Loading...
1i. Master Park Plan for Chanhassen Pond Park 1 CITY OF CHANHASSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 MEMORANDUM TO: Don Ashworth, City Manager 3 ,?_e-?'_ FROM: Lori Sietsema, Park and Recreation Coordinatol , DATE: March 7 , 1989 3 _/ � - SUBJ: Approval of the Chanhassen Pond Master Park Plan The Park and Recreation n Commission has as reviewed the layout and design of a Master Park Plan for Chanhassen Pond Park. The 1 Commission invited the residents of the area to comment on the design as per the attached minutes. 1 The plan establishes a passive park area, accommodating the observation of plants and wildlife in a natural environment. It calls for a nature trail that meanders around the pond and 1 throughout the park. An overlook area off of Kerber Blvd. is included with seven parking stalls . The orientation of the overlook is down the length of the pond and is a beautiful vista from that point. There are pedestrian tie-in points off of the 1 Kerber Blvd. trail. Additionally, there will be potential pedestrian access off of Laredo, once the sidewalk is in place. The plan calls for picnic areas in the upper portion off of 1 Kerber Blvd. and observation seating areas are shown along the trail. The Commission felt that the plan accomplishes the goals 1 established in the Comprehensive Plan to preserve this natural area. It is the recommendation of the Park and Recreation Commission to approve the Master Park Plan as shown. 1 1 1 1 I i I • • I ."\ i•\ ` Mew /• Y`, - _E_e WI`E !hi �m3 n ra 'S 3 LL ; 2 • ' O 4 E. r x ►. ..WI �� E c 3io °�°a mmi mu I _ m,3EUi _ E _ { ,,( a' \\ \ V' ( \` s I a " o E.▪ ■''1.r Pai'1 • \----V s' '- -- --_, ms V �� .,,, \ \J y '^ '''' _-:-----.7- - { iy�a s : /,,,/..3)/''... ...,i,,,::::. : o. . O I L 0 ■ IMOpda,,00, I I ■ i Park and Rec Commission Meeting February 28 , 1989 - Page 48 portage from Lake Ann into Lake Lucy and we called it Site E on the graphic, Figure 3 in the literature. The second point would be, to contact homeowners about relinquishing their boat rights in the Greenwood Shores, I guess it would be everybody around the lake. Their motorized boats . The third thing would be to recommend the induction of a cost feasibility study for an access, I think particularly at D. That ' s going to give us our highest cost option I think at this point out of the three options. The last one would be to contact Ms. Dodd on the potential of acquiring her parcel , Parcel B perhaps not as an access point on the lake . Watson: I ' ll second that . Hasek moved , Watson seconded to direct staff to contact the DNR regarding the feasibility of the portage option from Lake Ann to Lake Lucy, Site E on Figure 3 . Secondly, to contact homeowners around Lake Lucy about relinquishing their rights for motorized boats on Lake Lucy. Third, to authorize a preliminary feasibility study to be done on the Site E and Site D. Finally, to contact Ms . Dodd on the potential of acquiring Site B. All voted in favor and the motion carried . FINAL REVIEW OF CHANHASSEN POND PARK MASTER PLAN. I Sietsema : Last fall you may recall that we went over the Chanhassen Pond Park and ideas with audience and the people who lived in the area as to how we want to see that park developed . The only thing that was not settled at that point in time was the issue on the parking along Kerber Blvd . . There was discussion as to whether there should be two parking pads or one and if one, which one would be better . The final outcome of that was that staff should contact the engineering department and determine which site would be the best for the parking . I went out there with Al and he indicated that the area . . . if we absolutely needed parking the picnic areas , he could see 1, 2, maybe 3 spots but he wouldn ' t recommend it because the sight line ' s toward the Chan Vista , north , are not optimal so he would recommend that we keep the parking at the sliding area . Schroers : That was Mark ' s recommendation? Sietsema : That was the engineering department ' s recommendation . Watson : So as far as getting on and off on Kerber Blvd . into the lane would be safer? Sietsema : Right . Because the hill comes up right at that point and they' re real close to you as you would pull out if you didn ' t see them. Mark, did you have anything else to add? Otherwise , the park pretty much stays intact. This would be the master park plan and the next step in this process would then be to come up with a landscape plan . I 111 Park and Rec Commission Meeting February 28 , 1989 - Page 49 Mady moved , Schroers seconded that the Park and Recreation Commission recommend to approve the Master Park Plan for Chanhassen Pond Park with ' the parking as shown . All voted in favor and the motion carried . Hasek: I kind of sort of apologize for sending you back with this one but I really thought that maybe there would be a good chance that it might be better to the north and I think I 'm the one that pushed for that . Sietsema : It ' s 6 months later and we' re now just finally dealing with it and it ' s all your fault. Mark Koegler : I think if you looked at the Minutes , you could pass the blame around . Jay Johnson : One thing I 'd like to note , I mentioned this to Lori late last night. When Chan Vista was developed , the little pond that ' s a settling pond before , was only half built because the other half of the pond was on somebody elses property and the other half of the pond was going to be' bui.lt when the other property got developed . You now own the other property so I think in planning this park we have to finish that pond . Boyt : We don ' t build it . Chan Vista builds it right? It ' s there drainage? Jay Johnson : No . It ' s also drainage coming off of Kerber Blvd . and the drainage is coming in from the west . If I remember right, Chan Vista built enough to support themselves and the rest of the pond was going to be when more development happened to the west of there. That development happened and we ended up owning the park. The other items , when they built that pond , they didn ' t build it to the DNR specs . They didn ' t put your 1 : 4, 1: 10 sides on there . They put those sides nice and steep. You ' go up there and there ' s not much chance. The whole pond really needs to be looked at for redesign in that park as a nature pond and still provide the settling so I think we need to talk to our engineering department . The next step in this park development is to make sure that settling pond ' is working properly to protect the main problem. There ' s a lot of silt coming in on the west end of that main pond that ' s really been filling up over the years and that little pond . . . Sietsema : I definitely will check with engineering to make sure that that was built the way it was supposed to and it ' s done. What ' s supposed to be ' done gets done . Jay Johnson : I don ' t know if the previous council required the DNR ' s six steps on that pond but it ' s pretty much now we own the whole thing . Sietsema : Yes , I ' ll check with engineering . ' Schroers: I think that because there are no longer going to be cattle in there, that a lot of the erosion and sediment that has gotten in the past , won ' t now because those are the areas that were exposed earth will more than likely grow up with grass and it will eliminate a lot of that runoff. I 1 Park and Rec Commission Meeting February 28 , 1989 - Page 50 1 Jay Johnson : Another thing that has eliminated it , just an observation , since the cattle have left, the grass has grown up. With the grass grown up , the geese don' t like it . Everybody else who don' t like geese because they get on their docks and everything else, well this area was an area that geese came to and the people , they didn' t affect the people because. . . Boyt : What we need to do is have freshly mowed grass for them. Watson: I ' ll mow it for them. Hasek: Jay, I 'm going to say this tongue in check. I don ' t come to your meetings to make trouble. Why do you come to our meetings? REVIEW REQUEST FOR BASKETBALL COURT AT NORTH LOTUS LAKE PARK. i Hasek: I think it ' s a great idea but I think we ought to think about taking one of the nets out and putting the courts on one side or the other . The thing is , if somebody wants to get down there and play a game , they' re not going to be able to , a game from end to end , they' re not going to be able to do it if we put it on one side of the nets. So if we take a net out , we can put a post on either end . Eventually, if you want to put the net back up and still leave the posts in there, the people can, it just seems like a more logical way to do it to me than to throw them on one side. Watson : Because you ' re actually messing up both courts . Mady: You still have the option of practing tennis on the other one. Boyt : As long as we' re going to do that , let ' s put up a rebound board . 1 Mady: Oh you mean a tennis rebound board? Boyt : Yes , a tennis rebound board on that open court . 1 Hasek: Certainly. A back board for hitting balls against . Hoffman : Put one on either end if you wanted . Hasek: I think it should go behind one of them. Mady moved , Hasek seconded to design a basketball court on one court and to have a rebound board installed for tennis . All voted in favor and the motion carried . 1 1 I 1 R• 4 Van DorEn . Hazards Stallings ` e ArchNlct! Engines s Plurerd ' MEMORANDUM TO : Park and Recreation Commission and Staff ' FROM: Mark Koegler IJi DATE : February 23 , 1989 SUBJECT: Chanhassen Pond Park Last fall the Park and Recreation Commission reviewed the final master plan for Chanhassen Pond Park . One item from that review still remains unresolved . The Commission expressed a variety of opinions on the preferred location for the off street parking area along Kerber Boulevard . Two locations were identified , the first is shown on the site plan and the second is further north opposite the intersection with Saddlebrook Curve . The possibility of split parking at both locations was also mentioned . The Commission ' referred the item to the City Engineer for comment . A field review of the situation was conducted by the City Engineering Department . They have stated that the location that is shown on the current master plan provides the maximum sight distance in both the northerly and southerly directions . As a result , they feel that the parking lot should be left in its present location . In reviewing the situation , however , they did not preclude the placement of a small lot opposite the Saddlebrook Curve ' intersection . At this location , sight distance to the north is restricted . Due to the restriction , if parking is to be located in this area , the Engineering Department suggests that it be limited to a small area , accommodating only 2 or 3 vehicles . The Park and Recreation Commission needs to formulate a final recommendation on the preferred parking configuration . IC I I • —- y U- S/./4/1 7!I/I i, os i y f tA•01 I� e ' ,1 I Leo I, Ir • I 1 _ �zI l • / , ///______:______-----/ -------- ' , e 1 3/1/, , , ,/,/,4 ye /r 1 J/ /, 1,'s- —' 0 POND e,n I 4 r 4e tr 1 , •••,!..,...„or,!.., / ' 1 � r % h ♦ " ,- d SADDLEBR K - :t� ij ' z i� /,fib ,_�' o,i r ` / .„ , , . . _...„ i , " y - �- /� GATING W LKWAY / j ,r,,;,---_:.:'----:• e \\`' i s- .•• e oe P O N\ J columpipe..40:.• —"^-..., Y j t ^/......._, r. , Y TR 1 ` �i ,/ 111 Q /: , � .r• 1 t' i 1 / /' _ PURPOSE. Esta cr n J j(# � ;1 I T AI -► GENERAL RECOt • �� oa 7 s•'i' k ' ' • CATEGORY I } ° 11 Conifers AR. '.ii , i/■ . �i 1, I . „,....___-.: 0 A 1110,,,... \ i o I� If� /� \ I Grasses & Leg i i I 16 . k 1 q \I). ,.,/, O �� 3 3 \ Deciduous• -'„• '°;••X\,,s d• si Wo• roes .`\« V J s = c o ° ..)o •�4 , ••r,•�"c°Joy ,• I• 1 1 . CITY OF I CHANHASSEN 1 :K �'•` 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 1 February 7, 1989 1 Dear Chanhassen Resident: ' The Park and Recreation Commission is sheduled to review the final plan for Chan Pond Park at their meeting on Tuesday, February Z,S, 1989 at 7 : 30 p.m. at City Hall. Please feel free to ' attend this public meeting for discussion. Please contact me at 937-1900 if you have any questions . Ir Sincerely, 1 � D Lori Sietsema Park and Recreation Coor,:inator 1 LS :k 1 1 1 I(- 1 0:4i CHANHASSEN PARK AND RECREATION COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING SEPTEMBER 27, 1988 , Chairman Mady called the meeting to order at 7 : 30 p.m. . MEMBERS PRESENT: Jim Mady, Curt Robinson, Carol Watson, Sue Boyt, Larry Schroers and Ed Hasek , MEMBERS ABSENT: Mike Lynch STAFF PRESENT: Lori Sietsema, Park and Rec Coordinator and Todd Hoffman, II Recreation Supervisor APPROVAL OF MINUTES : Robinson moved , Watson seconded to approve the Minutes of the Park and Recreation Commission meeting dated September 14 , 1988 except for pages 7 and 8 which were missing from the packet . All voted in favor and the motion carried. PUBLIC INPUT AND DISCUSSION OF CHANHASSEN POND PARK. ' Public Present: Name Address John & Ann Olsen 690 Conestoga Drive Craig & Brenda Jerde 7220 Si.nnen Court Mark & Deb Olufson 761 Sierra Trail Duane Anseth 7470 Saratoga Sandy Anderson 7472 Saratoga Bonnie Coffee 7474 Saratoga Dennis Karstensen 7482 Saratoga Patti Flakne 7261 Sierra Court Sietsemsa: This item is on the agenda. As you may recall a while back the Chan Vista development was approved and part of that development included the acquisition of additional parkland around Chanhassen Pond Park. At that time we talked about ways that that park could be developed and it was the general consensus of the commission that it should be • developed as naturally as possible with the idea of bringing the people out there to enjoy nature. Funds were allocated in the 1988 budget to put together a master park plan which involves putting together topography and , boundary lines and water levels and that kind of thing. Mark has prepared a preliminary park plan to start discussion with the Commission as well as we' ve invited the residents in the area in to get their input as well as to how they would like to see the park in their area developed . ' Mady: First off, since there' s a lot of new residents here, this is Mark Koegler . He ' s a consultant with the firm of Van Doren, Hazard and Stallings and he does a lot of consulting for the Park and Recreation Commission. I I ' Park and Rec Commission Meeting September 27, 1988 - Page 2 f I Mark Koegler : Mr . Chairman , I ' d like to back up just one notch earlier to some material that Lori mentioned. Back to kind of some of the origins of ' this park and some of the thinking that ' s gone to date, at least what ' s happened to date. The park was originally acquired in pieces, as she mentioned . Probably the earliest pieces happening in the early 1970 ' s as ' part of the Western Hills development on the east side. In 1978 the City began preparation of it ' s Comprehensive Plan which addressed parks as one of the. . . It was adopted in 1980 and it has been in effect since that ' time. At that time the park was known as Western Hills Park. Consequently the name has been changed now to Chanhassen Pond Park but there are recommendations that were in that plan that we 'd like to bring for review because that essentially has been the City' s thinking for the ' past 8 years and it may be helpful in terms of putting it into perspective. The first recommendation that was in the original plan was a limited parking area should be constructed and the location as close to ' Laredo Drive as possible. Such an improvement should be adequately screened and landscaped . Item 2 was develop a master plan and planting plan for the area emphasizing native Minnesota plant materials. That' s a portion obviously of what we ' re finally doing now. Item 3 was provide ' natural environment for a variety of species of wildlife. Number 4 was develop a trail network which permits observation from high points as well as close to habitat areas. Such trails should contain grades suitable for access by handicap and elderly individuals . Item 5 , the seating area should be provided for observation purposes . Item 6, the water quality of Western Hills Pond should be continuously monitored in order to continue ' it' s safe useage by wildlife. And item 7 was the City should acquire title for easements on the land surrounding Western Hills Pond . Obviously the past 8 years that item 7 has occurred as a result of the Chan Hills development so the City now has land entirely bordering on the park and ' even extending further south probably than was originally envisioned. Let me stick an overhead up so everybody can see hopefully what we ' re looking at. As Lori mentioned, as we put together , and I 've got a larger scale ' board that I ' ll put over there . . . The purpose for the park, the master plan that ' s been put together , as Lori mentioned , is really a draft plan at this point. It' s a draft plan with two purposes. To seek. . .and receive public input which is the process we ' re beginning this evening . ' The purpose of the plan which is stated on this is to establish a passive park area accomodating the observation of plants and wildlife in a natural environment. The facilities that have been shown to date really represent ' kind of a summary of some of the discussion comments that have occurred with this group over the past several months. Again, they' re not . . . , they' re drafted for the purpose of beginning discussions . Accompanying that is just some general landscaping recommendations at this point which are intended to provide more of a natural attraction to some of the wildlife species that again, we 've been talking about. The plan itself calls for a trail network which is in this dark line. Basically it goes ' around the park. The purpose of orientation, Kerber Blvd. is over on this side . The older Western Hills portion of the development down in this portion and the new development up basically to the north side. The Park Commission has looked over on this side and having an overlook area which would be accessible from Kerber Blvd. was shown conceptually now as a one way circulation pattern with a drive in with about 7 parking stalls. The orientation being down the length of the pond and it ' s a very beautiful 11 • I Park and Rec Commission Meeting , September 27 , 1988 - Page 3 vista from up there and it certainly is not blocked by any of the tree cover or any of the grade that occurs in some of the other portions . There' s an existing bituminous trail that is now in that runs along Kerber Blvd. . There potentially are tie ins to that that would allow on grade access to get down to the park at this point with accesses then coming in possibly. There' s a steep walk and a possible cul-de-sac here. There' s of course the entrance of Laredo now and there' s the entrance that now has II been put in on the north side. The plan at the present time identifies a couple of picnic areas on the upper portion, which again is something the II Park Commission had talked about. Scattered around in some of the locations that are denoted by the s' s there are some seating areas which are just meant to be basically benches to allow observation of the pond itself and the wildlife. The surfacing of trails has not been determined II at this point. It certainly needs some additional input from the Park Commission. You talked in the past about several viable alternatives . Being either bituminous surfacing or possibly a crushed compacted rock surfacing again, to maybe' reinforce more of a natural type of approach. The vegetation that ' s shown on that plan is essentially existing with the planting selections being those that are king of a general category meant to attract wildlife based on various. . .and cover type plantings that are available. Mr. Chairman , that ' s a brief summary of what' s been put together to date. Again, the intent now is to seek further input from the Commission and from the public for the desired components of the plan so this should very much be considered a draft at this time. Mady: What I ' d like to do is open it up for public comment on the plan . We'd like to find out what you want to see in the park. It has been our intention all along to put a nature trail through the park. We want to find out what your comments are to make sure the park is going to be useable for the citizens . Dennis Karstensen: I 'm Dennis Karstensen . I live at 7482 Saratoga Drive. I do border the pond and part of the Western Hills Addition. I live right II adjacent to that . In general I 'd like to speak in favor of what you ' ve proposed so far tonight which is probably unusual for most things that you guys have people come to talk about . The reason I bought my home was because of the natural plants for the wildlife area in the back and I 'd like to see you keep it that way. One thing that should be kept in mind , if it is going to be a nature preserve, I 'd like to see some signs put up to that effect . There ' s been two problems I ' ve seen living by the pond . Some people have their dogs out there and having them chase the geese. Not just dogs. . . tell them to go chase the geese in the pond and the water and that so I see a problem. If people understand it ' s a wildlife area and keep it in terms of that . There' s also some children are building forts down there which in itself isn ' t bad but there was a fire down there the other night. Someone had a fire going under the trees behind my house and that' s where I think it should stop so there are some problems in that area as far as informing people what can be done down there. What the developer has put in for the pond permits , the developer said he would support wildlife . I guess I ' d like to , I 'm not really. . .but I have seen owls out there. I 've seen bats, hawks , geese, blue herons. Just about any of the bigger birds have been out there. . .to support wildlife that ' s out there now and if we improve , will do a lot better job in that area . 1 ' Park and Rec Commission Meeting September 27 , 1988 - Page 4 ' As far as the trail surfacing , I think I ' d like to keep it somewhat of a low speed trail . A path gravel where you can ' t ride bicycles on it or not ' necessarily ride them fast . I guess that ' s what I was kind of. . . A nature trail to. . . One thing that could be looked at, it 's supposed to be a wildlife area , what happens in the winter time? There' s some possiblities to use it as, skating in the wintertime possibly, doesn' t affect the wildlife at all . Or sliding, I think is something you want to look at for wintertime use. Summertime it 's pretty well wildlife but in the wintertime it turns into almost , it' s wild but people can use it on top of that without destroying any of it. Keep that in mind. That' s all I have. Thank you. ' John Olsen: Mr . Chairman , members , I 'm John Olsen , 690 Conestoga Trail which is just to the north of here and several of my neighbors are here tonight as well . This is the first time that we as a group have seen this particular proposal and from our quick discussion back here, one recommendation that we would make would be along this western edge, if you will , of the pond area, if you could incorporate or consider incorporating some type of apparatus for children . A great number of us are of the age ' bracket where we' re just getting to the point we either have young kids or will have very shortly. We all feel that it ' s important that any part element preserve the natural beauty of course but also incorporate in a tasteful fashion if you will , some type of jungle gym, for lack of a better term, that could be incorporated up here with the picnic tables so a family can go on a picnic to the pond and we ' re not that far from our ' houses. I would agree with the gentleman that the use of a crushed stone or an aggregate on the trails would cut down speeding people. People speeding through there on their bicycles or whatever and we could still be able to take walks with strollers and that sort of thing. It might be a ' little bumpy but depending on what you use , I think it would be workable. Mady: Are you aware that there are currently, we have two parks in your ' neighborhood . One up at the City Center Park right up here and in our budget this year we ' ve asked, we ' re looking to put up. . . Also, the Chaparral Park which is just down the other side of the pond , on the other side of Kerber. 3 or 4 blocks. You ' re on that side of Kerber already so ' there' s a trail going into there , there is playground facilities there also. ' John Olsen : I don ' t think it needs to be a major development or anything like that but 1 or 2 pieces I think would probably be sufficient. ' Patti Flakne: I 'm Patti Flakne and I live at 7261 Sierra Court . My question is one, will there be trash receptacles like at the entrance there? At the trail head? There ' s just so much garbage down there. Mady: One of the things that' s been complained at our meetings previously, there ' s a lot of flying paper around . A lot of it they tell us is due to the developer and the builders . It- Patti Flakne: . . . the builders don ' t throw those things. There are those candy, Nerds but it would be nice to have garbage receptacles at least at the trail heads if possible . I • i Park and Rec Commission Meeting , September 27 , 1988 - Page 5 47 Debra Olufson : I just wanted to get in , for sure that there is going to be a walk parkway around the pond . I 'm even concerned about wildlife. We live right on the pond and I 've seen blue herons and all kinds of wildlife and it kind of scares me that there' s going to be a walk completely. Is that for sure that there is going to be a walkway around the pond? ' Mady: It' s been our intention and something that we' ll be recommending one way or another tonight . Debra Olufson : It scares me because I 've seen 6 families of ducks and geese this spring and muskrats. Owls. I 've seen owls and herons. 6 blue herons and egrets . Then I see a lot of kids who are throwing rocks at the ducks, the baby ducks. Also, there was a near break-in at someone's house just down the street. Just down the pathway about , I think Labor Day weekend. We' re worried that that ' s going to be a problem too. , Boyt : You' re worried about the traffic? Debra Olufson: Yes , I 'm worried about the traffic and then also the wildlife . I just think that if we' re going to have , if we really want to keep it a wildlife area, I think we ' re going to lose it. It ' s going to go if we' re going to have a walking path . Sandy Anderson: My name is Sandy Anderson and I live on Saratoga Drive right on . . . and I guess I feel the same way that she does . I thi.nk. . . 10 II years and have just seen the wildlife decline and go away. It ' s not like it used to be . It ' s kind of sad teat we lost that nature. Mady: Okay, if there' s no other comments, if you have a question while we II have Commission discussions , we' d invite your comments at that time too . I 'm sure we' ll be addressing some of your concerns at our Commission discussion. Start off with Larry. ' Schroers : Basically I like the plan . I 'm encouraged to hear that the residents are also in favor and are concerned about keeping the area as close to the natural environment as possible and yet have it acceptable for public use. I think the crushed aggregate of one type of another would be fine for a trail around the park. I 'm in favor of having a picnic site or two provided that it ' s a very rustic and it' s only kept within an acceptable standard for keeping the environment as natural as possible. Treated timber . As far as the wildlife concerns , I work in an area where there' s a lot of wildlife and there' s also a lot of people. As long as the wildlife isn ' t being harassed by the people, they adapt very quickly. They' re rea-1 used to you being there even the large birds, the herons , the egrets, ducks and geese. I think it ' s the responsibility of the parents to teach their children not to throw rocks at whatever wildlife is there. I think if we use the park the way it' s meant, I don' t see a great threat to the wildlife. Other than that , I don ' t know, we ' re probably in pretty good shape as far as skating rinks are concerned in the II wintertime but we had talked about a sliding hill earlier and I would be in favor of taking a look at that. I guess that' s all I have right now. I ■ • Park and Rec Commission Meeting September 27, 1988 - Page 6 iRobinson : Mark, have you done any preliminary costs? Mark Koegler: No, we have not. We ' ll do that as the next step after you' ve decided as kind of a core group of recommendations in what you want to see. Robinson : I couldn' t see anything in 1989 , did we have any costs with this in 1989? Sietsema: No . Robinson: . . .we talked about project status . The master plan . . .park and ' development the summer of ' 89. Parking and development . Sietsema: Right . That was something that we would roll over and I don ' t believe that it was a significant amount of money. I think it was like $1, 000. 00 so if we wanted" to do more than $1, 000. 00 , it came under park development but actually what it was was like tables and benches . ' Robinson : Okay, so as far as the landscaping and what not , it ' s safe to say that you can tell the people that that probably wouldn ' t happen until 1990? ' Sietsema : Right , unless you wanted to include something tonight still because we will be discussing that on a later item in the agenda . Robinson: Just a couple of comments . I agree with almost everything that the people said . The crushed rock or the rock trail I think would be appropriate in that area . Signage . We talked about before I believe that it is necessary down there. Sietsema : That could have been included in that $1, 000. 00 . All we ' ve ' ever budgeted for Chan Pond is for the master plan to be done and then initial park benches , maybe some signs . $1, 000. 00 is what I recall . Robinson: Definitely the paper receptacles . There' s nothing worse. I walk down to South Lotus Lake all the time and pick up junk laying around . I despise that. Some kind of receptacle in appropriate spots are necessary. I guess I would like to see the walkway around the park with ' the hopes that we can do something to preserve the wildlife. It ' s such a nice area and I think we have to . . .something to preserve the wildlife down there and keep the walkway would be my position. That ' s all I have. Watson : I would like to see it stay as natural as possible. If it ' s possible, improve the habitat around that lake. . . Making areas where the birds can nest and they can try to get away. . . We don ' t have to settle ' for . . . You should still be able to walk around it. . . . there' s only so much we can do . The people will have to police themselves and each other as far as the wildlife and the garbage on the ground. It ' s everybody' s responsibility. . . Boyt: In the past we' ve talked about a sledding area and when they went through and worked on Kerber Blvd . , the engineer . . .graded the side of the 1 Park and Rec Commission Meeting September 27 , 1988 - Page 7 C hill , that ' s the area that was used as a sl edd i ng hill . There has bee n a portion kind of in your neighborhood that' s been used as a sledding hill but that won' t be used anymore . It should have been done . They cut down trees and bushes. I live adjacent to this area and I 've gone before and followed dirt bikes home after they' ve come out of that park and talked to them. I ' ve talked to kids who are down there working on the bridge. Working under the bridge building dams . It ' s a fun place for kids to play. They need some supervision down there. If you ' re walking down there , say something to them. Don ' t be afraid that they' re going to do anything. Tell them that what they' re doing is wrong. Get them out of there. Ask them their names . You really scare them once you ask them their names. I like the crushed rock trail. I lived on a pond in Florida that was completely surrounded by homes and we had a lot of wildlife. Some wildlife, the geese don' t care if you live there. They' re going to be there anyway. They like the fresh cut grass . The egrets are going to be there. The muskrats will be there. We have muskrats living next to ur house. A lot of that wildlife will stay if we provide food and coverage for it. I don' t know if you ' ve seen the planting list up there but there are lists and lists of plants that will sustain wildlife . Birds. Deer . There won ' t be deer there anymore but there were deer there a few years ago . Mady: I think we' re all pretty much in agreement of the park use . It ' s always been our desire, that the park is going to remain a low impact park. I perceive that we will be putting a trail in the park. However , I don' t see any of us wanting to do any grass cutting down there say. I don ' t see this becoming a. . . like around the lakes in Minneapolis where they cut every piece of grass right up to the lake. This is supposed to be a natural area . By keeping the grass long and leaving the trees and bushes there, we' re providing the protective areas for the wildlife that already exist . You are going to lose the deer . The remainder should remain. The birds . As long as they have protected areas so they can get away from people and be sheltered , they' ll stay. The deer however , because they' re losing, development takes place the entire circle of the park and the other side of Kerber Blvd . , they' re going to leave. You may see a couple of occasions when you ' re not going to have a family of deer II necessarily in that area any longer . I 'd like to see us continue the idea of just a few parking spaces . We' ve got what looks like maybe a half a dozen on Kerber Blvd . on the overlook area and they' re all diagonal so we have a one way drive and that ' s very important for safety. Further to the north of that area , the other curve in the trail . It might be nice to put in a couple of stalls for a picnic area . I think it' s important that we have a few picnic tables in the park, all around . . .on the outside edges of I the park. That way we can keep our garbage containers on the outside edge . We' re not inviting garbage into the middle of the park. I think it would be more appropriate on the edge. The plantings that you ' re showing , I like . I guess I want to make sure that we don ' t do a lot of plantings . What we do, I want to make sure is protective and provides the natural feeding areas but I don ' t want to see us putting everything in t— there either . It' s a pond, as it is right now, is a very nice natural II area . It needs a few plantings maybe but we don' t need to do the detail , let' s say that the downtown has done. It doesn 't have to look pretty. It just has to provide for natural wildlife. Concerning the trail down there I • ' Park and Rec Commission Meeting September 27 , 1988 - Page 8 and maybe throughout the g trail , especially if it ' s a gravel trail where you have loose rock, kids can throw them at the ducks . It' s an 11 enforcement problem and it ' s also an educational problem. The City' s trying to hire some CSO officers , safety officers who will go around and do public awareness type of education. Come into the school and tell the kids what is appropriate and what isn ' t appropriate. And an officer to patrol from time to time so they can make recommendations to the kids. As long as they define to their kids what is appropriate and what isn' t, I think we ' ll take care of most of that . John Olsen: How long does this rock last? This crushed rock. You would have that coming from Laredo . How long does this last as opposed to asphalt or whatever? We come from a little park in downtown Minneapolis where . . .everythi.ng from eagles , herons and pheasants and everything else. What' s the. . .and how long does the rock last as opposed to asphalt? ' Mady: There are two things that will happen to a rock trail . Heavy rain can wash it out so if we do the proper plantings on both sides of the trail , that will prevent a lot of erosion . You will have weeds growing up ' through it so we will have to take care of that and maybe do some chemical treatment from time to time as long as we ' re careful with it . The bituminous trail , although it would last longer , for instance the things that I personally would like to see in the park, would allow for bike traffic to past by pedestrian traffic. It also allows for skateboarding . Some of those things . It ' s my feeling that this should be a passive park and that means hiking through the tall grass or following the trail if that ' s easier for you, if that ' s what you want to do . The trail should go near the water from time to time but also stay away from the water so it provides protection areas to the wildlife. We can still get the ' opportunity to get close to them because the ducks , the geese, the muskrats , they' ll cover quite . . . As long as we give them some protected areas , they' ll be there. I 'm not real concerned because we ' ve seen that all over . Minneapolis has done , they' ve done too much actually. . . They've got a real nice area . . . for wildlife so I think we can still do that. The last thing I want to talk about is the play apparatus . ' Sietsema: Excuse me, Jim? I was wondering if maybe Mark knew what the life of the compact crushed rock might be since he probably has dealt with it. ' Mark Koegler : You touched on the biggest problem. We have to handle drainage adequately. If it' s handled adequately, if we' ve got a possible ' culvert to let the water go through, there ' s no reason that it won ' t contain itself almost as long bituminous surface. Typically bituminous surface you have to sealcoat roughly every 5 to 7 years and the life of . . . is 10 to 15 years. We' ve done quite a bit of work with the City of ' Minneapolis and St . Anthony Main area , Nicollet Island . They use the brine red rock that' s been packed and it ' s that kind of reddish brown color . It ' s very serviceable and actually the more foot traffic you get on it the better because it helps keep it compacted. It can be a very durable surface and it ' s not one that I would suggest you shy away from for fears of having to replace it every 2 years or something. That ' doesn ' t occur . Park and Rec Commission Meeting I September 27 , 1988 - Page 9 (7 II Mady: Something we have looked at in the past is woodchi.p trails . They are were very popular a while back. We don ' t see many of them anymore II because the woodchips are deteriorating . They flow away in heavy rain . They don ' t last long so if there ' s anything new on that, I guess I would shy away from. . . The play apparatus . I believe it ' s my intent to keep this park as passive as possible. If we were to put play apparatus in, the only place I think I could support it would be on the west side of the " park near Kerber Blvd . . I really don' t want to see anything structural put into the park outside of maybe a few benches and maybe an observation tower where you can get people up about 4 feet. The rest of that, it' s . . . and we do have play facilities adjacent to or very close to the park in both the Chaparral Park and there are some now in City Center Park in the school and hopefully there will be more this coming year . I guess at this II point in time I don ' t want to see anymore. Hasek : I have some questions for Mark. When this thing was first II acquired , and the process- went . . .passive park? Mark Koegler : Yes . I had summarized that , you weren ' t here at the time I think. Out of the previous Comp Plan and basically they are all passive uses including trail networks . It addresses much of the same thing that you mentioned tonight in terms of plant materials , natural wildlife, seating areas around and limited parking . II Hasek : Did you look at all about the possibility of putting some parking, obviously I think that the reason . . .did you look at the possibility of putting parking out closer to where the picnic areas are? I guess just in measuring off of the scale, we ' re looking at another 500 foot walk like we have down to Greenwood Shores . It' s hardly accessible. There is a trail connecting them that is separate from the road but it ' s still quite a walk for a person to get to it . Mark Koegler : I think that needs a little more discussion by this body because the location on that plan where it is shown, more to the south, is really the optimum place for that specific use . The picnic area , putting the picnic area on top, the most optimum location for that is under and up by the trees . If that' s the intent , possibly a secondary small parking II lot, as you mentioned, is appropriate to keep those two uses separate. That could be factored in . The other thing that is not shown on this but we talked about is that the entrance over on Laredo, there was previously discussion about having public parking spaces over there . That area is pretty tight. Perhaps if you look at a couple more , maybe 2 , 3 more , whatever , on the west side by the picnic tables , that may offset the need , for parking on the east side. Mady: The idea on the parking on Laredo , on Laredo we have 16 feet of road access on both sides of the road . We did get a trail plan approved , II funding approved to put the sidewalk on the west side of Laredo but we do k..._ still have 16 feet of road right-of-way on the east side. It ' s possible we could put in some parallel parking spaces , 2 or 3 spaces on that side. Now it is a curving road there. I 'm not sure if that ' s really adviseable. II That ' s something maybe Public Safety needs to look at but that ' s a possibility if you want to have parking on that side is to put a couple of II II Park and Rec Commission Meeting September 27 , 1988 - Page 10 parallel parking space bays on that side of the street . ' Boyt: I 'd rather see no parking on Laredo at all . Keep them to the busier road . Laredo is where our kids are right now. I think keep the parking out of there. I don ' t think it would look good . Mady: We already have people parking on the streets . It ' s just a way of getting the parking off the streets so it ' s not in the way of traffic . Schroers : I think if we make the parking too convenient and the place too nice, that it will be overused. That will take away from the passiveness of the area . I tend to think along the same lines as Jim on the formal ' type of play structure in that area . When I was growing up I spent an awful lot of time just running around out in the woods and having a great time and I didn ' t need things , an artificial play structure. When you 1 have an artificial play structure, that ' s where your attention is focused and I think the kids would be missing a lot of what the environment has to offer . It would distract their attention from it so I would just as soon ' not see a play structure. Let the kids use their creative imagination to entertain themselves . Robinson : I would agree with that . Especially since what you said Jim. I We' ve got totlots and play equipment relatively close at Chaparral and the City Park. ' Boyt : One of the things that we haven ' t mentioned is that , I think Lori was in contact with the school a year ago on this . . . if the school would like to use this . They'd bring groups of kids down to the pond to observe what the plants . ' Sietsema : Along with that , Matt did say they currently do go down there and use the park and observe and he would be in favor of and would ' appreciate some interpretive signage in that area that would point out what the different species of trees or where they might possibly see the different types of birds or wildlife . For the kids to stand in a spot and say, if you look out that way there might be a blue heron there or something or you' ll see a big maple tree or different kinds of bushes or whatever. Then it tells them something about that plant or that animal . Mady: I guess I have a concern a little bit there . I 'd like to see some interpretive signage. However , I don ' t think I want to see a sign every time on the different types of trees . Right in front of us is a maple ' tree and an oak tree and you ' ve got a sign, this is white oak. I would rather see a sign right at the start of the park that says , part of this is the City Center Park. Chan Pond Park contains various plant materials including white oaks , red maples , cedars , whatever . That way, especially ' for kids , with part of the science class and they identify those things in their books , the school can teach them by bringing them down to the park and making it into a learning situation for them. They say, okay find them instead of having it right in front of you. I don ' t want to fill the park with signs. We need a little bit of signs but I don' t want to have too many signs . I • I Park and Rec Commission Meeting 1 September 27 , 1988 - Page 11 (7 II Hasek : I guess I feel , not having been here over the last 5 years or whenever the acquisition of this park occurred, it seems to me like the intent is being met by the design . I have a little concern about the II location of the parking . I would like to see the parking closer to the picnic area for carrying in . . . I don ' t think we need more than 7 spaces in this park anyplace. I think a passive park, what I think if you' re I going to provide parking , we might as well park as close to the area and the facilities as possible . . . I think that the path ought to be aggregate lined because it ' s one of the intents of the City' s policy to provide I accessibility to the residents and an aggregate path would make it accessible to the handicap in the wheelchairs and the public which is something that . . .missing from the intent of that particular were being used . I guess generally I feel that development around the park should II not in the long run harm the general character of the park. If we take a look at the wildlife that exists in the small pond that' s just off of Shady Oak Road south of TH 7 in Hopkins , you ' ll soon realize that wildlife II and humans can live together . . . I think that this park can serve that function. I would hate to see any kind of signage at all in this park. 5 miles , 4 1/2 miles down the road you ' ve got the Minnesota Arboretum that is completely open to kids . A short bus ride out there and all of the II trees that you ' d ever want to identify. I think that to put signs in this park identifying the trees is . . .so I 'd like to see the signs . . . I think the point about the children throwing rocks at wildlife is one that has to II be policed by the adults . If my '<id throws a rock at a duck . . .so I think that ' s something the adults can take care of . Part of the reason more of the wildlife has left is because of development. I think when this park is completed . . .and the wildlife is used to it , a portion of that will begin to return. In fact at some point we ' ll have to find a way to get rid of some of it because the wildlife , the ducks and the geese are up on the yards making a mess so I think that over time will take care of itself. Probably what has happened is that . . . Mady: I had a question Mark. The trail going between the two pond II areas. There ' s the large north pond and the south pond , there ' s a trail between those two bodies and you can walk through there. The bottom this year was fairly soft . Have we looked at a floating type of a trail? Mark Koegler: What ' s indicated right now on the plan, if I g p you rad the fine print, it was a little side condition . Obviously this is not a normal year but the presumption would be that by springtime we will get a normal II rainfall , that probably will require some type of a floating apparatus or some type of a wood structure to get across there. That is shown right now as part of the plan . I Mady: Okay, is there any comment? Resident : I just had a question . Are there set park hours for the park? II Mady: Yes . Sietsema: 7: 00 to 10: 00. II II ■ 1 ' Park and Rec Commission Meeting September 27 , 1988 - Page 12 1147 Mady: We do also have , someone had commented on dogs . Currently the City Ordinance on dogs is that there are no dogs allowed in city parks period . Leashed or otherwise . We have recommended to the Council and I believe we are in the process of amending the ordinance to allow for dogs on leash on trails so whatever the current leash laws are . ' Resident: We' ve lived there 10 years and we yell at lots of kids and getting lots of people down there. It ' s real difficult for us to police ' because it ' s way down and nobody sees it . I haven ' t heard anything yet that sounded like it' s going to be any better than it has been but it ' s terrible there. Beer parties . There' s lots of stuff going on . ' Resident : We' ve had to call the police 2 or 3 times . . . Boyt: Were the beer parties on the trail that leads up to where you are? Resident : Yes . ' Resident : And the motorcycles going around . . . Boyt : We talked at one time about putting some sort of bollards and chains or just bollards to protect the entrance on Laredo so the dirt bikes can ' t get through. A. Mady: The only problem is , a dirt bike is that narrow. We can do the ' best we can. Boyt : It ' s not real hard to find where those kids are coming from either . I live right there. I followed them home. You ' ve got to go to the parents . Something that we have , ever since we' ve been up here , wherever there' s a park, there are similar problems wherever there ' s a park . Mady: It ' s an unfortunate situation including kids education and police and enforcement action. The only option other than that is to have no parks and I guess that ' s another option. . . .education and enforcement take care of a lot of it. Try to maybe not make it not as inviting a situation as possible and maybe through installing some street lights maybe. I would hate to see that down there but if that would solve the problems , than that would be done . We' ll have to watch it. The City does ' have a couple of CSO officers now and hopefully they' ll be providing a little bit more park patrolling so we can enforce the parks we have. Lori , if there ' s no other comments , I don' t think we need an action on ' this do we outside of maybe drafting . . . Sietsema : I need a motion of your direction on how you want us to proceed with this . Do you want us to add or delete anything? ' Boyt: We need to talk about the parking . IC Mady: Yes , that was about the only thing I heard that was . . . Boyt: There ' s an option though of moving the parking and , we have a seating overlook area . That ' s what it ' s for . It ' s to be a park that I Park and Rec Commission Meeting I September 27 , 1988 - Page 13 47 il could provide seating for that and parking for the picnic area . Watson : You could put the parking down here and then they could walk the II trail up here to the overlook. Boyt : When I drive by, the natural place for parking looks to be to the II north. Mady: You have to remember the sliding hill would be on the south side . II Schroers : Has the grading already been done for the parking? Mark Koegler : No . The grading permit along Kerber has been done . It II will accomodate parking either in the location shown there or further to the north . Hasek : Where ' s the sliding hill? II Robinson: South. Schroers : Will that bituminous trail that is there ri ht now be distu b II when the parking goes in? 9 r ed Mark Koegler : On this scheme , about 80 feet of it would be disturbed . II Schroers: Just taken out and . . . II Hasek : The other advantage I can think of off hand is you ' ve got a road on a curve and it ' s clearly visible. If you move it to the north, you could potentially design to exit directly opposite of Saddlebrook. Make II it more of an interchange. To me it just seems if the parking is more. . . Schroers : Is there enough base to accomodate that parking where the trail curves toward the wood line there just opposite of Saddlebrook? Mark Koegler : Part of this gets back to the issue of what ' s planned and buildable. . . II Mady: . . .but I 'd agree with Ed , I don ' t want to see 15 to 20 spaces in the park either . Maybe we if we allow 3 spaces in the overlook area. Put 4 or 5 down towards the picnic area . Hasek: What if it ' s just a pull off parking area with 3 spaces . . . ? The intent of the overlook is to have people driving by to stop and view for a minute and leave. Maybe just an off street parallel parking bay can accomodate that . Mady: Wouldn ' t you rather put in parking at the overlook . . . II Watso It is a lovely view but it isn ' t the Grand Canyon so I think i.f I ipLvi .yode . . I have a feeling that 990 of the traffic on Kerber Drive is going from one place to another and not necessarily. . . II ■ • ' Park and Rec Commission Meeting September 27 , 1988 - Page 14 I Schroers : It ' s the same traffic that goes past there time after time and ' they' ve seen it before. Watson : Right . They' re going back and forth to work, to the store, or they' re taking their kids somewhere. It ' s still pretty and local in ' nature and those people aren ' t necessarily going to pull off and look at it. They' re going to walk down there. They' ve already decided that they' re going to park and go down there and walk. Mady: When we were out there and met with Bill Engelhardt a couple of months back, the possibility of a sliding hill in that location and not all of us have our kids immediately adjacent to so we' re going to have to ' drive there. I don ' t believe we provide a sliding hill in the City right now so I 'd like to see us leave some parking available to us for the. . . ' Hasek : I 'd like to make a motion to get this thing off dead center . I 'd like to make a motion that we go ahead and develop the park as we generally discussed with the exception of moving the parking bays that were shown to the north and across Kerber Blvd. from Saddlebrook . Hased moved , Watson seconded that the Park and Recreation Commission recommend to develop the park as we generally discussed with the exception of moving the parking bays that were shown to the north and across Kerber Blvd . from Saddlebrook. Hasak voted in favor and the rest voted 3.n opposition and the motion failed . Robinson : I ' d say the same motion , that the development generally as described here with no exceptions to the parking . I like the parking as it ' s laid out with 7 spaces by the overlook area . You don ' t like that one either? ' Watson: I ' ll second that just to see how it gets the vote . Robinson: That ' s what I had an exception to on Ed ' s motion was the ' parking . Robinson moved , Watson seconded that the Park and Rec Commission recommend to accept the plan as Mark Koegler presented for Chan Pond Park ' s master plan . Robinson and Boyt voted in favor and the rest of the Commission voted in opposition and the motion failed . Mady: This is getting ridiculous . I think we ' re looking for split ' parking and if that doesn ' t have it, then we ' re going to let it drop. Hasek : Let ' s quite screwing around with this . It ' s ridiculous . Why I don ' t we give this to the City Engineer for just one session here and have him take a look at it and get his comments . To see if there' s anything , based on design that we should be looking at that we' re missing . I guess I honestly don ' t care if we ' ve got a few in one place or a few in 1 Park and Rec Commission Meeting ' September 27 , 1988 - Page 15 the othere place . Maybe the engineer will be able to tell us where the best location is for that . Does that sound like something we can agree on? Mady: I don ' t have a problem with it unless there ' s a public safety problem. . . ' Hasek moved , Watson seconded that the Park and Rec Commission direct the City Engineer to address the parking issue and give a recommendation back to the Park and Recreation Commission. All voted in favor and the motion carried . John Olsen : Mr . Chairman , this may not be germane to the discussion and obviously this is not the proper venue for it but I think I can speak for II a fair number of the residents in the area that that if you really want to enhance the park' s beauty, either (a) , enforce the 40 mph speed limit on Kerber Blvd . or in fact reduce it down to 30 mph . Boyt: You know what , you need to go to the Public Safety Commission. John Olsen : I 'm aware of that . I 'm just simply bringing that up as a general discussion about pull-offs and parking and that sort of thing . REVIEW STANDARDS FOR EQUESTRIAN TRAILS . ' Sietsema: As we move closer to the referendum, the trailway task force is moving into public meetings . Presenting the trail plan to different groups of people. One of the questions that we are anticipating to come up is what kinds of uses are allowed on the different trail systems. We feel we are pretty comfortable with what is and is not allowed on the paved trails . The sidewalks and the bituminous trails but it ' s still unclear what is intended to happen on the nature trails or allow to be happen on the nature trails . Whether horses will be allowed . I think that we've all agreed that motorized vehicles should be prohibited but the II question still remains on the horse use of the trails and what kinds of conflicts there are with pedestrians and equestrians . . . .since we do have a lot of horse trails in Hennepin Parks and maybe Larry just wants to go over some of the points that he' s found out . Schroers : I did talk to a member of Hennepin Parks Mounted Ranger Patrol and the information that I received in regards to the surface of the trail to accomodate horses , they prefer and strongly recommend turf where expected heavy use or a lot of use for horses would occur . They feel that the crushed aggregate also works fairly well but it can give some problems to the horses. Rocks got in their shoes and other things and it seems like, for whatever reason that the excrement remains longer on an f aggregate type of surface than it does on natural turf. Also, a couple of things that were brought to my attention was that in low areas , especially under wet conditions , horses tend to sink into the turf and it' s not particularly good for the horses and it pretty much ruins the trail for