3j. Minutes S
CHANHASSEN CITY COUNCIL
REGULAR MEETING
NOVEMBER 19, 1990
Mayor Chmiel called the meeting to order at 7:40 p.m. . The meeting was opened
with the Pledge to the Flag.
11 COUNCILMEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor Chmiel, Councilman Workman, Councilwoman Dimler,
Councilman Johnson and Councilman Wing
STAFF PRESENT: Don Ashworth, Elliott Knetsch, Gary Warren, Paul Krauss, Todd
Gerhardt, Todd Hoffman, and Scott Harr
OATH OF OFFICE: Mayor Chmiel moved, Councilman Johnson seconded to appoint
Richard Wing to the City Council as a replacement for Councilman Boyt's vacancy.
All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously.
Richard Wing was given the Oath of Office by Elliott Knetsch from the City
Attorney's office.
APPROVAL OF AGENDA: Councilwoman Dimler moved, Councilman Workman seconded to
approve the agenda with the following additions under Administrative
Presentations: Paul Krauss wanted to discuss the Eastern Carver County Study
and the Comprehensive Plan. All voted in favor of the amended agenda and the
motion carried.
PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENTS:
PRESENTATION OF MAPLE LEAF AWARD TO CLIFFORD WHITEHILL.
Clifford Whitehill was not present at the meeting so Mayor Chmiel indicated that
the Maple Leaf Award would be sent to him.
ACCEPT DONATIONS. A PORTION OF THE PROFITS FROM THE OKTOBERFEST CELEBRATION:
Wanda Biteler: Thank you. I'm Wanda Biteler. I'm the Individual Development
Vice President of the Chanhassen Jaycees and have been a member of the Jaycees
for the last 3 years. We would like to present this check back to the City of
Chanhassen. During the Oktoberfest we had bowls of caramels and apples. We
sold popcorn and we also sold the glow in the ring for the kids. We did very
well. We had profits of $600.00 and we feel 20% was an amount that we decided
on to give back to the City and it would be $120.00.
Mayor Chmiel: Great. Appreciate that. Thank you. I think one of the other
things was a dunk tank was it not?
Wanda Biteler: That's 4th of July.
Mayor Chmiel: Oh that's right. That's right but I was swimming then. Many
times. Okay. Secondly we have Dave Holub of Chanhassen Snowmobile Club. Dave?
Dave Holub: Thank you. I'd also like to, as a result of the Oktoberfest,
donate what our totals, 20% of our proceeds. Ours was slightly less than
t
1
11
11 City Council Meeting - November 19, 1990
the Jaycees, in the amount of $64.00. We put on the Toys for Kids and the games
that you saw there and so the Chanhassen Club would like to present this to the
City and thank you for your support.
11 Mayor Chmiel: Thank you. Is there anyone else wishing to present any more
checks? That's one way of getting our deficit down.
CONSENT AGENDA; Councilwoman Dimler moved, Councilman Johnson seconded to
approve the following consent agenda items pursuant to the City Manager's
recommendations:
a. Site Plan Amendment for McGlynn Bakeries to add a 52,972 square feet
manufacturing addition and a 3,600 refrigeration equipment addition to the
existing building, One McGlynn Drive.
c. Resolution B90-147: Accept Utilities in a portion of Lake Susan Hils West
4th Addition, Project 90-14.
f. Approval of Accounts.
g. City Council Minutes dated November 5, 1990
11 Planning Commission Minutes dated October 24, 1990
Planning Commission Minutes dated November 7, 1990
Park and Recreation Commission Minutes dated October 23, 1990
Public Safety Commission Minutes dated November 8, 1990
All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously.
B. APPROVE PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS. AUTHORIZE ADVERTISING FOR BIDS FOR WEST
78TH STREET DETACHMENT IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 87-2.
Councilwoman Dimler: I pulled item (b). Mr. Burdick would like to make some
comments.
11 Jim Burdick: Jim Burdick from Excelsior. On the 78th Street detachment, I've
seen the plans and Bill Engelhardt has looked them over and I'm quite pleased
with the overall plan. Thank heavens BRW's got away from these jogs and
dangerous corners and switching this lane and that lane and it's really quite a
straight, clean design. However, the plans available do not show the
landscaping and I just wanted to be aware that what you're approving, that
landscaping is not included and I'm most concerned about bushes and brush making
1 blind, dangerous corners and killer trees along the street. And of course
there's a curve in the street and I'm also concerned about the great
expenditure. We all remember when there were $300,000.00 worth of trees in an
area much shorter than this and thank heaven most of them died. You've heard me
say that before but it's a terrible expense and I'd be very slow on any
assessment for any shurbs, trees, what have you. The original plan had one tree
after another tied together but the minute Carver County saw it, they said
you're not going to put a tree within 200 feet of CR 17 so that saved part of
it. But I just wanted to express my concern about this and call your attention
to the fact that apparently it's not here for you people to see it tonight and
' it wasn't available for me to see it. Both from a danger standpoint and
practical standpoint and the expense. If it's going to be assessed against the
2
I
City Council Meeting - November 19, 1990
two property owners which, Charlie James and me. Thank you.
Mayor Chmiel: Thank you Jim. Is there anyone else that would like to address 1,
that? Gary do you have anything to cover on that aspect?
Gary Warren: The landscaping that was included in the feasibility study, due to Ii
the narrow right-of-way width, the landscaping concept is being reviewed and
will be brought back to the Council. As you may recall from the staff report,
we're looking to actually bid the project in February and we're going to be
running this plan set through the regulatory agencies who don't care about the
landscaping obviously so we wanted to get the plans set, at least in this form
through. Landscaping plan will be brought back to the Council for separate
approval. The budget in the feasibility study included street lighting, trail
and landscaping lumped together so I can't tell you exactly how much was just
for the landscaping but that budget was about $330,000.00 and that was the 1987
budget so we are sensitive. BRW is sensitive to the problems that we had with
sight distance and such and this portion of the project is supposed to serve as
a transitional area from no landscaping into what we have in the downtown so the
concept definitely is diminished from downtown's landscaping. But that will
come back as a separate item.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, very good. Any other discussion? If not, may I have a
motion?
Councilwoman Dimler: That's all I had so I move item (b). •
Mayor Chmiel: Is there a second?
Councilman Workman: Should you make as part of that motion? 1
Councilwoman Dimler: With the understanding that the landscaping will come back
to us for separate approval. I
Councilman Workman: Second.
Resolution $90-148: Councilwoman Dialer moved, Councilman Workman seconded to
approve the Plans and Specifications and Authorize Advertising for bids for West
78th Street Detachment Improvement Project No. 87-2 with the understanding that
the landscaping will come back for seprate approval. All voted in favor and the
motion carried unanimously.
E. APPOINTMENTS TO THE SENIOR NEEDS COMMISSION.
Councilman Johnson: I was kind of surprised to see that there was a meeting
that I wasn't at that the Seniors Commission, since I was the one that started
the whole thing 4 years ago and have been working on this thing for 4 solid
years, that this was considered at a meeting that not only I wasn't at but when
they went to call me to tell me that I was missing this meeting, they decided,
that Don was told not to call me. That you had a quorum and that you didn't
want me at the meeting anyway.
Mayor Chmiel: Whoa. Stop right there.
3
i
11
11 City Council Meeting - November 19, 1990
11 Councilman Johnson: Well, that's just what I've been told.
Mayor Chmiel: Do you want to clarify that? j
Councilman Johnson: I missed the meeting.
Mayor Chmiel: Yes.
11 Councilman Johnson: It was not a City Council meeting. Don went to call me. He
was then told, we've got a quorum. Let's not call him and get the meeting over
with. Something similar to that. I don't know exactly what happened but
I never.
Mayor Chmiel: You're taking it out of context Jay.
Councilman Johnson: I probably am.
Mayor Chmiel: Jay, stick to the issue.
Councilman Johnson: Stick to the issue? Okay. You had a Board of Elections
I/ meeting and you considered City Council things at it. It wasn't on any agenda.
Nobody knew it was going to be considered. The public had no business or had
no opportunity to putting input into it and decisions were made. Especially
since the Council member that brought it all wasn't even there, it was kind of
difficult. I didn't like it being made. Now to what was made. It was made
that we will base our decision on who's going to be on the Senior Needs Study
based on age, not abilities or what the person has to contribute to it. So as
far as I know that's age discrimination for one and we should not change our
ordinance to include age discrimination as a criteria for membership on any
committee we have here and so I'm against that part of this. Number two, by
having this age restriction you have to be a senior to be on the seniors
committee. It eliminates the care providers or the providers of services that
have the two providers of services to seniors who have experience and expertise
that will be invaluable to this commission. It eliminates them from being on
' the commission. I've argued this point a couple times before. I argued it when
we made the original seniors commission trying to get care providers on it to
have local expertise or have expertise other than just being a senior. So
1 I would like to table this and do the interview process as originally planned
before that meeting earlier this month changed it.
Mayor Chmiel: Don, would you like to respond?
Don Ashworth: Yes. I think Councilman Johnson brought up a couple of points
that I do need to clarify. One, we did have a Council meeting. It was
canvasing returns and that had been brought out as part of public meeting and
everyone knew that it was to occur. It got to be whatever time we had set for
the meeting. The Mayor was there. Councilwoman Dimler. We were short of
' quorum. I said I'll call Jay and Tom. As I went into my office to call, I
overheard either Ursula or Don say, oh here comes Tom and I never called either
of the other two. No one had told me don't call anyone or do call or anything
else. Second point. The Council did not make a decision that night regarding
the seniors study. We did discuss that you would like to have this on to a
future agenda where it would be publically discussed. That is tonight's agenda.
4
r
City Council Meeting - November 19, 1990
That's the reason the item is before you so that it won't be at a public
meeting. I
Mayor Chmiel: Thank you.
Councilman Johnson: On the Consent Agenda. I
Mayor Chmiel: Well Jay, it was a meeting that all the Council people were to be
at of which we knew that meeting was going to take place and I think you were
well aware of the fact that the canvasing board was going to review those that
evening and you were to be there. So it isn't as if you weren't aware.
Councilman Johnson: Well. I knew the canvasing board was going to meet.
I missed the meeting.
Mayor Chmiel: Right. Thank you. I
Councilman Workman: Well you know, we discussed an awful lot of things there
that night but made no decisions. Jay, I guess I'm not going to be saddened. I
think we've talked about this before and you've been trying to put on this
commission people from outside the city that are care providers unlike any other
commission we have. I
Councilman Johnson: There's nobody outside.
Councilman Workman: Well, in prior discussions you've complained that we're I
eliminating people from outside our community which are care providers because I
don't know of any care providers in our city, unless you can tell me somebody
that's providing care in our city for the elderly. They have to come from I
outside the city. I don't feel bad about making people on our commissions
citizens of the city of Chanhassen and the way the senior citizens are set up
these days, I'm almost a senior citizen. Now at age 31 I might have a whole lot
of, I might think I've got a whole lot of insight into the elderly but I've got
a feeling that somebody at age 65 might be able to have a little bit or there
abouts might have some insights I don't have. I don't think that's age
discrimination and I resent being accused of it. 1
•
Councilman Johnson: I don't know. When you put age on it, it's age
discrimination and there are care providers that have applied. Two of them who
are citizens of the city and the previous, we had two care providers. Just
because they don't provide the care in the city. One is at Waconia Ridgedale.
The other at the Scott Carver Coop and they both provide services to seniors and
they can't be on it because of their age. They're too young. You can't be on
it. There's only one member of the Council that can be on it and that's Don. I
don't think Ursula's 55.
Councilwoman Dimler: Thank you Jay. That was very nice of you to say. I
guess I'll add my comments. We had 9 applicants I believe and there's 7 seats
to be filled. I felt very strongly if it's a senior commission that the seniors
are best qualified to serve on it and senior is 55 so it isn't like we've got
you know really, really old people. If that's what you're concerned with.
Councilman Johnson: Well no. I
5
i
1
11 City Council Meeting - November 19, 1990
Councilwoman Dimler: If you're thinking of being senile or anything like that.
11 Councilman Johnson: Oh no.
II Mayor Chmiel: And of course many of these people who've applied for this were
set up and gave us the insight as to the concerns.
II Councilwoman Dimler: Yeah, they were on the task force and they're very well
knowledgeable. They were in on the ground workings and I think they deserve to
be on the commission.
IIMayor Chmiel: I agree.
Councilman Johnson: Well with that agreement, is there a chance that we could
I appoint the two care providers that have applied who, Pat says she's over 30 so
she's at least that old, and the other one, Linda is a month younger than I am,
and I'm not a senior yet. That we ask them to participate as a special
consultant to the group so that we don't just eliminate. So they'd be almost a
II non-voting member. So the members can vote. The 7 members can vote but these
people who work day in, you know work every day with seniors providing services
and have a practical knowledge of what seniors are asking for, that they
1 participate in it.
Mayor Chmiel: What I would like to see done Jay is let the commission come up
II with that conclusion. If they would like, if they so choose, then I would say
fine. I say leave it up to the commission themselves.
Councilman Johnson: Should we eliminate it as a part of the ordinance, the age i
I part of it and just have it at the Council's discretion that it is the City
Council's, we're not going to have an ordinance that has an age limit in our
ordinance. I just don't believe in doing that. Saying that, comprised of
1 residents of age 55.
Mayor Chmiel: I'd like to see the responsibilities put back onto people who
II feel what their needs basically are and not someone sort of guess what those
needs might be. Let them conclude as to what they feel they would like to have
done within this community. Provide those kinds of services or whatever to
them. They know better than what we do. Or excuse me, maybe than you do. I've
1 got to exclude myself.
Councilman Johnson: You've got to exclude yourself from that. Yeah but, I'm
1 just going on the technical point of we have established. I mean there are
certain things that are established by age. Drinking. Driver license. Stuff
like that but participating in a government commission should not be that. You
can be president of the United States but you can't be on this commission.
1 Mayor Chmiel: Rather than to deliberate this much longer, let's put it to a
vote. If you'd like to make a motion.
IICouncilman Johnson: Okay, I'll make the first motion that we modify the
resolution to eliminate the requirement that all members of the commission are
IIover the age of 55.
6
1
II
City Council Meeting - November 19, 1990
Mayor Chmiel: Is there a second? It appears as though it's going to die for
lack of a second. So I see we'll retain that within. Can I have a motion? I
Councilwoman Dimler: I move approval of item 1(e) as is.
Councilman Workman: Second. t
Councilwoman Disler moved, Councilman Workman seconded to approve the
appointments to the Senior Needs Commission as recommended. All voted in favor I
except Councilman Johnson who opposed and the motion carried with a vote of 4 to
1.
VISITOR PRESENTATIONS: I
Diana Maas: Good evening Mayor, Councilmembers. My name is Diana Maas. I live
on 641 Contestoga Trail. Or my husband and I, my family and I live there. My
property that my family and I live on includes a very small wetland. Ursula I
think lives very close to me. That approximately 6 homeowners own as portions
of their property. In 1988 the City of Chanhassen approved the plans for my
home which was designed to have a deck out of the back yard which is along that
wetlands. This same area. After we moved into our home being ambitious first
time homeowners, my husband built a deck and in retrospect we've learned we
needed a permit so we came to the City to apply for the property procedures to
obtain the permit. We were told that the permit wouldn't be approved because
there was a 75 foot setback ordinance from the wetlands so the next step was to
apply for a variance. In sitting down with Jo Ann Olsen she said the procedure
for granting a variance was to prove hardship and in my case we probably would
not be able to do that. In talking to my neighbors and exploring the matter
further, we learned that my neighbor on 7241 Sierra Court was issued a permit
for 25 feet from the wetlands for his deck.
Mayor Chmiel: Can I have that address again? 72?
Diana Maas: 7241 Sierra Court. I also learned that the builder Novak-Fleck was
issued two permits to build homes closer than 75 feet to the wetlands. Those
would be 7241 and 7251 Sierra Court. Basically I'm coming before the Council I
tonight to ask for your counsel on where to go with this issue. We've submitted
our deck permit application and all the proper drawings and I'm just here
basically, I'd like to get all the proper paperwork in and I'm not quite sure
where to go with it' from here.
Councilwoman Dimler: Diana, would you repeat your address? ,
Diana Maas: 641 Contestoga Trail. I sort of feel that the City has set a
precedence by already issuing one permit within 25 feet for my neighbor and then
to ask me to go through a very expensive variance procedure, it's sort of an
issue of fairness and I'm just here for your counsel basically.
Mayor Chmiel: I guess what I would like to probably see done is to gather the
data, the information so we can have it. So we can review it and come up with a
conclusion. I'm not sure as to what's existing. What's there and what the
encroachments are. From what you're looking, what would be your existing
setback from the deck if the deck were to be put on? What are you asking? 1
7
I
1 City Council Meeting - November. 19, 1990
Diana Maas: The closest corner of my home is 79 feet from my plot drawing.
11 From the wetlands. Our deck is 14 feet so it would be within 10 feet. So it'd
be 65 feet.
II Councilman Workman: I guess we, I know in our trials and tribulations of
variances, we were getting frustrated at one point about people coming in and
maybe they were spending the fee for the variance and maybe they didn't have a
I ballpark's chance of getting it. It's tough for us to predict what it would be.
I think we settled down a little bit or we had asked staff to maybe try and
deflect people who maybe weren't going to be able to get them or looked
apparently like they weren't going to get them. I think in light of the fact
I that we changed our variance procedure, her situation probably, I'm not going to
predict, may fit our new procedure but maybe we haven't redirected staff to
modify their recommendations to people coming in or the applicants because maybe
II you've gotten some of the bureauracy at City Hall that you didn't feel like
having and now you're here tonight. So I don't know if we need to redirect them
or maybe ask staff to not even get involved in the game of predicting or
suggesting. .
IIMayor Chmiel: Paul?
II Paul Krauss: We never like to have to second guess what the Council is going to
do or what the Board of Adjustments is going to do. However we think that it's
reasonable and necessary for people to have an idea about what the procedures
II are and what the likelihood of success is and then they can decide. And we
always tell you that we think you might have a problem or we think it's going to
get approved. It's really up to you to apply and here's how you have to do that. !
Ms. Olsen talked to me about this one this afternoon and she had advised Ms.
II Maas that the procedure was to apply for the variance. I'm not prepared to say 1
right now whether or not we would recommend approval or denial of the variance.
This is one of those, you know we have some of these nightmare situations with
1 decks. This is one of them. There was one permit that apparently was issued
several years ago in error. It probably shouldn't have been. There were two
decks built without permits that encroached. The wetlands is one of those
that's tough to locate. You know since last year we've been looking at new
house plans and whenever there's a patio door and it's set 75 feet back from the
wetland, we reject the plans now so I mean we're doing a lot of things to change
this but the procedure here is really to go through with the variance
application which Jo Ann did advise. We really, again we don't try to put words
in your mouth or anticipate exactly what you're going to do but based upon the
} facts as we see them, we try to advise the applicant as best we can yet tell
I 1 them the door is always open for them to apply.
Councilwoman Dimler: Is it a Class A or a Class B wetland?
11 Paul Krauss: Councilwoman I really don't know. I don't know all the facts.
I
Mayor Chmiel: That's some of the specifics we're not aware of.
IPaul Krauss: As you're aware, what Councilman Workman was describing was the
variance amendment that allows us to look at neighborhoods that deviate from the I
I ordinance standard and say the ordinance won't apply here. We'll use the j
4 ,
8
II
City Council Meeting - November 19, 1990
neighborhood standard. Maybe that's applicable here. I just don't know at this
time. I
Councilwoman Dimler: Okay. We're talking about a 10 foot variance. Did I hear
that correctly? And we're talking about a deck that's already existing? '
Mayor Chmiel: Yep.
Councilwoman Dimler: I do remember one last year where we had that before us as
well and I think we should consider it.
Councilman Johnson: The procedure is to apply for the variance. ,
Paul Krauss: Yeah. There was never any indication that it wouldn't be
considered. Just that the procedure was to apply for a variance.
Diana Maas: Is there any chance of, since the precedent has been set that
permits have already been issued without the variance procedure that the fees
could be waivered for the variance? It's a very expensive process that the
City's asking me to go through when they've granted my neighbor a permit within
25 feet of this same area with no expense incurred upon them other than the
permit. As an issue of fairness to one neighbor to the next? I
Councilwoman Dimler: What's it going to cost?
Paul Krauss: $75.00. t
Diana Maas: Then there's a property call list that has to go out that is over
$100.00 or more dollars so that's several hundred dollars you're asking me to
pay for the same permit my neighbor received for basic, just whatever the permit
fee is which is minimal.
Councilwoman Dimler: And your neighbor paid $75.00? f
Paul Krauss: Anybody who went through a variance procedure paid that.
Diana Maas: My neighbor did not go through a variance procedure.
Paul Krauss: Again, there's a lot of history to this one and I'm really up to
speed on all of it but normally when somebody builds without a permit, they're
double feed. I don't know if that was done in this case or not. We try to work
these things out as amicably as possible. I guess I would ask you, if you're
looking to waive the fee, to wait until the variance comes before you and you
can determine whether or not you want to rebate it. I don't know if this is a
unique situation or not. Jo Ann has led me to believe that, apart from the
background, that it might not be particularly unique but you could decide that ,
at such time that you review a variance.
Mayor Chmiel: Yeah. We don't know all the specifics either so it's rather hard
for us to either say waive it or whatever and I think I would just as soon see
the specifics regarding that and then move from that particular direction.
Whether it would be a requirement for you to file for a variance or we could
take the position saying it's justifiable and they should not but I would like
9
I
I
11 City Council Meeting - November 19, 1990
11 to get all the specific data. I'd like to .see what it is and what it consists
of and probably even come out there and take a look at it as well.
Paul Krauss: Should we then proceed with the variance application and notify
' the Council with that? Otherwise I think it's going to take a long time for
things to bounce back and forth between you and the Board of Adjustments.
' Mayor Chmiel: Right.
Councilwoman Dimler: Really with the new procedure it won't even come before
' the Board of Adjustments would it unless one of us called it forward?
Councilman Johnson: Or a neighbor protested or something.
' Mayor Chmiel: Yes, unless there's a protest on it.
Paul Krauss: But you know, I think what we would do here is the applicant would
' come before the Board of Adjustments with a variance request and then could
request that it goes on. Not, if they approve it they would then come to you to
request waiver of the fees and we'd give you the packet and you could make your
determination.
IMayor Chmiel: Yes. I'd like to see it done that way. Because I don't want to
establish another procedure that someone else could come in and say that so I'd
' like to be consistent with what we've done in the past. And even though these
have gone in without our knowledge or have been set back as they are, I think we
best be consistent with this and continue on as we're going. Thank you very
much for coming in.
Diana Maas: Thank you for your time.
Mayor Chmiel: Is there anyone else wishing to address Council at this time? If
not let's go onto our next item on the agenda, the Unfinished Business. This is
to consider traffic control for West 78th Street through downtown. Presentation
' by our consultant. It looks like they all left.
Don Ashworth: Gary, do you want to see this tabled until later in the agenda?
' Gary Warren: That was my understanding we were going to do that because this
may take some time for discussion.
' Mayor Chmiel: I think someone mentioned that. Gentlemen, if you don't mind
we'll just proceed with this and we'll put you back on the later part of the
agenda.
PRELIMINARY PLAT REVIEW TO SUBDIVIDE 8.7 ACRES INTO 15 SINGLE FAMILY LOTS
LOCATED SOUTH OF PLEASANT VIEW ROAD AND VINELAND FOREST PLAT AND EAST OF
PEACEFUL LANE. TROENDLE ADDITION.
Mayor Chmiel: Paul, where'd he go? There is he. He's running down the stairs
quickly.
Paul Krauss: Sorry. I didn't expect you to jump ahead.
•
f � 10
1
City Council Meeting - November 19, 1990
Mayor Chmiel: We like to keep you on your toes.
Councilman Workman: I'd move approval. I
Councilwoman Dimler: Really, that fast?
Paul Krauss: The applicants are requesting approval to subdivide an 8.7 acre
site into 15 single family lots. The lot's would be served by an extension of
Nez Perce Drive. That street currently terminates into Vineland Forest
subdivision. The City Council may recall that the Vineland Forest plat looked
at a variety of alternatives for extension of streets so that the neighborhood
could be developed with an overall access plan. Ultimately it was decided that
Alternative #3 of the 5 or 6 alternatives that were reviewed was the favorite
alternative and Vineland Forest was designed to meet this plan. What it
envisioned is the extension of Nez Perce which terminates in a cul-de-sac right
here now. Ultimately through the Troendle property and then ultimately would
pass through the Owen's parcel connecting Peaceful Lane with the. . .Pleasantview.
The goal of the process was to provide a thru street connection for a fairly
large area. At that time I don't think anybody anticipated the Troendle ,
property coming in for development so quickly but here it is and the plat that
you see before you was designed consistent with that recommendation. What it
would do is the current cul-de-sac is over here. It would be extended. I'm
sorry. The current cul-de-sac is over here. It would be extended to the west
into another temporary cul-de-sac. The Owen's parcel is over there and the
connection to Pleasant View would occur at such time as the Owen's property is
developed. The plat meets or exceeds most single family district standards.
Utilities are available. Drainage appears to be acceptable although some
further work in terms of providing computations is necessary. Basically the
storm water would be ponded. Most of it would be...on this lot. This plan has
been changed somewhat from this transparency. Staff was concerned that Lot 4
was difficult to build upon because of the size of that pond but basically the
home. .. The plan was revised so that this pond is now moved a little bit
further to the south and that there's a larger yard area for that lot. The item
was reviewed by the Planning Commission on October 17th. Area residents raised
some concerns regarding access issues concerning this plat. The City's also
received a letter from these residents since the meeting which is included in
the Council packet. Their issues, well they have several issues but they
basically boil down to traffic safety. They've raised concerns with the use of
Lake Lucy Road to serve this division and as you can see from the overall area
plan, that Lake Lucy Road and Nez Perce are the only access right now...and that
will be the case until Peaceful Lane opens up. They made a request that some
sort of.. .feasible, that a connection be made to Pleasant View so that this
subdivision has two means of access at this point in time. Staff supports that
as an idea but we can't find a realistic way to accomplish it. When the overall
concept plan was approved, the opportunity to put a road through to the north
was really eliminated because of local topographic conditions. Some of the
alternatives as you may recall at that time included punching up of the road
straight through to Pleasant View which had some traffic concerns. Property
line that's undeveloped... There's a large wetland over here and we really
believe that we're going to be forced to rely on the long cul-de-sac until the
Owen's property does develop. You may also recall that the Owen's property did
receive subdivision approval several years ago. At that time it was to be
• platted. That plat has since lapsed. We have some reason to feel, having
11
I
11 City Council Meeting - November 19, 1990
talked to the owner and several other people that it may be platted again
11 sometime in the future but there's no certainity of exactly when that's going to
occur. There's two other issues that have been raised in this review. Staff is
requesting that additional right-of-way be granted along Pleasant View.
' Something on the order of 7 feet. Pleasant View has an underwidth right-of-way
and the road design is far from meeting current standards and has some safety
problems. I think everybody accepts the fact that widening Pleasant View, if
I it's ever done, is going to be a very controversial project but I think it's
only our professional responsibility to tell you that traffic levels on that
street are relatively high now and are projected to grow whether or not we want
them to. I think that would be particular true with the opening of the
' Crosstown highway at TH 101. We think it's probably going to happen at some
point in time but at least some safety related improvements are going to have to
be made so we're recommending that we take the additional 7 foot of right-of-way
' so that we have the opportunity to make those changes in the future. The last
issue concerns a barn. The Troendle barn which is located on Lot 2. Frankly
when we had laid out the road concept plan we had assumed that when the Troendle
' property was developed that the barn would be removed. It's an old structure.
It's recently been improved I think in the last few months but we thought when
the area's platted it would be removed. The current plans are to give the
Troendle, or Mr. Troendle I believe a life estate so that he would keep the home
and the barn. The problem comes about is that the road extended to the west as
it needs to be, creates a variance situation for setback from the barn. When
these things occur normal recommendation in the past has been, if it's a barn
' and it were a garage and not the house, has been to either move it or bring it
down and build a new one. We are recommending that that be done here. We don't
see the hardship particularly that would be required to maintain the variance
for setback that results. The Planning Commission had a suggestion that some
sort of a temporary variance be looked at or change one of our conditions to
propose that. We've given that to you in the staff report. We're not
recommending that that be done. We have a difficult time grasping the concept
11 of a temporary variance. A variance is forever. We're also not quite sure how
we'd administered that so we are recommending that a policy that we think is
consistent with our past actions and that the barn be either relocated or
' removed. With that we are recommending approval of the plat without variances
subject to the conditions in the staff report.
Mayor Chmiel: Thank you Paul. Is there anyone else wishing to address this?
' Please state your name and address please?
Terry Berke: My name is Terry Barke and I live at 960 Lake Lucy Road. I'm one
of the, a member of the neighborhood group that sent you copies of this letter.
Did everyone receive the letter? Had a chance to read through it? If so, I'm
not going to bore you with going over the letter. Didn't everyone receive this?
Mayor Chmiel: No, I've not seen it. It's not in my packet.
Paul Krauss: It should have been as back-up. I'm sorry if it wasn't but it was
' intended to be as back-up in your packet.
Councilman Workman: It gets lost in City Hall if you send it there.
Mayor Chmiel: I'd you to at least go through your letter.
12
I
City Council Meeting - November 19, 1990
Councilwoman Dimler: You mean in the administrative packet? I
Paul Krauss: No. No, in the back-up.
Terry Barke: We talked to the people in the city here and they assured us that
it would be included in your review packets for this week.
Councilman Johnson: It's supposed to be Attachment O. ,
Paul Krauss: Yeah, I looked it up. Here it is. It's called Attachment $5.
It's dated November 11th. It's about 6 pages from the back of your, the Minute
packet.
Councilwoman Dimler: I don't have it.
Councilman Johnson: It starts, the purpose of this letter is to express.
Terry Barke: That's correct. That's the one. ,
Councilwoman Oimler: Oh, okay.
Terry Barke: Apparently not everyone's received it, or hasn't read it anyway. 1
It sounds like received it but maybe not read it. Maybe I should, should I just
read through it then?
Mayor Chmiel: Please.
Terry Barke: Okay. It's addressed to the City Council members. The purpose of
this letter is to express the viewpoint of the residents of Lake Lucy Road
residing east of Powers Blvd. to the plans for development of the Troendle
Addition. We have organized together to offer an opinion on the development
plans and make our concerns known to the Council. In this manner we hope that a
development plan can be defined which satisfies the needs of all concerned
parties. We support the proposed development plan for the Troendle Addition and
feel that a thorough evaluation of the options was performed and the resulting
plan represents good work by a number of people. There are several astericks of
the plan that are appealing to us. Shared traffic burden between Lake Lucy Road
and Pleasant View as a means of exiting the neighborhood to Powers Blvd. and the
proposal for a park in the new development, among other aspects. The major
concern of the neighborhood is with regard to the traffic safety on Lake Lucy
Road east of Powers Blvd.. We feel that a serious problem exists at the present
time with the speed and driving patterns of people driving this road in light of
the large number of young children living in the neighborhood. There are or
soon will be 13 children 10 years old or younger on this street. It is safe to
assume that this number will grow in the future as the demographics of the
neighborhood reflect young families. The neighborhood is willing to work with
the appropriate safety groups to find solutions to the existing problem.
Development of the Troendle Addition will add traffic volume to Lake Lucy Road
and increase the risk of injury to children in our neighborhood. We accept this
fact as part of development in the community. However, our neighborhood does
not wish to provide the only access from Powers Blvd. to the Vineland Forest and 11 Troendle Additions on a temporary basis until the proposed Nez Perce Road
13
I
City Council Meeting - November 19, 1990
eventually connects with Peaceful Lane. We feel that construction on the
' Troendle Addition must not proceed until Nez Perce is connected to Peaceful
Lane. The residents of Lake Lucy Road are bearing the complete volume of
construction traffic for, Vineland Forest and feel that this burden should be
1 shared by creating access for construction traffic from Pleasant View Road for
development of the Troendle Addition. The planning committee and the Council
have previously raised concerns over the difficulty of completing planned road
connections at future dates. We agree. This provides another good reason to
I complete the Nez Perce connection to Peaceful Lane prior to construction of the
Troendle Addition. Future residents of the Troendle Addition and Vineland
Forest would then be provided with a second access for safety reasons without
I delay. In summary, the residents of our neighborhood feel that the proposed
development plan is basically a very good one. Our major concern is traffic
safety and our philosophy is that traffic volume must be shared. We are not
I stating that some increase in traffic volume is unacceptable. That is the
price of community development. We are stating that this increase in traffic
volume caused by these additions must be shared between Lake Lucy Road and
Pleasant View Road in an equitable manner prior to construction on the Troendle
I Addition. This is ultimately in the best interest of all those concerned. We
will continue to strive for a solution to this issue until it can be resolve in
an acceptable manner. And then it's signed by myself and my neighborhood.
II Basically what I'd like to just say is that again we think this plan will, the
Alternative #3 is really a nice looking neighborhood and we're glad to have that
close to us. With what we've been reading in Minutes from previous Planning
II Commission meetings, it sounds like there's concern about having a cul-de-sac
that long for safety reasons. It sounds like trying to connect up to stubs at a
future date is always tenuous. We're really concerned that somehow we're going j
to end up, the people along Lake Lucy Road are going to end up having the entire
II burden of that Troendle Addition traffic and Vineland Forest for an indefinite 1
period of time. We think that when everything is done and completed it's fine.
We feel like we've already had a lot of construction traffic and we're going to
I get more with Vineland Forest and somehow we think it's only fair that the
people on Pleasant View share some of that. And I realize that Pleasant View is
not a very good road for traffic and as a result of that, the road access to
Pleasant View has changed so that it could actually exit very close to Powers
I Blvd. and that's great. I think that takes care of a lot of the problems on
Pleasant View and we're just concerned about our situation and the safety of our
children in the neighborhood. Thank you.
IMayor Chmiel: Thank you. Is there anyone else?
Daryl Fortier: Good evening. I'm Daryl Fortier, the applicant. I'm also
II representing Frank Beddor Jr. and Mr. Troendle. I believe you've received some
of the information that we've already prepared and I'll try to make this as
brief as I can. We've reviewed the staff report and for the most part we concur
with it. There are a few points however we'd like to touch on to ask for your
assistance. The first point is 8(b) and that is for the request for an easement
to the west to allow for the discharge of water from this site. I'm uncertain
with that as to what the proper disposition is. It appears to us that presently
the rate of discharge is going to be equal to what is existing. We are not
discharging any additional water onto the Art Owens property. For us to secure
II an easement over the Art Owens' property, we would have to know, Mr. Owens would 1
also have to know what are we attempting to achieve with this easement? Also,
14
I
II
City Council Meeting - November 19, 1990
what would be the definition of the easement. I'm not quite sure how to resolve
that issue. Perhaps staff can be of some assistance. I
Mayor Chmiel: Paul or Gary?
Paul Krauss: Possibly Gary can take that? '
Gary Warren: Well and I could ask Elliott to comment after my comments. The
purpose of the easement would be to assure that the City or the development has
the right to discharge from that subdivision. I guess we've not been provided
with the storm sewer calculations, at least as far as I'm aware at this time so
as far as the magnitude of the easement, those calculations are necessary for us
to confirm that. The drainage that is currently existing drains through this
area. Is that correct?
Daryl Fortier: That is correct. ,
Gary Warren: So that's a question that I'd have for Elliott as far as if you're
not altering the drainage course per se, or intensifying it, can the adjoining 1
property owner alter that? Doesn't he also have to accommodate that in any
other development plans that he would have?
Elliott Knetsch: Yes. We can require this kind of a dedication as part of the ,
subdivision process to deal with water that's on the land that's being
subdivided and that's what I understand this request to be.
Councilman Johnson: You want dedication of the land next door too? Not
dedication but an easement of the next door's land is what he's talking about.
The next door neighbors. ,
Elliott Knetsch: Well the water's on his property and it's going to be coming
off the property and they have to take steps to regulate the discharge from
their property.
Mayor Chmiel: What if you have existing flows? Topography's going to remain
the same. No difference. Isn't that what you said before Gary?
Gary Warren: What I was addressing is the fact that if the drainage is
currently draining in this same area, then the property owner, Mr. Owens in this
case still needs to accommodate it. The City should require and is requiring
that the rate be controlled to the pre-development runoff rate which is the
purpose for the ponding but the actual drainage course, if it exists today,
Mr. Owens can alter it but he can't block it. He still has to accommodate it
and so the necessity for the easement, I mean they're nice to have but I think
we can take a hard look at it and possibly do without it.
Daryl Fortier: As an individual applicant, how do we go about getting an
easement from an adjacent property owner? What control or rights do we have for
that? '
Mayor Chmiel: Would you like to address that?
15 '
City Council Meeting - November 19, 1990
11
Gary Warren: Well we have had several instances. One obviously is to pursue
1 the property owner and negotiate and purchase an easement. That's one way. The
other is if the property owner is not willing, the City could choose to _
intervene on behalf of the developer for the public benefit and condemn that
IIparticular area to acquire the easement again at the developer's cost. j
Daryl Fortier: With the City's cooperation, we have no objection to proceeding
objection P 9
with that assuming the City's going to support the efforts in securing whatever
II easement the City believes is necessary. We are still uncertain as to where it
will go but we're sure with staff's help we can find out. The next point I have
is.
IIGary Warren: I think we have, if I could interrupt. Once we receive the storm
sewer calculations I think we can better define what the size of that drainage
is and what's necessary.
II
Daryl Fortier: Calculations have been submitted. We will resubmit and work
with staff on that point. Apparently they're lost in the shuffle somewhere.
1 The next item I have is on the same point 8(c). Paul has touched on the
widening of Pleasant View and the additional 7 feet. We have directed our
surveyor to include the additional 7 feet in this plat. Mr. Beddor wants to
' ' make certain that he's on record of saying he is in no way supporting the
widening of Pleasant View Road. He will be one of the many people who will be
opposed to it. However, we are showing the 7 feet on the reviewed preliminary
plat. The next point I'd like to address is the variance for the garage. The
Troendle garage. It's been pointed out in the staff report that to support a
variance we must demonstrate a hardship that's existing and that the hardship
must not be of our own making. We'd like to show a brief blow-up of that area
' 1 which I think will demonstrate the hardship. What you see here is a blow-up of 1
the intersection from Nez Perce as it enters from Vineland Forest. It will come
onto the Troendle property. The alignment of the road is such, as shown here in
II yellow. It comes at an 83 1/2 degrees to the property line and that causes the
setback to be 21.7 feet. If we were to continue the road in a straight course.
We would prefer not to of course as a developer. Mr. Troendle is receiving a _
lifetime estate. Part of the reason Mr. Beddor is developing this property is
1 to accommodate Mr. Troendle. We would like to see the road sit out at least 30
feet so that no variance is required. We cannot do that because of the
alignment of this road. This road already exists. Mr. Troendle and Mr. Beddor
I had no part in causing this road to be specifically here. We certainly did have
a part in saying that we liked the overall concept and we believe it's a
rationale guideline for planning. We're fully supporting that. However, as to
whether it's coming at 87 degrees or 83, we did not participate in that. For us
1 to allow Mr. Troendle to keep the garage we would have to put the road in this
I area where it's shown in red. To do that and to match the right-of-way that is
on Vineland Forest would cause us to put a small curve in the road here such
II that it would have a reverse curve. We've talked to traffic engineers as well
as City staff and the engineering department as well as our firm really would
not support that. We find it would be ignored by most drivers. In order for
II them to stay in the right-of-way in their proper lane, if we were to put in such
a reverse curve, it would drop their speed to 23 mph. We think most people
would simple cross over the center line and it would not be good planning to
have a small kink in the road. So as you can see, we really cannot comply on
Iour own property with what we believe to be reasonable engineering practices and
I 16
1 •
II
City Council Meeting - November 19, 1990
a setback requirement. We are being forced into non-compliance merely because
the alignment with this road which we did not determine. It was determined. . .
Not by Mr. Beddor or Mr. Troendle. We would like to therefore seek a variance.
In lieu of a variance we would accept a lifetime estate for Mr. Troendle that if
a variance is not granted, that the garage need not be removed until he either
applied for a building permit or until the property was sold to somebody other
than Mr. Troendle. The way you would have of monitoring this is very simple.
If anyone comes in for a building permit, it is either Mr. Troendle or it is not
granted. Even if it is Mr. Troendle, you would then simply check to see if the
garage is there or not. If the garage is there, then there's no building
permit. Mr. Troendle is presently 80 years old. He was born on this location.
His folks were the people who bought this property. He has literally lived here
every day of his life for 80 years. He is certainly one of the senior citizens
and elders of Chanhassen. We'd like to see the City cooperate and to give Mr.
Troendle this much respect so that he can keep is present barn which he does
use. I guess that's all I have to say about this variance.
Councilman Johnson: Could I ask you a question?
Daryl Fortier: Certainly. ,
Councilman Johnson: Have you talked to the owners of Vineland Forest about
making the modifications to their street back in those two lots there through
that cul-de-sac?
Daryl Fortier: Yes. We have gone to the extent of even offering to purchase ,
one of the lots if he would agree. We've recently been advised that the
additional 4 feet we need here and the 4 feet we need here to correct this
alignment, he would not be in favor of replatting his property to provide us
with that additional right-of-way. If the City would like, they certainly have
some powers to secure that land for us to allow us to have a straight road but
we have made that attempt and we've been refused.
Councilman Johnson: But you only need the land on the right side?
Daryl Fortier: Actually we need land, that's correct. The extra right-of-way
here is no problem. We would have to secure a strip that's 68 1/2 feet long and
4 feet wide here. So it must go out 125 square feet.
Councilman Johnson: If you purchased that lot, combined it with your property, ,
it would be a replat.
Mayor Chmiel: If replatted...existing? '
Councilman Johnson: Yeah, but you weren't replatting all Vineland Estates.
You'd be combining that lot as part of your property in your plat. I
Daryl Fortier: That's correct. Mr. Beddor's interest was not in this but he
wanted to specifically avoid that. That's why he made an offer for one lot. He
made an offer for this front lot which would be potentially off Pleasant View.
Councilman Johnson: But that doesn't have anything to do with moving the road.
17
11
11 City Council Meeting - November 19, 1990
Daryl Fortier: This one doesn't unfortunately. Part of it was an enticement to
the owner of Vineland Forest. To get him to agree to this plat. He indicated l
that he really was not interested in selling the lots to Mr. Beddor and he was
not interested in replatting his property so we at this time have to report we
looked at it but we haven't been successful. The final point I have really
addresses Lot 4 and I think Paul's probably done a fine job of presenting some
of the changes that we've made on it. I hope this is no longer an issue. Lot
1 4, Block 1 is in this location and as you can see, we've reconfigured the pond.
Our engineer has reported to us that the ponding calculations are the very same
or greater than before their capacity to hold the pond. The building area is
' right up in this area. The building pad and it's designed for a rear walkout.
A full basement walkout. It walks out at the elevation of 1,001. This corner
is set 3 feet lower. This is 1 foot lower and that leaves you with a relatively
flat yard that ends up it's over 15,000 square feet with only a 3x slope to it.
That's a very sizeable and very flat yard. You could easily play football on
it. Some of the real strong arm. It's the size of a residential lot and that
excludes the building area and it also excludes the ponding area. 15,000 square
feet is flat. We think that definitely demonstrates that it's a very buildable
lot. That concludes the presentation I guess with one comment about the
citizens presentation from Mr. Berke. I would certainly agree that traffic
safety should always be a study and we have certainly no objection to trying to
work out some details where Nez Perce can be constructed at this time through
to Pleasant View. We know several citizens have concerns there. We have
' prepared some graphics to indicate what we would do to that corner of the
intersection. We've also worked with staff with it. How to go about achieving
that I guess is where the quandry really comes in. For the citizens' concerns,
they may be appropriate to let them know that Mr. Beddor does not intend to
proceed with this plat extremely rapidly. He does need to close for Mr.
Troendle's lifetime estate of course so that is urgent. However, actual
development, he will probably be in here a year from now requesting a one year
' extension. We had originally requested that you consider granting us a 1 year
extension already and we would be willing to not have any development occur for
2 years. We were told we would have to come back for a request for an extension
' which we do intend or we do plan on doing. So the earliest we would see any
development would probably be a year and a half. That as we would file our plat
within a year and we would then proceed with construction the following spring
so we don't see this as being eminently developed but I think the issue remains
' the same. If the City is, perhaps the City could consider with their staff
whether or not some eminent domain could be exercised or they could talk to Mr.
Owens and see what kind of cooperation can be done. It sounds like a reasonable
' suggestion. Thank you.
Mayor Chmiel: Thank you. Is there anyone else?
Julius Smith: I would just like to clarify one issue. I'm Julius Smith and I
represent Frank Beddor occasionally and the last point that Oaryl made on
crossing Art Owens' property with a road to Peaceful Lane. The only way that
' Art Owens currently, you can't talk to Art Owens about this because he can't
voluntarily give that easement or sell that property because he's sitting on a
homestead and he's currently in bankruptcy and the only way that you can, the
only way that he could give that property up and not lose his status in the
bankruptcy court is either under condemnation or threat of condemnation and that
doesn't change his status. So as long as he's there and for several years
18
1
City Council Meeting - November 19, 1990
thereafter you can't, I mean you can talk to Art. Certainly he thinks the road
will be there someday but there's no way that he can voluntarily,sell that to
anybody at this moment or he's really in big trouble on his whole piece of
property. He loses his exemption is what I'm saying.
Mayor Chmiel: But you're saying friendly condemnation? 1
Julius Smith: Well yeah. Under the threat of at least.
Mayor Chmiel: Thank you.
Terry Barke: I'd just like to state that it sounds like we're very close on
something that makes everybody pretty happy. I think these people seem like
pretty reasonable people to me. It sounds like they're in no real hurry right
now to build there and I'm wondering if there isn't something that we can do to
not rush the process through right now but make sure that when it does happen,
it happens in a manner that everybody feels good about and it sounds like we're
pretty close to that.
Councilman Workman: Anybody else?
Jim Stasson: My name is Jim Stasson. I live at 6400 Peaceful Lane which is on
the corner of Pleasant View Road and Peaceful Lane which is when that road does
go through, I'm going to end up with all the traffic. When the Vineland Forest
was initially platted, I was never notified of any of this going on and by the
time we heard anything about it, Alternate #3 was already chosen by everybody
and there wasn't much we could do. We got notified on the Troendle property and
my main concern is, Peaceful Lane has a very large radius corner. Used to be CR
17. Used to come down that way and turn around there. People take that corner
quite rapidly. My driveway is right probably at the end of the corner. Where
my driveway is, the road's about 28 feet wide. The corner's about 150 feet
wide. My main concern is when this road comes through, as that corner gets
straighten out to become a regular corner. We get a substantial amount of
traffic for only 3 houses on that road now. A lot of people come down Pleasant
View and they seem to think Pleasant View goes around that corner and they go
down to the dead end and then they turn around and go back out and continue on
down Pleasant View Road. I guess you've got, he had mentioned that there was
something to straighten that corner out. I guess I'd like to see what he's got.
Daryl Fortier: Step around front here. With Pleasant View Road being down here
on the lower portion, Peaceful Lane comes up this way. What we are showing is
now a road this is 28 feet wide or 30 feet to city standard which would be
connected at a right angle. This portion of the corner the way it's presently
asphalted, would be converted to grass or landscaping. Similarly this corner
which is extra wide would also be converted to grass or landscaping. That would
give you a setback of certain distances of 110 feet to your driveway. That is
less of course from pavement to pavement depending on the width of the road but
it would be I suspect at least 80 feet which would be fairly typical for a turn
onto a residential lot. Does that sound reasonable? '
Jim Stasson: As long as when this road goes through this gets done. And it'd
be nice if this was done before a lot of development occurred so we didn't get
the construction traffic coming.
19 1
1
11 City Council Meeting - November 19, 1990
Paul Krauss: I'm not quite sure how to put this but Daryl's not in a position
to design city streets on somebody else's property.
Mayor Chmiel: Yeah, I'm wondering who's going to pay for this.
Paul Krauss: What he's illustrated though is generally consistent with some
guidelines we established that there is a deviation though in that this shows
the new Nez Perce coming straight into Peaceful Lane. That is not the way this
would happen. You have through movement that comes around through here. We'd
want to bring this around on angle and probably come to the Owens' property the
best we can and completely rebuild that intersection. Now we had every
I anticipation of doing that design when the Owens' property is developed or I
supposed if the Council wants to condemn right-of-way so we can actually build
the street. We haven't gone to the extent of laying it out because it's
I premature at this time but that's generally consistent with what we've
discussed.
Councilwoman Dialer: Paul, maybe this is a good time to ask a question I was
going to ask later. Peaceful Lane, it seems like an awful narrow road to me. Is
it substandard?
I Paul Krauss: I'm sure it is. It's basically, it almost appears as though it's
an oversized driveway.
Councilwoman Dialer: A driveway. Do we plan on widening it at this point then?
Bringing it up to city standards?
Paul Krauss: The anticipation always was that when the connection was made,
that would be completely rebuilt.
Councilwoman Dialer: So you'll bring it up to City standards then?
IPaul Krauss: And every attempt will be made to shift I think the pavement width
if possible to the east so that it clears that home, the existing home over
Ithere better than it does right now.
Gary Warren: I think the concepts that we have from when Art Owens originally
brought this in here 3 or 4 years ago I think serves as a good guide for that
and that certainly was addressing that area as well.
Councilwoman Dialer: Now the question is who's going to pay.
IMayor Chmiel: Where it all goes. Those are a lot of the questions that are
still unanswered unless I get a commitment. I think, any other discussion?
Councilman Johnson: Specifically or in general?
Mayor Chmiel: Well, I think we're looking at _a couple three things here really.
I Looking at the eminent domain with friendly condemnation. This I'm not sure as
to how that's all going to work or shake out. It's something that we're going
to have to look at. I don't know if we have all the answers right now to even
I move on this at this present time. You're talking roughly that you don't plan
on doing anything this year. I don't see the real need to really rush at this
I20
I
City Council Meeting - November 19, 1990
until we get some conclusions pulled together so we know exactly where we're
going and what the basic needs are. Even though you were together, you were
talking about a year extension anyway. What you would be looking for would be
that 8.3 feet variance as well for the garage. That's something that we have to
look at as well. Any other? 1
Councilman Johnson: Well, if we're opening it up for.
Mayor Chmiel: Yes, opening it up for comments? I
Councilman Johnson: First comment, which hasn't been explored. I get looking
at this picture that they gave us and it shows an area in Lot 4 and Lot 1. Do
you have this picture yourself? Okay. On Lot 1 and Lot 4 you can see a natural
low area there. While an aertial photograph is not a good thing for judging
wetlands from, it appears that most of that area concerned say be a wetland. I
haven't gone out and walked it and looked at it particularly but it shows that
Class B type wetland vegetation. If such, why isn't there a wetland alteration
permit involved in this? And is that neighboring wetland that we know is a
wetland and have been arguing with Mr. Owens for a couple years on, is that
I/
within 200 feet and requires a wetland alteration permit also?
Paul Krauss: Councilman Johnson, as to the first question. This has been a
real tough one for us. The thing has been altered extensively. If you read the
background, Mr. Owens' claims that it never used to be a wetland. That the City
at one time apparently, according to him, broke a tile line that used to drain
the area causing the wetland vegetation to exist. You know historically you can
take that back further. We contacted the soil conservation service. They said
that the area on Mr. Owens' property has dehydric soils and if it had a tile
line, it's because it was a wetland in the first place and somebody drained it.
So I mean we've come to the conclusion that that pond on Mr. Owens' property is
identifiable as a wetland protected by the City. The part of that that extends
onto the Troendle property though has been heavily altered and some of that by
the illegal filling or unpermitted filling that occurred on Mr. Owens' property
backing water up in there and changing things. Jo Ann was out there with Fish
and Wildlife Service and they concluded that the portion of it that's on the
Troendle property was not the wetland. That the wetland was further to the
west. I know it was scaled at onetime. I would assume it was over the 200
feet. I think we can, I don't know if we can pick it off what we have right
now. I
Councilman Johnson: Okay, so Fish and Wildlife has looked at the soils there
and they're not wetland soils and that's not wetland vegetation in that low
area?
Paul Krauss: It's not a true wetland on Lot 4, yeah.
Councilman Johnson: Okay. As long as the experts have looked at it that's
fine. You know taking the access issue one step further, Nez Perce is a road
that has, and a lot of the roads in Carver Beach, has long been overlooked and
we really need to take a close look at Nez Perce as it approaches not only this
property but the Lake Lucy street that is in there because a lot of the people
want to go south go down to Kerber. Run Kerber through town and head out on TH
5 and Nez Perce being one of the city's most understandard streets, we need to
21
11
IICity Council Meeting - November 19, 1990
1 look at that. That is kind of an aside. It doesn't really, shouldn't have a
lot of effect but in any improvements I would think to Nez Perce, we also have
to look at the but for issue. If it wasn't but for the developments at the end
II of Nez Perce, Nez Perce would still be an all right street for those few people
that lived on it but for the increased traffic coming from this area, we may I
want to do an aerial assessment and say it's your houses that are causing more
of the problem on Nez Perce so therefore you get to share the cost of, or your
I lots in this case. It's just farm property. The cost of improvements to Nez
Perce. Who benefits from the widening of Nez Perce but that's almost another
issue outside of this one but needs to be, that's a street that's been
I overlooked too long now. As we build more we've got to get the connecting
infrastructure going. The same thing with Peaceful Lane when Owens' property
develops but I really think we've got to wait for Owens' property to develop to
do Peaceful Lane unless we can find some kind of monies to straighten up that
II
intersection somehow. It would be good to get that, at least the western corner
of that squared off on Peaceful Lane. I don't know how much it would cost but
just to start solving some of the Peaceful Lane problems now rather than waiting
II for Art Owens to get out of his bankruptcy and everything else which may take
years. It might be next week. Who knows? We thought this was going to be
years off before anything happened and Troendle's in here already. Many times
I people will say we're not going to, you know they'll tell you what they're going
to do. You know the guy who lived behind me, he said they're going to carry me
out of my house feet first. Don't worry about this ever being subdivided. He
now lives over near St. Hubert's and I've got 4 houses behind me. That was only
1 3 years after he said he was never going to move out. So when somebody tells me
that it's going to be years before this is actually built, economics change next
week and they look good. I don't think all options have been totally explored
Ion the variance. I do not like granting variances. 1 do see the logic of the
argument that the placement of the road did not take into consideration the
continuation of the road which was a mistake. You know we really stuck out
i blinders on and hit that property line and we stopped looking. We approved a
road that really creates the variance situation. But I do believe that Mr.
Beddor and everybody was completely involved. Everybody, the Troendle people
and Beddor were involved in Vineland Forest. They were in here talking a lot
II and I think that the purchase of that next lot over could solve the problem. I
know Mr. Beddor doesn't want that lot over but it does solve his problems as far
as being able to then change that road slightly.
1 Mayor Chmiel: Any other discussion from Council?
Jules Smith: There are a couple things. One, I might mention on that barn
I
thing and we're trying just to accommodate Mr. Troendle. We would be certainly,
we would put something on a record. Contract with the City on record that that
property cannot get a building permit or it can't do anything unless that barn
1 is removed after Mr. Troendle is. Let me rephrase that.
Councilman Johnson: Yeah, we know what you mean.
IIJules Smith: The only other thing I would mention is that like all real estate
today, we have a contract with Mr. Troendle to buy his property and give him a
life estate, he doesn't want to leave his property, for as long as he is on that
I property. His life estate is a determinable life estate. If he has to leave
with no prospect of coming back, and we have to go to court to show that.
II22
, 11
City Council Meeting - November 19, 1990
That's the only way. You'd have to get a court order on that. Then his life
estate terminates. So we have made a deal with Mr. Troendle that we will buy I
his property and we will give him that life estate. Obviously in this day and
age you don't buy property unless you know you can do something with it which is
why we have the condition in our contract that this is subject to municipal
approval in order to plat the property. So from that point of view, from Mr.
Troendle's point of view I would, I don't want you to rush into any action but I
would not . I would prefer from his point of view not to put it off for a year.
I would like to see it keep rolling you know but we would certainly be willing
to do some legal document which we could do very easily to guarantee that
nothing could happen on that property as long as Mr. Troendle was there,
otherwise we'd have to tear the barn down. It would never be used by us. ,
Mayor Chmiel: What I'm thinking right now Jules is I'm considering, and I don't
know the balance of the Council's position but I'm looking to possibly table
this to December 10th. Seeing what staff can pull together in reference to both
roads and also the friendly condemnation portion because we don't have those
answers either.
Jules Smith: I don't have a real problem with that but I got the impression we
were talking about next year.
Mayor Chmiel: Oh no. No, no. I was just bringing up the fact that talking ,
construction, it wasn't going to start for possibly 18 months or whatever.
Jules Smith: I was just concerned we'll keep working on it. '
Mayor Chmiel: Right. I'm not proposing to drop it right now and say come back
when you're ready. No. '
Councilwoman Dimler: I will second the Mayor's motion to table this until
December 10th. '
Councilman Workman: Can I comment quick because I think Jay had a valid point.
When Vineland first came in, and this picture's kind of the other way. When we
talked about that and we didn't expect that. That hasn't been going real fast.
We didn't expect this to come but my biggest concerns were Nez Perce and so
these people are suggesting that, Mr. Barke is saying that they're coming out
there. I believe that but I always believed that Nez Perce would be the way to
go if people were coming downtown and that is a very, very dangerous situation.
So as a part of this can we get that looked at also? This isn't a huge amount
of houses to be coming out onto anything I guess unless Vineland really went and
developed quickly too but I think Nez Perce is also going to get it. Not to
belittle. I don't know, the people that live right in that little tight area
there, you're going to either hit a tree or something. I don't know. I get
nervous everytime I go through there which isn't that often. 1
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. That's another comment to note Paul as well.
Councilman Johnson: As long as we're doing comments during a tabling action but 11
as far as the practicality of a notice that or a contract that says that we will
not do anything here. How that gets filed with the city. This would be the
only one. This would be a singular document that has to be somehow filed in our
23
10/ City Council Meeting - November 19, 1990
11 building department against this piece of land that could be found 5-10 years
from now that tells us this has to happen. How exactly the building inspector
finds that or anything, I just don't think we have a system within the City
designed to do that.
IMayor Chmiel: I think you probably have to do that through the County. The
County Recorder as part of that parcel.
IJules Smith: Either that or there's a development contract right now.
ICouncilman Johnson: But does the building inspector see every?
Mayor Chmiel: He doesn't but you'd also have to have clarification within the
City as well.
IIJules Smith: But the point is, anybody who would buy that lot would be on
notice that they can't do anything.
IIMayor Chmiel: That's right.
Councilman Johnson: It doesn't mean they won't. We see that all the time.
IIMayor Chmiel moved, Councilwoman Dialer seconded to table Subdivision 190-15 for
the Troendle Addition until the December 10, 1990 City Council meeting for
Ifurther review by staff. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously.
CONSIDER TRAFFIC CONTROL FOR WEST 78TH STREET THROUGH DOWNTOWN, PRESENTATION BY j
ICONSULTANT. s
Councilman Workman: We haven't received the full report yet on this?
II Gary Warren: No. Part of the process that we are, Council is aware I think
that we've been going through, we've made you aware at least at the previous
meeting, that Stragar has been hired through the HRA to basically take a look at
II the downtown street segment from Great Plains to and including Powers Blvd. to
give us some thoughts as we entertain new developments such as Market Square and
we also obviously hard pressed to take a look at the West 78th Street alignment
II as it related to the now defunct proposal for Target. So it's kind of grown as
an off shoot of that initial thrust plus the Hanus property proposals that we
looked at with Brad Johnson. We're in the process of completing a report with
Stragar for us which we hope to bring back here, actually via the HRA since they
II actually contracted for this. We wanted to bring some of their preliminary
thoughts to the forefront here for Council review and any further input you can
give us before we do finalize the report. SO with us tonight is Oennis Eyler
Ifrom Stragar who I guess will start off the presentation.
Dennis Eyler: Thanks Gary. It's a pleasure to be here Mr. Mayor and members of
the Council. It's really our first effort in Chanhassen that_ I'm aware of. I've
II been with the firm of Stragar-Roscoe-Fausch for about 7 years. - Before that I
was with the Minnesota Department of Transportation in the Golden Valley office
and my experience in Chanhassen is putting up a couple of traffic signals in at
IITH 5 at CR 17, TH 101 and at CR 16 so I am somewhat familiar with.. .
II24
II
City Council Meeting - November 19, 1990
(There was a tape change at this point in Mr. Eyler's presentation. )
Dennis Eyler: . ..and save the City of Chanhassen a little time and a little I
money in the long run and make sure we didn't move on parallel paths and find
out they weren't actually parallel. We looked at the Metropolitan Council's
model which is a, it 's kind of a metropolitan system's model. It's good at
predicting volumes on roads like TH 5 and to some extent TH 101 but when you get
down to an area like the City of Chanhassen and the downtown area, it starts to
fall apart. For one thing the zones that are land use zones that the
Metropolitan Council's model has and there were only 4 I believe for the
downtown area and some of those straddled 78th Street. And they mixed
residential property in with commercial property so one of our first processes
was to fine tune the Metropolitan Council's model by taking a window out of that
model which essentially went from Powers on the west, south of TN 5, north of
downtown and east of CR 16 to try to get the traffic that's coming into the
downtown area. Including what's on TH 5. And then we went down and got the
individual proposed land use data from Paul and Gary and looked at what was
likely to occur in some of these developments including the Burdick property
which is pretty well set as far as it's form and some general land use based on ,
acreages and what the land use guiding is for the other properties and we've now
completed a small area study with some forecast volumes and we're going back and
recalibrating the Metropolitan model so that the City has that as a tool to
evaluate future land use. But more to tonight's subject, what ramifications
does this increase traffic with the development have on 78th Street and what are
the problems out on 78th Street today and what sort of things can we do to
mitigate some of those problems. With that I'll turn it over to Mike Lewis
who's done the specific analysis work on 78th Street. Mike is a recent addition
to our firm. Prior to joining us he was with the Air Force and he's kind of an
in-house consultant to the Air Force. The Air Force has to operate like a
developer whenever they do any expansion at bases and things of that nature plus
he's done work for other governmental agencies. Mike has taken a detail look
and he's got a transparency presentation he'd like to go through. And feel free
to stop us at any time and ask any questions. Like I say, we're here on a
discovery mission as well as information.
Mike Lewis: What I'd like to discuss this evening is basically what's happening '
on 78th Street today. We did some traffic counts and you might have seen our
tube laying out on the roadway here the last couple weeks. The...you see there
are 24 hour counts. How many cars are passing the roadway section during one 24
hour period and that gives you some idea of the traffic out there now. In
traffic engineering a majority of the time we're interested in what happens
within the highest volume hour of the day and for Chanhassen and 78th Street we 11 found that highest hour to happen in the evening peak hour about 5:00 to 6:00.
And of course you can understand that. People get off of work and head for home
and the volumes you see there are volumes going in each direction. You see the
highest volume in that area is 871 vehicles. That's right before Laredo. And
with the count, what we can do is we can have some idea of what the capacity of
the roadway is. The capacity of the roadway is the vehicle carrying
capabilities of the roadway or intersection. We can assign a capacity or level
of service to roadways or signaled or unsignalized intersections. This slide
you see here is just kind of a brief summary of what level of service means.
Level of service is a range from A to F. A with being the best. F being the
worst and level of service E that you see, that is the level that is considered
25
1
ilCity Council Meeting - November 19, 1990
II capacity. For a roadway section it's generally looked at as, if traffic was
just to be able to free flow on the roadway, what speed would that be and then
as it drops down then it's assigned a level of service from there on. So the
II slower you go on the road, the lower your level of service. For a signalized
intersection, that's based on amount of delay, the average delay a driver can
expect at an intersection. Level of service C is the average driver will have '
about 24 seconds maximum. For an unsignalized intersection, that deals more
I with the movements themselves. Not most necessarily entire intersection as a
whole. For our study we looked at all the major intersections and we found the
level of services, next slide please? On the major street everything functions
I just fine. The left turns are at the lowest one is D which is still above
capacity. However, when you get onto the minor streets, the side streets, the
level of service as you can see drops off quite a bit and I think the lowest
II level of service is F and the highest one is C. Now this is an indication of a
possibility of a signal warrant being met. That signal warrant would be the
amount of delay that a driver would experience and I'll get into that a little
bit later on in here. As far as the roadway capabilities, we see 78th Street
I now as functioning at right about the maximum amount of traffic it can handle.
The 870 vehicles you see in one lane going one direction, that's about the
maximum number of vehicles that it can handle. Generally for a roadway such as
I 78th Street, we look at someplace between 600 and 800 vehicles in an hour as
being the maximum amount. One question we were asked is what type of truck
traffic can be expected on 78th Street. Normally for a business district, a
volume of about 4% heavy truck traffic and the 18 wheeler type thing which means
11 that you'd see 35 18 wheel vehicles go down 78th Street in an hour and I
sincerely doubt you'd see that. You might see maybe 4 or 5 during a peak hour
at that.
IIDennis Eyler: What Mike was getting at there is typically in the Metropolitan
area, arterial street systems we find 4% commercial. We obviously don't find on
II 78th Street. I think it's mainly because of the access to many sources using. . .
is pretty well served by TH 5 so you do have a good supporting surrounding
street network that pulls that traffic off your downtown area. We recently
completed some studies in some outlying communities like in Alexandria you do
IIsee truck traffic but you wouldn't see that here because. ..TH 5.
Mayor Chmiel: During the period of time that this was taken, would that include
Ithe trucks that are using 78th Street going off to Market Blvd.?
Councilman Johnson: DOT's construction trucks?
IIGary Warren: The dates that your tubes were out, we had talked about that
because we had Schafer Construction also doing some work in the downtown and the
conclusion was that when the tubes are put out, the technicians are looking for
I any pecularities in like detouring or anything else that would give you a wrong
reading and we concluded that that was not the case. The date that the counts
were taken, it was atypical to what we would expect. You're talking about
ISchafer's trucks running?
Mayor Chmiel: I remember when those tubes were down and I believe that Schafer
IIwas on 78th Street at that particular time.
I26
II
City Council Meeting - November 19, 1990
1
Gary''Warren: We did a follow-up to get more detail on Market intersection and
I don't recall exactly what the day was. Your memory may be better than mine on
that but it was only on that Market further detour we were getting but you
didn't think that you had anything peculiar for that day that would have tipped
us off.
Mike Lewis: No. See the 4% that I was quoting there, that's a typical number.
The tube counts out there, all they would have done is it would registered those
trucks as another vehicle on the road. It wouldn't have said well, here's a
truck so it increases the volume. It's just another vehicle on the road.
Dennis Eyler: The reason we're bringing this up is the issue that you mentioned 11 with 78th Street and their ability to accommodate truck traffic. The large
volume that we took, very large trucks are non-existent here. That doesn't mean
that there aren't.. .trucks.
Mayor Chmiel: Right. And the point I'm trying to make is maybe that 871 is an
inflated number because of those trucks using that access.
Gary Warren: The 871 was actually westbound traffic though west of Great Plains 1
wasn't it?
Councilman Johnson: Yeah. The trucks weren't in that area. 1
Gary Warren: The trucks wouldn't be there.
Mayor Chmiel: You're talking Laredo? 1
Mike Lewis: In the earlier slide, each one of those lines with the two arrows
is location of counts and it would pick up traffic just past that point.
Councilman Workman: We don't have one for West 78th and Kerber?
Councilman Johnson: Yeah.
Mike Lewis: Yes. Oh, no. On Kerber Blvd. , no. 1
Councilman Johnson: He wants to know the intersection of Kerber. I want to
know what was the rating, capacity rating of the Laredo intersection and Kerber
intersection on that other chart that you just took off.
Mike Lewis: No, we did not pick up traffic counts at Kerber. One thing I have
to caution us on is that these turning movements are based on a computer '
generated turning movement. We had not had time yet to go out and actually take
turning movement counts. We will in the future but for the purposes of planning
and for what we're doing for the presentation this evening, the computer
generated turning movements are pretty accurate.
Councilman Johnson: What are the F's?
Mike Lewis: The F's?
Councilman Johnson: Yeah. What streets? We can't read it from here. 1
27
1
I
City Council Meeting - November 19, 1990
Mike Lewis: Oh, okay.
Councilman Workman: Laredo.
1 Dennis Eyler: Southbound left turn from Laredo onto eastbound 78th Street is an
F. The other one is 78th and Great Plains. That's the westbound left turn.
' Councilman Workman: But are we going to get some counts for Kerber?
Dennis Eyler: Yes. We're scheduling manual counts for all those intersections
' next week. That's one of the final phases of doing calibrations. We had an
opportunity to do the machine counts. We just haven't had the opportunity to do
the manual counts. They're very labor intensive and we've just been trying to
organize the people to get out there and do it all on the same day if possible.
' That way we don't lose cars from one count to the next counting on the same day.
And these are based on kind of standard turning movements...but what the level
of service at stop signs will indicate is a lack of gaps. That's really what it
' says. That there are inadequate number of gaps for traffic to move out of there
safely and the gaps are determined for each movement. A right turn on the
roadway requires a smaller gap than for example a cross movement or a left turn.
Actually a right turn however creates more of a cross movement because you have
to accelerate into traffic but a left turn is really. . .
Councilman Workman: Well the reason I bring up Kerber, that's my intersection.
I Jay's is Laredo and it's not there so I'm yaaah. But I would say that, and
Laredo is maybe a little bit less than this but I would say 95% of the people
coming down Kerber take a left at 78th and then the accelerated speed and
' everything else.
Councilman Johnson: I'd agree with Laredo.
I Dennis Eyler: Yeah, that seems to be the definite travel pattern. Everything
from the north drains down 78th and heads east and eventually comes south to
TH 5 or continues on into town. You don't need turning counts to see that.
' That's just the normal pattern of the city.
Mike Lewis: Okay, moving on. The next item that we looked at is the type of
' traffic control that exists at the intersections today. Right now all the
intersections are two way stop and the stop control's on the minor leg. The
existing traffic warrants signals at two intersections during the peak hour
period. That's at Laredo and 78th and Great Plains and 78th. The Uniform
' Manual on Traffic Control Devices has established 11 signal warrants. These
warrants deal with traffic volume, delay experience, school crossings, access.
Many different things and what we've done is to look at what the volumes are 'out
' there and those are the only two intersections at this time that warrant a
traffic signal. The other intersections just do not have enough traffic on the
side streets.
' Councilman Johnson: But you haven't done Kerber yet?
Mike Lewis: No sir, we have not.
Mayor Chmiel: Clarify your traffic signal as to red, yellow, green?
' 28
I
City Council Meeting - November 19, 1990
Mike Lewis: Yes.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. What's the potential of just using stop signs at these
specific intersections? Having 4 way stops versus.
Mike Lewis: A 4 way stop will help the minor street traffic get out into the
intersection and on the roadway. However, what it does is have a tendency to
release one vehicle at even intervals which further down the road does not
create good gaps for other traffic to enter. A 4 way stop generally is looked
at in instances where you have a minimum volume of 500 vehicles on all 4
approaches entering an intersection during one consecutive 8 hour period. So
that gives you some idea of how much traffic you really need before you need the
4 way stop warrant in the... For that reason we do not recommend the use of 4
way stops at any of these intersections here.
Dennis Eyler: To clarify that. That's on a permanent basis. One of the ,
warrants for a 4 way stop is that you have the intention of eventually setting
up a signal. Until such time as you do that.. . To further follow-up what Mike
is saying, the 4 way stops do solve the problem at a given intersection as far
as getting traffic out onto the highway but usually at the expense of another
downstream intersection. So if you're going to do that, you want to make sure
that that intersection that you picked for a 4 way stop makes some sense from a
roadway system standpoint. That that is the focal point of the problem area.
So that the immediate adjacent intersections were now suffering from lack of gas
because of the metering effect of the stop signs. You tend to select alternate
routes to get over to that intersection and also use the stop sign. So you
really have to have some maybe parallel routes if that's going to be the interim
solution. On the other hand, a traffic signal at the right location can create
gaps downstream depending on how it's timed. Of course they're very expensive. '
They're a long term commitment to maintenance and operations. It's always a big
hurdle for the city to get it's first signal that they own and somebody is going
to maintain it. ,
Councilman Workman: And they're ugly.
Dennis Eyler: And Kerber, or I mean excuse me, Laredo with the volumes that are
there is certainly probably a good insulation for a 4 way stop for an interim
but with the idea that it is going to cause some problems someplace else. The
evening volumes that we show here show 432 going away which presumably would
reverse somewhat in the morning and be 432 going south so you do have roughly
maybe a 2:1, 3:1 ratio there so you're really on the fringe of having
justification for a 4 way stop. 4 way stops are not cheap for the motorist
either. They require everybody to stop whereas a traffic signal there's.. .
requires something less than everybody stopping so there are some hidden costs
for the 4 way stop. There's some noise and air pollution issues too and
back-ups. The only single lane approach is on 78th Street and may get some
back-ups at certain times of the day. We haven't done any sort of a cueing
analysis or back-up analysis of what a 4 way stop on Laredo would mean to
driveways for example east of Laredo on 78th Street. That's an issue that
should be possibly visited before a decision for a stop sign. Hake sure that
they're not going to typically back up and block some driveways. I'm not
sure.. . '
29
t
IICity Council Meeting - November 19, 1990
Mike Lewis: One item we did notice while we're driving up and down the roads is
I that there is a need for striping to be reaccomplished on the roadways. The
white line that separates the left turning lane from the thru lanes along with
the turning arrows that are in those lanes, they don't meet the MUTCO Standards.
I The turning arrow is way too small and it's not shaped in the proper dimensions.
Those are all items that should be done to help the driver along with for
instance at the intersection of Great Plains and 78th. You come up to that and
I it's difficult to know whether there's a left turn lane or right turn lane.
Paint on the ground is one of the cheapest ways of helping the driver understand
what's at the intersection.
1 Mayor Chmiel: Funny, we just discussed that today didn't we?
Mike Lewis: The next item that we went into is that of the geometrics of the
I intersections. What Dennis has put up here is a turning path guidelines of a
bus at the intersection of Great Plains and 78th Street. And as you can see,
the bus is outlined or it's colored there in orange and it encroaches on top of
I the median right there so one of our recommendations is that that median be cut
back about 12-15 feet. You can make that turn with a single unit truck. A
single unit truck is the UPS truck you see running up and down the roadways.
However, anything larger than that is going to have to swing wide. Swing out
II
into the oncoming traffic in order to make the turn. That is not generally an
accepted practice in traffic engineering. It does have some liabilities
involved with it and it's something the city should consider cutting back in the
II future.
Councilman Johnson: If you cut that backwards, what about the people coming out
II and making, coming the other direction and making a turn left that way if they
have to stop 15 foot further back?
Mike Lewis: No. They would not have to stop 15 feet to the back. Instead of
IIputting a raised island, you could put paint on the ground.
Councilman Johnson: Yeah, and then they're going to park on top of the
I paint and the bus goes over the tip of their car instead of the tip of the
island.
Mike Lewis: Well, those are always things.
ICouncilman Johnson: Since we have the head of our bus commission sitting here.
I Mike Lewis: Those are always things that could happen but we kind of rely a
little bit on driver, let's be friendly neighbors out there and if the bus sees
that he's going to run over the car in front of him, maybe he'll let him go
Iahead.
Gary Warren: I think you're also suggesting that we, in order to accomplish the
turn is that we shave the one side but you could still maintain most of the
II
dimension on the westbound side so that you still could provide that landmark
for them.
IIMike Lewis: That could be done also.
I30
II
City Council Meeting - November 19, 1990
Dennis Eyler: The edge along here could still remain. You could pull a
southbound left turning vehicle all the way up to here without it being, as long
as it stayed right on the paint, would be there without any problem. The reason
why we were asked to look at this is we understand that this intersection is the
topic of conversation within the city. ,
Councilman Johnson: That's a polite way to say it.
Dennis Eyler: Well, I've had a number of occasions to work with landscape ,
architects in doing some street layouts and my personal philosophy is the
landscape architects ought to confer with the traffic engineers because I
certainly wouldn't want to tell them how many trees to plant so I think it's a
two edge sword and sometimes architects seem, I don't know if there are any in
the room or not but architects seem to have bigger than average egos sometimes
so it's a sensitive issue and I understand that aesthetics are important too.
We think that one of the things going on here with the operations that maybe
there's just one too many things going on that the driver has to keep track of
at this intersection. If you look at it from any one aspect, the sight distance
although there are objects in the median and some other things going on, that in
itself is not really the problem. The volumes themselves are probably not
really the problem either. The geometrics while they're perfectly acceptable
for a car and tight for a larger vehicles. The problem there is that most
people who drive cars on streets, they're driving on streets that were designed
for trucks. They're not driving on roadways that were designed for cars so the
average driver's come to expect geometrics that were designed for trucks even
though himself is a car. A good example of a roadway designed strictly for cars
is a parking ramp. Those are negotiated at very slow speeds and are very tight.
So the driver out here is faced with having to keep track of several different
things. It's trying to find a gap. He's got to look through a little clutter.
He's distracted somewhat maybe by the traffic at the intersection and he's also
got to worry about hitting the curbs. And all three of those things together I
think have added up to provide the discomfort level that you find when you drive
through there. I don't know if eventual signalization of this, that will
certainly solve the gap selection problem and improve the safety but whether
that in itself is the total answer to your. I'm a little bit hesitant to tell
somebody to tear out something that was just put in a few years ago but when the
volumes are right on the border and we'll get into further what that means up
and down 78th Street. We've looked at the west end where that proposed shopping
center is going at that point in time. Ultimately the capacity here is going to
be a problem when you get to the year 2010 but when that date arrives, between
now and then is the...over the hill. That's the number we're still looking at
and we're going to try to tie up the land use and we'll bring that up later. I
Nike Lewis: As you see with that, we took the same process throughout all the
other insections and we found for the most part that, as I said, a single unit
truck can make the turns without any difficulties. However, anything larger
than that you're going to have to swing them wide or kind of take in and make a
swing, a U turn type swing in the intersection to make left turns.
Dennis Eyler: aid we check, we checked Laredo?
Mike Lewis: Yes. We looked at Laredo in particular and ran the bus through
there and a bus can make that turn but it's going to have to be a slow turn and
31
IICity Council Meeting - November 19, 1990
IIhe's going to have to swing wide to make rights and kind of swing wide in the
intersection to make lefts. We used the bus because we didn't have a train
templet that resembled a firetruck but we looked at it as if a bus can make it,
I then a firetruck sure can also. We also looked at using the turning movements
that were generated by the computer, what type of turning lanes would be needed
and we found that a right turn leg on the west leg at 78th Street at Laredo
I would be beneficial. I think there's 200 and some turns there in the evening
peak hour. A right and left turn at 78th and Powers. However I understand that
this has already been incorporated into the designs that are going on now which
II will be very beneficial and also depending on the phasing and the timing at the
signal when it's installed. The left turning lane there on 78th probably should
be extended about another 70 feet to allow for adequate storage capacity for
left turn vehicles so they don't back up out into the thru lanes and disrupt
Itraffic.
Councilman Johnson: Is that future or present?
IIMike Lewis: That is something that probably should be done in the future. As I
was going to.
1 Councilman Johnson: I mean it's based on future volumes?
Mike Lewis: No sir. It's based on present volumes. However, for us to rush
out there and do that, I wouldn't recommend it right now because first of all we
II don't have actual turning movement counts. We have a reliable source of
information but there's nothing like really going out there and looking at what
is exactly happening.
Councilman Johnson: Because I've never seen that happen. I've never seen them
back up into it as of yet.
IIMike Lewis: You probably won't. The signal would create that more than the
existing traffic now.
IIDennis Eyler: That's with the traffic signal.
IIMike Lewis: The signal stops traffic and then those cues start to happen.
Gary Warren: The overall thought here to as we point out in the staff report is
that we've got some signficant modifications that are going to happen in the
II next 2 years to these traffic patterns with the TH 101 north leg improvements
and such so our direction to Stragar was to give us their impressions at this
time but we wanted to be pretty conservative about what really you would commit
1 II yourself to doing. I mean this is good discussion but I think we always want to
keep that in mind what's going to happen with that north leg traffic.
I Mike Lewis: Another item we were asked to look at is what would happen if a
vehicle stalled on 78th Street. We scaled from the drawings the distance of
about 13 feet lane width. This means that if you have, depending on what the
stalled vehicle is. If it's a truck who's average width is 8 foot and then a
Cadillac comes up behind him who's average width is about 7 feet, he's not going
to make it through. 8 1/2 and 7 is 15 1/2 feet. That does not quite squeeze
through the 13 foot lane. However, to rush out there again and widen the
! II 32
i
City Council Meeting - November 19, 1990
roadway just to meet an occurrence that might happen, oh I don't know, 3 or 4
times throughout the winter, I don't know if it really is money well spent. We
were also asked to look at the visibility. We drove up and down the road
several times and we really didn't see anything that stuck out as a visibility
problem. However, I would recommend that we do the same thing come springtime
when there are leaves on the trees and visibility might become a problem.
Alright, then this is a summary slide of the recommendations that we would have.
I want to reiterate again that nothing out there is so serious that the Council
needs to make plans to change things tomorrow. We're at that point where we
have to take a very close look at the situation and monitor it very closely but
I don't think action is required tomorrow morning. Some of our recommendations
would be to widen 78th Street to 4 lanes from Great Plains all the way out to
Kerber and then continue that on out to Powers Blvd. which I believe the plans
do anyway. You want to make sure that we monitor the volumes and their delays
at the intersections to make certain that we keep up with anything that might
change to warrant a signal. You want to stripe in accordance with the MUTCD.
Dennis Eyler: Let me stop him right there. That's the Manual of Uniform
Traffic Control Devices. That's the MUTCD. ,
Mike Lewis: Coming from the Air Force, you know everything is an acronym, yes.
Councilman Wing: I missed that first recommendation. From Great Plains? 1
Mike Lewis: From Great Plains out to Kerber.
Councilman Wing: You're recommending?
Mike Lewis: 4 lanes. Yes sir. I
Gary Warren: Ultimately.
Mike Lewis: Ultimately. Not tomorrow morning but ultimately. ,
Councilman Wing: Alright but you're recommending that someday that's going to
be removed is your recommendation?
Mike Lewis: As the traffic volumes grow you're going to find that it's going to
be so difficult for traffic to get out into, to just make a right turn into the
stream of traffic that you're going to have to go to 4 lanes.
Gary Warren: That even with north, the modifications to north TH 101? ,
Mike Lewis: Yes. Yes it is. As construction takes place, efforts should be
made to increase the corner radius to a minimum of 35-45 feet. Right now they
look like they're right around 25-30 feet. As Dennis was saying, drivers expect ,
to drive on roadways designed to accommodate large trucks and their radius are
generally about 50 feet or greater. Also you should consider cutting back the
center line medians. This would open up the intersection more. Give the driver
a more open feeling and also accommodate left turn vehicles better. And as we
showed up there to cut back the center median on 78th and Great Plains. And we
should also re-evaluate the sight distance during the springtime. Now to move
into somewhat our work with the future traffic. We did look at what would
33
i
I
City Council Meeting - November 19, 1990
happen with the relocation of TH 101 and Great Plains Blvd. and I think there's
a slide in there. According to the Carver County study, traffic volumes are
going to drop from 1988 to the year 2010 by about 43% on that section there
that's highlighted in orange on 78th Street. I believe that's between
Great Plains and Kerber.
Dennis Eyler: Let's stop here. We don't agree with that. That's out of the,
' that's based on the Metropolitan Council's model which was used by the Carver
County study. And again it's done at a regional level. It's looking at roads
from a regional standpoint and what the Metropolitan Council's done with land
use is they take a look at the overall metropolitan growth and they apply it
uniformity across the whole Twin Cities area. They say if the area is going to
grow by 2% to 3% a year. They don't want to get into calling which suburb is
going to have the growth so they imply that on a general basis around the whole
outer rim suburbs and if you believe every suburb's growth rates, well the
metropolitan area would double in 10 years but on the other hand, you have to
know the particular area and what the likelihood of what's going on there. Now
one of the things we're going to do is we're not going to try to tie this to a
particular year. When we get into our final list of recommendations and
prioritizing recommendations, we're going to try to tie them specifically to
development levels. When something comes on line as far as land use, what
ramifications does that have. We have done similar exercise with the city of
Minnetonka for their development proposals for the 394 area. They looked at 3
different growth scenarios and they actually have an ordinance that budgets
traffic generation by the developers. A developer comes in and his proposal
tries to exceed the allocation of traffic for that site, then he's going to hav
a very difficult time getting that through. He's got to make mitigation or
' maybe he can team up with somebody else who's going to put a warehouse someplace
that isn't going to generate the traffic so we want to tie the future needs to
the expected levels of development and not try to call a. particular year because
that way if things accelerate you know when you're talking about the things you
delayed. ..
Mike Lewis: As Denny was saying, these numbers we don't necessarily agree with.
Just applying some estimates and some quick math, we feel that approximately
1,100 vehicles that are down TH 5 there where it says 51,600. That is going to
be, that section of roadway will be over capacity by about 1,100 vehicles.
Dennis Eyler: At least.
Mike Lewis: At least and those are some conservative estimates. Those 1,100
' vehicles are going to find another place to go and it will probably be 78th
Street so you add those numbers together and we feel that at a minimum there's
going to be about 1,750 vehicles in the year 2010 on 78th Street which is quite
' a bit more than what is shown here. Something I have to point out is those
numbers don't quite jive with what's shown there because those are AOT, average
daily traffic counts where I'm talking from a PM peak hour.
' Gary Warren: Also you'll recall that when we gave the approval to the TH 5
plans recently, about 2 meetings ago, that we also notified MnDot that we were
concerned about the 50,000 to 60,000 ADT in that segment and asked them to
respond to us with what in the future might have to be done. We haven't
obviously received that yet but we recognized that at that time. That premeates
34
I
City Council Meeting - November 19, 1990
throughout the Carver County study is that with under capacity in TH 101 and the
other major arterials, it puts the pressure on our local systems.
Dennis Eyler: Typically a 4 lane divided roadway, the type that MnDot operates
with traffic signals on a half mile spacing and full channelization at the
intersections. 35,000-45,000 ADT is about the maximium that you'd want to have.
Just as an example, TH 12 in front of Ridgedale prior to the 394 construction
was carrying around 45,000 cars a day... TH 7 just west of 494 I believe it's
in the 40,000 range right now so we're talking about numbers 10,000 a day
greater than that so you definitely are at the extreme limits of the capacity of
a 4 lane roadway. Whether MnOot's proposing 6 lanes in here or something
else.. .I don't know. As Gary was saying, the likelihood is that certain trips
that may have come down TH 101 and jumped onto TH 5 and gone down this way...
cross TH 5 and not use TH 5. On the other hand, you don't want to try to wall
yourselves off too much or break up your own street pattern. The idea of having
a good city street network is to allow your residents to make trips that are
entirely within Chanhassen on Chanhassen streets and not have to depend on trunk
highway system during those times of the day when it is over capacity. It'd
really be mean for somebody to make a 3 mile trip to the store to have to use
TH 5 just for half a mile and wind up facing severe congestion so you want to
provide a route that's okay for your traffic but it doesn't draw traffic off
of TH 5. It's a tough balancing act. It's really the purpose of a minor
arterial system in the city. i
Paul Krauss: If I can interject two comments. Along the lines of the minor
arterial system, for those of you who have been following the Comp Plan, which
is really all of you, you'll notice that we see that 6,000 number going across
there. That's a frontage road system that's being proposed by the Comprehensive
Plan. It's being proposed on both sides of TH 5. The exact purpose of that is
to intercept trips from within our community and allow them to get downtown or
wherever they have to go without going onto TH 5 so we've got that in mind too.
I also don't, I'd prefer that you didn't start casting too such doubt on the
Eastern Carver County Study when we say that we suspect, we have suspicions
about one or two of the numbers in that study. The Eastern Carver County study
was an areawide study. It was designed to deal with the major arterial and
collector routes. Gary and I pushed that study a little bit to give us some
handles on what was going on in downtown Chanhassen. The study wasn't
specifically designed to give us accurate or the nth degree information on 78th
Street. That's why we've retained Stragar-Roscoe. It was designed to give us
an overall analysis of where we should look at major problems occurring and we
think the numbers on TH 5 and on the more major highways are a fairly accurate
representations of the magnitude of what could occur but we are asking them to
give better definition for our local street system. '
Mike Lewis: That's a good point.
Dennis Eyler: The way the model operates, it really is based on traveled speeds '
and it tends to try to take the path of least resistence without looking at
capacity sometimes. You can go in and fine tune the model and have the capacity
restraint but the model as it exists in it's pure form in the Het Council's
computers is just a bunch of pads. Just a bunch of networks and they have trips
generated by land use and they have formulas for how they distribute out and
they go on the shortest path traveled and the highways of course are going to
35
I
I
1 City Council Meeting - November 19, 1990
have the highest speeds so this may be a little bit optimistic in the fact that
the capacities are going to be there if we don't provide it. I mean you may
never see 51,000. There may be a demand for 51,000 but the road may never l
physically take it and where that traffic would go then is on your streets.
' Councilman Wing: Certainly faster.
' Dennis Eyler: It could become the point where it's faster to be on city
streets. We're working with MnDot on 35W right now doing the EIS for 35W out of
downtown Minneapolis and some of the alternatives that are being proposed for
35W are really a no build alternatives. They're just fixing the roadway up as
' it stands and the traffic is expected to double in some sections of 35W,
particularly in the southern end. Where's that traffic go? The freeway's full
so it goes in the city streets or it's trips that aren't made and then there's
' economic stagnation. That's the other price I guess you have to pay.
Gary Warren: That 51,000 is a capacity restraint number. The Eastern Carver
' County study did run both versions and the capacity restraint. I think the
unrestricted was like 63,000 so they did take a look at I think a pretty
realistic number at least as far as TH 5 was concerned.
' Mayor Chmiel: Maybe we can just continue.
Mike Lewis: Okay, one final point before we leave this mysterious topic is that
' with the numbers that we're talking about, the traffic signal at Great Plains
and 78th, along with the 4 lane cross section would still be warranted. One
last thing we want to talk about is the impact on the Market Square shopping
center development. As this slide shows, you can expect approximately 317 trips
' coming into the shopping center and then 330 trips leaving the shopping center
during the PM peak hour. What we did then was took these trips and assigned
them to the roadway and the intersections to try to come up with some idea of
' what's going to happen at the intersection of Market and 78th Street. What we
found is that that intersection falls short of making the peak hour warrant by
about 30 vehicles. Alright, that's not to say that we just throw our arms up
' and say well a signal's not warranted. We'll forget it. I think that what will
happen is that with the background growth, that being the amount of traffic that
grows naturally, even without the development plus the traffic that will be
generated by the development itself, that a signal will be warranted by the time
' it's opening up in approximately a year.
Dennis Eyler: Of course the warrants themselves don't dictate that a signal
should be installed. They just mean that at that point it's an option.
Mike Lewis: It's recommended, yes.
' Councilman Johnson: If a signal goes in at that location, what does that do to
Laredo? Will that provide the gaps and everything?
Mike Lewis: It would help yes.
Councilman Johnson: Laredo will not longer warrant a signal within half a block
of each other?
' 36
1
City Council Meeting - November 19, 1990
Mike Lewis: No. To say it would not warrant a signal, we can't do that because
the volumes would theoretically still be there. It's just that the time period
might shift by a couple minutes but you're still going to have the volume
capacity at that point that intersects Laredo so a signal would still be
warranted.
Mayor Chmiel: That's the synchronization that you pull together on.
Dennis Eyler: Yeah. These become kind of systems of management decisions of
how you want your street systems to operate. You have a little more luxury than
to delay the installation of a signal there but that doesn't preclude you from
doing that. There are other issues involved with the operation of that
intersection. When I was with MnDot we had a priority system that we looked at
intersections that needed signals and tried to prioritize when we installed
those and one of the things we discounted was the fact that a signal in the
immediate vicinity provided gaps but that's, the technical warrants would still
be met there.
Mike Lewis: On a preliminary basis the modeling that we've done so far shows
that signals will be warranted at all intersections along 78th in the year 2010
along with a 4 lane section be warranted all the way out to Powers Blvd. and I
believe that's all I have to say. I think Denny has a few other words to bring
you up to speed on what our program is.
Dennis Eyler: Our next step is to make the manual counts including the count at
Kerber and to finish calibrating the model and then to provide a list of all the
recommendations and to try to, not try. We will tie those to the levels of
development so that you can then see that when a certain percentage of the city
gets developed, as these properties come on line, then you'd be a certain need II level for these improvements. I believe that's it. I'll respond to any
questions. We've taken a lot of your time and we really appreciate this
dialogue because it helps us to get a feel for the City of Chanhassen. Thank
you.
Mayor Chmiel: I don't know if there's any questions. I think you've covered it
pretty fully. '
Councilman Johnson: I have one comment. I haven't heard anything about stop
signs at St. Hubert's intersection there by the shopping center and everything.
Is that in your model for the futures? When TH 101 gets taken off of West 78th
Street, one of the objectives of a lot of people is to put the stop signs back
up that used to be there in order to give traffic at that intersection a little
better chance.
Dennis Eyler: That's east of?
Gary Warren: You talking about Great Plains and?
Councilman Johnson: Great Plains and West 78th where the old City Hall is and
St. Hubert's church. The intersection there.
Dennis Eyler: We haven't specifically had that in the model but that's no
problem to add that. We certainly will. Since we're going to be doing some
37
I
11 City Council Meeting - November 19, 1990
follow-up.
Councilman Johnson: See part of BRW's original design included slowing down '
traffic in that area which made it quicker to get down to TH 5 versus going
I through there and keeping people on the main street instead of and heading
towards TH 5.
1 Dennis Eyler: Understanding the improvements that are proposed for the east end
of town with TH 101 going straight down to TH 5, I guess I would try that first
and see if, it's always better to work with a carrot rather than a stick. Try
to make a good route to attract people down to TH 5 and then when TH 5 starts to
1 get over loaded and then you start finding that there is additional traffic on
78th Street, that might be the time to put that in as a traffic management tool.
I guess as an operations tool, if there is a problem with that intersection of
1 it's own, I don't see that that being the case. The volumes there are not that
great on the side street but we can certainly throw that in as another node that
we're analyzing. It's not a big deal at this point. We're still at the fine
tuning point. That's certainly a fine tuning option.
IICouncilman Johnson: That's something that's been considered a lot. A lot of
attention a few years ago.
1 Mayor Chmiel: Appreciate your presentation.
Iennis Eyler: Okay, thank you.
ADOPTION OF FINAL STUDY FOR PARK AND RIDE LOTS IN THE CITIES OF CHANHASSEN.
CHASKA AND EDEN PRIARIE, SOUTHWEST METRO. i
I Paul Krauss: Very briefly Mr. Mayor, the Southwest Metro has prepared a park
1
and ride study that I've given you copies of on previous occasions. They've
11 asked that the city formally adopt it basically as a policy recommendation for
them to operate on in the future. You probably are also aware that we're
looking to work with Southwest Metro on establishing and relocating a park and
ride on Bowling Alley Lane or whatever that street is called in the future and
IIwe'll be coming to the Planning Commission and you with that early next year.
The Planning Commission reviewed this study formally on November 7th and
I recommended approval of that study. We are recommending that the Council adopt
II the final draft of the park and ride study with the comments that I provided to
Southwest Metro previously. Basically my comments support the study and the
locations for the park and rides in Chanhassen. They raised some question as to
where and when it's appropriate to look at traffic management strategies that I
I 1 think we're all going to have to look at. I think it was good that they put it
before us. I just didn't feel that it belonged in a bus mass transit study.
With that we are recommending that the Council approve or adopt the park and
1 ride study and Diane Harbertz, the new Director for Southwest Metro is here
r tonight.
f 1 Mayor Chmiel: Paul, as I look at this, I know that we had approved the
relocation for the bus stop but has this been given back to HRA for them to
review the balance of this?
1
i
! 38
i
City Council Meeting - November 19, 1990
Paul Krauss: The entire study no. The possibility of the relocated stop on
Bowling Alley, yes. We didn't have a presentation before them. They
indicated, well they desire to work with this. We have not yet gotten the plans
completed. We'll be coming back before the HRA and the Planning Commission and
ultimately you for the specific plans and financial arrangements of how
easements might be transferred and whatever else.
Mayor Chmiel: I think maybe we should also just make them aware of the fact as
to what's here for the future as well.
Councilman Workman: Well I noticed that my train depot idea is kind of lost.
Mayor Chmiel: It went off the track right? ,
Councilman Johnson: What train depot?
Councilman Workman: That's an HRA thing. It's very complicated.
Councilman Johnson: The old depot out here?
Councilman Workman: Yeah. I thought we should use the, Gerhardt's laughing
because he kind of deep 6'd-it but we should be getting a piece of our heritage
back into downtown with that depot and make that the depot. The bus depot.
Councilwoman Dimler: That's what I said the other day.
Councilman Johnson: The bus shelter?
Councilman Workman: Yeah. '
Councilman Johnson: It has some problems of visibility that you want at bus
shelters as far as, because it has to be open all the way around. ,
Councilman Workman: Well we can open it up. You new comers to the County. You
want to. . .
Councilman Johnson: But there's also another point that the Commission is
currently taking up and we've approved a modification to our By-Laws which I
think Diane can probably explain it better than I can.
Diane Harbertz: Good evening. I'm Diane Harbertz and I . the transit
administrator for Southwest Metro Transit and what Jay is referring to is that
I'm working with Paul and his staff and probably at your next Council meeting
you will be considering to approve per the authorization of the Southwest Metro
Commission to consider authorizing the commission to be able to purchase real
estate and passenger buses without coming back to each Council for every piece
of property. And as you can see in the park and ride study, there's probably an
inventory of 12-15-16 different sites. Currently the Joint Powers Agreement is
written that the commission must come before each Council for every parcel of
land that's purchased. This was authorized by the Commission to come back to
each Council and ask them to reconsider that and give the commission
authorization to enter into purchase agreements without having to come back to
each Council but ultimately the City in which that particular land parcel is
39
I
IICity Council Meeting - November 19, 1990
located would have the final approval in terms of the selection and development
11 of the site.
Councilman Johnson: Currently there's a, in their Joint Powers Agreement, the
1 ability for one city to blackball any purchase. All 3 cities have to agree.
Diane Harbertz: Each time.
IICouncilman Johnson: Each time anything, any capital thing is purchased by the
commission and in forming 4 years ago, 3 years ago, in forming the commission
there was a little mistrust between the communities I think that put this thing
I in there. This gave effectively us the opportunity to say no. We don't want
Chaska to have a park and ride lot so we can blackball Chaska out of a park and
ride lot. I don't think that was, so we're modifying, trying to modify the
I Joint Powers Agreement to be a little more reasonable and flexible and part of
it is that anything approved in this approved park and ride lot, that we can go
ahead without any permission from any city and enter into a purchase agreement
II for it. Of course all zoning would have to be applied for. We have to apply
for every permit as any developer would.
Paul Krauss: If I could just add. Diane's presented me with the language on
that. I haven't had a chance to read the final language but you're not being
asked to act on that tonight.
IMayor Chmiel: Right. We understand.
Councilwoman Dimler: In regards to, I do like the study and I thought that
Paul's comments were good and I just wanted to ask you Paul if you thought that,
did they incorporate your comments or was this. Your pages didn't correlate
with this study that I got. That's why I'm asking the question. '
II Paul Krauss: There were some changes made to the original draft from the
document that you have now. It still includes some of that TOM language that's
been toned down somewhat. I guess I'm comfortable with the way it sits right
now. What I've done or taken the liberties of doing, the Comp Plan draft has
11 this study and the Eastern Carver County study attached to our transportation
plan as appendencies and I've also included my comments to this study in the
Comp Plan so all that will be forwarded onto the Metro Council. I've also
1 talked to Roger Gustafson, the County Engineer and under the auspices of the
Eastern Carver County Study, which is an ongoing program that we see the
communities really, we've got a good working relationship, transportation is an
I ongoing thing and we want to carry this forward. One of the things that I think
this group needs to do on a group basis is look at transportation management
strategies. They're really progressive things to do. They're things that we're
I going to need to do if we're going to deal with. It's the only control you have
to reduce the volumes of traffic on TH 5 or whatever. My only concern is that
the proper way of doing it is to sell it to the business community. Get them
involved with us in that and then do it on a multi-community, multi-county
I basis. If we take the high road, if you will, and do it ourselves, you know
they'll just go down the road to Chaska with the same requirements on it. I
think that Southwest Metro understood that and in fact some of those same
IIconcerns were echoed I think by Eden Prairie and Chaska as well.
40
II
II
City Council Meeting - November 19, 1990
Councilwoman Dimler: Okay, so you feel that this adequately addresses your
concerns?
Mayor Chmiel: Yeah. I would, as I look at a lot of this too, I'd like to see
somehow that we tie in with some of our larger companies to see if we can
eliminate many of their employees in coming directions from whichever depending
upon what we serve to tie with the Southwest Metro. To see if there is that
probability of eliminating that kind of traffic going either east or west. North
or south. Either direction. Somehow find those transportation needs to
accommodate some of these people. I think that's a goal that I think we should
really strive for to alleviate the problem of air pollution as well. i
Diane Harbertz: I think that's a point well taken. One of our goals in 1991 is
to address that very issue with the employer-employee travel options program.
You know one thing to remember as each of the cities, basically you hold the
cards. You deal them to the private individual. To the commercial. To
whatever in terms of how your transportation network system is going to be in
place. Southwest Metro is there to operate within that structure that you
provide so I think with the cooperation we're seeing from each of the three
cities as well as the progressive goals and objectives that each city together
and under the Joint Powers Agreement is trying to achieve, I think you'll see
some better strives to improve that transit network. Just tonight with the
development in some area of 8.73 acres that you'll add 15 home sites and the
average car per home is 2.3 cars per home. You know that's 30 cars right there.
They're starting from somewhere and they're going somewhere. That's where I
transit comes in.
Councilwoman Dimler: I move approval of the report.
Mayor Chmiel: Is there a second?
Councilman Workman: Second. ,
Councilwoman Dimler moved, Councilman Workman seconded to adopt the final draft
of the Park and Ride Study for Southwest Metro Transit with comments addressing
the study as noted in the memo dated August 21, 1990 by the Planning Director,
Paul Krauss. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously.
Councilman Workman: Let me ask a quick question. Richard and I were talking a
little bit about the financing and the budget and it might be helpful to get
maybe a copy of a budget and of how Southwest Metro operates. Where they
receive their funds.
Councilman Johnson: Oh, okay. That'd be real simple. On your property tax you
pay to the RTB. Part of your property tax. I
Councilman Workman: Met Council?
Councilman Johnson: Met Council, RTB, whatever. A regional transit board gets
the money. They give us as a Southwest Metro, up to 90% of the taxes collected
from Chanhassen, Chaska and Eden Prairie to operate our own bus system. Our own
transit system. '
41 I
1
1 City Council Meeting - November 19, 1990
Councilman Workman: But it comes through the RTB right?
1 Councilman Johnson: it comes through the it and whatever we do not finance. I think T2�years ago wetspenta about s65%Oofof
1 it, of what the MTC would have gotten if they were continuing it and we gave
considerably more service at 65%. Or 65% or 85%. I think we're getting with
the increase cost of the contracting and increase fuel cost and everything else,
II we're going to be real close to the 90% in 1991 of utilizing those taxes. We've
added a dial-a-ride and a lot of other services that weren't here before.
Councilman Workman: But it would be nice to see a detailed budget.
1 Councilman Johnson: Oh yeah. We et
on their. g a monthly. They have a very good budget
1 Councilman Workman: No, I don't doubt that. I've never seen one.
II Diane Harbertz: For 1991 we just submitted our grant application to the
Regional Transit Board. We're undergoing negotiations and I would say probably
within the next 30 days we would have available then a finalized budget which
will be presented to each of the Southwest Metro Commission members and in turn
can be brought back to each of the City Councils. So appreciate the request and
the interest.
1 Councilman Workman: We have to count on these guys to do that?
Councilwoman Dimler: You bet you.
IDiane Harbertz: Well, we'll send you a special copy.
Councilman Johnson: Our staff also gets. Jo Ann's our staff representative
Iright?
Paul Krauss: Sharmin's been appointed.
ICouncilman Johnson: Sharmin is now. So staff gets a copy of all this too.
Diane Harbertz: I think in the past Southwest has been operating at about 65%
I of the levy that's available and in 1991, right now we've
got
so we'll see what we can negotiate with the RTB. Basically any lofo the tfundingp
that's not used for instance the 65% and the 90% cap that Jay was talking about,
I basically gets turned back to the Regional Transit Board so with the Park and
Ride study that you have before you and with your approval, we're able to
basically recapture those funds and put them back into the 3 city area.
ICouncilman Johnson: We've been helping finance transportation throughout the
rest of the metropolitan area for too long.
IIDiane Harbertz: For 1990 we'll turn back about $400,000.00.
Mayor Chmiel: Good. Does that answer your question?
ICouncilman Workman: I still would like a copy of the budget.
II42
II
City Council Meeting - November 19, 1990
Diane Harbertz: Alright. We'll see that each of the Councilmembers gets one.
Councilman Workman: We can't depend on these guys or staff. I
Diane Harbertz: Thank you. '
ESTABLISH UTILITY RATES FOR SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT UTILITY.
Gary Warren: Do you need a presentation?
Mayor Chmiel: No. Just a brief discussion.
Gary Warren: Basically we have reviewed the position once again from the last 1
meeting where this item was presented and at that time we had a split vote I
guess between the 60% and 100% funding. We tried to I guess recapitulate here
some of the key elements that have related to staff's interest in seeing that
the fund is funded at the 100% level. Specifically I guess it comes down to the
point of adequately funding the utility as such that the proceeds are there to
be able to implement the programs which we anticipate to come out of the
original planning document such as the water quality plan and the Chapter 509
plan. We're talking about a 72 cents difference per month for residential
single family from the 60% scenario to the 100% funding scenario and back up
basically for the various options inbetween that is included in the attached
staff report. So that's where I think we left off the last time.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, thank you. We were at a stalemate. Now that we have 5. 1
Gary Warren: Didn't have a swing vote last time.
Councilman Johnson: Richard's tossed in the center now.
Mayor Chmiel: I think everyone is aware and I know Richard sat at the previous
meetings that we've had on this so he's not coming in cold. I would like to
entertain a motion for either or.
Councilman Johnson: Compromise? '
Mayor Chmiel: Let's hear a motion.
Councilman Johnson: Here's my compromise motion here. What we ended up as a '
compromise a second time. I'd like to move we fund at 80% plus any revenues
from the Redmond sale.
Councilman Workman: Pardon me?
Councilman Johnson: 80% as 80% of what we're looking here. It's halfway
between Don's 60 and my 100. 80% financing and on top of that, the monies from
the sale to Redmond of that wetland are put into the fund. That's in addition
to the 80%. I'm saying I'm willing to compromise. 1
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. There's a motion on the floor with 80%. Can you do that?
I
43
I
11 City Council Meeting - November 19, 1990
11 Councilman Workman: Do we have to earmark that Redmond money for this? Have we
agreed on that?
Councilman Johnson: No. We haven't agreed to anything to do with the Redmond
money.
Councilman Workman: Can that go into the general fund?
Don Ashworth: It could go to general. It could go, I would push for the
Environmental Protection Fund. Putting it in there. We do levy for that. The
' budget, I was going to push for that side.
Councilman Workman: How much money are we talking about?
11 Councilman Johnson: $85,000.00.
Councilman Workman: That would cover our raises. I know Mr. Mason is pushing
hard for raises.
Councilman Johnson: The U.S. Congress made sure that our salaries went down
' next year, not up. Your take home will go down.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, we have a motion on the floor. Is there a second?
' Councilman Workman: I guess I like that idea. However, I find the 80% with the
Redmond, well I'm not sure what that adds up to. Does that add up to more
money?
IICouncilman Johnson: I think it hits about the $100,000.00.
Councilman Workman: Does the 80% mean we're coming up with how much less?
What's 80% of 1.7 million?
Gary Warren: 80% would be approximately $285,000.00.
' Councilman Johnson: So we'd still be $200,000.00 below the 100% so we're not
even making 100% with it. My reasoning is that what we're doing with the
' Redmond property was compromising on an environmental issue so it should go into
an environmental fund, not the general fund. That we're selling a wetland and
we're allowing, which in turn then allows more impervious surface in the city.
Therefore more runoff. Therefore the money from that sale should go into
handling runoff. That's ...logic.
Mayor Chmiel: I agree with that to a point Jay. Yeah, that's logical but also
' if you have a deficit some of those dollars should be directed to taking care of
some of that portion as well of which we're running into.
' Councilman Workman: I'll second it for discussion.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Any other discussion?
Councilman Workman: Yeah, I guess I feel 80, 60, or 80 with the Redmond, I feel
they're all fairly arbitrary. When we're getting away from the 100% and as I
1 44
City Council Meeting - November 19, 1990
stated before, we've agreed on this plan and so now we're kind of trying to
figure out how and where to finance it. I don't have a whole lot of imperical
evidence other than what staff has given me. So for me to go up and say 60 or
80 with the Redmond, it makes less sense than the 100 at this point other than
you know, because I don't understand. I guess I don't understand the 60-80
concept other than it's just a basic lowball and so yeah. I guess I don't know
how this will end up. I'm willing to, I guess I'm not happy with the 80 either.
I'm not happy with the 100. Let's face it, I don't want to spend the money but
again, imperically I don't understand where the 60 or the 80 or anything would
come other than maybe the 100% and then that's of course where you get into the
lack of maybe details and the whole project that make people nervous about the
100 which I am too but that's the only imperical evidence I have. ,
Mayor Chmiel: Okay.
Councilman Johnson: I'd prefer the 100 but I'm willing to compromise. I
Councilman Johnson moved, Councilman Workman seconded to establish utility rates
for Surface Water Management Utility at the 80% level and including the proceeds ,
from the sale of the wetland property to Redmond. Councilmans Johnson and
Workman voted in favor. The rest opposed and the motion failed with a vote of 2
to 3.
Mayor Chmiel: We need another motion.
Councilwoman Dimler: I move a 60%. 1
Mayor Chmiel: Do you include Redmond's into it of another $85,000.00?
Councilwoman Dimler: I guess I'll accept that, yeah.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Any other discussion? All those in favor say aye. '
Councilman Workman: Was there a second?
Mayor Chmiel: I seconded it. ,
Resolution *90-149: Councilwoman Dimler moved, Mayor Chmiel seconded to
establish utility rates for Surface Water Management Utility at the 60% level
and including the proceeds from the sale of the wetland property to Redmond.
All voted in favor except Councilman Johnson who opposed and Councilman Workman
who was silent. The motion carried with a vote of 4 to 1.
APPROVE REVISED WATER UTILITY RATE SCHEDULE..
Don Ashworth: I told Tom Chaffee he could go ahead and go home. Hopefully '
getting his foot up so I hope that I understand totally what is presented before
you. We had gone through a process wherein we tried to look at increasing of
utility rate. First of all utility rates haven't been increased since 1986.
Secondly, we have been attempting to find ways in which to potentially
discourage water useage during the summer peak periods. We continue to take and
have higher than desired useage during those timeframes. So again we had
originally looked at it and based each individual's bill trying to set up a
45
i
IICity Council Meeting - November 19, 1990
standard and if you use more than you had used the previous year, you'd be
11 billed for that. Council really didn't like that idea. Would rather just see a
flat fee occur which is what Tom presented on this one. He came through and he
found averages depending on median or noon of 22,000 to 26,000 gallons. He
II applied that then or basically said alright, let's use anything over 25,000
gallons per quarter would represent higher than normal useage. We applied the '
dollar 30 to that so we established a base rate of $1.10. That's up from the
I current rate but not significantly. Then add the kicker in then when you start
going over the 25,000 gallons. He additionally added, and this is in response
to Metro Council's decision, or not decision but at least, they recently billed
us for sanitary sewer for this next year. That is going to increase by, what
I was it Gary? $60,000.00-$70,000.00. Our monthly payment will be $47,000.00.
Represents an increase of $162,000.00 for the year. It's just the increase of
$162,000.00. When we moved into this whole process it was based on Deloitte's
I recommendations that your utility system is currently losing money. That they
would highly recommend a rate increase and kind of that had started the process
in concert with the desire to somehow curb water useage during the summer
months. The recap of what all of this will do is in the back page and shows
II
that the cumulative affect would be approximately a 15% increase for both the
sewer and water changes that are being recommended.
IIMayor Chmiel: Combination of both?
Don Ashworth: Correct.
IMayor Chmiel: Discussion?
Councilman Johnson: I don't think that a 20 cent per thousand gallon increase i
II is going to discourage any watering of lawns. Especially when you get it on a
quarterly basis. If somebody does 10,000 gallons, that's a whole $2.00 increase
in a quarter and nobody's going to, very few people I know, I do know a few that
' might slow down due to a $2.00 increase per quarter but not that many.
Don Ashworth: You're probably right but again staff was kind of losing
I direction as to how Council wanted us to proceed. Are we looking at just a
straight percent increase or are we looking at some monitor increase that's
going to target the water useage so I guess we came back to this approach.
I Councilman Johnson: I think for PR purposes and everything, we can say we've
got the two tiered and that we're doing this you know but in reality it's not
going to be doing a lot of discouragement. $2.00 or $4.00 per quarter is not
II going to discourage anybody a whole lot but it does make for good press that
we're being so proactive.
I Mayor Chmiel: Well, I think a lot of our people within the community are
becoming more and more aware of the fact of cutting back on the useage of water
to be on a conservative basis with it. I noticed even within my own area and
our neighborhood. A lot of us have our own wells but yet those that don't have
I not been watering their lawns per se as much as they had in the past. Taking
that into view, I think it's something that we have to credit our people with
doing basically themselves without imposing a further restriction on them than
IIwhat you'd be suggesting to go beyond what staff has come up with.
46
II
: 1
City Council Meeting - November 19, 1990
Councilman Johnson: No, I'm not saying go any higher because I don't think it
makes that much difference. I'd rather just see one flat rate or what staff's
recommending here is fine too. I'm just saying that I don't think it's going to
make a whole lot of difference in water useage.
Mayor Chmiel: No.
Councilman Johnson: But it does establish a trend for us. '
Mayor Chmiel: True.
Councilman Workman: Because it pays for the bills. '
Councilman Johnson: That's the main thing. Whatever we do we have to increase
the rates to the point that we pay our bills. That's a given. ,
Councilman Workman: This fund is running a deficit isn't it?
Don Ashworth: Yes. According to Deloitte, the biggest item is really in terms 1
of depreciation associated with that and I guess in some ways I question whether
or not that is fully necessary but the fact is that Moody's believes that it's
highly important. They look at the continuous bracket around our utility fund
numbers and they question it. The citizen gets the newspaper when we do an end
of year accounting and it shows the fund balances and it shows a bracket around
the utility fund. They question that. Maybe they look at it and they say, you
know the City is in the hole. We're running a deficit. We are.
Councilman Johnson: We shouldn't.
Councilman Workman: Well I'd move approval if we're looking for that.
Mayor Chmiel: Is there a second? '
Councilwoman Dimler: I'll second that.
Resolution *90-150: Councilman Workman moved, Councilwoman Disler seconded to
adopt the resolution establishing the revised Municipal Sewer and Water Rates.
All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously.
Mayor Chmiel: I think it's something that we really do have to do. It's not a
big money maker for us but it's also one where we're still coming out in the
black rather than the red. I
COUNCIL PRESENTATIONS: NONE.
ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS: '
Mayor Chmiel: Paul, you had two items you'd like to discuss.
Paul Krauss: Yes Mr. Mayor. Talking about the Eastern Carver County Study. One
of the things they wanted to do is to have a meeting of the collective bodies
and Planning Commissions for the agencies that participated in this study.
Roger Gustafson was trying to find a date and we tried to get it manuevered
47
I
11 City Council Meeting - November 19, 1990
around your schedule but apparently unavoidably the meeting was scheduled for
1 December 10th. Now we were going to tell the Planning Commission about it and
they may be able to go but I talked to Roger about it. He said what Chaska is
doing is, I don't know what it costs. I think it's fairly nominal, to have the
1 consultant come in and talk to you directly and Roger would be willing to come
down there as well. What I'd like to do, especially because we obviously can't
be there on the 10th is to go ahead and schedule either at a regular meeting or
I a special meeting in January, having the consultant and Roger come and give a
presentation to you and the Planning Commission of an Eastern Carver County
study. I think tonight you got a glimmer of how important that study can be.
And with your approval we'll go ahead and set that up for January.
II •
Councilman Johnson: When is Chaska doing it by themselves?
IIPaul Krauss: In January.
Councilman Johnson: Why don't we look at doing it jointly with Chaska?
II Paul Krauss: We could ask but I was under the impression that Chaska wanted to
do their own.
I Mayor Chmiel: I would think that they probably do and I think it'd probably be
to our best interest to sit back and review ours as well.
I Gary Warren: There's certainly enough meat in that report to have a focus here
just on our own community.
II Councilman Workman: Are we going to see those reports? j
Gary Warren: We have copies available right now.
1 Paul Krauss: Yeah, I have them sitting in a crate in my office. I just wanted
to give them to you sometime to tie it together with something else.
ICouncilman Workman: Can I get one please?
Paul Krauss: Sure.
IICouncilwoman Dimler: Me too.
Mayor Chmiel: I suggest that you do that Paul. Set it up accordingly with
IRoger. Have him come in and give us that presentation. Your second item?
Paul Krauss: The second item concerns the comprehensive plan. As you're aware,
II we held the public hearing in I guess it was October. It appeared to have gone
fairly well. The comments were generally fairly reasonable and the Planning
Commission approved, or recommended approval. Sent it onto you with very minor
changes. At the meeting we indicated that we would try to get it on your agenda
II in December and I think we need to do that for continuity sake but there's
another reason that's recently cropped as well in that there may be some
turnover in Metro Council representatives. Our representative's term is up and _i
II several others that we're been working with. I think it would behoove everybody
if possible if we could set up a joint meeting between you and the Planning
II 48
•
City Council Meeting - November 19, 1990 1
Commission and advertise that as your review of the comp plan. If it's possible
to get it out of the Council and to the Metro Council this year, I think it
would be beneficial to do that. If you're interested in doing that, you know
we're juggling a whole lot of dates this time of year between budget and
everything else. The only dates that seem to work were December 4th which is a
Tuesday. December 5th which is a Wednesday. The 13th which is a Thursday or
one of the better possibilities may be the 12th which is a Wednesday, a regular
Planning Commission meeting but our agendas are very light lately and the ,
Planning Commission will be here anyway and if you're going to be here on the
12th, what we could do is just end the Planning Commission meeting early or
reschedule them and then you can change chairs and have it be a Council meeting
if we advertise it as such and we'll inform the neighbors and the newspapers and
what not. You know I think it's important that the Planning Commission be there
to present it to you and they can possibly answer some questions that you may
have on it. Again we also have a mailing list and we would notify the residents
we've been notifying throughout the process that you'd be hearing it.
Councilwoman Dimler: Can you tell me why the rush that it has to be done this
year?
Paul Krauss: The question of continuity. I mean we've been having hearings on
this since the spring. Over the early summer we had our neighborhood meetings.
We then went a couple of months without, you know before we went to the final
swing on this thing in getting the plan out. We had our meeting in October.
There's a lot of people out there waiting for decisions to be made. One way or
the other. I've been putting people off for literally a year in terms of going
to the Metro Council or coming to you with individual recommendations. The
Metro Council can take up to 90 days and they could ask for more time so getting
it from you to the Metro Council is only one of the steps that needs to be done.
Hopefully, I'm hopeful that if we can get it to the Metro Council very early
January, that by the spring of 1991 that the plan could be formally adopted. In
place and people can make decisions about their property. As I indicated too,
I'm also concerned that there might be turnover in Metro Council representation
that we have and other representatives that I've worked with for a while.
Marcy's term is up for one and several other people's terms are up in January
and what I've heard is that they probably wouldn't be replaced until March or
April, if they are replaced. The Metro Council is a political body. You know
you hate to start all over again with somebody else if you have to do that. If
we have to we will.
Councilwoman Dimler: I'm just thinking December's a terrible month. You know
people are planning vacations and are gone. ,
Paul Krauss: We would give enough notice.
Councilwoman Dimler: I'd hate to be accused of holding it at a time when nobody ,
could be there.
Councilman Johnson: Well, if it's early enough. I mean the 12th, people aren't '
headed out for Christmas by the 12th. It could be important to maintain some of
the current people on the Council to get it approved before, well Marcy leaves.
49
I
City Council Meeting - November 19, 1990
II Councilwoman Dimler: But there's guarantee that they'll take it up anyway is
there?
■
Paul Krauss: Well, if we give it to them they have to take it up. They can't
I just put it off ad infinitim. Their clock starts ticking as soon as we get it
on their desk. They can ask for more time.
iCouncilwoman Oimler: They can extend it 90 days you said.
Councilman Johnson: Who do they have to ask to extend the 90 days and who has
to approve that extension?
II
Paul Krauss: You. I wouldn't be, if it was still a highly, well I'm hopeful
you know, that it's not a highly controversial issue at this time.
IMayor Chmiel: It shouldn't be. I don't think it will be.
ICouncilman Johnson: I think the 12th sounds like the best.
Councilman Workman: Are you talking about the plan itself?
II Paul Krauss: The plan itself, at least at the City's point of view. I mean if
we hold a meeting on the 12th and if we have a lot of comment that needs to be
responded to, I think obviously I wouldn't, I mean I wouldn't ask and you
II wouldn't pass it along at that point in time. You'd ask us to go back and do
some more work on it. But if our meeting in October was evidence of the fact
that most of the questions for most of the people seemed to be answered, you ;
might want to look at quick passing it forward onto the Metro Council for those
II reasons. j
Councilman Johnson: I think we ought to do it the 12th.
IICouncilwoman Disler: That is if we didn't make any changes?
I Paul Krauss: Well, you can tell me to make some changes. I mean you can direct
us to make changes and then pass it along. We'd be happy to do that.
Councilman Workman: Well, and another concern if I were. ..sitting in the
Iaudience, I would like to have an opportunity to, we're not taking it away from
Jay. I'd be anxious to have a part of it and be a part of it. So I don't know.
That's another.
1 Councilman Johnson: But he can be.
II Paul Krauss: We've already spoken, well we need to set up times where we're
spoken to Dick and to Mike and try to set up, we're going to set up some
meetings with them to go through that and try to bring them up to speed. It's a
tough process. It's been going on for 2 years, to jell it down to a series of
IImeetings and I think Tom, as you probably found out, it's incredibly dull
reading to read through it but.
II Councilman Workman: Well yeah and then the politics of Marcy Waritz and
everything, you know. You know if recall back, I was screaming and yelling, hey
II50
1 ,
City Council Meeting - November 19, 1990
why didn't I get onto this Waste Commission and I think I said it right here.
I think I was of the wrong blood to get any kind of a nomination out of anybody.
I didn't hear a word and so that game is played and I'm not going to worry about
the cards fall where they fall and Marcy knows that better than anybody I'd say.
Councilman Johnson: I didn't get a word either and I'm not of the wrong blood.
So you and I got the exact same treatment.
Councilman Workman: All I'm saying is that I could list dozens of examples of
where politics are played and.
Paul Krauss: Yeah, it's not only the Council representation that may change 1
though because the Council chair is almost certainly to change and I know, I
think the Mayor and I have talked with staff over there, is quite concerned that
it's going to be different policies to operate under and you know, I can just
see this thing snowballing to the fact that inertia overcomes them and they
become difficult or intractable to work with at all.
Councilman Johnson: But see Marcy is a citizen of Chanhassen and represents i
many other towns within her district. We may get somebody who's not a citizen
of Chanhassen to represent us in the future and Marcy's worked hard for us.
She's done a lot, and she will continue to work hard to get this passed. 1
Councilman Workman: Oh, I don't doubt that. I don't doubt that but you
understand politics as well as I do and as well as Marcy does. 1
Councilman Johnson: Yes.
} Councilman Workman: And I can give you an example. 1
Councilman Johnson: She's not going to be there. I mean you know, the
governor's not going to, Governor Carlson's not going to reappoint her. 1
Councilman Workman: Well, I don't know that either.
Councilman Johnson: Probably not. 1
Mayor Chmiel: Well there are a certain amount of the opposite parties delegated
to carry on their existing areas provided there's satisfaction there. I know
that Tom says that I was appointed to the Metropolitan Solid Waste Commission
and I wrote down my party affiliation. I was sort of surprised that I got it
but they do appoint a certain amount. Not too many but, you're right. 1
Councilman Workman: But yeah. I mean that's something that we don't have a lot
of control over and it's there. Why ignore it?
Mayor Chmiel: So. You're looking for some direction as to.
Paul Krauss: Right. As to which day. 1
Councilman Johnson: Well I move we have a meeting on the 12th, everybody say
anything else. 1
51
11
City Council Meeting - November 19, 1990
Councilman Workman: December 12th?
Councilman Johnson: December 12th. The same as the Planning Commission night .
Mayor Chmiel: I don't think they're going to be able to move on that thing and
that's one of my major concerns. I don't think staff there will really be real
gung ho on it.
' Councilman Johnson: They have 90 days.
Mayor Chmiel: And I'm just wondering with, as Ursula mentioned you know, the
fact that there's going to be people out of town for December. A lot of
scheduling accordingly. I don't want it to appear as though we're trying to,
even though we've had a lot of discussions and a lot of meetings, the final
' bounce comes right here. I guess I want to make it available for everyone to be
here if there are some changes that they see or something that we can still
review that. I guess I don't want to really push it.
' Councilman Johnson: The 12th is what? 3 1/2 weeks from now. That's quite a bit
of notice. To get the word out. The 12th is 2 weeks before Christmas.
' Councilwoman Oimler: Let's face it, people are getting ready for the holidays.
It's the holiday party time. Holiday rush time. It's pretty tough to take out
a night to come and sit.
' Councilman Workman: I guess my only concern is the transition. Yeah, he can
have verbal but everybody can have verbal comment.
Paul Krauss: Whichever you wish. I mean we can set it up for January too.
I guess my concern again is that, whether it be December or January, that we get
it to them sometime before. I mean if we get to it being March or April, by the
time they get done with it the property owners will have lost a year which I
don't think is.
Councilwoman Dimler: If we get it to them by the end of January, I don't think
they'll act on it even if we get it to them in December.
Paul Krauss: That could have it done by May sometime.
' Councilman Johnson: See it's well into the building season where if we do it
and we get it to the Met Council first week of January, it could be.
' Mayor Chmiel: But there again Jay you don't know what they're going to do.
What they're going to set on it.
Councilman Johnson: They have 90 days.
Mayor Chmiel: Yep, they do.
Councilman Johnson: If it's not approved in 90 days, what happens?
Automatically approved?
Paul Krauss: They don't operate under the same laws everybody else does.
' 52
I
City Council Meeting - November 19, 1990 1
Mayor Chmiel: You've got that right. I
Councilman Johnson: They have a 90 day restriction but they don't really follow
it?
Mayor Chmiel: Yeah, they don't have to adhere to it and I'm almost sure of
that.
Councilwoman Dimler: That's why I'm saying they probably, I can't see them '
rushing. . .to go out beyond what our anticipation would be.
Mayor Chmiel: How about January 9th then? I
Councilwoman Oimier: Yeah. The first Council meeting in January.
Councilman Johnson: That's the first Planning Commission meeting in January is
January 9th.
Councilman Workman: Mike gets sworn in on January 14th. '
Don Ashworth: He can be sworn in anytime you had a public meeting.
Mayor Chmiel: How about Monday the 14th.
Councilman Johnson: His term of office begins the first business day of January
so he can be sworn in on the 2nd. He could be sworn in on the 2nd and sworn out
on the 3rd.
Paul Krauss: Would you want to schedule it on a regular Council night or on an
off night where that would be the only item?
Mayor Chmiel: That's a good question. ,
Don Ashworth: See, January 7th for example would be an off Council night rather
than the first regular on the 14th. I
Mayor Chmiel: And then of course he could be sworn in. Okay, why don't we go
for that.
Paul Krauss: January 7th?
Mayor Chmiel: Yeah. I
Paul Krauss: I'll tell the Planning Commission so they can be there.
Councilwoman Dimler: What did we decide? I
Mayor Chmiel: January 7th. Is everybody in agreement with that?
Councilman Johnson: Does it take a motion to establish that?
Paul Krauss: No. It's not an official public hearing. That's been held so
it's just a meeting setting date.
33
I
City Council Meeting - November 19, 1990
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, January 7th. Comprehensive Plan.
Mayor Chmiel moved, Councilman Johnson seconded to adjourn the meeting. All
' voted in favor and the motion carried. The meeting was adjourned at 10:45 p.m..
Submitted by Don Ashworth
City Manager
Prepared by Nann Opheim
I
i
1
I
I
1
I
I
1
I
I
54
i
I
I
I
1
I
I
1
I
I
I
I
I
1
1
1
1
1
1
r
I
CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
NOVEMBER 28, 1990
IIVice Chairman Erhart called the meeting to order at 7:40 p.m. .
MEMBERS PRESENT: Steve Emmings, Annette Ellson, Tim Erhart , Brian Batzli
and Joan Ahrens
MEMBERS ABSENT: Jim Wildermuth and Ladd Conrad
STAFF PRESENT: Paul Krauss, Planning Director ; Jo Ann Olsen, Senior
Planner and Sharmin Al-Jaff , Planner 1
II PUBLIC HEARING:
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AMENDMENT AMENDING THE FENCE HEIGHT FROM THE
APPROVED 8 FEET TO 15 FEET IN THE REAR AND SIDE YARDS ON PROPERTY ZONED IOP
IIAND LOCATED AT 7851 PARK DRIVE. LAKESHORE EQUIPMENT, STEVE WILLETTE.
Sharmin Al-Jaff presented the staff report on this item. Vice Chairman
Erhart called the public hearing to order .
Steve Willette: Yes , I 'd like to speak on my behalf . I also have some
things I 'd like to show you. I don't know what our problem is with the
I staff but I 've taken photographs with scales and I 'm kind of ticked off at
the report. To say the least and I 'll pass those around. That is a tape
measure . That is with my arm protected , 8 feet in the air . I can touch an
II 8 foot high ceiling. I cannot touch a 9 foot high ceiling . That 's the
highest stack of docks in the entire yard . This is the panoramic view of
the entire yard . I do not stack things over 8 feet . Okay? I 'd also like
' to show you what it looks like from the highway side . I 'm shooting into
the sun so I didn't get a real good picture but if I go back down to an 8 •
foot high fence , because of the 22 foot difference in elevation , you will
look deadly into this off of TH 5 . You're going to see all my docks
II stacked up and I don't think that it would look very nice . So I went to 15
feet . As far as the way the fence looks, the definition between a fence
and a wall . I know we can go as high as we want with walls . We can put
I building heights at whatever we. want to . My building 's 22 feet . I don't
think that the height should be the deterrent. If it's not properly
constructed . . . This is also the side from the road going by. This is from
I the building down below . This is the entrance area in front of the
building where it enters. This is the corner as you drive away and these
are the two road sites from down on the industrial park road. First of all
the staff report is totally wrong. I do not and have not stacked materials
I over 8 feet high . If you ask your staff they will tell you because I
talked to them about it tonight . They will tell you that they did not
measure the stacks . They just eyeballed it . I mean we did a thorough job .
' We 're making a recommendation to disapprove it with the thorough job of . . .
My product is at 8 feet high. From the ground up . The difference is the
22 feet . I think when we originally went through this back in 1988, I
think we had no idea of the difference in elevation and nobody thought
about it from the highway . I do feel that it should be totally screened . I
don 't feel that it would look good if I brought it drop it back down to 8
feet and stack my product to 8 feet high. I will do that if you would like
but you will see everything that 's in my yard including when you get up to
within 20 feet of the front part of the fence looking in from the back side
you can see a pair of sneakers sitting on the ground because you can see
I
I
Planning Commission Meeting
November 28 , 1990 - Page 2 1
the ground very clearly if we went back down to 8 feet . Okay? I have
planted trees around there . There had been a couple lost along the road
end that I do intend to replace. I 'm the largest dock and boat lift dealer
in the entire nation. I 've got a nice looking place . I want to keep it
looking nice . When the pine trees grow up , you will not even notice the I
fence because they'll totally screen it . You 'll see along the whole edge
of the fence with the exception of the backside where I lost a couple, that
as soon as those pine trees grow up it will cover the fence. As far as the'
aesthetics of the fence , the only thing that I find not eye appealing at
this point is the fact that there's some new lumber and some old lumber in
there ., I talked to city staff . The building inspector , Ron. Asked him if i
I should paint the fence or if he thought I should let it go natural
because sometimes natural doesn't stick out as much as if you paint
something . He said let it go natural so part of it's natural . And as soon
as the new cedar catches up to the natural look and gets back to all
blend , I don't think it will be a bad looking piece . The other thing is
when the pine trees come up , that 's going to cover it . As far as the
differences in the boards , we did go a board on board in a certain section I
of it . Because of the height of it, we went to 6 x 6 or 8 x 8 posts in
there now so it 's not going to blow down again but we also put some board
on board just to let some wind flow through the fence because when you
erect a fence that tall , there could be a possibility of the wind not
getting through. They are brace back . It's a very sound fence . It 's not
going to blow down again. We do plan on maintaining it and I just don 't
see anything wrong with it . I 've gotten a lot of compliments on the fence II
because it looks so nice because it 's all cedar . People say wow. You
built that all out of cedar . That 's really nice. It's a nice looking
fence because they can't believe that we spent the money to do that . I 'd
sure like to be able to work it out and be able to do my business in town
and I 'm in the industrial park because that's where you people wanted me .
I 'm trying . I 'm trying to keep everything covered like we talked about.
One of Bill Boyt's things when the City Council approved it , and it never
got into the Minutes. I thought it did but if you ask Bill or anybody that
was there , they were saying well the height of a commercial fence is not
the biggest issue . Totally screening the product is the biggest issue . I I
have several other things that if it does not get approved , that I mean
very, very obvious things that happened or that are going on within the
city . We 've got stuff sitting outside that they didn't even bother trying
to screen. I 'm putting forth an effort and I can't understand that we 're
going to have a big issue over this . Do you have any questions?
Emmings: Can I ask a question?
Erhart: Sure .
Emmings: The fence is the height it is for what reason? '
Steve Willette: Due to the 22 foot difference in the elevation of our
highway . You sit in a car you're up another 2 or 3 feet than you 're
looking right down into my storage yard which is at 22 feet lower than the
highway is .
Emmings: Okay , so you built it at that height to screen what 's in the 11
yard?
I
I
Planning Commission Meeting
November 28 , 1990 - Page 3
Steve Willette: To totally screen what 's in the yard .
Emmings: Any other reason that it 's that height?
Steve Willette: No . I just feel that it should be blocked off so that
people can't see it. I mean a 8 foot high fence is fine by me but you 're
going to be able to see in my yard and so it's a Catch 22 . You say okay ,
fully screen everything but then build an 8 foot high fence with a 22 foot
difference in elevation . Nobody caught it all the way through the whole
Planning Commission thing last time or through the City Council thing last
time and now I 'm stuck . I can 't go and bring 22 feet of earth in because
I 'd have to raise my building too and that 's impossible.
' Emmings: Right . Thank you .
Erhart: Is there any other comment from the public?
_ Emmings moved, Ellson seconded to close the public hearing. All voted in
favor and the motion carried. The public hearing was closed.
' Erhart: Why don't we just open it up to any commissioner 's comments or
questions . We won't necessarily go in order .
Emmings: I 've got some . He 's just explained to us why he thinks it 's a
good idea to have it at 15 feet and I 'd like to get some staff reaction to
that . Do you think that a 15 foot high fence does a better job of
screening from the highway of his yard? We obviously, when we looked at
the site plan we wanted screening of that yard . What's your response or
reaction to that?
Krauss: Well a couple things. TH 5 is , you know there is a visibility
factor from there but it 's also quite a distance away. It's not as though
the highway runs right adjacent to his fence line . In looking at it at an
angle past another site , it 's kind of down in a valley. We 'd prefer to
have this concealed . You know the elevation of TH 5 hasn't changed.
I mean TH 5 is where it 's been for quite some time so this should come as
no surprise . I think the magnitude of what's out there comes as a surprise
' and you know had, and I can't put words in people's mouths who reviewed
this thing 2 or 3 years ago but I think if I were in their shoes, had we
been aware of the magnitude of what 's being proposed there , we would have
gone about this differently. I don't view a 15 foot high wood fence as the
appropriate way to screen something of that size . If it was really going
to be that visible and it was really going to be that big of an issue , you
' might have looked at extending the masonry wall or doing something else or
even question whether or not that 's a valid use. I mean the yard seems to
be bigger than the building is . We do have, there 's no question we do have
some other outdoor storage situations in the city that have caused
' problems . Some are being acted upon now . Some are waiting until we get a
new shopping center built and tenants are moving in there . We are taking
the bull by the horns on that issue but what's different here is we have a
relatively new project that was approved with specific conditions and all
of a sudden the ground rules changed and we never authorized that .
I
Planning Commission Meeting
November 28, 1990 - Page 4
Emmings: Have there been any complaints from any of his neighbors down in I
the business park or anybody in the business park?
Krauss: I 'm not aware of any. This was basically found, you know we are
now doing annual reviews of conditional use permits . This was uncovered
during the review.
Emmings: I don't have anything else right now . I
Erhart: Steve , do you have a comment?
Steve Willette: Yeah . . . .talking about a review of the conditional use I
permit . . . This is not an accurate report and you're not getting the facts.
Because my fence blew down . . .I talked to Steve Kirchman and asked if
I should get a building permit to rebuild the fence . . . .rebuild the fence .,
It was on final approval of the building permit . . .not all on the annual
review so don't say things that aren't fact . And I cannot understand where
you 're coming from . I don't know where a cement wall is going to look any '
different than a .
Erhart: I don't think it makes any difference on when, on how we
discovered this .
Steve Willette: It's just all the facts all the way through. I don't knows
what a cement wall is going to do versus the wood wall .
Erhart: Any other commissioners have any questions or comments?
Ellson: There 's never been a precedence where we've had a higher level on I
the fence before has there? I mean Jo Ann, you 've probably been around
longer . If the whole idea was to screen it, I mean I can't see that we
could always screen from the highest point . In this case it's TH 5 but if III
that was the main intent , have we ever done that before because that was
the main intent previously . I mean has there ever been a precedence where
we said well screening's the most important thing so we'll go against the I
standard 8 foot because that's basically the premise that we 're kind of
deciding here .
Olsen: I can't recall . It seems like at one point we . . .10 foot . . . '
Steve Willette: Yeah , it was 10 or 12.
Olsen: That was before we had the new fence ordinance that limited it to 8
without getting a permit .
Steve Willette: When. . .originally approved it it was at 12 feet even '
though we had 8 feet in the condition. . .I said should I totally screen it
and move it up a little bit so we totally screen.
Erhart: Paul , let me help him there . Let me get that straight . When we
approved this conditional use , we approved an 8 foot fence and now you're
saying that the building inspector . I
Steve Willette: Ron, yeah.
I
i
Planning Commission Meeting
November 28 , 1990 - Page 5
' Erhart: Said to go ahead and build it at 12?
Steve Willette: When I told him we were building the project he said, put
' it up high enough so you can screen it and also for the final approval we
had the building , or the Planning Commission staff plus the building
inspector on the final approval and it was at 12 feet at that time . I
raised it up 3 feet . . .
1
Erhart: Who at staff was with you at that time?
' Olsen: I was on the final inspection but to be honest I didn't measure it
then . The condition was 8 foot . . .
' Steve Willette: Was it atrocious at that point Jo Ann?
Olsen: No .
Steve Willette: It didn't look bad then? So if it didn 't look bad at 12
feet , when I raised it 3 feet . . .
' Erhart: Brian , did you have something?
Batzli : Yeah , I was going to ask Paul something . Given the difference in
elevation , can they put fence screen of this particular yard if he didn't
have things stacked so high? I mean when I looked at it , it looked to me ,
with the addition on there I can't really tell what I would have been able
to see without the top part on there but would an 8 foot fence really be
effective at screening anything?
Krauss: Probably not but arguably a 15 foot high fence doesn 't do that
much . Well , that comes closer to it . You 've got a 16 foot change in
elevation from the highway.
' Batzli : Yeah.
Krauss: From the storage yard .
' Batzli : But I guess , I kind of picture the applicant in a catch 22 here
because no matter who utilizes this storage area , they 're not going to be
able to screen it from this particular angle with an 8 foot high fence .
' Krauss: Probably true .
Ahrens: Does the City really have a problem with the 8 foot high fence or
with the inadequate screening or both? I mean I heard Sharmin , Sharmin
didn't you say earlier that perhaps a 15 foot fence would be acceptable if
the screening was adequate? So if we left the fence up , we're talking
about the adequacy then of the screening which seems to be inadequate from
the pictures that you provided . I realize you 've planted pine trees but
the pine trees will take 10 or 15 years to screen that kind of a fence . If
the screening was . . .
Batzli : Plant Russian Olives in the meantime?
I
I
Planning Commission Meeting
November 28 , 1990 - Page 6
Steve Willette: . . .I planted 6 foot 6 trees when I planted my trees and II
that was according to ordinance . That's what they requested . That 's what II
I 've done . I 've done everything. The only issue that I 'm faced with right
now is that I 'm supposed to totally screen everything but I 'm supposed to
do it with an 8 foot high fence and with the 22 foot that nobody ever
thought about , I didn't think about it or anything. If you want it at 8
feet , I 'll put it at 8 feet .
Ahrens: I 'm not sure you can even adequately screen a 15 foot high fence . I
Krauss: Well I guess , I keep coming back to the ground rules changed .
I mean , we just went through the McGlynn's approval where they had that
huge blank wall and told them to do something with that . We knew what we
were dealing with. We asked them to respond to it . They responded with a
series of earth berms with a lot of landscaping that broke up the massing . 1
It was a solution that was acceptable to everybody. You know 6 foot high
trees are the minimum required by ordinance . You can put a 15 foot high
tree and we don 't penalize you by it . When you are trying to achieve I
screening , if you 're trying to screen an 8 foot high fence , a 6 foot high
tree is just dandy . If you know ahead of time you 're dealing with a 15
foot high structure , you might think differently of doing that . We now
have the 15 foot high structure. We don't have the screening to match .
Ahrens: I agree that the screening isn't adequate . I don't see that any
part of this is screened or will be screened for a long time. And it does I
look like the fence sections are of a different type . It doesn 't look like
it's all the same fence at all .
Steve Willette: It's board on board on portions where we're letting the II
wind out where we took and put a board on one side and board. . .but it's
still totally opaque .
Emmings: I have a question here. I 'm getting a little confused about,
we 've got a fence to screen the yard and then we 've got trees to screen the
fence so we 've got but when I look back at what we did when we approved the
site plan, the conditional use permit , it says all items stored in the
outdoor storage area must be totally screened. What needs to be screened
is the items in the yard . Is that right? Okay . '
Al-Jaff: At the same time it states that the fence may not exceed 8 feet .
Emmings: Right . I guess I 'm having trouble with this . We did want
screening and he's done that. In fact if he 'd done what we required him toll
do he wouldn't have accomplished that . I also notice in our fence
ordinance it says that we 've got a maximum height of 8 feet on fences but I
you can go over that if you get a conditional use permit so certainly our
ordinance comtemplates sometimes using taller fences. I think the staff
report , and I don't mean to be critical but you know from the tenor of the II
between the staff and the applicant here, and really the
report kind of feels the same way . There 's some real unpleasantness here
and I don 't care how it started or anything else but it seems like you
folks have gotten crosswise with each other and I don't think I agree with ,,
I think what we have to do is stop and look at what we 're trying to
accomplish . It's true that he violated the height limit of the ordinance .
i
Planning Commission Meeting
November 28 , 1990 - Page 7
He didn't have a permit to build the fence he build and my reaction would
be generally to that would be to say cut it down and get back within the
ordinance . But the way this has come before us is he is applying for a
' conditional use permit to have the higher fence that exists. So I don't
think it 's exactly fair to him to say we told you you should have an 8 foot
fence and now you 're asking for a 15 foot fence . I don't think that 's a
reason to deny it .
Batzli : I agree and I also think we have to look at , if there are special
circumstances on this particular lot because of the height differential
' between the road, that may be I 'm thinking more of kind of a variance
reasons peculiar to that particular lot but in this case , that may be a
reason to look at conditional use to have the higher fence . I don't know
' if I particularly like this fence but if the intent is to screen objects
inside the yard, I think the only way you 're going to accomplish it is to
give them more height on it .
' Emmings: And that clearly was the intent. When you read the condition it
just says all items stored in the outdoor storage area must be totally
screened . So that was the intent and it says no stored items shall project
over the fence and that 's going to happen .
Ahrens: Does that mean that people could stack things 40 feet high and
' that they would be allowed to just keep screening it as far as , I mean
people could stack things forever .
Emmings: No they can't because if they go over 8 feet with their fence .
They can 't have the things stacked higher than the fence .
Ellson: Right . But could you stack 2 feet is what she 's saying with an 8
foot fence? You could have your things stacked at 2 feet and have an 8
foot fence and would that be screened, I don't know .
' Ahrens: No , but what if they , what was approved was an 8 foot fence . They
had things stacked at 12 feet or 15 feet and they needed to screen that .
Emmings: Well , how do we know that? We don't .
Ahrens: Well because it's obvious by the fence that things are stacked up
awfully close to the top of the fence .
' Emmings: Oh, okay . The condition was that no stored items shall project
over the fence . So and what he 's in here now is doing is to ask us for a
permit for a fence that 's higher than anything that's stored in there but
' I guess the point to me is , I don 't think the fence looks good in the
picture . I do think it will look better when it weathers and obviously
when the trees grow and maybe he needs some more trees. But it gets hard
' because the staff and the applicant aren't cooperating to find some kind of
a compromise and maybe that 's what we have to do .
' Ahrens: I guess I don't understand also where the limits are on these -
fence . I mean you know are people able to come in for a certain permit .
Get approval for it and then just build a fence as high as they want and
then come in under a conditional use permit and then .
I
Planning Commission Meeting
November 28, 1990 - Page 8 1
Emmings: This is an amendment of his conditional use . He 's asking to
amend that element and yeah , he's doing it after the fact and that always
predisposes you to kind of use a knee jerk and say, you know take it down
and then come back and then we'll give you permission to put it up and I
don't want to do that . ,
Ahrens: Well I agree . I mean that 's ridiculous reasoning but you know I
think that I don't understand how we set limits in preventing unsightly
fences in Chanhassen that are even higher to screen storage yards.
Emmings: Well hopefully you do a good job the first time around and maybe I
we didn't .
Batzli : I guess in this case I see your point but in looking at the
pictures , if this is the typical way that he has things stored, I don 't II think for the kind of business he's in that he has unreasonable piles of
things .
Ahrens: Well I 'm not saying him. I 'm saying that when things come up in II i
the future , what are we going to do? I don't see any guidelines I guess in
how we're reasoning this out.. We 're just kind of .
Emmings: Yeah . It's hard .
Ellson: What keeps going through my mind is maybe we were wrong because we
didn't notice the elevations . That there is no such thing as making it
totally screened. I 'm thinking if we make the precedence that things have
to be totally screened, we could end up based on the highest level that any'
neighbor might be , for heaven's sakes we'll end up with you know, 22 foot
screens because there's somebody within a bird's eye view that's going to
see it . And I don't know that all along that highway 5, I mean if any area
wanted to see that , that 's probably the least harming to people versus
neighbors that don't like to see into things like that. I 'm more concerned
that we were wrong in saying that everything has to be totally screened and
making the assumption that it 's from all angles. In general , do the best I
you can with 8 feet is about what it came out as and so it all can't be
screened . I can live with that but I 'm more concerned that if we go
totally screened, then we're going to be asking people to screen for all
kinds of neighbors in the future and everything like that and we'll end up
with really high fences and building extra berms just because of the
topography. So I 'd just as soon give up on some of the seeing it from TH
5 . I could live with that is what I 'm saying . '
Erhart: Sharmin or Paul , is the fence strong enough? Did you see it
today? ,
Krauss: The building inspectors have told us that it is and when a fence
is over 5 foot it has to qualify under separate standards and apparently it
does . ,
Erhart: Okay. Is it going to stay vertical?
Al-Jaff: It 's up to Code . It meets all Code . '
I
I
Planning Commission Meeting
November 28, 1990 - Page 9
' Erhart: Is there an actual Code for a fence?
Krauss: Yeah. Over a height it has to meet wind loading and some other
' requirements .
Erhart: Okay , did it not before? That it blew down .
' Krauss: I don 't know .
Steve Willette: We had a high wind storm that took off the air conditioner
' screens and everything else . It was just a straight line wind that came
through and just did a little path. We also had a lot of dock and boat
lift damage out on the lake . It fell some trees . . .storm .
' Erhart: What's going to keep this fence from starting over the years to
start leaning one way and the other?
Steve Willette: It 's braced back . It's a good brace back and the inside
of it is 6 x 6 in a lot of areas .
' Erhart: My concern about the fence is you know , let's assume it 's strong
enough for wind but fences tend over the years to get to look really tacky
and if you think it looks bad now , which I guess I drive by it every day .
' I guess I don 't think it looks all that bad now but I guarantee you in 10
years it 's going to look like a pile of garbage and I guess I tend to
agree .
IElison: Then your pine tree will be there .
Erhart: With Joan is what you need here is a lot more trees that in 10
years you won't see the fence at all . It really won 't make a lot of
difference if it 's there or not . I also agree that we ought to , you know
do we have ordinances that deal with use of fences for screening purposes?
' We have an ordinance that talks about a fence .
Emmings: No , it 's right here.
' Erhart: For the purpose of screening though?
Emmings: Yeah. Fences for screening.
' Erhart: What does it say?
' Emmings: Fences for screening or storage purposes installed on property
used for commercial or industrial uses may have a maximum height of 8 feet .
Erhart: Okay .
Emmings: And then it goes on to talk about when they abut properties zoned
for residential uses and then it says the fence has to be 100% opaque . And
then it says commercial or industrial fences over 8 feet shall require a
conditional use permit . It also says under an earlier point by the way
that every fence shall be maintained in such condition as to not become a
hazard , eyesore or public or private nuisance .
i
Planning Commission Meeting
November 28 , 1990 - Page 10 1
Erhart: Boy , I think we ought to look at that . Even in a commercial or I
industrial area , it would seem to me that when we look at a mini-storage
building and we don't allow them to put up wood fences around the storage
area . They put masonary fences up . It would seem to me a commercial-
industrial area that if we 're going to use fences for screening , we ought
to define what 's the better looking material is going forward but on this
particular one I tend to agree that we should keep what we've got . I
really think we ought to go in and what do you say the distance between
those trees now is what?
Steve Willette: They 're about , well they're planted as close together as
they can to let them grow because when the landscapers put them in they
said this is how far apart they have to be . If you put them in closer
together or . . .tangle together and look like that so this is where the
landscapers said that they should be .
Erhart: They don 't look that close to me and also, I guess what I was
going to suggest to alternate them in a zig zag pattern . ,
Steve Willette: We did . We went up and down the hill and they 're about 11
feet . At maturity they'll reach 10 foot and there is a couple of areas II where we skipped so it wasn't solid all the way along because the idea of
the trees was to break the fence up and not to totally screen the fence
because we were just going to screen the drive with the fence and to be
honest with you Tim, I 've got $35 ,000.00 into this fence . . . It's a lot of II
cedar and I 'll do whatever you want to make it look , I want it to look nice
too . I want to maintain it . I want to be in Chanhassen . I made that
clear to everybody . I like the community . I like being here . I 've spent
a lot of money on advertising over the years to be here . I 've got a
business . My stuff is not stacked over 8 foot high in the fence. I 've
shown you that in the pictures . You 're welcome to come over and visit .
The front part of the fence is not much over 8 feet going across the drive I
area . Going across the back and down. . .
Erhart: Okay , I think we 've got a pretty good idea . '
Steve Willette: And you will see in there very readily . If you go down to
8 feet , it will be an eyesore .
Erhart: Yeah, the pictures tell the story real well . The other thing, I
think we should put something in here which restricts additional height on
the fence . Now there's some ideas I 've gotten. Some of the other , since II
we 've been essentially just going around here , is there some other
recommendations so we can lead to some kind of motion?
Ellson: I would think go down to the 8 feet until you've got a section ,
that you can see into and it's from TH 5 . I just think from a precedence
standpoint , there 's probably going to be more than one situation where you
can't possibly totally screen. I 'm thinking of that shopping center . That,
time when people were trying to measure from their decks . They didn't want
to see the roof of the shopping center and they were trying to build berms
so that people who were on their decks couldn't see and I just think that's,
going above and beyond totally screening. There are times when you can't
do it at all and 8 feet is something that we 've got in the ordinance and I
I
Planning Commission Meeting
November 28 , 1990 - Page 11
think it 's easy to follow and I don't think it 's a problem so I would
probably not even keep it where it is . I 'd go the 8 feet and leave it .
' Erhart: Okay. Brian , what 's your recommendation?
Batzli : My recommendation is to give him a conditional use for his 15 foot
fence based again on the differences in elevation that he 's trying to deal
with and that's assuming that we want it to be screened and that 's
important to us . I mean that 's the underlying hypothesis here is that we
want it to be screened .
' Ellson: Totally . I mean because some of it is I think .
Erhart: Joan , do you have a recommendation?
Ahrens: Well , I guess I 'm not sure that it looks any better to have a 15
foot high fence that is not particularly great looking than to have
'
something showing from above the fence . To have the 8 foot high fence and
then to have somethings behind it that you can see . I mean I don 't think
that that looks any worse and I think it probably would look better to have
' an 8 foot high fence than to have some , be able to see what 's behind that .
However , I am not enthusiastic about the idea of making him cut the fence
down either . I 'm more enthusiastic about having some screening for the
fence but I also , I 'm waffling . But I also don't see in the ordinance
' where we have any requirements to have screening for a fence . I mean that
seems redundant to me . I like the idea but I don 't know if we can require
that . Anyway , I suppose you don't have any idea of what I just said .
' Erhart: No.
Steve Willette: Joan? I 'm willing to work with you within reason. I mean
I 'm not , I just want to get . . .get on with my life because this is just . . .
If it takes a couple extra trees , I 'll put in a couple of trees . That 's no
problem at all .
' Ahrens: How about some vines?
Emmings: I 'm not concerned about setting a precedent here because I think
this is always done a case by case basis so I 'm not worried about every one
of these is different enough so I 'm not concerned about that . I
essentially agree with Brian that we should let him do this . I think it
would be a good thing and maybe even a condition that he maybe do a little
more screening right up against the fence . Maybe some high bush
cranberries or something like that that would just break up that expanse
until those trees get big. Something that could live in shade after those
trees are big . Would help in the short term . But I don't know .
I guess I 'd like to see them do a little more landscaping .
' Erhart: Okay , just to repeat . I think I 'd like to leave the fence left .
Make sure it was solid and to have the applicant work with staff to improve
the landscaping . I think that's also what you said Steve so with that , if
1 there 's not any more comments or questions , I 'd like to entertain a motion .
•
11
I
Planning Commission Meeting
November 28 , 1990 - Page 12
Emmings: I 'll move that the Planning Commission recommend approval of
Conditional Use Permit #88-17 to approve a fence with a maximum height of II
15 feet being my understanding that it 's only 15 feet high in certain
areas . That 's at it 's highest and we would put one condition on that and
that would be that the applicant work with the staff to try and get a
little screening perhaps up close to the fence or some how work out
additions to the landscape plan to break up the fence a little more .
Screen it a little bit . 1
Batzli : Second.
Erhart: Any other discussion on the motion? '
Emmings: Well I guess in discussion I 'd like to say , we're going against
our staff 's recommendation here and we don 't do that very often . And I
don 't like to do it . And I guess I don't like the fact that you didn't
comply with the original conditions of your permit and that should be said
too here . ,
Ahrens: Are we providing enough direction for staff Steve when we say?
Emmings: No , it 's real vague but I think that now that the staff knows
where we 're coming from and if the City Council agrees with us , I 'm sure
they ' ll be able to work it out between them .
Ahrens: But you said just to provide a little bit of screening for that
fence .
Emmings: Yeah , I know. '
Ahrens: I mean that 's not what we really want is it? We want a lot of
screening for that fence .
Emmings: I don't .
Ahrens: You don't?
Emmings: No. '
Ahrens: I want more than a little bit .
Emmings: I think that staff knows how to do that better than I do but my
idea would be to put some clumps of bushes along the fence so that it just
made it look a little better but maybe in comments after we vote on this ,
maybe we should all say what we 've got in mind . Our ideas and let the City,
Council see what they think.
Erhart: Are you interested in trying to amend the motion?
Ahrens: No .
Erhart: Any other discussion? I
i
I
Planning Commission Meeting
November 28 , 1990 - Page 13
Emmings moved, Batzli seconded that the Planning Commission recommend
approval to amend Conditional Use Permit #88-17 to approve a fence with a `
maximum height of 15 feet at it's highest point with the following
condition:
1 . The applicant shall work with the staff to get a little more screening
up close to the fence or some how work out additions to the landscape
plan to break up the fence a little more.
All voted in favor except Ellson who opposed and the motion carried with a
vote of 4 to 1 .
Erhart: Annette 's opposed . Anybody would want to make some comments? Of
' course we 'll start with you Annette .
Ellson: I just think that it 's easy enough to go with just the 8 foot and
keep it the way it was originally passed .
Erhart: Yeah. I would like to add too that I 'd like to see perhaps more
screening than was communicated in the motion . I think with the height of
1 the thing and the time that it 's going to take to screen it with the trees
that are there , I really think that a bit little more creativity ought to
be put into this thing and some investment to make it visually better
faster . So I would agree with Joan 's initial comment . Do you have any
more?
Ahrens: No .
Erhart: Okay . Anything else Brian?
Batzli : No . I agree with what you just said . I think he does have a
large investment and it wouldn't hurt to break up the fence with more
screening than perhaps a little bit .
' Erhart: Alright . Thank you. Let 's see , that will go before the City
Council on December 10th . Thanks for the photographs .
Ahrens: Do you want them back?
Steve Willette: No , you can keep them .
1
1
I
I
I
I
r
I
I
I
1
I
1
I
1
1
1
I
1
1
1
I
I
I
mirk CHANHASSEN PARK AND RECREATION COMMISSION
11 REGULAR MEETING
NOVEMBER 27, 1990
Chairman Mady called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. .
MEMBERS PRESENT: Dawne Erhart, Jim Andrews, Wendy Pemrick, Curt Robinson,
Jim Mady, Larry Schroers and Jan Lash
STAFF PRESENT: Todd Hoffman, Park and Recreation Coordinator and Jerry
Ruegemer , Recreation Supervisor
INTRODUCTION OF NEW COUNCIL MEMBERS-ELECT, RICHARD WING AND MIKE MASON.,
' Hoffman: I 'd like to introduce Dick Wing. Hello Dick. And Mike Mason.
Our two new Council people. Dick was sworn in at the most recent City
Council meeting. He will be serving out the 1990 term and Mike will be
filling the seat vacated by Jay Johnson.
Dick Wing: Thank you .
Mike Mason: Thank you .
Mike Mason: Don't we get to say nothing?
Hoffman: Sure.
Mady: Oh yeah. At any time . Our meetings are pretty much open so if you
have a comment on anything.
Dick Wing: The only comment that I would make is that I served 10 years on
the Public Safety Commission and we really. . .resource of information to the
Council and I really feel comfortable with the commissions and I feel
extremely vulnerable as a councilman because I know how naive and
uneducated and uninformed I am so I really. . .commissions. Input from you
folks . What I want , from my standpoint, comment a lot of support. . .
because I 'm not in a position to know what's going on or even make a
decision unless you people have researched it and have the information but
' what we need is a motion. . . I think it will be a kind of interesting
year . . .
Mike Mason: I 'll second most of what Dick said. I agree with the facts
but I think the motions do play a part of it too and I think that also
needs to be taken into consideration. But as you may know, one of the
reasons I ran was because I do want to maintain, I think a quote from some
of my literature was, the abundant recreation and park facilities we have
here and I just see that as a paramount issue. As I 've been paging through
some of the information Todd has given me, I 'm real impressed with what
I I 've seen. I really hope we continue in the direction we're going in.
What Dick said about you guys knowing what's going on and I don't and
you're input really will be appreciated.
Dick Wing: I just wanted to comment. I have a question. . . , could
I comment on that?
Mady: Go ahead.
I
A
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
11 Park and Rec Commission Meeting
November 27, 1990 - Page 2
11 Dick Wing: You know you look at that map, the development of the city goes
up east and across the north. The entire rest of Chanhassen is wide open .
' I mean you look at this town from the air , it's just a wide open space . If
that MUSA line shifts, it's going to be a disaster . Everybody's going to
be going for everything. There's going to be rezoning, rezoning, rezoning
on top of the comprehensive plan and it really troubles me the issue of
trails. Now it was defeated once and the issue I think was kind of muddled
at that time. It was tied up with the fire department. Is the Park and
Rec looking seriously at trying to make a decision to commitment to a trail
system of tying east and west and north and south in a system of trails?
And if they're not, because now in the only time to start buying land or
putting land aside or dedicating land for this trail situation. Wouldn't
this be the time to really get dead serious as a priority for this coming
year and try to formally commit. Not a referendum but commit to a trail
system. Get the Council support and then get the money for that. If we
don't do it now, the MUSA 's going to shift in the next year or two and it's
going to be out of reach. We're going to have to, we're going to be going
through neighborhoods if you don't do it now . Where are you as a
commission on trails?
Mady: Realistically Dick we've got , we do have the trail plan in place. It
hasn 't to my knowledge been formally amended to any degree. It's still
there in a concept form with phasing, you know necessary phasings .
Everytime a developer comes in here or a piece of property is being
developed in some way, shape or form where the city has an opportunity to
' address an issue , we are at minimum getting the dedication of the
trailways . Getting the land set aside so that we can, if we can't do the
trail now, we don't have the dollars from either the city doesn't have the
dollars or the developer doesn't. He's doing so much in his development he
can't pledge out the dollars for it . We're at minimum getting the land set
aside for a trail can go in at some point in time. But we are, we have
been actively pursuing getting the trail put in with the development at the
11 same time because , a couple of reasons. One , it's the easiest time to put
it in just because you don't have to deal then with emotions from
individual homeowners. If they come and see the piece of property there .
They see it's already got a sidewalk in front of it, it's a given . There's
no surprises at all . The second thing is it's always the cheapest time to
do it . The guy's out there. Got his big graders and blacktopping
equipment and everything is right there so it's really just an incremental
' cost of some additional blacktop versus having to pull all his equipment in
at a later date and do it . So it's always cheaper at that time and we have
been aggressive in seeking that . Staff has been pushing it. Whenever they
see the opportunity, they bring it to us so it's been, I think we're still
doing that . It's been a priority for me and for I think the commissions .
Lash: We've also been meeting with Council on that . We met at least once .
We had a lengthy meeting and the comprehensive plan was revised somewhat.
Has that final thing come back to us Todd?
Hoffman: No.
Lash: I didn't think so that's, if you get a copy of that one that 's
finished , that would be the most current information.
I
Park and Rec Commission Meeting I
November 27 , 1990 - Page 3
Schroers: We looked at restructuring the plan and prioritizing it and IF
setting it phases so that hopefully at some future time in a referendum it
may be more acceptable to the voting public and it might not look like such
a large chunk all at once . That big dollar figure and the priority just
went in the direction of linking the most likely used areas and the points
of interest in the city now and then the future developing was like Phase 21.
and Phase 3 but to answer your question, are we doing, do we plan to
connect each and west and north to south, the trail plan covers pretty much
the entire city. With a variety of trails. Multiple use system for
everything from nature trails to pavement . I
Mady: Staff have anything to add?
Hoffman: Basically they've covered the situation which we're currently I
under . The trail plan did fail twice by very minimal number of votes. 7
votes and 12 votes . Something like that . Both times it was unreal that it
could fail by that small a margin twice . Currently as the developments
come in, we take a look to see if that particular piece or that particular II
roadway fits in the comprehensive plan into the overall trail system
which has been designed . If it does, then we go after either trail
construction or possibly the easement. The upgrading of Minnewashta
Parkway, which the plan's currently in process, we're talking with the
Engelhardt and Associates who's doing that plan very closely and why there
should be trails . Making them know for sure that that trail is certain to
be part of it. So as pieces become available, we start gaining them but
yes , you're right . As we look at increasing that MUSA line . . .more steady
paces there. I
Pemrick: I have a comment . I had a call from a neighbor who's real
concerned about the highway 101 trail and I dug up my Minutes and I said 11
I 'd supply them with what we had discussed as far as Phase 1 , Phase 2,
Phase 3. Is that realistic do you think? The south TH 101 wouldn't be
touched until 1995 to 2000?
Hoffman: Realistic?
Pemrick: Yeah. ,
Hoffman: Yes.
Pemrick: Not sooner? I mean even if the Bandimere Park would go in and II
children were needing to ride their bikes?
Hoffman: Basically the south TH 101 piece comes in as part of the
realignment of south TH 101 . The highway itself. So the initial segment II
coming past Rosemount down Market Blvd. will begin construction in the next
coming few years but then after that, the following pieces which cut a
little farther east of the current TH 101 , won't be until 1995-1997 and at
that time the trail or the trail alignment along that south highway would
go in there.
Mady: Todd , I had a question. You brought up Minnewashta Parkway and I
get asked from time to time from a couple members of the city out there
about Minnewashta Parkway. Where's it stand and I don't know anymore. I
I
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
November 27, 1990 - Page 4
Hoffman: As far as the?
Mady: The study.
Hoffman: The study?
Mady: Was it done?
Hoffman: No, the study isn't done . It's currently underway. I just was
on the phone the other day with one of the persons working on it at
Englehardt and Associates. Basically what he tells me right now is they 're
looking at keeping the trail on the west side of Minnewashta Parkway on the
northern route and then crossing over and bringing the trail to the east
side on the southern route .
Mady: Basically at about Lake St . Joe it crosses over? I don't remember
the street there .
Hoffman: Yeah, somewhere in that neighborhood. In working with grades and
right-of-way and road widths and that kind of thing . We talked a little
bit about what we would like to see as a construction. It may not be a
full 8 feet wide . It might be a 7 foot wide path but it's certainly not
going to be a 5 foot sidewalk either . It's going to be developed as a
major corridor . In the dialogue which he was writing as part of his
report, he wanted to know why. He thought it was somewhat odd that that
piece just be put in by it's lonesome out there in the west side of
Chanhassen and my response back to him is that it's a very important piece
of the total puzzle once it is completed but the pure recreational value of
just that one piece of trail will give those people west of Lake
11 Minnewashta is just enough. Enough reason to install the trail . Allowing
those people to get off the road. Take a walk or take a bike ride . That
type of thing. The value of which that presents is really high in my
opinion.
Mady: And it 's the bare minimum of recreational ability they have out
there I think . At this point we certainly aren't providing them with
parkland. It 's important and they've been in here numerous times in my 5
years so it 's important to get done . I guess maybe we should get back to
the agenda unless there 's some more comments.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES:
Mady: Next item was approval of the October 23rd Minutes. Were there any
changes , deletions at all? I 've got one on page 18. Todd's first comments
on the page , his last sentence. It reads, I would anticipate another
appraisal being necessary . I believe you meant not necessary when we were
talking about the Herman Field.
Hoffman: Correct .
Mady: Otherwise I didn't have anything else.
Lash: I just wanted to mention that I appreciated getting the page with
the corrections on it. I think that's a good idea. Is that something
you 're going to continue?
1
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
November 27 , 1990 - Page 5
IF
Pemrick: There was a real minor one on the very back page. Comment by
Erhart . You weren't here . I don't know if you want to claim that comment
or not.
Robinson: That's the September 25th. That's the corrections from the
prior meeting .
Erhart: I don't even remember saying that.
Lash: I remember you saying that . I
Pemrick: Oh, okay. I thought that sounded familiar you know when I read
that.
Schroers moved, Lash seconded to approve the Minutes of the Park and
Recreation Commission meeting dated October 23, 1990 amended on page 18 to
change Todd Hoffman's comment to include the word 'not' necessary. All
voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously.
APPLICATION FOR CHANHASSEN PARK AND RECREATION COMMISSION. I
Mady: Todd, did you have any contact with the applicant?
Hoffman: Yes I did and basically discussion on this item is among the
remaining commissioners .
Mady: Yeah, I understand that. But if that person's not here, I 'm not
sure .
Hoffman: I 'll go over the situation. We also have one other additional 11
applicant which came in prior to the deadline. We had a person that
stopped in today that was interested. A Mr . David Koubsky applied for
the Planning Commission but then also put Park and Recreation down as an
alternate . When he turned in his applicantion, it went to the Planning I
Department. I did not receive a copy and conversations with the Planning
Department, he mentioned his alternate application for the Park and
Recreation Commission and just said that he didn't hear from me so I 'm
going to pass these out. We need to put Dave into consideration this
evening as well as the fourth applicant for this position. Or for one of
the two positions.
l
Mady: Is there going to be an interview? I mean are they going to be here
tonight?
Hoffman: They're available if the remaining commissioners. . .
Robinson: Tonight?
Hoffman: Yes . I would just give them the call and they would stop right
up . As it's listed in my report there, it's somewhat of an unusual
situation that normally we have 8-9 applicants in which to interview and toll
minimize the number of applicants which we recommend to City Council .
Interview and take a look at. With only 3, you could just choose to pass
up all 3 applicants to the City Council and then let them, allow them to I
conduct the interviews. Now with the fourth person in here, we could do
I/
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
November 27 , 1990 - Page 6
the same thing. Typically it 's about twice the number of open positions.
Twice that number of people which we pass up to the Council for their
consideration. I have contacted both James Slosh and David Koubsky. They
are available tonight . They're at home . If you would wish to conduct
interviews, I can simply call them and they'll be here in 10-15 minutes and
we can interview them at that time . So I guess it 's conversation among
your remaining commissioners who are not up for re-election to decide in
which manner they would like to progress .
Mady: I give off the question. First, would you want Larry and I to leave
first before you even talk?
Robinson: About even getting them in here?
Mady: Yeah . Well , anything.
' Robinson: No. I 'd just as soon interview them tonight if the rest of you
don't mind .
Erhart: I was going to say pass them up to Council .
Lash: I thought if we did do interview, I think I mentioned one time
1 before like last year that I thought maybe the interview questions needed
to be evaluated . I think some of them are fine and some of them aren't.
Personally I 'd like to see us come up with a couple of new ones. Maybe
1 each commissioner come up with something that they think is important and
I 'm not always real comfortable with them being supplied the questions
before .
Andrews: Can't we ask our own questions?
Lash: Well that 's what I would rather do than just , I mean if somebody .
You know what do you feel is the role. Everybody gives the same , pretty
much the same answer and then what are your feelings regarding conservation
and environment . Passive parks versus active parks and you have to go into
detail explaining what it means because most people don't even know what it
means to start with and then what are they going to say?
Hoffman: I think basically the reason for having the same questions is
just standardization to attempt to be fair so you're not partial or biased
when you're asking the questions. And we can certainly take a look at
coming up with some new questions in the future.
' Lash: We 've had people come in 3 years in a row and then they have the
same questions everytime.
Robinson: Maybe we use this as a guide and just wing it . No pun intended
there Dick .
Lash: But if we were going to interview, I guess I would like to put more .
Andrews: Can I reask the question? Are we bound to only ask those
' questions that are on the paper?
Mady: No.
IF
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
November 27 , 1990 - Page 7
Andrews: It just sort of sounded like you said we have to in order to be
non-discriminatory but then at the same time I 'm thinking that 's exactly
why we're here is to ask questions to discriminate the best from maybe not II
the best .
Lash: But yet to be fair , like Todd said, you know if you knew someone wholl
was coming , you could ask them a loaded question. You know if you wanted II
to and so to be fair , I think if you have a particular issue that you 're
interested in , you would want to ask all the candidates that particular
question.
Schroers: The Commission spent about 3 meetings about 3 years ago trying
to come up with questions that were valid and fair and that we felt would II
meet the criteria that we were looking for at the time so actually this
commission put together that list of questions.
Robinson: And that was when we had 7 or 8 candidates. I mean we could ,
have spent a good evening here just interviewing Park and Rec candidates so
we tried to cut that down a little.
Andrews: I 'd like to invite them here and ask the questions, even if it's
the one that's already printed on the paper . I guess it 's important to
hear . II
Erhart: Tonight?
Andrews: Well , tonight 's the night. Let 's get it done. '
Robinson: That 's the way I feel .
Andrews: Maybe we can set a time like 9:00 or 9:15 or just say be here at II
that time and we'll break away from our agenda if we're still in it and do
it. I
Hoffman: Okay .
Robinson: Let 's do that. 1
Hoffman: Curt , do you want to make a motion on that?
Robinson: Yeah, I 'll make a motion we interview the candidates tonight at II
9:00 .
Andrews: Second. 1
Lash: Are you going to call both of them then?
Hoffman: Yes.
Lash: Did you say you had someone interested today too? ,
Hoffman: Yes. Mike Parsinen.
Lash: Is that something we can consider since it's after the deadline or II
I don't know how that works?
.1
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
11 November 27 , 1990 - Page 8
Hoffman: No . The new resolution set forth by Council ._ 0PPaw" I'v 0.74" Es
Robinson moved, Andrews seconded to interview the candidates for the
positions on the Park and Recreation Commission during tonight's meeting at
' 9:00 p.m. . All voted in favor except Mady and Schroers who abstained and
the motion carried.
' Mady: Okay, what I think we 'll do for practicality purposes. We 'll
continue with the agenda and as soon as , you know when they 're here we'll
finish the agenda item we're on and then break. And Larry and I will go in
the back there .
' Lash: Wouldn't it be great if we could get done.
Erhart: Do we have applications on Larry and Jim yet? Applications filled
out on you two .
Mady: Todd I 'm sure has them on record .
' Hoffman: They 're not to be interviewed by the commission. They're
interviewed by the City Council .
Erhart: Oh, okay . I didn't realize that had been changed.
Mady: I think you guys know where I stand on just about everything . I
would hope after . . .
DISCUSSION OF 1991 MEETING DATES AND ROTATING CHAIR POLICY.
Robinson: We do fun stuff tonight . None of this development stuff .
' Hoffman: As we have been doing for the past 6 months or so, we basically
continue to meet on a once a month basis and at present levels of site plan
reviews and plat applications which are coming through, that type of thing ,
we can meet on a once a month meeting basis . I 'm going to leave that open
to the Park Commission to discuss the merits of , we've done it in the past.
Discuss the merits of both the bi-monthly or just once a month meeting and
then leave it up to the commission to make that motion. Whether they'd
like to continue this once a month or go back to twice a month schedule . I
would also like to discuss the rotating chair to see if you would like to
continue that in 1991 or dissolve that and then go ahead and look to
electing Chairs and Vice Chairs in the first meeting in January.
Mady: Todd , I was kind of surprised to see the item on the agenda for
tonight because it is a housekeeping item that was dealt with on the very
1 first meeting of the year . It' would be more properly handled in January
when if there are new members of the Commission, they should be able to
address that at that time.
' Erhart: That's what I was thinking too.
' Andrews: I agree . Why don't we move to table it until then?
Lash: The first meeting in January?
1
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
November 27 , 1990 - Page 9
Ir
Mady: Or just not act on it .
Robinson: Both the meetings and, both of those items? Table it? 1
Erhart: Rotating chair .
Mady: They're both handled as housekeeping items for in the very first
meeting .
Lash: Do you need to know ahead of time at least for the monthly, for the I
meeting schedule?
Robinson: Yeah. I think we can talk about the monthly meeting schedule .
I mean we changed in the middle of the year here to once a month. Why
can't we make it official now?
Hoffman: Basically the rotating chair , that policy was talked about last
January as a housekeeping item. The issue of meeting monthly or bi-monthly
is one which we could have discussed it two months ago just to make it,
confirm it that we are just meeting on a once a month basis.
Mady: Maybe a point of information for the two new Council members. I 'm
not sure if you understand what our rotating chair has been. Richard may,
I 'r not sure but for the past 3 years I think. 2 years anyway , the Park
Commission has appointed a Chairman and a Vice Chair at the beginning of
the year . The second year I was chairman, I talked a little bit to Ladd II
Conrad, on the Planning Commission and there was talk on the Planning
Commission of rotating the chair because Ladd is always at every meeting
and it's the very same for me . I think I 've missed one meeting in my 5
years so the Vice Chair never had the opportunity of learning what it is t
the meeting and so to make that available and so other people have the
opportunity and know how to handle a public meeting. And that way you get ,is
other people who may be want to be chair next year . We instituted a
program whereas anybody who was a commission member could request to handle
a meeting and then whatever there were, 4 or 5 or 6 people, we'd just take
every, you 'd get every fifth meeting or whatever and it served us well for O
the last couple years. Now there's been some concern raised by the Council
that that may be creating some confusion from the citizens of Chanhassen.
Not sure who the Chairman is for a given meeting. Usually what we had
handled in those situations, if an item is tabled and brought back at the II
next meeting and there is going to be involvement from the audience,
whoever handled the prior meeting will handle that meeting but it really
is, it 's only come up I think once in the 2 or 3 years but there has been II
some concern raised about it so being cognizant of that point and that
situation.
Lash: I guess as far as the meeting schedule goes, as long as we are able
to accomplish what we need to get done once a month, and we've been getting
done by 9:00 a lot of times, I don't see any reason to going back to twice
a month but I 'd like to make sure that we always have options. Leave open 11
the option of calling an additional meeting on a specific issue or if we
need a work session or whatever .
Hoffman: We certainly would leave that option open. There may be times as,
we get into some , start up again for the spring construction, that we'd '
I
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
November 27 , 1990 - Page 10
11 start seeing some more site plan reviews and some heavier park related
issues as it has to do with park dedication . Land dedication. Those types
of things and if there's a special project which we're taking a look at
down the road, the Bandimere Park , that type of thing , we'll just call that
second meeting of the month to take a look at that issue . I think that
' would serve you effectively.
Mady: I think you'll find that with, until the MUSA line gets moved,
there 's not a whole lot of land left for new development . We've probably
looked at most of the open land now and with the country heading into a
recession, or possibly in a recession or what have you, there are less
people likely to put their money on the line right now so it will probably
' continue at the same rate we've been seeing. I would think it's prudent to
continue on with the monthly meetings unless Council sees a need for us to
be doing something else.
Schroers: Do you want a motion on that?
Lash: You want to pick a specific Tuesday too right?
' Hoffman: Second or fourth Tuesday of the month. Whichever you prefer .
Erhart: Fourth .
Lash: That 's what it 's been.
Mady: I think it's important though we're at the Council meetings so we
have problems sometimes with packets being bumped.
IHoffman: It's pretty much a wash .
Lash: Speaking of which, I for one greatly appreciated getting my packet
' on Wednesday. We'll kiss your feet after the meeting. . .
Mady: They didn't work on Friday.
Lash: Either did I . I had time to read it .
Erhart: Unless somebody wants it on the second Tuesday or .
' Lash: It doesn't matter to me at all .
' Schroers: If this requires a motion I 'll make it.
Mady: I guess we 'd better then.
Robinson: And if another meeting is required in the month, I 'd prefer it
be the other Tuesday or the second Tuesday I guess .
' Hoffman: Sure .
Lash: Okay, I 'd move that we set the schedule for 1991 of being the fourth
Tuesday of the month.
11 Robinson: Second.
I
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
November 27, 1990 - Page 11
Lash moved, Robinson seconded that the Park and Recreation Commission
meetings for 1991 be scheduled for the fourth Tuesday of every month. If
additional meetings are required, they will be scheduled on the second
Tuesday of the month. All voted in favor and the motion carried
unanimously.
Mady: You will though review this in January with the planning and stuff? "
Robinson: As long as we're talking meetings. This would be then the
what? How far after Christmas night I guess?
Hoffman: The December meeting?
Robinson: Yes.
Hoffman: We'll take a look of going on the December 11th, I believe the
second Tuesday .
Mady: Yeah, right now it'd be Christmas night.
Robinson: I have other plans thank you. I
Hoffman: The meeting in December is scheduled for December 11th.
HANDICAPPED ACCESSIBLE PLAYGROUND, CITY CENTER PARK. 1
Hoffman: As stated in my memo, this issue was a lot of fun to work on
because we're working with somebody else's money but it certainly presents I
a lot of hoops to jump through to acquire that money. Basically to bring
you up to date. We have been working with that $5,898.00 figure which we
h,r .e in the Community Development Block Grant fund for 1990. Then in
dscsion and soliciting input from the Chanhassen APT, their Board
dec *--:d to kick in or allocate an additional $4,000.00 towards the purchase
of that handicapped accessible playground structure at the school . So ,
we're looking at somewhere just under $10,000.00 for purchase and/or
installation costs in 1990. In looking back, in order to spend that
$5,898.00, in working with the coordinator of the State and Federal fund
programming, they wanted bids or competitive bids depending on the dollar II
amount. That $6,000.00 he will accept quotes but taking a look back and
trying to get this entire project established on an even basis, if you
recall , the $6,000.00 was not going to get us far. So in setting up a park
plan area, playground equipment plan as you have it in front of you there,
you can see that cost much more than $6,000.00 or 810,000.00. The problem
lies in that if we go ahead and get quotes for initial phase or the first
portion of the equipment and one company comes in low, then after the first,
of the year 1991 , we have to take quotes again and seek out quotes and we
receive low bid from a different company. Trying to match those components
just does not work real favorably. So what we're attempting to do is to
put out specifications for the 86,000.00. Components which wouldn't make a,
difference you know which manufacturer they came from. Say the border wood
and the cost of the pea gravel and the swing sets. That type of thing.
Things which are separate from the total component. Then looking at in
1991 , staff has targeted about $15,000.00 of that CBDG money in 1991 for
this project. Of course that is contingent upon Council approval and
contingent upon the program itself coming through in the 1991 year . So the1
1
11 Park and Rec Commission Meeting
November 27 , 1990 - Page 12
current status is that Van Doren, Hazard and Stallings is working on
specifications for the $6,000.00 to $8 ,000.00 project or equipment cost,
which we 'd like to purchase in 1990 . Once those specifications are done ,
we'll solicit phone calls from 2 to 3 companies. Receive those quotes.
Bring those to you on the night of the December 11th meeting. Those
' probably will not be available for your packet. We 'll take a look at them
that night . Compare the different quotes . Take a look at the benefits ,
pros and cons of the equipment and decide on a contractor for that first
phase . Then in 1991 the money, fiscal year for the CMG program is June to
June so the money would not become available until June so we'll have time
in January and February to take a look at specifications for the design of
the remainder of the playground and then go ahead and solicit bids for that
' piece of the project . Questions?
Pemrick: Did you get a letter from Kitty Sitter? Was that in regards to
Ifunding or something?
Hoffman: Yep. The allocation of the funding. That $4 ,000.00 contribution
as you may recall , now we have to take that to the City Council . -They'll
' take a look at what 's that going to and the City Council does have to
accept that donation as part of this project. So I received that letter . I
did not return a thank you letter promptly just because of that fact that
Iwe do have to take that in front of the City Council for their acceptance . •
Pemrick: Do they have that money right now? Available?
Hoffman: It 's available . It's in the APT 's bank account .
•
Pemrick: Great .
Mady: This past year 's Capital Improvement Program we had $40,000 .00
I believe it was for City Center Park . Would we not be prudent to have
' this whole thing bidded out , maybe bid this whole thing out? Bid the
phases but make sure the whole thing's bidded out because if the $15,000.00
shows up in 1991 , we could do the whole thing. I mean actually have a nice
piece of equipment sitting there instead of doing this in a piecemeal basis
' for the next 4 years and some of the inherent problems that seem to go
along with not getting it all done at once . The money's available in our
budget . It 's been passed along from year to year . I 'd like to see us
maybe do something up there . We kind of put it on the back burner long
enough .
I Hoffman: Kitty did address that in her letter that you know, we're
allocating this $4 ,000 .00. It's not contingent upon you spending , the Park
Commission spending the $40,000.00 at City Center Park on equipment but we
would certainly like to see that happen. Originally the $40,000.00 for
play equipment at City Center Park at the school site was allocated or
designated for the west playground. The one just up here behind the
skating rinks. This playground site , you know we're just trying to keep
' the two projects separate as to the north. You certainly have the option
to go ahead and mix those funds whichever way you feel would be most
beneficial to seeing that both of those projects are completed . The
playground to the west of the school is certainly outdated and needs
replacement as well . And now at least for the time being the community
center question at the City Center Park is no longer being considered, that
1
I.
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
November 27 , 1990 - Page 13
we could look to the purchase and installation of new equipment on the west
side of the school . '
Lash: Is that something we could get moving on pretty quickly so we could
maybe put it in this spring? ,
Hoffman: By summer at least, yes .
Lash: Okay , just to clarify this in my mind. Phase 1 . Is that basically I
just your surface. and the scoop or is there something in Phase 1 than that?
Hoffman: For the initial $6,000.00, no. Phase 1 would include the scoop, 11
the swings , the surface underneath the swings. The swings are included
underneath . The installation of two exerglide swings.
Lash: Is that these things here? I
Hoffman: Yep .
Lash: Oh, okay.
Hoffman: And that surface . And then the purchase of the border wood and
pea gravel . What we're trying to do is come up with a figure which closely'
matches that $6,000.00 so we can ask for the full amount.
Lash: So then is Phase 2 the money from the APT? ,
Hoffman: Phase 2 . Phase 1 , if the figure comes out at $7,000.00, we would
pull $1 ,000 .00 out of APT for •1990 and then leave the remaining $3 ,000 .00 II
for 1991 . Phase 2 would be in 1991 would be the additional $15,000.00 in
CMG funds which we have just allocated . It's no guarantee. The money has
been there year after year . There's no been applicants for it so this year
we went ahead and we were fortunate enough to have that money designated
for purchase of a handicap accessible fishing pier and then to start this
project . My opinion is that the Council and if the money's available, the
Council will certainly like to see that we follow through on that project
to designate that $15,000.00 . Tack onto the $3,000.00 or $4,000 .00 left
from APT in 1991 .
Lash: Okay, and then Phase 3 would be? '
Hoffman: Just the phase that would be tacked on at an additional time .
Schroers: Just for your own information Todd, we have removed all the
extraglide swings from our facility due to a number of head injuries and
replaced them with kiddy swings. The smaller ones that. . .sharp corners and
a pretty blunt end when they come back and they have literally knocked
people out .
Lash: Are those the things that you pump with your arms? ,
Schroers: Yeah .
Lash: Because we have those at the kindergarten center .
I
11 Park and Rec Commission Meeting
November 27 , 1990 - Page 14
11
Hoffman: That 's the one reason which they were looked at to be put into
this project because a person with no lower mobility can then operate a
swing with their upper body.
Schroers: I don't think that we 'd have to consider looking at a different
11
type of swing . I think what we have to consider is a safe area behind the
swing.
' Mady: One other question on this one Todd. The play structure's in the
middle between the accessible one which will be on the west side and the
newest structures are on the east side of this. There's the old set right
in the middle there with a very poor surface underneath that . Will we be
replacing that surface with pea rock?
Hoffman: We 'd be looking at the pea rock is, the cost is so minimal but
' then it 's the removal cost and the labor to remove the sand which is
underneat that equipment which you're speaking of and then the
installation.
Mady: I 'd be willing to bet that we can get, since we built that system
before , we being the parents, the new one , we can get enough man power out
Ithere to dig out the sand.
Hoffman: And reinstall it .
' Mady: I guess I 'm going to be pushing that at each meeting I 'm at simply
because a friend of my daughter 's broke her arm on that surface this fall
and I know it 's not the only one that, that occurs from year to year so
we've just got to start because there's so many kids using that surface .
We've got to get rid of these bad play surfaces and we've just got to start
doing it now . We can't hide behind the fact that it takes time or dollars .
We can get it done with volunteer man power up there. I know we can so
it 's just a few shovels and wheelbarrels and it will be done.
Hoffman: We talked about that. It's just a situation where the money
' which is being used for this particular project has to be used under that
project . Kathleen would certainly like to see that, Kathleen Macy the
principal , would certainly like to see that material removed as well and
' replaced with pea rock so we'll continue working on that with the school
staff and the commission and park maintenance staff to see that that can be
done .
I Lash: I have another question about this too. Did the person, who drew
this up?
IHoffman: Earl F . Anderson.
Lash: Now is that someone, and I 'm assuming he knows the capabilities
' because I have to admit I 'm pretty ignorant about handicap and I guess I 'm
having trouble visualizing a little kid who's handicap going across on this
track ride and then going across the balance beam. I mean how are they
supposed to do that?
Hoffman: That portion of , the ramp structures are designed for a
wheelchair bound or handicap person. The track ride can be accomplished
Park and Rec Commission Meeting I
November 27, 1990 - Page 15
with supervision by a person out of a wheelchair and then go across and ■
come back but that Phase 3 is basically created just to connect them but
it's more for able bodied. It's to connect the play structure and it is all
piece which is more suited for an able bodied person.
Mady: Jan had a question. You're pretty familiar with these things.
These Tic Tac Toe walls? Do they get used?
Lash: By typical kids they don't but possibly because.
Mady: Wheelchair kids might?
Lash: Yeah. I mean there's not going to be that many things they could dil
that maybe that would be something yeah, they could go up there and maybe
they would like to do it but other kids are too busy running around and
sliding and swinging and doing all of that that they don't want to spend
time standing around playing tic tac toe. I
Mady: Yeah I hadn't seen kids playing with this so I know you see them at
school . I
Lash: Yeah and typically I don't think, and these porthole windows and
stuff, I don't usually see those getting used but maybe in something like
this they would get more use. I thought of that when I saw it too and
questioned it but I think maybe it would get used.
Mady: Todd, what are you looking from us? i
Hoffman: On this item no motion is necessary. Really an update. Again we
are looking to have those specifications back from Mark by the end of the
week so we can get some phone quotes. Get those back in here towards the
end of next week and that is packet week for the December 11th meeting.
So we would be bringing those quotes probably delivering them in person II that evening at the meeting that night. Taking some time to review them
and then to go to discuss that.
Mady: Okay, thank you. I
Lash: Can I push you one more time to make sure that we get going on the
west side equipment too?
Hoffman: We'll have another chance to talk about that tonight in our
Capital Improvement.
Mady: Right now.
1990 AND 1991 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT BUDGETS.,
Hoffman: I have attached a status report of what has occured. Originally
what was budgeted for 1990 and then what has occurred. Due to the I
transition which took place in the City's Park and Recreation Department
this year , coupled with the fact that the community center issue with the
location at City Center Park was once again. . . , a number of these things
did not get completed. The total figures were not on there. I apologize II
for that. You may have gone ahead and added those up yourself but under
•
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
November 27, 1990 - Page 16
1
budgeted expenditures the total is $160,500.00. That was what we budgeted
' in the capital improvement program last year for 1990. Expended year to
date is $31 ,500.00. That does not include the land purchase at Pheasant
Hills which came out of that reserve fund so you have approximately
$100,000 .00 there . Throw in the $1 ,100.00 which is the purchase of the new
furnace at the warming house and you basically come up with a balance
remaining of $127,900.00 so there were a number of projects which weren't
addressed. City Center Park is the major one there with about $70,000 .00
' some that out of the $120,000.00 that just never being addressed because of
the community center issue . The $40,000.00 for totlot . $25,000.00 for
general development . Whether it be improvement of the ice rinks or
' improvement of the tennis courts , that type of thing. I want to add and
just give a brief summary of the projects that were completed so just to
update, refresh your memory on what was going on . Where playgrounds were
' installed, that types of things. Which master plans, master park plans we
had targeted and which ones did or did not get completed. Discussion is in
order on the 1990 Capital Improvement Program. The status where we 're at .
Any final things . You know there's not a lot that's going to be additional
' to this in the 1990 fiscal year . Basically we 're at the end of the
purchasing season . We 're at the end of the construction season. There
will be a few minor things going in there but basically this is it .
' Robinson: I was just going to say , we go through this every year it seems
like in that we don't spent anywhere close to what we had budgeted and we
wrestle with that budget that boy we really need all this. But like you
1 say , when you take $18,500.00 out for Eagle projects and there were none
and whatever all that adds up to for City Center because of the community
center , that leaves about .
Mady: $90 ,000 .00 . $90,000 .00 between them .
Robinson: Yeah. So there's $20,000.00-$30,000.00. It doesn't look so bad
that way . At first I thought boy that's terrible to do this every year .
Lash: It makes you wish you could do that with your own budget .
' Robinson: Yeah , right . But can we talk about the areas we didn't complete
then and maybe as to why we didn't. Like Lake Ann, the trail through the
' woods . Is there some reason? Are we getting started too late every year
or don't we put enough emphasis on it once we get it in the budget?
Hoffman: In the budget? Basically the trail through the woods, the maps
' I 'm just picking up. You know for the past 6 months I was in between
positions trying to pick up what was going on in the coordinator 's position
and helping Jerry along with the work duties which I was passing up. That
' type of thing and the trail through the woods I started to acquire the
maps, the aerials, the topo maps necessary to go ahead and draw that trail'
out in-house sometime in the spring . That project was just never completed
so basically as I noted in there, I am now going ahead and plotting that
route and then possibly before the first of the year , if the snow does not
get too heavy, maintenance will get in there and grub out or pull out that
portion of the trail .
11 Lash: It 's been so long ago I don't even know where it is anymore. Is it
up on the west side?
I
Park and Rec Commissi. Mee ing
November 27 , 1990 - .age 1
Hoffman: Yes, on the west side and it 's basically a large wooded area of
Lake Ann Park which is a pretty high percentage of the total acreage in
there and is not used for a lot of recreational value so it was my thought II
that putting a pedestrian walkway through there would allow for other park
uses to go and make use of that area . I
Lash: You're just talking about a nature trail?
Hoffman: Yes. ,
Mady: There 's a creek bed and a nice ravine back in there. Really kind of
pretty . ,
Lash: So are you looking to us to roll these things over to next year?
Hoffman: We can get into that discussion . ,
Mady: Yeah, maybe it 's important to discuss each item on here. Determine
if they 're still a priority or important or not . Look at what our plans I
still are . Maybe even reformulate some plans. I think we just need some
general discussion prior to doing any motion or anything .
Hoffman: As the initial part of reformulating the 1991 . . .budget, we'll go II
ahead and we 'll take a look at the packet which you received at each
individual park . We'll just start talking about what we really would like
to see happen in there . How the neighborhood is developing . What are the II
current resident needs. What's going to be there. How is the growth.
That type of thing . To follow through on Curt's request , head on down .
South Lotus. Ballfield, play equipment . Master plan. I believe Lori held'
off on those . We never purchased them during the purchasing process in thell
early part of 1990 because of the TH 101 realignment so that's another City
Center Park situation . '
Robinson: Yeah. It really is.
Schroers: Also because there's some well drilling going on there also .
That 's all full of clay.
Hoffman: We have the two sides of the park. The one, basically the
ballfield play equipment was going to be located on the flat space above
the boat landing, boat access parking lot. As noted there, that was
cleared . Some of the rubbish removed and it was graded flat and seeded
this fall so we're not behind in getting some things going as we've been in
in the past when once people are requesting facilities and they don't even
have grass there so it is seeded and it will be a grass, maintained field
next year . ,
Robinson: Did the developer pay for that?
Hoffman: For that portion? !
Robinson: Yeah. The seeding and the grading.
Hoffman: That $1 ,500.00, 7es /V(.
I
I
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
1 November 27, 1990 - Page 18
Robinson: We can't even do grading for $1 ,500.00 .
Mady: Well grading's not cheap.
' Erhart: Neither is seed.
Robinson: No, I thought it'd be much more than that because that 's a nice
area there .
' Hoffman: Basically it was completed in house. This includes equipment
rental and seed.
Andrews: The balance of the $15,000.00 would be to take it from a field to
an actual ballfield?
IMady: Ballfield.
Andrews: Okay, and that's deferred until the realignment happens which
will be.
Mady: Until they know where it 's going to be. They haven't mapped it yet .
That's the problem we have . We don't know where it's going to be .
Hoffman: It 's pushed off until 1992 currently.
' Andrews: So does it make sense to carry a budget item over for an entire
year that we probably are unlikely to even use even in 1991?
' Mady: I think what it does is reflects it being a high priority item for
us. The people who live up there have been in front of us for a couple
years now saying we need this. We need this. We need this. It 's not a new
area .
Andrews: I don't disagree that but what I 'm saying is a budget is money
' you intend to spend the next succeeding year . If there's no chance of that
happening, it ought not to be budgeted. It can still be listed as a high
priority to get on a budget when it 's going to happen.
Lash: Put in the 5 year capital improvement program the approximate year
that we think .
Hoffman: It may be wise to budget for the play area. The location of the
play area is on the northern fringe of the east end of the park and that
would not be affected by the realignment of TH 101 . The ballfield
' location, moving it closer to the highway towards the north may be
affected. With the number of residents moving into the townhomes there and
the new South Lotus Lake Estates area , a totlot would certainly be welcome.
Moving down to the play equipment then. The master plan was never
completed. Minnewashta Heights trail study , $7,500 .00 in there .
Robinson: Excuse me . The master plan. It wasn't completed. Is it, where
does that stand?
Hoffman: Basically the master plan, the first common element we would like
to have is the configuration of the park.
I
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
November 27 , 1990 - Page 19
Mady: We don't even know what the park 's going to look like and how much
land we 've got .
Hoffman: The configuration of that park is going to change with that
realignment and then we might as well hold off until we know what the exact
boundaries are of the park will be so we can take a look at what type of
structure will fit in there . I
Andrews: So the timing on that's the same as the ballfield then?
Hoffman: Correct . ,
Andrews: We don't know what we have until the highway is completed?
Hoffman: Correct . Minnewashta Heights trail study and again I believe I
that means Minnewashta Parkway. If anybody recalls differently.
Mady: No , this is the parkway. We anticipated it being $15,000 .00 for the,
road study for both of them so we took half .
Hoffman: Basically we're included in part of the road package . 1
Mady: This actually should almost be an incumbrance .
Hoffman: This money has not been asked for out of our budget by the '
engineering department who is overseeing the study. Nobody's asking .
Lash: Why don't you give us white out and we'll just . 1
Mady: These guys didn't hear that. Nann will scratch that from the
page . . . '
Hoffman: Moving on to Chanhassen Pond. Grade the trail . Again, the trail
has really come along fairly nicely . It 's turf trail . It does have some II
dips and bends and that type in it but in Dale's opinion and my opinion as II
well in going back in there and trying to regrade and level some of those
spots off and get it reseeded is only asking for more problems that low to
the lake . Where this money could be used more effectively is if you've
walked the trail , is on the south end of Chanhassen Pond Park. When you
walk through the woods section. Just when you come into the woods from the
west end of the park there's a large drainageway which is being eroded out II
there and it's unsightly. It's not environmentally sound and it should be
corrected so the situation of having runoff into the Chan Pond Park does
not continue . So possibly looking at allocating the $3,000.00 or $4 ,000 .01
or whatever it takes to correct that situation may be desireable in 1991 .
We've touched on City Center Park and Eagle Scouts projects. I have no
recollection of why we put $18,500.00 in there but obviously.
Lash: I think there 's one too many zero's there .
Mady: We 've had a lot of Eagle Scout projects the prior couple of years II
and just something happened. They didn't show up.
Hoffman: The bridge cost $3,000.00. Something in that nature.
11
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
11 November 27 , 1990 - Page 20
Mady: I think we were anticipating some things happening down in Bluff
Creek with some of the ravines there could have been expensive.
Robinson: I think we had a total we wanted to hit that we thought we could
get away with.
Schroers: I think $15,000.00 of that was to locate Bluff Creek wasn't it?
Mady: Yeah. To find out the distance .
Lash: The Eagle Scout 's still down there looking.
Hoffman: Maybe there's a miscellaneous missing there somewhere .
Mady: That kid hasn't been found yet.
Lash: How about the tree farm? Wasn't that in there?
' Hoffman: Tree farm? Yeah, it 's listed. I noticed it on the 5 year plan.
Mady: We didn 't pay anything last year because of the sewer line going
through and there was no reason to buy plantings that year because they
were going to tear everything up anyways so we just didn't put it in the
budget. I believe was the reason. One thing I really want to stress
before we move on is the master plan at City Park. City Center Park . What
I looked at 3 years ago. The reason we even looked at City Center Park for
a community center was I 've simply walked in the park just to figure out
why in the world we 've got all this land and we don't have anything on it.
' I still think it's just a very poor utilization of a facility . We 've got
so much area that's not being utilized and we've got so many kids . It's
the highest density area of the city and probably always will be. We
should make better use of that park. We've got kids all over the place
trying to play ball in the spring and not enough fields.
' Schroers: I have a question relating to a budget. I 'm not sure which
budget . What budget is the community service officer paid from?
Hoffman: Community service officer? Paid out of the Public Safety
' personnel budget .
Schroers: Okay. I think that it would be nice to see some of capital
' improvements protected a little better , especially Lake Susan. Lake Susan
is looking really good and the only really bad thing when you go down there
is all the broken glass and all the graffitti and if we need to budget a
1 few dollars in order to protect some of our capital improvements here, I
think that 'd be money well spent and I would like to see some of these
vandals dealt with and given a message that that's not what the park is
there for .
Hoffman: I think we can accomplish that through meeting with Scott Harr ,
with our CSO's . Taking a look at what they're currently doing. I know
they 're doing drive thru's in the parks. They only work certain shifts .
Vandalism and breaking of glass and that type of thing can occur just about
any time during the 24 hour period in a day so I think sitting down with
them and taking a look at what they're currently doing in the parks .
I
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
November 27, 1990 - Page 21
Letting them know that we are concerned and we would like to see some
reports back directly to us . Anytime something happens in a park , they
file a report . We don't necessarily see it .
Schroers: The lake side of the pavillion seems to be a real popular
meeting spot for a bunch of the same group of people that like to drive
their motorcycles on the grass there and have beer parties and then break
the bottles against the pavillion and I 've seen the same groups of people
down there several times . I think that they should be approached on that .
Hoffman: I 'll address that particular situation with them Larry. I
Mady: You might let Todd know after a while what times you've been seeing
them so.
Erhart: Make a call to the City Larry when you see them. Sneak out of i
there and go call 911 .
Robinson: That really is nice down there though. Oh goll it's a nice
place and that basketball court .
Hoffman: Beautiful . I
Robinson: It really is . That's a nice area .
Andrews: Todd, at Lake Susan was the boat launch. Was that done this year'
or is that for next year?
Hoffman: It will be completed in the spring. 1
Andrews: There was additional lighting as part of that project wasn't
there? 1
Hoffman: Correct .
Andrews: That may help some and also create more evening activity there 1
during the summer months at least.
Lash: That brings to mind a question that I 've had about that too. Is I
that going to be operated like a Lake Ann with a gate and closed at night
and a fee or is that going to be?
Hoffman: No. 1
Lash: It's not going to be like that at all?
Hoffman: No.
Mady: Only if you want it to be.
Lash: Well , I mean it just seems like it's kind of a comparable facility
as far as having the bailfield and a lot of other things and it's got the 11
lake and maybe we need to look at .
I
I
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
11 November 27 , 1990 - Page 22
Andrews: I think the only problem is it's not visible to residential
' housing and that 's why you have the vandalism. People aren't easily seen
there unless you're very close to them.
' Lash: But do you think at Lake Ann having it closed at night and having a
gate attendant tends to cut down somewhat on that?
' Hoffman: It certainly can help . The gate closing program is another issue
that we work with the deputies and it 's not consistently closed and open
every evening so it's difficult . We do not have the personnel always
scheduled that can consistently close that gate at 10:30 or 11 :00 at night
' and then see that it's opened at 5:30-6:00 a .m . in the morning. We just
don't have that available to us at this time. So on a consistent basis is
very difficult. Vandalism which we 're seeing at Lake Susan I think is
' occurring once the gravel road , you know the access road was closed off
with the development Empak , there was just about no way to get down there
other than to drive across a field or access it by foot or motorcycle .
That type of thing and the pavillion sat pretty much isolated for a year so
' those people got accustomed to going down there and not getting bothered.
Now with all the new development and lighting and all the new activity
which will be taking place there, hopefully that will ease the problem. The
' graffitti which was painted on the inside of the pavillion on the food
serving area there , it's into the porous block tile so we can't remove
that . That will have to be painted and there's broken glass and that type
of thing there so hopefully that will ease up now with all the activity
that will be taking place there.
Mady: Todd, on South Lotus, and a couple individuals have already said it
' looks really nice and it does. I didn 't get out and walk the outfield but
the grass is unbelieveable it looks like from the parking lot anyway .
' Hoffman: At Lake Susan?
Mady: At Lake Susan. I 'm real concerned, since we're not going to be
' utilizing the field next year that it looks so nice that you're going to
find, because I know my softball team's like everyone else out there .
They're going to take every available field in the city and if we 're going
to want to keep people out of there, we're going to have to make it not
inviting . And one of the ways of doing that is to put snow fence across
the fence so there's a barrier there. I 'd like to see that happen at Lake
Susan and Lake Ann . The fields at Lake Ann to discourage as much useage as
' possible so that grass gets the opportunity to grow for the whole year and
get nice and thick .
Hoffman: However , with the growth that we saw at Lake Susan, I anticipate
that we may sometime in mid-June, late June , depending on how things come
along, that we may be seeing some use down there.
Mady: That 's fine but if we weren't going to use it, we need to rest it ,
we should protect it as best we can.
' Hoffman: Yeah . We'll certainly attempt to do that . And just to bring you
up to date as well on the status of the fields at Lake Ann. They won't be
100% in the spring . There are some open spots but we will start out
sometime in probably either late May or early June going on like a 50%
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
November 27 , 1990 - Page 23
basis on those fields as well .
Mady: Okay. That 's fine. 1
Andrews: I have a question. We're kind of jumping all over because I
guess we 're all thinking of what can we use this money for if we 're going
to reallocate it and that's what I 'm thinking too. With the Lake Ann
fields, what were the costs of putting the lighting in on a per field
basis?
Hoffman: The lights which are currently there on Field 1? _
Andrews: Yeah . '
Hoffman: Those were acquired with a LAWCON grant and the total project
cost was $62 ,000.00. Lights can be acquired on fields for much less than I
that . You could light 2 fields, surely 2 fields with that much money and
depending on the quality of lights, you could potentially light 3 fields
with that much money . '
Mady: And we do have the opportunity to share posts out there which brings
up the post that was put down. It's been put back up?
Hoffman: No, it has not .
Mady: What 's it going to cost us? '
Hoffman: Somewhere in the neighborhood of $10,000.00.
Erhart: What happened out there Todd? '
Hoffman: The vandalism occurred on the night of October 22nd, if I recall
correctly in that individuals or a group of people or an individual loosen 111
the four nuts holding one of the light standards at Lake Ann and toppled it
over .
Mady: Which all it takes is a little bit of wind and they go. Have we 1
taken precautions so that the bolts have been properly defaced so the nuts
don't come off easily on the rest of the lights?
Hoffman: Instead of defacing them, what we're looking at doing is welding
a box which then you could be removed more easily if we just weld the nuts
or the bolts and deface them . At some time in the future we need to. . . in
Mady: As long as they're looking seriously at doing something prior , as
soon as possible because that 's. '
Hoffman: The first bid came in. We've been in contact with our insurance
carrier . The first bid came in at Collin's Electric at $11 ,000.00 so it's I
a costly night of fun.
Mady: I 'm surprised it's that high because they don't have to put posts or
anything in. They've just got to put the post back up and run the wire . II
Hoffman: But they 've got to.
I
11
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
11 November 27 , 1990 - Page 24
Mady: Put new lights in.
Hoffman: Yeah . They need to remove the old base and install a new one.
Mady: Really? Oh, it busted the bolts off?
' Hoffman: They busted the bolts off.
Mady: Okay. One last comment. Since we're kind of in freefall here .
Our budget , just so everybody understands how this budget is and where the
' money comes from and what happens with it. It's not like the general fund .
The City maybe is experiencing some problems with it's general fund and
revenue shortfalls . Since our money comes directly from developers and we
' don't spend or plan to spend money until we've actually received it. Now
next year we 'll receive money we got last year . We 're not planning ahead
on receiving some money yet. We don't suffer some of the same problems
that the general city is. However we do have to realize that when we get
' aggressive in doing some spending, that that stuff gets put in by city
staff who get paid out of the general fund so sometimes there is some
impact. One comment I 've made in the past. I 'm still not, in my mind
' clear in reading through the Administrative packet , we need to maybe
address closer . Lori and I I guess disagreed on this a number of times but
that's dedication fees . One of the areas in California I believe it was,
I _ they were talking how a developer , when a developer pays a dedication fee ,
that fee has to be spent in that development. It has to go directly to the
people who put the money in. We've always operated on the assumption. . .
maybe at risk . I don't know if it 's necessary to have a legal opinion
issued by Roger , the City Attorney on it but I 've had a problem with this
for a number of years that we 're spending money in areas of the city that
have not generated any monies .
' Andrews: Why don 't we ask for a ruling on that because that gives us a
huge. . .
Mady: Well , there 's a down side to it. If it comes out that we can't do
what we 've been doing, all of a sudden we can't do anything because the
City's not providing any funding for capital improvement other than what we
get through developers and then all of a sudden we've got a problem. We
can't replace a swing set up at City Center Park. We can't do some things.
It 's just something I want to keep everybody aware of I guess .
' Lash: Well it said also some cities did it within a certain mile radius or
service area which we kind of operate in service areas so maybe that would
be one way to get around it is to figure to try to keep the money within a
service area or something . If it turns out that there is a requirement.
Hoffman: Just some thoughts on that . If we would want to look to
' establishing those types of rules when spending the capital improvement
money, we 'd have to take a look at basically starting that now and not
trying to revert back . It would be very difficult to identify which
' dollars were spent on this project and which on this project so we would
need to start fresh and then basically keep some separate funds . If we
would designate areas of the city, then we would have 7 different funds for
7 different areas of the city or something of that nature .
I
I
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
November 27 , 1990 - Page 25 1
Mady: It's not something I 'm advocating. It's a Pandora 's Box but I I
believe it's something that the entire city bureaucracy needs to be aware
of because I believe there 's a list there.
Hoffman: It 's something we should be aware of as a commission and as staff,
to make sure to address the needs of the neighborhoods which, new
neighborhoods which are generating a lot of dollars. We just can 't ignore
those folks. ,
Erhart: Because they don't end up with anything.
Lash: Right . That 's a continuous problem. They come in here and they've I
paid the fee and their park isn't getting done and they can't figure out
why.
Mady: Then we have the ones that paid the fee and it's all used up and
they still want more.
Andrews: I don't see how we can avoid asking for the opinion because just I
by avoiding asking doesn't remove the responsibility that we may have and I
don't want to be in a situation where we get sued or in a situation where ,
you get a long term plan and all of a sudden it blows up in our face
because all of a sudden we are sued by somebody and we find out we can't do
it . If there's a concern there, I guess I feel like it has to be answered
one way or the other because it's a major , major change in how we're
operating if it comes down the wrong way . I 'd certainly prefer to keep it
as much of as general fund as we could.
Mady: I think we have a disagreement on that . I think maybe what has to I
be done is , it has to be referred up to Council and let them, because
they're the ones that ultimately have to make the decision to go to Roger
on that anyways .
Hoffman: I can discuss that article with the City Manager and take a look
and see if he would like to forward it to the City Attorney for some type I
of comment.
Andrews: If there's a potential risk, we could maybe perhaps deal with it
maybe looking on a percentage of money collected from a certain development,
must be allocated and the rest goes to the general . Some way to address it
but I guess I feel very uncomfortable just avoiding the whole question
altogether . ,
Lash: I 'd like to think that if this isn't legal or whatever , that the
attorney would have told us long before now. ,
Mady: Unless it 's referred to him, he just don't look at things . Unless
they 're requested to him .
Hoffman: That's a good note to discuss prior to the 1991 capital
improvement budget . We 're at a quarter to nine. I believe we do have Mr .
Dave Koubsky present and he has reviewed the questions so why don't we
adjourn . We'll all come down . Go ahead and complete this interview and byll
that time then the second applicant should be in.
I
11 Park and Rec Commission Meeting
November 27 , 1990 - Page 26
11
( The Commission broke away from the 1990 Capital Improvement discussion to
' interview the Park and Recreation Commission applicants. The Commission and
applicants were not sitting near microphones so the following is what could
be heard on the tape. )
APPLICATIONS FOR CHANHASSEN PARK AND RECREATION COMMISSION.
Hoffman: I 'll just run through the questions. Do you want to give us a
little background of yourself?
Dave Koubsky: My name is Dave Koubsky. I moved out here about a year ago.
I live down in Lake Susan. . .talking about the park down there. Before that
I grew up in New Brighton and Roseville area . It 's fairly well
established . . . .played hockey. Played Little League baseball . Pretty
active in athletics and what not. . . .went to school and got a degree in
' geology and . . . I worked with a civil engineering firm for a couple years
out of school . For 2 1/2 years and after that I went to work with the PCA ,
Pollution Control Agency . I 've worked with different branches in there . I
' worked there for a couple years. Then I got hired on here, I don't know if
you 're familiar with . . .Environmental , the St . Thomas program . . . In
there I work as a group manager in underground storage tanks. . . So with
' that , I 've been living here for about a year . I kind of watched the
Planning Commission. When I moved out here and there really wasn't a plan.
I watched that develop and things changed a little bit and I kind of got at
least a taste of some community effort in goings on a couple times there
and just got interested . That's kind of why I , was reading in the paper
that commissioners were being offered so I was more familiar with the
Planning Commission since I 've sat in in quite a few of those meetings . . .
Sat through a lot of controversy so I thought I 'd give it a go.
Hoffman: Just to clarify . On the application there is a position desired
which Dave had indicated Planning Commission so he will be going through
this same process with the Planning Commission and then depending on the
outcome there. . .
' Erhart: Okay, so Planning Commission is first?
Dave Koubsky: Really either one . I wanted a shot at getting and being
' involved and I figure if I interview twice, I might have twice the chance .
Maybe not but at least get exposed . . .this afternoon to clarify that and
I asked about this and just got a call alittle while ago so I haven't had
much of a chance to look these over . . .
' Hoffman: Do you feel you have the time to make the commitment? We have a
meeting on a once a month basis . . .
' Dave Koubsky: I guess I 'm looking for a little support here because I 'm
kind of new and this is the first meeting I 've sat in. I 've talked to Todd
' on the phone a little bit about what the time commitment is required for . . .
versus other things and I think I can handle the commitment . From what
I understand it 's a bi-monthly meeting, sometimes down to once a month. It
requires to review the packet and do a little homework and. . . It's not a
full time job. You're not paid for it. But I have enough interest in this
and. . . I think I can have the time . . .
1
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
November 27 , 1990 - Page 27
I
Hoffman: In your time in Chanhassen, what type of impression have you
developed about the current park programs we have here . . .?
Dave Koubsky: It 's kind of in it's infancy I think compared to other
areas . . . .park around here , our favorite one's up at Flying Cloud . We go
to that one . The slides going down. We walk there . . .Lake Ann. . . Being
from New Brighton . . .we had 3 parks we could walk to with 2 hockey rinks ,
ballfields . Real well developed. Real nice. In coming out here , we went
house shopping and one of the things we looked at. . .Chanhassen as it grows
has to develop it's park structures and you can see it being done. It
needs a lot of work. There's a lot of space allocated. . .
Hoffman: And what expertise do you feel you have to add to the commission?'
Dave Koubsky: Well I 'm from an area, and I 'm sure you all are too, that
was fairly well developed and has nice parks and I 've had kids. . . I know
what they like and I remember being a kid I know I liked . I can envision .
I like parks a lot better now. . . When I was growing up they had all those
new parks . . .put those gymnastic things up . Oh yeah. Those were horrible .
They weren't any fun so now they're getting fun. You know so I like to see'
fun parks and I guess I had that vision. I 've also got, you know with
working with civil engineers, I have to work with developers. . . I know
construction . Light poles fixed when it falls down. They need to replace .
I can understand that concept and. . .working with contractors all the time II
and . . . I have an understanding of bid process and how much things cost .
So I guess I could, if anything have a lot of good input on that type of
working with contractors and bids and what's reasonable. . . ,
Hoffman: Have you gotten a feel for what you think the role of the Park
and Recreation Commission is . . .?
Dave Koubsky: . . .asked Jerry , what do these guys do? His response is ,
because Jerry works with . . .it seems like you guys work more with the land
acquisition and maybe not so much the acquisition but developing and I
planning . How much funds you have and how you can allocate them so what
park gets slides and new ballfields and where you want your hockey rinks
and things along that line . . . '
Hoffman: Basically the prime role of the commission is to take a look at
all those needs. . . The major drive is to . . . Fourth question, what is you in
feeling regarding conservation? Environment and passive parks versus
active• parks?
Dave Koubsky: Being in the environmental field, you know I feel pretty
strong feelings toward the environment. . .as much as possible. I guess in
lot of respects being in a development . . .understanding of what developers
are trying to do and how communities- are being shaped . As far as passive
parks and active parks, I think you want a combination of both. Lake Ann,
you can go down there . If it's active, you get a lot of people involved .
. . .something around the lake or you can have cross country ski trails or
hiking or roller skating . . . The nice thing about this area is you know
down by the river also. They have that Carver County park. That 's a real !'
nice passive park for skiing . People in this area have a lot of places to
go for passive recreation. I like passive recreation but we can't ignore II
people who like active recreation as well . . .
I
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
November 27 , 1990 - Page 28
11 Hoffman: Can you tell us a little bit about why you desire to serve on the
commission?
Dave Koubsky: Well I think I 've never been involved with a community as
far as volunteer work or work of this nature and I 've kind of settled down .
' I might. . . They're getting involved and that's the first thing we looked
at was where 's the closest jungle gym . . . I 'm just really interested in
seeing how the politics work and. . . You 've got to be involved I think .
I 'm kind of new out here to the community. . .
Hoffman: Any other questions from the Commissioners?
Andrews: . . .certain aspects of the Park and Rec process . . .?
Dave Koubsky: I really don't because I 'm really not , I haven't sat in on
any of the meetings . I don't have a real understanding of how things work
' other than discussions with Todd of the money allocation which you guys
were getting to look at tonight . Of course being in a new area , everybody
there wants something right away . . . There are a lot of kids up there .
Erhart: I know a few people up there .
' Dave Koubsky: Well it is. I mean this summer , in one month, Halloween was
great so I 'm not sure . . .and where things go but I 'd like to see , with the
newer communities , at least they get something in place. . . They've got
something there . It 's not much but . . . It helps the parents too . . .
Lash: I 'd like to know what you think would be your first or top
priorities of things . . .? . . .facilities or programs or whatever?
Dave Koubsky: It 's kind of hard to say. I came here last year about this
time so I had this one summer but that was mostly involved with work. . . I
think the first thing I 'd do and I 've been meaning to do anyway is get in
the car and drive around because I did drive the whole city when I was
looking for a house . There 's some real nice areas. I 'm hoping. . .and look
at parks in those areas . . .
' Lash: . . .wishes or dreams that you'd like to see done.
' Dave Koubsky: Well I 'd like to see you have like. . .funds to work with .
Give everybody at least some recreational activity. As the city develops ,
more and more funds should come in . With the tax deficit, I don't know if
you can get city funds . . .and that's slowing down so you probably had a big
' boost the last couple of years when housing was going way up and now it 's
going to slow down. Those are hard issues to answer with less funds and
more people . How you're going to allocate them. I guess that's your first
commitment is trying to figure out how you allocate. . . I 'm not sure .
Spreading of the wealth . I think you have to give everybody at least a
little. . . At least they have something. We did put in $500.00 or whatever
it was for the house and we 're just kind of patiently waiting . I don't
know if I answered your question. . .
Hoffman: Just to let you know what will occur then after you leave
tonight . This group of commissioners will discuss. . .whatever
recommendation we might make. The Council will be . . .
I
I
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
November 27, 1990 - Page 29
Dave Koubsky: Good . Thanks for your time .
Hoffman: This is James , or Jim Slosh. He was the initial applicant which
we had the application for . Jim, just go ahead and tell us a little bit
about your background . How long you've been around Chanhassen. Those
types of things.
Jim Slosh: Well I 've been a resident for about a year and a half . I
lived in Minneapolis for probably 24 years . Moved out here. Our children 1
are grown. We decided to get out in the country. Found the west suburbs
were the place for me so we moved . I have not been too actively involved •
in the community. Just didn't know what I was looking for . . . 1
Hoffman: Do you feel you have the time to make a commitment to the
commission and. . . I
Jim Slosh: Well yes. Like I said, my wife and I , she works nights 3
nights a week . I have no problem with it .
Hoffman: Have you had time to develop an impression of our current park
system?
Jim Slosh: Not really other than talking with. . .and there seems to be a I
good feeling . Your facilities are well taken care of and I live right by
Bandimere Park and there seems to be a lot of participation in the youth
programs. That's basically. . .
Hoffman: What past experience or expertise or knowledge do you have to ad
the Commission?
Jim Slosh: Well I worked with a lot of. . .and mainly that's playground use
and safety issue . And facilities . They use just about all of our
programs . I 've been involved with coaching and on the local park board in
Minneapolis .
Andrews: In working with the Edina Park and Rec. . . YOu served on the
Minneapolis Park Board, how long was that?
Jim Slosh: That was a local , Longfellow. That had to be I would imagine I
between 12 and 15 years ago.
Andrews: How long were you active in that? ,
Jim Slosh: Until they got into the high school program. Then I coached my
daughter for a year . . .
Hoffman: Do you have a feel for what the role of the Park and Recreation
Commission is . . .
Jim Slosh: Well , I feel that what you feel should. . .and I think you 've '
done a good job from what I 've heard . So I think it 's part of developing
the community in growing. I think that's probably your basic role. The
programs seem to be in excellent shape. . . I would think it's to make
recommendations to the Council if that's the way it works.
I
11 Park and Rec Commission Meeting
November 27 , 1990 - Page 30
Hoffman: What type of feelings do you have in regards to the environment
and conservation, passive parks versus active parks?
Jim Slosh: Well . . .I deal with environmental issues every day. Hazardous
waste . . .pesticides . I think we have to educate people of what you 're
trying to do. If you 're just going. . .let people know what you're doing. I
think you 're going to need an all around park system . As this community
gets a little older , because as some of your residents get a little older ,
they 're not going to be active in sports. . .picnic areas .
' Hoffman: And just tell us a little more about why you would like to serve
on the commission.
Jim Slosh: Well I just feel that with my expertise in budgeting and long
range planning , I 've attended an awful lot of playground conferences all
around the United States. . . I just feel like I can add, if you have any
questions . . .
Hoffman: I 'll open it up for any questions from the commission members.
' Andrews: I 'll just ask the same question I asked before was, what would
you consider to be your highest priority as far as a program or activity
' that the Park Board should pursue?
Jim Slosh: My highest priority? I would probably, my highest priority
would be on development and maintenance of the system. I guess I 'd have to
be honest I don't know an awful lot about.
Lash: I think he 's talking about future development .
Jim Slosh: And to maintain what we have.
Lash: That was my question.
11 Andrews: I know. . .
Jim Slosh: I don't know if that 's what you 're looking for .
Andrews: Yeah , to get an idea of what you 've seen so far and what you
consider most important to you personally. . .looking for your pet projects
so to speak . Something that would be , on the one issue . . .to act now.
Jim Slosh: Well , the one issue that really , because I didn't mean to act
' now was I looked in the paper . . .and decided this was something I know
about . If I 'm going to try to become active, this would be one area that I
would know . Basically I have no idea what your long range goals are..
Andrews: Sometimes we don't either .
Lash: . . .have a dream or a vision of something?
Jim Slosh: Oh no. I 'm not a crusader . . . Like you say, as far as
programs , they must be good . I have no bones with anybody to pick on on
11 the way things are run. I don't have children in school . I just feel that
I have the time and . . . Well , thank you.
I
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
November 27 , 1990 - Page 31
Hoffman: Thank you for coming. This group of commissioners will go ahead
and discuss your application and then make a recommendation on which
applicants to pass onto City Council . They will . . . We taped the interview
questions . Again, I 'm not sure how much Nann is going to hear . This mic
should have picked up a lot of it so we'll just wait and see what we get
out of here .
CONTINUE DISCUSSION OF 1990 AND 1991 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM. '
Mady: I guess we finished discussing the 1990 budget and what hadn't been
accomplished and what had been accomplished and we're moving onto the 1991 I
budgeting process .
Hoffman: Basically what I would like to complete here tonight . You 've all
received that packet . The most recent updated capital improvement program.'
If we can just start rambling through that park by park. Taking a look at
those .
Mady: I guess we can start doing that but one thing that might be helpful I
for each of us is to maybe each one of us to try to recollect and maybe we
should do it verbally, who's come in front of us in the past year
requesting things to be done so we make sure we address those in the coming'
year , if we can.
Erhart: They all have . '
Mady: I think it 's pretty simple. We can look at going down the list to
get down to , we 've got Bandimere Heights. Herman Field. Curry Farms . A11'
of Lake Susan Hills and the.
Schroers: And Pheasant Hills four times .
Mady: And Pheasant Hills. Oh, and Chanhassen Hills Park . Those were the
ones I wanted to make sure we just .
Pemrick: I 've got two I can comment on. One being Chanhassen Hills . I
had a mother approach me who said that the equipment that's been installed
is really great but they're wondering when Phase 2 is coming in already and
can they have a bike rack for the kids to park their bikes because they
don't have . And my second one is the Bandimere little lot off of Kiowa
Trail .
Erhart: They've been asking.
Pemrick: Will they get anymore advance playground equipment for the older II
children over 5? Right now it's.
Erhart: That's a pretty small we had set for that park. 1
Pemrick: Yeah , but with all the ballgames there and kids families going .
Erhart: But I 'm saying, I brought that up. . .and you told me it was pretty II
small .
I
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
November 27 , 1990 - Page 32
Pemrick: Yeah, it's teeny . Real teeny .
' Andrews: We also had some request for parking space.
Pemrick: That 's completed.
Hoffman: That area that's in there, they'll blacktop that strip as part of
the first road projects .
' Pemrick: Are they going to blacktop that?
' Hoffman: My impression at this point is yes, they'll blacktop it in the
spring as part of the first road projects and fixing the potholes. That
type of thing. They 'll swing in there .
' Pemrick: Great .
Mady: So they did it on the park side? How much of an area did they put
1 in?
Hoffman: Pretty much from park boundary to park boundary.
1 Mady: So it 's not head in parking? It's parallel parking?
Hoffman: No .
Pemrick: Head in. It will be about 8 cars maybe .
' Hoffman: It will alleviate some of the. . .
Schroers: So about 8 cars and 12 feet in.
1 Pemrick: No, bumpers hanging out in the street but .it helps .
Hoffman: As we go through this, we can continue on with the discussion
' from each commissioner . Just some parameters to think about. We budgeted
$160,000.00 in equipment and capital improvements this year , tack on
another $10 ,000.00 for consulting work by Mark and the folks at Van Doren
' Hazard so we looked at about $170,000.00 plus our special revenue funds
allocated for purchase of land. That type of thing .
Mady: Do you have our fund balances with you?
' Hoffman: For?
' Mady: As they stand today? That's what I 'm looking for .
Hoffman: Yes .
Mady: Because I guess I would like to know where we stand at the end of
last year and right now so we , I don't want to see us spend more than what
we took in this past year . That's kind of how I budgeted it the past year
is I don't want to overspend what we brought in. I 'd kind of like to see
our reserves being maintained.
1
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
November 27 , 1990 - Page 33
Hoffman: Budgeted revenue for 1990 was $245,000.00. Collected to date is
$201 ,834 .00 . So we're at 82% with 83 1/3% of the year expired . So my II anticipation is that we'll be pretty close but everything's slowing down
pretty much now with the expection of the last few housing starts which are
coming in prior to the end of the year so we'll be somewhat close . And
then expenditures, budgeted expenditures were $170,500 .00 and that is under'
the capital improvement program. Expenditure to date totals on this report
$150,193 .00 . However , that does include the special fund which are set
aside for land acquisition so that includes the Pheasant Hills acquisition.'
It 's not separated on here so it's. . .what we spent on those projects . We
just previously talked about.
Mady: What 's our fund balance? Do you have our fund balance? '
Hoffman: Fund balance forward, I do not have that with me. But inte -est,
our fund balance forward you know it's typically been in the $300 ,000 .00 xiir
figure because our interest for this year is $45,000.00 so our fund balance
is fairly healthy.
Robinson: What did we come into the year with do you know? I
Hoffman: Total fund balance forward?
Robinson: Yes .
Hoffman: I sure do. It should be in your budget book. Fund balance
forward for 1990 , $421 ,750 .00 . That includes the required reserves and the
budgeted , designated budget amount which we thought we were going to take
in 1990 . '
Andrews: What was that figure again?
Hoffman: $421 ,750 .00. Am I just assuming or did everyone , all the new
folks get a budget book?
Erhart: I don't think Jim got one . '
Pemrick: I didn't .
Hoffman: Two? Okay , I 'll get them to you and then you can go ahead and go'
through them.
Mady: You'll just be doing a new one in two months anyway. '
Hoffman: Yeah, but it's a good learning process to take a look at how it
reads. Our pages and then. . . '
Mady: It 's great reading.
Andrews: Has the City been able to make any kind of reasonable predictions'
as to what funding's going to be and what sort of changes in funding
they 're going to see from State and Federal government? It 's totally up in
the air at this point isn't it? I
jPark and Rec Commission Meeting
November 27, 1990 - Page 34
Hoffman: Very difficult. About all we can determine is that we think
1 building starts will be down about 20% in 1991 .
Andrews: Of the revenues we generate , how much of that is building starts?
Mady: All . That 's where it all comes from.
Hoffman: No, not all of it. We did get $45,000.00 in interest is a pretty
' large sum . It's larger than the trail development fees of $42,000 .00 .
Park development fees , if you just want to run down them. Park development
fees were $89 ,300 .00 . Trail development fees, $42 ,400.00. Interest is
' $45,000.00 . The donations from the Lion's, which as you saw on your
Administrative Packet , we now have lost , was $25,000.00 and that totals the
$200 ,000 .00 or so. 4 few, T/lG .614'7W e
Schroers: What was the reason we lost that?
Mady: They 're pulling out.
IHoffman: Pulling out of the certification .
Robinson: I wonder if the Chan Lion's will pick that up?
Mady: Have you done any chartiable gambling yet? I 've got some experience
with it Curt .
Robinson: Is that right?
Lash: Before we really get started on this, it seems like if I recall how
this process worked last year . We went through and put down all these
things and rolled all this money over and then we ended up with a budget of
' about twice as much as what we really had money for . Do you have some kind
of a ballpark figure to throw at us to start with so we don't have to go
back and do this over several times?
' Hoffman: The budget at $170,000.00 this year , if we follow that same
pattern with the budget reserve forward which we need to do and reducing
our anticipated revenues by 20%, 25%, our first initial target figure
' should be somewhere in about $150,000 .00 range for capital improvement
program and again, I apologize for getting started this late in the season.
Normally for the past couple of years we've started this quite a bit
earlier . September-October . Prior to that we had done it this way and the
last 3, 4 , 5 years ago , met a transition. Again the capital improvement
process is just something that got put off.
' Mady: We could do it the old way too. The way it was first done when Curt
and I first came on and that was they just said, well we're going to spend
$80 ,000 .00 this year and whoever comes in first gets it.
' Robinson: We wrote it down on the back of a matchbook.
Hoffman: What I would anticipate is we'll get through the initial phase
1 tonight . I 'll put some of those figures together . We'll bring that back
to you in a more complete, concise package next time with the figures .
What our fund balance is currently. What we're looking for revenues for
1
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
November 27 , 1990 - Page 35
next year . What our fund balance forward is for land acquisition. That
type of thing and we should really get some close figures in the December II
meeting and then we 'll come back once again for a final review in the
January meeting we can pass that up to Council sometime in January for
their approval . 1
Robinson: Yeah, I think we really need to know what the receipts are going
to be almost .
Hoffman: It's an estimate.
Robinson: Oh, I realize that but we should have some sort of an estimate I
on what the receipts are going to be and plan our expenses around that .
Hoffman: After that I 'll go ahead and continuation of discussion. '
Robinson: Just one other comment. We had a $421 ,000 .00 beginning balance
coming into the year and that's really great, especially the $45,000.00 I
worth of interest on that . But by the same token, we've had a number of
people come in here crying that they've paid for this development and we
don't have the funds to give them a totlot or whatever they want. I 've got
a bit of a problem with that . '
Hoffman: If you take a look at the 1989 reserves, $110 ,000.00 of that was
reserved for Lake Susan Park which has now been spent with the matching
LAWCON grant which we received there. $55,000.00, that was budgeted in
1989 . It was increased to $100,000 .00 for a reserve for the Lake Ann Park
shelter . $35,000.00 has been in that reserve for Herman Field. Lake Lucy
access , $75 ,000.00 again set aside. Pheasant Hills acquisition was
$100,000.00 set aside . That will be pulled out now and will not show in
1991 because it has been spent .
Andrews: I think what we need to do here is change the terminology I I
think . To me a reserve is like the rainy day fund for things that you have
a shortfall in revenue for some future project. What you really have here I
is money that is already allocated for specific projects.
Mady: It's earmarked.
Andrews: It's earmarked, correct . So I guess I 'd prefer to divide that I
reserve between money that's already earmarked toward a specified project
which is approved and underway versus monies that are just slushed so to I
speak. If there is such a thing in a budget like this.
Mady: Because what you 've got there is $375,000.00 out of $420,000.00.
Andrews: We don't have a reserve . That money's already spent .
Mady: Well , we do maintain a reserve. '
Hoffman: Acquisition fund . Maintain $100,000 .00 .
Mady: Which we ate with Pheasant Hills. '
Lash: But we need to think about starting it again .
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
November 27 , 1990 - Page 36
Andrews: I think we're going to be under some horrendous constraints here
with funding coming from other sources.
Mady: Well let's see. The $110,000.00 from Lake Susan, if it hasn't gone
yet it's gone . Figure it's going to be gone . Herman Field will be gone the
end of the year . Probably next year I would guess . That's moving along
pretty well . The Lake Ann park shelter hasn't happened yet . I don't know
if that ever will happen. Kind of one of those pies in the skies type of
thing .
Lash: That 's one that I was just looking at . I 've got to go from the
' first page . Is that one that maybe that is too much pie in the sky and
with so many people coming in and everybody wants just basic playground
equipment in all these parks that's going to get used everyday, maybe we
' need to reconsider that one and allocate that money up. Loosen it up so we
can use it in some of these other places that we're going to get a lot of .
Not that I wouldn't like to see that go in. It 's just maybe that's not
' something right now we should be doing . Maybe we could put that off .
Andrews: I agree . We have a number of new neighborhoods that have
nothing . There 's a lot more daily visible reinforcement on the parks
I system when the kids are out there playing on a totlot than it is to go to
a park shelter at Lake Ann .
' Schroers: There may be another way to approach that park shelter at Lake
Ann . If we could look at having that as a facility that would pay for
itself . Use the funds that we'd generate from renting the facility to pay
for it .
' Hoffman: We still need the $100 ,000.00 initially to purchase it and
whatever monies can be recouped, that could come back into the development
fund.
Erhart: That would make money though wouldn't it eventually? Renting it
out?
Schroers: You wouldn't have any problem renting that out, I 'll guarantee
you .
Hoffman: Take longer than we'd be here to pay back $100,000.00.
Lash: It 's not that I wouldn't like to see it go in. I don't want anybody
to misunderstand me. It's just that it's been on there for years and I 'm
even beginning to wonder now for $100,000.00 what we could even get and
would a lot more people be happy getting a tenth of that into their local
' neighborhood park and give them something.
Erhart: How many totlots could we do for that?
' Mady: Do well or do? We need $20,000 .00 to do them right .
Erhart: So you 're talking 5 maybe?
Mady: Maybe 5.
11 •
Park and Rec Commission. Meeting
November 27 , 1990 - Page 37
Lash: But we could do 10 like we did to Chan Hills and Curry Farms .
Hoffman: Second addition? ,
Lash: Well yeah but at least they've got something .
Mady: I 'm going go caution everybody here . Everytime, I see it so much in
government . Is because you get so many people asking for things you just
throw little bits of money at all of them instead of doing one right and I
getting it done . You start 15 projects and throw a little bit here and a
little bit there and you never really solve a problem.
Robinson: I took to heart what one of the gentlemen we talked to said ,
that stuff from Lake Susan Hills. And that is if we just had something
that the parents can gather around and meet and they do that . He said on a'
little totlot. It 's a good gathering place for the parents and I guess I
really believe that . I never really looked at it that way before.
Erhart: I thought he was kind of out of the norm though. You know happy
with just a little but there's so many people come in here and they want so
much more .
Robinson: Oh, he added you know, he let us know that he wasn't satisfied I
with that .
Erhart: Yeah, but I liked his attitude. ,
Robinson: That's true .
Erhart: Anything is fine and I 'm waiting patiently. ,
Robinson: Todd , excuse me . The back page . Page 24 lists some and I guess I
really all the pages . What you've got in there for 1988 and 1989, is that
actual expenditures?
Hoffman: The 5 year capital improvement program? ,
Robinson: Yes .
Hoffman: No. That is budgeted amounts. ,
Mady: Those are simply budgets.
Robinson: Oh, okay. I was going to say. South Lotus Lake in 1989 did not
spend any $60,000.00. I was certain of that .
Hoffman: Remember Curt , we axed the tennis court. That's where it went. II
Robinson: You bet I remember . '
Hoffman: So again, to address Curt 's issue. A fund balance forward of
that much, it is healthy but again we're going to see it dwindle as we've II
recognized tonight with the discussions with our applicants and with
all of our thoughts of good thinking our train of thought. With all these
new neighborhoods. The pressure to spend that money is here now and we're
1
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
November 27, 1990 - Page 38
certainly looking at development .
Robinson: I didn't understand all of that .
' Hoffman: Okay.
Mady: I think maybe what we need to do then is maybe go down each
individual 's thoughts on it . What we need to spend. Let 's start the
process. Let's get moving so Todd has some ideas where our priorities are.
' Lash: Go page by page?
Mady: Well I thought we'd just do it by the last page.
' Schroers: The summary?
Mady: However you want to do it.
' Lash: Maybe it seems longer to do it page by page but I almost need to
look at it to see what the individual things are.
Mady: Well that 's fine .
Lash: Just to see $300 ,000.00 written in, I 'd have to flip back and forth
' to see what it's all for .
Hoffman: Should we go ahead and do it page by page?
Mady: Let 's keep moving yeah .
' Hoffman: . . .each person and address each part?
Mady: Go ahead and start Jan.
Lash: Okay , we're on Lake Ann then?
Mady: Yeah .
Lash: For Lake Ann I guess I already said this. I 'd like us to just
reconsider the community park shelter . Seeing if that's realistic or if we
' want to think of using that to meet higher priority needs right now and
that's the only thing I see on Lake Ann.
Mady: In 1990 or 1991?
Lash: Well it's in 1990 and obviously we're not doing it so do we want to
roll it over to 1991?
Mady: What I want to do is get your comments on each, what you want to do
next year . Whether we did it last year or going to do it 5 years from now ,
' what you individually want to see us do next year by park .
Robinson: And we're only talking 1991?
I
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
November 27 , 1990 - Page 39 1
Mady: Yeah. You can bring the monies in from, if it was an item from 2 II
years ago, and we didn 't do it but you 'd like to see it done in 1991 ,
that's fine . I don't want to worry about it so much as looking at things
that are budgeted in 5 year plan as much as what you want to do next year .
Hoffman: That's what we're working on tonight . We're formulating the 1991
capital improvements.
Mady: Wish list. This is a wish list tonight.
Hoffman: And again, taking Jan's comments earlier . In the past we've come,
up with an exorbinate amount of. . .so as we go through these comments
tonight, if everybody will keep that in mind. I 'm sure your comments will
vary accordingly.
Lash: Okay. Am I supposed to go through the whole thing?
Mady: Just do one park at a time . ,
Lash: Okay . My highest priority for Lake Ann for next year would be the
raft . '
Mady: Okay . Larry , have you got anything?
Schroers: My highest priority for 1991 on Lake Ann are all the things ,
listed . The raft definitely . The concession improvements. That thing
needs to be brought up to speed so it is on line and useable. The soccer
lights . I 'm not sure what exactly we had in mind for the handicapped
picnic areas but if it would be convenient to work that in before 1992, I 'dll
be interested in seeing that also.
Mady: . . .1991 , we need to do the street curbing to designate our parking I
areas better . We 've got people driving all over the place. Until we get
the curbing in there, it's not going to rectify itself . The raft is a
necessity . The concession improvements, yeah. We've got to get that done .'
It just has to get done. The soccer lights . They didn't get that soccer
field properly graded I don't believe until late so the grass hasn't really
done a whole lot yet so we're not going to have soccer ability this coming '
year probably unless we get one heck of a growing season early so I think
soccer , the lights can wait until 1992. The handicap picnic areas . I
don't even know what they are yet. I don't know what that is and why it 's
$15,000 .00 . If we 're talking about putting in.
Hoffman: We 're looking at the development of trails from a parking area
with handicap stalls to an accessible picnic area where the concrete pad II
and the appropriate type of picnic tables and then facilities next to that
which can be used .
Mady: Okay. I
Schroers: I didn't mean for the soccer lights to be in 1991 .
Mady: So I 'm looking at, mine totals 40 grand is all I 'm really looking
for in 1991 .
1
1 Park and Rec Commission Meeting
November 27 , 1990 - Page 40
' Robinson: Is there any funds needed for the new ballfields out there?
Hoffman: Yes there are for benches so we'll be looking at having those
1 will cost a rough estimate , $1 ,500.00.
Mady: Won't those be coming out of the referendum proceeds? Have those
all been utilized?
Hoffman: Not . . .
Robinson: Then I think that should be on there and my only other one is
the soccer lights in 1991 . And mainly because I know we 're short of soccer
fields and in the fall it gets awful dark awful early .
' Hoffman: Other comments?
Pemrick: I 'd like to see the nature trail leave on.
Andrews: Just a general comment would be , I 'd like to be for everything
but I realize we 're limited in the number of dollars to spend and I think
what Todd , what you said is other than carry forwards from previous years ,
we're looking at about $150,000.00 budget or somewhere in that approximate
range for 1991 . I guess I 'll speak more in general terms . I agree that
the curbing is important . I think maintenance of the facilities we already
have are reduction of maintenance cost for future costs are something we
need to do because it reduces the strain on our future budgets. I don't
think we have the money for 1991 to look at the lighting . I would agree
' that the trail should be completed in 1991 .
Hoffman: Okay .
1 Erhart: My top three priorities would be the nature trail , the concession
improvements and the raft. Don't ask me to put them in order because I
think all three of them are equally as important to
' Hoffman: Okay. Lake Susan Park?
' Lash: We don't have anything in the budget and I can't think of anything.
Robinson: Isn't there a totlot out there?
Mady: That's already built. The only thing we out there for next year is
going to be the boat access which is already funded through LAWCON money.
Lash: So you think that everything?
Mady: How about the archery range?
' Schroers: You can forget about the archery range. I talked to several
different archery organizations and they'd be more than happy to use the
' median on main street.
Hoffman: The archery range is part of the project as well . I did receive
a comment and just in sitting down with Dale and going through some of
this. Again, it 's initial phase of totlot and once the initial phase is
I
Park and Rec Commission Meeting 11 November 27 , 1990 - Page 41
there , you 're always looking for more so the same thing at Lake Ann.
I think the use we 're going to get at Lake Susan is going to be exorbinant.
The one structure which is there sits amongst a huge area so at some point
in the future. '
Mady: We might be best to throw $10,000.00 at the wish list right now and
then next month when we come back with the wish list and totals, then we
cut then. That's usually how we work this thing. We throw a wish list
which comes up to $400,000.00 and then we go down to reality .
Andrews: I agree . With the boat access there's going to be a throng of 1
people down there .
Mady: Just the way it is right now, you can see it . It's fantastic today .'
You can 't see it now because of the snow but Sunday it was beautiful so .
-Hoffman: Other than that , obviously we just went through a large sum of
money in capital improvements so there doesn't have to be anything else
that has to be included . That was the only topic that came to mind was the
second phase of the totlot .
Mady: Meadow Green Park . The only thing I can remember on on that was the'
two, the new area come on line . I don't know of any requests for anything .
There was a narrow strip of land we built on. We already put kind of a
walkway inbetween so do we have any requests for anything in there . I
don't know of any .
Hoffman: Not any urgent requests, no. The thought was when the neighbors II
came in that eventually hooking the bituminous from that small segment down
through the park and to the parking lot would be desireable just because a
bituminous surface is a recreational surface in itself. It lends itself to
more activity then trying to cross the grass . Other than that the skating
rink goes in there . The totlot is there. The bailfields are there and
being used. The basketball hoop is in. The tennis courts are in and being'
used. We purchased trees over the past few years.
Lash: Would we be able to, I was at Meadow Green quite a bit this fall for
soccer and would it be possible to get more bleachers for down at the other'
end? They're only at the one end right? Or even more benches. Anything.
Hoffman: Benches are an item. Tables , benches and grills are an item in
which we 're in need of for a number of parks so additional picnic tables or,
benches and again looking at each year we're going to have for a while with
the development of fields. . .
Mady: Just buy a bunch of them .
Lash: Is that something we 're thinking of sticking in our budget
somewhere?
Mady: What we 've done in the past is Lori would talk to Dale and say okay,,
how many do we need or how many do we have to replace and we got 3 more
parks coming on line which need 3 apiece. That's 9. Okay, we need 15 new
tables next year at a cost of and that's how we came up with a number for
the budget for tables and benches and I anticipate we'll do something like I
11
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
November 27, 1990 - Page 42
that this year . Instead of doing those by park, we just kind of say we
need $20 ,000 .00 worth of tables , benches and grills and we just kind of lob
them together .
Lash: Okay , then can we put bike racks in there too? That's always my pet
project and Wendy brought it up tonight and mentioned having that . I just
think it seems ridiculous that we don't have at least one at every park.
1 You're trying to encourage people to ride their bikes and you park your
bike and no place , you don't have anyplace to put it. Chain it to a tree .
Hoffman: Bike racks, they've always received mixed emotions. Whether
' they're used or not used. The two that have been put out here have either
been vandalised .
Schroers: I did an independent study on that and whether the bike rack is
used or not is directly proportionate to the state of mind that a kid has
at the present time . If he's in a hurry to get to the playground, boom .
The bike goes on the rack and he 's gone . If his mother 's there along with
him, put your bike in the rack. Then go to the playground.
Hoffman: As far as bike racks and bleachers , we should probably take a
look as we go through these parks and designating a particular park for a
bike rack or additional set of bleachers . Currently Meadow Green is
probably, along with City Center Park probably one of the healthiest as it
' deals with the bleachers. There are other parks that currently don't have
them that the CAA is using during the summer as well .
ISchroers: There 's one more thing that Meadow Green Park needs and it 's not
a capital improvement budget item but it's a maintenance item. As much as
those fields are getting used, I would like to see them dragged . The
' infields dragged on a more regular basis. Starting early in the season.
Hoffman: Currently they're dragged probably about every other day or less .
Only Lake Ann are dragged daily. Other than that they're dragged on a
rotating basis .
Mady: Okay. North Lotus Park.
Andrews: I 'm the local advocate for that one. We talked about ivy wind
breaks there. Or putting some type of vine up. The other thing would be ,
I coach soccer on that field there . The field is still a little weak. I
don't know if we need to either overseed it or restrict access maybe early
in the spring to get it a chance to fill in the rest of the way. We had a
good rain all summer then September/October we really didn't get any
moisture at all and that field did get beat up fairly bad so I don't know
if we need to put any money in for that or if that 's something that's part
of routine maintenance so it can be handled that way.
Hoffman: Overseeding? We would need to drop in a couple thousand dollars
for that .
11 Andrews: I wouldn't say it's serious. It might be something that just
with proper moisture and just leave it alone for a month it would be enough
but then maybe it's, something where somebody has to look at it with a
little more knowledge then I have and decide if it really needs it or not .
I
Park and Rec Commission Meeting I
November 27 , 1990 - Page 43
There are some thing spots there . 1
Lash: How about the totlot stuff Jim? Is that something?
Andrews: That's tough . I think the kids are the best ones to answer that .
The neighborhood is growing up fast . It's not quite the bunny hedge that
some of the brand new neighborhoods are. I guess I 'd have to get a better II
idea as to what kind of playground equipment a Phase 2 is. If it addresses
the 8 to 12 year old group, yeah. I think we could use it. If it's the 2
to 5 year old group, we're missing the opportunity right now. That 's not
to say there won't be that age group around but I don't know .
Lash: What 's it for now? Is it for little kids now?
Andrews: Mostly the little kids are up there, yeah . It's a great park .
I mean the park gets a lot of use. Parents go up there a lot of night with
the kids and kind of meet up there like , the socialization part of it is a 1
function of the park . It does do that.
Schroers: What kind of dollars are we going to need to plant that
screening?
Andrews: Plant the screening?
Hoffman: I was just thinking in my mind here on who to call to get a
better estimate than I can come up with.
Andrews: If you gave the neighborhood association the permission . I
Hoffman: Depending on if we do two sides and if we do an outside
coniferous tree and then an inside vine type of thing, we're probably
talking 50 units at $10.00-$15.00 . Something of that nature so $700 .00-
$800.00 in shrubbery and plant material . $1 ,000.00.
Mady: You have to throw a minimum of $1 ,000 .00 in there and if you don't II
do it this year , you've just lost one more year . I mean it's going to take
10 years before it 's right anyway so you might as well do it as soon as
possible .
Andrews: But a vine takes a long time before it's thick enough to do any •
good.
Mady: Conifers, Todd's talking a vine. That's 10 years too so anything we
do now isn't going to help for a couple years but it's going to help
ultimately and it's a permanent solution.
Hoffman: It's a good investment.
Lash: How long have those people over there been promised this phase 2 of
their totlot and they 've been getting put off and put off .
Mady: Well it's only been in existence since 1988 . 11
Andrews: There's been no broken promises actually on this one so
everybody 's known what the schedule is and I haven't had any particular
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
November 27 , 1990 - Page 44
1
screaming or hollering to get it done. I mean I hate to say that maybe we
could get away with one more year there if we needed to but I think we
could.
Mady: Well at this point in time there's no reason to put it off . That
decision can be made next month.
Lash: So we'd want to keep that in.
Mady: I think it's important to keep it in. South Lotus Lake . Until the
road gets set , we really can't do a whole lot. Are we going to be able to
' put an ice skating rink up there? Flood it?
Robinson: You can put a totlot up there I think can't you?
' Hoffman: Totlot could go in there .
Lash: Should we just move that $10,000.00 over to 1991 then?
' Robinson: I 'd like to see that come in with that .
Andrews: That 's a carry forward then on that totlot?
Mady: $10 ,000 .00 there .
Robinson: And the tennis courts will probably go in over by the well
house .
Hoffman: To update on the skating rink . The drainfield for the wellhouse
goes right underneath where we would be putting that and then that would
force the frost down into the drainfield and when the city pump overflows,
it 's a normal occurrence . It's just. . .pump system works water . . .and it
goes out onto the drain tube so it 's a natural occurrence .
Robinson: So in other words, Craig is never going to have that skating
rink there.
Hoffman: It can't go in that location. If a ballfield was developed over
by the parking lot of the boat access, you know we could use it just like
we do out here . Putting a ballfield in the summer . Overseeding it with
annual seed and putting a ice hockey or open skating rink there instead of
the other location.
1 Mady: Larry said he'd tell Craig .
Lash: Just to back up a second. What you said about bleachers. Are there
bleachers at Lake Susan?
' Hoffman: Bleachers are not a budgeted item at Lake Susan, no.
Lash: Is that something that we would want to put in?
•
Mady: Well there is, it's not much but it was graded slightly so there is
some area to sit . Similar to Lake Ann but not to that degree so there is
some natural seeding area which is, when we do a park, that was probably
•
i
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
November 27 , 1990 - Page 45
f
the smartest thing we did at Lake Ann. We should always try to do that as
much as possible . To use earth as seating as much as possible . It's
cheap.
Hoffman: Anything else on South Lotus?
Mady: Not that I 'm aware of.
Andrews: Just to refresh my memory. At Lake Ann the warning tracks did goi
in didn't they? That we talked about?
Mady: Not at Lake Ann.
Andrews: Lake Susan.
Hoffman: Lake Ann and Lake Susan , Dale will be putting them in on the new I
fields in the spring .
Andrews: We don't need to budget that in here or do we? - I
Hoffman: Budgeted amount for ag lime which will go in there is .
Mady: I don't know where we stand now with the referendum proceeds on Lai
Ann but I know initially we were under budget at Lake Ann so I hope we
still are.
Hoffman: We can take a look at that and if we need to budget for the, I
either all 6 fields or the 3 fields on the older portion, we'll go ahead
and do that .
Mady: It 'd be great if we could. Greenwood Shores? Nothing's showing up.
Jan , anything there?
Lash: I haven't heard anything.
Mady: Okay . I don't know if anybody's heard anything or not . Carver
Beach playground which is the park up on *top of Carver Beach neighborhood. II
Not down by the lake .
Andrews: What happened to the canoe racks? Did that ever happen? I
Mady: That's down by the lake.
Andrews: Okay. Did that actually happen?
•
Mady: Yes . I
Lash: What have we got? $3,000.00 for landscaping right?
Mady: Landscaping . There was some additional trees, conifers if I 'm not
mistaken.
Hoffman: Along where you were talking in the play area along the border . II
1 Park and Rec Commission Meeting
November 27, 1990 - Page 46
1
Mady: Over by the homes. The screen. There are some pretty nice ones
over there but it may that some of them just need to be moved but we should
leave at least $3 ,000.00 in.
Hoffman: Again, this is another park where we're taking another look but
we still have some outdated play equipment. The slide for one . Some of
the other play equipment . Any time we go in and touch some play equipment,
even though it 's outdated, they want something back . But it really is our
responsibility to we know it doesn't meet current safety standards to
remove that .
11 Mady: Well we do have a new structure there and we did pull the teeter
totter out of there . I think that all that's left is really is the slide .
Hoffman: The slide .
Mady: And the slide isn't as bad as some things are .
Hoffman: I think it 's about the highest one left that doesn't have
enclosed steps and those types of things . So we'll have to take a look at
it . I believe that is an Earl F . Anderson piece. It 's modular . It can be
' added onto so if we could do either $4 ,000.00 or $5,000 .00 or a $6 ,000.00
project in there when we pull out the remaining old equipment and bring it
up to date . It 's a smaller item than $10,000 .00 or $12,000.00 or
$14 ,000.00.
Mady: Why don't we throw $5 ,000.00 added for updating and then if we don't
have the money , we don 't do it but at least we can start planning on it .
ISchroers: Is there an acceptable single rim basketball hoop for outdoor
play areas? You know we have the double rim hoops in the parks . Is there
not a single hoop that will stand up to .
Hoffman: Abuse? I don't believe so . A recreation standard for our
basketball court, you 're just talking the double welded?
rSchroers: Yeah .
Hoffman: And your question is strictly money oriented or the cost?
Schroers: No. My question is, that they are just very unforgiving . If
you . . .they spit it right back out at you . I don't like them. I like the
single rims .
Mady: Larry's been making money playing horse and now he's having a tough
' time . As you get older you need help . Carver Beach linear park.
Andrews: Can I ask a question? What's the seating?
Mady: That was built in benches and the landscaping on the edge as it
terraces down if I 'm not mistaken.
1 Hoffman: It may have been a picnic table down in that area . Benches, that
type of thing .
I
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
November 27 , 1990 - Page 47
Lash: Is this like where the trail is where you walk from one end to the
other? I
Hoffman: Yes.
Lash: Larry , you had mentioned something about having little cut out area II
along it .
Schroers: Just an observation area.
Lash: Yeah , with some benches where people could sit . Is that what it
was? I
Schroers: I believe you 're correct.
Hoffman: Along the wooded trail there . Just clearing out some areas and
dropping in a permanent bench.
Lash: So are you thinking of just rolling over that? j
Mady: We might as well carry over everything in there then to 1991 .
Hoffman: Okay . I
Mady: I have Chan Pond Park . I haven't walked it in 6 months. I walked
it early in the year . The approaches to the new bridge weren 't right but I'
think they've been graded since then. We do need to do something with that
drainage area but that's just a problem on the south side near the wooded
area and we should probably budget that $3 ,000.00 there. I
Lash: Do you think that's enough Todd?
Hoffman: It may come in somewhat higher if we have the availability to 11
plop in $5 ,000 .00 and then we do a cost estimate study . This winter get
out there and take a look and take some addition. If we wanted to do it
correctly , it will take some addition of fill material . Whether it be
large rock and then covering that up over with black dirt and then a fiber
barrier which is protected . . .so depending on if it is a contracted job out .
If we have the ability to do it in house will enter into that as well . So
as we get into that process, if we only have the availability of $3,000.00 •
and we have to do it in house, we can probably pull it off. Just stick the
$5 ,000 .00 in there and we can contract.
ll
Mady: The problem is , the important time to getting it done is going to be
early in the year and the maintenance staff, one. They're very busy with all
lot of things and two, has not hired their summer help yet so they're
always short staff in the spring just trying to take care of the huge holes
in the road that are always going to be there because we have this great
clay in this part of the state . I think we would be best off to budget it II
outside the city and if it can be done in-house , that 's wonderful . But it
needs to be addressed early on .
Hoffman: It is a isolated area. It's not easy access. It 's not a simple
solution but if you walk that park and the park itself is a natural area .
It 's being heavily used now. It's very unsightly and it 's not right . It 's
11 Park and Rec Commission Meeting
November 27 , 1990 - Page 48
a city park shouldn't have an area like this within it so it should be
corrected .
Schroers: Is there a way to differentiate whether or not these projects
like the wood duck stand for 1989 have been done or not?
Hoffman: Sure , we can show that .
' Schroers: Because we're looking at budget items here and we have a number
plugged in for them and for like the 1989 and 1990, we don't really have a
way of knowing which ones are done.
' Hoffman: Yeah . We can either highlight them or underline them or
something of that nature .
' Mady: Put an asterick right after them signifying they 've been done. I
know the off street parking wasn't accomplished .
Hoffman: Astericks are used for some other things throughout the budget .
Mady: Well some kind of .
' Hoffman: We 'll come up with something for that .
Mady: Rice Marsh Lake .
Lash: In 1990 we actually did spend $1 ,000.00 right?
Hoffman: Correct .
Andrews: Wasn't Rice Marsh the one that had the really poor playground
equipment there?
Mady: Yeah , we replaced it.
Lash: We should probably add that $1 ,000.00 in there. That that was done .
Hoffman: In 1990 .
Lash: Are there any bleachers over there?
Hoffman: No.
' Lash: Because there's lots of games going on over there.
' Hoffman: City activities going on there as well . And again, just activity
within that park, pulling up that old equipment and grading up that new
area for the basketball court generated a lot of interest. I received some
calls . We wanted a tennis court here for 8 years. What 's it going to
take? A petition and Jerry and I went down there and measured it and met
with this person and first off a tennis court would be 2 feet from the back
of the players bench and just about into the slew and just would not fit
' and the cost is $17 ,000.00 for a single court, etc. , etc. . But then there
also was a call from another individual that would like to see additional
playground equipment put back in there so it's always that additional
11
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
November 27 , 1990 - Page 49
I
playground equipment is the reoccurring request .
Lash: You put some new stuff in right? You put some of the new modular I
stuff in? Just took out the old things?
Hoffman: The new modular piece was put in there prior to. I
Mady: Two years ago .
Hoffman: Anything else in 1991? ,
Lash: Bleachers?
' Mady: Bandimere Heights which is the little park.
Pemrick: I commented on that earlier about maybe upgrading the totlot
equipment for a little older age group . There again for children. Some
are in high school now but . And as far as, I don't know how feasible this
is but while we're on the subject of tennis courts. There's been a lot of
discussion on the street on how nice it would be to use that area for a
tennis court . Now I know we've got two tennis courts allotted in the big II
game plan and I think we just want to make sure we keep those in there for
sure and if not , consider that area for use. ,
Hoffman: As a tennis court?
Pemrick: Yeah. !
Hoffman: That one 's included in the main park are certainly a component
which is desireable for like the southern portion. The closest one to
there now is the new one at Lake Susan Park.
Lash: I just want to protect that concept . But is there an interest in
basketball or the volleyball that 's on here for 1992?
Pemrick: I haven't heard it directly so I don't know. Basketball , there I
are a lot of backboards in the driveways and what not.
Robinson: And you 've got the big park going in right next to it there .
Mady: It 's going to be hard to justify major expenditures in this small II
park when the big one 's going to be put on line in 5 years .
Pemrick: Right. I
Lash: It's also something that's easily moved.
Mady: The trouble with that stuff , once it's in boy , when you start to
move it, it doesn't.
Andrews: Not only does it cost money but it costs a lot of labor . '
Mady: And it wrecks parts of it . It's never quite right after that . 1
Lash: But 5 years is a long time.
r
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
November 27 , 1990 - Page 50
Pemrick: I think if I was going to change anything I would delete the
basketball and push on that sand volleyball . That's more of an overall
11 family neighborhood type activity.
Lash: Could we move that up to 1991 then?
Mady: I don't see a reason to.
Erhart: I don't think there's room because they're using it , you know for
' all those soccer games and I have a feeling right now. . .
Lash: So really we wouldn't be putting anything in there .
' Erhart: I think they want their soccer more.
Schroers: I think there's an option there. I don't think you have to
build a sand volleyball court . I think you could just put up a volleyball
court and then if it 's designated area for volleyball , put in a couple of
posts and during soccer season pull the posts out.
tAndrews: Bleachers would also be a desireable feature there .
Hoffman: Okay .
Mady: Bluff Creek .
11 Robinson: Like Larry said, we should probably put a location fee in here.
Mady: We 'll hire Lewis and Clark .
' Hoffman: Strangely enough along those same lines , on the city base map,
the engineering department has been updating that and the park is not
designated on there . Taking a look at Bluff Creek Park , we had a person
' come in who owns some land on the south side , trying to sell it and wanted
to know if we were interested in buying it for an addition to Bluff
Creek Park . That 's another story but just looking at how they had it
configured on the map was wrong so now when we update it for 1990, we've
got to go back and get the configuration right on the map .
Lash: So who knows really?
' Mady: I think we have to hire Lewis and Clark .
' Lash: Oh , you do know?
Hoffman: Where it is?
' Lash: Yes .
Hoffman: Yes .
Schroers: The exact parameters though?
Hoffman: It would be tough to locate the exact parameters unless you took
a surveyer out there . I know the bottom of the gully. And I know a land
I
Park and Rec Commission Meeting II
November 27 , 1990 - Page 51
II
owner who wants to sell us his land. He 's the last lot just before you
cross underneath the bridge on the right hand side there and that would
provide access through to TH 101 because we don't have it.
II
Mady: Trouble is that 's a tough road. Right there, that 's an impossible
road to make access off of.
II
Schroers: That is the party access for the kids though right there. It 's
nearly an access.
I
Hoffman: But then you have the railroad tracks as well . Anything we want
to take a look at in 1991?
IIMady: No . Not unless you can find Lewis and Clark and hire them.
Minnewashta Heights Park . 'I guess , I remember a couple years ago when we
thought about putting in a warming shelter in there and. . . I
( There was a tape change at this point in the meeting. )
Schroers: The kids in that neighborhood are now ready, most of them are II
too old for totlots .
Hoffman: The one that is there is probably being used. We've haven't had II
an outcry for additional equipment .
Schroers: As far as I know, we've never had anyone from Minnewashta
Heights come in and request anything. II
Mady: Not in the last few years. When Ed was here we were talking about
that and Nann lives right there and she said well geez , you know we 've only,
got maybe 4 kids that maybe skate at thing twice a year so the
utilization's not high so maybe a warming house wasn't necessary . At that
time we were talking about the bus shelter concept.
I
Schroers: I think what we need to do is go out to Minnewashta Heights Park
and take a look at it and see what we think we can do with it to make it a '
nice addition for the neighborhood .
Lash: Maybe it'd be nice to canvas some of the people who live out there .
Find out what they have. What there are for kids. •The age ranges and if II
there are any things that they've been dreaming of .
Mady: Just caution you since budgets are tight anyway .
I
Lash: But people appreciate that you know. If somebody out of the blue
just comes and says you know, we 're kind of looking at this area rather
than all of a sudden just plop down some new totlot equipment that nobody's,
going to use and then they're going to think we 're crazy .
Schroers: You bet . That makes a lot of sense . I
Hoffman: Okay . Herman Park.
Mady: Herman Field. Well we 've got that $35,000.00 and it probably will II
be utilized this year or in 1991 .
II
11 Park and Rec Commission Meeting
November 27, 1990 - Page 52
•
Lash: So we 're going to get going on that in the spring right?
Hoffman: The next item is an update on that .
Mady: So there 's $35,000 .00 there and hope that's going to do something
for next year . City Center Park. I 'd like to see us throw everything
we 've got in 1990 over to 1991 . We 've been waiting for 3 years to do it .
We might as well do it .
' Erhart: I would agree with that .
Lash: I would agree with that too.
' Hoffman: We 'll take a look at this . I 'll get some figures on it. We 're
probably going to have to make a decision between, those are the only two
hockey rinks we have in town . They've been there for a number of years .
' As far as the standard goes in hockey rinks, especially since they're the
only two in town , they don't measure up to anything in any surrounding
community . But then again we have the tennis courts which we've hounded on
and hounded on for the past number of years to do something over there as
well . So we 're going to be in a difficult position to pick and choose
between . You can 't just go halfway on a project , on a hockey rink or
halway on a tennis court .
Mady: That 's why it 's important to get that master plan redone . I mean
let 's look at the whole space like it was a bare piece of land. What makes
the most sense to utilize the land and then do a project as we can. Each
year do a new project .
Hoffman: It 's not realistic to say we 're going to have those both done
' next year but you 're correct. Getting the master plan done .
Lash: But would it make sense for us to maybe try to stick a little more
' money in there so if we needed to do the tennis courts and the hockey rink ,
we could do both?
' Mady: A little bit more money , you 're talking $40,000.00 for the tennis
court and the hockey rinks are going to be $20,000 .00 probably .
Lash: Well what 's park reconfiguration? What's that $25,000.00 for?
Hoffman: That involves grading .
' Mady: Just putting the fields in.
Hoffman: Relocation and those types of things and again we're going to
have to investigate a cooperative venture on the tennis courts with the
school district to see what kind of funding they would be willing to do .
Mady: Before we can do anything, we know we've been talking about this
' totlot equipment for 3 years now . Talking about redoing the park . That's
got to get done . The warming house is being addressed right now. I think
those are the only things we can seriously anticipate at this time . Chan
Hills Park. Those people were in here. They got $10,000.00. They did get
the general development done there did they not?
I
Park and Rec Commission Meeting I
November 27 , 1990 - Page 53
Hoffman: The park looked very nice . The grading is nicely done . The
grass is growing . The trail connection is in there . Two access points .
Sand volleyball court is in. This site is graded for the eventual
construction of a tennis court and the totlot is in place .
Lash: For the $30,000.00 we had down for 1992 and over , what?
Mady: The tennis courts .
Schroers: Is it possible to move some of these up to 1991? '
Mady: It 's going to be real tough .
Hoffman: We 're way over the mark already. ,
Mady: You can put them down there and we'll cross them out next time .
Lash: I think last year we sort of looked at the ones who got this year
are going to get skipped next year .
Mady: We try to alternate . I
Hoffman: We haven't gotten to some of the biggies yet . 1
Mady: Curry Farms .
Hoffman: '91 , that's $10,000.00 in there . That would include such things
as continuation of development of the playfield, backstop, bases . . .park
trail . We have a master plan. Just continuing the development of that .
Lash: Is there more playground equipment included in that? '
Hoffman: I don't believe so.
Mady: It 's going to be tough. That development has spent all the money
already and we can throw the 10 in but right now we're stealing it from
somebody else again . '
Lash: That 's one I 'd like to see up if we could just a little bit . . .
Mady: They could put some money in towards it if they wanted to. That's 1
what we did at Meadow Green Park . Got the neighborhood to.
Lash: But they already got the developer to do it . 1
Mady: Yeah, they got the developer to do it but if the actual neighborhood
did it, like Meadow Green Park with fund raisers. I
Hoffman: To help you visualize the next ones , we have a map so you can see
where these are . Outlot G is the park that is right in this area . The
northern most piece which is in the most populated area right now. It
would be the far .
Mady: The western side of CR 17 . 1
11
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
November 27, 1990 - Page 54
11 Hoffman: Yeah. Lake Susan Hills West . The west side of CR 17, on the
north side of the development . It would be the park which has the highest
priority for development. It's Mr . Koubsky's neighborhood.
iSchroers: Is it surrounded by a neighborhood?
1 Hoffman: Yes. It is surrounded by houses currently .
Robinson: And there 's nothing there?
' Hoffman: '91 has $10,000.00 for totlot. $10,000.00 for general
development .
' Mady: Put it there. Both.
Robinson: Yeah .
Mady: When all the sidewalks are in, those people can get someplace ,
they 'll have someplace to go.
' Hoffman: Outlot H is on the other side of CR 17 along Powers Blvd. , or
CR 17 . Right down in here . Just the one cul-de-sac .
' Mady: That 's that little dinky spot.
Hoffman: Yes . The one cul-de-sac touches it right now . '91 has
$10 ,000 .00 for a totlot in there. It's not as developed and then as well ,
' there will be trail connection there to Lake Susan Park which is just a
stone 's throw away. Lake Susan Park would be in their service area.
' Andrews: How many houses are there now approximately?
Hoffman: Well on the north side you would look at estimated lots of 45
lots in that area but there will be a lot more development to the south of
that area .
Lash: Lots there but how many houses there?
' Mady: Right now there's not many at all .
Hoffman: 25-30.
Mady: But the ones that are there are right next to Lake Susan.
1 Schroers: Would it be logical to push that up to '92?
Mady: I think so.
' Hoffman: It would be .
' Andrews: Let 's cut that out.
Hoffman: Okay . F has got some dollars in there as well . F is the one
located within the 4th Addition. We took a look at it.
I
I
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
November 27 , 1990 - Page 55
Mady: The biggest one.
Hoffman: Yeah, it's the biggest active . It's the piece that's split kind II
of in two pieces by the narrow connection.
Mady: The one on the bottom.
Hoffman: Brian Olson was in and we took a look at it 4 months ago .
Something of that. They reconfigured the land. We're looking at totlot ,
ballfields , sliding hill , that type of thing. Building permits are just
coming in for the 4th Addition. They have completed some of the general
grading in there and then we'll need to follow through in the spring to see,
that they do grade that park to an acceptable level for the potential
facilities which we 're having in there .
Andrews: That 's currently totally undeveloped or totally unbuilt at this
point though?
Hoffman: Correct . '
Mady: I 'd move it .
Robinson: Yep. '
Andrews: I think we ought to move that forward too a year .
ll
Mady: We need a master park plan maybe. I mean those I 'd like to see done
as soon as possible but any development, that way we're not waiting in
April to do that and instead we 've got, we can order the equipment in April
so maybe leave the $1 ,500.00 there for the.
Andrews: I agree . '
Pemrick: Is that an administration?
Mady: No , we try to fund those through the development. Or have in the II
past . That's paying Van Doren, Hazard and Stallings to come up with plans.
Hoffman: The only other outlot in that area is the Outlot A, the natural
area and we'll be taking a look at that in the future just to come up with
a trail system which will link Chanhassen Hills up to Lake Susan Hills .
Lake Susan Park. Currently there is a park that 's under agricultural til
and nobody addressed it so we need to take a look at that.
Mady: Outlot G, that 's the portion that's going to be near the high
density apartments once they're built? ,
Hoffman: Outlot H. High density is going to be close to.
Schroers: The north side . That was the first one . '
Hoffman: G was the first one.
Mady: Yeah . That's the one that's going to be near , because H is that
little one across on the east side of CR 17 isn't it?
I
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
November 27, 1990 - Page 56
11
Hoffman: And that's where the high density is going to be .
Mady: Oh, they moved the high density? I thought it was going to be up
over on the west side near Park Drive or whatever .
' Hoffman: Outlot G is surrounded by single family houses . On the south
side and on the north side it's.
Mady: On the north side up by Park , isn't it Park Drive? Or Lake Drive .
Hoffman: Yeah, Lake Drive East . That would be the potential Redmond
property. Industrial .
Mady: Okay , that 's H?
' Hoffman: G . H would be this small park which would be here.
Mady: I just want to make sure .
' Lash: Have them named these strees now so we can go back and try to
think . . .?
Hoffman: Yep.
Lash: Maybe we could do that sometime pretty soon too.
Hoffman: That'd be a good idea. We have a few parks to name again .
' Lash: Well , you know last time it was hard and we thought we'd wait until
they had the names of the streets and maybe that would give us some
inspiration . He says they have them now .
' Hoffman: Most of them . Okay , moving on. Bandimere?
Robinson: We need a park master plan don't we?
' Mady: Mark worked on a lot of that .
Lash: Is that even a realistic number? That just does not sound like very
much money .
Hoffman: $10,000 .00 for rough grading?
' Lash: Yeah .
Schroers: I think we 're past that. . .
Erhart: Especially the terrain is so rough .
' Hoffman: Maybe that 's a rough figure, not rough grading .
Mady: I think realistically there's no reason to put any money in this
' thing at this time because the $300 ,000.00 will not happen. That's not
funded right now . That's going to be a referendum item . There 's no way
it's going to come out of general .
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
November 27 , 1990 - Page 57
I
Erhart: We could do the rough grading and then we'd be stuck there .
Mady: You can't do rough grading until you've got the money to do the rest"
of it.
Erhart: That's what I mean. It'd just be a waste. I
Hoffman: The plans we had were preliminary plans. They're not a specific
master plan but they 're certainly useable for discussion as it continues on
in the future.
Lash: Let's scratch this $10,000.00.
ll
Mady: Until you come up with that you're . . .the City to go to referendum to
get that kind of money , there's no sense in even coming up with a final
plan because . I
Robinson: Maybe we should get this on the agenda to talk about it early
next year . If we 've got a plan. '
Andrews: I think the climate for a referendum is not going to be very
favorable for the next 18 months , 24 months.
I/
Robinson: No, but we might as well start planning.
Mady: You have to create the crisis environment . I talked to the
individual who ran the school board referendums the last couple times and III
asked him , I said , how in the world do you guys get these things to pass?
And then I realized some of the comments we've been making in the past is,
the schools always wait until they had their backs against the walls and
couldn't do anything else and then they passed it . That 's how they do
things on the school . Whereas we've been more proactive saying we 're going I
to need this next year . Let's get the money now so we can do it and then
it never wins . So you can't wait until your back's against the wall . You
have no choices in the matter and then you get it passed.
Erhart: Well I think too Jim, if it had been a better time financially for"
some people , I think people would have been more apt to vote on things but
I know a lot of people who have lost their jobs.
Mady: Well I have a hard time with that in this city. The average income
in this city is pretty high . There's just a very negative tax climate
right now and until that changes.
Erhart: Oh yeah, that doesn't help either .
Hoffman: And again, looking at a youth park, eventually the growth that 1
we 're seeing in the city and the number of activities. We 're going to have
our own Little League soon. We're going to have a lot more youth sports
arenas . Eventually they're going to start knocking on our door for it
anyway.
Lash: People have to feel the pain first before they're going to be
willing to open their wallets. I don't think they felt that yet .
1
11
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
11 November 27, 1990 - Page 58
' Robinson: Did that give you enough?
Lash: How about this general acquisition?
IHoffman: Do you have Pheasant Hills? A rough draft?
Mady: Yeah, there's a rough draft of Pheasant Hills.
Hoffman: Tree farm?
' Mady: The tree farm, we need to fund the tree farm. That's got to be an
ongoing thing . We don't have anything.
Erhart: I agree .
Lash: But we skipped the general acquisition. Do we want to, did we use
up, back to page 22 , did we use all of that for Pheasant Hills?
Mady: Yes.
Lash: So we have basically nothing left there?
Hoffman: Nothing left there.
Lash: And that 's something that we want to start accuring again for out
west by Minnewashta don't we? It came in awfully handy having that chunk
of money.
IAndrews: Well Lundgren Brothers came in here and they made it sound like
give them time and they 'll come through but.
Mady: I 've heard that one before.
Andrews: They have tended to do pretty large projects .
' Mady: Yeah. The developers always tell you what you want to hear .
' Lash: Maybe what we can do is leave open. Look at the numbers you come
back with for us and then all the extra we have we can put in.
Mady: The numbers coming back, we simply need to have , look at current
fund balances. What the reserves need to be and what the estimates for
budgets for income for the next year is and then we can set it. We just
set how much we can spend. How much we have to add to rev and then we just
' knock that one off. That's how we do it .
Lash: But it would be nice to try and start this fund back up again.
Mady: It 'd be great , yeah .
Lash: If we could.
Hoffman: Alright , anything else in general acquisition?
11 Mady: I don't know of any. Pheasant Hills parkland .
I
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
November 27, 1990 - Page 59
Andrews: Now that we've got the land, what do we do with it? I
Mady: Well they know they're not going to get anything put right on it. I
think it 'd be nice to come up with a master park plan and in 1992 maybe be
able to do something. That's $1 ,500.00 for that.
Hoffman: Placing that $1 ,500.00 might be a $2,000.00 figure .
Mady: Let 's throw $2,000.00 at it then. You know, $500.00 isn't going to
break this budget .
Hoffman: Anything else? Pheasant Hills. We've gone through the land
purchase . They're going to be involved this winter in public meetings,
public discussion on what they'd like to see there as part of the master
plan process and so they're going to get involved in it and they're
obviously going to be hundry for some source of development. It's a lot of
site preparation. Tree removal . Dirt work. That type of thing so
obviously we're looking for some fairly major expenditures in 1992.
Lash: But realistically for next year the plan would be all we'd probably
really be able to get done anyway even if we had the money. 1
Hoffman: Potentially we could do some tree removal and initial site
grading if we got the plan completed in the spring. Again, this is one if
we look to, as we 've done at North Lotus, as we've done at Chanhassen
Hills, we did a master plan and then a site grading plan done by consulting
firms and then go ahead and have the public works do the site work . They
rent a D-9 Cat and go in there and then get that done so potentially that
could be done in 1991 .
Mady: The only other thing is the benches and tables and grills. Then the'
last thing that 's not on here is trails. We're bringing in $40,000 .00 in
next year , it 's just not on any of these plans and that needs to be
addressed . But I don't have any specifics on it. I 'm just throwing it I
out . So you'll come back next week, in about 3 weeks with okay, here you
guys . Here's your wish list. We need the wish list. We need to know what
the fund balance is to date. We need to know what the encumbrances are.
Reserves. However you want to call them. What those are . What the
necessary funds are to leave in it and what we anticipate bringing in.
Then we can decide how much money we can throw at 4e wall .
Hoffman: I 'll bring those figures forward to you and then right there it I
will spell out what we think we have available. With that $150,000.00
we're somewhat close . . .stage and we can take a look at jumping into those
fund reserves and maybe knocking off $200,000.00 next year . I
Mady: I 'd also like to see us also leave about $5,000.00 available for
Eagle Scout projects because we never know what those are going to be
before they come in and when a kid comes in here with a project, he doesn't "
have the ability to wait 3 years. 2 years or even 1 year . That needs to
get done right away so.
Hoffman: Thank you very much for all your input. We'll quickly continue
on so we can get out of here this evening .
1
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
1 November 27 , 1990 - Page 60
•
UPDATE. HERMAN FIELD PARK ACCESS.
Hoffman: Item number 8 , Herman Field. An update on this item. As noted,
we 're working with this vacation request which has been just kind of laying
' around between the residents and the city staff . They came back in. Pushed
again for a vacation of portions of the road which, the roadways which are
up there including Forest Avenue and Oriole Lane. Eventually through all
' that discussion what came about was that Oriole Lane should not be vacated .
We should maintain that so we can run a trail easement down into that
northeast corner of Herman Field Park. However , we were able to strike a
' deal up with the Schiferli 's to gain a 40 foot roadway easement for access
to Herman Field Park in exchange for vacating Forest Avenue which the Park
Commission has no use for it nor did the city for utility purposes or
anything of that nature at this time so that was the situation . The deal
' we struck up with them and approved at the City Council and then currently
our planning department is working with an outside firm in getting the
documents , those easements documented and go from there with the
' construction of an access road and development of Herman Field Park .
Lash: So that would be a driving access by the Schiferli and the
pedestrian one is the one off of Oriole Lane?
' Hoffman: Yes.
Lash: I get confused on that one all the time .
PROGRAM EVALUATIONS.
Mady: Why don't we move on to Program Evaluations. Does anybody have,
just because of the time , I don't know if we need Jerry to go through a
whole lot on this .
11 Ruegemer : Did everybody review it? Are there any questions regarding
either evaluation?
Pemrick: I had a question on the Rockin' and Rolling. What's the age •
group? What 's the age level for that?
Ruegemer : That was 4 , 5 and 6 .
Pemrick: That sounds like a nifty program .
Ruegemer : We're looking for additional , older aged kids.
' Andrews: How many sessions was that?
Ruegemer: It was 4 Saturdays.
Andrews: For $5 .00?
Ruegemer : Yes.
Andrews: Can we afford to do it that cheap?
I
•
f•
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
November 27 , 1990 - Page 61 1
Ruegemer : There wasn't really that much of a cost involved other than just
mainly an hourly wage for that instruction. The equipment we 've got from
the school . The mats and beams.
Erhart: How many kids in this. . .? I
Ruegemer : We had 13 for this one. That's a little bit high. . .
Andrews: I was reading over the softball critiques and there were lots of I
comments made with sort of that were questions like in we have a problem,
we've got to look into. I 'm assume those are things that will be coming
back in the spring or closer to the season about specific recommendations.
A lot of comments made about eligibility I know.
Mady: I didn't see anything new in the comments. '
Lash: Splitting the division? I mean are you considering these things
that are. 1
Mady: There are two teams that are going to be asked to be split out and
that 's about it . I just asked Larry , which team are you guys going to play,
in. Division are you guys going to play in.
Lash: No , but are you thinking about that?
Ruegemer : Not necessarily for the Over 35 but for other divisions .
Lash: Splitting it? The Over 35 is the one that needs to be split . i
Mady: Actually I don't think it 's a player that anybody gets overly too
excited about . There's a few teams that get excited.
Lash: Which team are you on?
Mady: One of the . . .
Lash: I know. I know people who get excited about it and they definitely
want to see it split.
Mady: The trouble is though, who makes the determination. The teams that
lose all the time would like to split.
Lash: Well look at the standards.
Robinson: This is a good evaluation again I think Jerry and we should take'
it to heart and try to correct some of the inefficiencies.
Ruegemer : You know too, with the industrial , there seems to be a lot of I
information in the industrial versus the other leagues that 's just kind of
a basic overall . The same questions came up throughout all the leagues .
The industrial 's just the one that I went in depth in so keep that in mind.
Other leagues are also important. I
Hoffman: This will be a standard. An evaluation will be standard for all
programs which we run. It 's a good feedback measure. We're providing a 11
11
11 Park and Rec Commission Meeting
November 27 , 1990 - Page 62
service. We should know how we're doing in that service and if any changes
or corrections should be made .
' ADMINISTRATIVE SECTION.
Mady: In the Administrative Section, I 've got a question on the ordinance
that was adopted dealing with malt liquor . I read through it one time and
got confused and then dropped and I thought staff would really help me
through it right now . What are we doing with malt liquor in the parks, or
liquor in the parks?
Hoffman: Did you notice that there was a duplication of pages in there?
The gambling part?
Mady: Yeah, I got lost.
Hoffman: This is a memo about the clarification was supposed to be that
second gambling one . Basically, the signs at Lake Ann Park which said only
3.2 beer is allowed within city parks. Our city ordinance said malt liquor
was allowed in city parks . Malt liquor includes all beer beverages , 3.2 or
' strong beer . So the deputies were on occasion ticketing people for
drinking strong beer in the park . One person took that to task and his
attorney checked out our city ordinance and said your city ordinance says
' malt liquor . That's any beer . The sign at Lake Ann says 3 .2. You know
you 've got a problem here which you need to clarify so as part of the
clarification , the sign is pulled. Our city ordinance still remains that
you can consume malt liquor which includes all beer .
Mady: Malt liquor only can be consumed at any park and that's all?
Hoffman: Correct.
Mady: The wine coolers and all that garbage is out? And anything in glass
' bottles is out .
Hoffman: Correct .
Mady: Good . Now I 'm not concerned .
COMMISSION PRESENTATIONS:
' Mady: I had one thing in Commission presentations real quick. With the
losing of the referendum on the community center , the need for a recreation
' programs in this city hasn't ceased. I know one member of the Senior
Citizen 's Commission who's going to be pushing the Council for a senior
center real hard. This is the body that's going to have to deal with these
needs for recreation needs . They 're there guys . Spend some time and go
out and see what happens with the basketball program in town and you 'll see
what I 've been talking about for 3 years. It 's ungodly up there and like
maybe we just haven't shown people the horrendous impact but right now.
Robinson: , What's that? What are you referring to? What about the
basketball program?
I
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
November 27 , 1990 - Page 63
Mady: We don't have gym space in town. You're basically throwing 100 kids
in that gym trying to teach them how to play basketball at night all at
once and it's not working .
Lash: In response to that, there is something I wanted to bring up too.
I guess I would like to hope in the future if the issue of a community
center arises again, that this body be involved in it from the beginning
because I think we had nothing to do with it whatsoever .
Mady: Jan, I 'll take you to task on that. Every meeting was well
documented as to when they were. If you wanted to be there , you should
have been there . I
Lash: No, but I think this is the Park and Recreation Commission and that
would be a recreational facility and I think we were just totally skipped in
somehow in the process. Not that there's a problem with having a task
force but I think the task force then should come to this commission . We
represent the citizens and then we make recommendations to the City
Council . I
Mady: No , the Council developed it .
Lash: I 'm saying next time I would like to see this body be involved . 1
That 's all I 'm saying.
Mady: I must have brought it up at every other meeting trying to tell '
people what was going on and because it was at the end of the meeting .
Lash: Yeah, but you were in a unique situation. You were the Chairman of I
both bodies you know and so it was just , you were well informed and we
heard what was passed on from you. That doesn't mean we were involved or
that our input was considered at all . I think as appointed commission
members for recreational programs, we should be involved in it .
Mady: You 've got to be active. You've got to do it . No one here ever
raised the , even asked us to do anything. I volunteered for it 3 1/2 years'
ago and put a ton of work into that thing . Maybe it's real personal with
me but I haven't seen one iota of thanks out of this city yet. Out of a
ton of hours and that's all I say.
Robinson moved, Erhart seconded to adjourn the meeting. All voted in favor'
and the motion carried. The meeting was adjourned at 10:50 p.m. .
Submitted by Todd Hoffman
Park and Recreation Coordinator ,
Prepared by Nann Opheim
I
I