Loading...
PRC 2001 12 11CHANHASSEN PARK AND RECREATION COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING DECEMBER 11, 2001 Chairwoman Lash called the meeting to order at 6:30 p.m. MEMBERS PRESENT: Jan Lash, Rod Franks, Jack Spizale, Jay Karlovich, and Mike Howe MEMBERS ABSENT: David Moes and Tom Kelly STAFF PRESENT: Todd Hoffman, Park and Rec Director; Jerry Ruegemer, Recreation Superintendent; Susan Marek, Recreation Center Coordinator; Kara Wickenhauser, Senior Center Coordinator; and Dale Gregory, Park Superintendent APPROVAL OF AGENDA: Hoffman: Can I add two items? A letter to your administrative packets, and then the commission needs to make an appointment to the City Center Commons Design Committee. And you can probably do that during your committee reports. Lash: City Center what? Hoffman: City Center Commons. The space left over after the library is built. That's the name that's being used currently. Lash: Okay. Do we have the letter that you want to add or not? Hoffman: Yep, got them. Should I hand them out? Lash: Sure. VISITOR PRESENTATIONS: None. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Hoffman: Mike and Dave weren't there and then they had all sorts of quotes so we're going to get that all straighten around. Nann is working on it as we speak. Lash: Mike and David were not there that night? Hoffman: No. Karlovich: We still hear them when they're not there to vote. Lash: You guys are going to have to start adopting a little more distinctive voices for Nann. Hoffman: Jerry's got us on TV tonight. Are we live? No? Lash: Good. Okay, so other than redoing them all and identifying the right things. Park and Rec Commission December 11,2001 Hoffman: I haven't heard anything else. Lash: Anybody here see anything else that we need to change? Okay. So I guess we'll need a motion that would be contingent on filtering out all the voices and getting them identified. Can somebody do that? Franks: I move that we approve the Minutes as to be amended. Lash: Okay, is there a second to that? Spizale: I'll second it. Franks moved, Spizale seconded to approve the Minutes of the Park and Recreation Commission meeting dated November 27, 2001 amended to reflect that David Moes and Mike Howe were absent. All voted in favor and the motion carried. PRESENTATION OF FEASIBILITY REPORT, HIGHWAY 101 TRAIL PROJECT NORTH OF HIGHWAY 5, HTPO, INC. Hoffman: Thanks Chair Lash, members of the commission. I'm pleased to have with us Lori Johnson and Joe Rutherford from HTPO. They've prepared a feasibility study on behalf of the City Council for the stand alone trail project, or what is referred to as a low impact trail project. And the reason the council is taking this approach is they would like to continue moving both projects forward. As the trail by itself, and then also the road project in combination with the trail. The meetings continue on the road project in combination with the trail. MnDot would like to get rid of this road in the worst way possible but some things need to be done to that road before tumbacks are accepted. So there's still negotiations in that area ongoing. In the event that the road does not, the road project does not become a reality, which has been a problem for what, almost ta years now probably, so there's some skepticism out there. Then the council had the ability to move forward on the stand alone trail project and we'll have these plans, or at least this feasibility study ready to go and can move forward with the trail project and let the road argument continue from there. So with that I'd like Lori to go ahead and give you an update and run through the feasibility study. Lori Johnson: Chairman and members of the commission. As Mr. Hoffman mentioned, I'm Lori Johnson with HTPO. We're consulting engineers for the City of Chanhassen and we have prepared a feasibility study for constructing a low impact trail along the west side of Highway tat. The northem limits being th Pleasant View Drive and the southern limit, West 78th Street. And at West 78 Street this will provide a pedestrian link to, there's an existing concrete sidewalk that ends there in front of the tennis courts. And as Mr. Hoffman also mentioned, this feasibility study was prepared for a stand alone trail project and it is independent of any road improvements on Highway tat. The trail is proposed to be 8 feet in width and the alignment has been designed to provide as minimal impact as possible to those adjacent residents and to the environment. In addition to that, the alignment has considered drainage and safety issues which are MnDot's two primary concems for this project. Where possible, we will be placing the trail a minimum of ta feet offthe existing roadway as is shown in the bottom cross section. And then we will have a drainage ditch between the trail and the existing roadway. In areas where we have difficult terrain or where we have limited right-of-way, the trail will need to be moved closer towards the existing roadway as is shown in that top cross section. And for safety reasons we will then need some kind of physical delineator between that trail and the existing roadway. Now this could be a guardrail or a curve or some vertical elevation difference between the trail and the road for safety reasons. Retaining walls, railings and fences are all going to be required on this project in some of these difficult terrain areas. A bituminous surface is 2 Park and Rec Commission December 11,2001 recommended for the trail for the entire length for two reasons. The first one being, it would provide a smooth surface to provide ADA accessibility. The second reason to minimize maintenance costs hopefully in the future versus a gravel surface. I guess an exception to the bituminous surface would be the two areas of wetland that extend out from Lotus Lake. In final design we would ask that a boardwalk be considered in these areas as an option to try to minimize impacts to those wetlands. The City has applied for a matching funds grant from the DNR and in order to qualify for this, the trail design has to meet ADA standards. In addition to the standards, we feel that consideration should also be given to placing a few benches along the alignment for rest areas, and we have included 3 benches in the project cost of the feasibility study. The majority of the trail will be on MnDot's right-of-way, thus necessitating the limited use permit from MnDot so we will need to work very closely with MnDot to get this approved. We will also need easements from private properties along the alignment. The majority of them would just be temporary constmction easements, but there will be a few permanent easements will also need to be obtained. And the City will be responsible for maintenance of this trail even though it is on MnDot's right-of-way. The total estimated cost for the project is $1,275,000. We are expecting the funds to come from the DNR matching funds grant in an amount of $500,000 and the rest of the monies to come from the City's park and trails fund. I have brought more detailed plans with if you are interested, and I would also be happy to take any questions. Lash: Okay. Anybody have any questions for Lori? Spizale: Lori, does the trail ends at a sidewalk on the north side? Lori Johnson: On the north side there's nothing to tie into. Spizale: There's nothing so at Pleasant View the trail would stop? On the north side of the trail so there's nothing? There's no sidewalk. At that point it just ends. Lori Johnson: No. The nearest, there is a trail on the east/west section of 62 that's in Minnetonka. But there's nothing along 101 further north. Spizale: Okay. Hoffman: We would want to incorporate two connections. One to the north and one back to the west on Pleasant View. And there's a trail what, 3 blocks to the west on Pleasant View and then we would also want to make that connection around the comer of 62. Howe: Lori when you talk about EDA, I'm sorry I was a little bit late. Other than the surface being bituminous, there are I imagine grades that have to be incorporated. A minimum grades. What are some of the things that ADA would require of a trail like this? Lori Johnson: The major thing is a maximum of a 5% grade on a trail. Howe: Okay. Thank you. Karlovich: On page A3 of the, this study, it shows kind of different right-of-way lengths from the center line and it appears as though Sunset View Addition is an older one and then Kurver Point 2nd Addition I know is an earlier plat. From the center line, how wide is the right-of-way along Sunset View Addition and then how wide is it along Kurver Point 2nd Addition? From the center line. Is it 33 V2 feet on one and then like 50 feet on the other or what were they getting on the plat dedication? Park and Rec Commission December 11,2001 Lori Johnson: Yeah, I believe the right-of-way varies from 33 to 50. This particular stretch, I'd have to get my scale out and check because I don't remember. Lash: What's your question? I mean the point of wanting to know what that is. Karlovich: Well I would think if you're getting 100 foot right-of-way, you're anticipating that it's going to go to probably 4 lanes at some point. A lane is like 12 feet. Lash: So you're talking down the road expansion so to speak? Karlovich: Down the road. Franks: The boardwalk. Two sections of boardwalk. I was looking in the back at the price breakdown and I didn't necessarily see the per foot cost of the boardwalk construction. Lori Johnson: We had put an estimated, I think it was under the options of I believe an additional $35,000 to construct boardwalk versus the bituminous surface. Franks: And additional what? I'm sorry. Lori Johnson: $35,000. Franks: So right now the plan is to go the bituminous surface through those wetland areas? Lori Johnson: Yes. Franks: For the $1.2 million. Lori Johnson: Yes. And for the ADA accessibility I think the bituminous would be better. Franks: Better? Lori Johnson: Yes. The wetland impacts need to be looked at a little bit closer. Lash: I had just a couple of quick questions. I think probably they're more for Todd, is that okay Lori? Lori Johnson: That's great. Lash: Wasn't there supposed to be some funding coming, I thought that Tom Workman was working on funding. Hoffman: That's the $500,000. Lash: Oh, that's the $500,000. Okay. I was thinking maybe that was something separate. And then I guess my biggest thing when I read this through, that jumped out at me is that MnDot has denied this permit at this point, right? So it says MnDot denied this permit and the documents sent to the City Engineer on November 20, 2000. Hoffman: Okay. 4 Park and Rec Commission December 11,2001 Lash: So what is it that we're working on to try to make the plan be something that MnDot is going to approve? Hoffman: Lori might be better at that. Lori Johnson: We received a long memo from MnDot with very detailed drainage and safety concems. To get to that level of detail we would need really to go to the construction document phase to answer their questions. I guess it's our opinion that we were at the concept stage when they were reviewing it more from a detailed construction plan phase so we feel as we move into these next phases, if we work with them, we can hopefully resolve their issues. Lash: So you're confident it can be resolved? I mean at some point, we can't go forward without their approval, right? Hoffman: Correct. Lash: So. Franks: My concem was a little similar too, about looking at the physical delineation barriers, guardrails, that kind of thing. I know in the past that's been a little bit of an issue with getting approval for barriers and I know in our last round of trails it was pretty difficult to get approval for guardrails and such. Now I don't know if you've had conversations with MnDot during this lengthy letter that they're actually suggesting these things. Lori Johnson: Yes, that was their suggestion. Hoffman: You may recall in the 1996 referendum when we completed those projects in '98, we sought and received limited use permits for both Highway 101 south and Highway 7 from the State of Minnesota. The Department of Transportation. And they have certain requirements that they want you to meet and in this case, I'm not sure if they were overly stringent or not. Obviously they want to build this, upgrade this road as well so I'm not going to read into it at all. Karlovich: On the last page, November, 2002 it says assessment hearing if Chapter 429. Who's going to be assessed for what? Lori Johnson: The way this report is presented right now, the only possible assessments would be if individual homeowners want additional landscape screening to screen their properties from the trail, that they would have to pay for that screening. Karlovich: In the cost estimate, is there anything for the right-of-way that has to be bought or condemned? Lori Johnson: There is an estimated easement cost in the total project cost. On page 6 of the main text of the report. Karlovich: And how was that arrived at? How many parcels is that or how much property or? Lori Johnson: I believe it was based on a square footage and some dollar figures that the engineering department gave us based on a recent project oftheir's. If my memory serves me right, there are over 30 parcels that would need temporary easement acquisition and 4 parcels that would require permanent. Park and Rec Commission December 11,2001 Lash: So that's a best guess? Lori Johnson: Yes. Lash: Did you get what you need Jay? Karlovich: Yeah. Lash: I'm going to go to the time line or the schedule on the back page. And the only thing again that, and maybe this is normal and typical. It just seems out of order that in January we'd be seeing public hearing where they, no. The council authorizes easements and negotiations and condemnations and then we're not looking really for approval from MnDot until March. So we would move ahead with possible condemnations and negotiating terms of acquiring easements before we even have approval from MnDot? Lori Johnson: This schedule was put together to assure completion of the construction in 2002. If we do not start working on the easements before it goes to MnDot, I do not know if that would be possible. Lash: But you can't move it, you can't move the MnDot time line up? Lori Johnson: MnDot will want to see final construction plans and we need a couple months from authorization to get those prepared. Lash: Okay, so that's a normal, that's a normal sequence? That's the way it usually goes? Hoffman: Not much is normal about 101 north so. Lash: To me that seems like it's kind of putting the cart before the horse because. Hoffman: Yeah I think if you go back to what Lori said earlier about the MnDot proposal, they want to see such detailed plans prior to their approvals that you have to prepare plans in order to send them over to MnDot for approval. And if we start down this project, rest assured that there's going to be some conversations over with MnDot that it's not going to be derail once we order plans and specs and start on down the road so. It seems a little backwards but it's the way it has to be. Karlovich: What is the current status of what is going to happen, or possibly happen with the roadway? Will it always be 2 lanes? Will it be 3 lanes? Will it be 4 lanes? Hoffman: I'm not able to comment on that. Lash: Crystal ball. Franks: As part of the plan there's that 150 foot section that's 3 feet in width. That's the plan that you're costing out at $1.275 million, correct? The concept plan has the 150 foot, 3 foot section? Lori Johnson: That is what was proposed in the concept plan that was prepared a year ago. MnDot did not look like would approve that. So no, these project costs reflect widening that. Franks: Widening it, okay. Lori Johnson: Yeah. 6 Park and Rec Commission December 11,2001 Howe: That was in the part, just on the curve right there? Just on Hill Street, is that where that? There's a ravine that goes in, the 3 foot section. Just outside of town. Lori Johnson: No, this is further north. Howe: Is it further north? Franks: But the cost includes widening that? Lori Johnson: Yes. Lash: So Todd, if Larry was still here, and we're talking about boardwalks, he's get all bristly about that. So has there been changes in boardwalks in the past few years that make them more, what were some of the concems? They weren't durable and the maintenance and all those kind of concems. Hoffman: The more money you spend, the better boardwalk you get so. Lash: But are they worth the money that we would invest if we wanted to go the boardwalk route? Hoffman: I think it's being looked at as an altemative. It could be some future conversations in that area. I don't have an opinion at this time either way if it's better to go. It's much simpler to go with asphalt. But depending on how far it goes out into the wetland and what the experience is like, aesthetically they're very nice. It's a long route. If they put a trail next to a road, a couple of little relief's out into the wetland might be actually welcomed. Lash: Okay. Anybody else have anything? Karlovich: Todd in your memo it says $850,000 would have to come from the park and trail fund and then supposedly we'd get another half million dollar grant. Then it says in the event that it is constructed as part of a road project, the park and trail fund amount would decrease due to transfer and cost sharing but would we still get the half million or how would that work or, if you're going to do a comparison there? Would we still get that half million and we'd have some other type of reduction in the $850,000? Hoffman: One of the difficulties in the halfa million is that it has to occur in 3 years. Construction has to occur within 3 years and so if it goes onto a road project, that may not be the case. That construction time line may not be met. The half a million goes away but state aid tumback dollars come in to replace that and then it lowers down those state aid dollars would lower down the cost of the park and trail fund from about $850 down to about a quarter million from what I know today. So state aid tumback dollars would make up the difference there. Because the trail is eligible under those. Karlovich: And how much do we have in the park and trail fund? Hoffman: Approximately a million 8. Lash: So we'd still have a million dollars left? Hoffman: Yes. Plus or minus. 7 Park and Rec Commission December 11,2001 Howe: Have we ever spent anything like that on anything else before? This by far would be the biggest one shot out of our fund. Hoffman: By far. Karlovich: And we're going to be spending an extra $600,000 to have it done now as opposed to at a later date? Howe: It's a what if. Hoffman: Yeah. Lash: You mean the later date thing is kind of the catch. The later date could be next year, the year after. It could be 20 years. Nobody knows. Hoffman: I think everybody hopes that it's completed with the road because that's got the road project underway as well but there's been, if you recall the referendum language in the brochure, it said Highway 101 trail will be built as a part of a future road project. And Highway 101 north trail was the highest priority trail in the city at the time of the parks and trail and open space referendum was put together. The committee agreed to take 101 out and put the other 6 segments ahead of that as long as there was that disclaimer down there so the council still feels very strongly about making sure that that promise is kept with the residents of Chanhassen. Lash: And what were we estimating the segment, the southern segment that we want to try to do between Mission Hills? Hoffman: $200,000. Lash: Okay. So that's still doable? Hoffman: Yes. Karlovich: So I'm trying to understand that last comment about the referendum. What did the referendum? Hoffman: The referendum had a note undemeath which said the Highway 101 trail will be built at the time of the future road improvement project, and that's why it's not in this package. And so the City Council still wants to keep that, you know make that statement ring true. Lash: But that said it was part of the road project. Hoffman: Well the hopes is it's a part of a future road project. Where the council finally said you know what, this road project is so messed up that we've been dragging this thing on, it's gone past 10 years now that we've talked about putting a trail on 101 north so they ordered a feasibility study for a stand alone trail. Lash: Sotheirpromiseisn'tthatitwillbepartofaroadproject. Their promise is that it would be complete. Hoffman: The City's promise, yes. It will be built. 8 Park and Rec Commission December 11,2001 Lash: Right. Okay, anybody have anything else? Franks: Well I sure hope it goes in as part of a road project soon too because I'd hate to spend that money on constmction and then 2 years after that rip it up and realign the road and the trail and everything. Howe: ... doing but you'd have no way of knowing. Karlovich: But just think of the other trails that could get completed in the meantime. The ones that have the nice bridges along Highway 5 and some of the other projects. Howe: It's an important trail though. Franks: Yeah. The people north have been waiting a long, long time to get connected. Lash: And that's the problem. That's been our catch for, you know I don't know how many years we've been talking about this but we always say well, it just makes sense to do it as part of the road project, and it does. I think we will all agree with that and probably the City Council agrees with that. Our problem is we don't have any control over the road project going in and it could be, we don't know when. I mean the worst scenario I can imagine is that we're going to spend a million dollars and put it in and then the next year they're going to all of a sudden approve the road project and. Spizale: If they approve the road project, where they took to build out, would they have to put it back in again? Would they pay for that or would they have to pay for it again? I mean say they did have to go in and tear that trail out. Franks: But isn't the idea that what they're hoping is that the County tums over the road to the City. So then it all becomes the City's responsibility. Spizale: It's a MnDot road though. Hoffman: It's a MnDot road now. It may go back to the County or the City. Franks: The County or the City? Karlovich: Doesn't it usually go to the County first then? Hoffman: Usually, but take a swipe of a pen and it could come right down to the City. Lash: So if the road project went through, would this whole trail have to be ripped out? Hoffman: Oh probably, sure. And it would probably be rebuilt into that project. I don't think the City Council is, you know they're afraid of that, just as afraid of that scenario as you are. Nobody wants to do that. Lash: But they're willing to take that risk? Hoffman: Oh I don't know. Lash: Well they're the ones who ordered all of this to be done so I'm guessing that they are. 9 Park and Rec Commission December 11,2001 Hoffman: Well what they're, they want to guarantee that if the road project just goes away and everybody walks away and says you know what, live with it. We won't be back for 5 years, then they're going to build the trail. Lash: Okay, so this is only as a part, this is only. Hoffman: I can't say what they're thinking Jan. I don't know. Lash: Okay. Karlovich: If you look at the trail, it's well within, you know mostly within the right-of-way and some of the right-of-way's only 33 feet on the center line so unless you're going to go on the east side of 101 to widen the roadway, the trail has to be demolished when the roadway is done. Lash: Okay, this is scheduled to go to the City Council in January. So if they approve to go ahead, they start moving forward, where would be the point of no retum where if all of a sudden MnDot and the Council and the City all come together and say well, we decided we are going to do the road project. Hoffman: Any time prior to awarding the project. Lash: Ordering the project? Hoffman: Awarding. Lash: Awarding. Which is April? Hoffman: Yep. Franks: What would be the cost to the City of going forward with this project all the way through to detailed construction plans? Maybe you can just reference the page for me. I'm sure it's in your report someplace. Lori Johnson: I believe we gave the City a proposal for that construction documents. Are you talking and easements or? Franks: Well back to that other question but. Karlovich: No just to, just to prepare your plans, what would that cost? Lori Johnson: Yeah, I think we're talking about $150,000. Franks: And how much is. Karlovich: To prepare the plans? Lori Johnson: Yes. That would include like all the surveying, easement exhibits. Franks: And that's including what's been done so far to develop the concept plan? 10 Park and Rec Commission December 11,2001 Lori Johnson: Well it would depend a little bit on how much things change I guess but. Lash: Okay, what is it that you want us to do tonight? Hoffman: Nothing. Lash: Okay. Franks: Well we're good at that. Karlovich: I think we need to, there's got to be some type of recommendation that. I don't understand why we're going forward with this. Possibly spending an extra $600,000 out of the park and trail fund, and to say possibly that oh, maybe we're just getting the plans in and we won't go ahead. Then we've just blown $150,000. There seems to be a lot of other projects and I think this trail should have to wait until the road project comes and the state aid money comes. Howe: That may never come. I don't disagree. It's a lot of money to put on the wheel. Karlovich: Then I think we should do another referendum where it doesn't say that it will be part of a road project and see if the voters want to vote for us paying all this money to an $850,000 trail along one segment that possibly might be tom up in the relatively near future. That roadway is terrible. It needs to be redone and redesigned for safety purposes and, and to handle any traffic flows. I don't know, it just appears to me to be kind of an irresponsible course of action that we're going on. Lash: Well I think the reason, you said you don't know why we're doing it. I can tell you why we're doing it. The City Council has elected to move forward with a dual track schedule to assure the trail is built. Which means this is one track. The other is the road construction. Hoffman: Yeah, they're making decisions as they go along. If the negotiations over the next few weeks don't go well with MnDot and the County, they could push this out. Push this out another year. Again, I don't think the council's willing to, it's not their strong desire to spend $150,000 on a set of plans that are just going to sit on the shelf if they're going to build the road as well so, they'll be making those decisions as they move forward and the best way to keep in tune with that is to attend that meeting or to give those folks a call before...what they're paying for. Send them some type of a recommendation from the commission this evening. Lash: Well they're not really asking us for a recommendation, or for our opinion on it I don't think. They've already elected to move forward with it. Karlovich: Yeah, but we're spending half of the park and trail fund on one trail that was never intended to cost this much and there's other projects in the city I think that the money could be spent on and this one could wait a little bit longer until we get some tumback funds which would seem to make a lot more sense for the greater good and the public. Lash: I don't disagree with your thinking. If we want to try and figure out some way of communicating our feeling on it to the City Council, I suppose that would be, this would be the time to do that but. Spizale: Todd, was there money set aside for this trail at one point? Hoffman: The previous council to this council. 11 Park and Rec Commission December 11,2001 Lash: So is that money still there? Hoffman: Oh sure, yeah. The money that was set aside was the park and trail fund money. The $850,000. Lash: So that's been identified fornorth tat? Hoffman: It was identified in 1999. 2000. Franks: I thought it was $400,000? Hoffman: Well it kept going up. It was 800 and some thousand identified at a council meeting. At a budget meeting in December of 2000. Howe: I think it was last year. Karlovich: Are we also paying money to have at least plans done for the trail being part of a road project also, or are we just doing the one set of plans? Hoffman: Well there's no plans being developed on the road project. There is no project. Franks: And are these plans for the trail being funded by general fund dollars or park and trail fund dollars? Do these cover engineering or? Hoffman: I don't know. I've not heard the, they're not included, are they included in the 1.27 Well, then you know where they come from. Lash: So the $850,000 1 want to check and see, was that something we had in our budget that we sent to the City Council at one point? Hoffman: No. Lash: They did that, okay. Franks: It's not currently in the CIP. Hoffman: Yes it is. Franks: Right now? Hoffman: Yes. Lash: But the City Council put that in there? Hoffman: Correct. Lash: That wasn't something that we worked on? Hoffman: Right. It's your call. You recommended that the $200,000, or I think we had $250 set aside for tat south. That be set aside and moved up to tat north. And that was simply increased to cover the cost. 12 Park and Rec Commission December 11,2001 Karlovich: Is there any risk that we won't get the halfa million dollars? Hoffman: If we don't finish the trail in 3 years. Howe: There's a time, I know that. Karlovich: But that's just it, the time constraint? Hoffman: As far as I know. I don't know what the recent budget shortfalls have that money in risk or not. Howe: Well that's what I'm wondering. Anyone...experience and again you're reading tea leaves here but with the economy where it is and the fact that they just even re-surfaced tOt, does that, would that indicate that well you're probably not going to see any money come there for 5 years or t0 years. There's no way to know that, is there? Hoffman: There is not. The only thing you can say is that Representative Workman acquired those funds or worked on acquiring those funds and a call to Tom might be in order. See if those monies are safe or not. Lash: One thing I want to be kind of careful of, I seem to recall we took kind of a hit when we put in the pedestrian bridge with grant money and then there was all of the buzz about, well you know of course we put it in because we got the grant money so wasn't that a good deal and then people were a little, not very receptive to that because they figured it was a bridge that didn't go anywhere and no one ever used but. So I want to make sure that that getting a $500,000 grant with a time constraint doesn't then push our hand to do something that in the long run is not wise investment of money just because we're going to get $500,000 from someone. Hoffman: Yeah, so far anybody I've heard talk about this is not afraid to lose the $500,000. Lash: Okay. Okay, well it sounds like there's some. Franks: Are we in agreement as a commission that while we recognize the necessity to move as expeditiously forward with constructing this trail, we also recognize that it's, it would be best for this trail project to be combined with any future road reconstruction of t0 t? Lash: I think that would be the most financially responsible position for us to take, and for our city council to take. So do we want to send a message on? Karlovich: I think the other comment is, you know either say you're going to go do the project and spend the $150,000. Don't just say we're on a dual track and we might spend $150,000 on the plans and then not follow through on doing it. I think if you're going to spend $150,000 on construction plans, you'd better follow through on the project. Lash: Okay, we need to I guess make a decision on if this is just for our information. If we want to just accept it and move onto the next item or if we want to send a message to the city council if we have some type of a unified opinion on something, we might as well share it with them. Spizale: I don't think any of us feel real comfortable with it and I think we should maybe send a message. 13 Park and Rec Commission December 11,2001 Franks: I think we should clarify comfortable with the financial aspect of the project because I think you know looking over the concept of the trail itself, it looks perfectly acceptable. So it might be good to make that type of distinction just to be clear. That the trail, the concept plan for the trail as proposed you know certainly looks great. Looks like it's fitting in with what MnDot's requirements would be. Where our difficulty comes in is how the trail project itself is potentially going to be financed. Lash: And the time line, which kind of is a. Hoffman: You support the trail and you hope it's built with the road. Lash: Right. Franks: To sum it up. Lash: Yeah, that would be our, that would be by far our first hope, wouldn't you say? Karlovich: Yeah, I would totally agree with that. I think the trail is great and it's unfortunate that we've had to wait so long for the trail but when you look at how narrow the right-of-way is there to go spend half of the park and trail fund on a trail that really needs to be ripped up in the relatively near future, just doesn't seem responsible expenditure of the public money, even though we're getting a half million dollars for free, but I guess that's all coming out of our pockets at one point you know there anyway. Lash: Okay. Can you summarize that somehow and send it off`to them? Hoffman: No. Lash: No? Okay, then somebody else summarize it. Howe: Do we need a motion? Hoff`man: I don't need a motion if you don't want to make one. If you want to make a motion, let's have it. Howe: Well I'd like to make a motion that you make the motion. Franks: I've kind of summed it up twice so. You never can repeat it. Hopefully our minutes of this meeting will be read and they'll certainly get the flavor of our comments and faith without just reading our two cent summary so, it's a complicated issue and we all have some different feelings on it. I don't know if we can all sum it all now, all of us. Lash: ... sum it up by saying that, the commission feels the most financially responsible option is to hold off`until the road project is complete if we have some, if the City Council has some type of a projection that it will be done within a fairly decent timeline. For me it would be 5 years. I don't know how you guys feel. If they get a message that it could be redone in 5 years, I would wait. If it's going to be more than 5 years, then I would be more inclined to go ahead and do it as a stand alone project. Because in 5 years a trail gets a lot of use. Karlovich: Todd, what was our, the life cycle for a trail anyway? 14 Park and Rec Commission December 11,2001 Hoffman: Somewhere between 7 and 10 years you can overlay it. And you know they last longer than that SO. Karlovich: Yeah for, I don't know for me at least a 1.2 and I think the budget will probably, actual budget will go a little bit higher but I think you're probably up to about a million and a half dollars I could see at least waiting 10 years for that, even though half a million of it is not Chanhassen money, it's still public money. Lash: But that would be gone by then so. Karlovich: Right. Hoffman: I think that's a broad... Franks: We can't even settle it. Hoffman: I think that you support the trail is the number one thing here. This project is complicated and it needs everybody to be backing this trail. Now I don't think there's any different feelings at the council level than here. They're the elected officials. They're not going to try to spend money in a. Lash: I think we support the trail wholeheartedly as a part of a road construction. We support the trail as a stand alone project with hesitation. I do. Because that is a lot of money that could be wasted. Karlovich: As a commission, if it was sent back down to us and made our decision, would we use the money elsewhere? Lash: If it was stand alone? Karlovich: flit was stand alone. Here we need $850,000 from the park and trail fund to go do this or do we want to, where would we put it on our CIP? Howe: You mean if the time frame were clearer and everything were clearer? Would we build it, is that what you're saying? Karlovich: I'm just saying would we put other projects first. Howe: I don't know. I think it's pretty important. I think it's an important link. Franks: I think historically this commission has had strong support for the Highway 101 North trail and I know personally that if it were not on the radar screen that the road reconstruction was in any way imminent I'd be personally in favor of going forward with the stand alone trail project. But one of the neat things that the trail system of Chanhassen has done is connected our city, which is divided by major highways. And especially that north/south division done by Highway 5 and the corridor trail down 101 would go a long way to reconnect those two portions of the city so they're pretty much stuck up there and I think right now the only way to get into town is to hop in your car. Lash: And there has been quite a bit of public input on how much they want it and how long they've waited for it. That's gone on a long time. My only drawback is that fear that we do it and then within a couple of years the road project goes through. 15 Park and Rec Commission December 11,2001 Franks: Right. And it's my guess that's the council's fear too. They have to answer. Howe: Should we make a motion? Should we take a stab at one? Lash: Sure. Why don't you try. Howe: I move that we fully support the trail. The plans are good. That we as a commission have major concerns about the timing. We'd like to see it part of a major road reconstruction project. Franks: If at all possible it be conducted in conjunction with the 101 reconstruction. Lash: Is there a second to that? Spizale: I'll second it. Lash: Okay, all in favor. Howe moved, Spizale seconded that the Park and Recreation Commission fully supports the trail for 101 North, but have major concerns about the timing. Would like to see it as part of a major road reconstruction project. All voted in favor, except Karlovich who opposed, and the motion carried with a vote of 4 to 1. Karlovich: I'll just, for the record, I just, it's just too much money for a temporary trail for me and that's something that I cannot get past and I just think $200,000 here and there builds some other really great trails throughout the city and I think that it's unfortunate but we should, I think the city should really pursue getting that road turned back or get it turned back to the county and get those state aid funds and spend this money elsewhere. Lash: I think we all agree with that. That's why we said in the motion that we want it as part of the road project. Okay. Okay, thanks Jay. RECREATION PROGRAMS: TREE LIGHTING EVALUATION. Ruegemer: Any questions? Franks: Did Santa show? Hoffman: It was nice. Very nice. That little park down there with the old St. Hubert's all lit up and the lights at old village hall, the crowd had a good time. Lash: Good. Sounds like the bonfire was good. Sounds good. Thanks Corey. RECREATION CENTER REPORT. Marek: I'm sure you can all read what I put in the packet. Nothing new and interesting going on at the rec center. I do know that the City Council is exploring closure on Sundays. Has that been determined? Hoffman: Open. 16 Park and Rec Commission December 11,2001 Marek: Stay open for another year, thankyou. The only new information coming out ofthereccenteris the tri-fold brochure that you have in your packet, and any comments you have on that would be appreciated. That's all I have. Lash: Looks good. Okay. Anybody have any questions? Okay, thanks Susan. SENIOR CENTER REPORT. Wickenhauser: Well currently I'm working on our holiday social that we're going to be hosting at the Rec Center this Friday. We have a catered luncheon. It will be catered by Milly's Deli and Entertainment. I roughly have 95 who have registered for that program. Other trips that are coming up are the holiday lighting tour that's being sponsored by Southwest Metro Transit on their new trolley. And that is full. And I also have a Doc Severson program at Orchestra Hall at the end of the month. That is also completely sold out so other than the busy programs there. The program itself has been busy. We had 135 seniors that received flu shots this year. Daily activities continue to do well. We have our bridge and card club activity continue to have 40 people a week for that program. Our wood carving group have added I'd say 3 new people or so to their program, and I believe they've been having I'd say about 12 people a week so it's kind of a great group. Our Chandoliers, which is our singing group, they continue to sing at nursing homes or retirement facilities. Their latest performance was at the Chanhassen Target for their senior shopping day on December 4th, so they had a big crowd. Besides good weekly attendance numbers, I've also continued to see new people stop in to be on a mailing list or to collect information on the senior center. The notes...half of them have been from the Chaska area so. So to combat that I would like to start a welcome committee that would maybe meet a couple months. The type of program that would off'er to have them come in and have a complimentary luncheon and show them a video that the senior commission and senior advisory board have developed that kind of details the senior center activities and some of the accomplishments of the senior commission has done over the years so we'll be ready to start that in the year 2002. Lastly, I'm working on a report for the senior commission that kind of demonstrates the growth of the senior center since I took over in 1985 to the present. And there's some tables in here. It's very rough draft but I thought it'd be interesting because they only need...twice a year just to see what kind of numbers I'm coming up with. I do want to put it into a bar graph form so you can see a little bit more visually where those numbers sit but it is kind of interesting so. Besides these 3, the monthly attendance numbers. Daily activity attendance averages and daily attendance averages by the day. They also want me to break it down as far as when the highest peak of the day is so, on Monday was the highest usage. All this is, this report has kind of been requested because they're interested in the space. The library space needed. We continue to see growth and so they want to demonstrate that for argument sake for possible additional space. So once I've completed this I will share this with you in the next couple months packet or I'll just retum in June and give you the final report so other than that, Merry Christmas. Enjoy your holidays. That's all I have. Lash: Good. Franks: I like the numbers. Like seeing that. Wickenhauser: I hope to complete it in the next few months. It took a while to go through all those numbers. Lash: Okay, thanks. PARK AND TRAIL MAINTENANCE REPORT. 17 Park and Rec Commission December 11,2001 Gregory: I've got kind of a good news, bad news report for you and the good news is the weather has been great. We've gotten all kinds of stuff`done. Odd jobs around the parks. Our ballfields, soccer fields all really held up very good this fall and that through all the use. We had a little bit over use on Lake Ann out in the soccer bowl area and we corrected that. Taken care of that area. And so we've had a chance to get everything up and running good for the next year. Bad part of it is the weather's too good. Ice is really out quite a ways. I just, I punched up the 10 day forecast today and the coldest night is 17 degrees and the days are running anywhere from 30 to 37-38 degrees and there's just no way that we can do anything. We need really cold weather for a week to get frost in the ground and then we need another 7 days of 24 hour a day flooding to have ice and it's not looking good right now for a while. Lash: You might just get them going and then it will be time to close them down. Hoff`man: Yeah, once February hits, the days get too long and the sun comes around and we start, last year we went to March for the first time in our history. Gregory: Last year was one of our longest years. We were already flooding at this time last year and we went into March. Lash: I saw on the weather last night, it was 11 below last year on this day. 1 was the high. Gregory: Might be just the opposite this year. That pretty much covers it. I just added some on the bottom about what some of the guys are doing in schools and stuff`upcoming. Re-certification and that type of thing that...little bit more time and we're working out there now and that. We're trying to get all our benches and everything kind of set up and that and once we get it all set up and that, it would be great to have you come out. Spizale: Yeah, would like that. Lash: Okay, thanks. ADMINISTRATIVE: 2002 MEETING SCHEDULE. Lash: Does anybody see anything that jumps right out at you? Hoff`man: Kind of tough to read. Did you guys get color? Howe: Yes. Hoff`man: There's a couple of alterations in there. You moved to a Wednesday, is it in May? Because of the holiday. And I think that's the only major change. Lash: We couldn't just, we can't just move it up to the 21st? So we altemate with the Planning Commission kind of, right? Hoff`man: Yeah, planning was off` Wednesday and they moved to Tuesday. Lash: Okay. Anybody see anything there? Okay. 18 Park and Rec Commission December 11,2001 APPOINTMENT OF 2002 CHAIR AND CO-CHAIR. Lash: Does that have to happen now or would it wait until we have new, we have 3 people who's terms are up, correct? Hoffman: Oh, wait til April? Typically you'll select annually for this so you should select by your January meeting. But you have 2 members absent. Table it until January? Lash: Yeah. Well you're up right Mike? Howe: I'm up in April. Lash: I'm up and Jay, you're up? Karlovich: I'm up. Franks: Chair, I would move that we table this, making the appointments of the Chair and Co-Chair until the January meeting when we can have a full compliment of commission members here. Lash: Okay, is there a second to that? Howe: Second. Franks moved, Howe seconded to table the appointment of Chair and Co-Chair for 2002 to the January meeting. All voted in favor and the motion carried. COMMISSION MEMBER COMMITTEE REPORTS. Lash: Under committee reports we can do the appointment to this new committee. The City Center Commons Design. Hoffman: Here's a publication from Damon Farber and Associates showing you. They gave a presentation to the City Council last night. Generally where this space is situated. There's two locations. City Hall and then the library sits down in the comer. And primarily we're talking about 2 football fields right here on the intersection on West 78th and Market Boulevard, so there's a space here that's 2 football fields in size and that's what we're referring to as City Center Commons. The old bank building is right here which will be demolished here this spring. And this is the location, this is a secondary space which will be included in this study, but it's not. It's an important space. You need to make a connection but this is the simple layout. Lash: So it's basically green space in town? Hoffman: Well it could be green space. It could be a more of an urban park setting. It could be more of a gathering spot for large events. There's 101 different ways this can be built. Franks: How many people do we get to appoint to the committee? Hoffman: Park and Rec, one. One from the downtown, probably the Downtown Council, the Chamber of Commerce. An additional council member has stepped forward. That's Councilman Craig Peterson. And 19 Park and Rec Commission December 11,2001 then the six members of the Library Task Force which includes the Mayor, Linda Jansen and the other members of the Library Task Force. Franks: Traditionally as a commission we review and approve park plans. Will that be the process as you understand on this City Center Commons? Hoffman: Don't know. Franks: Don't know? Hoffman: Don't know. Lash: I guess that's, sort of piggy backing on Rod's question. I guess I'm just kind of wondering why we weren't just given direction to just be the people to work with the guy. What's his name? Mr. Farber. I mean if we were doing City Center Park or some other kind of area like that it would just fall under our area. This seems like this committee, while I can appreciate the people on the library committee have an interest in it because they've been involved in the library design, to me the, this 2 acre, or this 2 ballfield space outside of it is a different issue and it seems to me like it should just fall to the park and rec commission as a task to you. So I guess I'm, it just seems like there's being a committee developed to replace what could be normally our function. So I guess that's my concem. It just seems like it's an unnecessary committee when we could just be the appointed body to do it and be done with it. Hoffman: Well the council directed us to do this. Lash: I know. That's why I'm saying it. Okay, somebody want to jump right in this committee? Spizale: I'd like to, yeah. Lash: Okay. Good Jack. Spizale: I'd be interested. Lash: It will be so, thanks. Okay, so that's taken care of. COMMISSION MEMBER PRESENTATIONS. None. ADMINISTRATIVE PACKET. Lash: We have this new letter, right? And then did anybody have anything under the packet itself before we go onto the letter. Ruegemer: We will not be starting hockey practice the 17th of December. Lash: Okay, so Todd on the skate park. Will that be on our agenda in January then? To go back and re- visit? Hoffman: Yep. 20 Park and Rec Commission December 11,2001 Lash: Great. Anybody have anything else on that? Okay. How about our letter from Tamara and Samantha, I remember them when they were in kindergarten. Little twins. So they're requesting some lights at Power Hills. Power at Power Hill. Hoff`man: Correct. Franks: Well I know for me darkness approaching has always been a good excuse to get the kids off`the hill and back towards the house so. Lash: Except when it's dark at 4:30. Franks: No, that's what I'm talking about. Lash: Where do we have a light? Do we have a light out in the parking lot area there? Hoff`man: No, no. There's no lights... Lash: There's no lights at all? So we don't even have power there, right? Hoff`man: No. Lash: Well that's an easy answer then. Howe: It's a precedent too. It's a great idea but. Lash: Well I commend these gals for taking the initiative to write a letter and I certainly think, I sincerely think we need to reply and say we appreciate their suggestion. We don't have electricity out there at this time. Howe: I think you should write, there's no power at Power Hill. Karlovich: Are there any homes near-by? Hoff`man: Sure. Lash: Yeah, they're all over. Karlovich: Because I know the pond behind our house, we run a cord down there and put in our own lights. Lash: Oh, you wrote a letter already. It's on the back. I didn't see that. Hoff`man: There's street lights probably at Flamingo. Gregory: Yeah, but not right at the entrance. Hoff`man: Kim said the girls wrote the letter and they'll probably show up at a council meeting. Lash: Good. 21 Park and Rec Commission December 11,2001 Franks: Will putting in that light for the skating rink at Chan Hills Park, what was the cost on that, do you remember? Hoffman: $30,000. Franks: Because that'd be a similar type of project. Hoffman: Oh, much more extensive I think. You're talking power poles down the sides of the hill. Franks: Ohno, I was thinkingjust like a flood light at the top or something. Sojustforwhathappenedat Chan Hills, that was like $30,000? Hoffman: That was the budget. I don't know if, I don't think it, believe it ended up costing that much but running the power... Lash: Okay, anybody have anything else? Okay, is there a motion to adjoum? Howe moved, Karlovich seconded to adjourn the Park and Recreation Commission meeting. All voted in favor and the motion carried. Submitted by Todd Hoffman Park and Rec Director Prepared by Nann Opheim 22