1g. Minutes I/ CHANHASSEN CITY COUNCIL
REGULAR MEETING
JULY 8, 1991
' Mayor Chmiel called the meeting to order at 7:35 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, Todd Gerhardt, Dave Hempel, Paul
Krauss, Sharmin Al-Jaff, Scott Harr, and Todd Hoffman
APPROVAL OF AGENDA: Councilwoman Dimler moved, Councilman Mason seconded to
t approve the agenda amended to include the following under Council Presentations:
Mayor Chmiel wanted to discuss senior volunteers; Councilwoman Dimler wanted an
update on the Chanhassen Personnel Policy; Councilman Mason wanted to discuss
' the seclection for the Surface Water Management Program; and Councilman Workman
wanted to discuss a city wide tree removal program, the Rotary tree plantings,
and the downtown traffic study. All voted in favor of the agenda as amended and
the motion carried.
PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENTS: None.
CONSENT AGENDA: Councilwoman Dimler moved, Councilman Workman seconded to
approve the following consent agenda items pursuant to the City Manager's
recommendations:
' b. Accept Land Donation from Nancy Raddohl, Carver Beach Estates.
' c. Resolution #91-62: Amendment to Conditional Use Permit to Allow Expansion
of a Bed and Breakfast Establishment, 1161 Bluff Creek Drive, Anne Karels.
d. Final Plat Approval, Kurvers Point Second_ Addition.
e. Approval of Accounts.
' f. City Council Minutes dated June 24, 1991
Planning Commission Minutes dated June 19, 1991
All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously.
PUBLIC HEARING: TH 5 FRONTAGE ROAD IMPROVEMENTS AT LONE CEDAR LANE FEASIBILITY;
AUTHORIZE PREPARATION OF PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS, PROJECT 90-9.
Public Present:
' Name Address
Scott & Laurie Gauer 3820 Lone Ceo.;r Lane -
Joseph & Marion Mitlyng 3800 Arboretum Blvd.
• 1
City Council Meeting - July 8, 1991
Dave Hempel : hr. Mayor , members of the Council. The City Council accepted the
feasibility study for construction of the right turn lane on westbound TH 5 and
frontage road improvements by Lone Cedar Lane on June 24th. The project is a
425 special assessment project and as such a public hearing is required. The
project is proposed to be financed with MnDot through a cooperative agreement
' pro=• -arr , local State Aid monies and special assessments to benefitting
properties. Approximately 87' of this project is proposed to be funded through
a cooperative. . .with MnDot . The main portion shared between the City of
Chanhassen and benefitting property owners. The total estimated construction
' cost of this prof' t is $90,400.00. The feasibility report initially had
recommended assessing two parcels equally on a per unit basis. However, since
the preparation of the feasibility report, an agreement has been reached between
' the two benefitting property owners with regards to splitting the assessments.
The split has been amended to be 25/75% split with 25% being assessed to Lot 4,
which is the Gauer residence and. . .taking up 75% of the special assessments.
The project is feasible from an engineering standpoint .and can be constructed
' and completed this year. However, time is essential. The critical factor here,
since we are dealing with MnDot, the plans and specifications have to'go through
MnDot for approval and a cooperative agreement also prepared and approved prior
' to the project proceeding. So with that it is recommended that the City Council
authorize preparation of plans and specifications for the frontage road
improvement along TH 5 and Lone Cedar. In addition, also recommend the
methodology for spreadino the special assessments be modified to reflect the
agreement arrived by the two residents, Mr. Gauer and Mr. Mitlyng.
Mayor Chmiel : Thank you. Is there anyone wishing to address this item at this
' particular time? As I mentioned, this is a public hearing. This is your
opportunity to address this specific project.
' Councilman Mason moved, Councilman Workman seconded to close the public hearing.
All voted in favor and the motion carried. The public hearing was closed.
' Mayor Chmiel: Being that neither of the two property owners are here, assuming
that they've reached consensus 'of opinion, oh I guess Joe is here. And
everyone's in agreement with what has been proposed?
1 Councilman Wing: I would move approval.
Councilwoman Dimler: Second.
' Resident : Does this mean closing off Lone Cedar exit to TH 5?
Dave Hempel: No it does not. The Lone Cedar access will remain open.
' Mayor Chmiel: Right. This is to provide a service road adjacent to TH 5 to
Mitlyng's property. And with an agr-eeme-nt between two of the property owners
' who are going to absorb that cost for putting in the service road. At one time
I received a call indicating there were 40 other property owners who were
concerned with this and what the position was going to be. At what cost to
them. There's no cost other than the two property owners. We have a motion on
the floor with a second. Any further discussion?
2
1
City Coun:i1 Meeting - July 8, 1991
II
Resolution #91-63: Councilman Wing moved, Councilwoman Dimler seconded to
authorize the preparation of plans and specifications for the frontage road
II
improvements along with a right turn lane for westbound traffic on Trunk Highway
5 at Lone Cedar Lane and that the methodology for spreading the special
assessments be modified to reflect the agreement arrived at between Mr. Gauer
II
and Mr. Mitlyng. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously.
VISITORS PRESENTATION: None.
II
PUBLIC HEARING: MINNEWASHTA PARKWAY FEASIBILITY STUDY; AUTHORIZE PREPARATION OF
PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS, PROJECT 90-15. II Public Present:
Name _ Address _
II
Betty Carlson 4020 Leslee Curve
Peter Moe 7141 Minnewashta Parkway II Deborah & Kay Lockhart 3618 Red Cedar Point Drive
Charles & Ada Anding 3631 South Cedar Drive
Charles Anding 6601 Minnewashta Parkway
Greg Datillo 7201 Juniper Avenue I
Ed Oathour 3940 Hawthorne Circle
L .C. & Susan Proshek 3613 Red Cedar Point
Chris Orakos 3900 Linden Circle II Michael Tim. . . 3733 Hickory Road
Mike & Susan Morgan 3734 Hickory Road
Terry & Lisa Rixe 7456 Minnewashta Parkway II Harry A. Drahoa 3911 Linden Circle
Mitch Regal 891 20th S.E. , Minneapolis
Peter Sickeler 204 Ash Street , Chaska
Evelyn Atkins 9580 Eden Prairie Road, Eden Prairie
II
Blake Horton 3711 South Cedar Drive
Nancy Nelson 3891 Linden Circle
Robert & Patricia Josephs 6701 Minnewashta Parkway
Greg Bohrer 3706 Hickory Road II
Lara Genz 7096 Red Cedar Cove
Don & Barb Bittermann 7085 Red Cedar Cove
Louis Guthmueller 7095 Red Cedar Cove
II
•
Ivan & Mildred Underdahi 7502 West 77th Street
W. Court MacFarlane 3800 Leslee Curve
Terry M. Forbord Lundgren Bros. Construction II Jim Way 6641 Minnewashta Parkway
Gordon Freeburg 3891 Lone Cedar Lane
James & Deborah Hofer 7098 Red Cedar Cove II Arlene Herndon 3750 Red Cedar Point Drive
Peggy Markham 6520 Kirkwood Circle
Kevin Cuddihy 3900 Stratford Ridge
George Peters 4010 Leslee Curve
I
Harvey Sobel 7024 Red Cedar Cove
Vern Isham 4030 Leslee Curve
Jo Ann Hallgren 6860 Minnewashta Parkway
I
James & Ruth Boylan 6760 Minnewashta Parkway
3
I
II
IICity Council Meeting - July 8, 1991
Name Address .
IDave & Lori Free 3921 Maple Shores Drive
Lowell & Janet Carlson " 4141 Kings Road
II Rich Comer 3800 Red Cedar Point Drive
Edwin & Leittia Seim 3616 Red Cedar Point Drive
Jean Larson 3609 Red Cedar Point Drive
Peter Benjamin 7231 Minnewashta Parkway
II Lee Anderson 6651 Minnewashta Parkway
Zoe Bros 6631 Minnewashta Parkway
Sukey Sobel 7024 Red Cedar Cove
I Jim & Andrea Bennyhoff 3931 Leslee Curve
Carol Riddle 4000 Leslee Curve
Suellyn Fritz 18464 Maple Leaf Drive .
` - Steven Erickson 3850 Leslee Curve
Ed Lucas 3941 Leslee Curve
Vince & Bea Decker 3861 Leslee Curve
Joan Skallman 6590 Joshua Circle
I Ric & Mariana Anding
Al & Carla Smith 3715 South Cedar Drive
3714 Hickory Road
Linda Johnson 3629 Red Cedar Point
I Marsha Keuseman 3622 Red Cedar Point Drive
Jeanette Boley 7414 Minnewashta Parkway
Basil & Helen Bastian 3719 South Cedar Drive
Jerry Johnson 3940 Glendale Drive
II
Jim Connor 3901 Red Cedar Point Drive
Gene & Carol Dahlin 3930 Glendale Drive •
B. Fuller 7075 Red Cedar Cove
U Tom Allenburg
Ken & Ruth Smith 6621 Minnewashta Parkway
3837 Red Cedar Point
Bob Schneider 7501 West 77th Street
I Ken Durr 4830 Westgate Road, Minnetonka
Ann Osborne 3815 Red Cedar Point
Mayor Chmiel: This is a public hearing and I'll open this public hearing at
I this particular time. I'd like staff to address this and those who also will
assist . Bill, are you going to do the formal presentation?
11 Bill Engelhardt : I'll make the presentation.
Mayor Chmiel: Alright, fine. With that if you'll start with that.
IIBill Engelhardt : Your honor, members of the Council, audience. My name is Bill
Engelhardt . We're the consulting engineers that prepared the feasibility study
for the Minnewashta Parkway. This feasibility study started some months ago.
II We've held two neighborhood meetings and I think most of you people have been in
attendance. I recognize quite a few faces. We had some good discussions.
There was some good points that were brought out. We went back and modified the
I feasibility study based on some of the discussions that we had to the point that
we could modify it by working with MnDot. That's Minnesota Department of
Transportation. Because of the amount of funding that the State will be putting
II into this project , we have to follow their standards. Their design criteria in
order to reconstruct this roadway. They were somewhat flexible on their
I 4
City Council Meeting - July 8, 1991
standards due to the terrain that we have out there. The environmental issues
with the trees that were removed or would be removed and what we're able to do II
is bring down the roadway width from what was originally proposed down to pretty
close to a typical residential street in the city of .Chanhassen. Some of the
issues that were addressed in the modified or revised feasibility study after
these neighborhood meetings are addressed in the feasibility report and in the
executive summary. There's about 9 items, 11 items and I'll just read through -
those a little bit and we can discuss those or go on from there. Major
considerations th,t resulted from the homeowners meetings. Number one, the
roadway was reduced from a 36 foot width to a 32 foot width. If I may,
I brought along a slide to give an example of how this. The existing right-of-
way for Minnewashta Parkway is a 66 foot right-of-way. The existing road
section is a 28 foot bituminous section with no curb or gutter. Very slight
shoulders in some areas and in some areas the lawn is abutted right up to
existing blacktop. In this type of section the drainage is carried in those
gutter lines or in those grass areas down to low points and then it just runs
helter skelter all through the area. So part of the project that 's being
considered tonight is a storm sewer along with the road improvement . With the
storm sewer we're able to correct a number of different problems that some of
the areas have out there and drainage through their yards. Getting back to the
road section though, the proposal is to go with a 32 foot roadway from back of
curb to back of curb. What that means is that they'll be adding about 6 inches
of additional blacktop to the edge of the road. . .and the gutterline is 18
inches. So about about a foot and a half to 2 feet from the existing road edge
as it 'd be expanded out to each side. In some cases again because this is a
State Aid Road, they do have to meet the State Aid standards. We will be trying '
to flatten out and decrease the sharpness of the curves, improve sight distances
on the roadway, both horizontally and vertically. Those are standards that we
are required to make. The significance of this is that it substantially reduces
the amount of work that has to be done on this road in the yard areas but still
within the right-of-way. It also maintains somewhat the character of the road,
although it will have some urban section which means curb and gutter versus the
non-urban section or the rural section. With the curb and gutter it 's much
easier to control and provide more control in the drainage area. The second
issue was the walkway alignment and originally the walkway, this map is a little
hard. It's more than a little hard. It's hard to see but the solid green line
is the parkway and the trail section is the heavy dark line on both sides.
Originally we had proposed that we would be on the west side of the road from
Maple Drive north. The crossing would be along the east side of the roadway
down to TH 5. Through the public meetings the discussion centered around trying
to place the roadway all on one side. A lot of the residents felt that they did
not want a crossover. At the last meeting on the feasibility study we did
indicate that we'd be trying to maintain that walkway on the east side all the
way along. The result of that is that through this area there's very steep
grades going from the roadway down to the lake. A retaining wall would have to
be built in order to accommodate the walkway. Since the last meeting I've met
with a resident. One resident out there that specifically requested that I meet
with him to address the walkway and point out the number of trees that would be
taken. I think it was a very good meeting. What we arrived at by walking from
up in the State Highway 7 area down to King's Point Road that probably a good _
compromise on the walkway, because some people- wanted it on one side and some
people wanted it on the other side. It 's kind of a confusing issue but a good
compromise on all parts was that we bring it from State Highway 7 along the west
5
City Council Meeting - July 8, 1991
side as originally planned. Carry that down to Kings Point Road on the west
side. Make our crossing at Kings Point Road and then carry it on the east side.
That accomplishes a number of things. It accomplishes saving some of the tree
work. Removal of trees along the lake side. It provides for a very good
crossing area. Good sight distance both north and south. It also lends the
' opportunity that on this particular section of the roadway it's about equal
distance from TH 5 and TH 7 and if we construct the crossing at that point,
Kings Point Road at some point in time could very well carry some of the
interior traffic and we'd place a stop sign on Minnewashta Parkway so that would
control the traffic going through from TH 7 to TH 5. Keep in mind that stop
signs are not used for speeding or to control speed. We do have to meet the
MnDot warrants in order to install that stop sign but simply the warrant of a
' crossing in all likelihood will allow us a stop sign and that will help in the
concern that the neighborhood had of being a straight shot through. It helps.
It probably doesn't completely take the issue away but it does help. The issue
' of the type of walkway came up at the last meeting whether it should be
bituminous or concrete. The original proposal was for a concrete sidewalk.
That was based on our conclusion that with a concrete sidewalk was more durable
' surface. Reduced the maintenance costs of the City in the long run and we felt
that the price for bituminous and concrete was very comparable. We were asked
to go back and evaluate the cost between the two types of trail systems. We've
done that . The estimate for the concrete trail is $146,000.00 and the estimate
' for the bituminous trail it, $136,000.00 so the bituminous is a little bit less.
Keep in mind though that with bituminous we do have to sealcoat it and we do
have some ongoing maintenance. Although on concrete if we have any cracks we'll
' have to repair those too. Bituminous seems to be very appropriate material. It
lends itself to the character of the trail system probably better than the
concrete does. It 's not necessarily a defined residential area. It's more of a
trail, natural and specifically a parkway. Keeping with the nature of the area.
So I think in the modifications of the trail, if we stick to the west side up to
Kings Point Road. Again we have excellent sight distance both north and south
at that point and then shift it over. We'll be able to save quite a few trees
' and reduce the number of trees that we'd be taking. We're still planning on,
even though we'd be taking some trees, we still plan on keeping the level of
tree planting up to where we originally proposed and the proposal was to plant
187 new trees. The third item was additional storm drainage problems identified
and those came out through the neighborhood meetings. There was one up in the
Linden Circle area. Leslee Curve. The, I'll call it Minnewashta Highlands.
Maple Shore Drive area. And all through the parkway alingment we have low
' points that are uncontrolled and we'd be able to control those low points and
direct the runoff to specific ponding areas. That's an issue, ponding areas and
the environmental control and the storm water runoff was addressed in the
' original report . It probably will be addressed all through the design phase.
We have to work with Minnehaha Creek Watershed District and the Department of
Natural Resources. Our original proposal was to take the storm water in this
' particular area. Let me start from the north at the high point at about
Stratford right in this area the storm sewer. From verything north from that
high point we go to the wetland area right behind the fire station which then
has an outlet to the north. From the high point going south we bring that down
' to the Lake St . Joe area. At about this location you can see, if you watch the
monitor, right at this location by Red Cedar Cove townhouses is a connection
between St . Joe and Minnewashta. We would be dumping storm water at that point
and then from about oh, right at 77th Street there's a high point that goes to
6
City Council Meeting - July 8, 1991
the north. We'd be collecting and taking that again to St . Joe. The very
southerly portion of the parkway would drain into the wetland through just the
southern catch basin. The issue that needs to be addressed is the Lake St . Joe
drainage. What will the DNR allow. How do they want it constructed and is it
better to go directly to Lake Minnewashta or to Lake St . Joe? Lake Minnewashta
is classified as a recreational lake which means it 's about a medium type lake
according to the DNR standards. Lake St . Joe has a higher quality or higher
degree of environmental issues and concerns according to the DNR. The DNR would
prefer us to go directly to Lake Minnewashta if a ponding area could be
constructed prior to Lake Minnewashta at the discharge points. Specifically
we're really only talking about this area, this part of the drainage area right
in here of the roadway. The balance again is going to other wetlands and the '
volume has not been increased that much because one benefit we did see by
reducing the width of the roadway is we reduce the amount of runoff that we would see with a 36 foot road. We're still going to have a slight increase but
not as much. Getting back to the DNR. Their comments are is they want to be
involved in the design. Both the DNR and the watershed will not give you a
specific answers at this time how they want it done but as you design the
project we'll be working very closely with their Fish and Wildlife experts and '
the water quality people to determine which method and which alternative is the
most appropriate use. If for example we cannot get a ponding area on the east
side of Minnewashta Parkway to take the storm sewer into Lake Minnewashta, then_
they would prefer us to construct a ponding area on the west side utilizing the
existing wetland areas or portion. You know, not all of them, just a portion of
them. Provide some ponding before it goes to Lake St. Joe and then from St . Joe
it goes into Minnewashta. But those options, they won't look at until we
specifically sit down and design the system with both the DNR and the Watershed.
Both agencies have a permitting process that we have to follow. The design
would be sent to them. It 's reviewed by their engineers and reviewed by their
boards prior to issuance of the permits. We still feel that probably the best
option at this time is to utilize the Lake St. Joe area. Construct some type of
ponding and holding area before it discharges into St. Joe and then letting that
water flow into Lake Minewashta. But it may be according to the DNR that that
is not the option and we'll have to search for a site. I think it will be very
difficult to find a site for ponding on this site. That's the biggest problem.
The fourth item that was addressed was the assessment rate. Originally the
assessment rate was based on $2,340.00 per unit . Per household. Per single
family unit . The assessment area is based again on an area basis where the
residential properties, both raw land and developed land, utilizing Minnewashta
Parkway as a major egress and ingress points from TH 7 and TH 5 would be
assessed on a unit basis. The basis for the $2,340.00 was the State Aid Road
project that was constructed about 2 years ago on Bluff Creek Drive. We took
their assessment rate and updated it for construction cost index. We updated it
for inflation for the increase in construction costs. I think their assessment
was around $2,200.00 and we arrived at $2,340.00. In analyzing the project
again after the neighborhood meetings, again very good input from the I
neighborhoods. The concern was that the Minnewashta Parkway area has much
smaller lots than the Bluff Creek Drive area. That's very true so what we did
is we looked at what they could develop their lots into and the way their houses
were situated even though they have a large lot, they still could only get maybe
one more unit at the most on their particular lot. So the unit cost was reduced
from the $2,340.00 down to $1,250.00. It's $1,250.00 is the proposed
assessment . That assessment would be spread, or proposed to be spread over 8
7
1
City Council Meeting - July 8, 1991
.' years and the interest rate in all likelihood would be around
what the bond was sold at . So this translates into about an annual payment on
II the first year of about $250.00 and in the eighth seventh, eit in
year of about $165.00. So the assessment g year, sixth, eevensh, eighth
compounded. And as the goes down. The interest is not
principal is reduced, the payment is reduced over those
8 years. When it comes to assessment we needed to consider raw land. There's a
I substantial number of acres where it 's developed at this time and we needed to,
we felt it very appropriate that that raw land area also share in the cost of
upgrading Minnewashta Parkway. At some point in time it will be developed. In
I fact in the area north of Kings Road, we have sketches of just proposed
developments. They have not been brought to the City but proposed developments
of how many units could be constructed in those areas. We utilized that and
showed the dashed lines for potential units in that area. For other areas where
' we have raw land, we originally looked at 3 units
per acre
that a substantial portion of the raw land area had wetlands. the
that were
increased requirements of setbacks and lot sizes that the ONR and the City had
I placed on these particular pieces of property. And in order to follow the
guidelines a more appropriate assessment per raw land area would be 1.8 units.
That 1.8 unit is developed by taking out any wetland area that would be on a
I parcel of land. Subtracting that out and the base raw land area and then
subtracting out another 15% of the remaining raw land area for roadways that
would have to be built if it 's developed and the result was that we could get
about 1.8 units. 1.8 units per acre would be about 24,200 square feet in that
I particular area. The DNR requirements for shoreland, for lot size is 20,000
square feet. So I think we're very close to being in the ballpark in what those
raw land areas could be assessed. Keeping in mind that they are raw land areas
I and that they may be developed anyway, a particular developer may want larger
units or may not be able to get as many units. I think we have to be sensitive
to that fact and there would have to be adjustments made if they could not get
II that many units on their land. However, if they could
land, they come in with proposals that show that 2 units more units on their
the 3 units per acre, they should be a _ Per acre or even up to
r
that would go into the debt service fund ofrthis Paly assessed for those units and
I nGreen
three parcels that have a classification of rticular pojec acre,. the hege's
acre classification does not allow us to collect assessmentsonthose parcels
elsn
until they're developed. The City can levy those assessments and the assessment
U would be deferred to such time as when the parcels are developed. They would
incur interest on the amount that they would be assessed and again at such time
as they would be developed, the assessment would be levied and they'd be paying
I their fair share just as every other parcel. The advantage is that they would
not be levied at this time unless the property owner so desired that they be
levied. One of the other complicated portions of this
project
roadway along TH 5 for about 1,300 feet is in the city ofVictoria.paThisfdark
I green line on the map indicates the corporate limits. The 1,300 feet runs up to
• about Hawthorne Circle. We've met with the Victoria City Council. The City
Council passed a resolution that the City was to work with Victoria to undertake
I a land swap which would allow the City of Chanhassen to annex Minnewashta
Parkway and seven parcels to the east. The parcels to the west at this time
would be allowed to stay in Victoria until such time as they may desire to
annex. That 's their perogative. The seventh item that we needed to address was
I how to finance the project and we originally started out with a 2.2 million
dollar project. That's a total cost and the total cost has been reduced, not by
IIa large amount but it has been reduced $2.1 million. And of that, we're
8
II
II
City Council Meeting - July 8, 1991 1
proposing 532 assessment units which will generate roughly $665,000.00 worth of
financing for the project . State Aid funds would pay $944,000.00 worth of funds
and the City would use general obligation bonds for roughly $477,000.00 to pay
for portions of the storm sewer and walkway that in past projects they have
participated in a like manner. That would be keeping with past policy on
various projects like this particular one. The balance of the project cost is
about $26,000.00. That 's for some watermain construction and that $26,000.00
would come from City trunk funds. Trunk water funds because it is a
reconstruction of existing watermain that would allow for future expansion.
Again the project , because of the reduced width of the roadway has significantly
reduced the number of trees that would be taken along the parkway. There are
particular areas along the lake side that it 's very difficult without specific
cross sections to tell whether the trees would go or not go. Our general
opinion is they probably could be saved. They're the type of trees that they
•. may be able to even handle small retaining walls and we may be able to shift the
roadway just enough in some of those areas and it isn't going to take much. It's
like a foot or two to save the trees. So again a significant number of trees
that we thought would originally have to be removed we would keep those in place
but still maintain the amount of tree planting that we originally proposed.
Second to the last item that I'd like to address is comments during the
neighborhood meetings just about placing an overlay on the roadway and what the
cost of that overlay would be and would that not be satisfactory as a
replacement for the Minnewashta Parkway system without completely redoing it.
The estimated cost for the overlay and leveling course is $120,000.00. That'd
be for a 3 inch overlay. The basic problem with an overlay is that when you
raise that surface up you can put gravel in the shoulders to match the lawn
areas but you have a very difficult time matching those lawn areas and you
create more drainage problems by doing that than, you're going to solve some of
your road problems but you're going to create many drainage problems behind the
curb. I think the most significant factor on not proposing an overlay on this
particular roadway is the subsoils in this area. We did some borings in it and
subsoils are very marginal. So in order to reconstruct the roadway we'll have
to excavate some of those subsoils and replace that with gradual material and
build the section up to meet design standards. But the overlay and the bad
soils and subsoils, you're going to see a continual problem just as you see
today in some of those areas where they continually break off. You can't just
keep putting an overlay on a roadway. It just doesn't work. Basically what
you'd be doing, I guess in my opinion is wasting the $120,000.00. It's not an
appropriate fix for this particular type of roadway. Again summarizing, just to 11 conclude here, to summarize a little bit on the financing options of it . The
State Aid Funds would be $944,088.00. That would utilize the monies that the
City receives yearly from the State. It'd be a 2 to 3 year process and what the
City does is designate certain roadways that will qualify for State Aid roads.
In this particular case it's connecting two State Highways. They could connect
County Road to County Road or County Road to State Highway. In this case it's
classified as State Aid because it does connect the two highways. Therefore it ,
qualifies for the funding. Many roads in Chanhassen would not qualify for this
funding. The City receives or has in their State Aid fund roughly $450,000.00
which means that we'll use this year's, next year's and probably a portion of 11 the third year's funding for this particular roadway in order to make the
financing. At that point you would schedule your financing for the other State
Aid roads that would have to be upgraded in other parts of town. So you want to
use your State Aid road money to upgrade your State Aid roads and you set up a 5
9
City Council Meeting - July 8, 1991
year schedule where these roadways would get improved on a 5 year schedule.
Special assessments again would be at $1,250.00 per unit. We're suggesting that
the special assessments would generate $665,000.00. General Obligation Bonds of
$447,000.00 would be utilized as on past projects to pay for 50% of the storm
sewer. The other 50% would be paid by State Aid to pay for portions of the
walkway. Trunk watermain funds of roughly $26,000.00 would make up the balance
of the project . So with that your honor I'd be happy to answer any questions or
take testimony or comments from the public and we'll try to address any
questions they may have.
Mayor Chmiel: I'd like to set just a couple parameters. I know I sat in on
most of these meetings and those that I didn't sit , we have had a chance to
' review the Minutes of that meeting. So what I would like to ask is that there
not be repetition. If there's any individual representing a number of people to
speak for them and I'd like them to also address that. One clarifying thing I'd
like to do. I'm happy that you're all here this evening, is to address a letter
that was sent out to all the residents within the area by an unknown person
indicating what this Council does. Ramrodding things through. That's the first
' thing I'd like to address. This Council has worked for the people of the City
of Chanhassen. This Council has not ramrodded one item through as long as we've
been in office in this city. There was some untruths within that particular
letter and hopefully clarification has been done this evening by the
' presentation that Bill Engelhardt has done. So with that I would like to open
the meeting for the public hearing and I'd like to have whoever'd like to start .
Please come forward and I'd like to try to limit this because there's a lot of
' people I know that would like to talk and I'd like to limit this to a minimum of
at least 5 minutes or less. Yes ma'am. Oh, one other thing I might add. I've
received approximately about 14 letters regarding this project and each of those
letters too are contained in our packets.
Arlene Herndon: I'm Arlene Herndon. I reside at 3750 Red Cedar Point Drive.
I'd like to just read this letter I've written if I may. Please public
servants. This letter is to voice my concern and opposition to the proposed
upgrading and improvements of Minnewashta Parkway on the western shoreline of
Lake Minnewashta between State Highways 5 and 7. With the right to assess being
' based on a benefit to the property being assessed, it is clear to me as an
individual with years of real estate experience that the properties would not
benefit from such a proposal with increased value but would undeniably lose
value. The quiet lifestyle we currently enjoy would not be just interrupted but
rather pre-empted. I, as a parent of 3 young children would be greatly
concerned for the safety of my children. Property taxes have just gone up a
tremendous amount for those of us living in the affected area of Chanhassen. The
' cost for living in the area must be weighed and analyzed according to the
benefits thereof. Following this enormous tax hike, a special assessment is
being considered in addition to it which will increase cost even more and cause
a decrease in value. Any elementary study of real estate values as it pertains
to comparable homes. One on a quiet residential street and one on a busy
thoroughfare clearly demonstrates the effect of heavy traffic. Marketability is
lessen as well as property values itself. Those who live right on Minnewashta
' Parkway are going to suffer the loss of peace and quiet as well as significant
dollars in real estate value. Are the now higtIr taxes going to be lowered to
reflect that decrease and are those homeowners going to be given credit for loss
of property values which will compensate them accordingly? Not with such a
' 10
City Council Meeting - July 8, 1991
proposal. The exact opposite is going to be the end result. As public servants
of our community I call upon your integrity as individuals elected to your I
positions to serve our community. Turning your backs on those who are so
directly affected will constitute nothing less than a disservice. Does anyone
have a hidden agenda? What is our overall purpose in our community? To make it
the best place we can live or to close our eyes to very real individual rights
and needs for the purposes of advancement. The price tag is being handed to
those very individuals who will suffer the very real consequences to lifestyle,
pocketbooks and peace of mind. I hereby am requesting that the affects of such
a proposal on property values and homes on Minnewashta Parkway be done so that
the real truth will be known. Your position on this issue will clearly
demonstrate your level of commitment to your community. ,
Mayor Chmiel : Is there anyone else who would like to address it?
Jim Boylan: Mr. Mayor and the City Council. My name is Jim Boylan and I live
at 6760 Minnewashta Parkway. I don't really have a letter tonight but I'd kind
of like to go through your cover letter on this memorandum if I may and address
some of the things that are mentioned on here. I guess I don't really speak for
a group but I may in some respects of people and neighbors that I've talked to
before. But I'm concerned as a property owner on this project. It is hoped
that the two previously held neighborhood meetings and corresponding follow-up
investigations have answered many of the questions and concerns of the area
residents. The following are some of the key project revisions directly
resulting from the discussions of the neighborhood meetings. Okay? This lends
me to believe that these are things that have been dealt with and I don't think
they have been. At least not to my satisfaction and I'm sure not to some of the
other people that are here. For example, MnOot approval of reducing the
proposing roadway width from 36 to 32 feet. Well, what does this really mean?
Is this really doing the job that we want to do here? Part of the new proposal
for the jogging path has created a situation now where instead of going along my
lakeshore on the east side, on the lake side, and causing the construction of
maybe a 12-14 foot retaining wall and a jogging path. Cutting down my trees and
making my view of the lake a jogging path with an iron railing of some kind to
keep people from falling off into my lakeshore and suing me. Now is going over
to the other side of the road and taking the last 6 trees out of my front yard.
About 4 years ago as all of us had suffered through the dutch elm situation, I
removed 16 trees from my wooded lot. This is one of the reasons I bought that
lot . It turned my front yard into a baseball diamond and the only thing that
was left was 6 old maple trees. Now these maple trees I can show you on a
surveyor's plot that was done on my land when Minnewashta Parkway was known as
Glencoe Road. At that time the right-of-way, those trees were not on the
right-of-way. They were in the property of which I now own. Since that time
the right-of-way has expanded to encompass these trees. Now these are trees
that my wife grew up on that property and climbed in as a child. These trees
are almost 100 years old and yet we're going to mow those trees down and put in
a jogging path in front of the house. Well, maybe some of you think that might
be alright. I don't particularly. I have a neighbor that lives next door to me
who's even going to be worse off because he has a house that's right up within
probably 6 or 8 feet of the jogging path and is going to have a problem. The
second item. The location of the walkway and trail system has been modified to
meet the needs of the residents. Who? Not me. I don't know about the rest of
you. I don't feel that 's a modification that meets my needs. In fact it's even
11 '
11 City Council Meeting - July 8, 1991
worst . It devaluates my property. I'm paying over $3,000.00 in taxes on that
piece of land, which by the way I've been in front of the City Council before
and heard you people say to me that the lake belongs to the City. Yeah, I'd
like to believe that except that when the tax assessor comes along, he doesn't
' quite believe the same way that you people do so I pay a little more because
I've got land on the lake. I feel that it''s my right and priviledge to husband
that and to voice my opinion about this. I think the presentation of the -
recently completed Eastern Carver County Transportation Study related to the
predicted future traffic demands is bogus. It 's absolutely bogus. I was in the
traffic control business for a number of years and I've sat down and figured
this out . The traffic that was proposed at those meetings is really only an
' indication of probably 10: of the people that live there. If you figure that
the people that we are talking about paying for this project each having two
cars and multiplying that out, you'll find that the traffic proposal, that only
' covers like less than 10% of that as far as driving. Where are these other 95%
coming from to drive down Minnewashta Parkway? Why do we need this kind of a
road based on those figures? I think the reduction of land assessment is
necessary in a lot of these cases. Yes, there are some people who have moved
in. Picked up a property and are looking to develop it. They ought to pay for
that . If they want to sell lots and make money, then they ought to pay for the
assessments that go along with putting in storm sewers, drainage systems- and the
I rest of that just like I did when I moved in here. There was no storm or drain
sewer or anything. We had a well in the front yard and a septic tank. Then
they came along and said well you have to hook up and we have to comply. We
I have and we paid for that . Somebody else coming into the neighborhood, I know
it costs a lot more nowadays but I'm sorry, developers should have to pay that
cost and pass it onto their people and not expect the people in the neighborhood
to have to pay again for something they've already paid for once. I think also
' the reduction of the assessment is not really, I've never felt comforable with
this because when we started out about the State matching funds my wife
contacted the Governor's office about the State matching fund situation and
I found out that that was being phased out by the State government . And that
there were no plans or had there been any proposals sent to them about this
project and they were very interested in finding out more about it. Now I hear
tonight that there's some proposal where you take regular State budgeting money
' that you've got over the next 3 years and use this to help fund this project.
What else are you going to do in this city then? You've got no projects for the
next 3 years except this one to fund? I can't see where that's really going to
' be a good deal. I guess in summation I have to say that I'm a little bit
distraught about the fact that I've looked through this number 3. Chanhassen
cover letter and all of the attached letters. I see a lot of no's here. I see
' a lot of people that have come here saying we don't want this. Why are you
doing this to us? Why are you making us pay for it and who are the yes people
that are saying so? I haven't seen them. Thank you.
Leittia Seim: My name is Leittia Seim and I'm a resident of 3616 Red Cedar
Point Drive. We own the property for the last 33 years. Now we live in
California and we know what means to urbanize. It 's terrible. I am very
' disappointed that a proposal of the kind I have listened to tonight is even
considered. It seems to me that the good engineer that present it has given
reason and have found reason for doing something- In other words, at first he
wanted large. Then he want to reduce. Then he says that will help the drainage
but now it will not help the drainage. Then we'll have to send the water to
' 12
City Council Meting - July 8, 1991 1
Minnewashta again. Then to Little Joe again. Seems to me just making water. I
want to register my strong opposition to enlarge even one inch of that parkway.
It 's large enough. I am also concerned that somebody wants a jogging path.
Well I have been not jogging. I cannot jog any longer but I walk a lot and I
have counted in one hour and a half 22 cars. 22 cars is not traffic. It 's just
very little traffic so I don't know why we need to enlarge anything. So I
simply want to say don't do it . • .
Harvey Sobel: Mr Mayor? Councilwoman? Councilmen? I'd like to know first if I
you all are fully familiar with our Minnewashta Parkway? I live on Red Cedar
Cove. Harvey Sobel. Are you all personally familiar? Each of you have walked
a piece of it? Understand it is a country road. By no means could it be
converted into a 41 type of highway. My second short question is, is there a
way that the Council, that you Mr. Mayor, can poll the 530 taxpayers? What if
75% of us for example voted for the time being let's gamble $150,000.00 on an
overlay? What would the results be of such a poll? Thank you.
Mayor Chmiel: Thank you. ,
Peter Benjamin: My name is Peter Benjamin and I'm a new resident on Minnewashta
Parkway. I live at 7231 Minnewashta and I just had a question about the Eastern
Carver County Traffic survey that was done in 1990. In October and it
recommends that Minnewashta be 4 lanes and I just want to have some response
about that proposal.
Mayor Chmiel : Okay. Maybe we can have, Gary? ,
Gary Warren: If I understood the question is why the Eastern Carver County
study report showed Minnewashta Parkway to be 4 lanes. Actually the report , as
I recall it , showed it to be a collector roadway system which can be 4 or 2
lanes depending on the width of the roadway. That is based on the computer
modeling that was done with the best input of the MnDot Transportation model '
that was used on the TH 212 corridor and input as far as the Crosstown
projections are for feeding into TH 7 and also on TH 5. It's with that in mind
that discussion here, I remember from some of the earlier hearings that the
7,000 average daily traffic count was in question and such. Actually the road
section would stay the same whether you're talking 1,000 or 7,000 based on the
State standards. There's a lot of room for I guess changes in traffic impacts
so you could cut the traffic projections in half and you would still be looking
to build the same road section out there under the State standards.
Mayor Chmiel: Thank you. Does that answer your question? ,
Bill Engelhardt : I'll give it a try. The way I understand the question is,
your concern is that it's going to a 4 lane?
Peter Benjamin: Yes.
Bill Engelhardt : Okay. When they do their traffic modeling and they put '
together the numbers that tell you or the guesstimate of how many vehicles they
would anticipate would travel on that roadway the future, in 2010. In the
year 2010, that model says it will carry so many vehicles. I think it was like
9,500 vehicles per day. I personally felt that when we looked at those numbers
13 ,
City Council Meeting - July 8, 1991
that that particular model probably was accelerated a little bit. I don't think
it 's going to get that high. So what we did is we went back to MnDot and we
said, what road section could we, or what road width could we put in there to
meet your design standards and still receive the funding? They said a 36 foot
' roadway. That would meet their traffic projections. It was classified as a,
I'll say a high density collector. That's the maximum width it was ever
proposed. It was never proposed for 4 lanes. It never would be 4 lanes because
it doesn't carry that volume of traffic. After the neighborhood meetings I
' asked and it was v'ry apparent that the 36 foot width was very objectionable.
And from tonight the 32 is even objectionable. Keep in mind that right now you
have a 28 foot roadway. So what we're doing expanding to 32, to the back of the
' curb, is adding 2 feet on both sides of the road which means we're utilizing
those shoulders. We went back to MnDot and we said, if you look at your design
standards, the traffic projections for a modified section would fall in what's
called a low density collector and we could reduce that street width down to 32.
They agreed with that and when this gentleman asked is that approved by MnDot,
that is approved by MnDot. They have given us their blessing on that to go down
to 32 foot wide. Back of curb to back of curb. Which results in about a 29
' foot driving surface where today you have about a 28 foot driving surface. So
you're talking about 6 inches of driving surface on each side plus the curb and
gutter. The question was through all of the hearings, the meetings was that
' you're going to increase the speed. The speed is going to increase. You're
going to construct an unsafe road and that 's not true. Studies have shown that
with curb and gutter on a roadway that the speeds are reduced. Now you can
believe that if you want . Those are the facts. That 's what the study shows and
' it 's been shown all through the country that if you have a wide open road with
no control . With no curb and gutter, that you will see higher speeds. By
installing your curb and gutters, you will see lower speeds. That's a proven
fact . So the next thing to do on the roadway for both the pedestrians that
utilize that road and for the cars that utilize that road and the way you do
that is through smoothing out the curves. Taking out the horizontal vertical
' curves. Correct sight distances. Still staying within MnDot guideline
standards and still keeping within the character of the parkway as best you can
and you can do it. It can be done.
Peter Benjamin: I was concerned that down the road that this would be 4 lanes.
Bill Engelhardt : No. It isn't going to happen.
' Ed Oathour: My name is Ed Oathour. I live at 3940 Hawthorne Circle. Because
we have an engineer speaking tonight I'd like to say that I'm a registered
' architect and I worked for Target for most of the last 4 years and I've done 37
times more asphalt work in that time working for Target than this road amounts
to. I've walked the road for 5 years maybe 200-300 times. I drive it at
minimum twice a day. There are some areas on there that have some foundation
problems. They're not very many. They're far apart. One of the things that
Bill just got done saying was that the addition of a curb and gutter on the side
of the road is going to slow people down. I don't know. Okay, if this is true
' in other parts of the world, when you take that road that you have to travel 30
mph on whether it 's the speed limit or not because you can't go any faster than
that and make it into a smooth, rolling thing with no trees on either side, I
' think you're going to see the traffic speed go up to 40-45 mph. I have serious
doubts about the safety of our children and that goes on. But the reason that
I 14
City Council Meeting - July 8, 1991
I came here today was not to talk necessarily about those things. Obviously I'm
opposed to this road and the reasons that I oppose it, first of all is the cost
is too high. Or maybe safety is the first reason but let 's go into cost first
because that 's what has been discussed by Bill quite often. We have a road to
the east of us. We have a road to the west of us. TH 41 and Rolling Acres.
Both of those are fine roads. They go between TH 5 and TH 7. The road that we
have here goes through a neighborhood. It's a different kind of a road. It 's a
different kind of a feeling in that particular area than these other two roads
are which by the way quite a bit faster roads. In case you have been out there,
there's just as many joggers and bikers and kids on this road as there are cars.
You can't drive it in the morning or at night without seeing at least 2 or 3
joggers or walkers or kids on bikes. My suggestion is that even though I'll get
booed out for this, I do believe that we do need to put a parkway walkway system
in there. We have no park in the area. The kids need it . The adults need it
• but we don't need the road to be upgraded the way we're talking about. Yes, we
need to have the catch basins. They have to be raised in some cases. There are
great potholes but where in Minnesota aren't there potholes. But we need to
keep the road at 30 mph and I believe the way to do that is not to turn it into
a speedway. I know that there's nobody in this room that really believes Mr.
Englehardt 's contention that this road is going to stay 30 mph. The signs will
say 30 mph and it will be a big revenue producer for the city but I'm afraid we
might lose a kid or two out there or an adult because I've seen 15 or 20 times a
gentleman walking down that road with a long white cane with a red tip on the
end of it . I know that a situation exists that needs to be corrected and I
believe that that's the situation. The next item is the traffic study was
talked about at the meeting that Mr. Wing attended. The public meeting Mr. Wing
attended. I believe that somebody said that the average residence in there was
going to generate 10 trips a day but the traffic study didn't bear that out . As
a matter of fact it was about 3 trips a day. So what we're dealing with here is
figures that are taken completely out of context by an engineer who I have a
great deal of faith in but I know that he's just using numbers that have no
basis in fact . At least in our area. The reason that they don't is because
these numbers were generated during the time when gasoline was 17 cents a gallon
and people didn't live 20 miles from the grocery store. We don't do business
like that . When we go to the grocery store we spend time at the grocery store,
the supermarket, the Target and everyplace else we go to. Then we take the
whole thing in one trip instead of doing it like people who live in the city do
in 10 trips. Last item I guess is, that 's why I oppose construction. Thank you
very much. ,
Lamar Proshek: My name is Lamar Proshek. I live on Red Cedar Point Drive and I
have some concerns that have been voiced by many others before me tonight. My
main concerns are that we are going to be addressed with a lot of new traffic in
the area and we can avoid that. The other concern is that we're going to be
addressed by a lot of additional taxes, money that we don't need. Now I
appreciate the fact that you say that you're going to float some bonds and going
to increase the taxes and you're going to limit those taxes to 8 years. Then
you're going to get State help. State Aid.. Where does that money come from?
From the State? Is anybody here in doubt? Now .I appreciate the fact that you
have put a lot of time and thought and effort on this project and I feel that-
this road which we're talking about has been there for many, many decades. It
has served the local area very well and I personally don't think that we should
look that it should serve other people in this State or this city more than it
15 ,
City Council Meeting - July 8, 1991
serves us. Now I wrote you a letter and I would like to just read it because I
think this kind of outlines my thoughts. I would hearby like to register my
pronounced opposition to the proposal to improve Minnewashta Parkway from TH 7
to TH 5 at a cost of 3 million dollars. Now I appreciate the fact that it 's
' been $2.1 million and. . .and I would suggest that by the time it 's built , it
probably could be much higher. In fact I would register my disapproval to
improve this road at all except for maintenance only of irregular surfaces such
as potholes. Curb, water, sewer and gutter and improved surfaces costing 3
' million dollars is a matter for city living, not country living. I live on Red
Cedar Point and before me my father had a cabin on Red Cedar Point since 1935.
We'd like to maintain for as long as possible the feeling of country living. We
' feel that if you straighten out, widen and smooth off Minnewashta Parkway, you
will vastly increase the amount of speed of traffic on this road and bring the
city to the country. In addition to this I realize that $3 million is quite a
' bit of money and all people who live in this area would be assessed a portion of
' this money. I would like to bring to your attention that our taxes have just
been raised 30%. The additional taxes which we would be required to pay I
consider unconscionable. Please leave our community adjacent to Minnewashta
IIParkway countrified and not citified. Thank you.
Dave Headla: My name is Dave Headla. I live at 6870 Minnewashta Parkway.
' I guess I'm one of the yes man. This may be the first one but I ask you do not
look at the idea of what we were in 1970 but look ahead to the year 2000 and
where we're going to be. Now the reason I support what you're doing and Bill
and I certainly aren't in agreement on all the issues but I think the concept
II I've got to support. Safety is the ultimate point. And one of the things was,
about a week ago we had a rain. I went down my driveway and looked across the
road and here was a kid, 9 year old boy sitting in the gutter playing in the
I rain. The water was coming down. He was having a good time. Now that's a
narrow section and cars haul through there. That kid could have been picked off
so easy. I think if we put in that road and I have a hard time accepting 32
feet but if we argue about that we're going to be wringing our hands and never
get anything resolved. So it 's kind of can hang you with a new rope and we go
32 feet. I think we've got to have that safety and where Bill has looked at it
again, now I'd like to compliment the Mayor on the letter. He responded to me.
I He gave me some facts. That $24,000.00 that we donated to the trail fund, in my
own mind I thought it was about 4 times that much. And then Bill was very
helpful and the staff in giving me numbers so I appreciate their cooperation.
' Now we walked down the trail and trees are going to come out from either side
so that didn't make a point. But he was willing to listen that out of 265 units
on the north side of Kings Road, only about 10 are on the east side of the road.
II He listened to that and then he looked at the trees and what it meant and he
said well maybe that does make sense to do that so I think he is putting forth a
real effort to do the right thing to satisfy a lot of people. So many homes on
that side, picking up a school bus or anything, I think it's by far the safest
' thing to do. As far as the road speed, I've got two comments. I talked to
somebody on Birch Bluff Road and I asked them does the speeed, did the speed
increase, decrease or stay the same after they put in the 9 ton road. They said
I that's not a fair question. I go out there at 40 mph, I'm holding up traffic.
So we may have that problem. So okay, we've got a problem. I think the issue -
is how do we work that problem. Now as you come off of TH S or TH 7, if you
come off of TH 7 onto TH 5, you see a speed limit 30 but you also see two signs.
IIOther signs on that post. What I really would like to do is have you work the
1 16
City Council McP4 ng - July 8, 1991
issue. Put up one sign and say speed limit reduced, 30 mph. Do the same thing
at the other end but then inbetween, at Kings Road or someplace put two more. 30
mph signs. Now all the way inbetween, you come out Red Cedar Point Road and you
come out of Stratford Ridge, you don't see anything so -I think we need more
warning on that . And as far as the traffic count , I was really in disagreement
with Bill on that but I started in front of my place looking at Stratford Ridge.
•
Oh there was traffic coming out of there all the time and that's not against
him. That 's the way it is. Then I look at when our place goes and our
neighbor's place g: 2s and I look at, I assume the same home count will have the
same traffic. There's going to be a lot of traffic on that road. So here again
I hate to do it but rather than wringing our hands I think we've got to support
that . Okay now the two issues that I'm really concerned about, outside of
safety is one is determination of the number of units. I .don't think there's a
consistent rule across the overall path. And Bill and I talked about it. What
I would really like to see you do is if I plot my land, then I get assessed for
every single unit that goes in there. My neighbors have to do that. They get
assessed at that time. Likewise neighbors to the north. If they squeak in
another lot, and that can-be done in some places, they ought to get hit with the
same assessment . I really would like to see you address that issue. Whoever
plots it , whatever goes in, that's when they get assessed. Now if I get hit and
the estimate right now is for 17 units, let me address the 17 units first . In
front of my place it isn't realistic to build another home. In the back of my
place I've got many oak trees, many old maple trees and determination of that
number of units wasn't taken into consideration. When a building, a builder's
looked at our place and he's kind of given an estimate of what he's done. They
never talk about trashing your home. They say hey, that's too valuable. We
can't trash that. They also want to save all those trees. Supposedly he wants
to save trees. Well, we're not going to save trees and come up with 17 units.
It isn't bare prairie land where it's rows and columns. My neighbor has a
ravine behind her place. That's just unbuildable but she gets hit for that spot
there so I'd like to see your decision making based on the number of units that
get plotted. Now the last point is that right now I'm assessed one unit and
I have no problem at all with that assessment. You know remember safety. One
kid gets picked off, then you think about your $1,250.00 bucks and I think we
need it. There's that much traffic. If I get hit for one lot now or one
assessment , I would like to see this one assessment and not have to pay interest
on the other 16. Now what happens if I had to pay interest on that 16, although
nobody in my place is using it. Just our family's there. You're costing me
over $200.00 a month and I just don't think that's right that I would have to
pay $200.00 a month when nobody's using it and hopefully they won't be using it
for quite a while in the future. That's all I have to say. You've got a tough,
very tough decision to make. Good luck. '
Mayor Chmiel: Is there anyone else?
Terry Forbord: Your honor, members of the City Council. My name is Terry i
Forbord with Lundgren Brothers. 935 East Wayzata Blvd. . Prior to any informal
or formal public hearings we have gone on record opposing this project for a
number of reasons. Since that time the formulas for assessments have been
changed. Lundgren Bros. controls approximately 50-55 acres of land contiguous _
to Minnewashta Parkway. A portion of that property is in the city of Victoria.
The reason that we have opposed this project primarily is number one, there's no
benefit to us as far as it 's marketability as a neighborhood community. People
17 '
City Council Meeting - July 8, 1991
11
will want to live there whether that road is the way that it is now or if you do
11 something different with it. Secondly is because we've had little difficulty
making the assessment formula, the proposed assessment formulas work within the
city's own zoning ordinance. The piece of property that we have right at this
' present time could not be platted at more than 1.4839 dwelling units per acre
because of this city's shoreland overlay districts, zoning code and because of
the constraints the ONR, etc. . And from a legal standpoint , I would challenge -
whether we could be assessed something for what the ordinance would prohibit us
' from doing. And there was discussion by Mr. Engelhardt that some adjustments
may be needed in certain areas. In that area north of, excuse me, west of
Minnewashta Parkway there are a number of pieces of property that I don't think
' would meet that test. I don't know how you would put together an adjustment but
at some point in time that 's something we would need to investigate. The last
item that I would like to mention is that we have not been contacted by either
Victoria or the City of Chanhassen regarding any land swap on property that we
I control and if there is discussion regarding that, we would like to be a party
to that and would welcome it. Thank you.
Mayor Chmiel: Thank you. Why don't you come on up.
Tom Allenburg: Mr. Mayor, Council people. My name is Tom Allenburg. I live at
6621 Minnewashta Parkway and some of the presentations were quite good and quite
formal and people had prepared. I really haven't. I would chastise one thing
that occurred tonight. I think Mr. Bill Engelhardt is it? I think his verbal
presentation was excellent . I think his audio visuals were extremely poor and I
' don't think that anybody here has any idea really what he was talking about.
Maybe you're not aware that this cannot be seen on the screen and I don't think
it's fair to us who have some legitimate concerns as to what's going on here.
' I am a jogger. I've lived on that parkway now for 9 years and a couple things
that I enjoy are early in the morning I can jog from my place, 1.2 miles down to
TH 5 and back and often not see another car. I do not quite understand why we
' want to upgrade this from a rural road to an urban road to make it a collector
road so that I can now maybe jog along a pathway next to additional cars that
are coming from other areas. I thought one other issue that he raised concerned
me, or maybe he didn't raise. The one gentleman who was going to lose his 6
' trees in his front yard. One thing that I really enjoy in walking the parkway
is that there are these nice trees that overhang the road both on Minnewashta
lakeshore side and on his side of the road there. It was brought out that the
' road's going to be expanded 6 inches on each side. Gee in front of my house the
road is 25 feet so it's going to be considerably more than that. Plus I think
we have to, and my understanding at the last meeting is that there's an
additional 11 feet with the walkway. Is that not right? So there's a boulevard
and then the walkway?
Bill Engelhardt: Right .
' Tom Allenburg: So it's not a 32 foot swath. So when I jog down this road it's
not that I went from a 28 foot to a 32 foot. I am now going on a what, 44 foot?
Bill Engelhardt: No. That's not correct. You still have a roadway of 32 feet
plus the additional 6 feet of walkway on the outside of the curb.
' Tom Allenburg: Plus a boulevard though?
' 18
I
City Council Meting - July 8, 1991 1
Bill Engelhardt : About a 3 foot boulevard, yeah.
Tom Allenburg: Well now wait a minute now. You told us last time 5 foot so
I've got 32 feet , I've 5 feet and I've got 6 feet .
Bill Engelhardt : That 's right .
Tom Allenburg: So I've got 11 feet outside of my 33 feet so that's 44 feet . Now
if we want real s�. fety you know we could make it 66 feet or something. I really
think that living on the parkway, gee whiz the reason we bought there it that it
was rural and it was not a major thoroughfare and yeah, I think the road needs
to be improved. I don't understand why it has to be wider and I don't 11
understand taking this giant swath out of the entire neighborhood. In summary I
. guess I'm really opposed to this plan. - I really think there should be
additional information that could be gathered and maybe additional plans that
would be presented to the people. I was at the last meeting and it was my
understanding that a survey was going to be sent to the residents asking them
various questions. I don't think anything like that showed up. The only thing
that showed up is this meeting notice saying that this was going to take place
tonight . So I guess I would really like to see you reconsider this and at this
point not approve the proposal as presented to you. Thank you.
Rich Comer: I'm Rich Comer and I live at 3800 Red Cedar Point Drive. We've
been ther.e for about 40 years. My wife was born on the place and her family got
it from the original indians from the Civil War and they've been there ever
since. There are a few little points here. Mr. Allenburg said that it was 28
feet wide in front of his house?
Mayor Chmiel: There are two different variations on that road. Some 28 feet '
and some at 25.
Rich Comer: True. When you take a measuring stick and you go from the middle
of the road to the edge you get 26 feet most of the way and on occasion you get
to 27 so if he goes to 35 or 32, we'll have the 6 feet that Dave Headla wants as
a walkway right next to the road. And with this sufficient speed limit, you
won't have to worry about little kid playing in the rain if he's in that
walkway. If he's not in the walkway heaven help him because there's no way
we're going to protect him. I'm the one who sort of developed the idea of
having an overlay. I think it's a grand idea and you hear things about Goodyear
has developed a mat that goes on top of the roadway and you just put the asphalt
on top and it lasts for a million years. Where are we with that? What happened
to that? I'd like to ask you Bill. '
Bill Engelhardt : It's good advertising. From what we've seen, the mats or the
fabrics that they've used work the best underneath the base or underneath the
rock material to separate the fines from getting up in the base. To just put
the fabric as you see in the Phillips 66 commercial, they're laying down the
fabric and they're putting a bituminous overlay on the top. It works very good
in the south where they don't have any freeze/thaw cycles. ,
Rich Comer: We happened to see it being done on TH 7 for the last 18 years.
They went from St . Louis Park all the way out. ,
19 1
1
City Council Meeting - July 8, 1991
11
Bill Engelhardt: They just put an overlay on that though.
11 Rich Comer: Exactly. And it 's holding up beautifully.
Bill Engelhardt : And they mill it off and then they put their overlay on and
the reason they mill it is to keep it at the same elevation. . .
Rich Comer: And the relative cost of doing that scoring and putting on the
overlay is way out of sight on the $3 million right?
Bill Engelhardt : No.
Rich Comer: It 's within reach?
Bill Engelhardt : The problem is that the subsoils in that particular area.
' Rich Comer: Whoops. Whoops. We have a stable road base.
Bill Engelhardt: No.
Rich Comer: It 's been there for over 100 years and you find a place in there
where it 's 14 inches of bituminous that makes it irregular? Wouldn't it be
justifiable to go down that road and where it is not standard, replace it.
Leave the rest of it alone because we all know if you lift it up and start over,
you're going to have a crown that's going to drop 14 inches over the next 15
years. An inch a year. That 's the way it goes. So you're going to have an
unstable road base if you put the 3 million dollars in. If you put an overlay
on, you'll have a stable base with the exception of where you have the drainage
' problems. And I like this letter from Don Ashworth where it says he doesn't
like the idea of an overlay because bituminous overlay would not improve
intersections, sight lines and storm drainage problems currently being
' experienced. I think the ideal for a storm drainage is wherever that drop of
rain hits, it gets to an absorbing soil as quickly as it possibly can. That is
crown the road so it gets to the gutter and is off in 13 feet and forget about
the storm. Now you say DOT requires it. We could finance this thing without
DOT if we simply have an overlay and eliminate the storm sewer and the gutters.
We've got ditches. That picture you had up there was ridiculous. A roadway in
the gutter? We've got ditches all the way along that road. It's going to drain
' off just as soon as it leaves that hard surface and I think that we should
eliminate the gutters and the storm sewers. As far as this package, you've got
$600,000.00. $665,000.00 from us. $994,000.00 from the State. Let's let the
' State, forget about that. We'll try to carry it ourselves. How did we get in
this mess huh? You know what happened? We didn't do the maintenance on a
regular scheduled basis. We didn't put down the sand and the tar that's
occasionally put on. It used to be before the Village took over. In fact just
before they put in the sewer, they had a sealcoat put on and then proceed to
tear it up. But if we had had a maintenance schedule all this period that would
be absorbed, there wouldn't be this problem. I think that the thing should be
' corrected on a maintenance basis without having any additional assessment.
Thanks for your trouble.
Court MacFarlane: Mr. Mayor, my name is Court MacFarlane. I live at 3800
Leslee Curve and I have just three points that I wanted to raise. The current
20
I
City Council Meeting - July 8, 1991
drainage off of the road is basically by sheet drainage and rather than going
into specific areas. I know there's one area off of Leslee Curve that drains
down across the road but that was upgraded just I think last year and they
improved the whole drainage through that area down into Minnewashta. But '
basically the rest of it is a sheet drainage system that just goes off the road
at a point that the rain hits and it's off _the crown and most of it goes toward
the lake side. Now you have a very mature slope along there and when I was
involved with the environmental committee that wrote the wetland ordinance for
the City of Chanhassen in 1984 we looked into the various types of wetlands in
Chanhassen. One of the things that came out at that time is along the Minnesota
River there is what they call an environmental slope easement along there
because it 's a steep slope. It 's a very mature growth area with a lot of old
growth trees. If you go along Minnewashta Parkway you're going to see those old
growth trees on the lake side. Most of them are oaks and oaks are notorious for
when their roots are disturbed or compacted that they die within a year or two.
I know some of those trees have got to be 200 years old. All you have to do is
look at them from the size. They created that slope easement along the
Minnesota River to preserve that slope so no building could be done and no
excavation could be done into it. I think something like that is certainly
warranted along there too because of the age. The other thing is that I live in
the Pleasant Acres Association and we basically have a circular drive and in the
middle of our development there and I don't know how many homes altogether there
are. There's got to be 50 to 70 plus another 30 that are coming in from the new
development that 's in there. The lots have already been platted. I think
there's only been two homes built in there at this point but I don't know who's
going to be using this trail. I don't think people from our area are going to
be using it. I know it 's used. Not from our area. People in our area walk
around Leslee Curve. They walk around in there. Some go down to the lake.
Certainly. We have a lake lot down there. It 's a crossing point but very few,
if any walk the entire parkway. I think the whole project is unwarranted and I
think that something could be done just with upgrading the road. I don't know
that we need the trail at all. I'm opposed to it and I'm opposed to completely
new road surface. Thank you.
Mayor Chmiel: Anyone else?
Arnie Head: Mayor. Councilmen. My name is Arnie Head. I live at 3860 Lone
Cedar Circle and Court who was up here just before me, we were on the access to
Lake Minnewashta. I chaired that committee and I think we probably provided
more safety on Minnewashta Parkway with the decisions that we worked out with
the DNR when we eliminated the parking of boats and trailers on Minnewashta
Parkway about 5 years ago. There are ways to protect safety without building
this new road. I think there's another item that the Director of the Arboretum
has been in negotiations with your people to determine what they can do to
protect the environment of the Arboretum. I think that might be taken into
consideration. There's a third thing that I've noticed in the Minnetonka,
St. Louis Park, other cities on the west side. There's always access to the
city on east/west highways. Every city seems to want north/south egress. Well
in Chanhassen we have TH 101, CR 17, CR 117 and TH 41 and we also have Rolling
Acres Road. That's five north/south so we don't need Minnewashta Parkway to
carry more traffic. My wife would shoot me I guess but I got a letter Friday
that I'm being requested to go to the Soviet Union to explain democracy to the
collective farms in Istonia. Maybe we can use democracy here and have a vote as
21 ,
I
City Council Meeting - July 8, 1991
to how many property owners out of the 532 approve this enhancement of
Minnewashta Parkway.
Mayor Chmiel: Is there anyone else?
' Resident : I just have a question. How many of you have really been on
Minnewashta Parkway to look at all the homes that are going to be affected by .
' this?
Mayor Chmiel: I've been there many times.
Councilman Workman: All my life.
Mayor Chmiel: No question. Yes sir.
Kevin Cuddihy: Kevin Cuddihy, 3900 Stratford Ridge. I guess the people that
drive a lot . I don't know. It's my neighbors believe me. Just a couple of
quick questions before I comment . Bill, MnDot, correct me if I'm wrong, has
approved a light going in on TH 7 and Minnewashta Parkway?
Bill Engelhardt : That's correct .
' Kevin Cuddihy: And what year will that be going in?
1 Bill Engelhardt : I think 1995 is scheduled for TH 7 and 1994 is scheduled for
TH 5.
Kevin Cuddihy: Yeah, I think that was talked about at our previous meetings.
' At that point I see it being very unrealistic that if nothing's been done with
Minnewashta Parkway that something will be done at that point. At that point is
it possible that MnDot may have more to say than it does currently?
' Bill Engelhardt : It 's possible, yeah.
' Kevin Cuddihy: So I would think that we look at that only in the sense that if
there is an inevitability about this, that we look at it now. I moved here from
Minnetonka. Before that moved out from closer into the city. I continue to
move out so I certainly can understand country versus urban. Unfortunately, if
' you look at the plans being involved right now for the City of Victoria, you can
see that that's becoming extremely suburbanized right now itself. Something
even further west than where we're at. I appreciate the fact that everyone
' would like to keep it more countrified. I guess I would like to add that there
seems to be some concern certainly, my concern that Minnewashta is a parkway.
We'd like to keep it a parkway. That we're dealing with the 32 foot curb to
' curb road on a 66 foot right-of-way which would leave us somewhere in the
neighborhood, if my math is correct, which probably isn't, about 34 feet to work
with in developing a jogging path or walking path. Whatever you'd like to call
it. And the particular area that would remain grass between the road and the
' walkway could at any point be up to 18 feet apart from the road. That's only 18
feet to avoid any major trees along the parkway, particularly on the furthest _
west part of the road. I think that way at some•ooint your walkway may be a
' minimum of 5 feet away. Could it not also be as much as 12 to 16 feet away and
leaveing trees inbetween?
11 22
11
City Council Meeting - July 8, 1991
Bill Engelhardt: Right. With the type of walkway we're proposing, we can go
around large trees. As I mentioned earlier, in cases where we might have to
build a small retaining wall, that can be done to save the tree. Depending on
the type of tree. You have a lot of flexibility on where to put that walkway
and how it can work. 1
Kevin Cuddihy: I guess finally if, and I personally believe in inevitability
because I've seen it in the State of Minnesota in my 35 years here. I also
believe that Governor Carlson in his many fine ways probably will not be giving
us as much State Aid 5 years from now as he is today and I can guarandamtee you
it 's going to cost you more 5 years from now than it is today and it may not be
your choice. So I may not be popular but I think it 's something to think about .
Thank you.
Mayor Chmiel : Thank you. Is there anyone else wishing to address us? This is
your opportunity.
Lowell Carlson: Lowell Carlson, 4141 Kings Road. On these walking paths, for
instance the curb and gutter, are they going to sweep that? Get a sweeper to
sweep that or Bobcat to clean up the walking path instead of making it one level
and when they plow the road they plow the one time and it's all done? What 's
the status on that particular case? I mean have they got to buy extra equipment
to maintain this thing or whatever's going to happen with this? If it's one
level , they plow her and sweep her or whatever and fix the road and whatever to
make it a little wider. Whatever form but the maintenance cost on that thing is
going to look somebody in the eye pretty soon. Thank you. Oh, one other thing
was on per acre lots, what did he say 1.8 now assessed for this road? Does
Chanhassen have a 2 acre minimal building lot deal right now do they? You've
got to be at least 2 acres per home. Or is it now down to 1.8?
Mayor Chmiel: Depending upon specific areas. Paul, maybe you can address that.
Paul Krauss: That entire area is guided for single family development and while
it 's not all zoned RSF I don't believe at this time, it all could be and it all
could be developed in 15,000 square foot lots.
Lowell Carison: Okay. So it still is a 2 acre per unit? So it's 1.8 now?
Bill Engelhardt: 3 per acre. ,
Paul Krauss: It 's actually more than that if you figure it on a gross basis. I
mean if you just take an acre you can almost get 3 lots out of it technically.
When you figure out what you're really going to get out of it when you subtract
roads and wetlands and whatever else, effectively you come out with a number
that 's a lot closer to the 1.8 that 's being used.
Lowell Carison: Say you ain't got no wet area and you ain't got no sewer and
water and you ain't got whatever. You've just got bare land. What are you
saying at that particular point what anybody's going to be assessed on this
property? Like for the 6 acres or whatever. What do you say the assessments
are going to be on that particular unit? As a -single family? Is this a single
family one shot deal or what do say on that now?
23 1
I
City Council Meeting - July 8, 1991
11
Bill Engelhardt: What we're saying is that if you have 6 acres of developable
property where you'd be served with municipal sanitary sewer and water, that you
would be assessed 1.8 units per acre which would give you roughly two 24,000
square foot lots per acre. The zoning standard for that particular area is at
15,000 square feet so you're basically getting a break. We're saying that you
can only develop 20,000 square foot lots when in reality you can probably get
15,000 or up to 3 units per acre. That's why we originally started at the 3
units or 3 lots. Three single family lots per acre and then after we looked at
it, realising the amount of wetlands that we have up there, subtracting out for
roads that you have to build to serve the property, it's closer to about 1.8.
Lowell Carlson: Well how many times is this thing really going to be changed by
the time I get done? I was at the last meeting and I recall talking to you that
it was, and you saying that it was going to be strictly a single dwelling, per
person regardless of acreage. Am I right?
' Bill Engelhardt : I don't think I ever made that statement. I said that if you
have a dwelling on let's say 6 acres, you would be assessed the single family
unit plus the number of units you could get on the balance of that lot. On the
balance of that land.
' Lowell Carlson: Well I must have got hard hearing on the tail end because I
didn't hear plus. The plus is what's kind of getting me a little. . .and I'm sure
the pluses are getting a few other ones. But thank you.
Mayor Chmiel: Thank you. Anyone else?
Harvey Sobel: Mr. Mayor, it 's been commented by various of us that perhaps you
' or the City Attorney can tell us within the City Charter, is there a possibility
that we can, we 532 unit holders, can we vote to influence the decision of the-
Council?
Councilwoman Dimler: It 'd be a referendum.
Mayor Chmiel: No, not really.
' Councilman Mason: You can at election time.
Mayor Chmiel: During election you'd have your opportunity to oust those who are
in office at that particular time by voting for the other person. That would
probably be.
' Harvey Sobel: Could you just conduct a survey though rather than an official
election?
' Mayor Chmiel: Yeah. Well, I suppose we could put a survey but we have right
now, if I remember correctly of the total numbers that I had seen on the back
end of here, it was 303, 307 total people.
Harvey Sobel: So it's 530 some units but it may not be that many people?
Mayor Chmiel: That 's correct. I went over each of these names just to.
II - 24
I
City Council Meeting - July 8, 1991
Harvey Sobel: Are all of these units being affected equally regardless of
proximity to Minnewashta Parkway?
Mayor Chmiel: That 's correct .
Harvey Sobel : Some people who live on the far end of Leslee Curve right before
TH 7 which probably use TH 7 than Minnewashta. Parkway, they still have to pay
the same?
Mayor Chmiel : Bill, is that what you've taken into consideration on that?
Bill Engelhardt : We discussed whether we should assess the people close to TH 7
the full unit and the conclusion that we came up with is that they will use
Minnewashta Parkway just as readily as anybody else in the neighborhood. The
possibility exists, and I'll say it as a possibility, that access at I think
it 's Leslee might be closed and the reason the possibility exists is because
it's MnDot ' policy when they improve their corridors, their highway corridors,
the major corridors like TH 7, that they try to close as many of those accesses
as possible. Now I'm not saying that it will be closed. I'm saying that it 's
their policy to try and close them. And if that's the case, then again
Minnewashta Parkway would be their only ingress and egress. I don't know when
that would happen. It would probably be way in the future. We felt that the
assessing everyone equally up in that area was the correct way to do it . Was
the most fair and equitable way for all parties and that's the way we proposed
it . I think one thing you have to keep in mind is that the assessments that
you're seeing we probably won't get around to assessing it until 1992, payable
in 1993. So we're talking about 2 to 3 years down the road. The project
schedule, if the project were to go ahead tonight , we would not see a bidding on
the project until late fall. You might see a minor amount of construction late
fall with completion of the project in 1992 and it may even go into 1993. I
doubt it . I think we'd be able to get it done in 1992. Assessment then in
1993. Payable in 1993. So your first payment on that $1,200.00 would not be
due until 1993. The schedule for the lights on TH 7 and TH 5 is 1994-1995 so
what we're doing is getting ready to accommodate some of the traffic that may be
using that road based on the lights.
Resident: I guess I was also thinking of Lone Cedar Circle and West 77th Street
where I think the bulk of this project would. . .directly out onto TH 5 and
occasionally out to Minnewashta Parkway.
Bill Engelhardt: Again we felt that because of the amount of the assessment
being at $1,250.00. Nobody likes to be assessed. I've been in this business
long enough to know that and been through enough of these projects that nobody
likes assessments but if you can make them fair and equitable so that all
parties are being treated equally, that's about the best job you can do.
Resident: How about the utility lines. Will they be buried along with this?
Bill Engelhardt : That question came up. A resident along the parkway asked
about the utility lines. Usually in cases like this we encourage NSP to bury
their power lines. We certainly would be in touch with them. In most cases -
when they see a major improvement like this the, will undertake the policy to go
ahead and bury those lines. The difficulty that you run up against is if you're
25 1
I
City Council Meeting - July 8, 1991
being served off of these power lines by overhead power, then your home itself
' has to be converted on the outside to underground and that can run from $400.00
to $300.00. Usually what happens is after that gets explained to the property
owner, they really don't want the power lines buried. But NSP may choose on •
this particular roadway, this is a very good opportunity for them to take care
of their utilities. We will have to have poles moved and they may elect to bury
the power lines. We would be working with them and it would be part of the
design phase of the project .
' Resident : That all applies to the gas and the phone and water too?
' Bill Engelhardt : Well the phone would be buried along with NSP.- That's usually
the general practice. Gas I'm assuming is buried at this point. I hope so
anyhow. Sewer and water I guess they're underground at this point too.
• Resident: When you straighten out your curb, you may be bumping into gas lines.
Bill Engelhardt : That 's all part of the project cost and generally, in all
cases those utility companies are required to move because they're in the
right-of-way by permit. We basically demand that they relocate their lines to
accommodate the roadway at their expense.
JoAnn Hallgren: I'm here again. JoAnn Haligren, 6860 Minnewashta Parkway.
I know I've bombarded you with letters. I've sat here for almost 2 hours. I
really haven't heard a lot of approval of the project but listening to Mr.
' Engelhardt , it 's going through. That 's the way it seems to me and I don't know,
do we have any voice at all. All of us here.
' Mayor Chmiel: Well, that 's what we're trying to determine this evening. Where
are we going to go from where we're at right now.
JoAnn Hallgren: I didn't understand the purpose of this meeting. Was it for
' you to decide if we will go ahead with this project or just to accept Mr.
Engelhardt 's study?
' Mayor Chmiel: Well, if we were to accept his study, then we would proceed then
with the project .
' JoAnn Haligren: I did read the study. I feel that it's not valid. It's
inconsistent with itself in a number of areas and that 's what I did say in my
letter for the Council to review it carefully. Thank you.
IMayor Chmiel: Yes.
Ed Hasek: My name is Ed Hasek. I live at 6570 Kirkwood Circle. I'll be living
' there for about 22 more days and then I'm moving to Shorewood. There's a couple
of reasons for that. I'm going to start with a question and then I'll continue.
What is the assessment area for this project?
IIBill Engelhardt : What is the assessment area?
Ed Hasek: Yes.
26
City Council Meeting - July 8, 1991
Bill Engelhardt : Right behind you.
Ed Hasek: It's just the area in blue?
Bill Engelhardt : That's right.
Ed Hasek: Does that mean that there won't be anybody else besides those people
who's going to use this trail? Is that the presumption that 's being made?
Bill Engelhardt : No.
Ed Hasek: I didn't think so. I moved here in 1982 and was at that time able to
job. I'm no longer able to do that but I used Minnewashta Parkway a lot . And
the thing that scared me about Minnewashta Parkway is I used to push my daughter
• and my son down the road with me. and my wife has had a friend killed on
Minnewashta Parkway when she was in high school. She's lived in this area all
of her life. Her father was Roy Beherle of Roy's Live Bait and a lot of her
high school friends used to use Minnewashta Parkway as a raceway to and from
Leech's and the beer parties and so forth that used to happen out there. That's
since gone and the traffic still has a tendency to drive much too quickly down
that road. The only thing that seems to deter traffic from speeding past Linden
Circle which is about a block and a half off of TH 7 is if occasionally there's
a cop parked up at the fire barn. It's very easy to try and sneak between cars,
take that corner and continue driving 50 mph until you get to a point where you
have to make a decision. If you'll look at some of the yards down there you'll
see that there are some people who haven't been able to make that decision quite
quickly enough. So I guess I've got a concern for those who are going to remain
about the traffic. Moved here in 1982. Saw a concern. Got involved. I was
appointed to the Park and Trail commission in 1987? In 1987 just before Todd
started I think, in an effort to do something about this. Within one year we
adopted a new trail plan that laid out for the city a citywide trail system and
it talked about the main corridors that should be addressed by the city for city
use. Not for Minnewashta Parkway use. Not for TH 101. Not for TH 5 but for
the whole city. And the anticipation was that the brunt of that construction
and that system would be paid for by the City. Over the course of the next year
or so we tried a couple of referendums which failed. One narrowly. The last
one a little more narrowly than the first I believe if I recollect correctly.
People felt all along that we were voting against the trail system when in fact
the trail system was in place. It's part of the comprehensive plan and as long
as I've lived here, I've lived here without the services of any kind of a park
system whatsoever. We have no trail. We have no local park. We're told
Cathcart Park is our park. That's bull. You can't get there. Part of what
your comprehensive plan says is parks are supposed to be accessible to the
people. No one can tell me that anybody that lives south of TH 5 can get to
either the Arboretum or Freeman Field, Cathcart Park, Minnewashta Park, any of
those parks safely. It can't be done. There is just no way to accommodate
those people. This was all along anticipated to be part of a plan that would
connect the Arboretum to perhaps Cathcart if a signal went in. That would help
a lot . Eventually, hopefully to some of the other parks that are south of the
road around Minnewashta Parkway. Part of the whole city system. What I don't
understand is why 500 some units are being assessed for something that's really
in place as a part of a city wide system like Lake Ann. It just seems
unrealistic. We've paid park dedication fees. The newer homes since the trail
27
City Council Meeting - July 8, 1991
dedication fee went in have paid that . We have seen nothing. All of our money
' has gone into either parks that existed in other parts of the city or into newer
areas of town. It just seems to me like it 's about time that those of you who
live in the center part of town begin to serve those of us who happen to live on
' the other side of the lake. Thank you.
Resident : . . .the sense of what people are for in this group. I have an idea
that , well you told us that we can't vote on it . That 's why we hired or elected
' you folks to vote for us on items like this. I don't want to put you on the
well whatever for tonight by asking how you lean. You know how we feel but I.
would like when you do make up your minds, send us a letter how you voted on
' this item please.
. Mayor Chmiel: I'm sure you're going to see how we vote, if we vote on this
' particular item.
' Resident : We'd like to know.
' Mayor Chmiel: I'd just as soon take someone who's not had an opportunity.
Would you like to come forward.
' Greg Datillo: Hi, I'm Greg Datillo of 7201 Juniper Avenue. I've got a question
for Bill. Bill, will the children be more safe with the proposed plan than they
are now on.that road?
Bill Engelhardt : I have to say yes. Yes. Definitely. Anytime you provide
pedestrian walkways, take the pedestrians off the roadway, the answer is yes.
' Greg Datillo: We're missing a very important group of individuals at this
meeting. You know what group I'm talking about?
' Councilwoman Dimler: Kids.
Greg Datillo: Yeah that 's right . I've got 3 kids and I don't let them go
on Minnewashta Parkway. You ask why? Because I love them. You've got to be
' insane to think that that road is safe for kids. Or your grandkids. I mean
this is why I got this thing started in 1986 with all my neighbors. I went
around and got a petition and come to the City Council and say hey guys, tell us
' what it 's going to cost us to make it safe for the people on that roadway. I've
asked the children already. Not only mine but other kids because I'm one of
those fathers that plays with the kids in the neighborhood. I tell them that
' we've got a good chance of getting you off that road and they don't believe it.
They ask well when is it going to happen because they can't go to another
neighborhood because of that road. There's no way of getting from Red Cedar
Point Road down to another subdivision without getting on Suicide Road. There's
' no way and you're not going to let little kids, I mean little being under 12
okay because it only takes two kids, two boys, two girls riding their bikes side
by side and what 's going to happen. There's going to be a car that's going to
' hit one of them. We just heard one a few years ago that got killed but here,
that is what I believe the whole issue has been is a basic safety issue. I
understand we've got the joggers here that jog early in the morning at 6:00 when
' there's no cars out there. But look at the kids. They're not up at 6:00. My
kids aren't up at 6:00. They're out at 9:00, 10:00 you know. They're out at
' 28
City Council Meeting - July 8, 1991
5:00 when everybody's coming home and that's the problem is to get the kids off
the road. Not the adults. Fine, if the adults want to get killed, that 's their '
problem but the kids, that 's where the problem is. So the kids, I tell them
hopefully it 's going to happen soon but we have a few people who are worried
about some trees, and I understand. I love trees but I love the kids more than
some trees. I hate to say that but that's the way I feel. We have some people
that just don't want change because well that's the way it used to be. -Well, we
could still be throwing rocks at dinosaurs if we kept that. Right , or some
people. And some people don't want to pay anything even though for every dollar
we're paying, the City's giving us back $3.00. How many times have we heard in
our neighborhoods, the City's not doing nothing for us. All we do is pay all
these high taxes. They're not giving us anything in return. Nothing, nothing,
nothing. Open your eyes. It 's 30% is what we have to pay and that 's a 70%
discount . I buy things at a 70% discount if I don't even need it. Okay?
Mayor Chmiel: If we could give him the same attention that everyone else gave
you please.
Greg Datillo: I have two lots that I have to pay on so with most of you I've '
got to pay double and I know there's some that have more but what I tell the
children is that your moms and dads or grammas and grampas have to realize, it's
going to change. The road's going to be upgraded and the question is, why don't
we enjoy it now and let the kids enjoy it now than 5 years from now when it 's
going to cost a lot more money because the City here, now Oave who's also been
working with the City. Everyone who's been working with the City here, is kind
of going more towards saying well let's do this because they're doing everything
they can to listen to what we're saying and everything we've asked for they have
given to us. 36 down to 32 foot and the assessment down to half. I just want
to thank the Mayor and the Council and Bill, I can't say anything wrong in how
they treated me or they haven't done anything against us. Believe me guys,
they're on our side. They're not working against us and here, I'm sorry, but I
want the kids off that road. Thank you.
Laurie Gauer: I'm Laurie Gauer. I live at 3220 Lone Cedar and I agree with the
previous gentleman. I have two young children and I've tried pushing strollers
down the parkway and I just won't do it anymore. I know that there are plans
for a playground or park north of Lake St. Joe in the future and people are
going to have to get from those neighborhoods down there somehow. Even if they
don't use the parkway now, their kids are going to have to use it so I don't
know about the road but I'm definitely in favor of the trail.
Kevin Cuddihy: I just wanted to add that at the community meetings that we had,
there was a possibility that because that park has not yet been built that we
could get some support from the park people for possibly reducing this
$1,250.00. I don't know, did you go back and talk to them? When I talked to
him he said he didn't know what he could give us but he might be able to give us
some cash for just the walking path part of the construction.
Bill Engelhardt : I think what they found is that there was a $24,000.00 park
dedication out of that area which would basically be used to construct the park.
What we did is we went back and we were proposing that $477,000.00 worth of the-
.
project be general obligation bonds which will go towards the cost of the trail.
So that 's what we're proposing. That's how we brought it down.
29 ,
City Council Meeting - July 8, 1991
Mayor Chmiel: Thank you. Is there anyone else?
Ivan Underdahl: Ivan Underdahl, 7502 West 77th Street . I guess the question
I had was there ever any consideration given just to providing a walking trail
without upgrading the highway itself to the extent that you've been talking
about?
Mayor Chmiel: Basically not to my knowledge. This was combined project with the
road as well as with the trail. Anyone else?
Resident: Would you elaborate on that question sir? Why not allow us to
' consider just the walkway?
Mayor Chmiel: Because we're looking at the State Aid addition to this which
would offset some of those costs and that 's what we had looked at at that
' particular time. Anyone else? If not , 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: I'd like to probably just start out tonight a little bit on this.
I'm feeling a little less comfortable in seeing some of the opposition that 's
here. Although I'm not seeing totally 307 people here this evening. I think
what I'd really like to do is to table this at this particular time to review
' the entirety of the Minutes and also to look and see some of the things that
were discussed that can be addressed and to come up with a final conclusion.
There might be a few loose ends and I'd just as soon tighten it up to see
' exactly where this is going to go and what the bottom dollar is going to be.
With that I would like to make, I'd like to table this at this particular time
but I will open this for additional comments from the Council. And I'll start
' with Michael.
Councilman Mason: Well thank you Mr. Mayor.
' Councilman Workman: Would you like a second for discussion?
Mayor Chmiel: Well we're still in discussion. I had the table on the floor.
' We don't have to have a motion. Mike.
Councilman Mason: First of all, I live in Carver Beach which has had it's own
problems and I know Minnewashta has problems. I was standing up there
' expressing displeasure 2 years ago when some lots were opened up that when
I bought where I bought was told that oh, they could never be built on. That it
would never happen. Well, lo and behold they were built on. So please I've
' been on both sides here. I want to comment, I've heard integrity a couple of
times and I'm really disturbed by that. Only that I hope people don't think
I lack integrity if I happen to disagree with you. I couldn't help but get the
' feeling by some of the comments that if I chose to disagree with the members of
that particular community of Chanhassen, I therefore no longer had integrity.
If there are some people that feel that way, I guess I feel kind of sorry for -
them. I don't think integrity is an issue of agreeing or disagreeing. I guess
' I see integrity as an honest opinion based on all the information that we have
' 30
City Council Meeting - July 8, 1991
received. Now I understand that there are 500 some units, 370 people involved.
I received about a dozen letters on this. Not all in disagreement but certainly
the vast majority. There have not been 372 people here tonight . Certainly the
people that are here, the majority of them are in disagreement with the project
but it 's by no means unanimous. I've heard speed mentioned, I've heard safety
mentioned. I have driven on Minnewashta Parkway prior to all this bruhaha.
I've driven on it even more since. I have gone 30 mph on it and I have had
people giving me the one finger salute behind me because of it. I've had people
blinking lights at me. I've had people 5 feet off the tail of my car so I'm not
convinced that fixing up the road will increase the speed. I think the increase
is already there and I think if anything else we need to work more on
enforcement of that issue. In terms of safety, putting a white line on the side
of the road and telling the kids you stay on that side and the cars will stay on
the other side is at best specious. I do a lot of bike riding and it's been too .
close too many times and I think I'm fairly responsible. A 9 year old walking
along the side of a road is potentially a very dangerous thing. I heard
mentioned earlier we need to address the needs of the community. I agree with
that . I agree with that 100%. We certainly need to look at the needs of the
residents of the Minnewashta area. We're also, all of us are in charge here of
running the city in the best way we think we can and unfortunately sometimes
there are major disagreements and we have public hearings to hopefully work
those things out. I guess I'd like, well that's pretty much all I had to say on
that . In terms of tabling Mr. Mayor, I guess I'd like to, before we reach a
decision on that I hope we have some more discussion on that.
Mayor Chmiel: Sure. Tom? • '
Councilman Workman: I guess to piggyback a little bit what Mike was saying. A
couple of things that struck me very early, the idea of some sort of hidden
agenda by the Council. And then the gentleman who spoke very early pleaded, why
are we doing this to you. I don't quite understand that statement . This is a
difficult decision for everybody. These issues are about as difficult for this • II
Council as a now built church in this town and when the cards are stacked
against you and you've got a tough decision to make, it's not pleasant and a lot
of the comments that were made are kind of tough to swallow when I could be home
watching the Simpsons or something. I don't understand how we associate country
living with a cruddy road. It's a cruddy road and it was eloquently summed up
by the gentleman over here who said you're getting 70% off. I could not and
will not support an overlay and a trail. It's a waste of money. I've been on
this Council long enough to see enough highway construction and highway
coalitions and transit boards and everything else to know that that is a waste
of money and it 's a band-aid and it won't work. Mr. Hasek explained that we
have neglected that side of the lake. I think Richard Wing's election is
testimonial that they want some representation out there. Since I've been on
the Council people have been asking me those same questions. When are you going
to get a park? When are you going to get a trail out here? When are you going
to spend some money out here? This roadway has been on the top of the State Aid
" list . Because of State Aid and because of those monies, ever since, since
before I've been on the Council, it couldn't come quick enough for the 6 dozen
people that I've talked to that have wanted this. And now here it is and I
really think that a lot of the people who really want it probably stayed home.
But if we say, and living in the middle of town, and I don't use the road
regularly. I do get out there. If we say to this roadway okay, let's take the
31 '
1
City Council Meeting - July 8, 1991
State Aid and move it somewhere else. What kind of a precedence do we set?
What 's the next , Dave Hempel, maybe you know. What 's the second road on the
list?
Gary Warren: Lyman Blvd.
Bill Engelhardt: Lyman Blvd.
' Councilman Workman' Lyman Blvd. If that 's the second worst road.
Resident : What road is that? We couldn't hear the number.
' Councilman Workman: 18. Lyman Blvd. .
' Gary Warren: Lyman Blvd. and Lake Riley Blvd. to the east city limits.
Councilman Workman: If that's second worst road, we will not need State Aid
funding for 5 years because that road is in good shape. But I go back to the
I question, what does it matter to this Council whether get that road fixed or
not? I don't prefer to assess people. It's the worse decision you can make or
ever have to make as a city councilmember so I guess I don't appreciate being
' accused of some sort of act of vengence against a large group of people because
it 's fun or it's something I prefer to do because I don't. We do have to look
at the entire city and if decide to do this or we don't decide to do this, what
' are the repercussions and for that reason I think it's a good idea that we table
it some more and talk about it some more until we all feel comfortable.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay thank you. Richard.
Councilman Wing: Well I of course live out in the area and I came on this
Council with good faith and I think open and honest and sincere in my intent to
' serve and to listen to the public. I respect the locals right to determine what
direction it's going to go and what we're going to do in their neighborhood and
not to have something rammed down their throat but as I've sat here tonight I've
felt like I'm suddenly not one of you. I felt like I'm suddenly not a neighbor
and a resident of the community. I've felt like I've been lectured and one
comment that particularly offended me was somebody to tell me that Pleasant
Acres doesn't use Minnewashta Parkway. I just so wholeheartedly disagree with
' that because I live in Minnewashta Heights and we use it a lot and if our
neighborhood's coming over there to use it, I just don't agree with you. Issues
of speed are opinion and not fact. Issue of traffic increase. They're opinions
' and not fact and I'm not denying that it may happen but I think we deal with
those at the time. I think it's a good proposal. On the other hand, I wouldn't
sit here and push this on you if a majority clearly doesn't want it . What does
' concern me tonight, the reason this hearing was originated. Council didn't
originate the hearing. It was originated from neighbors who got together and
said we're concerned about our children. Mr. Headla expressed his concern and
Greg Datillo and certainly myself. And others. And this was 2 and 4 years ago.
' Safety was the issue. Safety was the reason that the Council asked for the
feasibility study in the first place. I'm concerned that this evening the issue
of safety has not been discussed in depth. The co-use of the road by
recreational and traffic use hasn't been discussed and I guess I support the
Mayor's proposal and his request that we table this. I'd further like to
' 32
City Council Meeting - July 8, 1991
request that we continue the public hearing to specifically discuss safety
related issues and options to resolve those same issues. I'd also like to
address the question that's been brought up by several to discuss the trail
specific request . I think it deserves to be addressed. I think if the area is
supportive of a trail or feels there's a need for a trail and specifically a
trail only, I'm not opposed to that. I think it's unfair that we don't address
that one specifically so I support your request to table this but I also request
that you discuss as part of the tabling process specifically the safety related
issues on this road. ,
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, thank you. Ursula.
Councilwoman Dimler: I wasn't in favor of closing the public hearing but I I
didn't have any say so we have to call another public hearing obviously. Isn't
that the correct procedure?
Mayor Chmiel: We can still have people supply input if we so choose.
Councilwoman Dimler: Okay. I guess I'd like to ask Dave Hempel here on the
second page of the report . One of my concerns is safety and I agree with all
the comments that have been made about the walkways and the children but I also
have a concern on that intersection as it goes onto TH 5. If you're turning
towards the east , it 's a low intersection. It 's a very, very difficult turn to
make, especially in times of heavy traffic to get in between the cars. And I
see on that page 2 of the report , in the third paragraph, the very last
statement refers to MnOot 's roadway schedule for November of 1994 and February
of 1995. It talks about reconstruction. Now does that mean that they're going
to reconstruct those intersections on TH 7 and TH 5 regardless of what we do
with this project? '
Bill Engelhardt : Maybe I should. On the TH 5 intersection we will be doing
most of the work to bring that intersection up to grade under this project to
correct a lot of the sight distance problems. To correct the grade. To correct
alignment . When MnDot comes in and puts in their signals, they'll finish it
off. On the TH 7 side, there the original proposal was to construct the roadway
in such a manner to build it to MnOot's future proposal with a cooperative
agreement and cost sharing between the State and the City of Chanhassen.
Because it's a State Aid road, they will not do a cooperative cost sharing
agreement and the funds for, State Aid could only be used to start the
realignment process and again get it to a point where MnDot could then take it
over and expend their own money. Not City money to fully improve the
intersection.
Councilwoman Dimler: Okay, so TH 5, that intersection will not be done unless
we implement the project. Is that what you're saying?
Bill Engelhardt: No. They're going to do their project no matter what.
Councilwoman Dimler: They will elevate that?
Bill Engelhardt: Yeah.
33
City Council Meeting - July 8, 1991
Councilwoman Dimler: Okay. That's what I wanted to know. Thank you.Y Okay,
I guess I have a lot of thoughts on this project and I think a lot of the points
that have been raised both by the neighbors and by the engineers are valid and I
think some of them are invalid. I think the neighborhood has done it's homework
and I really compliment the engineer for having taken into consideration all of
the neighborhood's concern. I think they did an excellent job. I think the
point that many of you have received a huge increase in property valuations
which will translate into higher taxes, property taxes unless we cut our budget
' and services which we are not likely to do. So I think at that point a special
assessment may impose some unfair financial burdens at this time for some
families. I also have to say that I was a little bit offended by some of the
statements or the assumptions that I've already made up my mind because I
' haven't . I do listen to the neighborhood's concerns. I always have and have
taken that heavily into consideration. I received a letter from the Bower
family and I think in their letter they eloquently expressed a statement that
' I believe to be true and I quote. It says I feel it would be a grave and
certainly inaccurate assumption on anyone's part that silence means agreement
and I think that is true. He of course was against the upgrade and he wants to
' keep the peaceful serene pulse of the area and he indicates that there are many
others who believe as he does and I believe that's true seeing all of you here
tonight . Also I've heard from many who are walkers and joggers and they do not
favor the trail. I guess I was a little surprised about that. They feel that
everything is okay the way it is and also against the bituminous overlay because
of the fact , as Councilman Workman said, that it's a waste of money. I believe
that 's true. Given those facts, and I have to say I appreciate Mr. Headla's and
' Greg and Laurie's courage to get up here and speak in favor of the project when
there was obviously so many against it , but I still do feel that there is
probably a majority. Not a majority but there's a silent sector out there that
has not yet been heard and for that reason going along with the tabling, but I
would propose that we would continue the public hearing or open another one,
whichever is the proper procedure at this time and that inbetween this hearing
and that particular one in the future, that we as a staff and Council would
' survey the silent sector that has not been heard and we can do this through a
written survey and maybe even some door to door canvasing because I understand
some people will not answer a survey. I for one would like to get an accurate
' assessment of where this neighborhood stands.
Mayor Chmiel: Amen. The only thing that I would like to just quickly address
is, I think everyone has said pretty much what I would have said. The City
Council takes particular jobs as we do. We have to really determine what the
needs of the people are and we're not going to say this road is needed but I'm
saying in other types of services that we have to provide for you within the
' city. Whether it be shopping or whatever. But I look at the aspect of safety
and safety is the number one project with me. I've driven that road dozens upon
dozens upon dozens of times. At different times of the day. Different times of
' the evening. On weekends. I've looked at that road and I think I can tell you
every crack and cranny that's on that particular road. I've watched people walk
with mothers, fathers, children, grandparents. All in bunches of 6 or 7 people.
Taking up parts of that road. To me I have a concern with that. There is a
' safety problem there. For those people because it is a more traveled road. It
isn't going through some of the other residential, areas where you don't get the
quite amout of traffic. You may get it going info it but when you spur off on
the other roads you're not using it. Out here it is used constantly. You get
34
City Council Meeting - July 8, 1991
up in the morning and it's probably very true. You start jogging. It probably,
or there are not as many cars as there normally would be. Try it at maybe 4:00
in the afternoon when the kids are still out . Up from their naps playing. Or
early morning when they're out, probably about 9:00-10:00. There's still a lot
of traffic coming in and out just because of the people working there. Going to
and from work. Going to and from •the stores. Or wherever they're going. So
safety really is a given problem. To save one life is worth something in
itself. Hopefully that's never going to happen within the area but there's
always that potential. Potentials are things that always make me sit back and
really think about it. I would like to table this for 2 weeks and also for us
to review the Minutes of this meeting. Digest what everyone has said and pull
together as I said before. The total dollars. What we're talking about and the
different concerns that have been brought up this evening. And each of those
items addressed. And then I would like to see.this back on the 22nd of this
month and we will have it bright and early on the agenda so we can at least
address those specifics. And if at that time there are some questions that some
people have, I will open the floor for that at that particular time.
Don Ashworth: Mr. Mayor? 1
Mayor Chmiel: Yes.
Don Ashworth: We could have it back on the 22nd. We would be in a position to
respond to some of the questions'. We would also have the Minutes available for
distribution to the Council on the July 19th which is our normal packet day but
between now and the 19th, to be able to do a survey and get it back, we would
not be able to do it . So if you wanted to follow through with the survey
aspect, the first time we could consider this would be August 13th.
Councilman Wing: Mr. Mayor?
Mayor Chmiel: Yes.
Councilman Wing: As a resident of that community I use that road a lot and Rome
wasn't built in a day. The present Minnewashta Parkway is not impassable. I
don't believe there's an emergency existing. The concern that the locals have a
right to control their destiny and their decision for that roadway and I would
have moved that we reject this proposal if it hadn't been for the safety issues
which I don't feel have been addressed. For that reason I would like to support
Ursula's request that we formally do this survey. If there is a silent
majority, perhaps there isn't, and I think that that would be worthwhile
postponing the meeting until the end of August accordingly. I don't think this
is a criticP1 issue but I think those are questions that need answering so I
would move that we table. Also instruct staff to survey the community. The 300
when we were just looking at the 300 units or 300 residents?
Mayor Chmiel: 307.
Councilman Wing: And delay the public hearing until such date as that's
completed.
Mayor Chmiel: Until August the 12th, rather than the 13th.
35
City Council Meeting - July 8, 1991
Councilman Mason: I'm going to be out of town.
Mayor Chmiel: You're going to be lucky.
Councilman Mason: Well no. No.
Councilwoman Dimler: Could we have some input as to the questions that'would be
on the survey?
Mayor Chmiel: Well I think that would be something that we would have to
develop and make sure that it 's not one sided as to the survey because you can
always develop a survey to make it do what you want it to do but we'll make sure
that doesn't happen.
Councilman Mason: I have some concerns about this survey thing and getting it
done in a month. Who's going to put the questions up? How's the survey, I mean
if this survey is going to have any validity at all, it 's not just somebody
sitting down and writing 5 or 6 questions. Do you want the parkway or not. Why
' or why not . And I think are we opening up a can of worms here? I mean if we
clearly have I think certainly a representation of the community here tonight
and I'm not sure that going door to door is going to give us any different
' indication of what's been represented here tonight. And I just wonder if we're
not doing the old waving swords at windmills here by doing a survey.
' Mayor Chmiel: I'll bring it back up for discussion.
Councilman Mason: I guess I'd just like to reiterate. We had a number of
people here expressing some very legitimate concerns and to drag this out
' another 5 weeks, another month, another 6 weeks, I'm not sure what purpose it
would serve. I'll say more later I'm sure.
' Councilman Wing: Mr. Mayor, do we have a safety issue, a matter of life and
death on this roadway? And as such I would like to somehow be able to identify
them and if that exists, how do we resolve that safety issue?
' Councilman Mason: I'd like to, if there are people walking on a 25 foot road in
groups of 6 or 7, we have a safety issue. There is no question in my mind that
there's a safety issue there.
' Councilman Wing: But how do you resolve the safety issue? You may not
necessitate a 32 foot State MnDot mandated roadway.
' Councilman Mason: It may not. You know I think we're coming, this is surely
but slowly sifting down to two or three different issues here. There's the
trail. We can do that separately. If we want the State Aid money, we can't do
' it separately. Am I correct in assuming that?
Bill Engelhardt: That's correct.
' Councilman Mason: So if we just put the trail in now, 5 years from now as some
gentleman said previously, MnDot comes in and says, 32 foot? Baloney. We're .
putting in a 36 foot roadway and you can't do a doggone thing about it. Now I
36
City Council M- -ting - July 8, 1991 1
think there's something to be said for that . If we do wait 5 more years, it
will be more expensive and perhaps we won't have the say that we have now.
Mayor Chmiel: Well on an average you're looking at a .5 year period at 10%c per
year. So it would raise that project 50% more than what it exists now.
Councilman Mason: And with the possibility of not having any State Aid money at -
that point . Is that an assumption that could be made or not? ,
Bill Engelhardt : You would have some I'm sure. What the amount would be is
difficult to say. 1
Councilman Workman: Mr. Mayor, I guess I'm not, I think I know what the result
of a survey is. I don't think we need to spend good money after bad.
Councilman Mason: Yeah, I agree with that.
Councilwoman Dimler: . . .go door to door. I guess you know, in comment if we're
not going to go ahead with the survey, my bottom line here today is that I say
those that pay have the say and these people have spoken so I would have to vote
against it . So if that 's the feeling.
Councilman Mason: So the safety issue is a moot point then?
Mayor Chmiel: Safety is an issue, there's no question. . . '
Councilwoman Dimler: Yes, I've expressed my concerns over that but they're the
people that are going to pay. '
Mayor Chmiel: I agree.
Councilman Mason: They're the people, who's going to pay when a kid gets '
killed? I'm sorry.
Councilwoman Dimler: That 's sensationalizing. We had the same thing with
Frontier Trail.
Councilman Mason: You're right. I apologize.
Mayor Chmiel: Everybody goes through an assessment. When I moved into my home
they put in curb, gutter, sewer, water. My assessment I wish was $1,250.00. My
assessment at that time was $10,000.00 and thank God this is the last year I'm
paying for it but , those are some of the things that we have to look at
unfortunately. And assessments are assessments are assessments. No one likes
them. No one wants it. I don't want it. I don't even want to impose it on you
nor does the rest of the Council but we have to look at some of these issues. I
still suggest that we proceed with the July 22nd meeting as I said to review
what's here and address the issues that have been discussed this evening and
come up with a conclusion. Either yes or no.
Councilwoman Dimler: Mr. Mayor, I think that t 've done an adequate job in
answering each of their questions here today.
37 ,
City Council Meeting - July 8, 1991
Mayor Chmiel: I don't think so.
Councilwoman Dimler: Is there anyone here that feels there's still something,
besides the safety issue, that 's still.
Mayor Chmiel: There's still some issues that_ were brought up in regard to some
of the.
' Councilman Mason: ":le assessment issue. And you're right , I sensationalized.
Sorry.
' Councilman Wing: There hasn't been an accident on the parkway for the 25 years
that I've lived there. Personal injury accident .
'' Mayor Chmiel : But there was mention one was. Yes sir.
Resident : When you mentioned July 22nd, are you speaking a hearing type again
' or just the Council?
Mayor Chmiel: We'll have discussion back at Council. Answer any questions and
after that if we so choose, and I will choose, to open the floor to get
' additional comments. Not tie same comments we discussed this evening but any
additional comments that could be added to it.
' Resident : Speaking of safety, I'd just like to offer accommodation and I don't
know if. . .but I think within the past year or so as a result of some discussion,
there was a street light put out at the intersection of Lone Cedar Circle and
' TH 5 and that was the greatest improvement towards safety that I could imagine
because that was really a dangerous corner. That street light has really been
great.
I Mayor Chmiel: Thank you. I guess being that there's a little bit of thought
here, I would like to table this and I would like to get a motion on that.
' Councilman Workman: I'd move if it hasn't presently been moved.
Mayor Chmiel: For the 22nd?
' Councilman Workman: Yeah unless the neighborhood feels a survey of some sort.
They're very difficult to scientifically put together and unless we hire a
professional to do so, I don't think it would be very fair.
' Mayor Chmiel: I agree.
' Councilwoman Dimler: I think going door to door, talking to people. They're
honest with you.
Councilman Workman: I do not have the time to go to 300 doors. Not this week.
' Sunday I'm free. But no, don't get that idea. .
Mayor Chmiel: Everyone knows that our phone numbers are in the phone book and
I might suggest that if you so choose, you want to talk to your neighbors. Tell
them to give us a call.
' 38
I
City Council Meeting - July 8, 1991
Councilman Workman: Mr. Mayor, one morning on Cheyenne me and Dave Hempel and
some of the city crew went out and met about 7:00 a.m. . Dave came early and
there's a drainage problem there so we kind of all went out there and slapped
the bugs and we looked at it . It was kind of nice and we talked to the
neighbors and looked at the problem. The problem got taken care of. Maybe we
should all go out 'and have donuts out thereat about 8:00 or something.
Mayor Chmiel: I'd be willing to do it .
Councilwoman Dimler: That's what I'm talking about. Just get out there and
talk to them.
Councilman Workman: I don't want to knock on people's doors and get bit my
dogs.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, we have a motion on the floor. Is there a second?
Councilman Mason: Second.
Councilman Workman moved, Councilman Mason seconded to table action on the
Minnewashta Parkway Project 90-15 until July 22, 1991. All voted in favor and
the motion carried unanimously.
Mayor Chmiel: We'll see you on the 22nd. Thank you for coming.
AWARD OF BIDS: CITY CENTER PARK IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. RA-131.
Todd Hoffman: As noted, on June 24, 1991 the City Council approved the plans
and specifications and authorized advertising for bids on the City Center Park
Improvement Project . As the Council's aware, this project entails the
improvement and revitalization of the two existing play areas at the school and
City Center Park and the four existing tennis courts. As authorized,
advertisments for bids were placed and the resulting three bids were opened last
Tuesday morning. As shown, in the bid tabulation the bids ranged from a high of
$86,167.00 to a low of $62,465.00. The estimate for the completion of the work
was $54,467.00. This difference of $7,997.00 can be accommodated in the
project 's budget and it is felt that the low bid is acceptable. Alternate #3 is
also desireable to facilitate replacement of the bent tennis poles on two of the
courts. The contractor is available to begin work early next week if the go
ahead is given. The cumulation of much effort has brought the City to this
position of being able to move forward with construction on this project.
Representing the work groups which contributed towards this project, I'm pleased
to recommend the City Council award the City Center Park Improvement Project No.
RA-131 base bid and alternate bid number 3 to Finley Brothers Enterprises in the
amount of $62,465.00 and $1,000.00 respectively. If there are any questions,
either myself or Scott Hari from Van Doren-Hazard-Stallings will be available to
answer those.
Mayor Chmiel: Thank you. I've got a lot of questions. First question I have,
should we reject the bids and send out again for a better dollar figure?
i
39
11 City Council Meeting - July 8, 1991
Scott Hari: Right now the low bidder is probably one of the most responsible
contractors working in the area and has demonstrated that the completion on a
portion of the Lake Susan facilities over here and other projects that this
contractor has done for the City. The work is so mixed up as far as being
abnormal in the type of work and the completion schedule and combining this with
volunteer labor. The City doing some work and the City furnishing some
materials and the contractor installing it. I guess in accepting responsibility
to the $8,000.00 difference between the low bid and the engineer's estimate.
It 's very difficult to estimate well how a contractor would see this project
coming forth and also with the amount of work that has been backlogged by a
' number of contractors due to the wet weather, how they would view a very
stringent completion date because we need to get the whole thing completed by
the time school opens. And be substantially complete with most of the heavy
• •equipment running around on the site so there were a number of factors that were
hard to peg on this thing. But I would truly advise awarding this to this
contractor at this time.
' Mayor Chmiel: Is there any way we can shave that $8,000.00? Well it's rounded.
The other thing I had in question, can we utilize our public works people to
offset some of the $8,000.00?
Todd Hoffman: We currently have done that in taking a look at the original
estimates. Shaving those back. Pulling out some of the painting of the lines.
A number of items. Installing the north playground. The handicapped accessible
' play structure will not be installed by a contractor. That will be insta.11ed by
the City. The border wood on the north playground is being purchased with the
CBDG money as is currently in the process of being installed by the Eagle Scout.
' There have been a number of items that have been reduced, cut back. The
original intent on the west or south side was to purchase a substantial piece of
play equipment . That has been reduced back to $10,000.00 on_ the west side.
That could be cut out of the project but then again it was the original intent
' of the original project was to buy that equipment. Unfortunately some of the
site preparation and improvements necessary at the 3 separate locations have
chewed up the bulk of the money available. So we've taken a look at it. We've
' reduced it down and I'm bringing to you tonight a very restricted and
responsible project.
' Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Any other questions?
Councilman Mason: Why is it when these things happen, and I'm not questioning
the bid or what Finley Brothers came up with or whatever but it always seems the
bids come in high.
Councilwoman Dimler: Yes they do.
Councilman Mason: And that's really frustrating. I'm hearing what you're
saying Scott and I basically agree with you but God that's frustrating. Here we
' are supposed to be watching all the money and these things keep happening. I
wish there was, I just want to wave the magic wand over all of this and all of
these problems wouldn't come up.
Mayor Chmiel: Or bring $10,000.00.
11 40
I
City Council Meeting - July 8, 1991
Councilman Mason: Yeah.
Todd Hoffman: Again, the $8,000.00 can be accommodated within the budgeted
amounts from all the line items for this project . Instead of having $18,000.00
or $19,000.00 worth of play equipment on the west side, we now have $10,000.00
because of that bid difference.
Mayor Chmiel: Oh okay. We have cut back the $8,000.00.
Todd Hoffman: But it still is a very competitive bid. We're very happy with
the work that Finley has done down at Lake Susan and would enjoy having them
back doing work for the City. '
Councilwoman Dimler: What was the time line for this project?
Todd Hoffman: Substantial completion of the project by August 30th with the '
handicapped accessible playground on the north lagging behind a couple of weeks
because of the complications which were pointed out in the report.
Councilwoman Dimler: Okay, so you want this done before school?
Mayor Chmiel: Before school starts. I
Councilwoman Dimler: There's no sense in delaying it.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, any other discussion? If hearing none, can I have a
motion?
Councilman Mason: I'll make the motion to award the bid to Finley Brothers for
City Center Park Improvement Project No. RA-131.
Mayor Chmiel: In the amount of.
Councilman Mason: $62,465.00 and $1,000.00.
Councilman Workman: Second.
Resolution #91-64: Councilman Mason moved, Councilman Workman seconded to award
the bid and Alternate No. 3 to Finley Brothers Enterprises in the amount of
$62,645.00 and $1,000.00 respectively for the City Center Park Improvement
Project No. RA-131. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously.
ACCEPT UTILITIES IN LAKE SUSAN HILLS WEST FIFTH ADDITION, PROJECT 90-16. '
Councilwoman Dimler: I so move.
Councilman Mason: Second.
Mayor Chmiel: Thank you Dave. '
Councilman Mason: You moment of glory and its gone.
Councilman Workman: It's a rather mundane item. I
41 1
1
City Council Meet;' i - July 8, 1991
Mayor Chmiel: I guess I want to just throw something in. I don't have any
problems with Joe Miller but I do with some of his contractors. I don't want
the City to be liable for anything if they're not done properly within that
particular area. We've had some problems with some homes because I've received
' calls and I've gone out and I've looked. Some of those still have not been
corrected.
Dave Hempel: That 's the whole purpose of taking this before the City Council is
we've recently experienced some requests from developers. The minute they get
their plat filed to pull building permits and they won't even have cleared any
' trees yet . We'd like to put a policy in effect in our development contract
which clearly states the time for issuance of building permits. Lately we've
just had kind of a policy in-house here which has worked very well and
efficiently for us in the past. For keeping track of these projects where they
' are at . This typically would have been under a consent item. However, they
were lagging behind and in an effort to expedite the issuance of building
permits out , they requested we put it on the City Council at this time. I
personally did do inspection out there this afternoon of the utility lines and
the sanitary sewer and watermain lines were acceptable. All the tests had been
performed and passed. However, some of the storm sewer improvements do require
some touch up and will be addressed in a letter to the contract to be addressed
within the next 30 days.
Mayor Chmiel: On those mylars and blue line copies, are those signed by a PE?
IDave Hempel: Professional engineer? Yes they are.
' Councilwoman Dimler: Did you want to add another condition of approval then?
Dave Hempel: I think the conditions stated in here, that we add a condition
that the developer correct any punch list items is what they're generally called
within the next 30 days would be appropriate.
Mayor Chmiel: That would be item number 4. Okay, any other discussion? If
' hearing none, we have a motion on the floor with a second.
Councilwoman Dimler: With incorporating the fourth condition then?
' Mayor Chmiel: Yes. To include.
Dave Hempel: Any outstanding punch list items.
Mayor Chmiel: Item number 4, someone will clarify that it is for Lake Susan
Hills West Fifth Addition Project 90-16 be approved contingent upon the
following 4 conditions. I won't read those but the additional condition added.
Resolution #91-65: Councilwoman Dimler moved, Councilman Mason seconded that
the final acceptance of utilities in the Lake Susan Hills West 5th Addition,
' Project No. 90-16 be approved contingent upon the following:
1. Completion of all outstanding items resulting from staff's inspection during
the week of July 1, 1991.
' 42
City Council Meeting - July 8, 1991
2. The developer and/or contractor shall supply the City with a two-year
maintenance bond guaranteeing the workmanship and materials for two years
beyond the date of acceptance.
3. The developer shall supply the City with one set of mylar as-built plans
along with two sets of blueline copies.
4. The developer correct any punch list items within the next 30 days. I
All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously.
AMENDMENT TO CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO INSTALL A PORTABLE CHEMICAL TOILET DURING
THE SUMMER SEASON ON A RECREATIONAL BEACHLOT, OUTLOT B, MINNEWASHTA CREEK 2ND
ADDITION, MINNEWASHTA CREEK HOMEOWNERS.ASSOCIATION.
Paul Krauss: I'll try to be brief on this one. There's a lot of history on 1
this one. We've been looking at this request for almost exactly a year now. It
originally came in as a variance because the ordinance prohibited the
installation of chemical toilets. After a lot of consideration, the ordinance
was amended to allow them given some certain standards that had to be met . An
application was made and pursued. The Planning Commission reviewed this and
believed that in conjuncyion with the staff recommendation that this request is
consistent with the new ordinance. The request basically conforms to the use
requirements established by the ordinance. It will be screened. It's behind a
large tree. There will be screening attached to it. The setback standard from
the lake is met and other standards are complied with as well. The Planning
Commission did recommend approval of this request. They did however add a
condition concerning a pontoon boat at a dock that apparently is there not in
keeping with the CUP approval. They added a condition that approval of the
toilet be conditioned upon the removal of the boat. We heard this evening that
that has not yet been done. The boat's still there but that is the Planning
Commission recommendation and we're carrying that forward. So again the
proposal is for approval with the conditions.
Mayor Chmiel: Are these two separate issues though Paul? ,
Paul Krauss: Mr. Mayor, they're tied to a single CUP. You can legitimately ask
that they bring the rest of the CUP up to standards. They're intenstifying the
use so you're on very good grounds to address that issue. These issues are
typically hard for us to document. We're not out there every day. We don't
know when a boat shows up or doesn't show up unless, you know we're going to be
doing these on an annual basis but it's tough for us to track down. When
somebody makes a request for you to do something, you have a very good
opportunity to bring it up to standards. So in my view it's not appropriate.
Mayor Chmiel: Is that legal counsel? '
Roger Knutson: Yes.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, thank you. Any discussion? Anyone wanting to address the
issue first? Is there anyone who wishes to address that issue?
Joan Skallman: I'd like to. ,
43
I
City Council Meeting - July 8, 1991
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, would you like to come up to the microphone please and
' state your name and your address please.
Joan Skallman: My name is Joan Skallman, 6590 Joshua Circle. I am currently
' serving as co-chair for the Presidency of Minnewashta Creek Homeowners
Association. We have a conflict with the owner of the boat mainly because they
sold their property in 1978. Their lakeshore property to purchase this one and
had an agreement with the developer, at that time Remarco along with Bob Ritter
t to buoy their boat i - the water. They said they went to City Council in 1978
and City Council told them that no one owns the lake. They can buoy their boat
wherever they want to in the lake as long as they have access to it. They sold
' their property, their lakeshore property as well as their other property to
purchase this one specifically because of that. They feel that they are
grandfathered in because of the City ordinance that went into effect after they
' were there. Even though it doesn't document that they have rights, they feel
that they are grandfathered in. The Association has tried to basically just
present what the problem is to the owners. However, they do feel that they have
rights and they don't feel that they should be imposed upon to remove their boat
' from the water. It is a large pontoon so basically it would be very difficult
for them to put it in and out of the water whenever they desired to use it. The
Association's kind of at a standstill. We would really appreciate it if you
' keep it as a separate issue and have the City deal with the owners of the boat
separately from the association. There's not really much that we can do for the
association but to deny us the permit to have the portable chemical toilet would
' be hurting all of the other 39 families. Actually 37 families that voted for
it.
Mayor Chmiel: Do you know who's boats those are?
' Joan Skallman: Yes.
' Councilman Wing: Mr. Mayor? Just a comment on it. There's an existing pontoon
boat with a lift and existing boat that's just moored. Mr. Kenny Lund is
intending to buy that lot next door and both of those boats are clearly on his
' property. If you look out from his front, both boats are sitting out in front
of his house and he's asked that they be removed from in front of his house. He
just wanted me to pass that onto the Council. He has concern that those boats
are sitting on what you would call his lakefront property at this time. And if
' we were to enforce our dock setback ordinance or perhaps we will have to reword
it to say that any dock, portion of dock or attachment therein can't be within
10 feet of the extended center line, it's going to solve a lot of these problems
' I think but right now there are two boats, and I apologized to Mrs. Skallman at
the Planning Commission for kind of putting her on the spot with this issue. I
kind of spoke impulsively that evening on this issue without her really knowing
what was occuring but there are presently two boats moored that do not, that
are.
Mayor Chmiel: Moored on someone else's property.
IICouncilman Wing: Well, they're moored on someone else's property but more
important they're not allowed by the conditional use permit and I just felt one
way to get some attention to this issue was to hold up action on this request
that they have for the chemical toilet but I believe, as you suggested, they
1 44
1
City Council Meeting - July 8, 1991 1
really are two separate issues and I don't want to see Mrs. Skallman penalized
for this other problem. I think they've done a good job on this ordinance and
request on their beachlot .
Councilman Mason: . . .commission's trying to do with that and I think that that
pontoon boat should be removed but I don't-.think it needs to be removed on the
back of this issue. I agree with Dick.
Mayor Chmiel: Paul, do we have another way to address this with those two
owners?
Paul Krauss: Yes Mr. Mayor we do. If it's in violation of the original CUP,
that's an enforceable agreement and we can approach that completely separate
from this. We'd be happy to do it either way.
Mayor Chmiel: Let me
get some free counseling.
Councilman Mason: Free?
Mayor Chmiel: I mean he's here. It's costing us.
Roger Knutson: Yes. You can go after them for an ordinance violation. . . '
Apparently they make a claim that they're not in violation. That 'd have to be
ironed out .
Mayor Chmiel: Yes sir. Would you like to come up. Please state your name and
your address please.
Brian Windschitl: My name is Brian Windschitl. I happen to be one of those 1
boat owners. I've lived out there for 11 years and we've approached the Council
many times for rules for beachlots. Back in 1978 when I moved in there, 1979,
they had nothing. They were trying to make up rules for it. They wouldn't let
us do anything for 2 to 3 years while they were making these rules and they came
up and they had no docking of boats and stuff like that and mooring was not in
there and there's 2 out of 40 people that have had our boats out there. We
happened to be the first two people that moved in there and there hasn't been a
problem. The lady next door who just lately passed away hasn't had a problem
with it . Mr. Lund is trying to buy the property right now and the way I look at
it, there isn't a problem right now. I don't think it should be holding up the
portable toilet by any means and I think we need to, I don't think we need to be
tagged or anything like that. I think it could be talked about and as far as
mooring, I know that it came up with the ordinance like in 1983 or 1984. Both
of the other guy in question, we've been out there since 1979 so I don't know
how that works. I mean there's lot of boats and lots of associations out there
that have been grandfathered so kind of that's the way everybody feels right now
that we've been there for 11 years and right now they come up with another rule
and that changes it so we're going to get tagged for it . I mean we can
accommodate fir. Lund. I mean right now we have been, the lady that has been
living there was quite elderly and didn't use the lake at all and there hasn't
been a problem and no one's living there right now so I still don't see a
problem until Mr. Lund builds or whatever. Then that issue could be worked with
real easily. '
45 1
1
City Council Meeting - July 8, 1991
' Mayor Chmiel: Mr. Lund is a riparian owner of that property presently. And if
those boats are on his area, then he has the right to ask that those be removed.
My suggestion would be to have discussions with staff to determine what you
' might have to do. And I agree. I don't think we should hold this up because of
the need of the portable toilet facility on this site. I think we'll address
that as a separate issue and I would like to have a motion to that . •
' Councilman Wing: I will move approval of Conditional Use Permit #91-5, allow
portable chemical toilet on Minnewashta Creek Homeowners Association, items 1
thru 4 exluding number 5.
Councilwoman Dimler: Second.
Mayor Chmiel: It's been moved and seconded. Any further discussion?
' Councilman Wing: Mr. Mayor, I'd like to move that staff be instructed to follow
up on the conditional use permit violation by the next meeting and report to the
' Council with a decision.
Brian Windschitl: I have just one question on the setbacks. The 10 foot
' setbacks. I know they did set rules after I was out there that you have to have
a 10 foot setback on the your dock line. The way your property goes. How does
it go with mooring boats? I mean they didn't have the rules when we were there.
Who does own the lake I guess is my question?
IIMayor Chmiel: Roger, can you address that?
11 Roger Knutson: It 's public waters but we regulate that . We have regulations on
mooring. I believe we do. We discussed it in length with some other property
and some new regulations were passed but . . .
' Brian Windschitl: The reason that it's in my mind is because that was our, see
we were all, when that development started we were all kind of deceived. Like
by the developer told us yeah, you go and I just ran this through here. You go
' to the City and get a dock down there. You can do all these things. Well, you
know that wasn't true so we kind of, as a matter of fact the other person and I
were both in the same shape. We wanted to have a boat on the lake and stuff
' like that and so when they made all the rules, mooring was the way they didn't
cover it and we've been there like I say 11 years. I don't know where the
grandfather clause comes in on when your boat's just floating in the water and
where it might be floating. Yeah, sometimes when the wind's out of the south it
might go on Mr. Lund's property but when it's out of the east it's on our
property. You know I mean it 's just got a little line that it can move around.
So I say it's an issue I need to, I'd like to get clarified on that.
' Mayor Chmiel: i think Paul will come up with that for you and provide you with
that information.
' Brian Windschitl: Okay, I mean just the rumors were that Terry, he has his on- a
lift out there and like they're in violation and.they're going to get tagged and-
all this and I don't think we need to take it to that point. I think it can be
' talked about . It's something we've been doing for 11 years. It hasn't bothered
' 46
City Council Meeting - July 8, 1991
anybody and now evidentally it 's a problem and I think it can be worked out .
Real easily. ,
Mayor Chmiel: You can line up that discussion with staff.
Brian Windschitl: Okay.
Councilman Wing moved, Councilwoman Dimler seconded to approve Conditional Use
Permit #91-5 to allow a portable chemical toilet on Minnewashta Creek Homeowners
Association Recreational Beachlot (Outlot B) with the following conditions:
1. The applicant applies for a license from the city on an annual basis prior
to installation of the portable chemical toilet .
2. The portable chemical toilet shall only be permitted from Memorial Day to
Labor Day and shall be removed from the beachlot during the rest of the
year.
3. The beachlot shall be maintained in good condition in a manner consistent '
with previous approvals and current ordinance requirements.
4. The portable chemical toilet shall be located in accordance with the
application/plans received by the City on May 20, 1991.
All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously.
CHES MAR FARM, APPROXIMATELY ONE-HALF MILE NORTH OF TH 5 OFF OF TH 41, CRAIG
SWAGGERT.
Paul Krauss: Oh you do want a report on this?
Mayor Chmiel: Yes. ,
Councilwoman Dimler: I was at the Planning Commission so.
Paul Krauss: Keep in mind I'm the second string on this one. Jo Ann's still on
vacation. This is an incredibly complex request for a relatively simple action
and it's got a real confusing history which makes matters worse. This was
approved originally in 1985 and it was a pre-existing situation and the PUD was
used for a use that I've never heard of before and it was basically to
legitimize a non-conforming situation so they could sell off individual lots.
It was a real abnormality. The sewer wasn't anywhere close and it's only as of
5 or 6 weeks ago that the MUSA line was anywhere visible from this property but
there was always an existing multi-family dwelling out there and there are a
number of homes when the PUD was done. It was modified in 1989 slightly.
Basically what it did is we had a series of single family homes including the
quasi-elderly, pseudo historical home that's since been removed. It was in very
bad shape and it 's been cleared by the applicant in preparation of building a
new home. But what it boils down to is the current proposal with all the
requests, he's basically had to apply for virtually every permit we have in this
application, is to increase the size of the PUD .and decrease the number of
units. So we view it as a big step in the right direction. It's bringing it
into compliance with what's supposed to be out there. The guide plan is to take
47 '
1
City Council Meeting - July 8, 1991
it from medium density, which you can see is a little blip on the map up there
' and the zoning district is an abberation and come down to single family
residential which is really what it 's supposed to be. The multi-family dwelling
which has been a real difficult one and there's some code compliance issues and
' I know there's been some questions about the on site sewer for that and some
other things over the years. That's going to be converted to either a duplex or
single family and all the other lots are going to be developed as single family
residences and reasonably attractive ones. There is a request for a CUP for
beachlot . That is going to be used by several of the homes in here. There's a
wetland alteration permit which is for our normal boardwalk structure which we
use to protect the wetland to get out to the dock on the beachlot . Basically as
' odd as this request is, it does conform to our standards and we do believe it's
in the best interest of the city and the neighborhood for this to happen. We
did bring this before the Planning Commission. There were several adjoining
residents who had questions answered and came away supportive of the proposal.
' The Planning Commission discussed at length. There are several members of the
Planning Commission who remembered the other two times this came -up and were
very familiar with it and cleaned up a lot of the recommendations in a way that
I certainly couldn't have done not having the history and they recommended
approval and we are continuing to recommend approval. I should note however
that I pilfered through Jo Ann's mailbox today and we did get a letter somewhat
late but it 's from Camp Tanadoona where they expressed some concern over
development and protection of wetlands. We did not have an opportunity to speak
to them but I firmly believe that this is no threat to the natural environment
over there. In fact it 's probably the reverse is true. To the extent that we
had a problem property there close to the Girl's Camp, we're now removing that
and it's going to be single family homes on very large lots and very nicely
developed. As far as the surface water management plan goes or the DNR, our
' boardwalks are developed according to DNR standards and we work hand and hand
with them and we specifically do that to avoid impacting the wetland. I don't
know if they're here tonight . I don't believe so but short of that , I didn't
' have a chance to address this directly but I'm firmly convinced that the issues
raised in this letter are not relevant to this request and be happy to speak to
Miss Johnson after.
' Mayor Chmiel: It 's sort of far removed isn't it from one point to the other?
Paul Krauss: It 's not that far from, well it's far from where the active parts
' of the camp are. They of course are notified because they're an immediate,
adjoining resident but I really don't believe there's any direct impact. One
other thing too before I forget. There's a condition that we mentioned to the
' Planning Commission that they agreed with but got deleted by accident. It has
to do with a north/south trail connection through there as part of that overall
comprehensive trail system we have heard so much about a short time ago. One of
the trail corridors runs from basically the TH 5 area up to Minnewashta Regional
' Park ultimately. As properties develop and we can obtain the trail and there
was a request for an easement coming through there and it's I believe in your
packet. On the overhead when this came up when we mentioned it the first time,
' the location of the trail was shown right through here. We have some
flexibility on where it's exactly located and can work with the applicant on the
final location. We know where it has to go but-we have some flexibility in that
corridor to locate it so I would request that you add another condition to the
' 48
City Council sting - July 8, 1991 1
PUD amendment that a 20 foot wide north/south trail easement be provided in the
location acceptable to the City. With that we are recommending approval.
Mayor Chmiel: Thanks Paul. Is there any discussion? Does the applicant have
anything to say?
Craig Swaggert : I'm Craig Swaggert . I live at 2800 Stone Arch Road, Woodland,
Minnesota. In addressing the wetland alterations, I have contacted the ONR. I
do have to get a permit through them. I also have to get a permit through
Minnehaha Watershed District and I'm still waiting from the Corps of Engineers
whether I need ,a permit from them so I feel that we're pretty well covered as
far as wetland protection. A couple of the recommendations that I have a
question on. On the PUD agreement, it 's my understanding that the City Attorney
would draft that. Is that correct?
Paul Krauss: We draft that in house in conjunction with the City Attorney to
make sure all the i's are dotted and is are crossed. We have a broiler plate
form we use. '
Craig Swaggert : Alright and that 's a relatively fast process or something that
I have to look at first?
Mayor Chmiel: Within the next 10 minutes.
Paul Krauss: We will draft one up as soon as possible. '
Craig Swaggert: And then item 3 in the recommendations. I fully intend to get
back in here quite quickly for the final plat and by State Law I need to give 60
day notice to the residents. I would like to request that I have certified
letters requesting vacation as a condition rather than the actual vacation of
the properties. Of the 6 units.
Paul Krauss: Which condition are you addressing now?
Craig Swaggert: Condition 3. '
Mayor Chmiel: Of?
Craig Swaggert : Of this sixplex.
Paul Krauss: Oh, must be vacated prior to final plat approval. And your
proposal was to certify letters?
Craig Swaggert: Right. Requesting vacation. And along with that, it's my
understanding that I don't have to, that I can still have two units occupied but
not six units.
Paul Krauss: I think that I would be comfortable with that unless the City
Attorney has some objection if we had a date certain involved as to when we
would achieve at least the duplex or two units If you would come up with a -
date Craig for us to review. You know if we're talking 60 days hence, we'll
write that into the.
49 ,
1
City Council Meet;ng - July 8, 1991
Craig Swaggert : Well, it 'd be 60 days from June 1st because I'd have to give
' them notice on the first of the month. And in fact we have two units vacated
already.
' Paul Krauss: Okay. We could go with August 1st or August 15th or whatever we
worked out . As long as we had a date certain- in the contract , I'm more
comfortable with that .
Craig Swaggert : Th n the certified letters? Okay. And then number 5, the
driveway easements. My attorney would draft that? Is that correct?
' Paul Krauss: Either your attorney would draft it in a form acceptable to our
attorney or our attorney would draft it and you'd be billed for the time.
' Craig Swaggert: I think if I've got to pay for it I'd just as soon have my
attorney do it .
Mayor Chmiel: Our's is reasonable.
' Councilman Mason: Cheap. And he's good too.
Craig Swaggert : Maybe he -ould do it during the Council meeting.
Paul Krauss: There is a problem though. I mean we have standard formatting for
' that so if your attorney would check with Roger.
Craig Swaggert : Absolutely. And then on number 12, the tree preservation plan
shall be submitted by the applicant for city approval. Is that in conjunction
with the issuance of the building permit or the replatting?
Paul Krauss: With the building permit . We should clarify that.
Craig Swaggert : Okay, and then on 13 the trail easement. Is that going to be
part of the plat? The final plat or an easement?
Roger Knutson: Trail easements are not recorded on the plat.
Craig Swaggert : They are not? Okay.
' Roger Knutson: It 's a separate document .
Craig Swaggert: Thank you. Do you have any questions for me?
Mayor Chmiel: No. I sat at the Planning Commission meeting so I guess.
' Councilman Wing: Mr. Mayor, in order of time. One thing I didn't understand.
I have two questions. One on the dock and one on the driveway. Paul, I didn't
understand why when there's somewhat of a formal entryway to Ches Mar Farms now,
an existing road, why wasn't there some way to preserve the existing road and
driveway. Why do we have to put in a second driveway? Second access on TH 411
' Paul Krauss: They're quite a distance apart and the existing curb cut wasn't
all that great anyway. There was some consultation with MnDot as to whether
50
City Council Meeting - July 8, 1991
they felt this was an appropriate solution and they did. And it is a shared
driveway and we became comfortable with it at that time. We initially had some
concerns with that as well.
Councilman Wing: Okay. Perhaps my greatest concern is on the dock. Not the
fact that the dock's going in but maybe the location of the dock. What I wanted
to clarify, is the dock going west into the lake or do you intend to put the
dock into that little lagoon cut back area?
Craig Swaggert : It will go into the little lagoon cutback area.
Councilman Wing: I'm not sure if the ONR would accept that. I don't know if
they were notified. The little lagoon I'm very familiar with and it 's really
not even navigable in the fall• of the year if the lake level. There's kind of a
reef and some rocks that go across the front of it and then it kind of deepens
slightly into the shoreline. It seems to be somewhat of a spawning ground. A
little setback reef area and I think it's environmentally not acceptable for a
dock. That's my opinion and if I had been home I would have asked the Council
to come and look at that physically because I think it's a very significant
issue. I wouldn't be opposed to the boardwalk cutting through the wetlands and
then going straight west into the main lake portion itself. So I guess I'm
opposed to the dock's location going into the lagoon. I think that's a real '
issue and I think it should be looked at prior to approval. But also if you
haven't looked at that closely, it may not be to your benefit to put it there.
Craig Swaggert: I was out there this week to look at that issue. I've been out '
there in the winter and the spring and it's kind of difficult to get to so I
brought my boat out there and went into that little lagoon. There is a reef
there. The deepest part in that reef is about 3 1/2 feet.
Councilman Wing: In high water.
Craig Swaggert: At today's level which is, it 's about a foot below the high
water mark. For the 100 year high water mark.
Councilman Wing: In the fall of the season, because I sunfish out there, you 1
can't get a pontoom boat across there without tilting the motor up because
there's enough rocks and so you're basically, if we have a low summer or our
average 18 inch drop on Minnewashta. This is the 20 year average. My dock has
never changed it's position in 25 years. Where you're putting the dock is not
going to be, you're not going to be able to get boats in and out without
dredging or digging out a little channel. That's my opinion but more important,
I really think prior to approval that needs to be looked at specifically. I
would favor the dock in any way going straight into the lake. Not into that
little lagoon. I think that's to your benefit but more importantly I think it's
a real important environmental question that we should look at.
Mayor Chmiel: I think staff could probably look at that and come up with some
conclusion on that if that's a real concern. _ '
Councilman Wing: I think the proposal you have is excellent. It's an addition
to the area and I support it but I would ask consideration of the Council to
table this prior to staff looking at that dock placement.
51 ,
1
City Council Meeting - July 8, 1991
' Paul Krauss: You've got this coming back for PUD agreement authorization. We
could do it prior to that .
•
Councilman Wing: That's fine. That will give time, that would be adequate then
for you to review that? If that 's okay with you.
Craig Swaggert : Yes. Definitely.
' Councilman Wing: In a personal note to you, having lived on the lake 25 years,
that literally is high and dry on that outer reef area in the fall season. Many
' years. I don't know if the dock would be useable part of the year. Just a
comment .
. • Craig Swaggert : Thank you.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, any other discussion? Hearing none, I'll entertain a
motion to accept all 4 and if you look on page 8, the first one and then carry
it through with the balance of each of the numbers. Okay. Want me to do it?
City Council approves PUD Amendment #91-1 shown on plans dated May 28, 1991 with
a variance to the lot width requirement for Lot 1, Block 1 and the following
conditions of item 1 thru 13.
Councilwoman Dimler: 14.
Paul Krauss: With a 14th condition.
Mayor Chmiel: With item number 14 added. Okay, City Council also approves a
Comprehensive Plan Amendment #91-1 changing the Land Use Designation from
Residential Medium Density to Residential Low Density subject to the conditions
of the PUD Amendment , Conditional Use Permit and Wetland Alteration Permit.
Item number 3. The City Council approves Conditional Use Permit *91-4 for a
recreational beachlot on Outlot A as shown on plans dated May 28, 1991 with the
following conditions. Items number 1 through 4. Also, City Council approves
Wetland Alteration Permit #91-1 for construction of a permanent boardwalk
' through a Class A wetland as shown on the plans dated May 28, 1991 with the
following conditions of items 1 through 6.
' Councilwoman Dimler: Second.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, it's been moved and seconded. Any other discussion?
Councilman Wing: Did my concern get covered in this or would I have to ask an
additional item under Conditional Use Permit for a beachlot regarding the dock
pending staff review?
Paul Krauss: I assume we've been directed to do that. We'll bring it back.
' Mayor Chmiel moved, Councilwoman Dimler seconded to approve PUD Amendment #91-1
as shown on plans dated May 28, 1991 with a variance to the lot width
requirement for Lot 1, Block 1 and the following conditions:
' 1. The PUD agreement will be drafted and recorded against the property. The
PUD agreement will contain all conditions of approval for the PUD.
52
City Council Mr"ting - July 8, 1991 1
2. A revised preliminary plat must be submitted redesignating Lot 2, Block 1 as
Outlot B.
3. The residence on Lot 4, Block 1 shall either be a duplex or single family
unit . The six apartment units must be vacated prior to final plat approval.
4. The applicant shall receive an access permit from MnDot for the proposed
access servicing Lots 1 and 3, Block 1 and Outlot A and B.
5. A driveway easement shall be provided across Lot 2 (Outlot B), Lot 1 and
Outlot A and recorded against such properties. The driveway must be
constructed so as to accommodate emergency vehicles and must be maintained
in good passable condition.
6. The applicant shall be required to install a culvert sized by a professional ,
engineer, and approved by City Engineers prior to construction to
accommodate anticipated flows through the existing ditch on Lot 1, Block 1.
7. No more than 4 dwelling units will be permitted as part of the PUO; one on '
Lot 1, one on Lot 3 and one on Lot 4 unless the existing building is
converted to a duplex.
8. Demolition permits are required for all demolition; demolition of all the
buildings to .be razed shall be completed within 6 months of final plat
approval. ,
9. A revised preliminary plat shall be submitted showing all existing and
proposed on-site sewage treatment sites and proposed house pads and
elevations.
10. If a new residence is constructed on Lot 4, Block 2 it must meet all
required setbacks. All other existing buildings on Lot 4 must be razed. '
11. The applicant shall meet any and all conditions of Conditional Use Permit
#91-4 and Wetland Alteration Permit #91-1. '
12. A tree preservation plan shall be submitted by the applicant for city
approval for Lot 1, Block 1. '
13. A revised preliminary plat shall be submitted by the applicant and shall
reflect revised southerly lot line of Lot 3, the trail easement across Lot
1, Block 1 in accordance with Park and Recreatio Commission recommendations
and elimination of the driveway onto Outlot A. A barrier shall be erected
over the driveway at the lot line between Lot 1 and Outlot A to keep
vehicles from driving or parking on Outlot A. ,
14. A 20 foot trail easement running north/south shall be provided in a location
acceptable to the City.
All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously.
1
53 1
City Council Meeting - July 8, 1991
Resolution #91-66: Mayor Chmiel moved, Councilwoman Dimler seconded to approve
I Comprehensive Plan Amendment #91-1 changing the Land Use Designation from
Residential Medium Density to Residential Low Density subject to the conditions
of the PUD Amendment, Conditional Use Permit and Wetland Alteration Permit. All
voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously.
Mayor Chmiel moved, Councilwoman Dimler seconded to approve Conditional Use
' Permit #91-4 for a recreational beachlot on Outlot A as shown on plans dated May
28, 1991 with the fcllowing conditions:
1. The recreational beachlot will be permitted only one dock with overnight
storage of up to 3 watercraft .
2. Launching of boats from the recreational beachlot is prohibited.
3. The conditional use permit for the recreational beachlot is only for the
proposed dock improvements. Any additional improvements to the recreational
beachlot shall require another conditional use permit and wetland alteration
permit .
4. The applicant shall meet any and all conditions of the PUD amendment #91-1
' and Wetland Alteration Permit #91-1.
All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously.
Mayor Chmiel moved, Councilwoman Dimler seconded to approve Wetland Alteration
Permit #91-1 for construction of a permanent boardwalk through a Class A wetland
as shown on the plans dated May 28, 1991 with the following conditions:
1. There shall be no filling or dredging/grading permitted within the wetlands.
' 2. The applicant shall receive a permit from the Department of Natural
Resources for the permanent boardwalk.
' 3. The proposed trail shall be constructed at least 10 feet away from the
wetland located in the southwest corner on Outlot A.
4. The wetland shall be permitted to return to its natural state after
' installation of the boardwalk.
S. No other alteration to the wetlands are permitted without receiving another
' wetland alteration permit. Further, all approved alterations shall be
undertaken at a time and in a manner so as to minimize disruption to the
wetland.
6. The applicant shall meet any and all conditions of the PUD Amendment #91-1
and Conditional Use Permit #91-4.
All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously.
' 54
I
City Council Meeting - July 8, 1991
COUNCIL PRESENTATIONS:
Mayor Chmiel: I just wanted to address the senior volunteers that we're still
looking for in regard to the assistance in City Hall with pulling packets
together as well as any typing or working computers as we have. We're willing
to provide a short seminar teaching how to utilize the facilities that we have
and also working with some of the city staff to pull together the packets for
City Council meetings as well as the other commission meetings. In addition to
that I'm still loo' ing for CSO's from the senior citizens to patrol basically
the parks and they will have a short training with that as well indicating how
to use the radios as well as their rights as to what they can do. Basically
just a call for any help that they need by radio. So I'd really like to see the
seniors participate in this and to give me a call if you have any questions. I'm
listed in the phone book. I'd be more than happy to address those specific
questions. Ursula? '
Councilman Wing: Mr. Mayor before you go on. We have discussed this item
numerous times and it is obviously a pet project of yours and I support it. I
think it 's an excellent idea. Have you had any support or have you had any
response?
Mayor Chmiel: I don't think we've gotten a response. ,
Todd Gerhardt : It was brought up at the last senior commission meeting. I
don't know exactly what the comments were but there were some comments made.
Some were in favor and some were not.
Mayor Chmiel: Not knowing really what their responsibilities would be nor do
they know how to operate computers and so on.
Paul Krauss: Mr. Mayor, I was at the last senior meeting and they were
interested in the proposal. As a senior commission though they're not equipped
to go out and kind of find volunteers. I think if that's going to be proceeded
with that 's going to be done possibly through the newspaper or City newsletter
or something like that.
Mayor Chmiel: We're very fortunate to have a newspaper here this evening. Will
that individual please raise their hand?
Councilman Wing: No response.
Mayor Chmiel: If we could get some publicity going so we can really try to
accomplish this because I think really that they would probably enjoy this once
they got going with it. And it does give them another outlook on life and
another thing to do. I
Councilman Wing: I'd turn it over to Todd. Todd Hoffman.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Ursula? '
Councilwoman Dimler: Several months ago Mike and I served on a personnel policy
board that made a decision regarding a certain employee situation and at that
time we expressed a desire to update the personnel policy to cover all of the
55
I
11 City Council Meeti " - July 8, 1991
employees and I haven't heard any more about it and I'd like to know where we
IIare with that and if we can get back at it before we forget about it.
Don Ashworth: Misinterpretted your desire. When that document was drafted it
IIincorrectly provided leave for employees on maternity leave. More than had been
provided in the previous policy. The task force or group basically stated well,
this is the way it was approved and this is what we want so staff just left it
Iat that . So in other words, the more lenient policy continues to be in effect.
Councilwoman Dimler: Okay. And we want to apply it to all the employees then.
I mean it does now apply to all the employees?
Don Ashworth: Roger, you may wish to address this.
ICouncilwoman Dimler: Did you understand that we wanted to leave it that way?
Councilman Mason: I did.
IICouncilwoman Dimler: So nothing needs to be done?
Don Ashworth: Nothing needs to be done. Unless a majority of the Council's
I members were aware of those decisions, I think there's two Councilmembers who,
the Mayor and another Council member who were not directly involved but I think
I talked to both of them. Maybe not . If you want it placed on a future agenda
II so that everyone.
Councilwoman Dimler: No, not necessarily. I just want to make sure that when
II Council approved that we were not aware that it was a change and so I just want
to make sure everyone knows where we're at with that right now.
Don Ashworth: Okay.
IMayor Chmiel: Okay, thank you. Mike. Surface water.
I Councilman Mason: Mark Lobermeier from SEH called me and was concerned about
the process for the Surface Water Quality program. And he asked me what I could
do and I said well, I'll bring it up at Council presentation. He would like to
come before Council and express some of his concerns.
IMayor Chmiel: Can I address that? I had discussions with him also this evening
just before I came here and I expressed the position of my office to him saying
I .I didn't think it was needed. We chose the person that we chose. That I saw no
reason for him to make that presentation.
ICouncilman Mason: Okay.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. If you have any letters from Minnewashta Parkway we'll
keep them all. Tom?
IICouncilman Workman: Tree removal. I contacted Don Ashworth. I was contacted
by three individuals about where do I take my tree limbs, etc. . I talked to Jo
IAnn about it and I think the county's getting funding from the State and I don't
know. Minnewashta's open and Minnewashta's closed and on and on and on. We
I 56
City Council Meeting - July 8, 1991 1
need to, and Don has said that after a storm occasionally, a couple times a year
the City will go around and collect them. I would propose that the Council look
at maybe getting some sort of a program going. I don't know that we need -to go
out to people's homes personally. It is difficult for people who don't own a
truck or something but Don talked about maybe the Bandimere Farm is a place. We
have a chipper that does amazing things and- maybe a staff member could go out an
hour once a week or something to take care of it. Use the mulch and people
could come and get the mulch if they wanted but I got three calls on this and
what are we going to do and I thought , well we can do it for these couple people
but it should be on a city wide basis if anybody wants to do it .
Mayor Chmiel: I think in that , I also had discussions with Don on this. The I
same thing as which you're saying and I think really if we somehow get the
information out to the people saying those who in a storm. Not those who cut
down their trees and say I've got limbs and branches and so on. '
Councilman Workman: But see that's a problem too.
Mayor Chmiel: But during a storm it should be our responsibility to go out and
pick these things up.
Councilman Workman: But see the calls that I got were from your neighborhood. '
Mayor Chmiel: Yeah. Well we can't .
Councilman Workman: But that was a storm but it was just your neighborhood. See
that doesn't really constitute a city wide alert. The problem is that we don't
have a place for this stuff year round. Chaska has a pile and everybody in the
county had a pile I think except Chanhassen and Victoria and the County was
trying to help us out with that and it's unreliable so we need a place for
people to take this on a regular basis. Not just if they think there was a
storm and then we have to have Jerry Schlenk pull the chipper out to their house
or something. Which I don't think we should necessarily get into. If we could
have them drop it off down at the shed and they could chip it as needed, I don't
know. It 's just something I would like us to think about a city wide policy
because it is a problem. We promote trees every Council meeting and we're not
thinking about what happens when they fall down.
Mayor Chmiel: I think I agree with you on that. That we should have some kind '
of a process.
Councilman Workman: Okay on the traffic study. We had our little meeting. It
was not a good day to have a meeting. July 2nd and everybody was in the holiday
mood but I did have three strong individuals from the community come. Don
Andrus, Bernie Hanson and Jerry Roepke, the CPA. What we figured out was we
could have sat there all night and argued the little details of this thing and
it's a very, very difficult thing. Turn lanes. Take them out. Take the median
out and it was almost comical but we figured that we should get together at
least a couple more times so have another meeting or two in the next month SQ
we'll try to get that together. I think it was still very good. The Rotary -
trees. The Rotary trees. The continuous saga of the Rotary trees. The Rotary
went out and planted a berm on Kerber Blvd. under the auspices of City staff and
57 1
City Council Meeting - July 8, 1991
the City has mowed them all down. The berm is private property and we mowed the
hill. Apparently.
Don Ashworth: You think. The first time I heard about .this was at 7:00 this
evening when Tom informed me.
Councilman Workman: I saw it this past weekend and just about became nauseous.
Councilwoman Dimler: The trees are gone?
Councilman Workman: They're mowed down. Granted there were heavy weeds but
this gets back into the whole thing about the program that we wanted to get
going for spring and everything else which we could never quite get off. I'm
going to try and get a meeting with Tim Erhart, myself and Don Ashworth to talk
some more about this. I thought I had sufficient staff notified that we planted
that hill and something didn't quite match up. I don't know how we're going to
redo that hill or what 's going to happen there but it brings back a point.
Ursula I know this is one of your points is we're mowing things that are not our
' property and I wonder how much. Maybe we need to take an inventory of how much
of this city time is being spent on property that's not our own. So we have
some very aggressive lawn mowing going on and you took 500 Rotary trees.
Mayor Chmiel: Would you like to try 7100 Tecumseh Lane?
I Councilman Workman: So I don't know how but I'm going to meet with Don Ashworth
and we're going to talk about it. I'll get together with Tim and Don and we'll
talk some more about it.
' ADMINISTRATIVE SECTION:
Mayor Chmiel: Before we go too much further, I want to tell staff and all our
' busy workers that I really like our administrative section. They used every
part of the paper and they used the forward parts and back parts and I'd like to
see us continue to do that.
' DISCUSSION REGARDING NOISE ORDINANCE, PUBLIC SAFETY DIRECTOR.
Scott Harr: This memo came about as a result of some conversations the Mayor
' and I have had about the increasing number of noise complaints primarily coming
from construction. We have no noise ordinance. It's not had the support of the
Council in the past and to use development contracts is just not the panacea
' that some think it may be because in fact it really doesn't apply directly to
the construction of homes or remodeling. The Mayor and I have been a little bit
frustrated as has the Sheriff's office when they've responded to noise
complaints and I'm merely looking to find out whether there's interest in
' looking at noise ordinances again. The numbers are increasing and as I said in
the memo, so is the aggressiveness of the people making the complaints.
' Mayor Chmiel: I agree. I've received several calls. One I had to go out and
talk to the builder on Sunday. Discussed it with him and he did shut it down -
and I thanked him for it but he could have been a hard nose and proceeded with
it. Somehow I think within those development contracts it should be just Monday
thru Saturday. Sundays zip. The other thing that I have thought about too of
' 58
City Council Meeting - July 8, 1991
course and we've discussed this before is the decibels. To adopt an ordinance
according to the band and having a decibel reading in order to determine how
much noise we can put up with. I don't know. I just sort of thing that as
we're growing, I hate putting more and more restrictions on but I think there
are still a few inconsiderate people that will do these things. Legally and
technically we have no way of stopping them. The police will go out there and -
they don't have an ordinance per se. So I guess what I was looking at was that
maybe we should relook at it again. Take a look at some of the existing
ordinances that are out there and see if any of these can fit without causing
too much of an inconvenience to the residents of the city. But don't breathe so
hard Tom.
Councilman Workman: We argued this very carefully and it was all brought up by
a dog. The dog was barking, barking, barking. . A racoon would drive by, the
cops would come out there and no dog's barking. Over and over and over this
would happen and it will happen over and over and over and the reason I was
thinking about this, Scott brought it up and the reason I was thinking about it
was I drove through Chaska quite a bit and you come across the river there.
They've got this sign, Chaska and then it says, noise with one of these things
you know. But we looked in the code book back then and we have a nuisance
ordinance. That covers animals and it covers all sorts of stuff. I don't
understand. We do have something and maybe it needs to be shored up but we do
have an ordinance against barking dogs. We have one I assume for parties or
whatever. And that 's where we got into trouble with the snowmobilers and
everything else. What do you mean we can't drive in the city and then I think we
were telling people they couldn't mow their lawns from noon to.
Mayor Chmiel: Yeah, and that's part of the concern but I think there can be a
specific amount of time period that they can have those. It doesn't take you 3
days to mow your lawn. Although we've had a few residents that we've had
problems with. But I think we have to relook at it to see how it can compliment
what we have existing. '
Councilman Workman: Certainly.
Councilman Mason: I agree.
Councilman Wing: I agree. I think the history of Chanhassen has been live and
let live up through and including the present Public Safety Director. The
attitude on kind of letting things work their course if they will but this
ordinance if we were to have it would give him the option to say we have to draw
the line here. After this passive time period that he chooses to use so I
support you Don and I would definitely like to recommend that Scott pursue this
and get back to us.
Mayor Chmiel: I especially don't prefer those 2:00 in the morning calls that 1
I get.
Councilwoman Dimler: Could I have a final clarification. You're telling me
that the development contract does not cover the construction workers? Is that
right? The development contract only covers putting in the road and the sewer
and that type of thing but not the actual construction of the homes?
59
City Council Meeting - July 8, 1991
Scott Harr: Roger, do you want to comment?
11 Councilwoman Oimler: Okay, so you're having a problem with the people that are
constructing the homes and working at all odd hours and then saying we're not
covered by the development contract?
Scott Harr: Yeah. And it's not just construction. That's the one that 's
bothering us the most . And Tom's right in that the nuisance ordinance covers
some. Barking dogs, I don't know why that was a problem because that's clearly.
Councilman Workman: Lake Lucy Road, remember?
Scott Harr: I think the system we have right now we could deal with that but
when the nuisance ordinance then goes on to talk about any other louder and
' reasonable noises as set forth, I think that that's unenforceable because we've
had the opportunity to clarify hours, etc. and the Sheriff's office has had
frustrations with complaints where they just simply haven't been able to act.
' I'm thinking about loud cars being worked on at odd hours.
Councilwoman Dimer: I have one instance. Somebody called me and said that they
are constantly bothered by the bug zappers that their neighbor has. Has two of
II them and they leave them on all the time and those things do not sound pleasant
and she's in her backyard and she cannot enjoy her backyard because of it so
maybe there's a reason to enforce hours on that type of thing. Because I do
think people ought to be able to enjoy their backyards and enjoy their property.
Mayor Chmiel: I hate mosquitoes with a passion.
ICouncilman Mason: Get a bat house.
Mayor Chmiel: I have that too.
ICouncilwoman Oimler: You don't keep yours on all night do you?
I Mayor Chmiel: Oh no. We shut it off because it keeps me awake. Okay, so we
will further this and if you will pull together some additional things.
Compliment what our existing ordinance is and we'll go from there. Your next
item.
IDISCUSSION OF PUBLIC SAFETY COMMISSION VACANCY, PUBLIC SAFETY DIRECTOR.
I Scott Harr: Public Safety Commission vacancy. I would like some direction from
Council on how to fill Steve Morse's resignation. That's effective_ as we speak.
We have the Chairman of the Public Safety Commission has suggested that Council
consider going back to our interviews for the January, 1991 position. I sent
that information to you in the memo but if you'd like to re-advertise, we can do
that .
' Mayor Chmiel: I think being consistent with what we've done before, and I
understand the recommendation for what they have here. I don't know what
everyone else's feeling is but I'll express mine, ' I think we should
re-advertise for it all over again and see who's interested in it and then go
from there.
60
i
City Council Me- ing - July 8, 1991
Councilman Mason: That's been past practice? I
Councilwoman Dimler: Yes. And I think in fairness too to other members to be
able to apply.
Councilman Mason: And encourage those people to re-apply certainly.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Any other discussions? 1
Councilwoman Dimler moved, Councilman Mason seconded to adjourn the meeting.
All voted in favor and the motion carried. The meeting was adjourned at 11:30
p.m..
Submitted by Don Ashworth
City Manager
Prepared by Nann Opheim
1
1
61 1
i
t v-*
CHANHASSEN PARK AND RECREATION COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
JUNE 25, 1991
' Chairman Schroers called the meeting to order at 7:32 p .m . .
MEMBERS PRESENT: Jim Andrews , Wendy Pemrick , Larry Schroers , Dave Koubsky ,
and Jan Lash
MEMBERS ABSENT: Dawne Erhart and Curt Robinson
' STAFF PRESENT: Todd Hoffman , Park and Rec Coordinator and Jerry Ruegemer ,
Recreation Supervisor
APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Andrews moved , Pemrick seconded to approve the
Minutes of the Park and Recreation Commission meeting dated May 21 , 1991 as
presented . All voted in favor and •the motion carried .
DESIGNATION OF AN OFFICIAL LITTLE LEAGUE FIELD.
Todd Hoffman: This item is an accumulation of discussions that have taken
place amongst the At.heltic Association., Board of Directors , citizens within
the community , the Director of the Little League programs in other
communities which our discussions and conversations with the Department
over about the past 3-3 1/2 years . Essentially since my appointment to the
' City . With the increase in population in the city however , parents would
like to see more of the games . They 're not so opposed to participating in
South Tonka Little League or East Tonka Little League or something of that
I nature . They 're not opposed to that combination but they 'd like to see
more of the home games or more games being played in Chanhassen .
Unfortunately in the Little League category we don't have an official
' Little League field . In the past they have made use of the South Tonka
Little League program which a majority of our youth participate in at the
Little League level . Have made use of Field #3 at Lake Ann and this year
they 're making use of the North Lotus Lake Park , the field up there . But
II it 's just Freeman Field in the City of Shorewood. They came up with some
pretty nice fields up there so they 're playing on official grass infields
and fields made especially for Little League up there and it's just not
1 quite as exciting coming down here - and in essence playing second fiddle to
some of the use of the ballfield . As the letter states there, Chris
Polster 's brought that request forward in a written proposal . In a written
I request . I think it 's justified. In taking a look at the fields in which
we currently have , pinpointing a few at Lake Ann seems to make the most
sense . Field #1 is being used a large majority of the time currently for
baseball . With 3 additional fields added, we handle our adult softball
I load for the present and then.. . . So with that I have nothing further to
add to the report . Recommendation to pursue development of Field #2 into a
Little League field stands to . . .
Lash: You don't foresee any problems with space then for adults? -Would it
just always be for Little League?
IHoffman: Up until the point when we would go ahead and develop Bandimere
Community Park and can take some of the load off of that .
I
I .
1
1
1
1
IIPark and Pc,,a Commission Meeting
June 25 , 1G91 - Page 2
•
II Lash : What I meant was .
IIHoffman: Currently?
Lash : Yeah . If it was designated Little League , then there wouldn't be
Iany other play on it?
Hoffman: No . The fences would be shorten to 180 feet . The infield would
be torn out . Grass infield would be put in and would be used for
ILittle League only .
. Lash : How often do you think that would be used?
IHoffman: I would anticipate probably 4 nights a week and some weekend use .
I Lash : I 'm going to have a Little Leaguer next year so this is of
particular interest to me . I have just over the years heard from quite a
few different people who have put their kids in the different programs and
it 's been my own opinion that the South Tonka one versus the Chaska one ,
I the Chaska one is much cheaper . I think it 's maybe not as far to drive .
You wouldn 't have to go to so many different locations but I guess my main
question is , do you think that we would have enough kids to just have our
Iown here? Just have that field be for .
Hoffman : Chanhassen league?
ILash : Yeah . Our own league . That would be playing just their own teams
and not playing outside .
I Hoffman: I 've had that , or people have brought that up that they 'd like to
see that done . The other day when Jeff Bros the President , current
President of the Athletic Association was in , we discussed that . He thinks
I that that would be a detriment to the current program just because then
they wouldn 't have enough participants in their program to make it a
quality program . We wouldn 't have enough participants in our program
currently . You could come up with 4 teams and you play a round robin
Ischedule or something of that nature but the discussion is out there . We
won 't push one way or the other . It really comes from some networking
among the parents and the people who are coordinating the program and that
type of thing .
Lash: But it would be used , if was designated Little League , it would be
Iused by the South Tonka/Chanhassen League?
Hoffman: Chiefly by that league but again if we 're noticing that a large
majority or high percentage of them are going down to the Chaska program ,
I
they could certainly play games there as well .
Lash: I 'd certainly be in favor of when we get to the point when we could
Isupport having our own Little League Association , just doing that .
Hoffman: I think everybody is . I 'm not sure it 's at that point .
I
Park and Roc Commission Meeting
June 25 , 1991 - Page 3
Schroers: Do we have any new fields coming on line in any other of the
parks ? I know that Bandimere is still a ways off but what I 'm wondering is
if we can avoid reworking a field that we already have and designate a new
special field for that so we can keep what we have existing and give them
something totally new . -
Hoffman: The two new fields that are coming up with be the field at Sunset I
Ridge in Lake Susan Hills West which will be in a neighborhood setting .
Currently it will be removed , far removed from any roads because it 's on I
the opposite end of the park from where the pedestrian walkways are going
right now . The other one would be at Curry Farms Park where there will be
a neighborhood ballfield installed there .
Schroers : Probably would be parking problems with those•.
Hoffman: With those two and again , they 're in neighborhood parks which
we 're trying to get away from putting organized play into neighborhood
parks . Curry Farms has an additional problem in that the lay of the land
is so low and the soil type and soil conditions are so poor and it retains
moisture that if you have to count on that field for organized play , you
couldn 't .
Schroers: Okay , and Lake Susan is being utilized by the older baseball
players so there 's no time to schedule in there?
Hoffman: No , it 's been designed as a Babe Ruth/Legion baseball . It 's an
official baseball field which is much larger than Little League .
Lash: So how about #1 . Wasn 't #1 filling the .
Schroers : They 're playing baseball on Field #1 now .
Lash: Yeah but wasn 't that until Lake Susan was ready?
Hoffman : We 're using both consistently .
Lash: Was that the purpose to start with? I was thinking that one was
just 'supposed to fill in the gap until Lake Susan field was ready .
Hoffman: We 've seen so much increase in the Babe Ruth and Legion ball that I
they 're using it . I don 't know , maybe Jerry can probably comment on how
many nights a week .
Ruegemer : Okay , the 13 to 15 year old baseball players are currently using '
two nights a week at Lake Ann . Monday and Thursday nights . Two games a
night . 6:00 and 8: 15 . And at Lake Susan , they 're getting games in for
both the AAU and the Legion is also playing .at Lake Susan field at least 2 I
nights a week plus they 're using the Legion field over on TH 5 next to the
Legion at ;least 1 or 2 times a week . Thai 's just for our initial fields
and they 're also using the Freeman Field .
Schroers: And also Field ##1 is the larger portion so you wouldn 't want to
scale that field down to accommodate .
1
IIPark an Rec Commission Meeting
June 25 , 1991 - Page 4
II
Hoffman : h1.v .
II Andrews : I 'd like to speak in favor of Lake Ann as well because we 're .
putting in our new park building in there and this brings another activity
that would be targeting more to the younger kids which I think is something
II we 're maybe a little bit lacking there now . So it 's an attraction for the
kids to come for a tournament or whatever . The parents have a place to
cook and entertain themselves . That would kind of fit well with our kind
II of family concept .
Hoffman: Just as an example this evening , Fields 4 , 5 and 6 are being
used . Fields 2 and 3 are being used for Women 's softball and Field 1 is
I empty . There 's the capacity there . In some leagues , Industrial , Men 's
Open , we 've reached that capacity sooner than in other leagues . But
scheduling , we still have scheduling on 4 fields and then even bringing in
IField t1 for additional softball fields on your busier nights . We have
flexibility in capacity to continue 2-3 years in the adult softball .
I Schroers : I know that it really shouldn 't matter but I can 't help but feel
that we 're going to get some controversy or static from the adult teams for
the logic of building 3 new fields and then taking 1 away . It does seem to
be the most reasonable thing to do at this time . And you 're proposing that
IIthis is , all the modifications are made for next season?
Hoffman: Correct .
II Lash: Do you have any idea how much this is going to cost?
Hoffman : Again , I didn 't get in depth with those figures prior to our
Ibudget proposal .
Lash: If it 's a lot of money and then we think it 's maybe only going to be
Ifor a couple of years until we can do Bandimere or . . .
Schroers : Do you think that is the scenario that we would convert it to
I accommodate Little League for a period of time like 2 to 3 years , whatever
and then at some point in time convert it back to softball again?
Hoffman : Potentially we could convert it back . I would think the
I timeframe 's going to be more like 4 or 5 years and then at that time we can
take a look at where the increase is . Our youth program 's just expanding
heads and tails and do we need to keep it . Retain that field as such or
I are the adult leagues getting to the point where we could use that field
and take . . .softball leagues . Pick up the slack in the youth .
I Schroers: Well whatever expenditure is involved in this is much cheaper
than trying to develop something new if all we have to do is move the fence
in and grass the infield . •
I Hoffman: Potentially the outfield fences , currently there could be left
and just bring in a permanent temporary fence and take out the infield . So
depending on what our work schedule turns out to be for the summer of 1992 ,
I
II
Park Re: Commission Meeting
June 25 , 1° 1 - Page 5
it may be an in-house project or it may be contracted out but it 's the
dollere you 're talking aren 't excessive .
Lash : I do think you 'll find that in the next year or two there 's goi ng to
be a lot more Little League players in Chan just because there 's such a
bulge in the enrollment right now that 's going into 4th grade so next year II
there 's going to be an increase . I 'm assuming , unless the Victoria kids go
to Chaska or somewhere then that could affect it .
Hoffman: I would think that it 's only going to be a positive thing and
maybe some negative feedback .from the adult leagues but as far as being
able to then have a place for the youth and a place for the parents to go I
and play a real game of Little League should be exciting .
Koubsky : When you convert this back do you see it going back to softball
or possibly a legion field? It seems like we have a little more Legion
activity .
Hoffman : Probably back to softball because the potential for an
additional Legion field -at Bandimere is very good .
Lash: But the ultimate goal is to have adult activities at Lake Ann and
then the youth activities at Bandimere .
Hoffman: There 's been discussion that it would be nice to have that
reversed because Lake Ann is more accessible but at that point , it would
really be bringing havoc on our present facility . Trying to turn it from
adult to a youth facility where if we just create a new youth facility and
do it correctly from the start . So it doesn 't hold much merit , that
argument .
Schroers : Okay . If there isn 't any further discussion on this , does
anyone care to make the recommendation? '
Lash: I move that we designate Field #2 at Lake Ann Park as a Little
League Field in 1992 .
Schroers : Is there a second?
Andrews : I 'd like to see if we can maybe , I want to make sure that we have I
a comeback before construction goes on this . I think we would have to to
allocate funding wouldn 't we Todd?
Hoffman: Yes . '
Andrews: Then I second it .
Lash moved, Andrews seconded that the Park and Recreation Commission
designate Field #2 at Lake Ann Park as an official Little League Field
beginning the 1992 season and instruct staff to estimate the associated '
costs of this field transformation. All voted in favor and the motion
carried .
IPar !- and Pec Commission Meeting
June _E , lc?(;'1 -- Page G,
COMPREHENSIVE PARK RULES SIGN .
' Hoffman: This comes about from a variety of different reasons . Basically
because the commission has a sincere interest in seeing that park users
know what the rules are and what they can and cannot do within the parks .
I We 're also beginn: ,ig to acquire a greater amount of park locations and
people are using them consistently so I think it 's a fine time to go ahead
and 'implement a comprehensive park rules sign . A sign- which is basic .
Very straight forward but which is consistent throughout the park system so
' we can post it all entrance points to all parks again to educate our youth
and citizens as to what the park rules and ordinances of the city
'ordinances are in regard to parks . There 's some items listed there which
I potentially should be addressed . Again , the pets and glass containers
which is the new ordinance . Park hours . Alcoholic beverages . Driving on
the grass . Motorized vehicles . Refuse disposal , etc . . Attached on the
I back there a photo . Copy of a photo which was a park courtesy sign which
is posted at Lake Ann . Just for your information . In thinking about this
item and then also a list of our park rules as they are shown in the
I
Chanhessn City Codes . This evening I would hope that we would go through
and identify the key components to this rule sign . The items which are
more cr less unchanging , which in your opinion you ' ll be looking to change
that particular rule in any near future . Throw out some potential wordings
I
for the sign and work through that and come up with again some costs so we
can include this item in the 1992 budget process .
ISchroers : Well just about eveything is included on the copy here .
Koubsky: The things that I see are missing is one -we should probably add
with glass . Except for 3 .2 beer , the loss of malt beverage doesn 't really
Idifferentiate .
Lash: And that was just addressed by City Council and I believe it was
Ichanged .
Hoffman: That 's why this sign was pulled because we had a problem with it .
IThe definition there .
Lash: So how can we word that?
•
I Hoffman: No alcoholic beverages except you can either use layman terms ,
except beer or alcohol or else malt beverages . Again it 's something where
do you want to include it on your sign and advertise that you can drink in
I the park or , you need to be clear but because then if you do not include it
on the sign people wonder if they can or if they can 't .
Koubsky: If it said no alcoholic beverage and you didn 't include it , it 's
kind of be a misrepresentation of the law .
Lash: If we put it we have to include it but .
IAndrews : No liquor .
I
I
Park and R:. Commission Meeting
June 2' , 1S.c)1 - Page 7
Sc1-,r,: ers : t!-,ink they pretty much have in here the way it has to be . No
alcoh- lic k _...,cra,:;es except if you want to say malt or want
Y y t liquor c.. if you w:=n� to
�c> kEEr .
Koubsky: You could support the glass law and say canned beer allowed .
Pemrick : There you go .
Lash: Canned alcoholic beverages . What other kind of alcoholic beverages '
come in a can? •
Schroers : That 's exactly what I was going to ask . Is there such a thing
as a hard liquor that comes in a can?
Lash: Can you get those kind of pre-mixed like .
Hoffman : Canned wine coolers .
Koubsky : Is a wine cooler a malt beverage?
Hoffma n : No .
Koubsky: So that wouldn 't be allowed? 1
Hoffman: Canned beer allowed? It 's more positive .
Pemrick _ like that .
Koubsky : It 's good advertising . I
Lash: Only .
Koubsky : Only canned beer . '
Lash: Maybe that would be a way to do it . When we put no glass containers
and then put only canned beer and other beverages allowed . I
Andrews: It 's confusing though .
Lash : Well yeah except for it kind of hides the beer in with some other '
things so it 's not like we 're advertising that you can bring all the beer
you want .
Schroers: How about restricted alcoholic beverages , canned beer only .
That 's sort of signifies that other types of hard liquor are not allowed
but that beer types in a can is . '
Hoffman: Any favorites yet?
Andrews: I like the restricted . I think that 's more descriptive . It .
implies that we 're really being , everything 's prohibited except for beer .
I don 't think we should tie the glass and the can together . Otherwise
somebody 's going to say , well it said canned beverages and I 've got my
1
NI Park an Rcr Commission Meeting
June 25 , 1991 - Page 8
°I whi:Ap> ix if/ can here . You just said that was okay . This sign says yes
and this ei;pn say:: ne . Go ahead and prosecute me . See what happens .
I5chrocre : How about restricted alcoholic beverages , canned beer only? Is
that confusing or is that kind clear enough?
IAndrews: Alcoholic beverages restricted to canned beer only .
Schroers : There you go . That 's better '
I Pemrick : Alcohol restricted . You don 't have to say beverages . Just
alcohol restricted .
ISchroers: Alcohol restricted to canned beer only . Yep .'
ILash : So that 's not going to create a problem for the kegs?
Schroers : A keg is a big can .
I Hoffman : Proteoting those int*resto ' Alcohollo bevoraQes restrlcted to
canned beer only or alcohol?
IPemrick : Alcohol restricted to canned beer .
Hoffman: Alcoholic beverages is a nicer term than alcohol?
IPemrick : Do you have enough room on the sign for all that?
Andrews : It can be as big as he wants .
IHoffman : Thct 's two lines . It 's probably going to take two lines anyway .
IPemrick : Well if you 're already taking two lines you may as well .
Schroers : I think that the beverages sort of .
IHoffman: Softens it .
Schroers : Yeah . Yeah . It does soften it . If you just say alcohol that
I seems kind of haroh ' You want to get the meosage aoroos .
Andrews: You 're just going to say glass containers prohibited?
ISchroers: Yes .
Hoffman: Pets? This is one which is a little shakey because at least I 'm
I taking oalls and we "re all very awere that people aren ,t opposed td not
having their pets at the beach or not having their pet at the play area .
They 're a little less , when you get to the softball game , they like to
I bring them because they don't think they 're bothering anybody but really
when they 're walking through the parks and walking on the trails , that 's
when they think it 's excessive that you can 't have your dog in the park .
I
II
Pars, and F.e: Commission Meeting
June 25 , 1991 - Page 9
Schroers : I guess I have to agree with that . We have been aggravated by a
dog out in Lake Ann Park when we 've been trying to practice softball . There ,
was E Lerman Shepherd running around unsupervised . Out of control that was
being a nuisance and that you definitely don 't want . But on the other
hand , when you have your dog under control and you 're going through the
park to complete a route on the trail system , that should be allowed . '
Koubsky: You 'd have to change the law .
Hoffman : Yep , we 'd have to change the ordinance if you wanted to go that
way and then again the difficulties . I believe the reason it 's the way it
is now is because once you open it up , it 's very difficult with our present
enforcement system .
Lash: Could we , have leashed pets on trail areas only?
Andrews : The other problem you have like in our neighborhood unfortunately I
the fringe= of the park are used as pet dumping ground . Unless you just
say your pet 's prohibited , you 're still going to have people who are going
to walk their dogs and let them take their dump on the grass and walk them
back out . They feel like that 's nature . It 's not my yard . And there 's
really no way to draw a line that 's fair . The fairest thing to do is just
say no . Then you don 't have to argue about which was a good intent and
which wasn 't .
Hoffman: We 'd have a very difficult time trying to , these . . . leashed dogs ' '
or leashed dogs on trails , the parks would be open to dogs . Right now the
people know they 're not supposed to be there . When they 're there they have
that in the back of their mind that they 're not supposed to be there and
ma> he ne.<t time they 're going to leave the dog at home . We didn 't feel
comfortable when we had our dog along .
Andrews : It won 't be a popular sign . I can tell you that now . People in
our neighborhood , there 's a walking trail that goes right along the edge of
the park and there are probably 20 people a night that walk their dog down
there . ,
Lash: They 're there already .
Hoffman : They 're there in certain places . '
Lash: And for some people it stops them and for some people it doesn 't so
it isn 't going to make any difference if you put them on all . Some people II
are still going to do it .
Schroers: I just happen to have a whole lot of experience in this area .
We have designated dog trails all over and they 're signed . At certain
times of the year different trails are designated and there are probably
percentage wise half of the people that pay attention to that and the other
half of the people go where they want to go . Our observation is that dogs I
that are kept under control or on a leash , nobody minds . It doesn 't matter
where they are . It doesn 't matter if they 're , well you don 't want them
running through your picnic area or when you 're laying out on the beach but I
II Park anJ Pee Commis_ion Meeting
•
June 25 , 3 c?1 - Page 10
IIa path that ,goes relatively close to it . If your dog is under control and
ju=t passing on the path , no one seems to have an objection to that at all .
II Eut as far ac enforcing it , you 're right . You 're not going to enforce it
here but 1 don 't think , if you look at how many people walk up and down
Kerber on this trail and whether you want to designate that park property
II or not , I mean they could write tickets out there all night long if you
want to designate that as park . It 's a parkway and there 's just constant
dog traffic up and down there all night long . I don 't know . I don 't think
it 's fair for people to pay taxes to put in these sidewalk , trails and
IIwalkways and say that you can 't walk your pet on a trail .
Andrews : Then we have to change walk .
ILash : I had a very long discussion about this just today with a pet owner
and I like dogs . I wish that it would be that every dog owner was
I responsible and either leash their dog or kept their dog under control and
cleaned up after their dog and we could let dogs be in there . The problem
is there is the group of people who are not responsible and then they wreck
it for everybody . It 's not fair but I don 't know how else we can control
I it or enforce it unless we just either say they 're allowed and make a free
for all cr they are not allowed . And so if you 're bringing it in , you 're
doing it knowing that you 're potentially opening yourself up for a
I violation . The other thing is when there is a dog that 's around that is a
real nuisance and they are allowed , then how do you complain about that?
We have that a lot down at Greenwood Shores Park . We just had it the other
II day . Two dogs that we these people let run loose all the time and it lived
just up a couple houses from the park and they 're real obnoxious kind of
dogs . They have to come and jump all over you when you 're laying on the
beach and all the kids and make the kids cry and everything and the owners
I could care less what is going on down there . And then that 's what wrecks
it . There 's other people who maybe bring their dogs on a leash or jog
through or keep their dog tied up over away from everybody . I really do
I not have a problem with that . But if people see the dogs that are under
control and on a leash then all of a sudden they figure well okay , I 'm
bringing my dog next time and they may not be a responsible owner and
I that 's what wrecks it .
Pemrick: But don 't you think it 'd be controlled in the same way it is in
your neighborhood with leashing laws in general? It should apply to the
I parks too . I mean you have leashing laws in your neighborhood . Your dogs
aren 't free to run off your lot unless you 've got them on a leash . How 's
that controlled? Same way . You 'd call the dog catcher or whatever if
I there 's a nuisance . I supposed if they 're . . .dog control people . I don 't
know .
Schroers: If you know of pet owner or a dog , where it lives and call and
I
complain to the authorities , through public safety or the CSO or whoever
happens to be in charge . I did that . I :-`. n 't remember if it was last year
or the ysar before . A dog that came and attacked us and chased us out into
I traffic while we were jogging and I called . Had the authorities come out
and in 3 days the kennel was gone . That dog house was gone . The dog was
gone . It works . If you know the owner of the dog and you have a valid
complaint , you can pursue that . And people that don 't listen , I mean if
II
Park and flcc Commission Meeting I
June 2E , 199i - Pace 11
the. 're war:-:mod and it 's a repeated thing , you may have to follow up on it a
secrind time but then it 's certainly justified in getting a ticket .
Andrews : I think the problem we have here is the loss of one thing and
we 'd like to have it say something else . If the choice is putting an
actual sign up th7t states what the law is or putting a sign up that states II
what like the law to say , I think we 've got to put what the law is and
ask the City to change the law . I 'd hate to waste the money to put up
signs and then turn around and change this item too which I think is one
that will be used an awful lot as an enforced rule too .
Lash: If you boil it down to the compost factor and we 've just now banned
glass in trying to keep the parks cleaner and safer for people to walk
around an then on the other hand we 'd be saying we 'd be in favor of having
dogs c on;pos t i ng all over .
Schro€ rs : I think the way to address this may be to leave it the way it is I
here . No pets allowed in parks which is what you would designate as the
park , picnic area , ballfield , beach or whatever and then have a separate
sign th-t ' =:, not advertised somewhere that says pets , leashed pets only on
trail ,
Hoffman: I 'm not even sure if we have to go that far . The way it 's I
currentlj listed , if somebody has their dog on a leash and the CSO comes
into the park , they 're not going to tag them because they 've got their dog
in the park . If this dog 's been hanging around the ballfield or the beach II
for an hour and a half and the owner 's hanging around somewhere in the park
and som,cbody calls the CSO , they 're going to tag that person so it boils
down as well to some common sense type of enforcement . I can see it 's
somewhat cf an erntional issue . We 're here as a closed group this evening
per so but if you take this to the paper and a public hearing at the
Council level , it 's going to be opening a Pandora 's Box if this gets opened
up. '
Lash: Well not could this , if we say pets , all we 've talked about right
now are dogs . '
Hoffman: Cats .
Lash: They could open it up , we used to have horses all the time swimming I
at the beach at Greenwood Shores . I mean what they left behind in the
water was disgusting , let me tell you . We didn 't like it at all .
Koubsky: The ordinance says animals . I think the purpose of these signs
is to educate the people on what the ordinances regarding parks are . I
like the way it sits . I may say no animals allowed . I don 't know if
that 's too vague but I can throw that out . I don 't like the idea of pets
in the park . I 'm a pet owner but I 've got kids and kids are extremely
fearful of dogs . I don 't like dog droppings . ' People aren 't going to pick
that up . I think it 's a lot easier to enforce or allow the City to
determine- how they want to enforce an ordinance . But the purpose of this
is to educate the people on what the ordinances are and the ordinance says
that there 's no pets allowed in parks . It doesn 't define if a trail is a
1
.
11 Par enr4 R : Ccomission Meeting
Jun,- 2 , 19?2 - Facle 22
pr [ but it ca�s parks so the ordinance leaves interpretation on how the
�lt/ , -�.''' | ' -.�: �'cy it . I guess I 'd just like to leave it .
-- Andrei:: . I agree .
01 Lash : So do we wit, no pets or no animals?
Schroers : What kind of an animal would you have in there that 's not a pet?'
NI Koubsky : Wsll somebody might have horses .
.
' '
Schroers : Dut a horse is sort of a pet if it 's a recreational riding horse
I uouldn `t you think?
Koubi—,./: Yeah .
IILash : So whichever we think . Pets sounds friendlier than .
Schrocrs : I guess Z agree with that . I think that 's fine too and I don 't
I thin| it 's any secret that I 'm a frequent violator of this ordinance and
I 've n: t be,a: bothered . I guess until that time I 'm happy with things the
way they are .
I
Lash : I think the people who are conscientious about it are not going to
be gattin-7:T the complaints . So you 're right . People don 't object to people
joaging through with the dog leashed or under control . It 's the obnoxious
I onss who are running around loose that drive everyone crazy .
Andrews� In likE with this pet ordinance , I don 't see anything in here
I about littering per se . Is there a littering ordinance?
Koubsy : It says please do not litter . It doesn 't say no littering .
IHoffman : I 'd have to check . I 'm sure there is in another section of the
City Cede . It 's not under City Parks but that 's one of the things we could
Certainly address here . The wording , we 've gone with leaving the no out of
I there? Do ys have to have prohibited? Expound on your preferred wording .
No pets allowed? Pet prohibited?
IILash: No pets allowed .
Pemrick : No pets allowed .
IHoffman: Straight forward . Okay .
I think another one for me at least is important is the cars
I parking on the grass . It seems to be a constant battle , especially last
year with the drought . It was really hard on the parks . So it 'd be park
in designated areas only .
~~ Lash: This other one says , please do not park or drive on grass .
IIAndrews : That 's probably even better yet .
I
Park c n Pee Commission M e e t i n g
June :25 , 1c 1 - Page 13
E-chr _ - : we are going to be issuing citations for parking on the
eke 'ld be included in the sign somehow like park rules will he
enforced .
Koubeky: E'ut there again , what 's a park rule? I don 't anybody , this is
the first time I 've seen these . Nobody 's ever looked at these or probably
will ever look .
Schroers : Some people walk up and stand there and read the whole thing and
other people don 't even , walk right by and don 't even know it 's there .
. But we 'll have people standing 5 feet away from a sign and it says
• definitely no parking here and they ' ll argue why can 't they park here . I
parked here last week and nobody told me that I couldn 't . I guess you need
to be specific , especially if we 're going to be issuing citations . If this
is just a request from us . If this sign is our request of park users to be
courte._.us , then it 's not that necessary . But if this is in fact informing
park users of the rules that we intend to enforce , then that should be
included on the sign that says park rules will be enforced . So therefore
when the enforcement person comes around , he can say here it is . It 's II right on the sign . No parking on the grass . It will be enforced . You 're
parked on .the grass . I 'm enforcing it .
Lash : These premises are patrolled? '
Andrews : I think just saying these park rules will be enforced is good .
You don 't have to hold too big of a club over the public . '
Hoffman: You run the risk of if indeed enforces laxes and they 're not
enforced , then you 're telling them they 're going to be enforced and for
the , you know this summer I 've been out at the ballfield and they 've been
parking on the grass all summer and nobody 's been doing anything about it
so there 's E flip side to that as well .
Koubsky : Say they may be enforced .
Andrews: I think just by saying the park rules will enforced , that doesn 't I
mean they 're going to catch every person . They never do but I think it
just removes an excuse from the guy saying nobody ever told me you were
going to enforce this rule . You 're the example of the day . I think that 's I
a good idea .
Hoffman: Is that a consensus? Do we want to include that , what is it like
a footnote after all? 1
Schroers: gust at the bottom say , parks rules will be enforced. Unless
someone can think of a better way to put it . _
Andrews : Violators will be prosecuted , convicted and put in prison .
Schroers : Survivors will be prosecuted yeah . 1
Hoffman: Eut the driving on grass or park property is addressed under
Section 14-67 , Use of Vehicles . It says it in a couple different ways . No II
1
11 Park and r:ce Commission Meeting
June C . 191 - Page 14
~~ driver of any vehicle or no vehicle shall be permitted to drive across or
on par1- 2 ,,nds except cn roadways . No vehicles permitted on footwalk , lawns
IIor other ground of city park su it 's an enforceable rule .
Lash : Maybe we need to also say something about no motorized vehicles on
trails . Well we have motorized vehicles further down . That continues to
I be a nuisance . Just happened last week .
Hoffman: Yeah , I think they 're two separate . Driving off the road and the
I motorlzed xohicles ' Thm other one , no motorizad vehioles allowed but then
we allow snowmobiles on designated trails .so . Let 's finish out with
I driving on the grasa .
Lash: Do you like the way it was on the old one here? 4zlease do not park
or drive on grass?
ISchroers: That sounds like a request . If we add on the bottom that the
rules are qping to be enforced , this sounds more like a request when we say
please do not park or drive on the grass . We can say parking or driving on
I grass prohibited '
Lash: Let 's make sure as we 're going here Todd , let 's make sure we 're not
IIusing the same word over and over like prohibited or whatever .
HoffmEn: Frohibited . Right ' We 've got two so far .
ILash : Twi prohibited "s?
Hoffman: Yec '
IAndrews : It 's a strong word .
Hoffman: parking or driving on grass prohibited . Alcoholic beverages
II restricted to canned beer only . Glass containers prohibited . No pets '
allowed . Down to motorized vehicles .
ILash : No motorized vehicles allowed except snowmobiles on designated
trails?
IAndrewo , That "o too long '
Lash: But is that kind of the point?
IHoffman: Yep .
Koubsky: Motorized vehicles on designated trails .
I -
Andrews : I guess I 'd put that into two rules . One would be no motorized
vehicles on park property except for roads and then have another one would
say snowmobiles restricted to marked trails only . Something like that .
I
Koubsky: I would chose the later . Just the snowmobiles on marked trails
II only .
Park and Rec Commission Meeting !
June 25 , 191 - Page 15
Lash : But that doesn 't address the problem of the other motorized vehicles I
out on the ballfields and the trails and that kind of stuff , which we have
had a problem with here . I
Hoffman: Eden Prairie has a massive problem with snowmobiles In city •
parks . They used to have some areas they allowed snowmobile trailoring in
and then accessing the trails from the parks but people came out from
farther into the city and once they got to the parks they said hey great .
Eden Prairie allows snowmobiling up around the parks so they prohibited all
snowmobiling in any park . We see it as well in our park locations down in
Chan Pond and other park locations so I think it should be fairly straight
forward in stating that no snowmobiles except on designated trails .
Lash: Snowmobiling on designated trails only . '
Pemrick: That 's good .
Andrews: That 's a good one .
Lash: No other motorized vehicles allowed? Go with a dash? No other
motorized vehicles?
Pemrick : Yeah . That 's simple . Clean and simple .
Lash : Is that the law?
Hoffman : Yeah . We 're kind of getting vague in the way of motorized ,
vehicles . In our definition vehicle means bicycle , go cart , mini-bike ,
motorcycle , snowmobile , recreational vehicle , all terrain vehicle .
Koubsky: It says in ( e ) , nothing herein shall be construed to prohibit the I
use of snowmobiles in any area of a park so designated by resolution or
ordinance . So we can 't say no snowmobiles .
Hoffman: But we can say snowmobiling in designated trails only .
Koubsky: We could say motorized vehicles . '
Schroers: We could say authorized vehicles on designated trails only .
Hoffman : People won 't know what that is . i
Koubsky: You can say motorized vehicles and snowmobiles on designated
trails only .
Lash: No . Because that opens it up to all the mini-bikes and three
wheelers going on all the trails . I
Hoffman: People think of them as recreati.onal vehicles but then that
doesn 't fall back into our defintion in our ordinances . ,
Lash: Okay , so snowmobiling on designated trails only . No other
recreational vechiles allowed?
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
June 25 , 19x'1 - Page 16
ISchroers : You know we almost have this here where it says , where we have
parking or driving on grass prohibited . I don 't know that we need to
Ispecifically address this motorized vehicles thing . The snowmobiles kind
of , their route is marked out in the winter by the Snowmobile Club or the
Snowmobile Association and they put out signs at various places to say °
please stay on the trails and that should be enough . I would think that if
I we just leave this on the park rules here where it says driving or parking
on grass prohibited , that just about covers it . You 're not going to have
snowmobiles out there in the summertime doing any damage and driving pretty
Imuch covers everything there .
Lash: But it 's not only just on the grass . I mean we have had cars drive
on the trail from Lake Ann over to Greenwood Shores .
ISchroers: Yes I know and I 've seen that .
I Lash : The mini-bikes and the 3 wheelers and stuff , that doesn 't address
that at all .
I Andrews: I think you do need to be more specific other than kind of hide
behind the definition of vehicle . I think you need to be more specific on
what type of vehicle you mean .
I Lash : Well , if we say snowmobiling on trails is allowed . On the
designated trails , no other recreational vehicles allowed . Period . Are
they allowed in there anywhere?
IHoffman: No .
IKoubsky : They 're allowed on the roadways .
Schroers : Only if it would be a licensed vehicle . We 're kind of
discriminating against the people who like to drive ATV 's or 3 wheelers
I because we allow snowmobiling but we don 't allow them the use so when we
get too specific where we 're kind of signaling them out .
IAndrews: That 's what the law says though .
Lash: But that 's it . I mean the law says we can have snowmobiles .
I , Koubsky : It says you can have any vehicles though . It says no vehicle of
any kind shall be permitted to drive across or on parklands except on
roadways . So basically to me I interpret that as yeah , that 's number ( e )
I on the last page . It kind of opens any vehicle into a park as long as it
drives on the roadway . Then it defines vehicles as mini-bikes , go carts
and everything . So for us to .
IAndrews: But the State law says in order to operate on a public roadway
you have to be a licensed vehicle so we gr`_ kind of , we 're hiding behind
kind of a complications here of the law . We 're saying you 're allowed to
I bring a vehicle in but then that vehicle isn 't legal because it 's not
licensed . So I think we have to get specific here .
I
Park anci Rec Coi,,,nission Meeting '
June 25 , 1991 - Page 17
Koubsky: But are we describing State laws here or City ordinances?
Andrews : Well these are public roads . They would have to comply with
State licensing laws I would assume . You don 't want a situation where
somebody thinks they can take their go cart into the city park on a
trailer . Take it off the trailer and run it around on those roads .
Koubsky : Right , I agree .
Andrews: Somebody will do it if they think it 's okay : Any suggestions
Todd?
•
Hoffman: Again this falls a little bit back into the pet category in that
how big a problem are we perceiving with ATV 's . With mini-bikes . That
type of thing . There is some signage at Greenwood Shores at the entrance
that says no mini-bikes and then it says no recreational or no . . .vehicles ,
that type of thing . So that 's one location which has experienced a problem 1
in the past and that 's because it 's the entranceway to a trailway which
lends itself to that type of vehicle . Other than that , I can 't lay a claim
to hearing any other comments about ATV 's . I 've heard comments about .ATV 's
on the snowmobile trails which are not allowed and which will not be
allowed into the future . The Snowmobile Club is maintaining , is doing the
footwork and maintaining that trailway . They 're certainly not going to
allow ATV 's or 4 wheelers on their trails so we have to address that . So
it becomes one of those , do you have to include it or do we think it 's
something that , again the signs , it 's educational but we 're trying to
educate the masses . Obviously glass is one that you want to educate the
masses . Maybe recreational vehicles are so minor that the one or two or
three times they come up during the summer , we can still go back to the
ordinanec. and deal with it . We still have it backed up but are we knocking I
ourselves over the head trying to get it onto the sign .
Andrews: I guess the one thing I see as a problem on our neighborhood park
at North Lotus is snowmobiles are operating in the park in an unrestricted I
manner . I 'm sure that 's because nobody tells them that they 're restricted
to the designated areas .
Hoffman: Yeah , the snowmobiling one I feel is important . People feel they I
get that cushion of 6 inches of snow and they can go just about anywhere
they want . Like that snow is new property .
Schroers: I still think that driving or parking on the grass prohibited
takes care of most of the park thing and that we could have signs , just
individual , small signs that need not be on the park rules sign at the I
entrance to trails such as in the area of the boat launch at Lake Ann and
maybe another sign on the end of the trail at Greenwood Shores and at any
other park where it would imply that would say no motorized vehicles
because where we 're actually talking about and where the violations are
mainly coming from in the non-winter season is on the trails . ATV 's going
on the trails .
Hoffman: Going back to your suggestion about including parking or driving
on the grass . . . .we could try something like parking or driving of any
•
I
'
Park and Poe Commission Meeting
��
June 2E. , 1 �91 - Page 18
NI motorized vehicles and then bring in days . The roadways or parking lots ,
pari- ing or diivino any motorized vehicle off roadways or parking lots
prohiLitec' .
Schroers : Sure .
IPemrick : There y: _i go .
Hoffman: We can try to shorten that but that gets all, motorized vehicles '
in there . It says cars are not allowed on grass or off of the grass or off
I of the parking and then it says all other motorized vehicles are not
. allowed . ^
Lash: No motorized vehicles allowed .
��
Hoffman : Jim , we missed your go cart in the parking lot .
IAndrews: But I guess can we , we 're taking away something with that
statem.,:nt . We 're taking away everything which is kind of what we want but
then I tHnk we 'd maybe want to give back the snowmobile useage by saying
I snowmoLiling is allowed on designated areas .
.
Hoffman: Keep that one .
I
Lash : That needs to stay in . No motorized vehicles .
IAndraws : Take it away with the big print and give it back with the emall
print .
Lash ; No motorized vehicles allowed on .
Hoffman : Off of roadways or parking lots .
ILash : Sounds like we 're putting the whole ordinance in there .
Koubsky: It says roadways . I think you can consider a parking lot as a
Iroadway .
Andrews : Better say it .
N� Schroers: No motorized vehicles allowed .
Lash:Lash: On park grounds?
ISchroers: No . I was thinking of paved areas but we do have some trails
that are paved that we don 't want the people on . So yeah , you almost have
I to say roadways and parking lots because that 's the only place we want
motorized vehicles is on the roadways and parking lots .
Lash: Motorized vehicles allowed on roadways and parking areas only .
-- Sohrnera : Yeah .
I
I '
Park an_? Fec Commission Meeting
June 25 , 1991 -- Page 19
Koubs-ky : Or no motorized vehicles allowed off roadways or parking lots.
Hoffna : because then you 've included all the other things . So we 've got
Dave 's which is no motorized . -
Andrews: I like it the other way around which is motorized vehicles
restricted to parking , or roadways and parking lots .
Lash : Only , yeah .
Andrews : Instead of the other way around .
Schroers : We could just say all motorized vehicles restricted to roadways
and parking lots except snowmobiles in designated areas . If you want to
include it that way . But if you just say all motorized vehicles restricted
to roadways and parking areas .
Lash : And then maybe the next line you could put snowmobiling restricted
to designated areas so it 's not like a total run on sentence .
Andrews : Yeah I like the snowmobiles as a separate line . -
Schroers : Yeah .
Andrews.: So you just point and say , it 's number 6 . Right there you know .
Pemrick : It doesn 't say all terrain vehicle . It doesn 't say . '
Andrews : It says specifically snowmobiles .
Hoffman : Falling back to Jim 's previous statement . Then however we are ,
saying that you are allowed to bring your motorbike into the park and run
it up anc down the road .
Koubsky : According to the ordinance you are .
Andrews : As long as it 's licensed . t
Koubsky: Well yeah , licensed would be a State thing but as far as city .
The City doesn 't even differentiate licensed vehicles . '
Andrews : Well it would be the same as if you took your go cart out in
front of your house and drove it on the street . The city ordinance doesn 't
prohibit that but you 're breaking the law and I 'm sure that if that was the I
problem we could find a city official who 'd be more than willing to stop
that .
Hoffman: Motorized vehicles allowed on roadways . -
Andrews: I thought we were going the other way on that .
Hoffman: Yeah , motorized vehicles .
1
Park enH P: - [om" lsslon Meeting
��
June 2 , 199'1 - Page 20
IAndre - : P*stricted . -
II
Hoffmn : Fcsti ; cted .
' '
Lash : To roadways` and parking areas .
IAndrews: And parking areas only .
Hoffman : And the second would be snowmobiling on designated trails only .
ILash: Then we have only only there .
~ .
Hoffman : Any of the other ones which are of some importance include the
I litter refuoe diaposal and p�rh hour� ' P�rk hour� are 6 ' ': OO a m tn 1O: OO
p .m . . Doe s anybody have any dispute with that one?
ILash: No .
Schroers : You know the sign should really have some kind of a greeting
like Welcom� to Lake Ann Park . Hours . Just kind of soften up the first
I
impression before we get down to the rules . The prohibited and the only 's .
Andrews : Have you heard Morgan Mundane where he says have a nice day if
I you oan?
Lash : Have fun if you can .
IHoffman: Okay , so the first one is park hours 6: 00 a 'm '- 10: 00 p .m . .'
Schroers : As far as the littering , that could be a request . Please use
I littering receptacles .
Andrews : Please keep our parks beautiful . Don 't litter .
w= Sohroerc : Please keep your park clean . Don 't litter . Something like
that .
IHoffman: Okay . We need some exact wording .
Pemrick : Keep your park clean , don 't litter .
. I
Lash: Please don 't .
IPemrick: Yeah , keep your park clean . Please don 't litter .
Schroers: It 's like we 're asking them for some help . Help keep our park
Iclean . Please don 't litter .
.
Pemrick: That 's good .
111 .e Lash: It shows ownership ther -
Schroers : This is going to be quite a sign .
II
II
Park and Pei Commission Meeting N�
June 2E. . 1991 - Page 21
Hoffman : K/ intentions are that it 's going to be . N�
Sohr^erc : 4 , E?
Hoffman: 3 x 4 or a little less so about 2 1/2 by 3 1/2 . '
Schroers : Our beach rule signs are 4 x 8 .
1
Hoffman: Yeah for the beach . You 've got a lot of rules there . You don 't
want to make an eye sore either . I think I 've stated there "o about 30 . . '
about SO of these signs . N�
Andrews: What you need is where you have about an extra 3 feet at the
bottom so you can add more later . N�
Hoffman: Help keep our parks clean . Please do not litter .
Lash : Pleas don 't litter . m�
Hoffman: Please don 't?
Snhrocrs ' Do not is more authorative .
Androwt7 : I like that better . Please do not litter . N�
Hoffman: I don 't think we use don 't in our standard useage but okay . Then
underneath that the park rules will be enforced? Park rules are enforced?
Ull1 b-3 ind of , well they will be . Or are? N�
Schroers : I think it should just say park rules enforced . No will be . No
are . Just park rules enforced .
I
Hoffman: I like that Lar . Three words .
Lash : Do we have to pay by the word on the sign? w�
Hoffman: By the letters .
m�
Schroers : Signs are expensive .
Andrews : It sure would be nice if we could do routed wood but that costs a I
fortune .
Hoffman: Looking at probably a reflectorized sign so it can be read during I eveninQs -
Schroers: Metal .
Hoffman: Metal or the polyclave is getti +GD very good reviews . . Used
extensively in some of the park districts now . It cannot be bent , broken .
Stands up well . Have you uspd any polyclave? N�
Schroers: No , we have our own special wooden signs that costs us tons .
NI Park and Roo Commission Meeting
June 2� , 1991 - Page 22
ILash : Do you have a color in mind that sounds good?
Hoffman : ,� l . Etandard park color , either a brown with white lettering .
I It wouli bc: good to standardize all our signs and the additional signs -
would Le that color . Does that appeal to your liking? '
ISchroers: I think that 's a good idea . When people drive down the road
they can identify the color and type of sign and say that must be a park
there .
IHoffman : Either brown or green .
IPemrick : Brown .
Andrews : That 's consistent with the park .
IKoubsky : What are your other park signs?
Hoffman : Mish mash . That 's why we want to provide some tonsitency . But
the newest ones we 've ordered are brown with white letters .
Lash: If we already have brown , personally I like greens because it makes II' me think cf a park . Green space . . .
Schroers : Well we 're consistent with State signs . Most of them are brown .
State parks .
ILash : Did we cover everything now?
Hoffman : I believe so . Unless anybody else had a particular item that was
I not addressed .
Schroers : How about throwing that all together and running it back to us
I and aee if we hear oomethinO w* don "t like '
.
Andrews: Lake Ann , is there a separate sign for the permit , vehicle permit
I requjred?
Hoffman: Yeah . We 'll come up with some separate . There will be some
special interest signs . Beach signs . South Lotus Lake signs . Those kind
I of things . Okay I ' ll run these by you once and then also bring them back
in a written form with some price proposals and layout proposals .
Ik
Lash: And then when you look at it , to me there sort of seems like a .
Hoffman : An order?
ILash: Yeah , there should be a good order like putting the parking and then
the motorized vehicle thing and the snowm ~ ile and the littering and the
cans and the glass and all that so there 's sort of seems like if you look
I over the whole thing there 'd be a good order . I don 't know what it is
right now .
II
II
Par r an:.' P9: Cc- nission Meeting
II
June 2., , , c,c,1 - Page 23
Hoffmar : We need to talk about a header . This one had Park Courtesy II
Rules . Palk Rules . City of Chanhassen Park Rules .
Lash : Park Pules .
II
Pemrick : Park Rules .
Lash: Now that I know it 's by the letter . II
Hoffman : Probably not . i
Andrews: Rules .
Lash : Laws . That 's shorter .
II
Koubsky: Pules to recreate by .
Hoffman : Park Rules? Consensus? Okay . The first one was the park hours . i
Schroers ' Yeah .
II
Hoffman : Park Hours 6 :00 a .m . to 10:00 p .m . .
Schroers: Is there a greeting somewhere else out there? Is there another
sign that says Lake Ann Park or Welcome to Lake Ann? I can 't remember .
Hoffman: All parks have a park sign . Nothing that says Welcome . But
parks have a park sign which Lake Ann Park . Carver Beach Park . Welcome to I
Chanhassen 's Park? You want to be friendly right Lar?
Lash : But it would end up costing more if we had to have each individual I
sign made differently wouldn 't it?
Hoffman : Oh yeah .
I
Lash: We wouldn 't want to include the name of the park on the sign .
Schroers: I guess on the rules sign a greeting really wouldn 't work that I
well . I would go along with Park Rules .
Hoffman : Park Rules? Okay . Number 1 is park hours 6:00 a .m . to 10:00
II
p .m . . Number 2 , we can choose from pets , glass . Those are our next .
Lash : Parking . That seems like it should go first because that 's the
first thing people are going to see and the first thing they 're going to do
when they get in there .
Hoffman: -Okay . Motorized vehicles restricted to roadways and .parking I
areas only? That 's 2? Snowmobiles 3? That 's another only . Snowmobiling
on designated trails only .
Koubsky : I would put that on the bottom . I
I
I
I Pare and Fr_c Commission Meeting
June " ', , 1'T ")1 Page 24
ISchroer-F: I think I would too . Separate that .
II Andrews :\'� f . that d: eon t apply to very many people .
Andr o s : Na N it doesn 't .
IKoubsky : It 's see oval .
Schroer` : Very few people drive through that gate with a snowmobile . _
II mean some do but most of the snowmobiles come driving through .
Lash: Okay so the parking , motorized vehicles on roadways . •
IKoubsky : Glass and alcohol .
Hoffman: Class, should go first and then alcohol? Glass containers
Iprohibited .
Schroar: : No glass containers which kind of already tells them that they
Ican 't have hard liquor which will further define our alcohol statement .
Hoffman: Okay . 3 , is glass containers prohibited . 4 , alcoholic beverages
restricted to canned beer only . 5 , would be no pets allowed . 6 , would be
I snowmcbiiinc, in designated trails only . 7 , help keep our parks clean .
Please do not litter . And at the bottom , park rules enforced . Okay?
Seven rules. .
ILeas I f, _ I l ' _ God .
Andrews : I still think we should put have a nice day if you can .
ISchr oers • Okay , can we move onto item 4 now?
ISITE PLAN REVIEW , CHES MAR TRAILS.
Hoffman : As can be seen , it 's a fairly simple subdivision . However , it
I did include a trail segment as identified in our Comprehensive Plan . As
such we would need to address it . As seen in your packet the subject
property . The trail link is identified as a phase 3 or 2000 , 2010 trail
link starting on TH 5 directly across from Arboretum entrance and going
I along Crimson Bay Road . Crimson Bay easement was obtained from the end of
the cul-de-sac up to the property line where the Zimmerman piece picks up .
That easement was obtained as well to make a connection from Crimson Bay
I Road up to Dogwood Road so the first two phases have already been secured .
Then the trail will either be on street on Dogwood or in the easement . On
street along Tanadoona and then come across in some configuration on this
Iproperty . In talking with the applicant , they would like to see this
easement be taken along one of the property lines . Currently the property
line is about in this location . Staff has no problem working with them on
that . We could continue to do so just to insure that we do get a high and
I dry trail easement . Something that 's . . .a lowland or a wetland . Something
of that nature . But I advocate again taking that . . .trail easement . My
perception is that working with Camp Tanadoona , it 's not going to be very
I
II
Pe,-, Commission Meeting I
June 25 , 1991 - Page 25
difficult aT a low intensive use property . It 's a camp . They should be
all it favor of a trailway . However , that property may be at sore time in
the -F'-" -e s o l c' off cr separated or split off . That t ype of thi ra . What
this &g_ is allow residents . Not only the residents but . . .any groups from
the Arboretum wHich have an interest of traversing by foot to the
Minnewashta Park . They could do so from the Arboretum . It also allows all
the residents in this area to walk the system and get up into Minnewashta
Regional Park .
Lash: What do you think for the near future for getting Tanadoona to
cooperate?
Hoffman: In the near future? I don 't think it 's going to be a problem .
Lash : So are you going to pursue that?
Hoffman: Yeah , this trail link could come more quickly than the Phase 3 .
Again , it depends on to what extent we want to develop it . Gravel ,
bituminous . Those types of things but it would certainly bring it much
closer . '
La=_ h: HEve you looked at where the access point at the property line that
the people are asking that we put it there . Have you looked at what the
access point is into the park?
Hoffman : Just spoke with Mr . Swaggert today and we ' ll continue to clear
those types of questions up prior to going to the Council . ,
Lash : Okay . That would have a big impact on where you put it . I mean if
it comes into a wetland . '
Hoffman: Correct . Obviously when you split somebody 's property it 's not a
physic- ? . It 's a physical split but it doesn 't -create a big impact but
they 're more comfortable if it would go on the property line . That way
it 's way down . . . and it 's way down on his end of the lot and Mr . Swaggert
also is concerned that he 'll be fencing this off for horses and if it comes
in the middle then he has to put a fence there and another fence on the
other side . So putting it at the property line would be his favored option
and we ' ll continue to work with him to find an amenable solution for both
the City and the landowner .
Schroers : So basically what we 're recommending is that the Council require
a 20 foot easement but not a specific designated route at this time?
Hoffman: Correct .
Lash: By the time you took it to Council it would be designated though?
Hoffman: Yep . We 'll work with the folks in Planning and the applicants .
Schroers: Well I can 't see that we wouldn 't want to recommend to require
the easement when two are already in place and this would be the third and
we only need one more link to complete the trail . I mean we 're halfway
i
II Park 4r,_' Pc7Comission Meeting
Jun- , I c ?1 Page. 26
IIhcn_ not . :Unless someone has other concerns , I would make the .
rec :„ m,, d: tion to recommend to Council to require the 20 foot easement .
Is i -E E -` - nd
IPemrick : I ' ll second that .
II Lash: We don 't need to specify anything about location? That the location
is to be deemed appropriate by staff .
IHoffman : Yeah . Jointly benefitting the City and the applicant .
Schroers : I kind of did it just the way jt is here . Require this 20 foot
trail easement so I can kind of identify which one we 're talking about .
IAndrews : Okay . Did you get a second? °
ISchroers : Wendy seconded .
Schroers moved , Pemrick seconded that the Park and Recreation Commission
I recommend to require a 20 foot trail easement across the Ches Mar Trails
Subdivision at a location deemed appropriate by the City and applicant.
All voted in favor and the motion carried.
I Lash : Dor.;e mike a recommendation that we have staff contact Tanadoona and
pursue the connection there? Would we do that formally or go ahead .
IISchroer= : I think we can trust staff to follow up on that since they told
us thct they would .
Hoffman:an: Y h . Again , if we want to do that formally , we really need to
make a change to our Comprehensive Plan since there was a reason why it was
included as a Phase 3 . When it went through the development of the
Comprehensive Trail Plan , the Commission thought there were many other
I trails within the City which are more important than this one . If we don 't
incur any costs , we could very easily do it but how do you , if you 're not
going to lay a bituminous or an aggregate surface , then how do you
I designate the trailway and that type of thing and keep people from walking
all over the place? So we would have to incur some costs to install the
trail and that may be the drawback . We want to save those funds .
ISchroers: Okay . Then we can move on to 5 .
1991 FOURTH OF JULY CELEBRATION.
I
Ruegemer : We 're all set to go . The 4th of July will soon be upon us . Less
I than about 8 days away here . The 4th of July is well into it 's planning
stages . The 4th of July this year we 'll spend over 3 days again beginning
on Wednesday , July 3rd , Thursday , July 4th and Saturday July 6th we will be
wrapping up . Currently Wednesday is going to be designated as the street
Idance day up at City Center Park . We ' ll be having a lot of the activities
from years past including the 'kiddy parade and the trade fair which is the
second year . There 's continued interest in that . Local businesses getting
I
II
Park _ Fe Co s I P
o „_: mm��sion Meeting
June 25 , 1991 - Page 27
into a trade fair type of deal . It 's a really good set up this year . I ' ll 11
be having the entertainment again . All the carnival games which were very
attended games of last year . We 'll have the hot air again and the pony
rid: :, and including with the street dance featuring the Hi-Tops again . And ,
all those have been booked already a long time here . Thursday's going to.
be designated as a family day out at Lake Ann . We 're going to be starting
with the kids fishing contest which was very popular last year . We have
100 available spots for that which filled completely last year . We 're on a
pretty good pace this year also . - Also with the family games and the
innertube relays . We ' ll have a lot of family oriented games again this
year which were very well attended last year . We 'll start then with music
in the park with Jeff Brooks again and that was very well attended and
conclude on Thursday with the fireworks at Lake Ann starting around dusk .
Then to close out the 4th of July celebration , we 're going to be having the II
adult fishing contest on Saturday , July 6th as well as two softball
tournaments . Those will be double elimination with a Co-rec and a Men 's
Open tournament . As far as advertising for the tournament , the signs did
go up . The 4 x B plywood signs at selected areas around town and also' the
banner has been hung over by the St . Hubert 's Church . As well as an insert
was put into the Villager last week and we 're having a feature story this
Thursday on the schedule of events and the 4th of July celebration . At
this tirr : I 'd lil- c to entertain any comments or questions from the
Commission on the 4th of July celebration .
Lash : I have just a side question that occurred to me . What does the II
money go towards that we get from all the games out here?
Ruegemer : From the games? II
Lash: Yeah . I
Ruegerner : That 's used to help offset the costs as far as if you would like
to apply that to the fireworks display .
Hoffman: Basically the carnival games out here are purchased and then I
supplies to operate them . If there 's excess , it pays for purchase of
tents , fireworks , those types of things . Traditionally large companies
I
donate enough money to cover the cost of the fireworks . However , that is
not occurring anymore . They 're reducing . They still donate but they 're
reducing their amount . However with the upsurge in other businesses , we 're II
getting a larger amount of smaller donations . Donations .were remaining
fairly constant . We 're looking to other forms of offsetting the cost . The
celebration no doubt is subsidized, by the general budget but it 's our
largest community celebration and it 's well received . I think if we were
to quit , we would be .
Pemrick : Lynching . I
Lash: It 'd be an uproar . .
Hoffman: Lynching and uproar . That type of thing so we 're taking a look
II
at it . We 're going to have a raffle this year . Raffle off a number of
like 520 .00-¢25 .00 prizes to again generate some more income . But the
II
1
1 P:r k ar J CommCommission Meeting
rc 2E , 1 OC_,1 Page 28
IIfes' _ . a_ L , na means make money . But it 's not a burden on our budget
IILash : I _ _ ve the schcdule this year . .
Pemrick : Yeah , I do too .
1 Lash : It works out nice and I especially like the fact that the softball
tournament is not going on at the same time as the kids fishing . For a lot
II of people that was a conflict . You wanted to be down with your kids to
help them fish but then you were scheduled to play ball so this works out
really nice . I like it a lot .
IHoffman : T-shirts . Again this year the theme .
Pemrick : Are they spelled right?
IHoffmn : Oh you bet . The red , white and blue . Again these t-shirts are
available free of charge to anybody who would like to sign up to help on
ary date throughout the festival . Other than that they 're available to the
II general public at 1'7 .00 a piece . Just another way of celebrating .
• Schroers : I am going to volunteer to help . However , I don 't have a handle
II on my personal schedule right at the moment so I 'm going to have to get
back to yon
IIHoffman: Saturday morning Larry . Need some help with the fishing contest .
Adults-, , if you 're available?
Lash : Speaking of that now , I seem to recall last year there was a
conflict co.fer something . What was that?
Hoffman : Someone brought fish in late?
ILash : Yeah , that was it . You did good though so never mind . No , I just
remembered there was a problem and I couldn 't remember what it was .
1 Hoffman : Yeah . This guy was fairly heated .
Schroers : That goes from when to when?
1 Ruegemer : Is it 9 :00 to 11 :00?
1 Hoffman: 8: 00 to 11 :00 . 8: 00 to 11 :30 . 2 1/2 hours .
Lash : Do you have a list of rules for people when they start so they know
1 exactly . -
Hoffman: You bet . Yeah , specifically it `raid this year 11 :30 you must be ,
your fish must be weighed in or at the check in table .
1 Schroers: Why don 't you sign me up for that Jerry and if I find that that
doesn 't work , I ' ll figure out something that does .
1
II
Park Pee_ Commission Meeting
e 2E , 1r � Rage 29
Andre-L -2 : The other comment I had was , remember last year I made the
comment about the debris falling out of the sky in eyes . I was one of them
that : i_ ecrr,c in m; eyes . Are they doing anything differently this year?
Hoffman : Yeah . We 're planning on bringing that back probably to about the
middle of the beach and we 'll partition that off real early in the evening 11
so you don 't have people who set up in that area .
Schroers : We 're also going to require everyone in attendance to wear
Oakley sunglasses . I
Hoffman: And then as well , last year it was the wind that was coming in
strong out of the west and we 'll keep a watch on that as well . '
Andrews: Pass an ordinance , no westerly winds .
Pemrick : I can work on the 3rd .
Hoffman: Evening?
Pemrick : Yes.I
Lash: I traditionally have done , I ' ll do a game out here and then I 'll
help or. . Yeah , I gc to everything so .
Pemrick : Wait now , yeah that 's City Center Park on the 3rd? Yeah . I 'm
planning on going to the kiddy parade and then I 'll be free after that .
Schroers: And that 's like Wednesday evening right?
Hoffman : Yep . In the evening . I
Schroers: So the normal softball games are going to be going on at Lake
Ann that night?
Ruegemer : No . Not during that week . Just there 'd be a few make-ups on
Monday and Tuesday .
Andrews: Put me down for Wednesday . I 'll be there .
Pemrick : If it 's as hot as last year , you bring the water around a lot
more frequently because that was really bad .
Ruegemer : The shifts are broken down into two timeframes . 5:30 to like
quarter to 7:00 .
Hoffman: Hour and 45 minutes on the games . I
Ruegemer : 6 :00 to 7 : 45 and then 7: 45 to 9:30 .
Hoffman : Believe me I didn 't feel real comfortable making you stick in
there but you did it out of commitment .
1
'
IIP=' / � p. : Commission �eeting
` ,
` '�r� :Tr , 2 o1 - Page - D
IILash : r' ` inLinidation .
Hcf�r ` ' ' 77 - .
-- Lash: I mcsn I was ready to pass out . I was so hot .
NI Pemriok : You looked awful .
Ancir*ur : We were selling t-shirts until after 10: 00 because people came , '
as l�ng th: band was playing , we were selling t-shirts pretty much as
I peoplE wanted them I think .
'
' •
Lash : Were you having the dunk tank again?
~~ Hoffman: That was put on the by the Jaycee 's and they 're now defunct .
I Lash : That :as fux '
Hoffman: Ycch , we 're also having a t-shirt table as well we 're selling
raffl ticiets and t-shirts at one table so lots of things going on .
Lash : H.:-\;:E if you need people to help at that . I guess I 'd maybe be more
incline::: to split my shift and do an hour at a game and then an hour
II e*llig so you `re bendlng over plcking up . . .for 2 houro .
Pemrici. : Yeah , that was tough . That bending over .
IILash-,: PA-id all the tlood "s rushing to your head .
Pemrick : Where do we check in for duties?
II
Hoffman: FNI�ht there at the tent .
IAndrepo : He ' ll find us . Last year he pulled us right out of the car .
Lash: You ucre l &ta . Did I read this or did I just imagine this that you
had a cchad:le rain out for the Hi-Tops for Saturday night if Wednesday
I night doesn 't work out . Is that true?
Ruegemer : I think it was the 5th . Friday night .
U '
Lash: Friday night , okay . Is that publicized so people would know?
N� Ruegemer : It 's in the contract but it hasn 't been in the schedule of
��
~~
events .
Hoffman: That is a very good point . I 'm not even sure if we 've included
I that in the past brochures . They 've always agreed to a rain out date but
it would bc difficult at that point to advertise it so let 's see where are
we at? We could put it in next Thursday 's paper .
~~ Lash: Yeah , but that 's the 4th of July .
I
I . .
Park R:d Commission Meeting I
aurc LE , 1°O1 - Page 31
Andre _ : If it rained yesterday .
He ;: : _ , the dance was rained out yesterday , come tomorrow .
I
Lash : Yc_1 can probably arrange like with the bank to put it on the lighted
thing maybe .
Andrew:: Is there going to be a beer tent?
Hoffman : You bet . I
F'emrick: Yeah , hot dogs .
Hoffman: Dave , I think you 're the only soul we haven 't heard from . '
Koubek; : Yeah I know that . Let me get back with you okay?
Hoffman: '=gain it 's a big effort . Traditionally members ,
. � g i tonally comml��icn member
Council members and city employees and seasonal employees are the one 's who
have Find of pulled it off . At some point we 'd look to expanding that but II
traditionally we 've done a good job .
Pemrick : It 's a lot of fun .
Andrews Time goes fast .
Schroers: Jerry I just want to understand what you said . You said that
there are going to be no softball games played out at Lake Ann Wednesday
the
Ruegec E,I : Right .
Schroers : So how does that come up on our schedules? Is that a bye or
something on there?
Ruegcmer : There wasn 't any games scheduled .
Schroers : We just skip a week .
Ruegemer : Right . That 's a no play week . That 's considered a holiday .
You enter that into the computer and then it prints out and skips that
week . It goes the week before and then the week after . So that would just
prolong it .
Schroers: So we 've got a week off?
Ruegemer : Right . _ 1
Hoffman: Doesn 't it say in there no games on your schedule?
Ruegemer : I don 't know if it has that capacity but it isn 't listed . '
Schroers: Okay . Is there anymore discussion on 4th of July?
11
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
June 25 , 1991 - Pane 32
1992 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT BUDGET , PRELIMINARY DISCUSSION .
•
Hoffman : As stated , due to the number of items on tonight 's agenda , I just
' want to c,et the Commission thinking about this . This is an opportunity for
us in the 1992 fiscal year do a- bang up job on our budget preparation so we
have a good year in 1992 following through . This year and in year 's past
' we 've , well there 's one on here tonight again , a re-appropriation . Anytime
we came keep to a minimum re-appropriations or budget amendments , that type
of thine our year just runs much more smoothly . So I just wanted to get
started early . Tonight I would just like to open it up to Commission
t members to pinpoint on some areas that have been re-occuring in your minds .
You have been hearing on a certain park or a certain item . What you think
needs some attention in 1992 . I ' ll take those items . Put those together
' with an expanded list . I 've been jotting down park acquisition and
development area . Jerry 's been jotting things down in the recreation area
as they come in over the past 6 or 8 months and we 'll put that list
together so you ' ll have something to work off of next meeting when we come
' back and take a closer look at this and go specifically park by park and
seeing where we think the needs are .
1 Schroers : I have something unless . As you know some of us have been
involved in the City Center Park , if you want to call it improvement
project . We are running considerably short of funding for completing the
park the way we would like to have it . In looking at our 1992 capital
improvement budget , we may want to consider if there are items on there
that are not real feasible to be completed in 1992 or for one reason or
another that we could put it back . Shuffle around and maybe re-up some of
I those funds to help complete this City Center playground project . The way
it 's corning out is that we are going to have some pretty extensive
preliminary ground work for getting the play area laid out and that 's going
I to be expensive . Then what we 're going to end up with is very little play
apparatus . We 're going to have the area is set up real nice and then
there 's a lot of grading and drainage and bordering and surface materials
I and things that are eating up a lot of costs . . . We are looking at to put
in place is a modular type of system that you can add to but we would like
to have something in there that looks like we 've accomplished something .
We don 't want to say that we spent $50 ,000 .00 and all we 've got is pearock
Iand border .
Hoffman: Larry , I can expand on that . Those plans and specs for that
I continue to evolve and change in dealing with the Federal money , the Block
Grant money and that type of thing . When we get into the updates a little
bit later on I 'll explain that but we 're slightly better off than explained
and talked about at the last meeting . So we 're better off than originally
1 thought .
Schroers: Okay , the only thing I might add to that is the fact that , this
I is kind of a combination project between the school and the City and there
seems to be some kind of a false wall there or like it 's two sides of the
fence but I really don 't see that . The school does not say that other
I people can 't use the play area while the school 's in session or where
they 're having recess . I see this whole City Center Park area here as
something that is open to the community all the time and I don 't have a
I
Park and R�-c Commio._ion Meeting
June 25 , 1c-)?'1 - Page 33
problem putting park funds into that project . I think that the likelihood
that the school would say well we 're going to be using this from this time
and we don 't want others here at that time , I just don 't see a problem like
that coring up . So I think we could justify spending some of our budget in
that al ea .
Lash: I 'd agree . It 's been on hold for so many years and everybody 's had
big expectations of what it 's going to be like when it 's done and if we
kind of scale down from our visions , it will be kind of disappointing so I
would have no problem with that . And it 's used I 'd say probably more than
any other park in town as far as kids . '
Schroers: And a lot of work has been done' on it . It is continuing to be
done on it . The fly in the ointment , the thing that 's really holding up
the program is the lack of the funds . So that 's what we. need to do is take
a close look at the budget and see what is actually viable that we can and
want to do in 1992 and then where we may be able to acquire some funds .
Where we have pretty much bugged the school or solicited the school as much I
as is possible and they are totally saturated . We can 't really expect more
money from the school so we have to find other funds .
Lash : Have you attempted to getting any kind of commitment from APT or any I
funding? If we wanted to put in extra money next year , would they be
willing to put in a little extra . They do several fund raisers .
Hoffman : They put in $8 ,000 .00 this year and they 're not making any
commitments for future years at this time .
Schroers : So that 's just something that I would like to key on for when we
actually do get into looking at the specifics of the budget in terms of the
capital improvement program . '
Lash: I guess too that popped to my mind right away is the Herman Field .
To probably try and continue work there and Pheasant Hills . Those are two
projects that have been hanging over our heads with a big demand usually
behind them for a long time .
Andrews: I agree with Larry that City Center should be top priority . It
is our city showpiece so to speak and I think we have a commitment to the
City to finish that project promptly and do it properly . A few other areas
that kind of popped to my mind are park deficiency problems on the south I
side of town . Especially in the Lake Susan Hills area where it 's growing
there faster than we can provide equipment for those parks . I think we
ought to try and do what we can there to get caught up . However you can do
that I don 't know . And then with our pavillion that we 're talking about
this year , I believe that the landscaping budget was cut back quite
substantially I think if I remember correctly . We may want to look at that
as to if we need to provide something for next year to finish that off and
really dress it up nice for Lake Ann . And then this is something that it 's
not a park but I guess I look at this as ■cmething I don 't want to see it
die as Bluff Creek . How can we keep that idea going? What can we do to I
facilitate a park or protection of that area? I don 't think we 've really
discussed how we can do that . It 's not parkland but is there anyway we can
I
1
' Park arH Pee Commission Meeting
June Page 34
set UP a committee or some sort of group that could be active and try to
th___ project moving .
•
Hoffman: Currently the Planning Commission is working very diligently on a
bluff preE.ervation ordinance so that would provide some protection to the
Bluff Crest, area . So that 's the first avenue but there are certainly other
' avenues to investigate .
Lash : Another one that just popped to my mind is the lady who was here at
' the last meeting from out by Lake Minnewashta or whatever and she was
talking about some of that equipment being in poor condition . Maybe we
want to look at that .
•
11 Schroers : We did decide to take some action on that didn 't we?
Hoffman : For this year to provide border wood for the current facility .
Current play equipment and then so it can be expanded in the future or this
piece taken out and a new piece put in . Then put in the pea gravel .
Lash : What they have there is pretty old and decrepit isn 't it?
' Hoffman : Yep .
' Lash : She made it sound like there 's been a pretty big turnover in the
population . There 's more little kids . Also Curry Farms kind of pops up
and Chan rill` . They 're already budgeted for some stuff for next year
aren 't they?
Hoffman : Potentially in our 5 year capital improvement . *We 'll go through
that . That 's get very unrealistic very quickly . Curry Farms had
' $10 .000 .00 this year . Chanhassen Hills had 0 allocated this year so Chan
Hills is a natural for next year .
Houbsky : I guess something I 'd like to keep in mind . It probably is on
the 5 year plan but we do have a census that came out and you probably did
a demographic survey of some sort with the new kids coming up and several
' items that have come up throughout the year is kind of putting out fires
for the Chanhassen Athletic program and the youth athletics . It seems like
we 're always kind of shuffling . We need a soccer field is an urgent demand
or this new ballfield is an urgent demand . I 'd just like to make sure that
' we keep looking ahead and try to guess what our needs are going to be in 4
years or 5 years . With the new communities having children like crazy and
now the upswing in the 4th graders , there 's going to be a lot more demand
' in the youth programs . Not only , both boys and girls programs and I 'd just
like to ensure that we meet that on a progressive basis . That the City 's
ready for those population increases and design that into our system .
I Lash : Maybe we need to address that along with Larry 's . We have the
master plan for City Center Park . Maybe _ t 's time to think about trying to
head in that direction . Getting the addi !'ional fields and stuff .
IHoffman : When we start taking a look at potentially developing a master
plan at City Center or Bandimere , we 're going to have to time those . Those
Park an Pec Commission Meeting
Jude 25 , 1991 - ,Wage 35
are not going to be projects that we can potentially carry out of our
general acquisition and development fund . At some point were going to
have .o go back to the public and sell some general obligation bonds and
pursue those on a referendum level . ,
Lash : I can see the Bandimere one . I mean that would be a massive project
but City Center . Would that be so big?
Hoffman: City Center would easily be a couple hundred thousand dollars .
Lash : Even without purchasing that additional property? '
Hoffman: Even without purchasing it would easily approach $200 ,000 .00 .
Schroers : How does our new playground fit into that master plan? r
Hoffman: Very well . It was planned as part of it . But again ,
considerable amount of earth moving , filling , bringing in roadways , parking '
lots , those types of things . There 's also HRA is taking a look at some
planning to tie in City Center Park with City Hall . With these two empty
lots in the front of the building . Potentially tying that all in .
Removing the road from the front of the building and running it to the rear
of the building to bring in more parking in that area . Open this up to
like a Town Square kind of area and again that 's all , it 's just potential .
Throwing out ideas , that type of thing so we 're working as well with the
HRA to kind of incorporate these two separate projects as they come about .
Lash : Ec would there be a way of approaching them and asking them for
assistance? Forgetting about , I mean that road isn 't very old . All that
stuff was done just within the past few years . Instead of ripping all that
out and doing it all over , couldn 't they just put the money and help us
redo the whole thing up there?
Hoffman : Sure . Piggyback onto that project .
Lash: Not even piggyback . Just forget that part and just do park .
Hoffman: Well that 's our idea , If we 're going to tell them forget their I
idea and do our 's .
Lash: It 's dumb . It doesn 't need to be ripped out . It 's brand new .
Hoffman: Well they 're not going to take real kindly to it but we can .
Andrews: Tennis courts . '
Hoffman: Yeah . Paint lines on it .
Lash: It just seems like they have a way of coming up with spending money
that is hard for me to grasp sometimes .
Hoffman: But we just need to wait . There are things , lighting of the
ballfield at Lake Susan . That 's one that comes up . Additional lighting at
Palk Rec Cc- issior Meeting
June 2r 1992 Page 3d
' Lake ( rn . There 's a number of items which could be included in a park
referendum issue . The current climate is not the best for that but on down
the re - _ the City has capability to carry that debt load and if the mood
and tH r : on > and that type of thing comes up at some point , the
CorlmiEcicn will want to take a look at coming up with that . Bandimere is
not going to happen without one . As long as you 're doing a $300 ,000 .00 or
$400 ,000 .00 one , that 's your opportunity then to pick up some of those
' loose ends . Some of those things that have been knocking around in the
comries) cn 's top drawer and pull those things up onto the table as well .
' Schroers : What we 're talking about here on this particular agenda item is
trying to really identify and refine the budget for 1992 so we can make the
best use of the resources that we have available . I guess that 's what'
we 're really after here in a preliminary discussion . It 's not to identify
too many things specifically but just to target our resources in the best
way we can .
Lash : How about North Lotus Jim? Can you think of anything else?
AndreuT We need a swingset . I know I 've said that before . I don 't know
' if that 's something we . were going to try to squeak through this year or
not . There was some talk about that .
Hoffman : Coming in .
Lash: How about tennis courts?
' Andrews : Th€ tennis courts are in good shape . Really good shape . There 's
no problems there at all and they get tons of use .
Lash : That wind screen thing get settled?
Andrews : Yeah . No wind screen . It 's a 5 year project . Let it grow .
There haven 't been any complaints . It sure makes a lot of sense . You know
all that plastic laying around and you 're spending all that money sending
city workers out there to fix it for 2-3 days . It gets a lot of use .
' Lash : How about Carver Beach?
Schroers : Don 't hear much about Carver Beach . Pretty quiet neighborhood .
A lot of happy , content people .
Lash: Well probably the ones we 've listed will eat up all and more .
' Schroers : It will eat up more than the budget what we 've talked about .
Hoffman: My list is much longer than this .
' Koubsky: I just want to put my plug in for hockey rinks . Both North and
South . We have some in the middle here but there again that 's tied into
the youth athletic program .
1
Park and Re : Commission Meeting
June 2' , 299l - Page 37 N�
Hoffmrn : The removal and the upgrade at these hockey rinks have been on N�
the aQenda as well .
KouL � � : If vj* could keep moving .
°=
Lash : How about the warming house? We took care of that this year didn 't
we in the budget?
Hoffman: Yeah . The warming house just keeps plugging along . Shingles . --
It 's a building which is serving a use but obviously not a premiere type of
faoility within our premiere park . N�
~ Koubsky : Have we established any debits in any of the , I know throughout
the year we seem to borrow money here and there and shuffle it around . I
wasn 't involved too much in the 1991 . Well I wasn 't involved at all in N�
1991 budget . Did we establish any debits in any of the areas that need to
be repaid within the next year 's budget?
Hoffman : ro . Anyplace we 've made a reappropriation we 've gone ahead and
cut money which will not be spent and then put it in another location . If
we co me up into a debit situation , then that will be addressed with the N�
commission and we have . to ` something will not happen then . Obviously as m�
you go through the year , if you run over someplace something 's going to be
cut . One of the last things that would have been on the agenda to be
completed .
Lash : Those are probably the things you should bring back to us and say
well it was scheduled to be done this year but we did something else N�
instead Eo we don 't just totally forget about those. things .
Hoffman : On a related issue , Jim asked about the park acquisition and
development fees acquired to date and 41 .66% of the year expired as of May
of 1991 . So that 42% expired we had collected $34 ,258 '00 in park
development fees . That 's 31% of what we had budgeted so we 're behind by
10% ' Last year we had collected 31% as well . 30 '97% ' Here we 're at 31 '14N�
so we 're right on target with last year . Slightly behind our projections .
--
'Trail , wp "ve acquired $11 ,703 '00 ' Percent , 23% of our estimated . Last
year we were at 20% ' N�
Andrews: What were the actual dollars last year . Does it show that?
Hoffman : No . Percent to date . Not on this spread sheet . N�
Lash: Another one just popped in my head and that 's the railway thing .
Pemrick : The trail?
Lash: Yes .
.
Pemrick: That one I think should get some priority .
Hoffman : So we budgeted $116 ,000 '00 revenue . We 've collected $46 ,000 '00 NI
this year thus far .
��
Par !. `" _ F : Commission Meeting
2
June 25 , 19'T ° Pepe 38
Schroers : I think there was some kind of a delay on what we wanted to do
no that trail depending on that light rail transit authority . We 're
waiting for some information there to find out what kind of timeframe . You
know cc ' t wrrt .te stick a pile of money in there making a useable trail
surface croc then 2 years having- them decide they want to put light rail in
there .
Hoffman: Did meet with those folks down at the Hennepin County building
with the cities of Chaska , Minnetonka , Hopkins , Eden Prairie and myself .
What the Hennepin County Rail Authority is going to do is send out a
' proposal to the City saying you can sign onto this and maintain a trailway
on there up until such time as light rail comes through . It 's not going to
be for at least 10 years . Probably closer. to 20-25 before that comes down
so it 's a very long term issue for the light rail transit . At that time
' they 're not even opposed to us moving a trailway off if separation can be
brought in there . That type of thing .
' Schroers : Off rail trail?
Hoffman: Off rail trail .
' Schroers : (alright . I like it . Alright , is there anything else we need to
discus= on that for our preliminary capital improvement discussion? Okay .
1991 REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL .
Hoffman : Item 7 is just basically informational item . Again as listed in
' our City Code , the Commission shall render a report to the Council covering
it 's operation of the preceding 12 months . Then this goes along with our
recomc endati o n for estimated funds for work for the following year . So I 'll
be drafting a proposed report to the City Council and the Commission to
have . The Commission will have an opportunity to review that at an
upcoming meeting and then we ' ll send that on to the City Council for their
review . Figain basically it 's just a very simple report to highlight what
' the accomplishments of the Park and Recreation Commission have been in the
previous year
' Schroers : Okay . Any comments on that?
RICE MARSH LAKE PARK PLAYGROUND NEEDS.
Hoffman : I thought somebody might volunteer to write that . No volunteers .
Item 8 is one of those ghosts in the closet again that comes up
necessitating some potential reappropriation of some funds so we can meet a
' present need . As listed there , we removed some equipment at Rice Marsh
Lake Park late last year . The aggregate was , that area was replaced or
exhanged for use of the basketball court . The aggregate was installed .
' Bituminous will be going down this year when that aggregate settles down in
that area . Rice Marsh Lake Park also has poor soils so it needs to dry up
and settle down prior to putting the asphalt on . I continue to receive
' intermittent calls from residents , both related to other people talking in
the neighborhood and unrelated that they 're fairly isolated down there by
TH 5 and they 're restricted ndw to the play equipment that they have . The
Park and flee Commission Meeting II JunE 2 .- , 19c' - Page 39
•
reason cited there for the removal of the equipment are real . However , the
nee:3 f':r serf additional equipment , especially swings . Jar says swings are
l i Le a.r, c t n na l pia structure . Everybody wants swings , and Jim as well so
it c =sr 't to much . What we can do with this reappropriation is both
prep ai a for a future and propose for next year addition to that play
structure this year by expanding the border wood and then also purchase
swings So these folks can make it through the rest of the year and the
first part of next year prior to any addition added . So again it 's our
recommendation that we reappropriate $2 ,250 .00 of the remaining $2 ,500 .00
under the line item , "Natural trail , Lake Ann Park" for that acquisition of
the items named for the installation at Rice Marsh Lake in 1991 .
I
Schroers : My opinion on this is that $2 ,500 .00 will much more use at Rice
Marsh Lake than it would on a nature trail at Lake Ann and is probably II better money spent .
Hoffman: And again we 've already crippled that $2 ,500 .00 . We 've taken it
from $4 ,000 .00 which we accomplished a pretty good portion of that trail
and cut it down to $2 ,500 .00 so it 's useless . It remains there as buffer
in that tin_ item but it can be used effectively here .
5chroe-s: Okay . Do we have someone interested in making a motion on this? II
Lash : I would move that we reappropriate $2 ,250 .00 to Rice Marsh Lake Park ,
to Lay swings and border and resilient surfacing from the Nature Trail
in Lake Ann Park for the 1991 budget .
Andrews : Second .
I
Lash moved, Andrews seconded that the Park and Recreation Commission
reappropriate $2,250.00 of the $2 ,500.00 remaining from the 1991 budget _ II
under line item "Nature Trail , Lake Ann Park" for the acquisition of a
swingset , border wood and resilient surfacing at Rice Marsh Lake Park.
All voted in favor and the motion carried.
PARK PROJECT UPDATES: II
HERMAN FIELD PARK I
Hoffman: I 'm sure you 're all interested in these so have read through
them . I 'm a little aggravated in our progress . However that 's basically '
due to our wat. spring and as well our contractor , Finley . Bros . that 's
working on the Lake Susan Project and picked up a job which they could get
started on in that type of weather someplace else so they 're finishing up
that job prior to coming back to Lake Susan so those types of delays have I
been occurring . Briefly , Herman Field Park . Low base bid was submitted by
Bullock Contracting . That was accepted by the Council along with the
paving of the access road and parking lot . So our budget of $50 ,000 .00 II covers both those items and then the engineering fees on that park . What
we 're waiting on right now is a wetland alteration permit for the -
inst.allation of trails within the setback of a wetland and installation of
that floating boardwalk . Once that is approved, we will hold a
II
construction meeting shortly thereafter and ensue construction at Herman
I
II
an-2 Pea Commlsaion Meeting
Jun, 2� , 2931 - Page 40
Field Perk .
Lash ' D' you have some kind of a deadline for that?
N�
Hoffman . Once they get in there it 's probably going to take 6 weeks so we
should see early fall completion . And again , it 's not something that
anybody 's anticipating because once it 's done there 's going to be nothing
there but an access road and a flat field which is seeded .
Lash : I have a question for Larry on this one . I seem to recall some
discussion at one time at a meeting about boardwalks and you didn 't seem to
be a supporter . Did you say you had a lot of problems with those or
something?
N�
Schroers : Yeah , I think that they have come up with some new designs . It
~~ is an item that keeps coming up . There seems to be a small percentage of
the population that really likes birding and that sort of thing that a
boardw, lk offers . But our previous experience with boardwalks is that
they 're just way too costly to install and maintain . After they 've been in
place for a while and the vegetation grows around them , when you have to go
in and do a repair , it 's so almost anchored that you have to bring
N�
equipment down that it really does damage in order to get the stuff out so
you can repair it . We 're getting away from boardwalks .
Lash : So :hat kind of alternatives are there?
Schroers : I think what they 're doing is they 're developing more of a
floating resident type of dock where rather than having just styrofoam
N� floats underneath , there 's a very durable resident surface that animals are
less likely to be able to chew through and cause damage through and that
will ctznd up longer to the natural elements and that sort of thing . And
N� then thrre again , the cost of that is considerable .
Hoffman : Thie particular piece of boardwalk is not a non-essential piece .
It 's not something where it augments a trail where the trail could be on
N� dry land but we 're putting it into the wetland for , as you quote , the
nature aspect . Bird watching and that type of thing . It 's a short piece
of boarduadk . It 's specified as a superdeok which is the same material
N� which is the new Lake Ann raft is constructed of so it 's durable . It does
— not lend itself to be intergrown with vegetation and the park itself is
split into two high and dry locations separated by a very narrow wetland
N� area so that 's where the proposed boardwalk would go to connect those two
walking areas of the park .
Schroers : Basically we 're talking a bridge?
Hoffman: Yeah . Floating bridge .
ILash: Okay .
~ '
f;nn scion Me:-ting
June- oc1 _ 41-
SOUTH LOTUS LAKE PARK . I
To move on , south Lotus Lake Park work is continuing very w!.-11
duC to the rain the completion date was pushed out tc this
Friday . It 'c anticipated that they ' ll be very close to complete by that
tim: . Its coming along . It 's looking -much nicer than it was in it 's "
former condition . The drainageway will now work effectively so it can
handle those torr-ntial type of rainfalls which we 've been receiving the
past fe:, yc.e r s .
LAKE SUSAN PARK . I
Hoffm: n: Lake Susan Park I touched on briefly . Again , it was scheduled to
be basically completed by mid-June and we 've not started . So that bothers
me . I continue to work with the contractor and with our engineers to get
that project up and running so we can be complete at least by the August
25th grand opening celebration .
Andrepe : you concerned this contractor is going to be capable of
making his deadline?
Neff ,, • Fc : '
August 24th .
Hoffman (=t Lakc Susan , sure .
Andreae : I think that somewhat scares me that the guy still hasn 't started
yet and w_ ' t _< had a considerable stretch of good weather here .
Hoff:-an: M. understanding of what has occurred was during that wet weather
they had another job where they could start on where the wet didn 't affect
them as much as this one . The first thing they have to do is move the
dirt . Now they 're trying to finish that up before they mobilize all their
equipment off of that job and then come back down here . So we used to be
first in line . Now we 're second unfortunately .
Lash: Have they made a commitment as to a completion date? '
Hoffman: Completion date , no .
•
Lash: Can you try to .
Hoffman: Nail them down? You bet .
Lash: Sometimes you have to do that kind of stuff or they just jerk you
around forever .
Andrews: Are they a contractor we 've used before? '
Hoffman : . . .they 've done probably some of the best work .
Andrews: So there 's no reason to be alarmed here yet? Okay .
i
c'._.1 E P.ec Cc- ission Meeting
Jun- , ' 1° 1 - PE.re 42
ILAKE ANN RECREATION/PICNIC SHELTER .
Hoff r - : "eying on to the Lake Ann picnic shelter . Thin
= p Things are moving
elce - I I _ _ , . ti_ 'l c into a very long stretch of planning . The design ,
dove c . '„c ; ' . construction documents and then bidding will take
appro,tirrat ly 14 weeks so we 're into a late fall type of start for
construction . Nothing to be alarmed about . However , I 'm working very
II closely with Van Loren-Hazard-Stallings to insure that we have this
buildi nT ur and running . It 's useless to get going and to shoot for having
this building up and running for next year if we come into a completion _
I date of mid-'uly . That just does not make ourselves look very good in the
public 's eye and we don 't want to have that happen .
Lash : Are you going to have , somebody had mentioned before of having like
I a pictue - or a plan of it up at the site for the 4th of July for the ground
breaking EC' people are going to see what it looks like .
I Hoffman : Yep . Ground breaking will include I 'm sure a few short words
from ":c Ma\ or . Short description of the project and then we 'll have some
schematic drawings there and enlargements showing the building . Showing
II the precca d cons.tructieAn schedule . So everybody can get all whooped up
and excited .
CITY CENTER PARK .
Hoffman : - Trion back down to City Center Park . Chan Elementary School
playnroura . If I could , I ' ll just spend a minute or two on this . This
I project continues to evolve . It went worse for many days hut then things
continue -2 to get better . Problems are always looking for a solution and I
thine. 'ye ccmo up with some in this case . You have the copy of the plans
I in front of . Just to run over them briefly . Again the three locations
included are the north playground , the tennis courts and the west
pl 'grounc or the south playground . I ' ll go through them individually .
I Schrc.cre : Excuse me Todd . You didn 't happen to bring that landscape
structure cf that particular unit that we were looking at with that?
IIHoffman : The catalog?
Schroers : Yeah the catalog .
'
Hoffman: No . This area has since been squared off so this shows
I . bituminous in the basketball area or the 4 square court area and then it
showed kind of angular configuration for the borderwood and pea gravel .
I That has been squared off to accommodate a larger piece of play structure .
Again , as Larry eluded to earlier , this includes a large number amout of
money in site improvements . Things such as a common excavation , $2 ,500 .00 .
II Aggregate and base , $2 ,700 .00 . Furnish and install the border wood was
considerably higher than this but it 's now reduced down to $6 ,400 .00 . The
rock itself is T2 ,100 .00 . So just in preparation itself comes to a total
of *,27 ,001) .00 excluding any equipment in that location .
IAndrews : Wasn 't there an Eagle Scout involved in this project too?
I
Park ' : Commission Meeting
June 2 , _ °O1 - Page 43 ,
Hoffman: " involved in the north playground . Started work today an_'
the ,' erfo'-mea very well . The north playground .
Lash : Oh w i.t . Could you back up for a second? Where it angled before ,
right to the left of that . Like to the left of the swings there 's sort of
a rectangle that has some thing . What is that? I can 't tell what 's in
there .
Hoff :a- : That 's labeled on there as the Climber A . It 's typically
referred to as the spider climber but it 's current location is too close to .
the swingaet so a child can jump from that and hang himself on the pole
comes down off of the swingset so the separation is not good at the present
time .
Lash: No . I maybe have my paper turned different . It would be on the
north side of the swings .
Hoffman: Oh the rings? 1
Lash : Okay , that s what it is .
Hoffman : set of rings that are out there as part of the vitacourse . ,
Those are out.rid:e . They 're continued to be used until they 're in such a
condition t hat . . .
Lash : Cc: now is the hope then that if we allocate a little more funding
next year that we 'd be able to put in more play equipment in this area
that 's been squared off then? '
Hoffman : Correct : And again we 've trimmed down the original estimates
we 've trimmed that project down . Made use of the City labor in instances
to cut back on the contract and have more money on the bottom line for play
equipment in this location .
Lash : Okay , and then the slide that 's been relocated from the north area , II
is that the tall , old slide that was over there .
Hoffman : The tall slide is currently in this location . It needs to be
removed . The school district is taking care of that removal .
Lash: So then you 're bringing the old slide from the north area?
Hoffman: Correct . Coming down to this location there will be a new slide
installed on the north site .
Lash: And then climber B is the big thing that 's out there now?
Hoffman: Correct . And it 's used extensively . The Phy Ed teachers wanted
to keep it so what 's in the contract is to remove it , dig a trench. sink it
down and resecure it .
Lash: So it 's maybe a little safer? '
1
1
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
Junc 1991 - Page 44
N� Hoffman: �lco add an alternate on the contract to provide a new geodesic
Lach :
.
Hoffman : If anybody 's interested in the drainage pattern . It was very
difficult to get all the water from this area down into this drainage swale
0�
and out into the parking lot so the drainage , the PVC pipe is included to
run through this area . Hook up to a concrete pipe running underneath the
berm and then emptying down into the current hockey areas . So that 's how
the drainage is being handled . Again the north side , this involves removal
N� of the cld border which has been completed . The maintenance people went
, out there with a Bobcat and pulled it up . ' The Boy Scouts ripped it apart .
Took all the nails out . Piled it up for removal . That 's been completed to
N�
date . We will be purchasing the border wood which will be installed by the
-- Boy Ecouts and then we ' ll also be purchasing either Phases 1 and 2 or all
Phasce 1 , 2 and 3 of the handicap equipment . It 's come about that we 'll be
N�
using city crews to install that equipment . Guidelines attached to the HUD
money or the federal block grarTt money , that $20 ,000 '00 necessitated that
you have to follow federal related guidelines or more or less hire union
contractor: if you 're going to use that money for any type of labor . So
what 's ha to happen is we separated this into two contracts . One for the
purchase of handicap equipment only and one for the provision of all the
work related to the project . Then to accommodate that , we 'll have city
crews wa'rk to install the handicap equipment . It stretches our dollar and
it also stretches our work forces so . Any questions on the north site?
Tennis courts . I 've always been hit upon in this location that they need
some wcri, . . .the project will look very nice and be serviceable for many
years into the future . My main concern was that the cracks were going to
reappcay and they will show up as structural cracks or stress cracks .
Again , in some of those locations where the large cracks are right now but
N�
they shc:ld not come back in the near future . The large cracks which there
currently are . Estimated total for this is $26 ,265 .00 at the current time
to have those tennis courts refurbished . That will include as well picking
up the center median . . . The last item which is included in your plan
packet are the phases of equipment for the north playground . In this
orientation as it sits up there , Phase 1 and 2 are bid . That will be a
straight forward bid . Phase 3 is an add-on so we 'll bid those separately .
N�
It 's a separate contract . We have $20 ,000 '00 to work with here so we can
be flexible . We added in the border wood and pea gravel and those types of
things . If we end up somewhat short , they will allow us to charge off a
N� portion of the City 's labor to this contract as well . So as discussed
earlier by Larry and as discussed in our last Thursday evening meeting ,
we 're not going the pie in the sky that everybody would like but we are
N� getting a major improvement at the school site . This estimate has been
reduced so what we have left over will approximate $10 ,000 '00 to $16 ,000 '00
to buy play equipment for the south playground and we ' ll accept proposals
from vendors ' ' 'with that accepted vendor to go ahead and supply and install
that equipment on the south playground .
Lash: $10 ,000 '00 to $15 ,000 '00 additional to what is shown on the plan?
�� .
Poi and P:_ e Cnrr:r:iss on Meeting
Jun: 75 , 1 991 - Page 45
II
Hoffman: Again , these numbers are confidential . The project is out for
II
bid at this time .
C:chroe': _ - '', not sure that I heard that right . We don 't have 110 ,C0C? .CO I
cr $15 , : :. .00 to acquire more than is shown on the plan currently? .
•
Hoffman: At this point we do . With the reduction , taking out the labor on
that north playground , we save some money there . We changed , instead of
going with a redwood border we 're going to go with green treated which cuts
the project down considerably . Instead of going with the 2 inch overlay on
the tennis courts , it 's reduced down to an inch and a half . - We pulled out
painting of the lines which was $1 ,500 .00 on the basketball , tether court
areas . Either the school district or park' personnel will complete that .
They had items in the contract such as removal of the existing , removal of
the swing . Removal of the merry-go-round . Those types of things . We
pulled those out of there and made an agreement with the school that they
will remove those pieces of equipment so we pared this down considerably
and the base bid with contingency , with engineering fees add up and then
II
leave us , depending on where the bids come in , an estimated $10 ,000 .00 to
$15 ,000 .000 fo- purchase of equipment on the south side . So it 's been a
lcn,g oraur out process but the product which we end up with is going to be
v'c~> nic . .
. Schrcer: : What we might want to know though is that the structure that we
are looking at was currently listed in the catalog at $42 ,000 .00 so if we
do end up with »15 ,000 .00 , we 're still 25 grand short of what we 'd like to
have .
Hoffman: Yep , and that 's product only . Not installation . If you tack on II
installation on a $40 ,000 .00 piece it turns into $50 ,000 .00 .
Schroers : So I guess I don 't want to leave the commission with the 1
impression that we 're fat on that project .
Hoffmc n: Hunky dory . No , we 're not .
I
Lash : Well and $10 ,000 .00 or $15 ,000 .00 doesn 't buy very much either .
Hoffman: No . We purchased a piece for South Lotus at 10 and a piece for II
Sunset Ridge at 1.2 so we have some knowledge as to what that buys .
Schroers: Okay , does that conclude item 9? - I
Hoffman : Yep . Unless there 's any other specific questions .
Koubsky: Could I ask you Todd , you mentioned Sunset Ridge . How the II
schedule is looking on that project .
Hoffman: Dale was in the other morning . We talked about upcoming II
prioritization of projects . And again , bi4fore the play equipment can be
installed at that location and before the ballfield can be constructed
there , we need to go ahead and do the finished grading so he 's been disking II
it . We 're waiting on the developer to go ahead and have the boundary line
II
II
n_ e Cemmission Meeting
II 'Teh: .7 , 1 -('1 - Pa --,: 4(",
II en the we',et side surveyed . It 's unclear currently where the exactly
h ' , is and se Dole will continue to work the park site out there .
:J7 it un and get it new fine graded and type of surface . Then they ' ll
II Lena i': al :; they ' ll subcut for the volleyball court . They ' ll sub:ut f:e
the a,=-.;,-ce:te which is on the ball-Field . Haul that in so you 'll see that
coin; in and than they ' ll seed and potentially mulch the pails and then coe
in after that with installation of play equipment and other things . The
IIbackstop and that type of equipment for the park . So it 's going to he late
in the year It 's nothing that we have to look forward to in the near
future .
IIKoul:,sky : I 've been asked by some of the residents who abut that park . The
disking and grading doesn 't go up to the residents property line and is
that the intent?
IIHoffman: No . It 's just currently he 's just in there doing the bulk of the
park . Once wa get down to the fine grading and that type of thing . T
• didn 't grade them along the trailway either . Dale was just unclear when he
was out then a doing that . We need to go out there and verify exactly where
all these back let lines are . It 's a scenario where the first time you 're
II establishin3 th., park lawful boundary at this time and it just takes some
coordination to do that so you 're not tilling up somebody 's backyard or
you 're staying 10 feet back so 5 years later you find out that somebody 's
been : .r .inteinihg their yard 10 feet out into the park . So there 's been
II some footwark to ha done there . But it will be , we 've talked about that
and I '., c, -secived these calls as well .
II ":chr,: - - s : Okay , anything else?
COMMISSION PRESENTATIONS:
ISchroer: : 'len we move on to Commission Presentations? Do we have any?
Lash : I hee a couple questions , and I know we already talked before the
• it.
meeting about the dock and the garbage cans down at. Greenwood Shores but i
continues to be an aggravation to me that these dilinquents are vandalizing
these things repeatedly . I made some suggestions . Already have solutions
I for them and as long as it continues to be a problem I think we need to
address it . Another , I noticed the other day on the trail between
Greenwood Shores and Lake Ann it was mowed real nice on both sides and
everything but there 's some areas where it 's getting kind of a jungle
Ieffect . When you 're trying to walk through the branches are starting to
grow so close together across the trail you can 't hardly get through .
II Schroers : There is actually some safety concerns with branches . If
someone was unaware and came through there fast with a bicycle like that
would be hit in the eye .
IIHoffman: I would propose we go ahead and take care of those emminent
problems at this time and then take a maj7: clearing effort sometime later
IIon in the year .
II
II
Park Pnd Pee Co• -•-,ission Meeting
June .C' , 1 "91? 1 - Page 47
Lash: It 's closer to the Greenwood Shores side . If they want to know how
to access it easiest . And then I had a couple of comments and this is
probably typical and I just am not knowledgeable in this area . But from
some pis cro :MD were on the new fields last week , that it 's so rough and
hard row . Is that typical and are we going to do some like reseeding this
fall to try to smooth that our or what do you do with that?
Hoffman: The fields are very hard and it 's a new surface . Again , it II
remains as basically a rock hard baked dirt surface with some grass growing
on it . It 's not turf as of yet . As that turf establishes itself , old tyrf
becomes a buffer . Like the other fields have grass and then they have
II
residue and they have some buffer zones . Some black dirt that they 've
built up underneath that so it acts more as a cushion . Those fields are
very hard and next year they 'll get better . The year after that they ' ll be II
better yet . But there 's nothing you can do to them to create a better
surface .
Lash: Okay . And then last week up here at Pee Wee 's , one of the coaches , II
it was on Thursday night when it was raining . We ended up calling the game
anyway but we were on the field closest to the elementary school and a
coach not knowledgeable ,in how things are funded was complaining how that
fie' : . He doesn 't think that field was maintained properly because anytime
it rains there 's always puddles around all of the bases and the other
fields don 't have those . He figures if the City 's getting 20 bucks a kid
the least they can do is have those bases you know . I didn 't really want
to get into him about where the money was going and start a big thing but I
just thought I 'd pass that on . That he 's kind of concerned about that .
And then ales the one field in particular at Lake Ann , the new one . Field
S . _ was watching a game on there last week and I saw a and t
9 guy , typically
these are not running that fast okay . But in this one particular
instance I think he tripped so he was going faster than usual and this guy
just bammed into the backstop and just about stained himself through it . �.
Then somebody said well that backstop looks like it 's really close behind
home Lose . That should have been backed up . Now is that standard? i
Hoffman: 25 feet , yeah .
Lash: And that 's a standard measurement? I
Hoffman : You bet .
Schroers: Can I add to that? On the new fields , people would like the 1
numbers also facing the other fields so that they know what field Field 5
and Field 6 is without having to go walk down to the backstop and look
back .
Hoffman: I 've already taken care of that . I called back the day they were
put up . I went out there and said , you 've got to be able to know what these II
fields are from the back side . So I called up Dave Owen to see if they.
could apply that number onto the back so rather than taking them down at
this time , we ' ll wait until the season is over . Take them down . Send them
back down to landscape and they 'll enamel the numbers onto the back side as
well .
II
I
Par L and Rec. Cc- ission Meeting
I 3une � , i ?l - Page 48
Lac-h : Couldn 't they just be faced the other direction? If you 're out on
the ficld playing , you probably already know where you are .
Schroers : Put there 's parking in the outfield too . Yeah , you need double .
Hoffman : Lesson learned .
ADMINISTRATIVE SELTION.
Schroers : Can we move on to the Administration Section? I think one thing.
worth noting is the handy work of the little 4th of July flyer here . It 's
again done well and deserves an atta boy . That 's the only thing I have to
' .comment on in there .
N�
Pemrick : I liked your spotlight on Chanhassen . I read that in a magazine
when it came out .
Hoffrran: Did you?
Pemrick : Yeah , I thought whoa . That was pretty exciting .
Schroers : If we just want to have kind of a conversation we can call for a
motion to. adcurn '
I _Andrewo moved, Pemrick omconded to ad 'ourn thm meeting' All Votmd in fawor
and the motion carried. The meeting was adjourned at 9:50 p .m . .
Su±mitted by Todd Hoffman
Park and Recreation Coordinator
Prepared by Nann Opheim
`
•
I