The URL can be used to link to this page

12. Authorize Negotiations to Acquire Carrico Property for Park land I . 1 ._ CITYOF -- ,1 \ ,1 \ ' ,0 G CHANHASSEN. • • 1 690 COULTER DRIVE P.O. BOX 147 CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 {' (612) 937-1900 t , . V (,W " I MEMORANDUM - - riL;,2,:_- ... ._ - TO: Don Ashworth, City Manager a-� "'` IFROM: Lori Sietsema, Park and Recreation Coordinato ri.te .,�0 i!._ 1 DATE: February 22, 198944 ISUBJ: Parkland in the Pheasant Hills/Lake Lucy Highland Area 1 The Park and Recreation -Commission has received requests from the residents in the Lake Lucy Highland area and the Pheasant Hill area for parkland and recreational park facilities. At one I point it was thought that the outlots in the Pheasant Hills sub- division could be used as mini-parks . This does not look to be feasible in the near future as the City does not own the outlots I and clear title cannot be obtained until back taxes are paid. Additionally, the development contract for this subdivision does not require the dedication of the outlots . As the outlots are I used for drainage and holding ponds, it is questionable whether the topography would allow adequate park use. Given the situation with the outlots, and the fact that the I Comprehensive Plan identified this as a park deficient area, the Park and Recreation Commission felt that undeveloped property in the area should be looked at too. It was at this point that the I Carrico property was being considered for development. As the Carrico' s expressed interest in selling their property to the City ( see August 9, 1988 minutes) , staff was directed to have an 1 appraisal done and to look at the potential uses of this property and other vacant pieces in the area. Attached please find a study done on the undeveloped parcels in I the park deficient area. This study, completed by Mark Koegler, found the Carrico property to be best suited for park purposes. The appraisal the City had done ( see attached) on the property I appraises the 11. 7 acre parcel at $58, 500 . The Carrico' s have indicated that the piece would be worth $225 ,000. Staff feels the difference in the two appraisals is related to whether or not the MUSA Line would be amended to include this piece. The deci- 1 sion to allow the parcel into the MUSA area ( sewer service area) prior to the agreed to "Year 2000" rests solely with the Metropolitan Council. However, they will not consider such a Irequest without having first heard the City' s position. 1 1 Mr. Don Ashworth February 22 , 1989 Page 2 1 The Park and Recreation Commission has recommended that staff and the City Attorney be authorized to enter into negotiations with the Carrico ' s and, failing to come to terms , enter into condem- nation proceedings . If such is approved, I will send this on to the Planning Commission so as to modify the Comprehensive Plan. 1 Attachments 1 . Mark Koegler ' s Land Study. 2 . Park and Recreation Commission Minutes dated February 14 , 1989 . 3 . Appraisal. 4 . Petition. 5 . Park and Recreation Commission Minutes dated August 9 , 1988. 1 Manager ' s Comments: If the Council acts to approve the Park and Recreation Commission recommendation, a budget amendment will be required. Three sources of revenue exist: 1) actual 1988 reve- nue projected ( $59 , 000 ) ; an undesignated fund balance ( $21 ,000 ) ; and 3 ) a reserve account set up for unexpected reallocations/City share of mid-year grants ( $100 ,000 ) . The Council should be alerted to the fact that a reallocation will also be forthcoming to fund the Laredo/Carver Beach sidewalk projects (additional revenues received in 1988 over anticipated has not been included in the fugures shown above ) . 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 CITYOF CHANHASSEN 1 . 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 ', MEMORANDUM TO: Park and Recreation Commission FROM: Lori Sietsema, Park and Recreation Coordinator ! DATE: February 7, 1989 tSUBJ: Potential Parkland Sites The Park and Recreation Commission has been made aware that the Pheasant Hills/Lake Lucy Highlands area is park deficient. Upon reviewing the Carrico site plan proposal in late 1988, the Com- mission directed staff to research potential parkland in the area, including the Carrico piece. ' Attached please find a letter from Mark Koegler outlining a number of possibilities and the merits of each. As the area was studied, it was determined that the Carrico property is the best ' suited for park facilities and uses . If the Commission agrees with these findings , the City Attorney and staff should be directed to negotiate with the Carrico' s and, failing to do so, enter into condemnation procedings . Additionally, if this is the ' course of action the Commission should choose, this item should be sent to the Planning Commission so as to modify the Comprehen- sive Plan. I I I - I _ cp ' Van DorEn Hazard Stallings February 6 , 1989 Architects•Engineers•Planners I Ms . Lori Sietsema ' Park and Recreation Coordinator City of Chanhassen 690 Coulter Drive Chanhassen , Minnesota 55317 Dear Lori : The enclosed letter report is a review of alternate park location sites for a neighborhood park in the northern part of Chanhassen . In 1980 , the Comprehensive Plan identified areas north of Lake Lucy ' Road as park deficient . The acquisition of Curry Farms Park on the eastern end of Lake Lucy Road provides service to a portion of the deficient area . Areas along the western portions of Lake Lucy Road , however , remain short of neighborhood park space (Exhibit 1 ) . Neighborhoods affected by the existing park deficiency include Pheasant Hill and the Lake Lucy Highlands area . ' Two criteria governed the search for neighborhood park land in the deficient area : 1 ) sites had to be located within one half mile of the potential users and 2) sites had to be large enough to ' accommodate typical neighborhood park facilities . Neighborhood parks in Chanhassen typically include a small ball diamond , tennis courts , play equipment , trails , picnic and open space and in many cases , a small parking lot . Five acres is generally considered to be the minimum desirable size for a neighborhood park facility . Exhibit 2 identifies six sites that have the potential to serve as a neighborhood park for the deficient area . Each of these sites is summarized as follows : PARK LOCATION STUDY - SITE COMPARISONS 1 Site A Size : 12 . 5+ acres Site Description : Undulating topography generally sloping from south to north . Farmstead on west is elevated and a stand of tree cover bisects the site on the east end . I 3030 Harbor Lane North BIdg.II, Suite 104 Minneapolis, MN. 55447-2175 612/553-1950 ME ME 1 r I IIIIIMMMIMIIIIIIIIIIIIMIIIIIIIIIIIII 1 MI 111111 1 1 LILAC LANE I .ii ft RD , I !/a �1�1 I •, I • ; i • • • I I �' '�..ditik I �o��s JTI + ••409 . - 1, nia mss; .>.�:►.-ter: Ea. i °_imam .r- _ �'gjrh■ � lrfasE NM: am \c'J LTSt��i i.'TA - =IOU *4 40 ;oil 4,14 04�iciLs as►� ® :� y„u : :.. �"t .4�11 t lin r� Far s .. __ .............. ..... r --...trb.,.,11.4;..0, .z 1 .:.:.:.:.. • • .:...:.:.: • ji 'Herman••Field• ....�r:; :' �:'� ::'�::•::::: �' r ��''�� I1ETAll Ilk 4 , 2 .......... �� .� 'lel !1 E° ■ illy o '..., VI Olt"• . ,...) ,, ,i :,, co* (.,.) . .47 k 1 g 1 , .40. �, L IL fill\600.- Cavq 1 LA KE i +� i a..., \ . \ ll•t A KE ••�� ii r 1 1111111111 HAP RI SON :.t all- k I 4- ' LAKE LUCY e ! �� iAtitiliNgSji c,....4 Existin Parks - - I7 o . ..i I Gre;.nwood Shore mall •1111 . „iiii a 0 Service Area Boundaries °- Q.r0 7 .9 y� .�� II �, Park Location Stud EXHIBIT 1 ANN y___\\ I T-1 0 I I n .1 . . i V\ r .c. rr r - - - - - cci , �� , ;� ■7 — N R I 1,(� T . . : • f I �ILAC LANE I IBM OM r,,,, .._ Ilh.....i Iffirva.. IIII illiks111117: Wit] NI 1 11111Wir. .„.,,,,- 0,,,,,,,..... ..., . , •�,;�� •�: • - �� ihl� •� ��r 1■ �iILasE ■cam :■/ .c.f4 L al lE/4, r 4'i/211e(RPV IP . ,ONE. Mill ,/LTiErti`]a TA - ��' ��w- • A+�4!4�1 qI.j��►/_ :` Oyu :•.• °:::i: °: ,ice it �, �, r! --��' �� r ..... ,-trig •!a � ' 440 — 9 ;Aim Imo• ��+ 0�+vows.1..1 , i 144116..:::10 ri:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: :...:.:.:. ir- NI Nif,______ALAA si-al 1 mriiirwi g.ati?,,Alth, mil li illidei MI--M.SIM::::;.::::336::::::::::igoitlitt Ire .i ^„ , :.E. A ::::::::::::::i::::;:::::;1;i:::::i:::::;:. 111ZT"Triiiiiii a.ii....iffigU har":121111 i '1 4 1):, ..„,) .f. 1,,, Ippr 111111.1 o S� Z. , TFI� )\ ' e, J L.tt 0 1 ,( . . MI 4441.1P1.1 • r. L. Lkati.... ...:0. A/4 41 ■-..-- 111r-Tramiliina —'`--.. .,.,„ i '1'9..:: /\ \lel '4a OM B -..7.‘:***:e:""r-j. lrly) PW11141 111 ids_ IF [A KE *41 �I _ \ HARRISON 1,' LAKE LC Y ! •�E _. CHF9 4,RFAp~AD 1 Existing Parks I' ■i7 qw' ■ ' © Service Area Boundaries ° it i" a Q9rr 7 i , -4 \ P �% 1 oJ� Potential Sites _,« Park Location Stud EXHIBIT 2 ANN y 1! % , / ''- y V\ , 1 . Active Park Usage : Rolling - topography , the farmstead and tree ' cover area complicate the usage of the site for active recreational purposes . Neighborhood park uses such as tennis , a small ball diamond , parking lot , play area , picnic area and a ' sliding hill are possible with substantial grading and possible removal of the farmstead . • Service Area : The service area of Site A includes only about one half of the residential units lying north of Lake Lucy Road , east of Galpin Blvd . , and west of Yosemite. Site B ' Size : 7 . 1+ acres ' Site Description : The site consists primarily of a low area connecting Lake Lucy Road and Lake Lucy. The northeast portion of the site is wetlands . ' Approximately 1 . 5 acres along the southwest side of the site is a dry area that has been cultivated in previous years . ' Active Park Usage : Due to the extensive amount of wetlands on Site B , neighborhood park uses can not be accommodated . The parcel may be suitable for ' a future access to Lake Lucy . Service Area : Site B provides service to only about one half of the residences in the park deficient area . Site C ' Size : 11 .7+ acres Site Description : The site generally slopes from northeast to southwest . Areas of tree cover occur in the north central portion of the property. A wetland area ( not designated by City) exists on the southern end of the site . Active Park Usage : The existence of slopes , tree cover and the wetland area complicate usage of the site for ' active purposes . With minor grading , it is possible to accommodate a 250 ' ball diamond , tennis courts , play area , parking area and picnic facilities on the site . 1 II. 100%Service Area : Site C provides 100% coverage of the park deficient areas north of Lake Lucy Road . I Site D ISize : 3 . 8+ acres I Site Description : The site lies immediately north of Lake Lucy Road . The topography of the site is gently rolling with an area of tree cover on the north end . The property contains an occupied single Ifamily residence and outbuildings . Active Park Usage : The topography of the site is generally I suitable for construction of a neighborhood park . The site , however , is somewhat undersized when compared to the City ' s adopted minimum of 5 acres for neighborhood parks . IService Area : Site D serves 100% of the park deficient area north of Lake Lucy Road . I Site E ISize : 5 .0+ acres Site Description : The site consists of a low area bordered by I wooded hillsides on the east end . Scattered tree cover exists throughout the property . I Active Park Usage : Low , apparently wet areas make the property questionable for use as an active park . With soil corrections , it is possible to construct Ineighborhood park facilities on the site . Service Area : The site serves the park deficient zone but requires the crossing of Yosemite by a majority Iof the park users . ISite F Size : 4 .8+ acres ISite Description : Site F is a lowland area which receives drainage from 63rd Street as well as the surrounding properties . The site contains I scattered tree cover with concentrated understory tree cover along the south end . I 1 Active Park Usage : Use of the property for active park purposes will require the importation of fill material . 1 Substantial filling may have a detrimental impact on the surrounding watershed area . Service Area : Site F is suitably located to provide ' accessibility to the surrounding park deficient area . ' RECOMMENDATION Of the six sites considered , only "A" and "C" have serious ' potential for acquisition and development as a neighborhood park . Both sites will require grading to accommodate neighborhood park facilities . Of the two , Site "C" is expected to have lower development costs due to less required grading . In recommending a preferred site , locational criteria should also be considered . In the park deficient area , the vast majority of ' users live north of Lake Lucy Road which functions as a major collector street . Since Site "C" lies north of Lake Lucy Road , access to the park can be gained without crossing any major streets . Additionally , Site "A" is located within one half mile ' of only about one half of the potential users in the deficient area . ' Based upon site constraints and locational criteria , it is recommended that the Park and Recreation Commission pursue acquisition of Site "C" as a neighborhood park to serve the ' existing deficient area in northern Chanhassen . If you have questions on any of this material , please contact me . I will be present at the Park and Recreation Commission meeting on February 14th to further review this issue . Sincerely , ' VAN DOREN-HAZARD-STALLINGS , INC . 1 by : flitfaL , R . Mark Koegler RMK : sd 1 IICHANHASSEN PARK AND RECREATION COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING II FEBRUARY 14 , 1989 Chairman Mady called the meeting to order at 7: 30 p.m. . I - MEMBERS PRESENT: Jim Mady, Sue Boyt, Larry Schroers, Curt Robinson, Carol - _ - Watson, and Ed Hasek IISTAFF PRESENT: Lori Sietsema, Todd Hoffman, Scott Harri. and Mark Koegler <If.. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Robinson moved, Schroers seconded to approve the Minutes of the Park and Recreation Commission meeting dated January 24, 1989 meeting as presented and the Minutes of the Park and Recreation IL4 Commission Meeting dated January 31, 1989 with the correction on page 23 4 by Sue Boyt to change the word "numbers" to "members" . All voted in favor except Carol Watson who abstained from the January 31, 1989 meeting. lif - REVIEW POTENTIAL PARKLAND ALTERNATIVES IN THE PHEASANT HILLS/LAKE LUCY HIGHLANDS AREA. ISietsema: As you may recall , we' ve been discussi.ng . the Carrico site as potential parkland property in response to requests -for parkland I acquisition in that area by the residents . It is a park deficient area . Before moving ahead and going out and negotiating with the Carricos to purchase their property, we thought that it would be a good idea to look I at the entire area and vacant pieces of property to see what' s out there and what would best serve our parkland needs. Mark Koegler is here to go over what he has found. I Mark Koegler : I think most of you recall that the 1980 Comprehensive Plan that identified areas in the northern portion of Chanhassen that were deficient in terms of neighborhood parks . The standard that' s called for I - in the Comprehensive Plan is essentially a half mile service radius which is what these ' ares portray. At the time the 1980 plan was put together , Herman Field was in existence as a city owned parcel as it is today and ?''the junior high was used for summer recreational facilities. Since that Iy ti _ me, as you' re well aware, Curry Farms has been added as another park as x`' ,another park which like Herman Field is presently undeveloped. It has the "potential to service a portion of that northern area that presently had I :' "been deficient. That area being between essentially CR 117 and CR 17 on , I. _ the east and along Lake Lucy Road. The charge then when the Carrico project came in and there was public comment about the deficiency of the I neighborhood park facility, was to take a look at that area objectively and determine if there were sites that may be suitable to provide that. Looking at the area, looking at aerials and discussing it with staff, basically we formulated six alternative sites , A through F that are called I out in that exhibit. I ' ll just run through maybe some pluses and minuses very quickly on each of those. Site A, which is south of Lake Lucy Road and immediately east of CR 117 is about 12 acres of property. It is I relatively available from the best knowledge that we can find. It' s a large enough piece, 12 acres so that it can accomodate normal neighborhood park facilities : It will require some grading however . The site has a drainage area that comes through it and the farmstead sits high on the II • _ I • Park and Rec Commission Meeting ' February 14 , 1989 - Page 2 knoll . The negative side of that particular site is that given it' s distance from some of the existing residential units , it really serves only about half the population that needs parkland within that half mile radius. Another slight problem for that particular property is being on the south side of Lake Lucy Road . Obviously the population is on the north and does require a crossing somewhere of Lake Lucy Road which ultimately in this city will be a fairly busy street. Site B that was looked at is about 7 acres. Like site A is on the south side of Lake Lucy Road . It was suitable in size at that 7 acre number . However , the area contains quite a bit of lowland and really is not sufficient for neighborhood park purposes. It also would serve only a portion of the deficient area. I think we noted in the letter report that if the City was ever looking for access on Lake Lucy, that may be a suitable site, where it' s not suitable for a neighborhood park. Resident : Are these sites labeled up here? ' Mark Koegler: Yes, they are. Alright, I ' ll run through it. A is right here. B. C is up in here. It' s this cross hatched area here. D is immediately east of there. E is this lined piece over here on Yosemite. F is north of a portion of the Pheasant Hill development right now. Those are the 6 that we reviewed. Site C on that exhibit which is the Carrico piece, again is right at 12 acres , plus or minus . It is sui table in size and topography and will require a minor amount , moderal amount of grading to accommodate, particularly a ball diamond , a neighborhood type ball diamond facility. It is very centrally located and does service the neighborhood that is in need of parkland at the present time. It also, given the street right-of-way that' s platted in there, provides a good walking access to the park. Resident: How much property is it? Mark Koegler : About 12 acres. I think it ' s 11. 8 if I remember exactly. A portion of that is lowland. I 'm sure you ' re aware along the extension of Lake Lucy Road which is known as Lake Lucy Lane I believe, there is a f , significant lowland down in that area that is basically wet. Site D is east of that, that I highlighted on the map a moment ago. It' s a much 14(-smaller piece. It's 3 1/2 acres. It does have suitable topography but the size would be a constraint to developing the normal types of - ' facilities than having enough open space that typically the city has tried to place in neighborhood parks . Site E is east of Yosemite. It ' s a somehwat low area that's surrounded by wooded hillsides. We have some concerns just with soil and drainage in the area that it would be costly to develop as a neighborhood park. It would potentially be feasibile. The site is large enough. The final site that we reviewed was Site F. Again, it' s about 5 acres and that' s the one that I referenced being immediately north and a part of Pheasant Hills . It ' s suitably sized . However, this one I think potentially has the most drainage problems of any on the site. It' s a very low area and it ' s one that accepts drainage from literally all of the surrounding properties. Of the sites that we looked at, realistically, there are only two that should be considered for serious possibilities as neighborhood parks and that' s Site A and C. A again being the one south of Lake Lucy Road and C being the Carrico I • ' Park and Rec Commission Meeting February 14 , 1989 - Page 3 In looking property. g at location criteria , potentially developability, if you will, of the two sites, we think C has the edge. It' s centrally located , as I indicated. We did a very rough grading schematic to see what would fit on the site and could easily will accommodate a 250 foot or so ball diamond and a couple of tennis courts , a small parking lot , if it ' was desired off of Lake Lucy Lane, normal picnicing, trails, things of that nature. So our recommendation will be that the Park Commission endorse parcel C for potential acquisition as a neighborhood park. ' Schroers: Since C and D abut up to each other, would it be suitable to put those two together? ' Mark Koegler : A portion of D has an occupied single family residence on it. That' s not true of C. It is true of some of the other parcels. A I think is the only other one that has a residence on it at the present time. That 12 acres and with the amount of open space that' s there, I think C in and of it ' s own -is certainly adequate to provide neighborhood park facilities that would service that area. So I don' t think that 3 1/2 acres would really be a benefit. Robinson: I don ' t understand . I ' ve got a question .for Lori . In your memo Lori , I don' t understand because it says, if the Commission agrees ' with these findings . The City Attorney and staff should be directed to negotiate with Carricos and, failing to do so, enter into condemnation proceedings . What do you mean by condemnation proceedings? Sietsema: If we want the Carrico property and we can' t come to terms as far as a price for that property, agree on a price , then we would go through condemnation and the courts would decide the price of what we ' would have to pay for that . The City has the ability to condemn property for parkland. Robinson : Condemn at a determined price? Sietsema: We still have to pay for it if we condemn it but the courts then decide what that property is worth. Isn' t that your understanding? Mark Koegler: Yes. There are. . .done by both sides in that situation. Ultimately it goes down to a panel of 3 and then it' s determined out. ' Mady: Mark. . . , is that the Nye property? ' Mark Koegler : Yes it is . Mady: I 've had two different phone conversations with Tom Nye over the past two weeks. He' s interested in having the city look at his property. He' s also said, if we don ' t want the Carrico property, decide we can' t get it together on the property, he would be interested in talking to us about his property. He claims he has . . .acres but he will only give us 3. 6. Mark Koegler : In looking at that particular piece, we made some generalized assumptions as to where the house sits now and what you might I Park and Rec Commission Meeting , February 14 , 1989 - Page 4 be able to detach. If you found out , if he ' s got 8 acres , a parcel of 5 is not unreasonable. Robinson: When we discussed this before, weren' t we talkin g in the 5 acre range that we would need at the minimum? Si.etsema: Minimum. Robinson: Do you know of the site C, 11. 7 acres , how much is not wetlands? Mark Koegler : I 'm going to have to take an educated guess and I think it' s in the neighborhood of 7 1/2 - 8 acres is clearly high and dry, if you will . There' s probably a certain percentage of that that' s questionable and then a larger percentage of what' s left that' s actually wet. The one copy of the City' s wetland map that we have, does not ' designate that property as -a city wetland but I can assure you it' s very wet. Mady: That' s the southwest corner of the property? Mark Koegler: Yes. The drainage course kind of comes around that exception property where the letter C is that is owned by a gentleman named Mr. Hughes. There' s a drainageways that come around through there and picks up drainage all the way up from the Nye property. From there, it comes down through there also. , Hoyt : Since it' s not designated as a wetland , we could grade to fill in some of that wet area with special permits? Mark Koegler : Presumably so. Now it may subsequently have been designated on a newer version of a map. I think the potential is there and what would enhance that wetland and possibly open up some water in some of that lower area to where it is seasonally wet right now. Those are the kinds of things that we ultimately look at if it was acquired and we had been looking at plan options . , . Mady: I'd like to ask anyone that' s in the audience to address any concerns or questions, comments, to please come the podium. State your name and your address and let us know what you have to say. 1 Mary Cordell : My name is Mary Cordell and I live at 1730 Lake Lucy Lane. I 've been coming to a lot of these meetings about the park plan and I 'm a real supporter of getting some parkland in the area. I think the Carrico property is an excellent choice. I 'm concerned about the other choices that would be directly on Lake Lucy Road which is going to be a very busy, and once it goes through to TH 41, if that does happen, it will become increasingly busy so I think the access off of Lake Lucy Lane which is a very low traffic area , would be good for the neighborhood . Also , there would be access across land for Pheasant Hill too so I think the walkability to the park is a great asset . Also the size of it. I think we should get as large of a parcel as we can for the area because these large parcels are disappearing very quickly with all the development . I 'm I • ' Park and Rec Commission Meeting February 14, 1989 - Page 5 very strongly in Y g y favor of this . Particularly this parcel . . . Boyt: Mary, since you brought up Lake Lucy Road. I don' t know if you attended the Council meeting last night but they discussed taking the trails off of Lake Lucy Road and I 'd just like to say, if any of you live ' out there, you might want to let the Council know if you don' t agree with what they' re doing or if you agree with it. They' ll be discussing it again in two weeks . Tom Steinkamp: Taking the. trail off? Boyt : Yes, and changing it to a parking area. ' Steinkamp: Who would want to park along Lake Lucy Road? ' Boyt : The people who live on Lake Lucy Road . Steinkamp: They all have half mile driveways . Mark Cordell : They' re talking about putting the bike trails up on top of where they' re putting the water lines. Having a bike trail off the road which I think would be an advantage because most people don' t ride on bike trails . Boyt: I don ' t think that was the consensus of the Council that they would ' take off the on road and put an off road. I think just take it off was it. I think it would be helpful to talk to them because any park that goes into this area is going to be accessed by Lake Lucy Road and it' s going to be pretty dangerous if there ' s no trail out there. Sietsema: The Council ' s trying to be very receptive to what the residents of the City want and there are people that have come that have expressed a need to park on the road and not necessarily a need for the trail . They need to hear if there is a need for a trail . If you then you should probably let them know. Hasek: I think it would also be helpful , our Minutes are verbatim too so if you do have a comment on that, now wouldn' t be a bad time to get it into the record . Resident : . . .parking along side the road? Boyt: No, they' re talking about taking it off both sides . Mady: The problem, the way trail is , because it ' s on road , you can not have a bike trail with bike traffic going the opposite direction of the car traffic. Bikes have to travel the same direction as traffic so you can not just move the trail to just one side of the street legally. We can ' t do that. ' Watson: Unless it' s off . Mady: Unless it ' s off road . 1 Park and Rec Commission Meeting ' February 14 , 1989 - Page 6 I Schroers : I would like to officially comment on that. That is currently my jogging route and I don ' t want to jog in traffic. I definitely want a trail on the side of Lake Lucy. Sietsema: You' re right . There was talk about putting an off street trail on top of the trunk watermain and that is an option and then they could have had off street trail with an on street trail on the north side for bikes and then parking on the south side. But the City Council has not heard that there' s a need for a trail there at all . The people that have lived, that have been coming to the meetings have expressed that there is no need . The people aren' t using it and there isn ' t a need for a trail so if your views are different than that, they need to hear that because they want to be responsive to the residents . Tom Steinkamp: Someone should go out there on an evening in the summer and look at all the poeple--walki.ng up and down that road. I guess I 'd better make some formal comments rather than sitting back there. First of all , as far as the parkland is concerned . 1 Mady: Who are you? Tom Steinkamp: Tom Steinkamp. 1771 Pheasant Circle. First of all , as far as the parkland is concerned, I guess I would most favor, or mostly C, the Carrico property as well . I think A might be a good piece of property for parkland but I think it ' s kind of out of the area where I 'm concerned about and I think if you look at it , just look at the population of the area, it looks like most of it quite a bit farther north and closer to C so I would favor C. I know that you mentioned, just skimmed over it but I think that there is a legitimate access from, is it Wood Duck that ' s into that Carrico property so as that gets developed more , so we wouldn' t have a problem with people cutting through people' s yard as those homes get built in there. In talking about the trail along Lake Lucy Road, I guess I would strongly object to removing the trail . I guess if we were looking at an alternative for a trail along Lake Lucy Road , I 'd be interested in hearing what that is but abolish a trail on Lake Lucy Road to me would be foolish. That road was 15 feet wide 2 years ago and nobody could park on it. Why all of a sudden do people need to park on it now? I don' t understand . That it' s a nice wide road . You go out there in the evening in the summertime and you meet dozens of people along Lake Lucy Road. As Curry Farms gets built up later this fall , we saw more and more people walking on Lake Lucy Road. I know my wife walks to CR 17 every night on Lake Lucy Road so I think that it' s important to keep a trail of some sort there on Lake Lucy Road. If it ' s acceptable, if there's the possibility of putting it off the road , that 'd be fine with me but to abolish it or get rid of it completely, I 'd be strongly against that . Hasek: Is it safe to say that your neighbors would be strongly against it? Tom Steinkamp: Oh yes . They' ll hear about it. ' 1 I Park and Rec Commission Meeting February 14 , 1989 - Page 7 Hasek : If you can' t make it to these meetings , you can contact Council by letter too. Or the City or phone. ' Tom Steinkamp: Has there been ongoing talk about this? ' Mady: They discussed it at the meeting last night. There was a motion made to have it come back to Park and Rec for review and Council voted against having the Park and Rec Commission review it. They thought they could handle it on their own at the Council meetings . I believe it ' s a very important issue that I think you need to. . . Sietsema: This is the second time it ' s been discussed at the Council level . Last night was. It was brought up and they discussed it so this is the second discussion of it. ' Mady: Actually, we' re not even supposed to be discussing it tonight . That was the impression I got from the Council but it' s important enough. . . Hasek: We are the Commission and I don ' t think that unless Council shows up here that they can really tell us what we can and can not talk about as long as it' s related to Park and Recreation. -- Tom Steinkamp: I would think that it should be you the ones talking about it instead of them. 111 Joe Schimml : I 'm Joe Schimml , 1751 Pheasant Circle and located right here. I will heartily agree with , I chose C as the option for the park is concerned . I think it' s necessary, it has to be where the people are and ' just in Pheasant Hill , right here, there are 87 lots. If you look at the families out there, there are probably 2. 4 or 2. 8 kids per family. Boyt: Little kids too. Joe Schimml : Little kids. Our youngest is 23 so I don' t care if there' s a park there or not but I think it' s important for the neighbors to have a ' park there. On the Lake Lucy Road, I can ' t imagine sound judgment going into taking both of the paths off. If there' s an alternative to putting them on the side of the road , I can see that but it is basically going to • ' get busier isn' t it so certainly I 'd like to go on record as saying we do need , at the least , a trail along Lake Lucy Road . Tom Steinkamp: The traffic gets going pretty good now that you' ve made that nice road . The traffic gets going pretty quick on that road too . I think it ' s important to have something set aside for people for that reason too because it would be quite dangerous without it . Boyt: Well , and as the park at Curry Farms is developed too. . .park area . Mady: One of the things I tried to bring to the attention of the Council last night in the discussion, the residents who were in attendance indicated there was a lot of traffic there and I mentioned to the Council that as we are developing Curry Farms park in the next couple years , • 1 Park and Rec Commission Meeting February 14 , 1989 - Page 8 I informed them that the Commission is aggresively seeking parkland in the Pheasant Hills area. That we now have reasons for people going from one end of Lake Lucy Road to the other end . Those things there, people start to move and there isn' t anything there right now does not mean 5 years from now it' s not going to be a great need . We need to keep the future in mind when we do these things. We can' t just do what' s politically II expediate today and find out that we made a big mistake 2-3 years down the road. Anything that we can do to help condemn it , just let us know. Hasek: I think one other thing about the trail that is currently placed along Lake Lucy Road is that it' s not only there for the people that abut the property and use it from the park to wherever . It' s part of a much larger system that' s actually put in place and was thought about being in II place for once again, all the residents of the city as opposed to just the people that abut the property and that' s a concern often time forgotten. I think it' s important that it' s kept in mind . This body is here to represent all of the people of the City, not just the abutting property owners . Tom Steinkamp: When I looked at your trail system that was voted on at the last referendum, that' s one thing I looked at. How do I sit in on this whole trail program? If the trails are all going to be on the other side of the City, well I 'm not going to vote for it but it looked to me like you people did a good job of getting trails throughout the city and part of that trail is that trail on Lake Lucy and how does that connect me now to Lake Ann? I looked and I specifically looked and I can ride a bike on a trail from my house to Lake Ann once the trail system gets in and that' s one of the reasons I voted for the trail system. Not you ' re taking away that link if they do indeed do that. Boyt: And it is a link. It ' s part of the whole system. It' s not just one road. Mary Cordell : I just want to add too . I didn ' t really comment on the trail system when it was up there but. . . Mady: You are who again? , • Mary Cordell : Mary Cordell and I live on Lake Lucy Lane but our property is also on Lake Lucy Road. To me personally the parking is not an issue but I definitely would be in favor of an off street bike path because I think it would be safer. The road is getting so busy that I probably won' t let my kids bike on there until they' re 12. I don' t know. Which is 10 years from now. I would definitely favor putting in an off street walking , biking trail , whatever , but I would not want to see the trail abolished by any means. If it has to stay on street, I guess on street is okay although I do notice that a lot of the bikers don' t really bike in the trail because of the gravel runoff and that they bike in the road . Sietsema: That should be slowing down once construction slows down in that area too. i ' Park and Rec Commission Meeting February 14 , 1989 - Page 9 Mary Cordell : Yes , but if it was off street , that 'd be nice. We moved here from Minneapolis and the bike trail system around the lakes and that was wonderful and very safe . Mady: I ' ll defend Don at this point because Don you' ll at least be able I to keep it for the next two weeks without Don ' s help it wouldn' t even have been there. ' Hasek : Keep it? What do you mean? Mady: Remove it last night. ' Hasek: Somebody made that motion? Mady: Ursula . Hasek: You may want to write a letter or contact Ursula too. Mady: It's still there. Don' s got some ideas on how we can keep it there so thank you both . Tom Steinkamp: You mean without any notice to any of the concerned people, I can come in here and speak my piece and if I put on a good enough speech , I can get something passed without somebody taking a look at it? Boyt : Not at this level . We just recommend . I don' t know about the Council . Tom Steinkamp: But that ' s what happened at City Council last night . Boyt: Almost. Mady: Any other comments on the Carrico property? Lori , have you gotten any indications from Carrico' s what their estimate of the park is going to be? Sietsema: Their appraisal is not completed because their appraiser has been ill . He had some preliminary numbers . I was supposed to meet with ' him today and I was ill but what he said is he was willing to sell to the City but not for a mere $55, 000. 00. He felt the property was worth $225, 000. 00 and he has a purchase agreement to that affect and that' s how ' much he would be asking for the property so I have a hunch that' s based definitely on water and sewer being available to the property. He can not get, the way I understand it, he can not get water and sewer without the support of the City and if the City should decide that they want the ' property, I don' t see us supporting him pursuing water and sewer. Getting approval from the Met Council . Therefore , the property would be worth as a rural piece. I don' t know if he would ever agree to that. That' s where the Attorney comes in and negotiations start and if we can' t come to terms , then we'd have to go through the condemnation process . Mady: Is there any other discussion? 1 Park and Rec Commission Meeting 1 February 14, 1989 - Page 10 Robinson: Do we need the whole 11. 7 acres? Boyt : Yes . Because we don' t have chances in that area to get large pieces . . . Mady: It' s always nice to start as big as you can and get half the work down if we have an option. But if you start at the minimal . . . Sietsema: The bottom line is, if we were going to take a minimum of 5 1 acres, we' re not going to take the wetland part because we want active parkland and if they can ' t build on it, we can' t build on it . Therefore, he'd only have 2 acres left of buildable property and I don' t know how they' d work around that. Hasek: . . .positive response to area A. I Boyt: It' s rather removed from where most of the people live . Most of the lots around it are large lots. You also would have to cross Lake Lucy Road to get there. Watson : And there is a single family residence on it. Boyt: It would have to take a lot of grading. Schroers : I 'd like to move that we recommend to Council to pursue II acquisition of Site C as a neighborhood park in the Pheasant Hills area to serve growing Chanhassen . Hasek: Second. 1 Boyt: Does it have to be recommended to Council or do we direct staff to enter into negotiations? Sietsema: I 'm not sure. Boyt : In your recommendation here it says , we recommend that if the 1 budget has to be amended. Sietsema: I think it would be wise to take it to Council now because it' s 11 going to ultimately have to go to them and why spend the money on legal fees without their consent . Hasek: We' ve gone through the hassle of having Mark take a look at this. Do we have a reasonable alternative is C just turns out to be. . . Boyt : A is our next alternative. 1 Hasek: Do we want to stick that into a form of a recommendation? Mady: I don' t believe so. If the Carrico property were to just 1 disappear , it just wasn' t feasible in any way, shape or form, then I think we would want to maybe redo it. Park and Rec Commission Meeting February 14 , 1989 - Page 11 Hasek : That could be stated in the motion . Tom Steinkamp: I think we as residents would want to know if plans change . I wouldn' t want you to put C first , A second and go on to A ' without us knowing about it. Mady: From my standpoint , C is the clear choice. I don' t have a second choice at this point. There' s not a second choice here. Tom Steinkamp: Does anybody have a wild guess as to what kind of time frame we' re looking at? ' Sietsema: If we have to go through condemnation, it could be a while. Tom Steinkamp: 5 years? Sietsema: No, I wouldn ' t think that long but it could be substantially to 2. 9 tang ally a Tom Steinkamp: I guess that brings me to the next comment. At the first meeting we had there was some talk about putting a totlot or something I maybe for the time being kind of thing . I think it ' s fairly important to have parkland but is there any possibility for one of those outlots, I think there ' s really only one that ' s got any possibility on it and you people have to actually take a look at that and see, to put a small totlot on that lot . Playbox , swingset , something like that. There' s dozens of kids in here that are under the age of 5 and they' re all in the street right now. iMady: We looked specifically at the lot that Tom Klingelhutz had mentioned and it' s got an awful steep back drop and it can' t be more than, ' I don ' t know, if I remember right , maybe 8 feet wide . Boyt: Doesn' t it back up to a wetland? ' Mady: It ' s steep. It' s a real steep drop and it ' s right on the street. . . Tom Steinkamp: But that goes all the way around to that house that' s there and that' s 150 feet deep at that point . It ' s . . .steep as it goes towards that house. It backs up all the way against, right there. See, on the south end of that , that south end . That south end has got to be 100 feet deep. It' s as deep as that lot is where that house is sitting on. Sietsema: The other thing to consider on that is that we do not have ownership of those outlots . It was not a stipulation of the development contract that they deed those outlots , although there was discussion that they would do that. The owners , the developers did not do that. There are taxes owed on it . We can not acquire it until the back taxes are paid. They' re not paying, I don ' t know if they' re going to pay the taxes but one way that we can acqui._re them in the future is through tax forfeiture because they haven' t been paid for the last two years . Park and Rec Commission Meeting February 14 , 1989 - Page 12 Tom Steinkamp: Is there any recourse you could take on other property as far as taxes are concerned? Taxes on the property that haven' t been paid , for? Sietsema: I don' t believe so. It' s really a County, I don' t think so . Not that the City has that I 'm aware of but I think that it' s Outlot C that will be going up for tax forfeiture next year if taxes are not paid by that time so that would be available in 1990. Then the other two would be available in 1992. Hasek: What is our position on collecting lots like that? I know that eventually they go up for bid but if a government body, we get it first? ' Sietsema: We get it first . Hasek: That might not be a dumb thing to do in the interim. Take a little closer look at it and see if it is possible and if it makes some sense. Tom Steinkamp: They' re playing in my yard now and that' s great , I don ' t have any problem with that because I 've got kids of my own. I like them to pay in my yard but that lot ' s bigger than my yard , the part that they' re playing in, so I think that it' s feasible. Granted on the north side of there it gets pretty steep and I think if it was just graded a little differently, you could knock some of that out of there. In other words, right now it goes from the back of the lot towards the street . If you sloped it the other way, went from the street to the ponding area , you 'd cut a lot of that hill out, number one, and number two, you 'd make it deeper because there ' s quite a bit of room once you go drop off the bank. There' s still quite a bit of room to where the barrier , the erosion barrier was put in to protect the wetlands so I think there' s some room there even after the dropoff if it was regraded a little bit . Boyt : One of the things we discussed , it was a while ago, that there are a limited number of dollars to be spent in this area and would it be better to put them into acquiring a decent piece of property or making do with a small piece. I think what we'd do if we decided we wanted to look for the best we can provide for your neighborhood. Tom Steinkamp: And we appreciate that. My only concern is that, if you ' go into condemnation with Carricos , you and I all know that it ' s more than 2 years. Boyt : Another alternative is for your neighborhood to get together and acquire that piece of property as an Association piece of property and develop it yourselves . I don' t think we have the dollars to put into that. Mady: That' s the problem we have is just the limited number of dollars we II have to spend because we don' t get any dollars from the property taxes. It comes straight from development fees . I Park and Rec Commission Meeting February 14 , 1989 - Page 13 Tom you Steinkamp: If p y guys can get ownership of i.t, I can get it regraded. I ' ll grade it . Boyt : That ' s important to know. ITom Steinkamp: And we' re not looking for any major . . . Boyt : But grading is normally a big expense . Tom Steinkamp: Well, I ' ll do the grading for you. Mady: Thank you very much for your help tonight . We really appreciate 11 it. It makes our job a lot easier when we get good assistance . Mary Cordell : When will this be put before the City Council then? Is that in two weeks or is that a longer process? Sietsema: I ' ll try to schedule it for the next two weeks . I ' ll definitely notify you before that meeting. If the next agenda is too full , it will go to the following but it should be able to go within the next two weeks. I ' ll let you know. Hasek : I have a quick question and I know there' s been some discussion on the trail on Lake Lucy Road tonight . What is the City' s policy regarding that? I know that a developer has an obligation to let people within x ' number of feet know that they are doing something. If the City has a project going on such as installation or removal of this trail , are they obligated to notify people within x number of feet of that project as well or not? Sietsema : I don' t think legally we are. Do you know Mark? ' Mark Koegler: To the best of my knowledge, it ' s not an item that State Statutue requires any kind of public hearing process at all . Hasek: Even though it impacts more than just the people that abut the property? The people that are here voicing an opinion? Mark Koegler : It' s really a regulatory function of changing signage and striping . Yes , you take the trail off but really you ' re just changing the parameters of the road. That' s not subject to public hearing as far as I know. Hasek : How would it be if a park were being sold for development . . . Mark Koegler : That action has to be approved by a judicial body in order to platting park property. . . Hasek: . . .platted trail separate from the road and outside of the right-of-way or within an easement, then there notification would be going out but because it ' s within the right-of-way, it doesn ' t have to be done? 1 Park and Rec Commission Meeting , February 14 , 1989 - Page 14 Mark Koegler : If it was platted , I would agree it would have to be. If it' s an easement situation, I 'm not too sure what. If that sheds a different light on it or not . When you have a platted piece of park property, it can be reverted back to private purposes but it' s a legal process . Hasek : If you have an easement and you' re not using it for the purpose that the easement was acquired , do you give up the right of that easement at that point? Mark Koegler : I 'm not certain . Hasek: It seems a little short sighted on the City' s part as far as I 'm concerned to take an action like that without all of the affected property II owners or users knowing what ' s going on and I think if the policy isn ' t in place, then perhaps the Planning Commission or Council should get together II and put something down to do that . If the intent is to listen the abutting property owners , then I think all of the people that show up or are impacted by that ought to be notified that it ' s happening before hand so that they can have equal input. It' s just a suggestion of course. Schroers moved , Hasek seconded that the Park and Recreation Commission to recommend to pursue acquisition of Site C, the Carrico property, as a neighborhood park in the Pheasant Hills area to serve growing Chanhassen. All voted in favor and the motion carried . FINAL REVIEW OF THE SIDEWALK PLANS ALONG CARVER BEACH ROAD. Scott Harri : I don' t know if you all remember , I was here December 13th and we presented kind of I guess "final design" for the trail system. After some very good interaction discussion with a fairly active group of neighbors on Carver Beach Road , we kind of threw the ball back in their court and I had roughly sketched out for them a trail system along the north side of Carver Beach Road with a few notes on the plan which illustrated the types of features and tree removal and mailbox adjustments , etc . etc . so they could make some contact with their neighbors. I guess following 6 to 8 weeks of throwing the ball in their court , Lori was informed that they didn ' t meet with a lot of success in selling that trail system on the north side of the road. So pursuant to your recommendations at the December 13th meeting there have been one modifications made then to the trail system on Carver Beach Road. That would be to extend the trail from, if you recall , we were proposing a crossing of Carver Beach Road . . .and we would be eliminating that crossing , extending the trail system all the way up to Nez Perce where there exists now a four way controlled intersection creating a more formalized crosswalk at that location. Remodeling the fencing at the park to allow for a more attractive and inviting entrance to the park at that point and doing some fence work way on the west end of the park to discourage the ' people from crossing Carver Beach and going across private property. So those were the modifications we had yet to I guess implement them in the form of a drawing. We will do that if that is your pleasure before we MI Andrus Agency, Inc. I Minnetonka Business and Professional Center 17809 Hutchins Drive,Minnetonka, MN 55345 Phone 612.474.9443 Fax 612.474.0922 i"' ' November 21 , 1988 <.r, Ms. Lori Sietsma :,..,: .:i ,,,„., Park and Recreation Director Chanhassen City Hall ;, Chanhassen, Minnesota 55317 ,. Dear Ms. Sietsma: At your request, I have personally inspected an 11 .67 acre parcel of land on Lake Lucy Lane in Chanhassen. I have also reviewed a preliminary layout of the parcel contained in the "Carrico Addition" plat which was revised September 9, 1988 IIby Cardarelle and Associates, Inc. , Land Surveyors. You asked that I provide you with my estimate of the current fair market value of this parcel. Based upon my I investigation, I am of the opinion that on November 21 , 1988, the date of this letter, the subject parcel has a fair market value of: IIFIFTY EIGHT THOUSAND FIVE HUNDRED DOLLARS $58,500.00 1 : - This was a very difficult parcel to evaluate. While it is an attractive parcel that would be reasonably easy to develop 4and would have appeal to prospective homeowners; it is not within the confines of the Metropolitan Urban Service Area. This, of course means that currently, it cannot be ii " -,P:4 ,-- subdivided in the manner proposed in the preliminary plat proposed by Cardarelle and Associates. I ;," According to the current Chanhassen Zoning map, this parcel �� i� . as of February 19, 1987, is in a Rural Residential District. ''' - . The City Code indicates that a one-unit per ten-acre density is required in the zoning district. If I read the code -. -Ir • correctly, 2 units could be built on this property unless it . "j_' can be rezoned. It can only be rezoned if it can first of all be placed inside the MUSA line. I I Real Estate Services for Business I Individual Membership, Society of Industrial &Office Realtors • Certified Commercial&Investment Membership• National Association of Realtors Minneapolis Commercial Multiple Listing Service• Independent Fee Appraisers Association I II Ms. Lori Sietsma 1 ' November 21 , 1988 Page 2 I had a long interview with Mr. Carl Burandt at the Metropolitan Council concerning the probability of the subject property being put inside the confines of the MUSA line in the near future. His answer was that since Chanhassen has substantial land within the Urban Service Area now, he would think the possibilities would be very low. He went on to say, however, that the City Council does have the right to move the MUSA line around. This can be done only by "swapping" some land that is currently within the MUSA line for some property that is not so that the area within the MUSA line remains the same. The owner of the subject property, he explained, would have to find an owner willing to "swap" and would have to take his case before the Council. I talked with land developers in my efforts to determine the development potential of this site and the costs involved. One developer, Mr. Don Peterson, told me of a very attractive 15 acre parcel he was about to purchase in Plymouth. His last minute research revealed that the property was adjacent ' to, but outside, the MUSA line. He went to the City of Plymouth and was told that there was no way this property could be subdivided into residential lots until the mid 1990 ' s. His comment was that he would never again consider a property in this situation. Too risky, in his opinion. The City of Chanhassen has been doing some Tax Increment 1 financing in some parts of the City in an effort to encourage development. One might assume from this that the City might be somewhat positive about getting this property within the MUSA line confines. Current real estate taxes on property are $572. If homes were built on the 13 lots that are proposed, the taxes based upon 1988 assessments would be in the area of $3,500 a home for a total tax potential of at least $45,000. (13 X $3,500) . I have called the Planner' s office in Chanhassen to get , another opinion regarding the likelihood of the rezoning, but have been unable to get a call back. I Andrus Agency, Inc. Real Estate Services for Business 1 Ms. Lori Sietsma November 21 , 1988 ' Page 3 _ I have reviewed the sale prices in our files of many single family residential lots in Chanhassen and the surrounding area, and have concluded that the fair market value of the lots proposed in the preliminary plat we have referred to at ' this time would be approximately $30,000 per lot. In referring to our files and talking with some developers in the area, I have come to the conclusion that the reasonable ' price for a developer to pay for this site, assuming it could be developed as the preliminary plat specifies, would be 25% of the estimated projected sale price. We have projected a sale price of the lots when completed to average $30,000. 13 lots X $30,000 = $390,000. 25% of $390,000 is $97,500. Because the subject property is not inside the MUSA line and ' because it is zoned rural residential, there would be a great deal of risk and a lot of work involved for a developer who would purchase it based upon its 13 lot development potential. For this reason, a 15% of projected sales price rather than a 25% of projected sales price factor has been applied. 15% X $390,000 = $58,500.00. ' A representative from our office spent several hours in the Carver County Assessor's office this week tracing all land sales made in the county in the last two years. We therefore have a good idea what has been paid for acreage sales when the land has been zoned RSF and when it has been zoned RR. We also feel we have enough information to indicate to us what finished single family home sites have been selling for. ' In the essence of time and the expense involved, we have not gone into detail regarding comparable sales in this report. If you would like us to do so, I will gladly send some ' examples of actual sales that helped us to a conclusion regarding the fair market value at this time. This estimate of value required a great deal of research and some assumptions. It was necessary to consider the value if ' in the MUSA line and value if outside of the MUSA line and the probabilities regarding rezoning. We also had to consider the value of individual lots if completed as plotted. The value conclusion has hopefully taken all of these factors into consideration. II Andrus Agency, Inc. Real Estate Services for Business 11 1 Ms. Lori Sietsma II November 21 , 1988 Page 4 I This should not be considered as an appraisal but rather an opinion of fair market value. An appraisal would involve II _ much more detail and include all of the legal aspects of the property involved. I would be glad to provide you with all of the detail if requested. If this report has not addressed all of your concerns regarding this property, please let me II know. I assume no responsibility for matters of legal character II affeacting the property. It is assumed that the title of the property is good, free and clear of any liens, encumbrance, and title defects. II No survey of the property was made andtherefore, the size of the lot and the boundaries are taken fromrecords believed to be reliable. II I have no personal interest or bias with respect to the subject property. It is understood that I will not be II required to give testimony or appear in couart by reason of this estimate of value, unless prior arrangements are made. I thank you for this opportunity to be of service. II Sincerely: II C -i-Z04/41.4-.. - z Bud Andrus I I I I I Andrus Agency, Inc. _I I Real Estate Services for Business CZ IPARK AND RECREATION COMMISSION C REGULAR MEETING • _AUGUST 9, 1988 ,4: Chairman Mady called the meeting to order at 7: 30 p.m. . IMEMBERS PRESENT: Sue Boyt, Jim Mady, Curt Robinson, Mike Lynch, and Larry y MEMBERS ABSENT: Carol Watson and Ed Hasek STAFF PRESENT: Lori Sietsema, Park and Rec Coordinator and Todd Hoffman, I _ .. . Recreation Supervisor II APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Robinson moved, Lynch seconded to approve the Minutes of the Park and Recreation Commission meeting dated July 26, 1988 as amended. All voted in favor except Boyt who abstained and the motion II carried. REQUEST TO PURCHASE AND DEVELOP PARKLAND IN THE PHEASANT HILLS SUBDIVISION I AREA. Sietsema: We recently received petitions from the residents of Pheasant IHills area to provide parkland in the area. They had three requests . ( That parkland be provided in the area . That the outlots that are there be improved as parkland and the undeveloped lots be cleaned up. I did forward the third petition to Scott Harr to take care of that one so that Ileaves us with looking at the first two petitions . We were just out at the site to see what the three outlots were like. Basically they' re wet. They have water standing on them and they have a lot of topography. What II would suggest is we ask the residents in the area that are here what kind of parkland, what kind of facilities they' re looking for and start A.•-; i.' off that way. I � MadWe just toured your subdivision and looked at the three outlots . Y:_ It was the general consensus of all • of us that given the steep grades ,' existing, the standing water , the City' s ordinance against using wetlands '_l . in any way, shape or form, we just can' t see a way of making them into an `_, active playground type of arrangement. They are fantastic wetlands ' natural areas waiting to be looking and #' "ideas from the residents . What syour dthoughts are ronldeveloping possibly some Ideveloping possibly „Alk,, an active play area because it is a park deficient area. The nearest parkland to you, to my knowledge, is the Curry Farms park that is being ,;{::_. developed as a part of the Centex Homes development off of CR 17 and Lake Lucy Road . That' s it. The best you can get there, it looks like it ' s at ' least three-quarters of a mile away so we' re looking for some ideas . I Tom Klingelhutz, Tiqua Circle: I 'm the developer of Pheasant Hills. I 'd like the record to show that I did not receive a letter or notification of this meeting either by written letter or verbally. I wonder why. I think I I 'm the most involved in this thing . Why wasn ' t I sent a letter on it? Sietsema: I'm sorry, I did not perceive this as your responsibility. II Park and Recreation Commission Meeting - II C August 9 , 1988 - Page 2 Tom Klingelhutz: Then contrary to the wordage in the letter that was II Y g w sent to some of the residents in Pheasant Hills, the Park Commission did, in - 1984 on January 19th, review this plan.. You were at that meeting, right? II Sietsema: No. Tom Klingelhutz: They did review this and I have the Minutes here. I' ll II give you that as Exhibit 1 and here' s the outline of the Minutes. They decided they would sooner have the money than the land at that point. Now I 'd be more than willing to give them land at that point. Now I can' t ,� give you land . It' s platted. You can buy it from me but it' s costly. Sewer and-water is all -in. - The streets are in. There' s nothing I can do but at that point, at that time and you were here, they were land rich and II dollar poor, right? You probably still are. So it was determined that we would pay at that time $415. 00 a permit. I have Exhibit 2 which is some more of the recommendations from the City. On outlots, we have been II trying for a year to give these outlots to the City. The County Assessor had put a valuation ridiculous on them and taxed us for them. One of them is at $32, 000. 00. There was no sense in us paying that. We had to go through all the motions of getting abatement from the County which took a II long time. We finally have it. The City has the warranty deed laying up here someplace. - i Sietsema: It' s not recorded though. II Tom Klingelhutz: But they' re not recorded . We know that. We checked at 1, the courthouse. The warranty deeds are up here someplace. If they can find them, I don' t know. If they can ' t, we ' ll find another one. We have a letter from Barb Dacy dated May 11th. The city maintained outlot D as a skating rink last year . They scrapped the snow. They flooded it which II was fine. My insurance company found out about it and I had to put a 3 million dollar liability insurance policy on it. It cost me over . '.;. $2,000. 00.•so don't think I want to get rid of it. I don' t want it. --;'' Outlot C, there' s something in your minutes here about the size of a II _ = totlot. Bob Waibel said I understand. . . is 2,000 square foot was "' sufficient for a totlot. Outlot 2, I could get at least 3 walkout lots in s here. All the way over to here before you even get to the wetlands. ' . j.t.There's a lot of flat land up here. I wish I would have known that you ""*' guys were going over here, I 'd come over and showed you the lines of the -,'x4r property lines. Again, I should have been notified. I know exactly where ,-iY;; they are. Recently I mowed the lots because I seeded them last fall and we haven't had much rain this year. I 'm trying to get that grass that' s planted in there to grow. Now I have contracted a guy to mow it but he I hasn't mowed them yet. I have restrictive covenants in here, many of these people that signed this petition, and I see the petition, have violated the restrictive covenants in my area. They are also going to be getting letters . One from me and the City so this thing works both ways . I Grass clippings, brush, old dead trees , all these things thrown on my property, I don' t appreciate that . It ain ' t just the developer that' s having problems. The City, the developer has plenty of problems with people. That ' s you. There is no problem, only people. I' ve lived in II this town all my life. I built here for over 30 years. It used to be fun to build here. . 11 I Park and Recreation Commission Meeting August 9, 1988 - Page 3 Mady: Is Outlot C, is that here? ITom Klingelhutz: There ' s a house being built right here and the ro er is right here. . . There ' s quite a large area that' s planted. p p ty IBoyt : Do you know how many feet it is from the road to the marsh there? I Tom Klingelhutz: Right here at this point, over by the lamp post, it ' s 131 feet to the back corner and the marsh starts at approximately in there but there's a slope at about 110, 112, 115 feet back and the slope goes down. I had to fill part of that with the idea that possibly it would be IIan area that could be used. Boyt : Is that pretty consistent around the curve, about 100 feet before? IITom Klingelhutz: It comes over to a point about where the. . .and then it drops pretty fast . IBoyt: So this is the area? Tom Klingelhutz: Well over 10,000 feet. If Boyt: We' re not making you use it. . . I Tom Klingelhutz: Well , from the restrictions I ' ve got . I ' ve done everything you asked for right down the line. I have for 30 years . That ' s what I 've been developing in town , for over 30 years . I ' ve done everything according to what the City has asked . IBoyt : We don ' t find you at fault for anything here. We ' re just looking at a way to get some parkland for the people who live in this area. It ' s I , not your fault that Park and Rec didn ' t ask for land 4 years ago. That ' s no reflection on you. Tom Klingelhutz : This just kind of excited me you know because I didn ' t know about it. I hear about it from some of my friends and some of my &,;6, other friends are sneaking around trying to stab me in the back you know and it's kind of a sneaky way of doing things. Lynch: I have a couple of questions for you Tom. On that small outlot A on the 4th Addition. ITom Klingelhutz: Yes , that drops off . That ' s a street right-of-way for future access to this property. I didn' t make a street but I left a 50 foot right-of-way in there for either possible or road right-of-way out to ILake Lucy Road or . . . Lynch : Frankly I don ' t care. . .but as compared to this here. Tom Klingelhutz: The wetlands are. . .and I think this , there' s really no water in this lot. There' s, a lot of water in back of houses here but that ' s about. . . i Park and Recreation Commission Meeting August 9 , 1988 - Page 4 C 1 Mady: It ' s 80 feet from that garden on that outlot. Boyt: Could I ask again how much, approximately how many square feet there is along this area? Tom Klingelhutz: In this area probably, I don ' t have the footage here, 160 feet from that point. . . It would be 412 feet all the way along to this point so 412, we' re talking about 139 up to this point . . . Mady: Would anybody like to make a comment now? The Commission recognizes the need for a playground, an active area. By looking at the topo, it looks like we can probably make maybe a totlot, maybe a play area II there. I 'm not sure how much else we can do at this point in time. We'd like to hear at least some of you. Tom Steinkamp, 1771 Pheasant Circle: First of all I 'd like to say Tom, we II don' t have a problem with you. We realize that it isn' t your problem. That you went by what the City wanted at the time the land was platted . There' s been some conversation with you. You talked about this portion of Outlot C that would be available as a totlot. Personally, I don ' t know. I have some pluses and minuses about that but I can understand that. Some of the people in Pheasant Hills went to the City and asked them what' s 1 going on because it' s been our understanding that those outlots have been turned over to the City. I think you told me that. You told some of the people in the neighborhood that . I think that process has tried to happen but maybe there' s been something wrong with it. I think a lot of people 11 at the City think they own it because that ' s why they agreed to flood and maintain the ice rink. Had the guys at the Park and Rec Department known that it wasn ' t their property, I don ' t think they would have done that so II I think there' s some confusion here at the City, it' s safe to say. Our problem is that, I think everybody here agrees that Pheasant Hills is parkland deficient and we went to the City and said, what do we got to do II about developing some of this land into parkland or getting it up to parkland standards now that the City owns it. We were told that the first thing you' ve got to do is get a petition going to get some action rolling. - I didn' t think that it really needed to be any of your business and I don' t think anybody else here thought it either to be your business because I don ' t think you have to do anything about it. You 've done your -; share. We don' t have any problems with Tom Klingelhutz or the development :1 itself. I think there were some things done wrong on the City' s behalf. Back in maybe 1984, some of you should have said well , no those lots can ' t be considered parkland because at one time those lots were talked about being parkland . It says that in the letter that we got but that decision II was made in 1984 and now it's 1988 and now we've got to live with it so what can we do about it. Personally I don ' t really like the idea of that as a parkland. It' s pretty close to water. You know what kids and water II do and I don ' t know what liability that puts the City in if there ' s a park within rock throwing distance of water. I think the City ought to buy some lots from Tom and put a new park in. That ' s what I think ought to happen. I don ' t think it 's Tom' s problem. I think it' s the City' s problem. 1 Park and Recreation Commission Meeting August 9, 1988 - Page 5 ' Boyt : Can I say that lot J Y a t of our parks are on water . Lake Ann . Lake Susan. Lotus Lake. Tom Steinkamp: You staff a lifeguard though don ' t you? But there ' s a lot more property and how many square feet we' re talking about. This is a pretty small area . Although I think it could be graded to make it larger and not ruin much or any of the wetland. There ' s some area there where it drops off before it gets to actual wetland so it probably could be made even bigger than if you went out there right now and looked at it. It probably could be made a little bit bigger . As citizens of Pheasant Hills, we want the 3.6 acres that you said in the letter and I think we all should realize that that ' s probably unrealistic too but I think we should meet at some compromise between the two. Boyt : Is your neighborhood a neighborhood of very little children or ' older kids? Tom Steinkamp: Very young . ' Boyt: Are you interested in totlots? Tom Steinkamp: Of the people that signed the petition, there ' s about 60 kids represented there. There ' s probably another 10 homes that didn' t have the opportunity to sign the petition that had kids. There ' s probably 70 to 75 kids in the neighborhood. I would bet you all but 15 of them are under 10. Is that safe to say? They are all zero through 8-9 years old . Personally I don' t need full sized ballfields and tennis courts. I want someplace to get the kids out of the street but some of the other people have to make their feelings known too. I hope you ' re not mad at the ' people in Pheasant Hills Tom because that wasn ' t the intent at all . If we had a problem with you, we would have come to you. We didn' t have a problem with Tom Klingelhutz. We want the City to do something and we ' realize that it isn ' t really Tom' s fault at this point. Maybe it never was Tom' s fault. He did what he had to do for the City back in 1984 and now we want to do what we have to do with the City in 1988 . IMady: Tom, let me ask you a question . What ' s the cost of a lot? Tom Klingelhutz: Somewhere around $34 , 000. 00 to $35, 000. 00 now. Average. Boyt: Is that a third of an acre? ' Tom Klingelhutz : They vary in size from 14 , 000 square feet on up to I think the biggest one in there is 22, 000 square foot. Maybe there are some smaller than 14 , 000. I don ' t remember the sizes exactly. I know I had some smaller ones. The 4th Addition basically has an average of ' probably better than 15, 000 square feet on each of the 22 lots that are in the 4th Addition . Some of the lots in the 2nd Addition were smaller C because of the road situation at the time. Lake Lucy Road was in there and we made them smaller along there based on the fact that probably that road would be there forever and you wouldn' t be able to build as nice a house on it . It ends up Lake Lucy Road has nice houses on smaller lots but it works out fine. I Park and Recreation Commission Meeting , August 9, 1988 - Page 6 Tom Steinkamp: I 'd like you to clear up a question I have. How does the Park and Rec determine whether a developer like Tom Klingelhutz has to put land aside for parkland or not or like this money deal that happened? How does that work? Lynch : There ' s a standard formulation that we look at plus the property itself. Now oftentimes a piece of property is too small . 5 or 6 or 7 lots . It' s not on the plan there . In other cases , if Tom really did his home marketing, he had the meeting which I sat in on back in 1984, it , would be worth reading in the Minutes . The City Manager noted that staff had discussed park meeting dates with Mr. Klingelhutz. This area is designated in the Comprehensive Plan as a park deficient area , even then 1 on our 5 year plan it was and it has continued to be. However, Mr . Klingelhutz' property has severe terrain differentials. It may be feasible to secure enough land for a totlot activities however finding II sufficient land area for ballfields , skating rinks , etc . does not appear possible. Active sports areas are located at Minnetonka Jr . High. Now, the thing that I wanted to point out , we' re really dealing with two issues here. You' re immediate needs obviously would be served well with a totlot ' and there ' s probably a place there somewhere that we can squeeze a totlot in. A totlot is just not that large. The second question was answered somewhere, in the subsequent. . .was a letter from Bob Waibel , City Planner , about the same piece of property at that time. He said the recreation element of the Comprehensive Plan indicates that the majority of the property is in a park deficient area and states that as development occurs , the City will try to obtain a 5 to 10 acre parcel for future neighborhood park. We ' re still striving to do that. Unfortunately, the property, as it' s developed up there , it has almost been a house by house operation other than Pheasant Hills and the Curry Farms development which we were able to get an actual park in Curry Farms but there hasn ' t been enough large. . . in that area . Tom Steinkamp: That has less of a terrain differential than Pheasant Hills? Lynch: Well , yes because they made it so. The developer said I will do 1 this for you. I will grade this and there are always some trade-offs. There are always some property in every development which is undevelopable. The developer would always like to give that to the City. II The City doesn ' t always want to take it. There was , I 'm sure Tom remembers this, before around 1984 the philosophy of the park board was to set aside nature areas and since then it ' s become let' s have active play facilities for the folks youth so it was about that time when we were trying to change our focus and say we need a flat area that we can put a ballfield and a tennis court and skating rink and a picnic area. I never realized what a development costs of just bulldozing a few hills flat was until I got on this board and found out and looked at bids. It' s inconceivable at this time in the City development that we could take a 5 to 10 acre lot that was hilly and out of the City pocket, bulldoze it to accomodate an active park because you' re talking a couple hundred of thousand dollars in earth moving . 1 Park and Recreation Commission Meeting August 9, 1988 - Page 7 ' Tom Steinkamp: You ' re spending hundred g a couple p red thousand dollars here and a couple hundred thousand dollars there, why don ' t you spend it in our neighborhood . Boyt: We ' re not. ' Tom Steinkamp: The City is . Somebody is . There ' s construction going on all over around here. Mady: . . .that' s not available to us . Tom Steinkamp: So at that time it was decided that let' s take the money ' instead of the land . Lynch : Right. The land not being suitable , we felt. . . Tom Steinkamp: Now does - that money go into the general park fund or does that go into a fund specifically for Pheasant Hills? Mady: It' s a capital improvement fund for the entire City. Sietsema : But it has to be spent in your area . The money that we collect from your area has to be spent in your area . Boyt : How many homes are in the development? About 90? ' Tom Klingelhutz: The original plat was around 89 I think and I think we have 26 lots left . Something like that . The original fee was $415. 00. Not it' s $425. 00 so half I would say, it doesn ' t amount to much. ' Lynch : Anyway, my point is that we ' d like to do something . I think we can do something on a totlot. We don ' t have any idea where a 5 to 10 acre park is going to go in that area . Now, we didn ' t in 1984 because of the development pattern. We don ' t now. Tom Steinkamp: Who owns the property, maybe Tom can answer this , south of the last house? Tom Klingelhutz : Carrico . Tom Steinkamp: Wasn' t that property for sale. Tom Klingelhutz : I believe he was trying to sell it. He tried to sell it to me once. Tom Steinkamp: Didn' t he try to sell it to you but that ' s outside of the ' sewered deal? Boyt : Do you know what he' s asking for it? Tom Klingelhutz: If it ' s unsewered, I won' t build on it . • 1 Park and Recreation Commission Meeting I August 9, 1988 - Page 8 Tom Steinkamp: And it can ' t be worth that much because , e the only way he can sell it is in 2 1/2 acre increments , is that correct? Tom Klingelhutz: Now it' s 10 acres . Tom Steinkamp: If it' s for sale, obviously he doesn ' t want to hold it. Mady: Every developer always has their land for sale for a price. Tom Steinkamp: Maybe I would suggest that you people look into that. 1 It' s a flat piece of property. Mady: You have to realize that our budget doesn' t allow us to do much. We are attempting to develop a large parcel for a community park in the southern area . We had to go to a referendum to get $300 , 000. 00 to do that. The City is very limited in referendum abilities . I Tom Steinkamp: What ' s the population density where you ' re putting that park? Mady: That ' s a community park, not a neighborhood park. It ' s a very different concept. _ Sietsema : I think that' s a good suggestion and we can definitely look into that. I certainly wouldn ' t throw that alternative out the window. Tom Steinkamp: In the meantime , I think myself and I think some of these other people have to get up and say what they feel too but myself, I would be happy with a totlot . . .but I think in the future I 'd like to see something larger than a totlot in that area of Chanhassen because the closest thing I know of in size is Chaparral . I don ' t know what Curry Farms. • • Mady: Curry Farms is a 5 acre in that area that will have , probably when I it's developed it will have a ballfield, basketball court, skating rinks , totlot equipment. The way the Park Commission always has tried to work is to provide active park area through development. Have it deeded through the development process rather than to go out and buy it because we certainly don' t have the budget to buy it. Your development looks like it' s generating about $25, 000. 00 so far . That will probably develop into between $35,000.00 to $40,000. 00 when it' s all said and done. That would not buy us a whole lot of land and development costs are astronomical . We' ll try to work the best we can to find some kind of solution. Staff will investigate the Carrico property to see what is available there and we will pursue the Outlot C option. Once we have some information on all this , we' ll bring it back on the agenda and that ' s when we' ll be contacting you again concerning that. Is there any other comments , suggestions , ideas from the homeowners? Pat Johnson: I 'm not in the Pheasant Hills area. I 'm in the Lake Lucy Highlands area but we have the same problem. Although I understand because our lots are larger lots that maybe they don ' t come under the same requisites for parkland as the Pheasant Hills area does . Maybe they do , I II I Park and Recreation Commission Meeting August 9 , 1988 - Page 9 (: don ' t know but we' re map south on this J p o f Pheasant Hills just across Lake Lucy Lane and we have, as far as I know, no parks or no parks ' scheduled for development in Lake Lucy Highlands which is an area of slightly a bit larger lots. I guess they are 1 1/2 to 2 1/2 acres so although I do know that there are lots available , I 'm not real wild about ' having a park in front of my house but there is a lot at the corner of Lake Lucy Road and Lake Lucy Lane that ' s relatively flat . About 2 1/2 acres. It' s technically in Lake Lucy Highlands. This gentleman, did you ' develop Lake Lucy Highlands? Tom Klingelhutz: No . ' Pat Johnson : On the corner there and it' s relatively flat and it slopes upwards. I don' t think you have to do a whole lot of grading. Personally my feeling is , I have two young children too and I 'd like to see a totlot ' in the area but more importantly I 'd like to see some ballfields and a football field . Coming from the City of Minneapolis where I lived originally, I prefer the City' s idea of where they would develop the park , maybe not for a ballfield or some swings , every 2 to 3 blocks whereas here, I think in the suburbs, the idea has always been in the past let ' s develop these massive, huge parks , regional parks almost at the expense of the neighborhoods and the neighborhoods I believe are the ones , the Ineighborhood parks are the most important . It gets the kids hanging out ( with sort of a common need. Maybe you could kill two birds with one stone and develop a park for both Lake Lucy Highlands, which in area has got to be the size of Pheasant Hills , although not as developed and also for the Pheasant Hills people. The suggestion I have, I know the lot is available for sale as I understand it from the neighbor who knows the fella who owns it so that might be an option . I don ' t know what the price would be. I think originally he paid about $28, 000. 00, maybe $30, 000. 00 for the lot. Mady: We will look at that . Our standard for an active playfield is 5 • acre minimum. We can probably fit a small softball field on there. It' s darn tough. Pat Johnson: I think the comments about the water on the outlot , they are ' important too because as parents, we' re kind of concerned particularly when you' ve got a little pond or a swamp or something and you have a steep grade, there' s some concerns about kids falling down a hill into that and ' playing in that . Especially when you ' ve got murky water , what have you. The totlot situation and water , I agree don ' t go together. I don' t know if that particular lot has water or not . I agree we need something there. ' Mady: Just about all of our , a lot of property anyway is adjacent to either a natural area or a ponding area or a lake. Chaparral is and there are methods to work with that without jeopardizing safety beyond an acceptable level . We always do that . We make sure we ' re developing a park that' s safe. Are there any other comments? Otherwise, I think staff has all your comments and ideas that have been brought forth and we will review them some time in the future and if you signed up the sheet in the back of the room, you will be notified as that comes available. I don ' t believe we make another general mailing . I Park and Recreation Commission Meeting August 9, 1988 - Page 10 Sietsema : I will mail to everybody who signed the petition again . g P g . Mady: If you' re on the petition, and if you signed up in the back. . . ' Sietsema : If you' re not on the petition , you should definitely sign it. Mady: And check the paper because hopefully our agenda is published in the paper everytime. Thank you for coming. Resident: What kind of a time line are you looking at as far as 1 determining this outlot is appropriate? Whether it will be developed and investigating other lots. What is your timeline for that? Mady: I guess I don' t know. Staff ' s got a better idea . I can ' t give you 1 a time line. We' ve got a lot of development going on right now. A lot of heavy park items going on probably the next 6 months so I can ' t give you a ' good definition but we will look at it as quickly as we can. Sietsema : There won' t be anything done , development this year because we obviously haven' t put anything in the budget. We have a lot of projects going on. I would say that we would look at this towards the winter and be prepared to do something next spring . I( Lynch : If there' s something there that is easily developable as a totlot , II what Lori is saying, we would not be able to put in this year . Our budget is already put forward and approved . . . As regards to acquisition of land , you could realistically look at 2 to 3 years . If we found something next week that we felt we could acquire and we felt we could afford and we started the wheels rolling , you ' re talking 2 or 3 years. Tom Steinkamp: Can I ask that you get those outlots in your possession so II we can have a hockey rink this year? Sietsema : We' re working on it. 1 Tom Steinkamp: Number one and number two , is there any plans by the City to do anything with any of those other outlots? Particularly Outlot B, the one where the ice rink is I believe. The mailboxes are there and it' s 6 inches of mud to get your mail . Resident : Protecting a wetland is different . A wetland is . . .and stuff but this is in the middle of the three additions. Something needs to be done with that . Mady: One, we can ' t do anything until we have ownership. As to mow it , you mean right down to the water? Down the hills? Resident : I would like it all the way down. Mady: All the way down to the water? Resident : Yes . I don ' t know how everbody else ' y e feels about it. 11 1 . 1 Park and Recreation Commission Meeting August 9 , 1988 - Page 11 • Mady: It' s hard to consider open spaces and I ' ll s P P speak for myself , an open natural area like that, I would never recommend cutting it. I would ' guess if we have mailboxes on the outlot , that they' re probably going to have to be removed . If that' s going to be city property, they' re going to have to be moved . The only comment I 'd wanted to make and I know ' it' s . . . is neighborhood trails. If we put a totlot or a park in your development , how are we going to get those kids to that totlot? Are they going to walk on the street or what? Tom Steinkamp: That' s what they' re playing in now. You' ve got to cross streets to get to it. ' Resident : No matter where you put it , they' re going to have to go . . . Boyt: Some people would prefer their kids on sidewalks and some would prefer . . . Resident : We want a totlot . . . ' Tom Steinkamp: I don ' t have a problem with my kids going , the neighborhood isn' t that terribly busy of a neighborhood to have kids going back and forth on the road . He ' s quite right , they' re playing in the I streets now and that is my biggest concern about getting hit by cars in the streets . My biggest concern is just get them off the streets and get them to someplace that' s more natural for them to be playing in. Resident : Long range and that ' s a valid question. If we develop a park somewhere that right now there aren' t a lot of cars , what ' s going to happen several years down the road when those streets are used and those ' kids have to get there? Are you still going to say the same thing or are we then going to be coming to the Council and saying , we now decided we want sidewalks? • ' Resident : My opinion would be, it ' s safe to say that Pheasant Hills is not going to get that busy. There' s only 25 more homes to put in there, it won' t get more busy. . . Mady: As the entire area develops , one of our ideas is we' ll have to open the street right-of-way in the Carrico property and if we put a park in, a ' large active park in , we will put parking in with it . Although it ' s a neighborhood park, it also has to be open to the general public. That' s how we tend to develop so I just want to make sure you understand . There ' was one item here on what your thoughts are on trails . It doesn' t sound like you' re real excited about trails. Tom Steinkamp: Do you have any kind of estimation as far as what totlots cost? Sietsema: $10, 000. 00. Tom Steinkamp: Will that come directly out of the fund? Sietsema: Yes . 11 • • Park and Recreation Commission Meeting August 9, 1988 - Page 12 47 Resident : See , now isn ' t that short sighted for us to take care of a totlot today when we' ve got 60 kids that in a few years from now won ' t be II satisfied with just a totlot. They' re going to want a field where they can play ball . Mady: $38,000. 00 probably won ' t buy a field where you can play ball . Resident: Just so we aren ' t short sighted and put our funds. Maybe what this other gentleman suggested , maybe we' re going to have to combine funds 11 and be satisfied with a centrally located area . Tom Steinkamp: Did the people in Lake Lucy Highlands pay park dedication I fees when they bought permits? Sietsema : Yes , they did . Tom Steinkamp: Where is that fund going? Sietsema : That goes in your same area . , Tom Steinkamp: So then we actually have got more than $40, 000. 00, ( whatever it is . ' Tom Klingelhutz: Is there going to be a park in Lake Lucy Highlands? As far as I know, there' s not going to be a park in Lake Lucy Highlands . Sietsema : The park dedication funds are earmarked for your area but we haven' t acquire a park yet. Tom Steinkamp: Do you know how much those funds , those revenues will be eventually? From both neighborhoods . • Sietsema: I don' t know how many lots are in Lake Lucy Highlands. ' Pat Johnson: I would say Lake Lucy Highlands has in the area of 25, 20 to 25 but you must collect a bigger fee . ' Sietsema: No. It' s $425. 00 per unit regardless of size of the lots . Boyt : So that ' s another $10, 000. 00 and when Tom' s development is all through, what' s that? $38 ,000. 00 to $40, 000. 00. But we don' t have to deal with those exact numbers . Your area is a range. It' s a circle drawn around your area. It ' s not just Lake Lucy Highlands and Pheasant Hills . Pat Johnson : But we could pull out of that , if we pulled 10 grand on the totlot tomorrow and not build. . . Boyt : We' re not going to ignore you, acting to give you a totlot . We ' re going to continue to look at the needs of your neighborhood as it grows and changes . As children grow, you need a tennis court. You come to us and say no, the kids are growing, we'd like a basketball court or tennis court. If the property is there, we' re going to look at what we can do to 1 . Park and Recreation Commission Meeting August 9, 1988 - Page 13 meet the needs of the neighborhood . ' Tom Steinkamp: . . . the $30, 000. 00 today, 5 years when we want the tennis courts , he' s going to want 60 grand for it. ' Resident : The area west of Galpin Lake Road that was mentioned in the letter, is that considered part of our neighborhood? Sietsema : Yes . Unless it ' s outside the MUSA line . These are diagrams that we go by. If we have land that's in your area that becomes available , yes we' ll go for it. We' ll buy it and it will serve that whole area. It might not be right next door to your house. It might have to be ' a half a mile away but it will be in your area and the funds that you paid will go to developing and acquiring that land. Resident : I would just like to say that for my needs , the area west of Galpin Lake does not meet my needs at all because I believe that road is much too busy for my kids to cross and that would not be serving my needs at all until about 8 years from now. ' Tom Steinkamp : In a letter that was sent out for this meeting seemed to suggest that maybe a park would be developed west of Galpin Lake Road . Sietsema: The reason I put that in . . .undeveloped land right now. If 'a we ' re going to go through the development process , that would be the logical place to look for additional parkland because it ' s undeveloped so we could probably get a big chunk of land in that area because it ' s not developed there . Now to get a big chunk of land and buy up three lots that are close together, the price is really high. Where we can get it ' and waive the park dedication fee , we haven ' t spent any money. We ' re not going to get any money for development but we can use the money in surrounding areas to develop or other monies . We can budget for it . It ' doesn' t mean that you ' ve only got $40, 000. 00 that we ' re ever going to spend in your area because we ' ve got areas that are developed that never paid park dedication fees . They developed the ordinance went into effect and yet we' ve provided them with park. Chan Estates is a perfect example. ' They have a park down there that we got from their developer that they dedicated but that was even before the park dedication ordinance. ' Mady: A couple things you've got to really work down here. One is we do provide community services , community parkland so some of that is bound to come from there. Also, we do not get any of your property tax dollars for our park development . Unless we go through the referendum process . . . Tom Steinkamp: Does the County? Mady: Does the County? Tom Steinkamp: Does any of our tax dollars go for park to the County? Mady: I don ' t know. I can' t speak for the County. 1 y Tom Steinkamp: What supports Lake Ann Park? • Park and Recreation Commission Meeting August 9 , 1988 - Page 14 47 Sietsema: Tax dollars pay for the maintenance and upkeep but for development in that position, we generally. . . ' Mady: To buy land or to put a swingset or basketball court or anything like that, that does not come from your tax dollars . , Tom Steinkamp: How can they put that building on Lake Ann Park? Sietsema: Lake Ann Park is a community park so that is a totally ' different category than what you' re talking about in a neighborhood park. The community park is developed and is acquired through tax dollars but most of the neighborhood parks are funded through the park dedication fund I which comes from the money that it put into the pot from the building permits . That ' s what we use plus the grant money that we get from State and Federal grants. That's what we use to develop the neighborhood parks and acquire . We try to acquire through the development process because then it doesn' t cost us any money up front. In one sense, there' s development going in and they' re going to dedicate 37 acres of parkland , we' re giving them 50% credit on their park dedication fees so that we have II half of that money to go in and develop those 37 acres of parkland . It ' s unfortunate that we didn ' t have the foresight to acquire park property in your neighborhood but the personality of staff changes . The personality II (I of commissions changes. The needs for sections changes. People maybe didn' t even have any idea we were going to grow to the extent that we did or that people were going to have those kinds of needs . It ' s personalities . It ' s perceptions and now looking back, we have to live with the decisions that were made. Hopefully we' re making wiser decisions in things that are coming up now and I have to agree , I think that we have to look farther into the future than just a little piece of property for totlots . If that can meet your needs for right now while we' re looking at II a bigger piece , I don' t think it will have gone to waste because there' s going to be a need for totlots 10 years from now too because those houses are going to turn over and new families are going to be moving in . So just because we put a totlot there doesn' t mean we can' t still acquire some property. Mady: To answer your question on the building at Lake Ann, the American Legion is building that building. That was through their pulltab game. - That ' s where that ' s coming from. A generous donation by the Legion . I II think we' ve answered most of your questions hopefully. We will be getting more additional information and coming back to you in the future but at this time we can' t tell you when that ' s going to be. We will give our best effort in providing the parkland . We thank you for coming and remind you to please sign the sheet at the back of the room so we can contact you in the future . 1 CONSIDER DELAYING TRAIL EASEMENT ACQUISITION, TIM ERHART. Sietsema: I pretty much explained everything in the memo. We reviewed ' Tim Erhart' s subdivision plan at the last meeting and our recommendation was to require trail easements along the east side of the property and the 1 . Zo. . 1 CITYOF INC ,,k CHANHASSEN . \ ,,A; _ 1 . 1 ` �'-,. ,,. 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 IMEMORANDUM TO: Park and Recreation Commission IFROM: Lori Sietsema, Park and Recreation Coordinator DATE: August 4, 1988 ISUBJ: Request to Provide Parkland 1 Recently 3 petitions from the residents of Pheasant Hills ( located north of Lake Lucy Road) was received. The petitions are requesting that 1) parkland be provided in the area; 2) the I outlots be improved as parkland; and 3 ) the undeveloped lots be cleaned up. I have forwarded the third petition to Code Enforcement Officer, Scott Harr. IL Pheasant Hills lies within the MUSA Line and is considered part of the urban area. It is one of the few areas within urban Chanhassen that is park deficient. The population of this area I is roughly 225 people, which generates the need for at least 3 acres of parkland. I There are 3 outlots within the development that are used for ponding purposes. At one time there was discussion involving using these outlots for park purposes. The 3 outlots combined equal 3 .68 acres; Outlot A = 23, 400 sq. ft. , Outlot B = 59 ,350 Isq. ft. , and Outlot C = 77,700 sq. ft. Currently the outlots are still under the ownership of the developer. As soon as the City obtains clear title to ,these parcels, park development can occur. I It is anticipated that such will take place within the next 30 to 90 days. -`*`� The Park and Recreation Commission should look at these parcels M I to determine what type of development would be appropriate. As no funds are available in the 1988 budget, consideration should be given for such in the 1989 budget. IAs to acquiring additional property, we typically acquire parkland through the development process . Development may occur I in the future in the area south of Pheasant Hills, west of Galpin Blvd. Land acquisition should be considered at that time. ( I I . , . .. . • - ,• ' - . . . , • • - ' • . . • • _ : •-•11..,:.-•!:..::..,,,..•;A. '-•1- '' ' .„.• - • .,• . - _ - n.-* " r -,••••••••:•tn-'•:••......-•:- ,.:,2.1,,•••!'n:•1•:;,,....n%'' - , _ I - .,.....,-,,-.11,.„;.:-„,-x.,t,-;7•,.......---,.4-.0•.*... .,-,,,:i.„.4,4.-i.,:,.- .:' • 11[ - - , .L.....-, . . - . .. . - -' . .. -=-. .: . ..,'-'• ,- -- -:'..:-=/4.',.-7."....-,-..,_:.. .21.4..,...7 ''..--.• • -. - - •..•-- --' '-'-.7-.:".••"•r•••••,•.-•-)." .--i,..•,;,.....-,-,,/i4•'A,-,•.,-:,.4`-••'‘-••!•.2'.::„'-.„.,I;-;-,.=,,.'-,.4---;.,'!:::1:,'.-r•:r,..' - .,:=4K'..-,.-...:- -' 5--• IL' ..•-•-- ' - 4 , e.,.......„N...,1..1 .••..... ,„••,••,,•„••.-,"••. -t",•'!'..•'• •..- - -. -. 'n-;••••• --' '--"'" • • -./... • - *. -V.'''. "nn'-Vilt,••.' nikk..- 4 - - •••:.- ;n'-‘•-,In •.:%In'2.-- n'' ' n n " . ..,4•,, ..igili;,,-et. .....f - 1'4 '- . ' .4 -■•• .. . , _. ...4....,,,.... .........._;"-:„.f.„,,./.....Tv%••••i-T.....7. :A54.314,,...;,,,,, ..xli-r s 0-,-1.13:,x,M,‘K OEHNEN ,.-4,....,CIRCLE'7;*;,Vk',..,,;",-,:i 34,-;., • ' • - . - •-,.ife-1,1,),...-•<:.,t,,'-' ,- "• ,• - -- , :: Z /ie ' ....."'7!....'",,,2,--k.:-..,,NP,,,.• ',..7.•; ,-' •-,.:-.1.S•,,,-,..-••••: 4 ,:„1.: '4..1 3.- • J. a.. 022121. •.112o•it• . .....'...7 •.r i.;•-•-.;:.14.-pti;•-.•*.Nkl-,,•-• AV. •Vf.4:,•st(17,X,:',:i.'t....,,-• 1. ",?..A4.,,,,3 ,: -,,' ' t "",.",-;:-':l'f"'•.•`11,--;,...■,.". Ix. ""A'AA! ‘.._' ,..,g-- 11 ... .-f•l•-•.Zr_•`r-1•5:W;:.•J: -.V -,- .,..::....,',/-itto,,-",, .., -.,4.,4,,. ,,. ,,,. _ . •.1 i______-__:_' 4 ... '' . Cifkr" -•'.."8: -" -Twr 4 i•S ...-416--...1 ',..r •r...... ,••90... • .....-•. .'X. 2•t74.-...•‘..,•.,,,.:•ff- ••;-.1• •• '..„,•••-•;•••2• -.••• ,_ - 2 .••••-1.-24. - ' ;-: KOEHNEN CIRCLE 2 (J.. 8E. wtitTZ ...4 y.,„ - 1 ■ *4-' - t•:-/-.--. - .-t-..*Z.-kP.--• .,..4 -.------ - \ft • so . 1. '1..241• 011.44 . % •}9 _.: ...1. ...:•••••• ,••••-4'2.i f.I.7•,....le 1,.. • -: .11 . . :..:•'64.•. ..e..)..,■...r...* •:lit ., , '• ;•4.S..r!•'*•?' ,•‘:,,.....: lik - - .., 1 •• • •?, '. I: . ,.?.. '•.:,".• . _ - -- ------ -a-.„ •-•... ,.- 6 - . i-, ,- 7 ...- - a , , ...4 •-t,...',..-1,„ , ,L,. • 6- ,..r...1.,t.,-.4-....- (.: ._ At•-k'',:-..-k•t• ' -,,.--,1`.•• . ,'.17,..- --,-.,-;;..,---• . - -- -1 -• - ,: • ' • .: • ... --• ;II:v----...1-,, • . ' - ....,::, .),-.• •- -•.....0,0-tt ._..;-....„..-.7 .:. ,..t.,.?: ._ .. f - • -f• ,, '1• • -,--i'..,•-:"-'-:-•- ,- --CIE -..:_, c....--- •-"1:-..tv•i7 :."..- :-.0i •• •*I.... ...„,,,,E.BRAc....0,-.„.2 -. .....„,.,„ .A........,.: ' "*..'1.e* . is---.. ,.. .4 , ,,..... , D e, ic•• ''"`"•-NO. . .4 a..3.. 1i2 130,2 327 , 1 •••1•7 - ••••••"4- 40 "••■•.1 70 /ti.1....0: .1 . -'F--.1.,--,-4./:;t-eIti.;.=, -4" •0,-;`,. ,w i li -..if' ..,-;-.• .•-•• iscs Ro 'It_ • '.,_%44,::,itt. .:•:1:: A • :Aft i ,20 , gr-tlivi,,,, . ......,...„ `• I if •-17.. S' 1„, -.--.,---4 .-...=•;:, -5--...,1/4,- • - . - V a El i ::1 - 1:::13.:3/4`.': . g•C, /; - . CIRCLE. e • ,,: • 't -. .9"0 . • i'"•/;.■ GSECii* ' Y. W X, ' '''.2 • N_tik e / ‘,\ II:Ii -••.... -•, . n-'• *,-• 2,.• . .1 • 's s'If..\••-- 0 ' Air A ..„,,, d.- . .41.1 4,-.• c R u_...1.1C3. L.. ,i(1._-1- .63RD __.i.......ao . : .sr . ;.-.,.,.. . - - .A. lir•T it,-•.- •14 1 I illi 141/111..i'13 II I I illo is 1, N VILLA ESTATES . , - .... ---- '-- . • . ._E --...' -• gollial„E,111A„,1010'. , -:. .. ,, • , •., ,. „.i. ..., ( . _ .• . .,=f-4- 2 i P_.A.lR4Tl RIDGE.Cu IR.0,7.• ,.N... • 1, p4 H••: .A,5 •,: •., - • _,....- .,--_,..•• a AV „ .!...•..--,,..-..,-..,....,',!.,',c:2.%..t.-.Z,.,.4..-*4'"0.,:-.-. t...tl..' -;k 2,44-1r. .:... . 10N Illoww,10_ , 01 o it . ., .. GI•:S'.4 ,- .. t_ rix • bk11._;.,!11111&4?/10P4111,#111 • Jr.°- .• 2 / 0=T211 11 't A 0 DIrION - . . ---. . ' .-- • ''= •..,.•,-,--.,. • .,,,:c.. - - I-•,.-.: -,,,.-- ".•: _4. IIIP , .-,.Z. 1.,.;:• 5 . .. 4111rill410.p.p n. tcto 7, DAVID 1 HUGHES • i - • • ,`. • • ' . ,. - ■ ''.: ',A..., l'•Zrgire'SktrA ...Z • • •••• . VOW .. . . 2 s'‘o•-.'4.,..., . • 41„e Ac) I , '-' s'' . :• ' 7.::--...-f'', ---:,,-- _ Or 4tscbk vs : ,CAR. C. CL.F.11..0 . - ILLS <4 ...*. 6 . \.• • . .k• '_ __-_______. •'- • ' • PM.I.IP G.hittiNKIVIETZ •.., . . .. DOC. NO.71111111 3 c- *1 .\CI - ••••••••1.••••. ,s:l.-C • <ei c1:1\ 4 . s • •• - • ,:s, 1 •-, ...•••••` 4 L ... ' 5 '. f----7,2--.; ...3 • •. A . . • . • - 6 1.1 •'' , '•., - ' • - ....-1. , ••• Gip 0),,, . ?•`1' 5.4' '4 ro : I. -. 13 ,, . • 5 ^ 4 41:: ••' •• •' it • ./1.•,,,,, . • „,_ ..-- . 41.. . • .. •_ -. • • . ,7 ,,, ; 4- ••■■ ..,, , .., -----------------------:- . , : •2 X G. ll. _J. . ' . • . • . ' 12 -- ROAD- ,s.2s,s :2-- - _______ti In i . • -. - . ----i--6-7--T.,.,-- --, . __ `1...--_- - --20*■-:“..."-".' *‘-'n • --- . . - • • • I I . #•#•;°.***....'". .-'..... -,...: •,,,,,..-,'•••,-.= - . - • •-'s.;•1-••••'' ..• • .. . . . .. •-•••••- . - _ .n . • ; • r THEODO . IF COUNTY': • - • - . • -,' CARVER CO , - • ' DRAWN ST.JE , • • • AJG:191" 19 • . • • . •• , DEC tse6 - • OCT *8?Pi. . . DEC isseT COom Trit MSS Pt iff - • . " -• .. ••••-•••■•■C.'4;•.• . . •44 al •......W.•a-V-v......-ft...".•••.....1,.:_,Z,,,„a+,.•:. I . . . 1 _ TO THE CHANHASSEN CITY COUNCIL: We, the unde44ugned, concerned nez-dens ob Phea4an.t U-LU Addition to the City 1 oti Chanha4zen, MLnnezo-ta, do hereby tionma.C2y 4eque4. .tha-t the city oli Chanha-s4en I . adequa-te.ey -i.mpnovt.and maintain de4ugna-ted exi tong city pnopen.ty do az to compty wu.th approved pandtand 4.tanda4d4. Said exes.t'ng property being cru ets A, 6, and C in the 1unae pLa-t. 1 NAME ADDRESS 1 11 bL ■1ccccv,,t Urc\-c . ,-.� -- I y ,e, (.,.., ..„..-2,././... . "77 7-7-1--/ -A,,. ?,4.-4--,- . 6,--'i.c-z,_ 1 ,- (IAA t e 1ec1, 1-7 k J1 ie:1-4. t- ( c t.c c c__ Iv.ni'i ., - Zui. r_ _ 1/4-iId / 7 i l ?nee( nst e' 'k . (1. (-) - aid , 4&) 6-76o (iu',�t A 9 ( /i 1 > if ‘, g„,, �.,, L A - J /PPe) Z,;, -_eL .d.,,I 1 ( 'Th6 L 4- i),,-r, 'W,' /77 / 0h ^1Ec_" _ .02.i.,.) . 13,,,i,,,, Qi/ ,--->)ca,,,/,' 2,1?-1_,L,,(-9, _ /,P ; .4_,,,i.y.._ A4: d).., , IA TOO 1�i�eQS . , 4„ofyyLe.re, ,Z...--( 1 ii/ r „„, ,, _„(;,,,e4,5 ,, / /7 ,i9e7 7- --AEL6x • _ . ..,. ' J( uL/ / .L� afee,A,ze, /- /c1e i cz-GfL) ,ac'e LCF __�� —� /7;1 i------"-- L_--- � ivL_ .„,4,—c, -,A , 6c 7/ 1% AL .L ?)1 G,rile, i If /0/7',04-d-Q ze, #4h 6 6/5// cJ/i 0.64e 1 Araik (P-t- -1--- M u 6,, I..d- /)),,,, a _ 3 0/3 1y q P1:`t':(A cl'ej ( c//0 ,f.,/,.' ,-,Lt- v O ✓-c o,-- • . 1 TO THE CHANHASSEN CITY COUNCIL: We, the undekzigned, unenvied nezidentz o6 Pheazant Hitt Addition to the City 1 of Chanhazzen, Minne4ota, do heneby 6o4matty neque- t that the city ob Chanha44en adequate'y .cmpnovn and maintain de4ignated ex.czt4i.ng city pnopenty -o az to compty with appnoved panfzLand ztandandz. Said exo4ting pnopenty being ou-ttaot4 A, 8, and C in the b.Lnat peat. NAME ADDRESS 1 i‘a-t- ka4-4: EL;Ce/YZAA V .o lejA, 1/41)ve 1 S ÷ SA p. IAA C5 EKSTIP c- &14 3/ LVki-t, aeu E �R 72 -_ a� -/ , / 73 a h ,`-." 1 --tYA , 4(11.4..`rnat- / -7&0 Eprcic ql� /7?D I 2 / O e cl ,CAE aj) Latlalf RtA.,C-6 r . &i_s2Lzi L-tnaldp 4,4„42Y- 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 I . , , . II TO THE CHANHASSEN CITY COUNCIL: We, the undenusigned concen.ned '.e-s.identz o6 Phea4ant Hitt Addition to -the City IC ' o6 Chanha4s4en, M�.nne4o-ta, do heneby 6onmatty neque-st that the City o6 Chanha44en pnov.ide 4ui.tabte pank and ptaygnound anea to compty with exiting city nequine- , ments. We 6ee2 that OWL nei.ghbonhood .is panktand de6.ic-en-t and doe4 not meet the need o6 the ne- dents and -thei.n 6amit e4 now az wett az in the 6utune when 1 the devetopemen-t - completed. We ask that additionat Land be developed and maintained ass panktand and xeenea-t4 on I anea. We ask that thi4 matters be bnought be6one the Chanha-s4en City Council and conuide'ed at its ea4tiezt convenience. We w-.LL be pneoent 6o4 que4tion4 and com- ments at yours neque4-t. IINAME ADDRESS NUMBER IN FAMILY / �7 / `� `\)-:,\Zv�,� \ 1 1l Q. ' }fir C:.)C: -k C\\f c c__ I itin l's-i. dt I V ( ,,f-:4-4 / cl. t l c.`, i n"jt'- i i': '--;4"4! 6-4'\A- t i -'.1:7,,,t,/' &e 4. ‘(--- -.:-3 <��C-C • ./ • , Z'�C /-”,�•L- � �J % r G r 11107777 4.1t_cf/ / ,/,-, Aza--;,,,//a,-1,-.74 / 77/ (7162sw.,,(Ly,:cieL o r, 2-7zi _. ( 2/*x 1 L( 0,1 'c� ; ,n-' 1\ -%,--)� �� I11) L u- CIY.L!_..v Z,'-:-Y"L.!LC+- /1/0 &,-,,‘,- ,-,,Cr! 6-e e a/ iiir-iX ,,i ,1;U.4,z_ ,/q %-s2"4"`• --7/ . 19-1,„,-, a-,,,_,..0 .-)2c2,1.7.. ay S - M° 'Pl\--� c-, 11,97 / f_v /2/Niacit-,--- -, _..///---e--)4 0.4----) / , i/c) ,uz (- ,,,,,„?<,,J-> . (--/ ,,v-,:-/-- 2. '„/,..Z / 7 y 0 r_.-zi_,..,„_. &-,_- •' ' .5" iktiA:ri CC-/e( /74.?/ ,2t,h ;t Gc% &I &---- r ' ' /�?U� I ' ;o-c, 4- -•'"'---‘1,-- �-- t�,i /%.'k C c (J CtG�stc. 6 ys d - «), -- • TO THE CHANHASSEN CITY COUNCIL: I We, the under4i.gned concerned re4.ident�s o4 Pheazccnt Hitt Addition to the City C ob Chanhassen, M.innuota, do hereby bormatty nequezt that the City ob Chanha-zen pnov.ide 4ultabte panfz and ptaygnound area to comp.y with ex-L- t.ing city nequ.ire- I menus. We beet that our nel.ghbonhood -ins parfzLand deb-ic.. ent and doe-o not meet the needs ob the ne4A.dent.s and the.in 6am.it.ie4 now ass weft ass in the butune when the devetopement £ completed. I We asfz that add-i.LLonat Land be developed and maintained ass panfaLand and necAeat.ion area. We azfz that thus matter be brought bebone the Chanhats4en City Council and II eon,sidened at .its eant.ie4t convenience. We wilt be pne4ent bon que4t.ion4 and com- ments at your neque4t. NAME ADDRESS NUMBER IN FAMILY II /0/77 9' 0&,01"(-'€ / /;-& v` ‘vY/ L oLe. 6104. 2 tof: 3` I ie.PP 4 \ecki-L -Peskti Vi (i\ ,k2- i )\- 6k- 3 One,' ‘ 3---A.,/,e.1 ,e,_„/„..,,i 6 y(0 ,i4d-r 0,-,, ,,_ I 7{-e,Lact 4 LeCi_ a u ioSS<i, ( �6e 1 ca- q 1 S K ( P Q .1E-2- etrEms PA-k.... 4, 43 ( C,VL . +c Do Ar 3 fclk(T4- I 17 3 0 AGv /v e' A 'c C)?0A,M;01) t 'i � Lt-r) ,i Km' .-rnarc 1-`)02Jz=c, /7 8,6 la , Li -zi I 14t-4-ti,/ 1- -L'-fel-e-e— h . zift....0-e.J.-- _437—, f2 I ')OkCh n Y -}. [2.,�5116 1-•,c6A.c E / 8 80 P��f �c•P6 .5 I 1 ' , 4 LL /��s v !/ ■ , - G ig I I I C I I CITY OF . ( CHANHASSEN - 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 I August 4 , 1988 Dear Resident: ' The Park and Recreation Department recently received P etitions regarding park concerns in your area. The Park and Recreation ' Commission will be discussing these items at their next meeting scheduled for 7: 30 p.m. on Tuesday, August 9th. The meeting will be held in the lower level of Chanhassen City Hall in the Council Chambers. IC This notification is to let Ya ou kno y that public comment is welcome. Attached for your infomration please find the staff ' report to the Commission. Please call me at 937-1900 of you have any questions . ' Sincerely, ,LA4 `c- ( Lori Sietsema Park and Recreation Coordinator LS:k ' Enclosure