PRC 1999 07 27CHANHASSEN PARK AND
RECREATION COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
JULY 27, 1999
Chairwoman Lash called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT: Jan Lash, Mike Howe, Fred Berg, Jim Manders, Jay Karlovich, Rod
Franks and Dave Moes
MEMBERS ABSENT: None.
STAFF PRESENT: Todd Hoffman, Park and Rec Director; Jerry Ruegemer, Recreation
Superintendent; and Tracy Peterson, Recreation Supervisor
VISITOR PRESENTATIONS: None.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Howe moved, Moes seconded to approve the Minutes of the Park
and Recreation Commission meeting dated June 22, 1999 as presented. All voted in favor and the
motion carried.
CONSIDER REQUEST FOR LANDSCAPING ENCROACHMENT~ MR. RONALD
FRIGSTAD~ 9270 KIOWA TRAIL.
Todd Hoffman presented the staff report on this item.
Lash: Is Mr. Frigstad here? Okay. Are there commissioners with comments or questions?
Howe: We're talking just mostly about lilacs and shrubs?
Hoffman: Yep. The back page, yep.
Moes: Versus what's there now?
Hoffman: Grass. With the exception of the trees that he has shown there. That are kind of planted
on the property line. Outside of his property line, before Bandimere Park it was corn fields.
Lash: So all these little things...
Hoffman: That's what he would propose on planting, yes. New trees and shrubs and then the
lilac hedge.
Lash: So is there anything in particular that he has in mind for planting?
Franks: Do the plans for particulars need to be submitted prior to his placing it?
Park and Rec Commission Meeting - July 27, 1999
Hoffman: I provided Mr. Frigstad a copy of the approved trees by city ordinance.
Moes: Todd what's the, I guess the depth or width of I guess maybe the larger portion here
compared to the top part?
Hoffman: The top paws probably about 25 feet and that back paws 75-100 feet or so.
Lash: Okay. Any other questions or comments?
Karlovich: So there is no fencing going in?
Hoffman: No, he originally asked for fencing on the outside line and a lilac hedge on that outside
line but staff or the attorney, we did not want to see any type of a barrier in concurrence of that
property line put up in a hedge so. It's important, or I think it's valuable to note that outside of
the trails, the perimeter trails in Bandimere Park, we're not going to complete any maintenance.
There's going to be a maintenance, two foot maintenance strip and outside of that no maintenance
and so.
Lash: Grow wild, right?
Hoffman: Yeah.
Lash: Okay.
Karlovich: The only question I have Todd was, paragraph number 4 that says the City may, with
cause, terminate this agreement. What does.., cause?
Hoffman: If we plan on doing something else with the property. We make that easily just
extend that to make it even more on our side in terms of that.
Karlovich: ... city attorney has already drafted just to make it perfectly clear what we can do with
public property from here on out...
Lash: We decided we wanted to go in and cut everything down.
Karlovich: The only thing I see is that these trees are put in... maybe he does not want them to
come down at some later date and the city wants to do something, there could be an argument
over what constitutes cause.
Lash: Did you look on the next page? Oh you said just cause. I thought you said cost.
Hoffman: We'll just change that to the City may at any time terminate this agreement by giving
the owner of the subject property 30 days advance notice.
Lash: Okay, anyone else? Okay, is there a motion then to approve this with that slight change?
2
Park and Rec Commission Meeting - July 27, 1999
Berg: So moved.
Lash: Is there a second?
Karlovich: Second.
Berg moved, Karlovich seconded that the Park and Recreation Commission recommend
that the City Council to approve an encroachment agreement between Mr. Ronald
Frigstad and the City of Chanhassen for landscaping at Bandimere Park as amended in
paragraph 4. All voted in favor and the motion carried.
RECEIVE FINDINGS~ ROUNDHOUSE PARK STRUCTURE ASSESSMENT~ LOCUS
ARCHITECTURE.
Public Present:
Name
Address
Peter Moe
Paul Neseth
Janet Carlson
Dave & Timothy Hughes
Howard Anderson
Deanna Bunkelman
Edward Kling
7161 Minnewashta Parkway
1211 West 24th Street, Minneapolis
4141 Kings Road
1780 Lake Lucy Lane
4150 Red Oak Lane
4191 Red Oak Lane
4169 Red Oak Lane
Todd Hoffman presented the staff report on this item.
Paul Neseth: Good evening. Again I'm Paul Neseth with Locus Architecture of Minneapolis.
On July 8th Dave McDonald and I and Todd Hoffman met at the roundhouse to spend about an
hour looking through the structure and our task at that time was to assess the current conditions of
the building and then provide you a synopsis of what those current conditions are and then also an
estimate of what the cost might be to bring it up to a useable structure. I understand you were just
out at the site so I don't need to describe exactly what the building is. Roughly it's just a stave
building. A circular building with supporting on, the walls are the supporting structure with the
roof, flat roof that has essentially failed at this point. The findings of what was there at the time
was that the foundation is in satisfactory condition from what we could see. There's quite a bit of
muck and water coming in at this point so it's really hard to determine exactly where that's
coming in. The floor structures you saw was buckled and our assessment is that that is the
substructure of that is still intact and good condition. Once it dries out I think it would be able to
be repaired and brought back down to it's current, it's earlier condition. In the report, just to give
you an outline of what we did. We looked at three main areas. One was the demolition that
would need to happen in order to get the building up to a useable state. The second thing was
those pieces of the building which we would have to renovate and treat the surfaces differently or
Park and Rec Commission Meeting - July 27, 1999
add to them. And then the third thing was just the new construction that would have to happen in
order to get it to that point. The demolition, if I could just highlight a couple things. One is that I
think it's important, even though we're taking out the second, or suggesting that the second floor
get taken out in the renovation. The material in that and possibly the roof should be taken out in a
way that could be reused. It may bring the cost of the building down and the final construction of
the building down to a better price for you. And the other thing is just in general the building
needs to be taken down and once the roof is removed, it should be cared for in such a way that no
greater damage occurs during that time. In the repair and reuse thing, the main things that we
were looking at was the foundation. The foundation floor seems to be in good shape. The
foundation itself is, it's a fairly logical, inherently strong type of structure. The forces coming in
from the outside are taken up by the compression of the basement itself so it appears as though
there's no structural damage at this point and that it's just, because it's such a logical structure and
the foundation. It should stay that way for quite some time. The first floor deck again it's a fairly
simple, 2 1/2 inch thick deck boards supported by two, by the walls as well as two main support
beams running across about a third of the way across in each case. And that may have to be
beefed up a little bit in the final construction with some columns and maybe some footings in the
basement. But it does appear as though it's in quite fair shape. The floor structure being 2 1/2
inches thick I think would be something that would once it is renovated, would wear very well for
the type of use that you're looking at. So I think that's actually quite an advantage there. The
exterior walls. I think the thing about that that I was struck by, I think in general the building is
unique and I think that's apparently unique. I don't think any one of us have been in buildings like
that. Probably not anywhere else. But I think the thing that's not apparent is the quality of the
materials and the exterior materials are materials that we can't find these days. It's very hard to
obtain those types of materials so I was actually very taken by the fact that if you do intend to take
that building down, you ought to save those materials because they are so good. We have, in a lot
of our work we actually do a lot of re-use of materials in our final products and if you have any
questions about how that can be done, I can certainly talk about that because it's, we could show
you examples of what it looks like. I think it conjures up some ideas of your uncle's shack in
northern Minnesota but it certainly isn't like that. I mean the re-use of materials can be a very
beautiful thing. The utilities, from what I understand is they're in working order. Gas and electric
are to the site so that's not a problem. The new construction that needs to occur on the site or the
third category. The roof obviously is something that needs to be rebuilt, and I think that actually
removing the flat roof and building something that might have a bit nicer profile would actually
enhance the building quite a bit. The windows again need to be changed out. I don't think I need
to go through everything but some site work needs to be done. Heating system in order to allow it
to be a wanning house in the winter time. Potentially a ceiling fan of some sort that might
circulate air. Entry canopy. New beams for the structure of the floor. And then a couple other
things. Reposition the steel hoops and rebuilding the basement stairs are something that needs to
be done. Another thing actually the steel angle is something that the engineer suggested might
need to be done. Again it's a structure that he has not seen before as well, and the way the load is
coming down on the floor structure is something that I don't think he's confident in so we'd have
to provide something there to take up the load coming down. So that kind of gets you through the
pieces of the text for the assessment and then the last page is the cost figures that we came up with
for the three years. Again the demolition, the re-use and repair and new construction. I think it's
fairly apparent it should be in the same order so you can refer back and forth from one to the
4
Park and Rec Commission Meeting - July 27, 1999
other. I guess just finally I would want to reiterate again, I think it's a, if there's any way to
preserve a building like this for historical reasons, I think it would be an important thing. And
also just for the sake of we have, I think there's historical significance in the materials themselves
as well because they are, they do speak to a time which occurred maybe 100 years ago so if it can
be restored and repaired I think it would be a benefit to everyone. That's all I have, thank you.
Howe: Paul in your experience, would we have trouble, we talked about this earlier this evening.
Would we have trouble finding a contractor to rehab that if we went that route? I mean is that
easy to find someone who would do that work?
Paul Neseth: Well, I would think so. I think you would find you would need to find more of a
craftsmen, small shop or a single person to do it. I don't think you're going to go to a larger
builder, developer to find that kind of thing. I think they're not interested in that. It has to be
someone who's more interested in unique. There are details that they aren't ever going to do
again. Or have never done so I think you can find it. I've worked with people like that. We have
a construction ann to our business and we do things like that so I know there are people out there
like that.
Howe: In these estimates, how much of those are what the city could do and how much of the
demolition work, what's included in those numbers as what we could do ourselves?
Hoffman: Was it $10,000 to $15,000 for demolition that was set aside.
Howe: That's our internal cost then?
Hoffman: We could assume that, correct. Yes, we would want to take on that task just before the
time the contractor would come on board. Work with us and they would want to make some
observations during that demolition. Also we would need, a decision is made to save the house,
restore it, then...
Lash: Dave, do you have anything?
Moes: Well yes. Just as far as kind of, the building is very unique setting and situation here.
What would it take on a I guess an annual basis then to maintain it in that same format structure,
appearance, etc? It does seem like there's a lot of uniqueness to it and I'm just wondering if it has
any other?
Paul Neseth: I don't think there are any inherent things other than you would see on any other
building. I imagine once the paint on the outside is removed, it may be resealed with some sort of
a stain to let the wood show through and that may need to be done every 5 years or so. But the
roof situation I would think would be no different than any other. And the foundation I think is
fine so I don't think there are great costs in that.
Lash: Rod.
Park and Rec Commission Meeting - July 27, 1999
Franks: I'm wondering about the second floor. Are we, are you considering removing the second
floor back because of structural problems or was that done in consideration of keeping the cost of
the rehab project more in line?
Paul Neseth: That was actually more presented to us and that's kind of the way we went into it.
Assuming that that was going to be done. And it seems like a reasonable idea.
Franks: Did you find that the supporting structure for the second floor deck had failed or was it
just?
Paul Neseth: No, I don't think it's failed. I think it's just a matter of do you need a second floor
for the use that you're looking at? And it's probably no. I would think it would be for a lot of
reasons security for just the use and traffic and how much square footage you have. Do you
really want to take it up with a stair going up to a second floor? You don't gain that much in
what you use up so I think it's a reasonable thing to think of taking that second floor out. I think
the interior structure would be a much more dynamic structure as well. I think it would be, the
interest of being on the first floor and looking up at a personally framed ceiling could be really
nice.
Lash: Okay, I just have lwo questions. Did you have something in mind for the roof? I know the
shape you have in mind.., but as far as materials. What did you have in mind for the roof?
Paul Neseth: It may come down to cost I would think in the end.
Lash: Because it's going to be more visible. I mean now you can't see what's out there so it
doesn't matter.
Paul Neseth: I guess I was thinking more of something like a, if you can do a cedar shake roof or
if you can do a metal roof. Of all things, you know you certainly could spend for a copper roof
and it would be beautiful. So I think it may be a, it's hard for me to throw things out because I
think it's a collaborative effort in trying to figure out what this thing's going to look like.
Lash: You didn't really have anything?
Paul Neseth: Not, no preconceived notions but I think what we would try to do is not put on an
asphalt shingled roof because I think that wouldn't add to it. I think that would detract. So yeah,
it would be something that would be more visible and more appealing.
Lash: So if we went ahead with this.., got going what we presented was a more formalized
drawing and specifications and stuff showing exactly what's being used and how it's going to
look in the end.
Paul Neseth: Before you start construction? Absolutely.
Franks: Can I follow up on that? We have a low estimate for the roof at like $18,000 and the
6
Park and Rec Commission Meeting - July 27, 1999
high estimate at around 24. When you kind of develop those types of estimates, can you give me
like some range of what the material would be?
Paul Neseth: I don't think it's, are you saying that the low might be an asphalt roof?
Franks: Well that's what I'm wondering. When I look at the high and I look at the low, you
know some are just about double and I'm wondering well what were we thinking about when you
did low and what were we thinking about when you did the high and you brought up the roof so I
thought that would just be a good example.
Paul Neseth: In the roof situation I think it's, of course your most expensive's going to be some
sort of a metal roof, copper roof or something like that. And then something less than that would
be a cedar shake roof or something. When we were talking with the engineer about the cost on
these things, he suggested the estimate for the reframing of the roof would be about $3,000 and I
think it became obvious to me that that's the difference between an architect and an architect is the
engineer's going to replace what's there and we want to do something that has a visual impact as
well. And so that's, again you could get something. You could repair it. Build a new roof for
maybe under 10. But I think if you want something that can add to the look of the building and be
a positive thing, I think it would cost more.
Lash: Can I just throw out a question. We can never do it with this project but down the road,
Rod had asked about the second floor and I had wondered if it'd be possible structurally wise to
put like a cat walk up at the second floor. It would be open but you'd have a.
Paul Neseth: Sure.
Lash: An area that people could go up and look out...
Paul Neseth: Go outside of the building?
Lash: No, not necessarily. Inside.
Paul Neseth: Yes. Absolutely it could be. Yeah. It would need to be, you wouldn't re-use any
of the structure that's there. You'd have to rebuild the whole thing.
Lash: Fred.
Berg: When I'm sitting down on the first floor and I look up, what do you envision my seeing on
the inside? As far as the roof is concerned, the ceiling. Is it just going to be sprayed or do you
see beams or?
Paul Neseth: I would think you'd see the structure itself with beams or, ideally even you know
potentially the bottom of the roof. The roof system itself. The sheeting itself. I don't know that
you need a great deal of insulation up there and that can certainly detract from how much you can
see of that. So I think, I guess I would want it to be visually appealing. For one you get into the
7
Park and Rec Commission Meeting - July 27, 1999
structure and it is, it's unending. I mean it's so simple, the skin is so simple that I think a contrast
in something that might be a little bit more delicate and crafted in the ceiling might be a nice,
... the position ofiwo different things.
Berg: Maybe this is a stupid question but I can tell by your presentation that you're interested in
preserving the historical authenticity of the building too. In your mind, with the improvements
that you're talking about, would that still be achieved?
Paul Neseth: I think it's, there's no precedent for what this building is so historically it's not a, I
think preserving it in it's current form is not necessarily preserving it. I think the idea of
preserving it as a round building I think is preserving it. And preserving the materials that are
there is also preserving it. So to go back and say that we have to, as you would in preservation
work in a main street or something, I think replicating what's there is not necessary but taking the
positive features that are there and then enhancing them I think is really what we would suggest.
Berg: Okay. That's all I have.
Lash: Jay...
Karlovich: My only question is, can you just give us a little bit of narration. I love to watch This
Old House. I think a lot of folks have the fear that we'll get into this thing and it will end up
costing $160,000. When you build other shelters you know what they're going to cost .... or the
rest of the commission on how.., you are on these estimates or are we going to possibly get a
contractor to big on the contract and have nothing but change orders and problems? I know you
can't guarantee that but I think it's a fear that everybody has.
Paul Neseth: I think the unknown, the big unknown that you have is that no one's worked on a
building like this. And so that's, but that you would know right at the very beginning from your
bids that come in. The thing that you have going for you is that once this thing is, once demolition
has taken place, there are so few elements left that could go wrong or that could be, you know
that could require change orders, that I think it would be very straight forward at that point.
You're left, once you remove the roof and the second floor, you're left with the foundation, the
connection beiween that and the first floor and the walls and then that's about it. I mean it's fairly,
it's inherently a very strong building. So I think once you, the fear of it being, going over cost
would take place only at the very beginning when your bids come in from all the contractors.
Because that's where you would say, that's where they would say you know I'm not sure about
this. I've never done this. So they might cover themselves at that point. But as you go forward I
think it would be very smooth I think at that.
Karlovich: Thank you.
Lash: Okay, anyone else?
Franks: Todd, I just have, that just brings up another question but if this is approved and goes for
8
Park and Rec Commission Meeting - July 27, 1999
bid and the bids come back from contractors and they're just unacceptable to us, and what kind of
options do we have at that point?
Hoffman: Rebid it. Redesign it. Elect to dismantle it at that time. You know change, typically
what happens is you take an appraisal of why do they come in over bid. Was it the, did you miss
the project? Did you miss the mark? Or did you just bid it at such a time when the market was
so high do you make a decision then well, do we have to redesign this bid package or do we just
sit on it and rebid it at another time when it's more competitive. We go out and find some bidders
that we think would bid on the project so. The other element to this whole proposal is that
currently you only have $40,000 in the bank and you need to request of the City Council the
additional $40,000 in your 2000 CIP to make it happen so. That also need to be... of the City
Council as well.
Lash: Okay. Any other questions? This was a very well done report. Thank you .... to address
the commission. Can you come up to the podium and state your name and address so we have it
for the record.
Janet Carlson: Hi. I'm Janet Carlson. I live at 4141 Kings Road. He was just saying that they
only have $40,000. I guess I would like to see the building stay. That has been there for oh 50-
60 years I suppose. It's an old water tower that the original people that lived there moved in.
And all the neighbor kids that used to live there, all went to Sunday School on Saturday... for
everything but I guess my question is how much would it cost to put the roof, you know a new
roof on to hold it and maybe fix the windows. At least now until we get some more money. I'd
really like to see it stay. I used to live in that house at one time. And it's just really a very neat
house. I don't know I guess, and as far as that second floor, does the second floor have to come
out? Because if you took the second floor out, wouldn't that be for the balance, I mean I don't
know.
Paul Neseth:...
Janet Carlson: No, but it does now. Yeah.
Paul Neseth: ...
Janet Carlson: No, okay.
Hoffman: The roof would hold it up top if you took the second floor out. The issue of the
second floor is what do you use it for. In a public building you have a narrow stairway that goes
up the side of the building.
Janet Carlson: Would you have restrooms in there?
Hoffman: No. Portable restrooms on the outside. If we add plumbing costs into this, then we go
up another $20,000 to add plumbing into this building and we would have heat and lights and for
9
Park and Rec Commission Meeting - July 27, 1999
a wanning house.., neighborhood gathering for the focal point for a neighborhood picnic or...
playground programs.
Janet Carlson: How much does it cost a year for the outhouse now?
Hoffman: Minimal cost for that park. $200-$300 a year.
Janet Carlson: That's when they get knocked over.
Hoffman: They get knocked over quite a bit.
Janet Carlson: Yeah.
Hoffman: If it's determined that we want to move forward, we want to secure that roof so we
keep the water out but we've gone down this, as you know, talking about trying to save it part
way and it's really, if you understood what Paul was saying, if we take this thing down to what
we need to start over with, it's nothing but the block foundation and walls. That's it. And if you
want to save the second floor, the second floor would stay in...
Lash: Okay, thank you.
Dave Hughes: My name is Dave Hugest and I live at 1780 Lake Lucy Lane. And I had the
unique experience of working for the Harstad Company under the auspices of your Park and Rec
Director in clearing that site and I had my eyes on that little building because that's a U.S. military
grade number one Douglas Fir. You cannot possibly buy anything better at that time in history
and you wouldn't even find it today at any place. I had many, many people interested in that
lumber and notwithstanding what you decide to do, you could probably sell the lumber at any
time you decide to get out and have a very fair amount of money. Including the people who built
the steamboat. They wanted the lumber for that. That's the quality of lumber it was. So it is a
very unique structure indeed. You happen to have a unique individual here in your city by the
name of Gary Reed who also happens to be an individual contractor. Some of you may have...
He's been in the community for a second generation and he works for himselfi maybe with a
helper. And what makes him unique is that he worked for that man on these water towers when
he was a young man so he's intimately familiar with that structure and it's repair and so on so I
don't know if he would be interested. He's in his late 50's I think. He might not care to take on
something that big but he might be somebody to contact if you should decide to go ahead with it.
Lash: Thank you.
Peter Moe: My name is Peter Moe and I live at 7161 Minnewashta Parkway. I've lived there
since 1979 and I've been in that neighborhood for quite a while and I've always just thought of the
round house as kind of an odd little house. And there was people living there and one of the
daughters went to school with my kids and I guess my involvement with the park since the
beginning. I've been involved with the park since the first ideas were proposed was the
recreational parts of it. It's already a beautiful site. Beautiful lake views and the beach and my
10
Park and Rec Commission Meeting - July 27, 1999
family used the park on a daily basis but that is definitely what I would rather have the city spend
money on is the tennis courts. We've been trying to play tennis at Cathcart and been turned away
two out of the last three times with people using it and having to find other tennis courts. We
need that. You know the improvements that are at the park are great but there's more things that
need to be done that are in the long term master plan list. Planting trees. Other things like that. I
look at the Arboretum and.., building and grounds and we have a lot of old buildings at the
horiculture research center that are about the same age as this and we're constantly spending
money on those buildings although we're trying to keep them in with all the things working. I
think the plan here with striping it basically is certainly going to be lower cost but old buildings
are real expensive to maintain and you always find unexpected surprises has been our experience
so. My family and I love the park. We go there almost every day. We like the beach. We're
looking for the other recreational facilities and we prefer a modem structure that might cost less
money. That could be a cold warming house too with that big exposed area. And ifI picture a
conical roof on it or something, I think of a grain bin but that's maybe just me but that's my
opinion, thank you.
Lash: Anyone else?
Ed Kling: Hi, my name's Ed Kling and I live at 4169 Red Oak Lane and I'd just like to ask first
ofl~ is there a deadline that you have as far as making a decision on this building?
Lash: We need to turn our budget in, our propsed budget to the City Council by August or so,
yeah. And included in our 2000 budget is funding to do this project. So yeah, we need to make a
decision so that we can decide if we want it in our 2000 budget or not.
Ed Kling: August what?
Lash: By the end of July. So by August 1st, yeah.
Ed Kling: So we're talking about 3 days. Okay. Just give you a little background of what I think
of Chanhassen and what I think of this area. I just moved from Maple Grove. I've been living in
my house for a month and I looked from anywhere's from St. Michael down to Savage. Probably
put about 5,000, 6,000, 7,000 miles on my car in a three year period looking at all these
communities and Chanhassen was the community I chose because of it's location and it's charm.
Having, coming to the area we looked at a lot of different developments and you know the
development we chose was the development right behind the Roundhouse Park. The first thing
that I noticed about the park area was the building. My father grew up on a farm so I'm familiar
with these type of buildings. My grandmother's silo has been sitting there with basically no repair
for well over 100 years and the building is built exactly the same way. The only difference is it's
made out of cement instead of wood. The cement is actually falling apart in that building though.
But looking at the structure of the building, I have friends that are in the building trades and I have
a friend who is, he could probably teach BobVila some tricks on how to build. He took a 1937
house, dug out the building, went to Ernst Movers and jacked this house up and made a colonial
out of it. I told him he should have Bob Vila over there but he laughed at about the whole deal but
bottom line here is I've been working with my friends for about the last 20 years, on and off jobs
11
Park and Rec Commission Meeting - July 27, 1999
so without being a tradesman. I'm not a tradesman by work but I've spent literally thousands of
hours on jobs with these guys and I've learned things that probably the average tradesman
wouldn't understand if they're just framer. And I can look at your list here and I have a friend
who's a paint contractor. I've been painting on and off for the last 20 years with him. I can see
right now that there are some different aspects of your job here that I think could be dramatically
reduced if you just look at the cost of the materials and the cost of the labor. My friend who is a
paint contractor, his job's typically run approximately 10 times the amount of the material. 10%
of the job is materials. 10 times that is the labor and the reason why is because he has to pay
social security twice. Federal and state tax and by the time he gets done with the job, you know
he comes out with something he can live off of. But looking at some of these figures, and like I
say, some of them I don't really understand because there are certain, you can't know everything
but the roof, I can see where that's going to be some expensive figures but I built a deck on the
back of my house and I put $2,000 to $3,000 into it in materials alone. I had some of the certain
things subbed out but I did most of it myself. And I had people tell me I had a $25,000 deck off
the back of my deck and I put $3,000 worth of materials into it. Another example is the paint.
Exterior finishes. $2,000 to $3,000. I could realistically with my experience know that I could
buy a very high quality latex paint, which is really the paint qualities are very good right now.
They've come a long way. I could probably paint the exterior of that paint material for probably
$200. There's going to need to be some refinishing that's either going to need to be water blasted
or sand blasted or both. I don't see that being $1,000. So the point being here is I think that if
there's enough interest in this building, and you can see the inherent value of the building and I
think another thing is that we have to look at. One of the reasons I left Maple Grove was because
it was growing too fast. I didn't like the way the community was growing. It didn't have the
value of an aesthetically pleasing community. And I see that changing critically as time goes on.
So that's why I came down here. Moved down here. I think if we start to change our
philosophies of thought just because it's easier to do something, then I think what we're doing is
we're really not paying attention to what you know, what our environment is and how we're
addressing our lifestyle. And since I've been down here for the last month I've noticed that my
blood pressure's a lot lower and it really is. I'm not kidding. And I live by the lake. I take my
kids down there every other day. I love it here and I can't say enough about how I feel. If this
job is going to take $80,000, my friend put up a colonial for less than that and that was because of
labor. Now my suggestion would be to open bids and I'm sure that there are some very talented
people that would be willing to take a look at some of these jobs. So my suggestion would be to
see if there's a chance that we can circulate some of these bidding jobs and see if we can get a
quick response back as to what we can, how we can reduce some of these costs because I think
there are some neighbors, I know there are some of my neighbors that have suggested that they
would be willing to contribute their time and if we can get some funds delegated for these jobs, I
think you'd probably find that you'd have a lot of people who are very talented in the
neighborhood that would be able to do that. I don't know what you're looking for, but I think it's
a very doable thing and I think this figure of $86,000, I know we can reduce that to a reasonable.
The other thing is, if you tear the building down for $40,000 and there's $15,000 demolition fee,
you're up to $45,000, almost up to $60,000 in itself just to get the building demolished. At that
point you're very close to, and like I say, I could easily see us shaving off $15,000 to make it a
wash. But then that goes back to you know how I feel and I think it's part of the community that
when you start to change the look of your community, then I just don't see that here and I guess I
12
Park and Rec Commission Meeting - July 27, 1999
would expect everybody to look at what their, you know how they truly feel inside about it and
you know what they feel about as far as their community. And I guess that's all I have to say.
Thank you.
Lash: So you'd like us to preserve it.
Ed Kling: I would definitely like to see you preserve it.
Lash: I just wanted to make sure. Okay. Anyone else in the audience? Okay. I'll open it up
for commissioner comments. Why don't we start with Jay.
Karlovich: Caught me off guard. The last meeting we had I waffled back and forth and
expressed my opinion and I was moved by one of my fellow commissioners but I am behind this
project. I think we should go forward with it and ask for additional funds in our year 2000
budget.
Lash: Okay. Fred.
Berg: I really don't have anything to add over what I've said before either. I support this with as
much vigor as I can muster.
Lash: Okay. I feel the same. Rod.
Franks: Well I was also a waffler last time. Last once when we discussed this. I'm more
convinced, I'm not completely convinced. I remember when we moved into the community in
'91, a little more than a month ago but the round house was one of the first structures we noticed
and it's certainly something that makes the city unique. I smiled when you were talking about
Maple Grove because where I work there's a little Chanhassen-Maple Grove competition going on
about which is the more livable city. We know who the winner is. So in that regard I just would
hate to see those certain features which are unique, just a part of our landscape. At the same time
though, I know our budget is fight and we have a lot of demands on what it is that we want to
provide as far as equipment and recreational opportunities and so we're looking to go above what
was in the referendum by double and we request that that be approved by the City Council. I
think that we understand that their call is to be as fiscally responsible as possible so I'm weighing
those thing and I guess, you know what I'm really wondering is, is there a way that we can
approve the project and word the proposal as such that the contingency for the money is that we
get an appropriate bid. I don't know exactly how we would.
Lash: ... did come in just over budget and...
Franks: Well I guess what I'm thinking is up, you know we're talking about a kind of, make the
request more palatable I guess is what I'm considering as we're saying authorize up to another
$40,000 instead of saying.., that we're trying to put together this $80,000 package. I think that
they'll balk. We can approve it.
13
Park and Rec Commission Meeting - July 27, 1999
Hoffman: It will be a couple of weeks before I'll be talking to the council about your
recommendation and they're going to be in the same spot. They're going to understand that
$80,000 is hopefully what it takes and council is typically more direct in it's $80,000 or nothing
so if you want to make the request that up to another $40,000. There's some seasoned council
members on there as well. They've been around. They've seen that... They'll smell that out so
you just give it to them as it is and say here's what we want to do and they can read the report.
They'll understand it.
Berg: But we're not talking $40,000 additional tax dollars.
Hoffman: Correct.
Berg: We're talking $40,000 out of our 2000, our year 2000 CIP.
Hoffman: Absolutely.
Berg: Which I think is an important distinction to make.
Karlovich: The one thing I would like the record to reflect, and I don't think there was more
discussion about it, was the proximity of the building to where the skating rink is going to be and
there needs to be some type of wanning house structure there. That's something this building
would provide and during our tour today I was at least swayed by that we either have to do that or
we have to bring.., satellite building.
Franks: While I'd like to see the second floor but I agree, take it out. It's a little claustrophobic
in there with that, on that first floor.
Lash: I think all the windows are...
Franks: In the interest of maintaining some uniqueness in our community I'm in favor of the
restoration project.
Moes: I evidentally missed the tour today. I was just checking my agenda here too.
Hoffman: I just called today. This morning and left messages for everyone.
Moes: Okay. I guess from my perspective I appreciate the longevity of the building and respect
people's thoughts and input as to how long it's been around and possibly the reassessment of it
and restructuring it or bringing it back in it's former mode. At the same time I guess I hear and
respect the people that are looking for additional playground facilities. You know there's a
couple that we've seen that have commented on you know more of the pavillion type structure
that gives them both the coverage and the accessibility to picnic facilities as well as even more of
an open area. And ifI look at it from a I guess a fiscal perspective, looking at $80,000 and
understanding that it isn't additional tax dollars. At the same time thought I balance that off with
you know what other playground facilities enhancements could be purchased, acquired for those
14
Park and Rec Commission Meeting - July 27, 1999
same dollars, I start thinking through as to which one will provide more of a benefit to the
community in total and which will get more use from it. And understanding you know Jay the
wanning house thought there, it would certainly provide that capability for them. However I
know we've also got the portable wanning houses that could very easily be put into place and
utilized as well. Where I'm at now is I'm leaning more towards a demolition and utilizing the
money for additional playground facilities. Long term strategy. Long term planning.., those type
of features.
Lash: Okay. Mike.
Howe: I think due to it's uniqueness we should keep it. I worry a bit about finding a tradesman
who can do this and on budget. Maybe it's something you do over the winter or the slow months
but I do think, even though it is our money technically and not tax money, we've got to be careful
about what we get into but I do think it's definitely worth keeping so I would say full steam
ahead.
Lash: Okay. Does anyone else have anything else they want to throw in? Call for a vote. Okay,
would someone like to make a motion?
Franks: Fred.
Berg: I'm trying to think, yeah. I'd like some help. I move that we recommend to the City
Council that the round house at Roundhouse Park be refurbished at a cost of, at a maximum cost
of $80,000.
Lash: We need to differentiate the lwo, half of it being, no? Okay. Is that all we're going to
need? Okay, is there a second to that motion?
Karlovich: I second it.
Berg moved, Karlovich seconded that the Park and Recreation Commission recommend
that the City Council authorize up to $80,000 for the refurbishing of the round house
struture at Roundhouse Park. All voted in favor, except for Moes who opposed, and the
motion carried with a vote of 6 to 1.
Lash: And Dave, do you want to say anything more about your reasons? You were pretty clear.
Moes: No, I think I was pretty clear. I'm much more a proponent of playground facilities for
kids and everything so.
Lash: Okay, motion carries. Thanks for coming and for your comments.
Hoffman: I think we have a couple of the neighbors here that mentioned other facilities. I'm
interested, as the commission moves forward in planning for those other facilities, maybe we
should have just a brief discussion on that. The master plan would call out tennis courts, a hockey
15
Park and Rec Commission Meeting - July 27, 1999
rink/inline skate rink, Phase II of the playground. As far as the master plan, that would be it. The
location for the tennis court, the basketball pad was just put in with the feeling that that would last
for certainly a number of years at a minimal cost. $6,000 to put that in versus $60,000 for a
tennis court. While you saved up, went elsewhere and spent your money elsewhere for a while
and then came back out to Roundhouse. Roundhouse Park to date, I haven't added it all up but
it's nearing the half million dollar mark in a neighborhood park for what you have there to date.
Hockey rinks, inline skate. Big chunk of money. $100,000, more or less. And then Phase II of
playground, $25,000. So if we, as a commission if you can know what the neighborhood wants
next, we can be focusing on that as you move forward. Does anybody have comments on that? If
tennis was the big one or.
Audience: ...
Lash: Does that have to be there or could we move it?
Hoffman: Well that's the best location for it. It was the only other place to put it would be farther
back to the west, the open play field. That site was graded specifically for a double tennis court.
Lash: Then we lose the basketball.
Hoffman: Well then your basketball would go inside the tennis court with hoops inside. You'd
have a combination...
Karlovich: If we do Phase II of the playground, do we have to do the same color scheme?
Lash: We wanted an ugly yellow. That's kind of an ugly yellow.
Hoffman: Trees we'll plant as they become available. We typically do a lot of tree spading in the
fall and the turf is established now where it can handle a spade coming into the park so.
Lash: You figure people would want tennis first?
Audience: Well I can't say...
Lash: What do you think is the feel for the hockey?
Audience:...
Lash: Okay, thanks .... I think we'd plan on starting, if it goes into the budget and is approved by
the City Council, we'd be looking at next summer, wouldn't we?
Hoffman: Well earlier than that. We'd want to get, we'll receive approval of the budget. If they
go ahead and approve the $40,000 additional money in December at some point for the final
allocation. So then we would want to finalized plans and specifications and get those out
probably in the first of February. Some time frame like that. Bidding and then allow the
16
Park and Rec Commission Meeting - July 27, 1999
contractor to start at their own schedule. Earlier in the year typically the better off you are so.
Anytime we go over $25,000 we're a public bid...
Lash: Well what about the stuff that the staff would have to do to just secure the roof and all that,
when would that, that would have to happen.
Hoffman: Yeah, as soon as we get an indication from the council or they approve of it, we can go
out there and start shoring up the waterproofing.
Audience:...
Lash: Well we do. Thanks for coming tonight.
PRESENTATION OF THE PROPOSED SKATE PARK PLAN.
Todd Hoffman presented the staff report on this item.
Hoffman: Do we have any audience members?
Lash: Yes, do we have any?
Tim Hughes: My name is Tim Hughes and I live at the same address he does. But I'm not
prepared to say anything to you guys but I just hope you make a comfortable decision because I
know I wouldn't feel comfortable spending $15,000 if it was coming out of my own pocket and I
know this is a set aside budget for you guys. And I know I would use the facilities and greatly
appreciate them so if you guys can put that in your budget that'd be great. So that's about it.
Berg: You have friends that would use it too I assume.
Tim Hughes: Yeah, lots of them.
Lash: Thanks Tim.
David Hughes: ... and I guess you folks all recognize there's bicycles.., ride bicycle whether
you've got a bicycle trail or not. And runners are going to run whether you've got a running trail
or not, and skateboarders are going to skate whether you've got a skate park or not. And it drives
the merchants crazy so, and it drives the police department crazy I'm sure plus creates some
safety hazards so I know you folks want to do this as much as young people want to do it. It just
makes sense that you put it under control and supervision so that the darker side elements don't
get out there and raise havoc in a way that isn't wholesome. And I just, I'm thrilled that you as a
group are considering this. Sort of ground breaking. It's a new sport I guess and it's ground
breaking and it's a little I'm sure difficult to say well should we spend $15,000 that might go up
in smoke. In four years it's not going to be here anymore, but look at every other fad that turned
out to be a major industry and started out young and I think this is one that's headed to be the
17
Park and Rec Commission Meeting - July 27, 1999
same. It's not going to go away and I just, I thank you for considering it and I want to encourage
you to make a positive decision on it.
Lash: For the record Mr. Hughes, please state your name.
David Hughes: David Hughes, 1780 Lake Lucy Lane, Chanhassen.
Berg: I confess to not having read this as carefully as I should. Has it been demonstrated that
where these are built, there is less use, there is less problem with kids around buildings in the
downtown or the merchants and all that sort of thing? Is there any evidence to that?
Hoffman: There's no, my discussions, we did not talk about that. That's certainly part of the
philosophy behind these. Whether or not it's come true I do not know.
Berg: Common sense would say if they're using these, they're not using them where they
shouldn't be. At least as much.
Moes: Well a follow-up question to that is, that was running through my mind is, I think
previously we talked about the age group from 7 and 8 year olds up to 13, 14, 15. How do these
kids get to the skate park? I mean I'm up northeast Chanhassen and a skate park in the middle of
you know downtown Chanhassen would be a challenge for anyone 7 to 13 year olds to get to and
I'm just curious, how do the kids get there to use it? Or continue skating where they're at.
Hoffman: They're going to get rides put together. You put this thing together and it's going to be
a focus of excitement. Why skate anywhere else if you've got this going on because you've got
other people skating? You can watch each other. You can learn from each other. It's a location,
destination location. They're not going to be down at Market Square, at least not at the volume
they are today if they can be up behind City Hall where they've got some actual jumps and ramps.
Tim Hughes:...
Lash: Tim, I have a question for you. Did you see the plan? The plan that we have here. Yeah,
what did you think of it? Okay. So you think that would keep people happy for a while?
Tim Hughes:...
Lash: So you see what is Phase I? The Phase I, if you look at the plan. Phase I is the first three.
Tim Hughes: ...
Howe: One thing that resounds, I read this stuffi-vvice because I wasn't familiar with it. It's not a
sport, like Commissioner Franks that actually... One thing that all these articles say is involve the
skaters in choosing the park and I think I was impressed with this.., ride. It looked pretly good
and obviously skaters are using their equipment now across the whole Twin Cities area but they
hammer that home. Involve the skaters in the plan. I think we've done that. We've kicked this
18
Park and Rec Commission Meeting - July 27, 1999
thing around for a year. Back to the skaters, two years. Back to the Council. Back to us. So
involve the skaters would be something I would capitalize.
Lash: So back to the question. Phase I is good?
Tim Hughes: Oh yeah.
Lash: Okay. Well Dave, did you have something you wanted?
Moes: Just comment. I, myself have to say I feel like I'm still in the research and digesting
mode. I know there's been a lot of discussion on this and the material is great. It does seem like
there's a lot of use and a lot of interest in it. The one thing that I balance it off with, I'm in my
research mode, is when I drive around my neighborhood and I even get into Shorewood because
I'm that close to it. I see very few skateboarders, skaters. Folks taking their dogs for a walk or
something. So I may just be in a younger age type neighborhood that doesn't have the right age
group, which is why I've asked a few times what the age parameters are within the skate park. I
feel comfortable though in moving forward in the phased environment just due to the fact that I
think it does give us the opportunity to really get a feel for it you know first hand. Grows from
Phase I into Phase II because of the strong interest I think we... decision. So I'm still listening and
we'll wait until the final count.
Lash: Rod.
Franks: I bought my first skateboard, I went back and figured it out. 1974. Now people are
concerned about.
Howe: Is that it right there?
Franks: No. No, no, no. That's one of the later versions, you can tell by the use. That one's
been around for a while... No, that was just recent. The older kids in the neighborhood were
trying to show me some stuff and I realized that a person my age should not be attempting some
of these things. But you know there's concern about is this just something that's here and gone. I
have experienced that sport for, well since 1974 and it's still here and my guess is that it still will
be here. Tarzan, the new movie is nothing but a glorified skater movie so you know I drive
through my neighborhood and I see the makeshift ramps in all the driveways and the basketball
pad in the Chan Hills Park, almost every day has got some sort of skate ramp built on it, which is
incredibly unsafe. The kids are screwing pipes together to, you know and that's in the street. So
this is happening all over town. It's about time that we do it. I think the plan that you put forward
is good. The company obviously has a good reputation of being able to provide what the skaters
are going to want. It's within the $15,000 budget and I think it's definitely time that we just move
forward with this. It's a perfect place. It's right downtown. It's easily accessible by the public
service officer if necessary. There's people here in this building all the time. I can't think of a
better location for it to be and a better time to do it.
Lash: That's it?
19
Park and Rec Commission Meeting - July 27, 1999
Franks: That's it.
Lash: A question for you Todd. When do you figure is the time frame, like you'd set it up in
April or give it out til October, September? Kind of have an idea of when you think.
Hoffman: Six months, yeah. About mid-April to mid-October.
Lash: Okay. Yeah, I agree completely with Rod and I'd like to hope that this comprehensive
report is answering the question very clearly that has been asked by City Council and the City
Manager. I think Todd's done a great job of trying to answer a lot of questions that I think we all
really felt that we already knew the answers to. It just never was really put together in that form.
So if that's, is what they need to move forward, I hope that will do the trick. One thing that I was
wondering, I'm just going to throw this out. Just a recommendation. I would certainly want to
see the Phase I go in as quickly as possible. And I'd still kind of be interested in seeing if it's
possible, if Phase I fills the needs, then I don't really have a desire to put Phase II into our next
year, into the next budget. And if it appears that Phase II is necessary, we're getting a lot of
requests for we need another ramp or whatever these things are called, then I'd also be interested
in, at that point seeing if the kids then wanted to do, you know the City Council is really interested
in this grass roots thing and just see if they want to take off and pick up on that. And if they
don't, and still the demand is there, put it in our next budget at that point in time. If they think
Phase I is going to fill their needs for a while, I'd be content to just leave it at that and see what
happens.
Berg: I'd just echo everything that's been said on the positive nature. It's just nice, all the years
I've been on the commission we're finally doing something for this age group. It's been a concern
of everyone that's been here anytime at all.
Lash: We've talked about it for years and we never do it.
Berg: We've looked at everything from Rec Centers to basements of churches to you name it and
it's really exciting to think that we might actually get something now for an age group that's been
forgotten for years.
Lash: Hey, could we use the round house for a teen center?
Berg: They'd trash it.
Lash: Jay. Are you done Fred?
Berg: Yes.
Lash: Okay, Jay.
20
Park and Rec Commission Meeting - July 27, 1999
Karlovich: I just had a question for the young man in the audience here. In your opinion is Phase
I, is that a nice park or is it chincy or do we need to be, you made the comment about needs to be
3 foot by 24 foot wide in this Phase II. Can you just give me an honest opinion on the adequancy
of this to be a fun place to come to or is it kind of a low budget compared to the other places that
you go to?
Tim Hughes:...
Karlovich: What is a half pike?
Tim Hughes: Phase II...
Lash: Just to do a follow-up. How many kids could be doing this? With Phase I. I mean I have
no idea like how many, could you have 10 kids there at a time or would they all be crashing into
each other or?
Tim Hughes: ...
Lash: Like how many could be there before it would start getting.
Tim Hughes: ...
Lash: Oh cool. At a time?
Tim Hughes: ...
Hoffman: Half of the activity is the socialization that's going on.
Berg: So they go through the cycle and then the next group goes through and you just rotate
through.
Lash: Do you like score each other and stuff like that?
Hoffman: Maple Grove, they have like $60,000 or $70,000 worth of equipment. Shoreview
about $27,000 worth of equipment.
Karlovich: So with Phase I, is there a flow to this or a session as you're stating Tim? What
would that be, just out ofcuriousity? I mean educate me. I mean seriously. I'm very curious as
to what a flow is or a session.
Hoffman: Where you start and where you end up.
Karlovich: I mean in this Phase I, what would a session look like or where would the.
Tim Hughes: I don't know how to...
21
Park and Rec Commission Meeting - July 27, 1999
Karlovich: Okay. Well what flow would you use if you went through this?
Tim Hughes: Right here...
Lash: So you could be like flying.
Berg: Or falling.
David Hughes: ... two thirds of them will be standing or on the side lines and watching those
that are in the activity. Then there will be 2 or 3, 4 on each side. Then they'll decide to go. Go
from each side and they do their tricks and so on and then they come back up and everybody
makes their comment you know. That was really, whatever it is. So then they rest and then
another 2 or 3 will get up there. 4 or however many and then they go. That's I think what...
Lash: Now is this only for skateboarders or can people who, in line skaters. Okay, and you all
can get along together?
Tim Hughes: ...
Lash: So we could put that on our rule board, right? Okay. Okay, Jay? Are we at you still?
Karlovich: Yeah, the question I had was that, the feeling is I think we're going to have approval
of Phase I but Phase I, there isn't really a Phase I and Phase II because if we approve Phase I, it's
not really, well maybe we'll get.., end of this summer but really then Phase II, putting the $15,000
into next budget it really handle Phase I and Phase II in the spring of next year is the
understanding. And if you need, I'm wondering if the phasing was just trying to keep us under
budget for the first year, but if we actually need to have a Phase I and Phase II, to just have a
basic, decent skate park, that's.., discussion. I know the chairperson was talking about not putting
the Phase II in the budget so I just want to kind of open that up for discussion. Now if we're
going to do it, are we going to do it... our Phase I and Phase II in place by the spring of next year,
or were you thinking that possibly the money that is set aside for Phase II is something else on our
laundry list to do.
Lash: Well there is no money set aside for Phase II. Now.
Karlovich: Right.
Lash: There's only money for Phase I, right? And that's already in our budget this year. So
hopefully we can get this, if City Council approved this, hopefully we could have this in.
Hoffman: There's a reason to pause on whether or not we should... September or October 1st or
have it delivered April 15th. That along with what recommendation you want to forward on Phase
II is the real recommendation. Obviously you can forward with your recommendation to acquire
Phase I. When do you want to do that and then what do you want to do with the Phase II?
22
Park and Rec Commission Meeting - July 27, 1999
Karlovich: My question was Todd, your recommendation to do a Phase I and budget Phase II. I
think, I just wanted us to explore do we need to do that in order to have the basic decent park or is
there something else that you have in mind?
Lash: Well I don't have anything in mind.
Karlovich: That $15,000 that you think is more important than our laundry list that we're going
to talk about in the CIP.
Lash: There's plenty of things for $15,000 next year and I think if we get, I'm just feeling like if
we get Phase I in next year, we see how next year goes. We see how many kids are using it.
And then go from there. Instead of putting it in the 2000 budget. And if by the time we're going
to roll around to the next budget, it will be 2001. If it looks like we really need it, to have this be
a complete facility and meet the needs, clearly then we put it in in 2000. That would have given
us a year to... Tim seems to think Phase I is going to be great. Didn't he say? That was kind of
my thinking.
Karlovich: I see your point ofyour's that if we approve Phase I and Phase II and put off.., public
supporting funding for it.
Lash: There might be. And if there's not, well then we deal with it. If there's enough desire for
it, then we put it in the next available budget. Anybody else have comments?
(There was a problem with the recording equipment at this point in the discussion.
ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS:
Lash: ... the hope is that, I mean it's brand new and so there probably weren't a lot of participants
in Chanhassen to start with.
Hoffman: Well it's the same cost for every city. I don't care if you've got 100.
Lash: It's still $108.00 per.
Hoffman: Minnetonka has lee or 200 people that are paying lee to 200 times the $1ee.
Chaska's going to add in. Chanhassen. The hope is that the more communities that add in to
lower the cost.
Lash: So Chaska's going to add in?
Howe: Well it's expensive but those people aren't really being served by a lot of things. I don't
want to say it's an obligation but.
23
Park and Rec Commission Meeting - July 27, 1999
Hoffman: The cost to Chanhassen Park and Rec on an annual basis is a million four for how
many users.
Lash: Well there's lots of uses.
Hoffman: With a million four overall budget for capital and maintenance. Divide a million four
by 20,000 people.
Karlovich: Does it seem that the consensus is that this isn't that much.., at this point?
Lash: Well we already approved it for next year. If we want to reconsider that for the next
budget. Actually that budget hasn't been approved.
Hoffman: Yeah, I've submitted it.
Lash: ... pull it back out. I think it's very, very, very expensive. On the other hand I sort of feel
like they made a commitment to do that as part of.
Berg: I'd like to see us assess it another year from now. I think after one year it's not fair. The
numbers change where more people are going to use it.
Lash: So if more people use it, will it bring down the cost or is it not going to?
Hoffman: It will.
Lash: Okay. Well we'll see what the numbers are next year.
Hoffman: Yeah, can we take 20,000 people times $1ee, every man, woman and child in the city,
that's not quite that much. $70.00 a person we spend annually.
Lash: But that's for the whole year. That's not for one event. That'd be like saying, this was
$1ee for one event... Okay. Do we have any committee reports? I don't think we have any
committees going. Is there anything with the race going on?
Howe: I called her back. It's back to square in her lap... No, there's nothing with the race.
Lash: Anybody else who's on a committee for anything? No.
Franks moved, Howe seconded to adjourn the Park and Recreation Commission meeting.
All voted in favor and the motion carried. The meeting was adjourned at 10:30 p.m.
Submitted by Todd Hoffman
Park and Recreation Director
Prepared by Nann Opheim
24