neighborhood meeting. However, as of this time only two of the property owners ' along Lake Riley Blvd. have shown an interest in being a part of the project. Councilman Workman: Okay. Well I agree with the Mayor and City Manager's ' suggestion on tabling. Mayor Chmiel: Mike? 1 14 r City Council Meeting - November 4, 1991 Councilman Mason: Yeah, I do too. Personally it would seem pretty wasteful to do one now and 2 years from now dig it up and do it again. That seems to me like we're throwing good money after bad. I think maybe there's move to it than that but I've thought more than once how irritated I get when I see a road dug up for one thing and then in 2 years it gets dug up again. So yeah, I think tabling it 's a very good idea for now. Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Rather than bringing this back up to Council, as indicated in the staff report , bring it back by December 9th, I'd like for us to delay that until sometime in January. Probably our second meeting in January which would be January 20th. And probably prior to that time I'm not sure that if you have all the information pulled together, you sit down individually or sit down with a group from the people within that area and have sort of a work , session. Charles Folch: We can have another one. Mayor Chmiel: So they will have an idea as to what and where we're going with this. But right now I see a lot of things here that this really does not strike my fancy at this time. So with that , with the agreement I'd like to make that motion that we table this. Is there a second? Councilman Mason: Second. I Mayor Chmiel moved, Councilman Mason seconded to table the watermain and sanitary sewer improvement project in Section 24 and Lake Riley Hills until the January 20, 1992 City Council meeting. All voted in favor and the motion carried. PUBLIC HEARING: VACATION OF A PORTION OF LONE CEDAR LANE (CEDAR CREST COURT) , RIGHT-OF-WAY, SCOTT GAUER, 3820 LONE CEDAR LANE. Councilman Workman: I'd move to close the public hearing. I don't know if there's going to be a problem. Mayor Chmiel: No, we don't have to close the public hearing at this time. We're going to leave it open. That 's the way I tabled it . Councilman Workman: No, I mean this one. Mayor Chmiel: Oh, on this particular one? , Councilman Workman: I don't think we've got a problem here do we? , Jo Ann Olsen: I've just got a couple things to add. Mayor Chmiel: Yeah, maybe there's something. ' Councilman Workman: There are children here who would like to go home. Including me. , Jo Ann Olsen: There isn't a problem. This was brought in the past and there was some objection from the owner on Lot 3 to give up his right to the vacation. 15 1 City Council Meeting - November 4, 1991 They have come to an agreement now but he wants a condition added. Condition number 5 stating that the Gauers shall grant easements strictly in accordance with the terms of the July 8, 1991 agreement . The agreement between the two parties and in that agreement there's referral to easements being granted so he wants the approval tied to those easements being provided. We have no objection ' to tha4 being added since he is giving up his right to that right-of-way. Other than that it 's right-of-way that we no longer need and with the proper easements being granted, we're recommending approval . Also then in condition 2, it should say Lot 3, Block 1. Not Lot 4. ICouncilman Workman: I move to close the public hearing. Mayor Chmiel: Is there anyone who would like to address it? Scott Gauer: I'm here. I don't really have anything to say. I have looked lover the proposal and I don't have any questions. Mayor Chmiel: Alright . There's a motion on the floor to close the public hearing. Councilman Mason: Second. ' Councilman Workman moved, Councilman Mason seconded to close the public hearing. All voted in favor and the motion carried. The public hearing was closed. ' Mayor Chmiel: Discussion? Councilman Mason' It sounds like everyone's happy. ' Councilman Workman: I'd move vacation of a portion of Lane Cedar Circle, Lot 3, Block 1? II Jo (nn 0ioen: Right . Councilman Workman: Cedar Crest . ' CouncilmEln Mason: Second. Scott Gauer : . . .Lot 4 right? Jo Ann Olsen: Well, it 's in front of Lot 3 and Lot 4. You don't need to specify. It 's described in the easement vacation. Both lots are involved, Lots 3 and 4 . Resolution #91-108: Councilman Workman moved, Councilman Mason seconded to approve Vacation of a portion of Lone Cedar Lane (Cedar Crest Court) right-of-way with the following conditions: 1. A 20 foot wide drainage and utility easement shall be reserved over the ' existing watermain and the new storm sewer facilities within the right-of-way proposed for vacation. 16 11 City Council Meeting - November 4, 1991 I 2. A driveway or cross access easement shall be provided by the applicant in favor of Lot 3, Block 1, Cedar Crest (Mitylings) for rights of egress and ingress through the proposed vacated right--of-way. 3. The City should delay recording the vacation document until the City has received final payment from MnDot for the cooperation construction project (#90-9 Trunk Highway 5 Frontage Road Improvement ). 4. The City shall quit claim the vacated right-of-way to the Gauers. , 5. The Gauers shall grant easements strictly in accordance with the terms of the July 8, 1991 agreement. All voted in favor and the motion carried. APPEAL DECISION OF THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS AND APPEALS, 51 FOOT WETLAND SETBACK VARIANCE REQUEST TO CONSTRUCT A SWIMMING POOL, BOB AND ANNA SANTOS, 251 TRAPPERS PASS. Councilman Workman: Mr . Mayor, do we need four votes for these? , Mayor Chmiel: Variance needs 4 to 1 right? Don Ashworth: I don't think so. Mayor Chmiel : Are you sure it 's a simple majority? Don Ashworth: I believe so. Sharmin Al-Jaff: Variance you need 3 votes but zoning ordinance amendment you need 4. Mayor Chmiel: Okay, I was just being cautious. ' Councilman Workman: Just checking. Mayor Chmiel: Who's going to present this? 1 Sharmin Al-Jaff: I will. The applicant is proposing to build a swimming pool within 24 feet of a Class B wetland. Lots within this subdivision were created I with insufficient depth which made them difficult , if not impossible to build upon without a variance. There was compounded by approval of a building permit which resulted in the construction of the home without obtaining a variance. At the time these actions were taken, staff was working under enormous pressure being both short handed and faced with large number of development proposals. The ordinance requires that we survey the area within 500 feet . We did so and we found out that we have setbacks from the wetland that are as 18 feet, 52 feet , 20 feet , 35, 65, 62. None of those meet the required 75 foot setback. There is a precedent that has been created within this neighborhood. Normally staff would not recommend approval of a variance for a swimming pool since they are not normally considered to be a necessity. However, in this case the owner purchased a lot with reasonable intentions and are only now having problems due to past actions by the City. The Board of Adjustments and Appeals reviewed this 17 • City Council Meeting - November 4, 1991 item and recommended denial with a vote of 2 to 1. Chairman Johnson and Board member Watson were concerned with the level of chlorine that would be dumped into the wetland and how it would affect the wetland. Staff contacted Ms. Ceil Strauss with the DNR. We also contacted the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency. WE were informed as long as the concentration of chlorine does not get , high concentration of chlorine does not get into the wetland, that it won't do it any harm. Again there is a reduced setback standard established in the .surrounding neighborhood. Approval of this variance will not set a precedent nor establish new reduced setbacks within the neighborhood. We are recommending approval of ' this variance with conditions outlined in the report . Thank you. Mayor Chmiel: Thank you. Is there anything that you wish to address on this? 11 Or do you accept what staff basically has indicated? Kevin Norby: Mr. Mayor and members of the Council. My name is Kevin Norby. I'm a landscape architect and I've been retained by Bob and Anna Santos to put together the plan for these improvements and to help them understand this variance process. One thing I'd like to point out I think is that they didn't build the house and at the time they purchased it were under the impression they ' wouldn' t have a problem putting in a swimming pool or any sort of an accessory structure on the lot . It was no fault of theirs that the home was built without a variance and I think this problem will occur again if any of the other ' residences, on the wetland try to put in an accessory structure because they all extend into thin wetland. I guess we would obviously ask you to consider the recommendation of the staff. When we met on the 14th, Ms. Watson and Mr. Johnson c• pressed a concern about the chlorine. Between Sharmin and myself we've spoken with the State Health Department , Pollution Control Agency and the DNR and they've .72.1 given us their blessing to go ahead with the pool. We have moved the pool equipment and the backwash equipment outside of the 75 foot ' setback to take care of any of those concerns so that we will not be putting the chemicals directly onto the wetland. ' Mayor Chn,iel: Very good. Thank you. Councilman Wori,man: You have my comments from the Board. ' •Mayo Chi ___ ' Ir ybc you'd like to. Councilman Workman: Well I sort of thought the Santos letter did kind of 1 summarize soon of the points. It kind of centered on I think we're all kind of trying to center on what an accessory structure and what was allowed and maybe what wasn't allowed and which I think really maybe wasn't pertinent discussion in that . The other two members of the Board felt that a deck was okay but a pool wasn't . I think we're kind of getting into a discussion about what we felt people should do and shouldn't do and I don't know if it was based on anything concrete so the word, using the word dumping in front of chlorine when you're talking about a wetland always scares people too and that , as the staff report I think proves, is not exactly what 's happening there so I based it on exactly why we kind of relaxed that one provision of the Board of Adjustment and variances ' to allow these people to do what all their neighbors have been allowed to do. Mayor Chmisi : Very good. I 18 City Council Meeting - November 4, 1991 Councilman Mason: I agree with what 's been said here. Mayor Chmiel: The only additional thing that I'd like to see added to the staff recommendations is item number 4. Jie've discussed that one of the concerns with the backwash but I'd like item number 4 to be that the backwash equipment be set back 75 feet from the wetland as one of the conditions. Additional conditions. Councilman Mason: It already is set back? Mayor Chmiel: Yeah, but I want it spelled out . So with that . Councilman Mason: With that I'll move approval of variance request #91-18 with the conditions stated in the report plus item 4. Councilman Workman: Second. Councilman Mason moved, Councilman Workman seconded to approve Variance Request #91-18 with the following conditions: 1 . The applicant uses Type III erosion control along the edge of the wetland. 2. The applicant remove the sandbox/tot lot located within the utility and drainage easement and restore the wetland to its original condition. 3. The applicant shall re-establish vegetation in all areas disturbed by the construction of the pool immediately after work is completed and prior to I final inspection. 4. The backwash equipment shall be placed 75 feet from the edge of the wetland. 1 All voted in favor and the motion carried. A. ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT REGARDING ACCESSORY DWELLINGS, ALLOWING TWO PRINCIPLE STRUCTURES ON A SINGLE LOT, FIRST READING. B. APPEAL DECISION OF THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS AND APPEALS, REQUEST TO ALLOW TWO PRINCIPLE STRUCTURES ON A SINGLE LOT AND A 28 FOOT FRONT YARD VARIANCE, C.W. FREEMAN, 7431 DOGWOOD. Jo Ann Olsen: I should just state that item A you can't act on. 1 Mayor Chmiel: Pardon? Jo Ann Olsen: Number A. Letter A. You don't have the 4/5 vote. Mayor Chmiel : No, so we can't do that this evening. That 's right. Unfortunately we have one of our Council people flying his 747 to London tonight . He wasn't setting up for this meeting and our other Council member is also sick. So I would think that what we should wind up doing with this is just tabling it to our. Councilman Workman: Can't we do 6(b)? 19 ' . 1 City Council Meeting - November 4, 1991 IIMayor Chmiel : We could do 6(b) if you'd like. But if we don't allow the first part of i ' the second part doesn't fall into it . 11 Councilmar Mason: This is a tough issue. I'd be more comfortable with 5 people here than 3. IIMayor Chmi W:l_ we have to have 4/5 on item A. Councilman Mason: Right . Councilman Workman: Are you saying we can't do B unless we do A? IIJo Ann Olsen: No, you can do B. ' Mawr Chmiel : You could do B if you so choose but then you're cutting the other- IItwo Council people out from the discussion. Councilm-n Workman: Well you know I never liked those guys. II Sharmin Al-Jaff: One of the conditions of the denial of this variance is that they rip up all the plumbing system that they have right now so if they do that , I guess they lose their chance to be included within the amendment . The Zoning IIOrd nance Amendment . Councilman Worlds&= Yeah, but a variance can always be approved outside of that righ' ° I don't know. I guess I cam: prepared to act on it but . IIMayor Chmiel : I would think, as I'm really looking at this, I would think we'd be bee' to just , unfortunately you're here this evening. You drove through not IItoo pleasant ctreetc. Hopefully they're better than what they've been now. But I think iL7. would be the position we should take. But I'm open for discussion. II Craig Freeman: I don't know exactly how to present this under the circumstanee.e. I gather from what you say that . Mayor Chmiel: Please just state your name for our records. IICraig Fracmar,: Oka/, m;' name is Craig Freeman. I live at 7431 Dogwood Road and we've been discussing this for some time now. Are we discussing item B now? Mayor Chmisl : Yes, we could. 11 Craig Freeman: Well if you'd prefer to hold it all over until later , if you'd be good enough to put it at the front end of the meeting, that would be alright . Mayor Chmiel: Good point and I don't disagree with that either. I think we II should. Councilman Mason: I do too. II Craig Freeman: That 's fine with us but . 1 20 II II City Council Meeting - November 4, 1991 Councilman Workman: Old business usually comes before new. This would then be old wouldn't it? Craig Freeman: This is very old. Mayor Chmiel : It 's getting really old. Okay. I Councilman Workman: You still have time to try one of our fine restaurants in town. I Craig Freeman: I have and they are good. Mayor- Chmiel: So with that we'll table item A and B until our next Council agenda. Councilman Workman: Second. 1 Craig Freeman: Can I make one other comment? Mayor Chmiel : Yes sir. Cram Freeman: In my reading over this material and reading over the proposed change in the amendment to the ordinance, one thing appeared to me that might solve everybody's problem. That is if we add to the number 3 item on the ordinance. I don't know whether you have it in front of you or not . Number 3 item says the accessory dwelling must have been constructed at least 10 years prior to the construction of the principle dwelling. Now if we add to that and it 'E useage shall not be altered, then that leaves the dwelling as it is. Nobody can turn a chicken coop into a guest house. Only guest houses that have bear t `re for 10 years can be used as guest houses. And ours has been there for 40 year So you might consider that in your discussion. Thank you. Mayer Chmiel Good point . Thank you. 1 Mayor Chmiel moved, Councilman Workman seconded to table action on the Zoning Ordinance amendment regarding accessory dwellings and the appeal to the decision 11 of the Board of Adjustments and Appeals to allow two principle structures on a single lot until the next City Council meeting. 'All voted in favor and the motion carried. ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS: Don Ashworth: I showed November 21st as, are you ready for the Administrative? I Mayor Chmiel Are we ever. Don Ashworth: I had shown November 21st as the date that we had selected for the next TH 5 Corridor meeting. That 's with people from the University, Bill Moresh. They are preparing a presentation to or for the task force. That is also the night of an NRA meeting so both Tom and the Mayor will have a conflict at least after 7:30. The question is, how early can we pull Council members or task force members in to give as much time as possible to the presentation by Bill Moresh and Lance Niccard and still meet your schedule? In other words, 21 ' 1 City Council Meeting - November 4, 1991 II they would like to do it at 5:00. I said no way. The question is 5:30 or 6:00, 1 I think we talked about 6:30 but that really squeezes them into a 1 hour time slot . So if you could do a 6:00 or 5:30 would be preferable. Mayor Chmiel: I'm going to be in St . Cloud and Vickerman that day. I could . IIprobably try to push for 5:30. Don Ashworth: Okay. I'll be putting out a memorandum. One of the areas that 1 they would like to do is they have like a mini-group of mini-cameras and they have picked out areas along the corridor and they would like to have assigned one of those areas to each task force member and sometime during the next week 1 to 2 weeks we would actually be giving you this camera along with you might say instructions in what it is that they want you to look at at that particular location and then literally take pictures of that location. They will develop those and then use those as examples of what it is that you're seeing. What it 1 is that should be preserved and why and how. I'm not quite sure if what they have in mind is going to work but I thought it was kind of an innovative approach. Again I think that they have a purpose in trying to have the Council 1 or task force members looking at these areas so that when you come in. Councilman Workman moved, Councilman Mason seconded to adjourn the meeting. All Ivoted in favor and the motion carried. The meeting was adjourned at 8:55 p.m. . Submitted by Don Ashworth City Manager 1 Prepared h,, Nanr Opheim 1 I 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 22 1 CHANHASSEN PARK AND RECREATION COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING SEPTEMBER 24 , 1991 Chairman Schroers called the meeting to order at 7 : 30 p .m . . ' MEMBERS PRESENT: Jim Andrews , Wendy -Pemrick , Dawne Erhart , Larry Schroers , Dave Koubsky and Jan Lash MEMBERS ABSENT: Curt Robinson STAFF PRESENT: Todd Hoffman , Park and Rec Coordinator and Jerry Rugemer , Recreation Supervisor APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Lash moved , Erhart seconded to approve the Minutes of the Park and Recreation Commission Minutes dated August 27 , 1991 as amended on page 1 by Jan Lash changing the phrase "who it not in litigation" to "who is now in litigation" . All votedin favor and the motion carried . HENNEPIN COUNTY REGIONAL RAILROAD AUTHORITY RAIL CORRIDOR, HOPKINS TO CHANHASSEN, INTERIM USE . Public Present: — Name - - - - - — - Address Verne Severson 675 Lakota Lane Diane Gilbertson 1190 Bluff Creek Drive Matt Thill 9610 Meadowlark Lane Hoffman: Tonight to begin my comments I 'd like to say that the majority of the input. , the Commissioners , the Council and then as well staff has received to date has surrounded the issue of allowing horses or horse use on the trails . The availability of this proposed to horse owners is a valid concern . One which will be addressed in an appropriate time in the planning process for this recreational opportunity . However , prior to that issue even being resolved I think we can certainly touch on it this evening . The larger issue of whether or not we can sufficiently upgrade and maintain this trail at this time for the use by the general public . I believe is the larger issue which we ' ll take a look at this evening . With that I 'd like to distribute the letters which I have received . I know you may have received copies of the same from people in the city of Chanhassen expressing their concerns and desires in relation to this trail . Some of these folks in the audience were here last night at the Council meeting on unrelated issues so I applaud them for their involvement in this item as ' well . The first thing I 'd like to do this evening is take a look at a 12 minute video tape of the corridor itself . . . had dubbed in some narration on here so you can orientate yourself from the tape and what we 're actually viewing . You can go ahead and turn on your TV 's up there . ( At this point in the meeting a video presentation on the railroad corridor was presented . ) ' Hoffman : Just to show the distances which we covered there . The origin of Pioneer Trail is here . The entry point in this location is dowP farther into the city of Eden Prairie on Lake Riley Road . The entrance would be 1 Park and Rec Commission Meeting September 24 , 1991 - Page 2 • 11 you 'd need to travel down to TH 101 to the underpass where you can exit at that point . Continuing on , that segment is 1 .4 miles . Continuing around the next .57 miles between TH 101 and Bluff Creek at grade crossing and then this section from Bluff Creek to the Chanhassen border and to the 212 underpass which is here . The 212 underpass is just under a mile . When you drive from this point to here you need to turn around on the tracks and go back . There 's no exit point at that location . Another thing to think about is eventually at what point it would be . . .going ahead with this project . If you 're going to lay this portion of the trail in the aggregate surface with the paving machine , you need to drive the paving machine from Bluff Creek the 1 .05 miles to this location and then back each truck individually backing up the full 1 mile distance to get to that point . Unload one truck which would go what , about 40 feet and then drive that truck back out . . .so establishing this trail in it 's present orientation is a difficult task . Schroers : The Lake Riley itself and where that gravel road that comes out of Eden Prairie Park there is just to the northeast of the bridge on Pioneer Trail? Hoffman : Just to the northeast , correct . That 's where you looked down and saw the horse off to the left of the house . Again the Park and Recreation Commission initially reviewed this item on April 23rd . Prior to addressing the planning and operational procedures which would be necessary to transform the railroad grade into a useable trail , a correction to the recommended budget amount would be necessary . As documented in the Minutes of April 23rd , the correct estimate for the purchase of the typical material which is being used , 3/8 minus limestone aggregate is $15 ,000 .00 . In speaking with different suppliers , the 3/4 minus which 100% of the material falls through a 3/4 inch sieve but 5% to 10% of it is that large . However this is the material that the City of Shorewood uses and they don 't receive back as good a reviews about the trail surface . However , if you went with that it would be an approximate cost savings of $3 ,500 .00 . This being the case , it 's embarrassing for me to have recommended a budget figure of $6 ,000 .00 when we went through our budget . That was caused by an error in calculating the aggregate quantity a second time when I went ahead and did the budget proposal . However , if it 's the wish of the Commission to go ahead with the project and look for that additional money , that portion could be very easily made up in the budget allocation prior to taking the budget to the City Council on October 14th . However again the larger issues of the budget amendment . . .prior to amending the proposed budget it would be my recommendation to take a look at those different issues which have been brought to your attention this evening . Again in ' conducting the site visit of the corridor a number of discoveries were made , including the presence of dramatic views which some of which you can see on video but certainly the video does not do justice . Existing dangerous conditions , the road overpasses , the lack of an existing trailhead which can be used for vehicle parking and trail access and then again just the shear immensity of the project . Further it was clearly apparent that the alternative to developing an equestrian/snowmobile trail or one or both of those uses in the ditch line of the railroad right-of-way in our section just is not feasible as you saw . Again it is my conclusion at this time that the City is clearly not in a position simply to surface the trail and leave it at that . There are to be clearing of immense 11 Park and Rec Commission Meeting II September 24 , 1991 - Page 3 quantities of brush and small trees prior to work beginning on the trail II surface . And again the safety railings would need to be constructed absolutely at TH 101 . A barricade could be constructed at 212 stopping th trail before it crosses the trussle because once you cross the trussle you e don 't go but to 50 yards and the tracks end . Further the corridor lacks defined access points other than the at grade crossing at Bluff Creek Drive . Then there 's no publically held land anywhere in the area for us to develop a trail access where a person from some other portion of the city could drive to that location . Access the trail . Walk 2 miles out . 2 miles back and then leave the trail again . So as you can see , I have mixes emotions on the alternatives which are available to us at this time . The first would be to sufficiently increase the proposed budget . Plan on completing the improvements in 1992 . However if this is not met with favor from the Commission , the project must be delayed . The opportunity to construct a trail of this link bisecting probably the most beautiful area II of Chanhassen along the bluffs there is unmatched within the city . However the expense of construction of the safety railings and the investment of labor and materials and machinery would be significant . Again additional costs would be accumulated in trucking the aggregate to the site . They would bring in about a 20 ton loads in semis to the site . The cost is shown there I think just over $4 ,000 .00 if we had to send tandem axle dump" trucks to their pit and take 7 tons at a time . We would be doing that for weeks to get all the material on site so what would be proposed is they would create a stockpile near the location and then we would take it from there . Load it into the dump trucks and create the surface . Then again the lack of a trail head raises significant doubts about the accessibility to the proposed trail to the general public . It 's my recommendation that if the Park and Recreation Commission wishes to move forward with the plane to complete this project in 1992 , that staff be directed to prepare a detailed analysis of the financial investments necessary to complete such and then allow for a budget amendment . It would be a fairly drastic budge amendment depending on what portions of the improvements we would take a look at completing . Then further investigate the potential trail head locations that would potentially be available to us . At one point a perso did approach me for the sale of the lot just north of the TH 101 underpass on the west side . That lot could potentially at some point in the future be acquired . Again the sight lines in that area and the access is not the most. conducive to a trail head location . Then again the grade on this site is , that 's the reason there 's not a house there right now is because the grading would be extensive . Schroers : Was there a price attached to that lot? Hoffman : Not at that time , no . I Schroers: Do you have any input from the cities of either Eden Prairie or Chaska . . .developing the trail and what their timeframe would be? II Hoffman: The City of Eden Prairie is taking a look at it in the 1992 budget process . I 'm not sure if they ' ll move ahead with that if the City Of Chanhassen does not . The City of Chaska doesn 't have any portion of th right-of-way which has been purchased by the Hennepin County Regional Rail Authority in the city at this time so they don 't have an option . II II 11 Park and Rec Commission Meeting September 24 , 1991 - Page 4 Schroers: Do we have any information on whether or not , and if so when , the trail would extend into the city of Chanhassen? I mean city of Chaska . Hoffman: None whatsoever . Schroers : I 'm a believer that a trail should go somewhere . It should connect points of interest and if it were to start in Hopkins and developed all the way out to Chaska , you know that actually is an avenue of transportation . You can get to different municipalities . I question the ' validity of taking that kind of money into a trail that deadends in the middle of , you know just out by a major highway and not in any city really at all . Hoffman: P representative of Chaska was at the meeting with the Regional Rail authority and would certainly be interested in pursuing that in the future . Currently between Eden Prairie and Chaska it 's kind of a waiting game to see who 's going to do what and what action is going to be taken . Schroers, : Okay . Well before we get into two lenthy of a discussion here , why dent we open it up for comments from the visiting residents this evening and see what kind of information and input we get and we ' ll talk about it and what we can accomplish . Is there anyone that would like to give us some information? I/ Matt Thill : My name is Matt Thill . I live at 9610 Meadowlark . I 'd like to enc ouv ag '- the Park and Rec Commission to go ahead with this . It looks like a really neat opportunity that could really be literally a chance of a lifetime . I think your staff brought up some really good concerns that maybe we didn 't see at first like the railings and the grades and that kind of thing . So what I 'd like to encourage us is that we go ahead and look into how much some of those would actually cost . Which ones would actually need to be done . Some of the concerns that are brought up . There are national groups . One that I know of is called Rails to Trails . Maybe that would Le a good resource . They may know how to access resources of larger government bodies . I think a positive of this route would be the safe alternate for bikes . Bicycles as opposed to some of the highways that are in South Chanhassen . They 're really heavily traveled . High speed and in general no paved shoulder . I guess just to sum up , I really think it 's a great opportunity and I 'd like to at least see what we are up against with Some of the trail heads and those kinds of things . So thank you . Schroers: Thank you . 11 Verne Severson: I 'm Verne Severson . I live at 675 Lakota Lane . My wife Susan has been writing some of these letters . She couldn 't make it tonight so she sent me here . I think , well as Matt said , some of the concerns that were brought up were very valid and we 'd be concerned about the safety of the trail as well and access but I really encourage you to still pursue it aggressively and try to find a way to get this in because that is a very beautiful area of Chanhassen . We live there and we 'd like to share it with ' the lest of the city and other people . Of course we 'd like to use the trail as well . It was also mentioned that the primary interest has been expressed that it should be used for horses . Well , I think the people that I 've talked to , my wife included , has said if you can 't get it set up for 11 Park and Rec Commission Meeting I September 24 , 1991 - Page 5 horses now, we shouldn 't stop anyway . We should go ahead and cover it so II people can walk on it or ride bikes on it . Maybe that isn 't as big an expense as going all out and getting everything ready so we 'd like to encourage you to at least get started on it . And the other point . I gues:� all of us on the south end of Chanhassen feel left out because we feel that the northern part of Chanhassen gets the nice parks and trails and this time we think it 's our turn so we 'd really like to have you aggressively consider this . Thanks . Diane Gilbertson: Hi . I 'm Diane Gilbertson and I live at 1190 Bluff Cree Drive . You all have my letters and I guess I would really appreciate the opportunity or your opportunity to continue looking for a trail system for multi purposes . I have horses but I also , it is beautiful down there and . think at some point if Eden Prairie and Carver , it would get us to the river bottoms on the other side of Chanhassen . They 're gorgeous and enjoy them . Echroers : Thanks very much . We appreciate your input in this and the timI that you 've taken and your concern of the matter . I 'd just like to make a general statement . I think that our mission here is to try to provide ever, reasonable recreational opportunity for the residents of Chanhassen and our neighbors as well and I think that everyone would be delighted to see this trail go in and to be used to it 's fullest potential . However as Todd has very thoroughly pointed out , there are a number of issues that ar going to have to be dealt with and they 're not necessarily easy issues . From a monetary point of view , funding and budgeting is really tight . The State cutbacks have affected the municipal operations as well as the State in general . Some of the physical barriers as far as having a place where its even feasible to try and acquire a good access site are limited along this trail . Se it 's going to be kind of a difficult thing to pursue but I would think that we are certainly in favor of having a trail . It 's just whether or not its practical and feasible . So with that we can start wits thoughts and opinions from Commission members and do I have a volunteer for who 'd like to start . I Andrews: I 'll start . I just want to be sure I understand . We 're not in a position of use it or lose it as far as this right-of-way opportunity goes The way I understand it . Hoffman: That 's right . It is , as I stated , a golden opportunity but it will probably exist for 20-30 years . 1 Andrews : I feel that we should at least look into the cost of doing the proper job . I feel it 's important before we make a decision pro or con that we understand what the alternatives are and what the cost to doing a proper job are . And I think just to be informative and thorough , that should include a proper horse trail as well . Personally I feel that a multi use trail serves a broader section of the public but I do also see II that the beauty and the value of the river bottom and that drainage area and that would make probably one of the most ideal horse riding areas that could be found in the Twin Cities and perhaps that could be looked upon as something that would be a unique recreational opportunity that we in Chanhassen could at least consider . But I 'd like to know what it could cost us and then I think we could make a better informed decision . I woul11 II I Park and Rec Commission Meeting Eeptembor 24 , 1991 -- Page 6 ( agree with the recommendation that you made Todd and that would be that we do a more thorough job and we review this again . ISchroers : Okay . Wendy , do you have any? Pemrick : Yeah . As far as the overpass on TH 101 being redone . I assume I they 're planning on widening that . Is there any time frame that 's been given as far as when that would be done? 11 Hoffman: Again , I just caught wind of it today . I tried to reach the Carver County Engineer and did not get back . They may be looking at removing that and taking that down to an at grade type of crossing . Why replace it with a bridge if you 're not running a railroad cars over the top of it anymore . Obviously it 's a dangerous one lane intersection which they certainly have an interest in removing . So I ' ll find out that information as well . It certainly would be premature for us to build a railing Istructure on top of that if they 're going to build that down next summer . Pernric.k . I was just wondering if that would be something that they 'd be I responsible for taking care of if and when they did the rebuilding on that . If we had our trail in place . It 's probably all out of the same pot . Hoffman : Yeah . The road project would be a County project . County Road I 101 se at that time if we could piggyback along with their project to serve .ion of eu ; needs we certainly would . I PemiicJ - Well I would like to see this pursued . Whole heartedly . I think it ju_!: a f, nt aat i. _ oppou Lunity for us but I also feel we need to get some nir,Ie firm coats . I would have to say if there would be a way to do it could have a separate horse trail apart from pedestrian , I would ' be snore in favor of that than combining everything on one trail . But I think m,a should go ahead and really try to get this in place for the of citizens of Chanhassen . ISchrec Thanks Wendy . Dawne Erhart : I think pretty much everybody has expressed the concerns that I would have . I would also like some answers to the cost before I could make a conscience decision either way on it . I also agree that if at all feasible , I would like to see the pedestrian and the horse trails separated if we could . But first of all we 've got to find out what the cost is . Schroers : Okay , thanks . Dave . Koubsky : Just one comment . If they are planning to widen TH 101 and take that bridge down , it will probably be a lot easier not to have the overpass . We might even be able to negotiate some sort of trail access at that point . That person 's property may become more to our liking if there is grading involved with sloping the trails down . So if Carver or if the I County does have any long term plans or engineering designs , maybe somebody can look into it Todd . I guess in reading Eden Paririe 's letter , it seems to be a wait and see game . They 're waiting to see what we 're doing and I hate to be in a position to table things now and wait and see what Eden Prairie 's doing . Like other members have said , if we can at least look I Park and Pee Commission Meeting II Sept ember 24 , 1991 -- Page 7 into the cost of things and show that we 're trying to move forward on this' thing without making a real dollar commitment here before we know what the end result 's going to be . I guess that 's all . That would be my recommendation at this time . Keep going and maybe in that turn Eden II Prairie will and Chaska will jump in too . Lash : I guess it sounded to me like a big part of the cost overrun or whatever you want to call it would be from having it continue from Bluff Creek to 212 . Am I understanding that correct? Hoffman: It 's a mile of the 3 miles so about a third of the cost . I Lash: But that 's where you 'd have the trouble getting the rock in? Hoffman : Yeah . It would take more time . II La: h : I guess I 'd be interested in looking at breaking it down possibly . I agree with Larry 's earlier comment . While it doesn 't seem like it makes a lot of sense to dead end something but if that would be a major stumbling block for us with that last section I guess I 'd be interested in seeing th cost broken down and doing it in sections and stopping at Bluff Creek and at a later time finishing the end . Maybe by that time we 'd have a better idea of what Chaska 's position on it . I would not be in favor of , I don 't think this year . . .budget amendment just because I think we work hard on th� bud -e"t . . .over one project . But I too would be very interested in the cost Break downs for this and I also don 't feel that . . .trail would be compatible for all the different useages that we 're looking at . . . Plus I 'd like to thank Todd for the video . That was really helpful . . . II Andrews : I had a question . How wide is that right-of-way? Hoffman: It varies . Typically from about 60 to 100 feet . II Schroe From the center of the tracks? II Hoffman : Total width . Andrews : Would that give us room to put in a road with nose in parking at certain points there? Could we do that? Hoffman: Possibly if the Rail Authority would allow us to do that. . But II again that would take some , we 'd have to find the right spot where the grade would allow us to do that . Lash : Larry , the trail that you talked about that goes through Shorewood II and all that . You know I look at this as a similar type project where people are going to be coming from a long ways away and biking or jogging and I don 't know at this point in time how much importance I place on actually having a parking access for people to drive to to get out . I loo at it as more of an Eden Prairie or even farther east as having a place to go . Of course when it dead ends somewhere , what do they do then? II • Schroers: Yeah . Well the existing trail that actually goes from Minnetonka Mills all the way out to Carver Park is wonderful . The only ba( il 1 1 Park and Pee Commission Meeting September 24 , 1991 -- Page 8 sections are the portions through Shorewood where they use the larger 3/4 minus Class V material . That material is poor for a trail surface . It 's I/ not good for bicycling . It 's not particularly good for walking or hiking . I wouldn 't imagine it would be very good for horses and then the other little part through the city of Excelsior is not completed for some reason but you can use alternative streets . But there are many places along that route where you can access . You can park in the parking lots of the Minnetonka City Hall . Carver Park has several parking spots for their bike trails and you can access this trail system by connecting spurs from Carver Parks . You can also park in the business district of the City of Victoria . You can park in the business district in the city of Excelsior and there are many places that you can access this trail from and that 's important . I access it on my bicycle . I just ride from my house and ride down and ride on the trail and then go and it 's very important . In this particular location there are no opportunities like that . I mean possibly there would be someplace to park in Eden Prairie up around CR 4 . That 's close to the Edcn Prairie VFW . If they wouldn 't mind , you could probably park in the Eden Prairie VFW and access the trail from there or east of there I would think there would be opportunities , either streets or parking lots that you ' could possibly park in but when you get west of Eden Prairie , there 's nothing . I mean all there is are the roads that cross TH 101 going down that hill through those sharp corners is a hornibly dangerous place to have an access . Even if it 's a developed access with adequate parking , there 's traffic coming onto and off of TH 101 in a hazardous , you would have to say that that was a hazardous area . So that wouldn 't be good . There may be a better option at Bluff Creek . I don 't know . I think the point that Jim brought up regarding the right--of-way is important . I would see that as probably the most encouraging possibility of gaining access . If we have to go out and purchase a lot , anybody that lives down there and is familiar and knows that is a very nice area and I would have to guess a fairly expensive area for purchasing private property . If a lot say went for $40 ,000 .00 , if we had to purchase a $40 ,000 .00 lot for an access point , that would greatly restrain the success of this project . I think at this point we really don 't have any solution but to accept staff 's recommendation which I think is very fair and appropriate at this time . We ha■ia to do more research into the areas of accessibility and cost analysis 11 for developing and consider the safety issues as well . There 's too much that we don 't know about this . We would be ill advised at this point to say yes , let 's budget money for surface material and go ahead and put down thr- surface . We would be premature on doing that . So I too am in favor of going along with staff 's recommendation and I would like to actively and enthusiastically proceed with an attempt to get this trail into place but we do need to get these cost estimates and other items of concern more narrowed down . Andrews : I ' ll give you a motion if you want . I think we 're unanimous . 11 Schroer.^, : We are . Please go ahead . Andrews : I move we direct staff to provide us with further detail of cost in developing a multi-use trail as well as an appropriate horse trail and separate t hose costs for us to act upon at a later date . Pemr irk ; I ' ll second that . I Park and Rao Commission Meeting I September 24 , 1991 - Page 9 `-_'Sc hroe'r Okay , is there any further discussion? Does anyone feel that 11 there should be more added to the motion? Andrews moved , Pemrick seconded that the Park and Recreation Commission I direct staff to prepare a cost analysis of the financial investment necessary in developing a multi-use trail as well as an appropriate horse trail along the Hennepin County Regional Railroad Authority Rail Corridor ," and separate those costs , to be reviewed by the Commission at a future date . All voted in favor and the motion carried . Schroers: Hopefully we 'll be able to find the means to get this trail in II place at some point in the future but I wouldn 't expect to see it completed within the next year or two . But I 'd like to thank everyone for taking t.h time to come here tonight and to write the letters . Community support is ultimately very important in a project like this , especially when it gets to the City Council level . They want to know that the dollars that we are spending are going to be appreciated and that people will be using , make good use of the mone> and effort that 's put into something like this . So please continue to support this and we 'll do everything we can do . Thanks a lot . SITE PLAN REVIEW , CHANHASSEN BUSINESS CENTER PUD . Schroerse : The people involved with this development were unable to attend the meeting tonight . However staff would like to address this issue and give us some information even though the development people are not present . I Hoffm= n : Thank you Chairman Schroers . Again this was the same proposal which +4a brought up last month and was pulled at the request of the applicant . Kent Carlson is the person who contacted RLK , their associates" that a,, c w _ ckirg with them at 5 :00 this evening and had somebody stop down here to let us know that they 'd like to have the item pulled from the a.g:nd._.'n . My response was that I believe we should still go ahead and revie(� the item . If the Commission feels that it is unfair to render a decision to the City Council because of their lack of attendance , that is a perrogeti'. c . However we are falling behind in the time line . It went to City Council this evening for their concept approval so City Council is backing this concept . It was addressed last evening that the applicant would be addressing the Park and Recreation Commission the following evening , which is tonight . They are not doing that and obviously as you read through here you see that there is some conflicting interest as far az,, what the applicant feels they should receive in park dedication credit and what City ordinance calls out for . So if we can just briefly take a look II at this issue . Get some of your feelings on it . Then I ' ll leave it up toll the Commission whether or not they would like to give the applicant the opportunity to come next month to present their position or if they would like to take a recommendation to the City Council at this time . Two main iseues, are the trail . Originally the trail was slated to be a looped configuration around the entire site . There carne a concern from the applicant with that orientation . Due to the future possibility that there may be somebody that wants rail access from the Chicago , Milwaukee , and St . Paul Pacific Railroad . It 's a valid concern . It 's a small likelihood that that would occur but if it would , having that trail there would certainly I/ II ' Park and Rec Commission Meeting September 24 , 1991 - Page 10 limit the opportunities and it would cause some safety problems . As an alternative to that , take a look at aligning the trail in this c.onfii,wiation . It makes it somewhat smaller but it still does make a heck of a lot of sense since this connection point right here is the future Lake Drive East . Excuse me , Lake Drive West which connects with Lake Drive East . This is the road Redmond was going to develop the property to the north . It 's also the property which skirts the Sunset Ridge Park and will connect up just over on Powers Blvd . just to the west of Lake Susan Park . So continuing that trail along the entirety would take a trail from this cul-de-sac all the way back along the frontage road and through that development , the future development to the east . Back down past behind the Legion and back by McDonald 's . All the way in front of DataSery and out to the border of Chanhassen . So it would be a continuation of that trail . Then as well this connection point here is directly across from Heron Drive and the Lake Susan Hills West neighborhood . Those folks could access the trail b, crossing Audubon Road . Walk down along this 100 foot buffer zone 11 which is being i ncor porated into this development . Due to the single famile residential which would be constructed to the south . Loop around and come out . Eventually then we would take a look at connecting ' pedestrian trail in the Bluff Creek corridor into this segment as well . I don 't believe the applicant has a problem with this . Situation came up with how do we want to fund it . Do we want to allow them to construct it? World we like to construct it? Currently the best recommendation coming I free a conference with the City Manager is that the roadway , the sewer , the water will all be incorporated into a tax increment financing package . Just tact on the construction of the trail with that development contract . Have a tax increment financing district to pay for the construction of the trail . Trail fees remain a valid charge and we can still deposit those into our park acquisition and development fund . The other issue of course th _ i_rsuc of park dedication credit . Outlot A as shown here , you have some_ to; f" information and other information on your other maps . The triangle ar ,^ is the large stand of trees . It is the only stand of trees th_ t iteelf apart on this site . That is dramatically not even any developer I don 't believe in their right mind would pull that set of trees to gain en additional lot . The creek also comes through that location . Out thie configuration , it would be difficult to develop . What Ryan Cont r uc t i on and RLK Associates is proposing that. the City give them park dedication credit for providing Outlot A to the City . However , as stated in my report , City ordinance does not allow for that . Outlot A is clearly being dedicated to the City as part of the PUD amendment for this subdivision and if you give that a credit , the benefit of allowing them to zone PUD for the dedication of Outlot A . You also give them the credit for park fees in dedicating Outlot. A . We 've just shot ourselves in the foot ' for no reason . I 'm not sure what their argument back to the City is going to be on that . It 's in conversations with Mr . Carlson , he 's been very up front . . . I 'm not sure what their motive is for not being here tonight . However , I certainly feel that they are sincere in their interest to develop this site in the best possible manner . Again the main point to the park dedication which , if you calculated it out is fairly sizeable sum . $175 ,000 .00 . Something of that nature . That 's certainly money that you 're not going to just throw out the window . Is the fact that Chanhassen City, Cod_- states that land conveyed or dedicated to the city or the cash fees in lieu of the dedication shall be in addition to and not in lieu of open spaea requirements for planned unit developments , PUD 's . And then as I Park and Roc Commission Meeting September 24 , 1991 - Page 11 II stated in the attachment , what you have from the Planning Commission . I meeting , Planned Unit Developments are to encourage the following . Number 1 states it exactly . Preservation of the desireable site characteristics and open space for protection of the sensitive environmental feastures il including steep slopes , mature trees , creeks , wetlands , lakes and scenic views . The findings in this proposed development , the applicant intends to save the existing stand of mature trees along Bluff Creek located in Outlo A . Comprehensive Plan land use map identifies the park corridor as open space . In order to meet the PUD , that 's what they 're dedicating to the City . Again if we wish to hear the applicant out , we can table this until October 24th I believe would be our next meeting . It 's getting , the development process is getting along in it 's stages . The further we put this eff , again the further it would get behind . It 's not that that action won 't be taken to the Council prior to their final decision but each time they go to another government body and has to get some support for it , it bolsters their position . Then if all of a sudden they say , look it . Your Park and Recreation Commission has created a stumbling block for us here . They want us to pay full park fees . We don 't think that 's a valid point . Ever, bod; else is being real cooperative . They 're posing a problem for us . I don 't want that to occur either . Schroer, : Okay . Are there any commission members have any particular points of view regarding this? Andrews : Yes . I share Todd 's concern that I think the developer is trying tm eta :mr ell this right through us . When they applied for the PUD they had full knowledge of City Code and the costs of what this project entailed . For them te_ imply that we ought to give them a break because of the PUD I . think is unrealistic . I also look at the funding there and we cannot ,,ffrrd t ,., pass that up . We must not do that . And the third reason being , if LJ:: let it go this time , every future industrial or commercial PUD , you can ise cu, park foes good-bye . We won 't get them anymore and we can 't afford to do that either . Especially with the MUSA line being expanded and 311 the future commercial development here . We 're going to need that mone to fund our expansion . So I feel we should at least make a recommendation to Council on what we 've got so far and if it means that we still reserve a future hearing for the developer to come before us but I 'm concerned that if we don 't do something , that we could get pushed into a corner . Like Todd said , it 'd be looked upon as the only thing that 's holding up the project and I don 't want that to happen . Schroers : I think we 're receiving the signal reasonably loud and clear 11 here and rather than going through each individual commissioner on this , I would just ask is there anyone that has a point of view or an interest in this that hasn 't already been discussed? Koubsky : I guess the only thing I 'd like to say is it looks like we 'll probably do a motion tonight . I would like to leave it open that Ryan Construction or the developers could come back and address us on our motio , anJ wr would be in a position or we would be willing to hear them . I 'd hate to make a decision . Close the door on them where that could be used aguinet us in the future also . So I 'm all in favor of making a motion as long as we keep the door open . II II Park and Per Commission Meeting September 24 , 1991 Page 12 Sc hroer s : Okay . I think that is reasonable . I also think that there would be no advantage for us or anyone to hold this up for the next I/ meeting . To bring this up . I think if there is going to be a contest to our recommendation , it 's going to happen at the Council level anyway . We may' as well let it happen there so I am very much in favor of just going with staff 's recommendation and if they have a problem with it , to take it up at the Council level . Erhart : I 'll second that . Andrews : Was that a motion? ' Schroer : : I guess that was a motion . Erhart : I 'm moving the meeting right along . 1 Echrorrs : Good . That 's fine . Is there anything else that anyone would like to add to that? Andrew- : Could you read that motion back or summarize it? I 'm not clear what was said there exactly . Echroer.o : Basically staff 's what we said was that. we are. accepting �.t.aff s recommendation for the full park fees and trail fees and that the developer can corn- back and address us in the future if he 'd like but at this point we 'd just lilsc to pass staff 's recommendation on to Council . Is that the way you have it Todd? f- offm-n ' Y _s Lash : I have one question on the trail . . . It looks like there 's an empty spst on Audubem . Is there something existing there or is there a reason for t hat . . .? Hoffman : The trail picks up on the other side of the road in that section . Th_ only reason we brought that small loop . . . The trail currently exists on th east side of Audubon Road . From Heron Drive at this point north , whera it crosses the bridge , all the way down to the public works building and then it goes to the west side . It goes in front of McGlynn 's all the ' way up to TH S . This portion was brought up here to match that trail coming out of here and so those people could drop down and come around . At this point then , pedestrians would cross Audubon and either continue on Lake Drive West or go south or north on Audubon . ' Lash : I guess I 'm looking at it as if I was a noon walker , which I kind of am once in a while . That I would rather not want to have to cross the street . . . Hoffman ' If you were an employee and you wanted to walk the loop , you have the opportunity to walk the loop . Good point . If the Commission wishes to ' include that then , the recommendation would be recommended to go ahead and include that segment of the trail as well . Actually include the dedication of that easement and then include the construction of that additional 11 segment in the TIF package . I Park and Roc Commission Meeting September 24 , 1991 - Page 13 Schroers : I think that makes good sense to connect that r Andrews: We 've got a second and motion . Is this a friendly amendment then? Oka, . . II Schroers: As far as I 'm concerned it can . Andrews : Do you know about how many feet we 're talking about there Todd , II roughly? Hoffmrr : 400 feet? Is there a scale on there? It 's 300 feet . 250 . II Andrews : I 'd like to speak regarding the amendment to the motion . I feel like we 're holding the developer to the letter of the City Code here on till PUD , rightly so . I do look at asking the developer if they 're going to be responsible for that additional 300 feet . I don 't think that 's quite fair . We 'd have a trail directly across the street that complies and is avail4ble . We 're're now imposing additional cost above and beyond what he 's required to do . There should be compensation for that . Schrr_-re : Well we could consider using a portion of the trail and park II dedication fee that we get from this development to complete that section . Lash - Dc you feel Todd that that 's asking above and beyond the PUD? I H_ ffmnr : Again , the PUD allows the developer to tighten up those lots . It give ,yin, e lot of flexibility . In return for that they need to do a little bit of additional landscaping . They need to dedicate Outlet A . The' need to Le- very consc ience in their storm water management and those types of thin.2: . What we 're asking Ryan Construction Company for is simply a 20 feet ..:i de easement plus the trail dedication fees . Then the City would go, aheed and construct that trail segment along with the road project and the etw�ei internal improvements as part of the tax increment financing impre•, ement package . So to connect that segment there I don 't believe II t.o_ ' H! Le of arty great hinderance to Ryan Construction . And _w n - It 's not going to impact them at all then if it 's part of the to increment . Hoffman : Right . Andrews : In that case . 11 Schroers : All it is is getting the easement from them and why wouldn 't II the/ Hoffman: Potentially if they had a question . If they thought it would affect Lot 10 and Lot 11 adversely , having the trail in front of there but the, 've got some fairly substantial setbacks there for buildings and I wouldn 't see that that 's going to be a problem . cch, .-ers : Ma; be it would be an enhancement rather than a deterrent . II II II ' Park and Re_ Commission Meeting Septcnir 24 , 1991 Page 14 rnch-ewc I would be in favor of it as long as it doesn 't create a cost to R,'an . If it does , then I think we 've got to be °quail,' fair to them as we expect them tc, be of us . I/ Schroers : I think if they feel that that 's unfair , then we have left that door opn and the; can come back to us . Andrews: Okay . Last- : I guess my other point was , I just personally don 't like to see dead ended sidewalks . . . Schrocr: : Okay , cc . Do we have this? Do you want to read this back to us Todd? We already have a motion and we have a second . Is everyone read, to vote on it ? Are we clear on it? Andrews - I 'm sorry . I just want to do this the right way . Schroer: - That ': okay . Then let 's just continue . ' Schroers moved , Erhart seconded that the Park and Recreation Commission recommend to accept full park and trail dedication fees for the Chanhassen Business Park PUD . To require a 20 foot wide trail easement within the 100 1 foot buffer zone on the south edge of the development; along the north side of the proposed cul-de-sac; on the west and north side of Lot 8 , and on the west side of Audubon Road from the cul-de-sac to the 100 foot buffer zone . The construction of this trail/sidewalk will be included in the Tax Increment Financing Package . All voted in favor and the motion carried . Note: The applicant , Ryan Construction Company requested that this item be pull from the August 27 , 1991 Park and Recreation Commission meeting and at 7 : C O p .m , on the evening of September 24 , 1991 Park and Recreation Comrr _ _. -'.r. n meeting again asked that it be pulled . The Park and Recreation ' Commission chose to act on this item on September 24 , 1991 asking that the app r '_ Le allowed to discuss this item at their October 22 , 1091 Park and Re : rcation Commission meeting if they so chose . Hoffn n : I will supply the Minutes of this discussion to the developer , to Mr . Kent Carlson . I 'll presume that he had a valid reason for not being here this evening . . .come and speak before the Commission . He was at the Council meeting last night and he didn 't say anything at that time so it must have been something that carne up right at the last moment . Just an interesting note . The weather station , if you noticed on Lot 12 is 1 basically the anchor tenant , if you will . That 's going to be a unique lot simply Lecause it is a small building with a lot of weather tower . They ' ll be releasing , they 're moving that from the airport so it will be the site . Pcmrick : Is that going through for sure? Hoffman : It should be going through , yes . They release the large weather ' L t:l l o from that site everyday . So Chanhassen should have accurate � r„ weathc r for : scts . 11 I Park and Rec Commission Meeting September 24 , 1991 - Page 15 Lash: Oh , do you have an estimate as to trail fees that we would be pulling from this? Hoffman: $533 .00 an acre . I haven 't calculated that out . That would be II only for the lot acreage . So just strictly for each individual lot as they would come in for development . Lash : Dave has here roughly like $60 ,000 .00? i Hoffman: Something like that . And again , we need to look to this type of development for park acquisition and development fees . Again we need to remind them that their taxes are not going towards that purpose . We don 't II get our piece of the pie at that time . We get it up front and we need to protect that interest . A similar case scenario is the southern piece just below this , the Rod Grams property . That 's being developed single family . They 've been in with some initial conversation with staff . They too would like to dedicate that lowland as their park dedication credit . They too were sent away with the opinion that that lot be accepted and you should come up with an alternative . Schroers: Good . Very good . Let 's move on to item 4 . , 1991 REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL . Hoffman: As part of a special City Council meeting held a couple of Mondays ago , September 16th , the City Manager asked that I prepare a comprehensive status report for all our parks and park improvement projects . You have a copy of that report for your review . As that report detailed the activities which resulted from the work of the Commission . I chose to highlight the commission and it 's member 's in a follow--up report to the City Council which is also attached . . . Lash moved , Pemrick seconded to approve the submittal of the 1991 Park and 'Recreation Commission report to the City Council . All voted in favor and the motion carried . ( There was a tape change that occurred at this point in the meeting . ) UPDATE PARK AND RECREATION 5-YEAR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM. Hoffman: . . .having the 5 year capital improvement program . We 're starting to establish that . Looking at the development of an additional or a community survey . Those pull a lot of weight . If you ask the community in a survey if they 're happy with recreational facilities and they say yes , there 's no point looking to a referrendum type issue . If they say hey , we 're crowded . Where I moved from had a lot better opportunities for my children to participate , then we know we 'd better get in gear and get some activity rolling . I Andrews : Have you been reading the local papers? There 's been several rather interesting letters regarding trails in particular . There was one that was rather condemning of the City saying that we 've been irresponsible in not providing any trails . I thought it was interesting because it made it sound like we 've never looked into it . We 've never tried . It 's our I ' Park and Red Commission Meeting September 24 , 1991 -- Page 16 responsibi.lty to do so and it 's frustrating for me to read that knowing how desparately I think we all want to do it but knowing that the funding 's just not there . I think if you were to poll people , what were some of the things you 'd want to see . I think trails along the major thoroughfares , TH 101 and TH S and some of the other busy streets are going to be the highest priority but at the same time those are the most expensive projects we could get involved in . Schroers: You 're right . I think there 's a definition problem of trail . When we have a trail going in with a development like what is proposed along , let 's see , industrial development and the business climate , basically what we end up with there looks more like a sidewalk than a trail I and people don 't relate that as being trailways . When they think of a trail , that 's someplace out in the country that gets you from Point A to Point B so they 're not aware of all the little hook-ups that we are able to make . Sometimes in a referendum or public hearing processes , this information is brought out and it 's a good opportunity to get the community a little better informed on what is actually happening . ' Lash : In the survey process , what I see that happens is that people are asked would you like to see trails or would you like to see more neighborhood parks or would you like to see more ballfields at Lake Ann or whatever . And people would say yes , yes , yes , yes . But then when it comes down to having to pay for it , well all of a sudden they 're not so interested in having it . So sometimes I think we 're . . .that 's the way that they 're presented with it . Would you like to see that? Would you like to ' see it and it would cost you $100 .00 a year or you know . You have to have the money involved for people to make an intelligent decision on those types of things . If we 're going to base our decision on a survey , then maybe they need to be informed that there 's going to be a pricetag involved with most of those . Andrews: Taking that a step further , if we were to ask people to rank 11 what 's most important and then go back with on a second survey and say okay , knowing that if you had to pay an extra $100 .00 you could get this much . If you had to pay an extra $75 .00 you could get this much . If you 1 had to pay an extra $50 .00 you could get this much . How much are you willing to support? That might be real useful to do that . ' Pemrick: If the survey were to be presented , who would be developing the questions or coming up with it? Hoffman: It can either be taken on by staff and the Commission or as in ' the last case it was contracted out to a student doing some work as part of his , I believe it was graduate studies . Pemrick : We could have input though as far as the final survey? Hoffman: Correct . We would take a look at that process . Do we want to do it in-house or do you want to have a firm come in and give us direction on that and have them develop it . Lash : Is there a possibility as we 're budgeting , if we were to look at 11 Bandimere Park , for us to budget x amount of money each year . Not that it 1 Park and Rec Commission Meeting II September 24 , 1991 - Page 17 would be spent but that it would just be like we would do our own savings . Say I wanted to . . .the whole 5 years and decided I was going to save $1 ,000 .00 a year . Can we do something like that with our budget? Or do well actually have to use the money? Hoffman: No . We can set it aside in the budget reserves . Schroers : Correct me if I 'm wrong but in regards to this 5 year capital II improvement program , I see this as a guide or kind of a wish list as you will . This is not something that we are bound to . This is just a way to II organize what we would like to accomplish within the next 5 years but we certainly are not bound to completing it because things are going to come up . Things are going to change and so we can think of, this as a guide or II work aid but I don 't think that we have to consider anything that we do as etched in stone . Andrews : I want some realism of funding . I think Jan 's point about like all sinking fund for Bandimere . 5 years from now if Chanhassen continues to develop the way it is now , we 're going to need to develop that park . IF it 's a half a million dollars today , it will probably be about $800 ,000 .00--' $900 ,000 .00 5 years from now to make that kind of development . I think it 's important that we establish some realism as to what that future cost is . I think also back to this poll or survey or whatever , I feel would be viable . I think maybe we could go maybe until next year before we do it II because I don 't think we 're in a position to really act upon much of anything we survey at this point . I think a survey can be used for two purposes . One is it creates information for us but it also gives us the opportunity to create awareness back to the public as to what other people are thinking as well as it gives us a chance to create our own awareness back to the community of what are the projects we 're working -on and II considering . Helps them prioritize things so they aren 't having these vague wish lists going through their minds and saying well we 've got trails we can do . We 've got parks we can do . We 've got this we can do . Helps to make choices . I Lash: I know from being here that there 's a need to acquire property out. by Lake Minnewashta but if I was an average citizen and a referendum came to me or someone said to me would you be willing to pay a certain amount so we can acquire more property for a park out by Lake Minnewashta . I 'd say wait a minute , you 've got 30 some acres . . .passed a referendum a few years ago and it 's just sitting there . I just feel like we need to prioritize , how we want to do some things . I know that 's the point of this but when it 's a big project like that and it seems so overwhelming that we ' ll never be able to do it unless we have a referendum , we 'll never be able to do it unless we have a referendum . Unless we prioritize it and say maybe what well need to do is start bank rolling it . Let everybody know it 's a priority and moving in the direction to do something and we ' ll probably never be II able to get enough to do it entirely out of our little budgets each year but maybe it would soften the blow when it does hit . And again , it 's not carved in stone but at least we 're saving some towards some of these big projects . II Andrews : People are a lot more receptive of the idea if you 've already set aside 200 and you 're looking for 500 more just to do it . That sounds a loll • II Park and Rec Commission Meeting September 24 , 1991 - Page 18 11 better than saying we 've set aside nothing . We need $500 ,000 .00 . It sounds a lot more positive . Erhart : We 're doing the rough grading right now out there too? Bandimere Park? Hoffman: Bandimere Park , no . Erhart: It 's got big machinery out there . 11 Pemrick : That 's for the compost they 're going to get . ' Erhart : Oh , okay . I was all excited because I was saying oh 1992 plus . $10 ,000 .00 for rough grading . We 're already there . We 're doing it . Okay . Schroers : Well these are all good points that we are coming up with . Is there anything that anyone would like to do beyond asking staff to develop a priority list that we can work off an item or two on each meeting until we get through this thing? IHoffman: I ' ll as well take Commissioner Andrews comments on , you have the facility list which was accumulated this spring . Let me just go ahead and ' list those in here in a menu fashion so you have under Bandimere . Schroers : Well you know , with each item that we bring up at each meeting , a. little pre-history and what we would like to see in the future or what ' we 've done in the past will help us decide what we want to do in the future . So if that 's included , that would be great . ' Lash : And you know if you 've gotten calls from people or requests for certain things , you know . Hoffman: Many of the parks are at a point where they 've been fully developed and we 're actually back remodeling or refurbishing those . I quickly brought that point up at the special Council meeting held on the 16th in that Chanhassen is unique in it 's situation that we do not fund any 1 dollars from the general fund for park development or park redevelopment . As it would be the case in Carver Beach playground where we 're going in and refurbishing equipment using new monies which are generated from new ' development in the city . At some point that opportunity to do that is going to run out . All the cities and other park and recreation department people that I 've talked with , they go ahead and allocate , whether it be a fourth of their budget , a third of their budget or 90% of their budget , ' depending on where that particular city is in development , out of their general fund for park acquisition and development . That may very well be the case where we 're going to need to make that type of recommendation back ' to our City Council at some point in the future . The City is in a position of a fairly heavy debt load at this time . However , we 're in an excellent position to free ourselves of that in the very near future . Unlike some other communities that have in essence sold themselves very short in the long range financial availability for their city , Chanhassen is going to be much better off in the near future . So we 're going to need to take a look at some alternate sources of funding as well . When the end of the development boom hits , our budget 's going to bottom out and we 're not going I Park and Rec Commission Meeting II September 24 , 1991 -- Page 19 to have a job to carry out anymore . Again I go back to Jan 's type of II comments . If we can soften that blow by beginning to take a little bit from the general tax base for these type of redevelopment projects which are taking place in old town , we may want to take a look at that . Schroers : Very good . Is the request that we 're making of staff , are they reasonable? Is that something that is within your work load- capabilities? II We 've asked you to do quite a lot . Do you think that that 's reasonable? Hoffman: Sure . I 'll go ahead and break it up in neighborhood . Then in community . In trails and potentially then in long range goal planning as II well so we can touch on some other things . Bring back to you , if you 're in the mood to go ahead and go through it . Some information on our budget situation currently . What our fund reserve is . Currently we go ahead and only budget for the general budget . What we 're assuming that we 're going to take in revenue in the following year which is the safe way to go . If we want to end up with any money left over in capital improvement budget , we certainly want to take that step . However we did go ahead and approve the Lake Ann Park shelter out of the capital improvement budget which was up and beyond a special project which was approved by the Commission and is to be starting construction here October 21st . So there are times when we take a look at taking a bigger chunk out of that fund reserve in doing some special projects but it has come down from approximately the $600 ,000 .00 range _ We 'll probably be down to about the $400 ,000 .00 range by the end of, the spring of the year so . It fluctuates but we certainly want to keep it up there in the high range because we generate some nice income in taking the interest off of there . In fact many communities , some of the older communities , Fridley , Columbia Heights , those types of areas , they strictly operate their park acquisition , or it 's not acquisition anymore but their II park development off of interest generation . $60 ,000 .00--$90 ,000 .00 to $100 ,000 .00 in interest off of their fund reserve each year . So there 's a variety of unique ways of continuing to fund Park and Recreation Departments and continue to keep on top of those . So that 's clear Larry . II Schroers : Okay . That 's clear and we don 't require any further action on this at this time . So we are free to move on to item 6 . II ( There was a tape change at this point in the meeting . ) ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS= I 1991 GATE ATTENDANT PROGRAM REPORT. Ruegemer : . . .$150 .00 which can be figured into the total from the revenue II collected from the 1991 passes at Lake Ann . And just below that then is the 1990 totals in regards to the 1991 with this same type of layout . II Below that then is just the total hours of each gate attendant that was hired this summer for the Lake Ann and South Lotus Boat Access . Then in regards to total hours , wage and total earnings for the 1991 summer . Just below it then is just for your references . The 1990 totals with hours and II total wages earned . Lash: Excuse me , what 's the cost of the printing of passes? II 1 11 Park and Rec Commission Meeting September 24 , 1991 - Page 20 Rugemer : The printing of passes with the seasonal and the resident passes is roughly around the $800 .00 mark . But keep in mind for the seasonal passes , there were enough ordered that they can be used for next summer . This report is just used to gather information from year to year . It 's more of a creative tool or information tool just to look back and try to build on to the next year and also to use as reference in past years . As far as any types of activities that 'happen out at Lake Ann and activity at the Lake Ann gatehouse and boat access . Are there any comments or questions? ' Schroers : Good job . Hoffman: Chairman Schroers if I may just have a short minute to comment . ' Again the Lake Ann entry fee has been an issue that we 've rehashed how many times . I continue to get the questions from , I spoke with a seniors group in Excelsior and the first question was , he stood up and why do you charge to get into Lake Ann Park . My daughter went over there to go to a picnic ' and you nailed her for 2 bucks to get into the park . I continue to hear comments like that and when you take a look at the revenue which is generated versus the expenses , it appears to be that approximately ' $12 ,000 .00 is generated to the good but if we take into aspect advertising for employees , administration costs of hiring those employees , getting them on the payroll , administering them on a daily basis for 3 1/2 months and all the other overhead costs which go along with that program , that gets reduced even further so is $5 ,000 .00-$6 ,000 .00 clear profit worth the controversy and the issue which are raised every year about the fees at Lake Ann Park? I continue to question them in my own mind and I urge the Commission to think about it as well . OKTOBERFEST . IRuegemer : We ' ll move on then to the Oktoberfest . The Oktoberfest section of the next agenda item . As Oktoberfest is coming up here this coming weekend , the 28th on this coming Saturday . It will take place from 4:00 to ' 11 :00 . The festivities will be set up down in the lower parking lot here of City Hall and on Coulter Drive . The Rotary tent will be set up along Coulter Drive . Their types• of games are the family games . The Snowmobile ' Club and also is the weather permits , there will be a Jacob 's Ladder set up by the Soccer Association down in that area . There will be , Coulter Drive will be barricaded off on either side of the street . Preparation for Oktoberfest continues on a daily basis too ultimately . Get all the details ironed out before the weekend . Advertisement . This flyer was inserted in last week 's Villager that did go out to all the Villager circulation throughout Chanhassen . It equaled out to be roughly 4 ,500 ' flyers for that . The rest or extras were printed up and the extras were distributed around town as far as posting up in key areas and also being distributed throughout local businesses to hand out to their patrons . Also advertising has been sought at the Chanhassen Bank . They will put that up on their flashing , sign . The banner did go up around town . Also just word of mouth . Also in advertisement , a story will be in this week 's Villager also as kind of a follow-up from the insert from last week . Hoffman: He promised us a front page . I Park and Rec Commission Meeting II September 24 , 1991 - Page 21 Ruegemer : Just to continue on , the report does go through the various il types of groups and activities that will take place at the event . The type of music . The food that will be available . Different groups that will be II presenting information on the senior interest and the arts fair that 's going to be coming up . There will be a booth set up for that to pass out information to the Chanhassen residents about such a special event . Again Rotary Bingo will be taking place throughout the night . The Snowmobile Club will also demonstrate and will have new snowmobiles available for the II residents to look at and also a groomer . All the permission for the lot across the south side of City Hall has been granted so it would be okay II then , assuming the City accepts all liability associated with Oktoberfest . That has been cleared so we will set up portions of the snowmobile demonstrations and also the hot air balloon over the vacant lot just 11 directly south of the Chanhassen City Hall . Schroers : Quick question . Who owns that? Hoffman: The bank 's property company . Mithune is his name . So the person, who owns the bank owns this property . Ruegemer : In all , just a general concept map and other activities have 1 been taking place just to make sure that Oktoberfest goes off without a hitch . Is there any questions or comments from the Commission? Hoffman : Remind them we didn 't even ask them to work . II Ruegemer : You 're getting by with that . We 're getting soft on them . I Koubsky: Jerry and Todd , I guess I was looking at some numbers on the gate attendance program and just kind of what you had said Todd about maybe making a $5 ,000 ,00 profit , When you look at these numbers and the daily II passes roughly equals about the hourly wages on the gate attendants so what people it seems like we 're doing is basically paying those people to come into the park . If you make $5 ,000 .00 profit , that leaves about another II $5 ,000 .00 which is your time which is made up here by seasonal and non- resident passes so those are the people who can drive by . They 've basically paying your extra salary to administer these people which leaves II us to the $5 ,000 .00 profit which is the 70 softball teams . Now could we still I guess , what I 'm thinking is to look into the potential to just charge the softball teams the $75 .00 a team to use the field . Eliminate the passes and you 've got your $5 ,000 .00 profit without any administrative fees or burden to you other than registering the softball teams . And drop the fees . Hoffman: Softball teams are certainly not going to go along with that . II Kouhsky : They 're not going to like that? II Ruegemer : That 's a big definite . If you just associate or kind of single out a certain group that 's picking up the tab versus , they 're going to say m why should we paY for coming in for a seasonal pass when nobody else is getting charged? Hoffman : Why shouldn 't we charge the swimmers? II 1 Park and Rec Commission Meeting September 24 , 1991 - Page 22 Erhart : So it 's everybody or not at all? Rugemer : Yeah . Schroers: Well we have beat this issue up a few times . Andrews : I want to add more to it too . If we are getting the part time inspection done on the boats and we 're covering the cost of having those gate attendants do that , there 's a benefit there that 's . Lash: The other benefit that hasn 't been kicked around is just the fact that there 's someone there . ' Andrews: It will cut down on the vandalism . Lash : Well it makes people feel more like maybe they need to make an effort to follow the rules . Schroers : It 's kind of a security benefit for the park . If the park is ' just open and there 's no attendant and there 's no fees , that just kind of sends out a message that anybody can come in here and do practically anything that they want . You really need to establish the impression to ' people that come to use the park that the park is looked at or controlled and the ordinances attempt to be enforced and that sort of thing . A lot of that message is passed on by having an attendant on duty at the park . Also someone who knows how to get emergency services in a hurry if they 're ' needed . The attendants are a valid part of the operation I think . Hoffman : The commission can kick it around . We ' ll address it again when we take a look at 1992 fees . - Erhart : They 're designed to make money though? ' Schroers : No . No . We brought that up before . We realize that it isn 't a money making plan really but each time it basically came back to we made very few changes . The fees have remained the same and it has come down to ' the idea that we should have a fee and we should have an attendant so we can kick it around again . We would certainly appreciate a recommendation from staff . Suggestions . Ideas in how to improve on the situation if there was a way . Hoffman: It is as well from the last decisions which were made , it 's become unequitable that we allow many people to enter on a free basis ' because they 're involved with a youth athletic sport so if they drive in and sa,' they 're with the baseball game and they go , if they 're there to play adult softball or go to the beach , they pay so . Lash : Has that cut down on some of the whining? Hoffman: Drastically from the out of town teams . The youth teams that came in and then were charged in the city of Chanhassen to play when the children from Chanhassen went to Shorewood or Chaska they didn 't have to pay to get in their parks . I Park and Rec Commission Meeting September 24 , 1991 - Page 23 II Lash: So that was the main purpose for doing that . Just because we had II gotten so many complaints , or you had . Hoffman: And that has ceased . I Lash : Okay , good . Schroers: Do we want to continue on then to the central park master plan . II CENTRAL PARK MASTER PLAN . II Hoffman: Item 7( c ) , the central park master plan has some definite ramifications in the area of the Park Commission simply because it directly impacts City Center Park which is one of the most widely used recreational facilities in the city at this time . The HRA is currently investigating the possibility of establishing the central park in Chanhassen . As you can see , this park would encompass City Hall . Taking Coulter Drive as it II currently exists in front of City Hall and moving it . Purchasing the property to the south . The building , the Chiropractor Professional building and then developing that central park plan . The major , the driving force for that type of action is when you take a look at the other communities and how they present themselves in their center of their city or their town square or that type of thing , City Hall would basically become another building amongst all the others in the city if these two lots were developed with a professional building a couple of stories high or whatever . Out in front of City Hall would be tucked back and there would be no benefit to the community as a focal point for both the community and the business . The downtown area . However in the event that the HRA moves forward with this , we ' ll be losing the one ballfield directly behind us here in the parking lot , That being the case , we would jointly look at central park project with the redevelopment of City Center Park to II the extent that we can grapple some of the redevelopment money for that activity since they 're the culprits who have caused us problems in City Center Park and we would need to redevelop and buy additional land to the II north . We would certainly attempt to convince them in that fashion . Because what would basically , this entails is taking Coulter Drive and moving it to the north . That splits up the nice quiet nature of City Center Park as it currently exists . You would need to have some parking on, the north side of that road so when parents and children exited their vehicles to go to a ballgame , they don 't have to run across the new Coulter Drive up here behind City Hall so there 's some questions which need to be II addressed . Looking at a larger plan or the same one that precluded , this is the general concept to expand this past the Post Office . Up through the City Hall . To the north of City Hall . This would be the area which is II currently the ballfield which exists out there today . The skating area would be reconfigured . The hockey rinks would most likely be affected in some way . It is still felt that they, can fit in their present location . , This area would then be used for the special events which we currently hold . The Oktoberfest , 4th of July . This Chanhassen Art Festival which . . . going on now for next August to hold an arts and crafts fair of approximately 200 exhibiters in the city . It would take place mainly at this locale . The bandshell would facilitate Music in the Park . Those II types of activities so there 's many different things that can take place in that open space . So again there are no specific recommendations . I ' ll II I 11 Park and Rec. Commission Meeting September 24 , 1991 -- Page 24 11 certainly take your comments back to staff members who work with the HRA or if you want to send a bonafide recommendation whole heartedly approving their efforts in this regard , you can certainly do that as well . Lash : Would we get into the warming .house . . . ' Hoffman: That warming house is the biggest dump in the city . I remind Todd Gerhardt and Don Ashworth of that every time we bring this issue up .. I 've got to take them on a little visit over there . If you currently go in there , there 's mold growing from the walls to the floor to the soccer balls which are stored in there so it 's a bad place . We would be taking all the residents right by that building with that new road up there . It 's another ' one of those big projects which is out there . How nice it would be to develop that into a warming house with a vending counter which could be accessed from the inside during the winter . Which could be accessed from the outside for the CAA activities in the summer which would include bathrcoms which you can access from the inside during the winter . From the outside during the winter . Which would include storage for the athletic association and which would include storage for the park and recreation ' equipment . And then build the building to match the City Hall architecture . Andrews : Sounds like a quarter million right there . Hoffman : Yeah . Schr oc rs Let 'a talk . Lash : cc will the vote for it? Hoffman : That 's the other situation . That 's a , City Center Park currently , an night of the week you 're up here during the first month and a half of school , the first month and a half , two months after school , it 's the hottest spot in town for youth activity and parents to get together and take advantage of their leisure time . We don 't want to in any way take that away from them . ' Lash : We can 't afford to give up a ballfield . Absolutely can 't . Hoffman : No . Schroers : I agree with that . I mean what we have to give up , we have to gain somewhere . This concept is nice . It looks good and I think the idea is good but we don 't want to lose existing facilities . Lash : Well we just can 't . I mean it 's already booked to the max , isn 't ' it Todd? Hoffman : Yes . It would either need to , we would need to redesign the present property which is there following the plan which was developed and approved by the Commission which then squeezes things in a little bit tighter but it makes better use of the property . But ideally , looking to the acquisition of that last piece of land up there for the , to include in Park and Rec Commission Meeting September 24 , 1991 - Page 25 II this whole center type of activity , publically held property for the use 11 and enjoyment of the residents would be the best avenue to take . Lash : Co when you 're talking a joint project , are you talking us II contributing to the funding of it? O.r would they be willing to take the whole . Hoffman: We would certainly need to be a partner in the redevelopment of I City Center Park . What portion lawfully and under an agreement with the HRA that they can take on , they would certainly be willing to do that . II Schroers : I think at that point we have to look at the functionability as well as the aesthetics . The way things are laid out here , they seem like they 're all pretty cramped and I 'm wondering if there is enough open space II available for these things . Events like the Art Fair and the Oktoberfest and that sort of thing . I mean if we 're going to go to the trouble to make it this nice , we certainly want it to be at least as functional as it is nice . II Andrew: : The other comment I 'd like to make is , this plan would imply that' if City Hall were ever to be expanded it would again expand to the north which would again chew into the park spaces that we have here . If you 're going to invest all this money into a boulevard development , that would not be the likely place of any future expansion . I think they should consider that too . Lash : That was my thought too . II Hoffman : The future expansion of City Hall is noted on here . It doesn 't show . . . It 's a mirror image currently of this portion where we 're sitting and then this portion hasn 't developed and the front half of this area . I Future expansion to complete the mirror image is this back half shown on the plan with the basement underneath or the lower level corresponding so that would be the expanded area of City Hall . . .plans for the future . But this .ia the parking lot which is now a baliffield , Andrews ' Never mind . ll Koubsky: I guess I really like the idea . I think it 's great . Whether the design 's right or not , I guess I haven 't looked into it that much but just by looking at it , it 's pretty exciting to me . I think the ballfields , mrorell kids in the area you know , that 's a consideration that will have to be taken into account . We do have more parks you know . We 're developing more and more where activities are expanding . We don 't want to I don 't think II jeopardize any youth activity to create a parking lot . I like the idea of a centralized city park . This plan at least in concept looks pretty fun to me . Especially the realignment and improvement of the hockey rinks . II 5chroers: Yeah , the concept looks nice . Lash: What happened to , yeah there was an idea kicked around a while ago when Pauly 's would be gone and that would be a , did that just go down? Hoffman: Not large enough . II II Park and Rec Commission Meeting September 24 , 1991 - Page 26 Erhart : I like the idea of a central park too but I don 't want to lose any youth activities to a parking lot . But maybe we can work with the HRA . 11 Hoffman: The other point which I had brought up is , we 've had a very good relationship with the school district on developing and using that property . However , it should be remembered that city property does end at ' just on the other side of the warming house . So we need the full cooperation of School District #112 in this type of activity as well . Schroers : There really is no specific common area for the city right now . Place that people can go to while they 're shopping or somebody 's getting a hair cut somewhere or something rather than waiting in the lobby or I something . If they want to come to a place like this , we really have very little to offer . I think something like this really offers a comfort zone to people who are using this city . Hoffman : And as was pointed out at the Chamber meeting , Chamber luncheon today i o that it may not seem that it 's in the center of the city today but it will be in the very near future . The grocery store is locked in . It ' will LE Hsere . Erhart : For sure now? Hoffman: For sure . Schrocrc : And is the location like straight south? ' Hoffman : Yep . Straight south . Schroera : It 's right next to the hotel? Hoffman : Yep . Just across the street from the hotel . There will be a new .bank which will go in the corner and then beyond that will be the parking area and the new mall with Festival Foods as the anchor tenant . Merlin 's Hardware moving over there . MGM Liquor moving over there and Bernie 's moving from downtown over to that location . And with the continuing development of West 78th to the west , City Hall will be surrounded by retail and professional in the very near future . Schroers : If this concept or something like this is approved and we go with it , the City has to require an ice cream or yougart shop somewhere within walking distance . Hoffman : So noted . Andrews : Municipal yougart shop . ' Schroers ' Municipal sponsored . That 'd be great . Okay can we move on? Hoffman : I believe the HRA would be glad to hear your comments in the formalized fashion if somebody wishes to make that type of motion that can be passed on to them . If you- approve of such . Disprove . Park and Rec Commission Meeting II September 24 , 1991 -- Page 27 Lash : Something like we would be happy to cooperate in a joint project for II this area along the City Center Park redevelopment . . .? Hoffman: I think they 're basically the developer of this city park . Our II portion of it would be the cooperation and the redesign of City Center Park . But the point of not , if we lose the ballfield , that we need to gain that back in some shape , manner or form is a valid one and that 's the type II of information that 's going to say ah-ha . They just can 't walk all over us here . Lash: How do we have to put it then? I Schroers : t..Jhat we want to do is make a motion to the effect that the Park ii and Rec Commission is very much in favor and would like to support the II concept of the city central park . We 'd be willing to consider a joint effort in an attempt to attain a facility of this nature . I don 't think that we want to say specifically that we want to lock into this plan . I thin;, we just want to give them the message that we support the idea . We like the idea and are willing to work with them in order to attempt to accomplish . II Andrew=:: Friendly amendment . I think we should put in there we do , would like to be compensated for any lost park resources that are involved in this project . If that means replacing or . 1 Schroers : I don 't know at this point if they would look at that as a shot in the arm . I Lash : I would not he happy to support it if it is not a joint project . City Center then will be redesigned so we don 't lose facilities . If we II lose that ballfield , I 'd be not happy to cooperate with them on this because I don 't think we can afford to lose the ballfield . Schroers ' No , I don 't think we can either but I don 't think that we 're II gettinc, that specific at this point are we? Koubeky : Can we just express a concern about losing the ballfields? I Andrews : Yeah , let 's do that . ( There was a tape change at this point . ) I Schroers moved , Andrews seconded that the Park and Recreation Commission pass along to the Housing and Redevelopment Authority it's unanimous I approval of the Central Park Master Plan with the note that it is vital that any ballfields or playing areas displaced by the plan be relocated . All voted in favor and the motion carried. II LAKE ANN PICNIC/RECREATION SHELTER. Hoffman : 7( d ) is the report . This report would be attached to the II documentation being the plans and specs for both the shelter project and the utilities project . We have broken those down into two separate projects . It would be in the city 's best benefit to do so . Two very II I Park and Rec Commission Meeting September 24 , 1991 - Page 28 different projects working towards the one end . The plans and specs were approved last evening by the City Council . The project is currently out for bid so it 's moving right forward . The schedule is attached on the back to begin construction on October 21st on both the utilities and the shelter . You will see that if you 're interested and want to head out to the park the first part of November , you ' ll see the large trench , valley which will be dug right down the middle of the ballfields to accept the watermain and the electricity which is coming from the center of the park . That will be filled in and left in an unfinished manner for the remainder- of th:, winter and then restored in the spring . They ' ll get the majority of the block structure up and the building and get it closed in and then I would presume they 're going to start with their stone work and finish it up . They do have a clause in the specifications . A damage clause specifying $200 .00 fine back to the contractor if this is not completed by June 1st of 1992 . So I believe they will take that with some seriousness . Andrews : $200 .00? Hoffman : A day . Andrews: A day? 1 Hoffman :i'i rC)r'T e,V.t Schroere : I have a question . Right down the middle of the ballfield is a trench? Hoffman: Right down the middle of the . ' Scla , f r s ' Inb:tween the ballfields? Not through the middle of the playing arc c. . ' Hoffman: Sounds bad , that 's right. . I rescind that comment . Right up through the berm . ' Erhart : I thought it was right through the ballfield too . Andrews : Are we going to be putting in rough in 's for the water or sewer where we could put in facilities near the ballfields or is that just going to be buried and left? Hoffman : It 's incorporated into the project and again , now is the right time- to do those types of things . It 's raised the cost of the initial estimate somewhat. . That will be addressed by the Council . That includes a water fountain at Field #1 and a water fountain up at the concession building . If the City brought water right down the middle of the park and did not leave a drinking fountain in those two locations , again we would not be very popular . Would be looked upon as foolish . Then the water continues down and will stub in a yard hydrant up to the parkview picnic ' area so those peop] e can make use of water in that area . We presume at some point in the future we 're going to take a look at a concrete slab covered type shelter . Picnic shelter in that location . Bouncing back to the ballfield , that concession building will serve our needs for some time I Park and Rec Commission Meeting 1 September 24 , 1991 - Page 29 in the future but I would presume that the City would take a look at a morel complete shelter building in there including restrooms to serve the ballfield area . That will very easily be accommodated at that time . The water 's there . Electricity 's there . The sewer just needs to be a gravity line to run from that location down to the lift station which would be located at the turn around and then pumped over to Greenwood Shores . The lift station there . So this , I mean this is like , you 're servicing an entire subdivision . It just happens to be a park . Now we 're free to take II a look at additional improvements in the future . Schroers : Okay . That takes care of the Administrative Presentations . The l last item is the Administrative Section . Anything there that anyone wants to focus on? If not , call for a motion to adjourn . Andrews moved , Lash seconded to adjourn the meeting. All voted in favor and the motion carried . The meeting was adjourned . Submitted by Todd Hoffman 1 Park and Rec Coordinator Prepared by Nann Opheim I I I I I 1 1 I 1 1 1 I ' CHANHASSEN PARK AND RECREATION COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING OCTOBER 22, 1991 ` ( The Commission completed a site visit to the recently finished Herman Field Park prior to the official meeting . ) Vice Chairman Andrews called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m . . MEMBERS PRESENT: Jan Lash , Dave Koubsky , Dawne Erhart , Curt Robinson and Jim Andrews ' MEMBERS ABSENT: Wendy Pemrick and Larry Schroers STAFF PRESENT: Todd Hoffman , Park and Recreation Coordinator and Sharmin Al-Jaff , Planner I APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Erhart moved , Koubsky seconded to approve the Minutes of the Park and Recreation Commission meeting dated September 24 , 1991 as presented . All voted in favor and the motion carried . SENIOR CITIZEN PRESENTATION: ' A. SENIOR CITIZEN COMMISSION. B. CHANHASSEN SENIOR CENTER. C. COORDINATION OF SENIOR ACTIVITIES. Hoffman: Come on up and sit up here . We 'll do some brief introductions . Meet each other and hold our discussion . We 'll let Sharmin give her presentation . ( The Park and Recreation Commission members and Senior Commission members introduced themselves to each other . ) Hoffman: Sharmin , why don 't you give us a brief introduction. Let 's go ahead and follow , discuss what the Senior Commission is all about . . . Al-Jaff: The purpose of our visit is to bring the Park and Rec Commission up to speed as to what Senior activities are in the City of Chanhassen right now . Just some background . This all started a couple of year ago . We started with a senior task force . We were asked to conduct a study . We didn 't know what the outcome was going to be . It was an open ended study . We found out that we have between 800 and 1 ,000 seniors in this city . This U number is suppose to double within the next decade . We don't have any types of activities in this city . The only group that does meet on a regular basis is the Chanhassen Senior Club and their main activity is playing cards basically once a week on Thursdays . They meet for an hour . Other than that there isn 't anything else going on. Most of our seniors in this city go to neighboring communities . Chanhassen does help subsidize a program in Excelsior , South Shore Senior Center . We work with the Senior Community Services that does most of the programming for South Shore . They are aware of what we are doing . We have an excellent working relationship with them . Most probably they will be helping Chanhassen in providing ' programs for seniors . One of the outcomes of this study was the need for senior center in Chanhassen . To accomplish that the Senior Commission was established . They were appointed by the Council and their task was basically to implement the results of the study . We found out that we 1 Park and Rec Commission Meeting October 22 , 1991 - Page 2 don 't have adequate transportation for seniors . There isn 't programs . No activities . There isn 't one source where they can gather information or anything basically they needed wasn 't available to them . The senior commission started working on trying to find a place where they can meet . We looked at many different places . We always came back to City Hall . There is a space behind the library . Actually it 's behind the Council chambers . It 's used for storage right now and we thought that we could convert that into a space . An interim space that they could use for now and maybe in 3-4 , maybe 5 years they would have their own free standing 1 building . If that should take place , which we 're sure we will . We already went to the Housing and Redevelopment Authority requesting funds to start the architectural plans and building . The structure and they gave it their ' blessings . Programming , we have already sent out bids to contract for 12 hours a week through Community Services . If that should take place , we 're probably going to use the Park and Recreation 's offices . They will be working closely with Todd . Also Todd 's expertise will be needed . He has ' always been very wonderful in providing programs for different ages . I don 't know if , he has shown interest in providing programming for them and I don 't know if that 's just . . . Hoffman: . . .We 've taken a look at the Senior Community Services option with their contract for 12 hours is the best way to go in dealing with a specialty area which we do not have the professional experience . . . We 'll ' be lending support in finding local contacts and . . . That person may very well office in our office for a portion of the time until space is available in the lower level . . . Senior Community Services works in how many communities? Al-Jaff : About 12 . Hoffman : 12 communities . Al-Jaff : They 're very experienced . We can 't go full time with a person U right now that would be dedicated to seniors basically because we don 't have the funds for it . This project was thrown into our laps a couple of years ago but once we get into the programming aspect of it , it will become I think a Park and Recreation . Hoffman: We 're simply acting as a coordination agency . The folks who . . . those will be the people telling us what to do . . . It 's a new area for the city and these types of discussions , round table discussions are continuing on an ongoing basis to keep the open communication available . 1 Al-Jaff : With this we ' ll turn it to Barbara Montgomery . She 's the chair person . I believe she has a few words she 'd like to say . ' Barbara Montgomery : One of the exciting things I think is how cooperative everybody has been and how much help we have had from everybody . It 's just really been exciting . I think one of the things we have to contend with is the large age span . When you think of 55 to 95 , you 're talking about 40 years . Well if you subtract 40 years from 55 , you know , if you 're programming for 15 year olds all the way up to 55 year olds , the same thing . You know it isn 't going to work . And it 's the same way with the senior population . And so what we need is a lot of different things that Park and Rec Commission Meeting October 22 , 1991 - Page 3 are appropriate for certain age groups . And we don 't know all the answers either . I think that comes when you do have the volunteers . You begin to have the core group and you begin to find out what they want . But I think - with the experience that the Community Services has had , we 're going to save ourselves a lot of mistakes and a lot of false hits . And they have been just great . So I 'm really looking forward to having this person aboard . We 're also going to have somebody who 's going to helping in provide volunteer services from the community . If somebody needs something fixed in their house or somebody needs something done , that sort of thing so I think we 've got a lot of good things . And I don 't know , maybe you have some questions or maybe some of the rest of you have something you 'd like to add . Emma St . John: I 'd just like to add something because I was involved when South Shore started and that was through Senior Community Services also and II we were just , we 're still just open 3 days a week but when we started it was very small and had day person setting up the program and everything and" then as it moved and found out what programs that the people in the community wanted and now we are going real well and have also introduced the congregate dining program which has helped an awful lot to the increase in participation to our program over there . And this is something that would happen here too I 'm sure . We have educational programs and entertaining programs and just all kinds of things . The other day we had , in fact yesterday we had a lady come and teach us how to make some Scharinschnitzel . Scissor cutting designs and all kinds . So it isn 't always something just the people that come to the congregate dining are involved . Others have no interest in coming to eat . Others have no interest in coming and playing cards there which we do once a week also . They want to learn some of the other things or come to the other programs so it 's a variety of programs for different ages . So I 'm sure once this gets started , it will grow just as fast as that and we certainly appreciate the Chanhassen City has done for the South Shore over there . Hoffman: Where did the center start there? I know it 's in Mt . Calvary Church . Emma St . John: In the old high school . We had two classrooms and that 's where , and we started with the bare walls and it was a lot of work . Having" to buy the equipment for it and put it in and different organizations helped . Hoffman: Then it went from there to Mt . Calvary? I Emma St . John: No . We 've been in Mt . Calvary only one year . This is about 7 years old now . We went out of there because the talk was they were, going to tear down the school . They needed more room for the classrooms and Mt . Calvary offered their spot to us so we felt we 'd better take that and not wait until we 're really pushed out into the street . ' Andrews: How many people are being served in South Shore? Emma St . John: As a whole I don 't really know how many . The dining , that II goes from 35 to 55-60 average in the 3 days . But then like I say , there are other seniors , other people that come for the programs too . . . .Burn I Park and Rec Commission Meeting October 22 , 1991 - Page 4 was the coordinator there and now it 's JoAnn Pavelka and Ben Withhart . They have been very supportive and since our center opened , they also have opened one in Long Lake . So there are a lot of centers that they help and support and they know how to do it . Barbara Montgomery: Of course we won 't be able to do any congregate dining over here because we don 't have the space . Selda Heinlein: I think we could have some kind of educational or health or various programs like that . Where I came from . . .we had at least every ' other month we had some kind of a film shown or they would just talk to us about watching our step when we were out and Chicago in areas , as everybody knows . Now when I read so much about Minneapolis and that I think well golly , I moved from one State into another one and I hear the same story . But I mean they were really good and then we would have , and we met in part of the church also . It was not a public place . We had facilities . They did have a kitchen but they would have different stores which we do not have here to my knowledge . Comparing it like with Rainbow or Cub with . . . and they would come and buy a lunch and we could ask whatever fee and then they would have groceries . Packages of groceries that they would draw names for . Constant little things like this that kept the unit going . We had a 100 members . That was our limitation and I was one of the first ones in it . My husband and I were one of the charter members . I know now it ' has dwindled because of the age of the various members that have been in it since the start . Quite a few of them have passed on and are in ill health but they 're still going . Fighting to keep going and doing things that 11 they 've been doing in the past . That sort of thing is what I think it should be . Sort of on the agenda once in a while to sort of steer away from constant card playing . I 'm not an avid card player . I play just for the fun of it . I don 't miss very many meetings but those are the things that I would sort of like to see . Hoffman : I think we 're in a . . .position here . . . They 've been battling for 11 our business . Robinson: How many active members do you have right now? Emma St . John : We have no members . Oh you mean in Chan? Robinson: Yeah , in Chan . Selda Heinlein: We have 40 registered on our roster . ' Barbara Montgomery: That 's the card club . And that 's not the senior center . They will be able to take part no doubt but that 's a separate sort of thing . Selda Heinlein: That 's what we would start with I assume along with more . Robinson : That started out as a card club? ' Selda Heinlein: Well , there 's some doubt about that . . . .they were a senior center when they started according to the papers far , far back . Then somehow or another they lost that name and it 's become a card club 1 Park and Rec Commission Meeting October 22 , 1991 - Page 5 because they stopped doing the things that they were doing . As I understand it they used to do crafts and things like that and I don 't know , lunches and things like that . Well I know since I 've been in there we 've had several pot luck lunches and things like that but . I Emma St , John: It is not just that you can do things for entertainment . There are other programs that you have to have to be eligible for some of the things that are available for help . You have to have certain number of health programs . You have to have other programs that are educational . You cannot have just an entertainment or come and eat . And as a center it is not a club . There are no dues to pay . 1 Barbara Montgomery: I think originally the card club was started by Carver County . Hoffman: Don 't they still lay some claim to that? The County? Barbara Montgomery : No . 1 Hoffman: No money? Barbara Montgomery : No money . Robinson: And the age is 55 and over? II Barbara Montgomery : I think that 's what the study said . Selda Heinlein : That 's normally what they consider senior age now I think . l But our oldest member is 95 and she is there every week to play cards . Emma St . John: That 's what keeps her going . Somebody else has something II else . Barbara Montgomery : Jane , what about you? Jane Kubitz : I think it 's been covered . I think there are a lot of programs that we will have . . . Andrews: It seems like having sort of a central clearinghouse of knowledge 1 or some place to call to find out where do we get a group for this or where do we get a group for this , that would be an important part of it too . To have one place you can call and say I 'm putting together , I 'm interested in gardening . I want to start a gardening group . Interested in the Twins games or something like that . That would be important too to have that coordination spot . Barbara Montgomery: Right . I think it 's very frustrating when somebody decides that they want to help or they want to do something and then they II can 't find anybody to talk to . It 's very difficult . - Or you get passed along from one phone to another . Robinson: A meeting place is also , go to the same place all the time . 1 1 1 Park and Rec Commission Meeting October 22 , 1991 - Page 6 Barbara Montgomery : That kept coming u . That 's what we finally P g ' P ally decided . We had to do something about that . We weren 't going to get anywhere until we had a central . Selda Heinlein: We meet in the school and this is , we use the gym now for our meetings . Card playing . And there 's times when they want to use the gym for programs and that . We only meet once a week so you know , this makes it a little bit difficult . And when the weather gets cold , it gets kind of cold when the door opens and we 're constantly going back and forth closing the door . Lash : I used to work at Chan Elementary when you guys would be up there ' and they 'd walk by with all the kids and it 's pretty disruptive for people trying to sit . They 're there to play cards and then to have 700 kids in the halls . Jane Kubitz : That 's why we need a room where people can just drop in to talk to somebody when they don 't want to talk to their 4 walls , as well as find something to do . 1 Selda Heinlein: Well the new princpal , and she was there the first day . She came over and spoke to one sitting at my table there and she said are you here every Thursday and we answered yes . And she said well now , she said I know the children can be noisy but if they get too noisy , be sure you let me know . Well we 've discovered that she has the teachers , they go in front of the children when they go from class to class . You don 't hear much of a sound at all until it 's time to go home . Which is natural but it really has . They don 't have the older children anymore but last year it was really something . Last 2 years but now they say , they have them pretty IIwell- under control . Barbara Montgomery : I know several seniors who still love to go skiing . 1 Love to play tennis . You know all that sort of thing too . . . Jane Kubitz : Ideas and interest and desires as you have seniors I think . 1 Selda Heinlein: Well we have a tour guide that will set up trips from time to time . He has an agency in , where is it? Is it Hopkins? Somewhere in that area . And he sets up various trips for the seniors . But being as that so many are just interested in playing cards , it 's hard to get a group sufficient . Now we went on a trip 2 weeks ago and it was alright . It wasn 't totally to my liking . But normally I am satisfied with what he put 1 on or he tries to get a group together to go to the Dinner Theatre . Prices aren 't that high but a lot of them will not even go there . These trips , I 've had some very good ones . Right after I joined we went up to Bessemer , Michigan and spent 3 days and 2 nights and saw a whole lot . Stayed in a chalet . Price was reasonable and things like that he has come up with . But since it 's harder to get the group to do those things . ' Barbara Montgomery : You were menti.oning advertising and that sort of thing . ' Hoffman: We can do that . Sharmin , could you just take a few minutes and highlight the new center and . . . 1 Park and Rec Commission Meeting I/ October 22 , 1991 - Page 7 Al-Jaff: Sure . We have two basic proposals that , sorry this is not large I enough so everybody can see it . Two concepts that were put together by Jack Anderson . He worked on the design of City Hall . It 's consistent with the overall plan for City Hall . The long term plan . The difference between those two concepts is this one has a vestibule on the outside and it would look exactly like this entrance only it would be on the other side of City Hall . This is what will cost a lot of money . The other concept II eliminates the vestibule and instead you would have a partition on the inside . Both concepts have a kitchenette . This will be the area where the activities would take place . Small office for whoever 's going to be doing the programming . Koubsky : The square feet was what? Al-Jaff: 2 ,000 . It 's really small . We 're trying to accommodate 50 people, only for now . Hoffman: 2 ,800 square feet . I Al-Jaff: 2 ,800? In the future either the library is going to have it 's own space or , most probably the library will have it 's own space . One thing that we run into is what happens when the City offices need to expand . Hoffman: We can point out on here , there 's other options to expanding . The library falls underneath this portion . The front portion will be the now developed senior center . But then when the expansion is done to the back of City Hall , this will open up a larger area as well on the lower level to expand the senior center and if the library moves out before -the senior center finds a free standing center , they can use this space as well . So there are upcoming two opportunities for expansion . Robinson : It sounds like the current organization has a reputation as a . . . Selda Heinlein: Yes . And that 's detrimental . I Robinson : Almost I would think people that aren 't necessarily interested in playing cards would probably say . . . ( There was a tape change at this point in the discussion . ) Lash: . . .organized place too because I think , I went through a period with!' my mother-in-law where we wanted to keep her at home but couldn 't find services to do that and I know how frustrating that can be for people . I think it 'd be neat to have a place where we have the Honor Society students who are always wanting to do community services and Scout troops . I know the neighbors were just figuring out how to organize to volunteer seniors . . .in their homes . Al-Jeff : The Senior Commission has established a sub-committee that would deal with volunteers . We have also contracted with a program called H .O .M .E . and they basically help keep seniors at home instead of moving to II senior nursing homes . That will depend on the income of the senior . They will do an assessment of the income they have and based upon that , they • Park and Rec Commission Meeting October 22 , 1991 - Page 8 would either charge or provide volunteer services . The Mayor has been very helpful as far as the volunteers are concerned . He 's the one who has been pushing for that . We have a lot of people that have contacted . . .services to seniors that would need . Pemrick : . . .much interest is there of the seniors to volunteer? Barbara Montgomery: I think there will be . I really think so . We were just appalled really when we did this study at the end of the year time how much need there was . Really appalling and it was hard to know where to start so we just sort of started everywhere at once and decided we 'd see what came along . It 's really been going well . Emma St . John: At South Shore the volunteers are the receptionist and the dining program there but- they also have people who try to get programs . They are volunteers . They have volunteer bus driver , van driver . They have shopping trips every week . These are to the grocery store or to like Knoliwood . Some are paid but also some volunteers . There are even amongst the seniors there are volunteers that like to do that . Lash: I 've talked to the Mayor . . .because I work at the kindergarten center out at Jonathan and we 're trying to get volunteer parents to come in and help us with things . It 's so hard these days because •almost all the ' children 's parents work . So we thought , well wouldn 't it nice to try and get seniors involved . Get them working with kindergartners . . . Emma St . John : I volunteered at our church school the other day helping serve lunch . One of the cooks got sick so I volunteered over there . Barbara Montgomery : I think there are a lot of volunteers , if they know specifically what you want of them and they have a definite job . Lash : That 's why . . .at one time he was trying to get that going and if you ' told people specifically what we 're looking for . There are a lot of retired school teachers around here . . . Andrews: We 'll have a place to call if you do want to volunteer . It 's like you have a place to call if you need service but also a place to call if you volunteer service . ' Barbara Montgomery : Right . We need to get that going . Al-Jaff : One of the things we 're working on right now is basically ' establishing a director for the senior citizens in Chanhassen . One of our problems is part of our city is located in Hennepin and the other part in Carver County . Carver County concentrates on rural communities and 11 Chanhassen isn 't completely rural . Hennepin County on the other side has wonderful services that they could provide for seniors but not all of their agencies can provide services for Chanhassen mainly because of our location . So we 're trying to gather all that information . Just trying to figure out what is available to Chanhassen and what isn 't . Barbara Montgomery: Maybe you can help us with that , it 'd be great . We need all the help we can get . • Park and Rec Commission Meeting I/ October 22 , 1991 - Page 9 Koubsky : This building , the expansion is to do in 4 years? Al-Jaff : No . Actually we sent . . .out . They 're due November 1st . Back here . Senior Commission 's goal is to have the center open by May 1st because May is Older American 's Month . It would be a time to have their grand opening . Any activities that we can have during that time would just work out wonderful . The idea of will we be able to accomplish that II deadline , I don 't know . Originally we had thought that this process would take a year or two but the Council and the HRA said do it now . It was something that we weren 't expecting . This really pushed us to work harder ." It 's working out wonderful . Koubsky : So they 're looking at that organization will have something to 11 springboard on . You 're looking for a central clearinghouse or a center spot to organize and kind of digest and dispatch information? Hoffman: Well , it will be the person that of Senior Community Services . They may start before that right? They 'll start , did they give a time line? Al-Jaff : On November 8th . i Hoffman : This year? Al-Jaff : Of this year . Barbara Montgomery : I thought it was December 1st . 1 Al-Jaff : November 8th we will be interviewing the person . Hoffman : They will be officing with us until this is complete and they had . . .for 12 hour weeks . Koubsky : So this is really coming along? I Hoffman: It 's coming together . Al-Jaff : Faster than we expected . I Koubsky : . . .education and information . That would be the next step to get" everybody informed . Communication . Hoffman: Any other input from the commission? Andrews : I 'm wondering if your commission could handle our trail and bike II path problems . You seem to get this one handled pretty quickly . Barbara Montgomery : We tend to follow our noses . I Andrews : Well thank you for coming . Jane Kubitz : Talking about your trail and bike path . . .travel by the swing sets and so forth . . . 1 1 Park and Rec Commission Meeting October 22 , 1991 - Page 10 I/ ESTABLISH 1992 PARK AND TRAIL DEDICATION FEES. 11 Hoffman: Item 2 , establish 1992 park and trail dedication fees . In gathering information for this , making a phone survey I ran across a mailed survey . . .and in waiting for the results of that I would ask that this be tabled . We do review this on an annual basis for the City Code . We are on the upper end of park fees in the metropolitan area but we 're no means the highest . We 're constantly knocking our heads for more money and in conversations with Council members today , they say why don 't we raise them so we ' ll see how we do depending on . . .cost of development . . .and fees associated with that . ILash: I make a motion that we table this item until November 19th . Andrews : I 'll second . ' Lash moved , Andrews seconded to table the 1992 Park and Trail Dedication fees until the November 19, 1991 Park and Recreation Commission meeting. All voted in favor and the motion carried. tSITE PLAN REVIEW, MAIL SOURCE. • I Hoffman: Item 3 is a site plan review for Mail Source . Mail Source is a business very similiar to United Mailing , the Instant Webb companies . They 're located on an interim basis in the industrial park at the present time . Essentially this item was a done deal . The Commission has reviewed ' this lot on a previous basis . It 's in the industrial park where there 's really no purpose or need in taking park property . There 's not a sidewalk system in place in the industrial park' so it does not make sense to take ' one of the segments of sidewalks along with fees . Therefore - it is recommended that the commission approve the acceptance of park fees and trail fees in full for the R .J . Ryan Construction proposal for Mail Source . ' Koubsky: Todd , do these guys represent competition to Instant Webb and United Mailing? Hoffman: Sure . Competition as well . There 's a small recording studio that could be in the industrial district which I presume would be competition for Prince 's studio . ' Andrews : Any discussion? More discussion? Robinson: I make the motion that the City accept full park and trail fees from the developers for Mail Source . Lash: I second that . Robinson moved, Lash seconded that the Park and Recreation Commission recommend to accept full park and trail fees in lieu of parkland and trail construction from the developers for Mail Source, Inc. . All voted in favor and the motion carried. Park and Rec Commission Meeting I/ October 22 , 1991 - Page 11 UPDATE 5-YEAR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, NEIGHBORHOOD PARKS . 11 Hoffman: At the last meeting we presented the discussion on the 5 year capital improvement program . It was the Commission 's wish to break that down into segments so it would be neighborhood parks, community parks and then trails . Tonight I 've assembled a package . Unfortunately it 's quite all lengthy package for the neighborhood parks . What it entails is a cover sheet showing the 16 parks which we identify as neighborhood parks . They 're showing face to face in the worksheet from the years 1992 to 1996 . As well as the past 5 years CIP from '88 to '92 . . .park inventory to give II you an idea . Admittedly it 's very difficult to do that on a piece of paper so . . .draw upon personal experience of commissioners . We can take whatever direction the Commission may wish tonight . , Lash: I have a question right off the bat . I always kind of tend to get a little confused when I look at the past few years because when there 's money budgeted , does that mean that we absolutely did that or is that a copy of the old budget and how are we supposed to know if it actually . Hoffman : If it actually happened? I would cross reference over to the facility and see if it ended up there . As we go through there , take for instance Bandimere Heights . Off street parking in asphalt . $3 ,500 .00 was not expended in 1988 . The work was done in this year and $500 .00 was expended on the asphalt . . . Lash : Those are the kinds of things to that should have a follow-up . They need to be looked at pretty seriously because it was budgeted a couple of years ago and we just never had money to do it or had an emergency and had to pull it . It shouldn 't just be forgotten . Obviously there were thoughts back then that there was a need for it . You know maybe it 's been filled already by doing it with the gravel . . . If that 's the case we need to know II that or maybe we need to go back and spend the money to pave it . That was the original intent . Hoffman : I 'm not sure whether it was noticeable but I purposely left them in for let 's say accuracy sake because it was discussed at that time . If you want to x it out of there at this point . . . I Andrews : Where is there a hockey rink anywhere near that part of town? Is there any down there at all? , Hoffman : The closest hockey rink is down . . . Andrews: Is that flooded at all? Is that flat enough to be flooded and II used as play skating? Hoffman: Bandimere Heights? I Andrews : Yeah . Hoffman: Could be . The neighborhood which surrounds it is very small . ' Andrews : You 've got the lake right there too . Anybody have any suggestions for further improvement to Bandimere Heights Park? , Park and Rec Commission Meeting October 22 , 1991 - Page 12 I/ Pemrick : Have there been any requests for anything? Hoffman: Not that I 've heard of . In fact they 're down there . They brought in fill material associated with TH 101 extension right across Market Blvd . here . Once Bandimere Community Park is in , Bandimere Heights Park is going to be open playfield with a play area and that 's essentially 1 it . Andrews : I don 't see wise expenditure money to improve a park that 's going to be not used when Bandimere , the regular Bandimere Park gets developed . Lash : I agree with that . Would it make sense then to eliminate that $2 ,500 .00 basketball? For 1992 . 11 Hoffman: This CIP was done in 1990 . Erhart : Before the community park was actually purchased? Hoffman: Yeah . So it was kind of a targeted deal in 1992 . Plus that $2 ,500 .00 is more than enough to cover a 50 x 50 asphalt area for basketball . Lash : But is there any point in putting it in? ' Hoffman : Not really . Most of those type of things . . .neighborhood requests . ' Andrews : I guess I don 't see any 5 year improvement there necessary at this point . Let 's move on . Carver Beach . II . Hoffman: If we look back at 1991 , the landscaping . $1 ,000 .00 was not expended in additional landscaping . Totlot upgrade of $5 ,000 .00 was expended for additional totlot equipment . $5 ,000 .00 which we put in where we split it out up above in 1992 . . . It 's an old park . Not an old park but an established park . That playground equipment is . . . Andrews : That $5 ,000 .00? Oh , that 's totlot . I see . Okay we have another phase for 1992 then yet to do? Hoffman : That 's up here . That 's what we 've budgeted . What we 've put in ' our CIP for 1992 . • Lash : And there 's a skating rink? Hoffman: Yes . Andrews: That 's a lot less than $5 ,000 .00 . Hoffman : Yeah . Again the figures on the bottom were developed in 1990 in a similiar meeting to this . They just said we 're going to need some totlot Iexpansion for 1992+ for $5 ,000 .00 . What did we end up with? Andrews: We 're under 3 . Why don 't we just for accuracy sake change that to 3 . Park and Rec Commission Meeting I/ October 22 , 1991 - Page 13 Hoffman : Down here? 11 Andrews : Yeah . Hoffman: Yeah , this bottom one is just a worksheet . This is just for the information . This one will disappear and this will be the new sheet up top . I Andrews: We have the racks for canoes or sailboats . Is that in existence there? I Hoffman: Carver Beach Park? Carver Beach playground . Carver Beach playground is up top and this is Carver Beach Park . Carver Beach Playground . I Andrews : Never mind . Lash: Anybody have any suggestions for anything else that needs to be in I here? Koubsky: Just one thing I might add . Just kind of paging through . , Chanhassen 's got four , I think four skating rinks not including the hockey skating rinks up here so I guess 5 skating rinks and the two hockey rinks . We only have one warming house and I guess the 5 year plan , one thing I Chanhassen is lacking , to me Roseville has a fabulous hockey system . I 'm not a hockey fan but it 's a winter activity that doesn 't exist here really . I think over the next 5 years we should think about at least putting a couple of warming houses up so if people want to skate , they have someplace to sit . Dad can go up and read a book while the kids skate . We don 't have that . Hockey rinks I know are expensive . Warming houses are expensive and then you have lights also but I don 't know if the Commission 's ever set a direction or thinks about winter activities . You know every place gets a ballfield and soccer fields . Ice skating is a winter activity . Hoffman : It 's been talked about and there are alternatives . Not many but II I know some cities have used the satellite , the portable building . Many companies have them and just move them on site for seasonal use . . . Lash: How would you do that? Just rent them? Andrews : Like a mobile home . I Hoffman: Yeah , small mobile home . Bring it on site . . . Have to take a look at it . They 're not cheap . . . I Pemrick: I think that would be a real good idea to try and come up with a few of those around the city strategically located . Andrews: I 'd like to see the north . We 've got the city center covered but I think we need something north and we need something south and probably something west . I Koubsky: I guess I 'd be willing to look into , well you folks probably know the park system a little better than I do . Anyway , where should we target?" Park and Rec Commission Meeting October 22 , 1991 - Page 14 I/ Obviously the Bandimere may not be a good place . It 's a dead end road . Only has a few people . What are some population centers here that could utilize it? Pemrick: Does North Lotus have? Andrews: Ice but no . Lash: No . I know you have ice because that would be a nice spot . ' Hoffman : North Lotus , Sunset Ridge and City Center for now would be the most appropriate locations . Lash: Well I agree that would be wonderful . My kids like skating but there 's only one place . . .there 's anyplace you can ever go to warm up just for a few minutes or even to sit down and put your skates on . ' Andrews : My concern about those portable units is would they take the wear and tear of young kids with skates because the warming houses I 've seen have been really beat on . ' Hoffman: That 's what they rent them for . 1 Andrews : They do? Specifically for that? Hoffman: Specifically . ' Andrews: Well let 's look into that . I think it 'd be a real neat thing to try . But that doesn 't affect Carver Beach however . ' Hoffman: No . Carver Beach is small . I 'm not sure if they 'd go for it . The other thing is , if we look to a warming house , you almost have to . . . lighting otherwise what 's . . . If you 're going to get your money out of - renting the building , you have to provide after school skating . Andrews : Which means you have to provide power to the site . ' Koubsky : And you need warming house people . Hoffman: It 's an investment and then you have neighborhood response to ' looking at lights . . . • Andrews : North Lotus will work good because it 's secluded from the houses . ' Lash : And maybe Lake Susan Park would be , community park would be better than Sunset Ridge . Sunset Ridge is set back . ' Hoffman : Without the road access , Sunset Ridge . . . We don 't have the spot designated at Lake Susan . . . ' Lash : Where do you do it at North Lotus? Hoffman: There 's an area specifically graded . 1 Park and Rec Commission Meeting I/ October 22 , 1991 - Page 15 I Andrews: That one 's really set up very well for a warming house . It 's got a pretty natural . 11 Lash: How about Chanhassen Hills? That 's . . . Hoffman: That would be . . .but it is surrounded by back yards . It has a parking lot . . . Erhart : What 's wrong with Sunset Ridge? We didn 't have access to it? Hoffman: Road access . Andrews: We 've got to move here . Carver Beach . 1 Lash: I don 't want to harp but I always feel there 's a need for bleachers and bike racks . , Robinson: I think we need something . We 've got to be considering beyond 1992 in some of those . Lash: Those are pretty minor . Andrews: These are small ones that are difficult to develop . Not a lot of" space . Now , Carver Beach Park . Lash: That one was slated for 1991 right? , Hoffman : Fishing dock was done . Landscaping , some of that . Seating , $1 ,000 .00 was put in there . . . Lash : . . .volleyball? Was there space for that? Andrews : I don 't see the note here about racks . There are racks down there aren 't there? Hoffman: Canoe racks? Not on our list . Wasn 't developed . . . I Andrews : They 're there though right? Hoffman: Yep . One canoe rack . I Andrews : I look at one charcoal grill as probably being inadequate . I would like to see us do more there . Tables? How many picnic tables do we II have there? Many? Robinson: Chan Estates are we on? ' Lash: No , Carver Beach . Hoffman: No picnic tables at either site because they had difficulty with II them dragging into the lake . Lash: I tell you the chain solution at Greenwood Shores is working . , 1 Park and Rec Commission Meeting October 22 , 1991 - Page 16 I Andrews : You 've got to stake them down then? Hoffman: Yeah . Put a pad down and stake them down . Andrews : I 'd like to see that too . If we 've got charcoal grills we 've got to have picnic tables . Probably need them made out of pre-stressed concrete so they don 't destroy them or something . ' Hoffman: In fact that become very evident . : .had their picnic there and we sat on the ground . Andrews : I guess I 'd like to see 3 grills and 3 or 4 picnic tables in that area . That 's a pretty area . I think that area will attract more useage as time goes by here . I think a lot of people don 't even know it 's there . ' Koubsky : Yeah , it 's a nice little area . . . .refurbish that play equipment? Hoffman: That will be in 1992 , for that little play piece down there? ' Koubsky : Yes . I Hoffman: That was one of the first pieces put in the city and that site , the beach on that side , on the south end is the place that . . . The north side is very sensitive and if we just drop in a picnic table and charcoal grill , the neighbors . . .certainly have something to say about that . ' Andrews : I have a problem with that . I mean I feel like we have a duty to serve equally and even handed to all . And for somebody to say I don 't want any facilities in my end . Why don 't you put them down on the other end , I think that 's wrong . Yeah they may complain but I think we have an obligation to serve our citizens evenly . ' Erhart : . . .you have to hear both sides . Lash : If no one 's requested anything . . .that 's one thing but I sort of feel I like when they were trying to . . . And if they don 't want it , then I don 't think . . . How about a fishing pier? Isn 't there a fishing pier? Hoffman: Fishing dock went in on the north end . In fact we just pulled ' that out of the water and put it on park property and received two calls from that . Lash: So that 's the one dock you have to . . .? Hoffman : Yeah . ' Pemrick: So there 's nothing in there? Hoffman : The north side? ' Basically the two portions of Carver Beach which are the . . . The mini beach and canoe racks and fishing dock . Lash: But at the other areas? ' Hoffman: . . .picnic and play area . Park and Rec Commission Meeting October 22 , 1991 - Page 17 Lash : Maybe that 's where we should kind of concentrate . Andrews: Any other? I Robinson: Does that really get used very much? This Chan Estates . That 11 park down there . Hoffman: The mini park? Nobody ever knew it was there . We put a sign up . It 's back in the corner . The only access from the neighborhood is via kind of a pedestrian little path. . . Andrews: Is that the one that 's surrounded by trees like arborvitae? Hoffman: Yes . Andrews : Would this be something where we maybe want to clear some of that'll so it 's visible? It 's so secluded you can 't see it . Koubsky: But if the neighborhood knows it 's there . I Hoffman : The mini park is right across from McDonalds . Lash: You 're thinking of the big one? I Robinson : Yeah , Rice Marsh Lake or whatever . Hoffman: This one 's got a swingset in it and a sandbox which is going to II be pulled out of there . All there are is cats . But yeah , the park sign could go up and that would be an appropriate spot to take a few to put a II park sign in and get some identification . Lash: Do you think if we threw a couple of picnic tables over there it would , maybe people who work in that area would walk over and eat lunch . Hoffman: In fact there was a grill there for that intent . At some point . . . I Andrews: I think we have to have it visible both from a parents standpoint so they can see their kids if they are playing in that area as well as from a vandalism situation . If it 's so secluded that you can pull the grill out without being seen , it surely will happen . I don 't like to kill trees but maybe they can be moved . I don't know . They 're not huge are they? Koubsky : They 're tall . . . At one of the Planning Commission meetings there, was a couple of outspoken citizens when Lake Drive was going in and they were very concerned . They wanted . . .there were some trees . The road was disturbing some of it which gave them a beautiful view of DataServ . I think it might have been an offset to this . The offset was a row of arborvitaes instead . . .so we might have to tread lightly . Andrews : You have to leave the east side of trees up to block the view of DataServ . Lash: And also , if they . . . I I Park and Rec Commission Meeting October 22 , 1991 - Page 18 Andrews : That 's something we 'd probably have to have a hearing on before we start pulling stuff to make sure . Hoffman: I wouldn 't want to do any mass clearing . If you look on the map right along there , there 's trees and then the next house would be back in Cheyenne . . . The people , their back yards go right up to Lake Drive . Andrews : I guess I agree that the lunch traffic would be something we 'd want to encourage there . That 's probably one of the better uses for that spot . ' Hoffman: . . .open field . Obviously the piece of property . . . Robinson: I think that is a good idea . Picnic tables . ' Andrews: Would there be room for a sandlot court in there? Hoffman : For volleyball? Andrews : Yeah without taking up much area . 1 Hoffman : There might need some grading . . . Andrews : That might be something popular with horseshoes or something or maybe even a small piece of asphalt and a basketball hoop . That might be something that 's real popular there too . Do they , they 've already got that at DataSery don 't they? 1 Robinson: That might be a good idea to at least put in your out a few years . ' Hoffman : There would be some resistence between DataSery use and neighborhood use . . .public hearing to get some input on that . . . 1 Andrews : I think a basketball court would be even better than a volleyball court . It would get more use , both from neighbors . I think you get more neighborhood use out of , kids will come over and shoot baskets . You only ' need one guy to do it . Volleyball you pretty much need 4 , 5 , or 6 to get going plus the nets have a tendency to walk . Pemrick : I like your idea of a basketball court . ' Koubsky: As we go here , if there 's any resident input . If you 've had any requests for the parks . Andrews: Any more for that one? Let 's move on . Chanhassen Hills . Which one is that? Hoffman: Chanhassen Hills is here . Everybody with us on Chan Hills . This is it 's year to get money . I 've got it . . .so in 1993-94 potentially we ' ll probably look to some of the types of . . . It 's got a master plan there on ' the top sheet . What will be done is a softball field , play area all in the first phase and then there will be volleyball . 1 Park and Rec Commission Meeting October 22 , 1991 - Page 19 I Lash: Is basketball not slated to go in there? Hoffman: Basketball , tennis . So we 've got the sign , construction of ballfield in 1992 and installation of trees . That $800 .00 in trees was for trees around the play area . We 've also received a request , in fact people . .get together , is trees along that berm . There 's a berm right along here with 212 . Andrews: Probably a good idea . Put those arborviataes over there . I Hoffman : We talked a little bit about tennis courts and we 've . . . They 're expensive to put in but there are a lot of parks that chose to put them in . . . I Lash: What 's the price of a basketball court versus a tennis court? Hoffman : Basketball , we can put that in ourselves . It 's the cost of the II asphalt , fill underneath it , two hoops if it 's a full court . $1 ,000 .00- $2 ,000 .00-$2 ,500 .00 . Andrews: And about $25 ,000 .00 for a tennis court? Hoffman: A double tennis court like that is $30 ,000 .00 . , Erhart : Why is that? Because of the fencing around it . Hoffman : The tennis court cost? Yeah , it starts with the sub base . You 1 need 3 feet of . . .underneath the tennis court before you can even start . . . labor in putting down material and the different courses that go on . . . Andrews: Maintenance . Lot higher maintenance too . Erhart : Have they ever said anything at all about a picnic area . . .? Hoffman : I don 't believe so , no . It 's kind of like what we 're hearing from North Lotus . . . Lash: How about skating? Would that be a place to put a skating rink? Koubsky: That 's an isolated community . . . I Andrews: Yeah , we don 't have any tennis or skating down in that south park chain . It 's pretty undeveloped . Partly because that 's our newest area bull Bandimere Community Park isn 't going to happen anytime soon and we keep holding off here because it 's all going to be there but it 's not going to be there for . Erhart : It 's interesting . . .and I don 't hear a lot of people expressing an interest in anything down there and I don 't know why that is . Is it because their lots , a lot of them are 2 1/2 acres . They feel that they have their space . Andrews: There 's not a tennis court within 2 miles of there . 1 1 Park and Rec Commission Meeting October 22 , 1991 - Page 20 Pemrick: like tennis courts when the new community park goes in . I/ Hoffman: They are slated . 1 Erhart : This is one that 's been there . This has been here before Lake Susan and before . . .and some of those others . . . Andrews: Yeah , I 'd like to see a push here on this one . I think tennis courts , from what I 've seen at North Lotus , boy the use has just gone crazy . I mean you just can 't get on the thing . I think you know another $20 ,000 .00 or $30 ,000 .00 but you can get a tennis court and a basketball court at the same time essentially . Erhart : A lot of homes going in that area . Hoffman: There 's a way to look at it as well . You can go a double tennis court or a tennis court and a full court basketball next to it . . . ' Andrews: One thing you could also do is to extend the flat grade out enough so you could potentially look at a . . . You 've got to have the same kind of level ground . I 'm sure the rough grade to the necessary amount of ' levelness would be inexpensive at that point . Hoffman: For the skating down here we would probably use the field . ' Andrews : Okay , that would be fine . Does that come with grass? Hoffman: Yeah . It 's grass . . . ' Lash : I think the tree thing that they brought up is important too . . . ' Koubsky: One thing with tennis courts is they will be connecting the outlot up to Lake Susan that 's got two courts . Are those used all the time? I guess I 've never noticed a lot of heavy use on the two courts . . . ' Hoffman : Yeah , I 've seen them used . I don 't know how much . Koubsky : The connected trail you know , that gives them access to two other ' courts . Erhart : That 's pretty far isn 't it? Koubsky: Well you 'd have to bike . . . ' Andrews: See in 1992 we're trying to push the City Center project right? Wasn 't that kind of emphasize for 1992? Hoffman: '92? Lake Ann . ' Andrews: Lake Ann , that 's right . We 're looking at probably 1993 or later than for tennis courts here . My personal preference is I 'd like to see a ' push on that for some south park here . Erhart : I would too . What kind of cost are we looking at for a double? . . . 1 Park and Rec Commission Meeting October 22 , 1991 - Page 21 1 Hoffman : Tennis Court? Erhart : Yeah . For a double . I Hoffman : $30 ,000 .00 . Erhart : For a double one? I would like to see that if at all possible because there are so many more homes are going in down there and not everybody has big lots . I think it 's just a matter of time before . . . I Lash: . . .Lake Susan Hills and they 're not getting a tennis court there for a while . . . Andrews: Well the tree part , we need to allocate something more for 1992 there to get us some more trees? Hoffman: If we want to for 1992 . Andrews : Oh , we 've already set our budget for that? Hoffman: Yeah , but we did put a contingency in our budget this year . As well we have $30 ,000 .00 floating around for the . . . Andrews : I guess I 'd like to look at those trees when I have an opportunity basis . I 'm almost sure that sometime in 1992 we 're going to find that opportunity to sneak some trees in there . If it means we pull 11 them out of the mini park or if we pull them out of the nursery or something . Hoffman: It 'd be a fairly intensive . It 's a long distance and we 're 1 probably talking 50 trees and they could . . . Erhart : I 'd have a problem . . . if you want to think about this . Next spring we have about 100 evergreens that are ready for , they 're going to have to be moved . They 're just too close . Right now they 're 5 and 6 feet . And you 're looking at thousands . . . Probably cheaper than we . . . ' Andrews: The distance would be a lot less too . Hoffman: Commission is selling the City trees . I Erhart : Yeah , it doesn 't sound good does it . Maybe I 'll have to donate them . I tell you what , I 'll donate the trees is the City wants to pay for II the labor to dig them out and move them over there . Hoffman: Did you get that? Lash: Give them a receipt for a tax write off . Andrews : We ' ll name it the Dawne Erhart Memorial Tree Arboretum or something . Robinson: That 's an ideal height . I Park and Rec Commission Meeting October 22 , 1991 - Page 22 Erhart: Right and they have to be moved . We did get rid of a few . . . but we didn 't even make a dent . They 're so close that . . . Andrews: We 'll find a way to help . Hoffman : We 've got a tree spade . Erhart : Well yeah . That 's what I 'm saying . Lash : Maybe you want to start taking some out this fall . It 's almost ' better to do it in the fall isn 't it? Erhart : Fall or spring , yeah . Lash: But you know you can never get those in too soon . You 've got 212 is going in there . . . ' Erhart : No , I think if we wanted to move some this fall we could . Andrews : Let 's do that if we can . Hoffman : Talk to Tim . I 'll give you a call . Andrews : Otherwise , do we want to put tennis courts in 1993? Is that what I hear? Okay . Lash : Put in $30 ,000 .00? Andrews : $30 ,000 .00 in 1993 . I guess based on our fair play doctrine , that 's kind of it for them for a while.. Lash: Tennis/basketball . Hoffman: When I bring this back cleaned up then I 'll verify those figures . 11 Andrews : It 's an estimate . Depending on the grade work can really change it . Curry Farms . Hoffman: They got their shot in the arm in 1991 . Lash: What else are they? ' Hoffman: They 've got a master plan . . . Lash: We can 't plug another one in there in 1993? Hoffman: No . Then we 've also we 've discussed the . . . ' Andrews : Let 's delete it . If it 's a headache and isn 't going to happen . Lash: What 's the play area like down there? It was pretty little the last ' time I saw it . Hoffman: There was an expansion this year . Park and Rec Commission Meeting I October 22 , 1991 - Page 23 Lash : More on line? Hoffman: Yeah . . . Lash : And the ballfield? Hoffman: The ballfield is in . The asphalt is ready to put in on the trail and the volleyball 's in there . Lash: How about skating in there? Andrews : Yeah , I was going to say the tennis had something too . Lash: Would they go for skating? Hoffman: Let 's see where do we have skating? At Carver Beach . We need to, carefully think about where we place our skating rinks because they 're labor intensive . They cost a lot of money to put down . Koubsky: That almost determines a study in itself . How you want to put II them in and where . . .I 've been afraid to calculate the . . . ( The discussion wasn 't being picked up on the tape recording at this i point . ) Andrews : I 'd like to see us in 1993 at least do a soil study . Because if II it 's not suitable for being developed as a tennis court , we ought to then delete that off our budget . Delete it off the plan, correct . We have nothing on tap for 1992 so why don 't we figure 1993 a soil study and I think the beginning of some tree installation there would be good too for II 1993 . We don 't have any money in there for it . Oh , the Erhart Grant? She 's going to come home and her whole yard 's going to be empty . Lash: There are some things on here that are there . I mean there 's a swimming beach . There 's shore fishing . There 's a dock . There 's a trail . • Andrews : What 's that $50 ,000 .00? Lash: I think there 's some type of idea about trying to acquire some more II property somewhere . . . Andrews: I think that 'd be politically very unpopular . Robinson: Was that back behind Lake Ann and Lake Susan? Andrews: Oh , the penninsula? I Lash: I don 't know . I think that was kind of a . . . Robinson: Scratch it . Lash: $50 ,000 .00 wouldn 't buy much . . .but I did this summer have a request • from the neighborhood . . .volleyball . . . 1 I Park and Rec Commission Meeting October 22 , 1991 - Page 24 Andrews: Let 's delete the 50 though . Let 's get that out of there . 11 Lash : Do you think the volleyball court , does that cost a lot? Hoffman: It 's very inexpensive to put in . Andrews : Is there a sand beach there appropriate to put volleyball right in the water? Lash: Well . . . ' Andrews: The bad thing would be if it 's not permanently attached , it will be gone . ' Hoffman: We have had problems with our nets . Erhart: Larry came up with . . . Lash : Or maybe . Andrews : Electrify them? Lash : No , I was thinking that there could be checked out but I supposed that would be hassle . Well anyway that was something I was asked about . Hoffman: Put it in 1993? Robinson : Sure . Andrews : Herman Field . What 's left to do there? ' Hoffman : . . .get this $20 ,000 .00 here and they should be set for the near life out there . Koubsky : They have an open field now don 't they? Hoffman : Yeah . This was . . .taken last spring . Lash: Actually now next year it will be an empty ballfield . Hoffman : Open ballfield . No backstop . So we 'll put the trails in with the maintenance crews . Put the play area with the maintenance crew . It 's the only play structure we 're buying . . .and then picnic tables and get some grass growing . Robinson : Is that seeded or will it be seeded this fall? Hoffman : Yeah , dormant seed . ' Erhart : It 's seeded right now? Hoffman : They did seed it but then we didn 't accept it so . . . I I Park and Rec Commission Meeting October 22 , 1991 - Page 25 1 Lash: . . .Okay and then how far down the line , tennis courts are on there . How far down the line do we want to look at that? The west doesn 't have much out there . Koubsky: In soil studies Todd , do we do soil studies before we determine? II Hoffman : Not on every court , no . If you have a reasonably stable site . . . But at Curry Farms . . . It 's a peat site with a lot of black dirt on top . Veryll unstable . Andrews: Just from a tennis court standpoint , I think we ought to put that fairly far out on Herman . If it just became fully developed . 1995? Hoffman: And then if it becomes . . . Andrews : Yeah , I think you pacify the neighbor and then move on and I think we 've done that . Robinson: But it 's important that we get it in here at sometime . ' Andrews: Yeah . Keep it in front of us . Meadow Green . Okay , that 's got a lot of stuff on it . Bike racks . Do we have plenty of those there? I Lash: One . Andrews : That 's got to be a very high traffic park . Do we need more bike I racks? Lash: We need more bleachers . • Erhart : Yeah , they play a lot of games there . Lash: I have to sit on the ground every time I 'm there . There 's one set II of bleachers . Well maybe there 's two of them . . . Hoffman: They did have one on each side and the wind picked the set up and' blew it across the field . Lash: Or even more park benches . If that 's cheaper or easier . I Andrews: Put that for 1993 . This park I know gets tremendous use . This really is our kind of city center park now . It draws a lot of people . Koubsky : I guess I was thinking , if we ever were going to start putting in hockey rinks , this would probably be an ideal one . There 's a lot of people around there . It 's a big park . The electricity wouldn 't be a problem . Hoffman: It would take out one of the ballfields to put it in . Lash : I think we have to be really careful and maybe even we should be looking at all of these as we 're going . . .because the City Center thing starts , we 're going to be minus all those fields for one season . So we 're II going to be looking at what our options are going to be for that year . 1 I Park and Rec Commission Meeting October 22 , 1991 - Page 26 Andrews : One of the comments I overheard was , what 's there now? Well it 's only a balifield . It 's only this . It 's only that . Well I realize that the scarcity of ballfields we 're already dealing with . It 's what , a 3 year project to get a balifield on line and running . Erhart : But I can understand where that comment is coming if they 're not associating with ballfields . If your children aren 't . . . tAndrews : Yeah , you bet . ' Lash : How 's the play equipment holding up over there? Hoffman: It 's an older piece . We 've had some problems with splintering . . . ' Did a safety check on it and . . . Lash: What 's the life expectancy of that stuff? . . .replacing it? ' Hoffman : '96 potentially . Lash : That gets a lot of use . Andrews : Let 's put something in '96 I guess to kind of , $20 ,000 .00? I guess by '96 you 're looking at getting more than that . . . ( There was a tape change at this point in the discussion . ) Andrews : . . . It may not be adequate to play hockey but to safety skate . That would probably be quite well received I think . There are a lot of kids that use that rink . . Lash : What if we were to try putting in a rink and one of those portable warming houses for a year and kind of try it and see what kind of useage it gets and if people say , well this is dumb . It 's always dark and we can 't see . . . ' Andrews : Now those warming houses Todd , are those , do they require electrical to be run into them or are they something that you can kind 1 of . . . Hoffman: You have to run electric . Have a panel . - ' Andrews : There 's no electrical on North Lotus now is there? And that 's big bucks . Big bucks . ' Lash : How much? Hoffman: That depends on if we go with single line . . .and how long the line ' is . Anywhere from . . . Lake Ann is a major run and it 's got two trains coming in at $18 ,000 .00 . This would be more of a residential type use . Lash : How do you think people up there would feel about lights? Andrews: I don 't think there 'd be much objection . You 're a long ways from any houses . 1 I Park and Rec Commission Meeting October 22 , 1991 - Page 27 Lash: That 'd be a nice area to do that in . It 's pretty far from City Center . I Andrews: That would address the issue of the more grown kid activity . I guess one of my questions would be , if we 're going to run electrical in there for a hockey rink , would we want to run electrical in there for lights on that field . Use that as a ballfield one night . Lit ballfield . You 're looking at big bucks but if you 're going to do it , let 's do it once instead of twice . Hoffman: Yeah . If we run electrical into the warming house . . .right up the road . . . 1 Andrews: Yeah it 'd be a long run to the rink but a short to the lights . Do you run 220 for the lights? Hoffman: The one at Lake Ann is . Andrews : Just a thought . ' Hoffman: It 's never been the intention to put lights on any neighborhood ballfield . But you live there . Andrews: It 's used as more than a neighborhood ballfield . Teams are coming in to use that field . I mean you 've got softball , soccer teams that' are coming from all over the place . I will make one comment , the parking down there is grossly inadequate . People are parking on the grass and on the street which really isn 't wide enough to handle it . It 'd be tough to expand that parking . There 's not really anyplace to put it . If you were I going to add parking , probably the thing to do would be look at widening Fox Hollow there along the edge of the park wide enough for pull off parking . People are parking there anyway and so far there are no houses built right adjacent to the park so nobody 's there to complain about the parking . Oftentimes 3 soccer teams practicing at once . Two on the main field and one on each end and one up on the hockey rink area . So you 're looking at 50-60 cars trying to get into a spot there . There 's just no way . Lash: Those are things we need to try to . . . 1 Andrews : It 's becoming more than a neighborhood park . Lash: Maybe that needs to go in first . Andrews : On the flip side of that I as a resident , if I had a choice between parking or lights for a hockey rink , boy I 'll take the lights any I day and I ' ll suffer with the parking . They 're not parking on my grass and they 're not parking in front of my house but I can ,use the hockey rink . Erhart : Right . Parking would be just providing for outsiders that are coming in to your neighborhood park . That might even encourage it more . Andrews : As far as the warming house situation , I don 't know if we could investigate . I think we 've got to at least figure out the cost of running I Park and Rec Commission Meeting October 22 , 1991 - Page 28 the electrical in because that is a good spot . It 's well graded . It sits away from . I think it would be , if we 're going to try it as a trial , try one spot and see how it works . If it doesn 't work , we haven 't put a lot into it and walk away . And like I said , I don 't think we have to necessarily have to light it bright enough for hockey . If you 're going to have hockey you have to boards up and you 're going to have to Out bright lights up and I don 't think that 's what the neighborhood is looking for . ' For just enough lighting to safety skate and that doesn 't take much. Lash: Do you have any idea how much . . . ' Hoffman : I looked through their brochure and . . . Andrews: We can maybe mount the lights right on the portable unit . Just ' put them on a couple of poles or something and when you 're done you take them down for the summer . They 're gone . There 's really no need for them there in the summer . Just a thought . ' Robinson : That 's the only thing they 're used for . They 're not used for something in the summer . ' Hoffman : It 's like the portable construction site buildings that they lease out . Same type of deal . These they just , they grade . . .for warming houses , they have the rubber pad in there and they 're built to last and . . . ' That 's it . They 're a warming house . Robinson: So for 2 1/2 months use , I would think they 'd have to be kind of expensive just for somebody to make a buck . Andrews : Well let 's find out . ' Lash : Yeah . If it 's something we thought we could squeeze into trying , would we even be able to try it this year? ' Hoffman : What we probably fall under is not a capital improvement but an annual expenditure of . . .rentals of equipment . Lash: If we could try it , even without lights this winter just to see what ' kind of reception we get . . . Andrews: My personal feeling is . . .80% of the money you spend on your ' warming house is going to be wasted because it 's pitch dark by 5:00 and I don 't see many people who lace up their skates at 5:00 on a cold night . If the lights are there , it just creates a totally different atmosphere . You feel warmer because you can see . You 'll get the families out . Otherwise ' you 're just going to get 1 or 2 diehard players that just want to skate for a couple minutes . Erhart : And then just weekends . Andrews: Yeah , it 's going to cost to run electric . I don 't know , you ' can 't really run temporary electrical in because that 's not going to do anything for you . . . Park and Rec Commission Meeting October 22 , 1991 - Page 29 Lash: So we can 't even try this? I Robinson: You 've got to run the electrical . Lash: And we would probably couldn 't . . .but we could try it for 1992 . 1 Robinson: Well I think that 's the way to start . Try it without lights ands see . Maybe it won 't be . . . Erhart : Well first we need to find out what the cost is . Then we can make a decision . ' Hoffman: The shape that this warming house is in . . . Robinson: We were going to be out of here by 9:00 . ' Andrews: Yeah , why don 't we put $5 ,000 .00 -in for . Hoffman: Electrical? Lash: For what year? Andrews : 1993 . Best we can do . Lash: . . .we sure can 't do it in 1992 . We 're putting tennis courts in . Andrews : Pheasant Hills . Lash: . . .talk about trees . Boulevard trees . Hoffman : Going to have . . . Andrews: Yeah , we 're going to have them all . Lash: Completely? So you never . . .in the future? ' Andrews : There 's the road and narrow strip path in here . There 's a ditch and then a field . There 's really no , in my opinion there 's really not a spot to put trees along the road . Lash : So that should be taken out then? Andrews: Otherwise you 'd have to put them right next to the road and I think from a traffic standpoint , I think Public Safety would say no way because they 'd be within 10 feet of the edge of the road . ' Koubsky: Interfere with parking . Andrews: Interfere with parking and I think it would be , if .you put them I on the other side of the trail they 're going to be in the way of fields for soccer . I guess it 's just a matter of the trail was put in kind of goofy spot so I think it would be unnecessary . Sacrifice that for hockey . Pheasant Hill Park . Park and Rec Commission Meeting October 22 , 1991 - Page 30 Hoffman: This is going to take another hit just to get it fully graded and seeded and those types of things . Lash: After 1992? Hoffman: Yeah 1992 . Lash: So what do you think about . . .trees? ' Andrews : Are you thinking more general? General preparation necessary or is 1992 going to make it ready for final development? ' Hoffman: It will be an intensive effort to get it done in 1992 . We 're talking a crew of 2 people working on it . If they worked out there for a month , that 'd be a month of their time shot . They 're certainly not going to work out there for a month . They need to clear trees . . .general maintenance to do this stuff . . .but if we can get this thing ready to be seeded . . .Sunset Ridge or Herman Field . . . ' Lash: So this is seeded too? This $20 ,000 .00 is seed? Andrews : So we 're probably thinking 1992 will be the first time we 'll really get in there -and do much? Hoffman: Yeah , I would think 1993 's got to be a wrap up on site development . . .and maybe get some grass growing and that type of thing . . . ' We 've put play equipment on dirt before and it just doesn 't work well . It 's unfortunate that they 've pushed and worked hard to this point . We 've spent $150 ,000 .00 to buy a piece of land . ' Andrews : I sympathize with people that cry but you know we have got such a diversity in all of our city . I feel like we 've got to be fair . Lash : What could we , if we 're going 20 and just getting the property was a big chunk of money , $20 ,000 .00 next year . 1993 is going to be kind of an off year . . . What would be a reasonable thing to put in for 1994 that would make it just get the ball rolling a little bit? Hoffman : Play area . ' Erhart : Since that 's a relatively young neighborhood anyway , by that time they 'll still have small children . Lash: I don 't know . At the last meeting they said their children were getting older now . ' Robinson: They were young when they started complaining . Lash: But now they 're saying hey , we want a balifield and tennis courts ' and stuff like that becuase the kids are getting older now . Erhart : Basketball courts or something? Lash: Put in a balifield . Park and Rec Commission Meeting October 22 , 1991 - Page 31 Hoffman: Yeah , they want an open play field . I Robinson: Well a play area would be open . Hoffman: The open play field and then the play structure would be the fist thing . Parking lot again , if we want to look at a parking lot , that would be 1993 would be the last time we 'd come in and put in the blacktop . Andrews: Why don 't we figure blacktop '93 and jump on development in '94? Robinson: Yeah . I Lash: If we did a ballfield and play equipment and maybe basketball court? Andrews: I think these people are going to be looking for an instant play II area like , not phase 1 , phase 2 but phase 1 and 2 . Robinson: Everybody is but . I Hoffman: $25,000 .00-$30 ,000 .00 in 1994 is . Andrews : Big hit . Lash: So what are you putting down for them? Koubsky : All you need to start out is picnic tables . Hoffman: Sand volleyball court will go in as part of the grading . 1 Andrews : That 's good . How about some picnic tables in too? We need something . , Hoffman : Picnic tables in 1993 . Andrews : In 1994 I think we ought to look at Phase 1 . No , when would a I ballfield go in? 1993? Hoffman: They didn 't ask for a ballfield . We have that as an open play field . Lash: In 1994 we have open play field . Andrews: 1996 phase 2? Lash: No , the play field . , Andrews: No , phase 1 of totlot . Lash: Oh , play equipment . Andrews : Yeah . 1994 phase 1 , 1996 phase 2? Lash: Could we get basketball in there? I Park and Rec Commission Meeting October 22 , 1991 - Page 32 11 Hoffman: . . .in 1'994? Lash : '94 . • Andrews : That 's pretty rapid development . Hoffman : Yeah . The blacktop is going to cost some big bucks in 1993 . Andrews : I think we 're going to hear a lot of neighborhood input on that . It 's going to we want . . . Hoffman: But it does serve a pretty large area . Lash: And that 's building up too especially with that . . .but really all that would be left to do in there would be the trail and the . . . ' Hoffman: The trail would bituminous work along with the parking lot in 1993 . Andrews : Any grills we want in there or not? Hoffman : The list that you see is the list which came about as a result of 1 the meetings . . . Andrews: Very good . Moving on . Are we going to be able to do anything in ' 1992 here or do we have to wait? Koubsky : This isn 't graded yet . ' Hoffman : It 's being graded right now . Koubsky : Yeah , it 's in the process of being graded . They 'll probably ' . start houses next summer . Hoffman: 1993 should have some site development . Some grass seed . Final grading . ' Andrews: Tennis courts . . . Where is this one located? Will you help me get oriented here . ' Hoffman: It 's got a plan . It 's basically a big open place . A big elongated park with a lot of natural area . The sliding hill . Parking lot . ' Play area . Andrews : We were talking about tennis courts at this one over here too . I think to me that 's within a reasonable service area . ' Hoffman: Tennis courts at Lake Susan and tennis courts at Sunset Ridge . ' Andrews: I think we 're over allocating tennis courts in that part of the city . ' Lash : But this one basically when it goes in , we 're getting the parking lot and once the final grade and seed is in , the play field is there right? Park and Rec Commission Meeting October 22 , 1991 - Page 33 Hoffman: Yeah , open play field . I Lash: So there 's nothing to do there . So it would be play equipment? Andrews : 1995 . I think we 're really hitting '94 . Hit them with a phase 111 in 1995 because we 're looking at probably a grade out in 1993 . Phase 1 in 1995? Maybe we want to hit it with a full job in 1995 . 1 Robinson: . . .totlot in 1994 and get it going and something more major . . . Andrews: Yeah , let 's do that . Phase 1 totlot? I think that maybe would be a good candidate for a Phase 2 . Wam bam this year next hit it again . Erhart : In '95 you 're saying? Andrews: Yeah . There will be a real bunch of houses down there . Lash: Did you put park , where was the parking going to go . . .? ' Hoffman: '93? Andrews: We were looking at that as a fairly undeveloped property . Hoffman : It 's got a site plan for a play area and open field . I Andrews: How much building activity is in that area at the moment? Hoffman: It 's complete here . . .but there 's more to come . 1 Andrews: That 's been just zoned out right? Hoffman: Yeah . They ' ll have access , trail access to Lake Susan . Not that a totlot 's not an important piece . That would be pushed up in 1995-96 . . . as this gets developed down to the south . Lash: . . .all the grading and seeding . Is there going to be seeding or is that natural? Hoffman: Yeah , right now it 's maintained in it 's natural state . . . keep it in a mowed fashion . Lash: So we won 't have . . . Hoffman: '94- '95 potentially look to some site preparation . Andrews : Look at site prep '94 . Yeah , '95 take a look at that . I 'm not even sure we 're talking about going it but we 'll know that when we do the site plan in 1994 . Or the grade out . ' Hoffman: Okay . Andrews: Would this park be one where it 'd be appropriate to let the ' prairie grass just go? Park and Rec Commission Meeting October 22 , 1991 - Page 34 Hoffman : Yeah . In fact we 'll only maintain certain portions . Andrews: I guess I would like to see , how much acreage do you think we 're talking about up here? You 're looking at probably 1 1/2-2 acres there? Hoffman: Yeah . Even about 1 1/2 . Andrews: Does this directly abut other residential properties? ' Hoffman: On this side yes . There would be some houses down here . Andrews : I guess I 'd like to see something go completely wild if possible . ' I think it has a beauty of it 's own . Lash: And all these . . .that are going in too . . . ' Hoffman: These trees are going in as part of the . . .this fall . The developer 's bringing the trail stuff in and planting the trees . Okay? ' Andrews: Okay , Rice Marsh . Hoffman : Another fully developed park . Andrews: Now we 've just done some totlot work there haven 't we? ' Hoffman : A swingset . Robinson: Does that get that much use? Lash: Yeah . Robinson: It does huh? * ' Lash: Well that when they have ball out there . Rag ball . Little League every night of the week . Hoffman: It 's the neighborhood I get the most calls about play equipment . Lash : When you go there to watch , you 've got another kid who 's . . . ' Andrews: Are we at a Phase 1 status or Phase 2 status on totlot there or 0 status? ' Hoffman: Phase 1 . Expansion would be . . . Andrews: Volleyball court has no sand . It 's just dirt or asphalt? Hoffman: Two volleyball poles on grass . ' Robinson : We didn 't put the bleachers in there did we? Hoffman: Bleachers , yes . Park and Rec Commission Meeting October 22 , 1991 - Page 35 Andrews : We need to hit this one with some more totlot I think based upon what Todd 's saying . Lash: Well we 've got $6 ,000 .00 in for next year ., Hoffman: I would say in '94 potentially or '95 . . . The reason we took the heavy . . .on equipment is because we took out some old equipment and put in basketball . Andrews: What 's the parking like? Hoffman: The parking lot is terrible during a CAA game . 1 Lash: It 's terrible . Hoffman: They park way out . . . Lash: . . .that whole circle is full of cars . ' Hoffman: The neighbors are just accommodating as heck . Lash: Is there anyway we could expand that? 1 Hoffman: The parking lot? You 'd have to park on the ballfield or tear the basketball court down . Andrews: You 're looking at a Phase 2 then . Would '95 be unreasonable then for this? Let 's look at Phase 2 in '95 . Lash: Any other requests from them for anything else? Andrews : Would there be any reason why we should change that volleyball to, " sand? Is there any safety concern in your mind? Or just leave it as is . I don 't have any big stands . Okay , let 's leave it alone . Lash: No other requests? Hoffman: No , that 's it . It 's interesting to note that it 's what , ,a 30 acre park and then you see this little square is the park . Robinson: I was going to say , 30 acres? Hoffman : That 's it . The rest of this is marsh . Robinson: 90% wetland . ' Andrews: What developer gave us that piece of? Hoffman : Gem? , . Andrews : Yeah . Hoffman: The park was . . . 1 Park and Rec Commission Meeting October 22 , 1991 - Page 36 Pemrick: Todd , how did we get one spot . . . Hoffman: Back when . Robinson : Chan Estates was developed I suppose . Hoffman : What 20 years? Robinson: Oh at least . That 'd be in the late 60 's . Pemrick : There probably wasn 't as much of a push for recreation or parks . ' Andrews : Sunset . Where is that one? Which one is that? Hoffman: That 's Dave 's park right there . Andrews : That 's Dave 's park . Dave wants hockey and tennis courts . Koubsky: I don 't care about tennis courts . Erhart: How many hockey rinks Dave? ' Koubsky : Well there 's one on the master and I wasn 't around . Lash : So what actually is going in this? ' Koubsky : This year it 's graded and it 's got volleyball in . The softball . . .or ballfield is in . II Hoffman: You want to make some changes on here? The tennis is not there • anymore . The tennis is going to be here by the parking lot . And then volleyball was moved down below where the play area is noted and the play area is right up on this knoll . Switched around . Tennis , play area , ' volleyball . That was to accommodate the grading and . . . Andrews: So '91 is rough in? ' Koubsky: This is not . . .neighborhood . Probably the average age is 4 . ' Hoffman : There 's a big piece of play equipment which is purchased and it 's sitting out at the barn . . .already working 3 1/2 weeks on the school project so it will probably be put in this spring . Lash: Is that equipment going in . . . Hoffman : The equipment is purchased . We have it in storage both for this site and for South Lotus Lake Park . . . Lash : So it 's not in but we 've bought it? ' Hoffman: Yep . Andrews: I guess I 'd like to see this park , since it does show a rink on it , to maybe be looked at at the same time as North Lotus is , if we decide I Park and Rec Commission Meeting October 22 , 1991 - Page 37 to proceed , as one with electrical in and put the lights in and put the shack up and do it . That covers a south spot , a north spot and we 've got the middle spot already covered with the City Center . I Lash: What kind of a recession . . . Andrews: Is it too close to houses? f Lash: It 's pretty close . It 's real close . Andrews: Like 50 feet from a house? Koubsky: The one thing , the fault I find in this plan is you have a hockey" rink and there 's no open skating . Usually you have a little open skating area for little kids and you have a hockey rink . It 's hard to go skate with like 4 or 5 year olds and have pucks flying everywhere . Andrews : You can 't , yeah . Hoffman: We could potentially accommodate that . We 'll take a look at some' measurements . If we could move hockey up in front of the parking . . . Koubsky: Lights are a problem . You might want to start planting trees around that . Evergreen trees would be a natural block . Erhart : Where does the wetland start? Koubsky: Right about in here . Just down in that corner . One of the things with lights in that area is they overlook a warehouse area . I think Prince 's lights shines right at the guy across the street from me . And Prince won 't turn the light down . You , know it just beams right in his bedroom . Andrews: Is the parking area in yet? 1 Koubsky : So they 're used to lights . Lash: So could tennis and basketball go in this area and then hockey and skating down in this area? Put hockey down there so the more intense lights would be the farthest . . . Andrews : What if we had the parking over here? Lash: Well except for the access . ' Andrews : I agree with Dave . If there 's not a family skating area there , we 're really losing the value of the lighting and the warming house . ' Hoffman: I 'm not so sure that 's the appropriate spot for hockey . Koubsky: You might want to just consider open skating with a warming ' house . Open skating with a warming house and a low condenscent bulb or something . Park and Rec Commission Meeting October 22 , 1991 - Page 38 I Hoffman : We have to decide on if we can service it with this path with the water truck or if we want to wait until the future Lake Drive extension comes through . Lash: What if it wasn 't such a great family skating area? Would . . .so you could have it in this area and that wouldn 't be so hard to access . . . Hoffman: But we have to get the parking lot on the road . . . This is all ag field . Lash: Well we were talking about putting it in , when is the road going to go in? Hoffman: We haven 't developed . . . ' Koubsky : I think the park 's in pretty good shape . You 've got a softball field . Hoffman: There 's a backstop for that . I think looking to keep at this park because of the neighborhood . . . Lash: The only things missing will be the tennis , basketball and skating and those would . . . Andrews: The totlot is in . Hoffman : Basketball , that would be one that could go in here . . .and get some use . ' Andrews : Let 's do it then . Hoffman : '93? Koubsky: I would think basketball with maybe variable heights because there are young kids . I know my kids would go over and shoot but they ' can 't make a basket . I think that 's something you should consider for all , or we should consider for all parks . ' Andrews : 8 foot hoops . Koubsky: Maybe they 're not adjustable but yeah , 8 foot . Andrews: If they 're adjustable they 're breakable . Lash : If they 're adjustable you have to have one of those things to adjust ' it . But is this that combination tennis/basketball? Hoffman : It 's not shown as such and I believe we only had room for a single court with basketball on the side . ' Lash : Before we did that we have to be real sure that 's the layout we want to keep . 1 Park and Rec Commission Meeting II October 22 , 1991 - Page 39 IIAndrews: That reminds me . We had a request for those , what those kicking walls for soccer . Hoffman: We can incorporate that in . My only comment on the short news . . . ( There was a tape change at this point in the discussion . ) COMMISSION PRESENTATIONS: None . II ADMINSTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS: 1 Hoffman: Oktoberfest evaluation from Jerry . 7( b ) is the November meeting is a week early because of the holiday and December we 'll plan a social after hopefully a short meeting at that one . II Andrews : A question . We have to get this park review all done by December correct? , Hoffman : No . Andrews : Okay , good . I didn 't want to short ourselves here . Can you give, us a cash flow projection for our next meeting? What we 're talking about . Hoffman: It all depends on when Market Square comes on . If Market Square II comes in . Andrews: We 'll be sitting pretty . I Hoffman : Yep . . . Lash : I realized from reading the Minutes of that PUD . . .I don 't know if II you were conscience of that and that just sort of . Andrews: Boiled your blood? 1 Lash: Well it just made me feel even more strongly that we were in the right . They 're supposed to be going above and beyond . I Hoffman: Their contention is that the Planning Department did force them to do a PUD . II Lash: But that 's the way it is . That 's not . Hoffman: Not our problem . II Lash: Right . PUD 's they should be going above and beyond . We're not asking that . We 're asking basically . . . I Hoffman: . . .Lake Ann picnic/recreation shelter . That 's the bad news one . Andrews: Further comments on that? Is anything going to happen there? II Hoffman: We 're going to ask the City Council to repropriate probably another $40 ,000 .00 . . . Basically it 's come back that anything . . . Council II 1 Park and Rec Commission Meeting October 22 , 1991 - Page 40 approved additional funds . . . The question everybody had on their mind . . . the type of building that we 've looked at . . . rAndrews : That horse trail thing . Where are we at? What did we end up doing? Just kind of at a hold . Hoffman: Yep . We 're not going to be able to accomplish it for the money that we put in . . . Andrews : I 'm not sure we want to so we have to really discuss that . . . specifically do we want to do it . From what Eden Prairie says , it sounds like it 's just a , it 's a great idea but it just doesn 't work . Koubsky : The horse trail? Andrews: Yeah . Much to the disappointment of the people who have horses but you just can 't have a multi-use horse trail . Hoffman: . . .Herman Field we toured and Lake Susan the boat access is in . ' They 're putting the bridge in and unbelieveable park . Lash: . . .Really nice . ' Hoffman : . . . I hired Tony Biese for a gate attendant 5 years ago . He worked as a gate attendant for 2 years . Worked for Dale for a year and now he 's in school to be a priest and he gave back . . . Lash : Did he have anything in mind that he wanted us to use it for? Hoffman: No . There is an article in there in the South Shore Sailor on the section of trail that 's been discussed . . . Erhart moved, Lash seconded to adjourn the meeting. All voted in favor and the motion carried. The meeting was adjourned at 9:45 p .m. . Submitted by Todd Hoffman ' Park and Recreation Coordinator Prepared by Nann Opheim 1 1