Loading...
PRC 1998 01 20PARK AND RECREATION COMMISSION SPECIAL MEETING JANUARY 20, 1998 MEMBERS PRESENT: Jan Lash, Fred Berg, Jim Manders, and l~od Franks MEMBERS ABSENT: l~od l~oeser and Tim Howe STAFF PRESENT: Todd Hoffman, Park & l~ec Director and Dave Nyberg, Howard I~. Green Company TRAIL DISCUSSION. Taping of the meeting began at this point in the discussion. Lash: So why don't we open it up for public comment. Let's start out with the Great Plains/101 segment. Is there anyone in the audience who'd like to address that segment? How about the Pioneer Trail/Lake l~iley segment? Sharon Gatto: I'm Sharon Gatto, 9631 Foxford l~oad. The concern which might have been addressed was the trees up and down Pioneer, across from Halla Nursery. What bothers me is if the County doesn't give us the alterations made, are they going to still proceed with the existing trail bed? Will we be notified? How will that happen because by this letter it sounds like it's going boom, boom, boom. They're trying to put everything through quickly and if the County doesn't respond, what happens? Lash: ... respond negatively? Sharon Oatto: Yeah. Or they don't come up with a decision and you have your dates for City Council. Lash: I think that's a tentative date for City Council based on hearing from MnDot and the County. That's the way I understood what you said. Sharon Oatto: So it won't go forward until the County, Carver responds? Lash: l~ight. Sharon Oatto: Okay. Will the people that it's affecting going to be notified? I mean we've been calling David periodically and but. Lash: Staffhas the mailing list of everyone who's been in attendance and it's, yeah. Sharon Oatto: Because we all want it. I mean I don't want anybody to get us wrong. It's just we've put our trees outside the easement and so did everybody, it looks like Carver is kind of Special Park & Rec Meeting - January 20, 1998 taking a lot of loose ends here and moving this easement a little bit so that's why all these trees are, according to them, in the way. But according to us they're outside the easement. Hoffman: Yeah, there's outside of the road right-of-way but there is a 20 foot trail easement there as well. So and those trees would be within that 20 foot trail. Sharon Gatto: Actually when we measured they were 25 feet out. So that's, I don't know who's doing the measuring so that's why I'm curious too on this. Where did they start counting from the easement because that's, we called the city. They said measure from the edge of the road. And we put our trees at 20. Beyond the easement so they actually look like they're our property, not the easement. Hoffman: Each of these alignments was surveyed by Howard R. Green in the field so the plans will give you a better indication. Dave Nyberg: What we're actually showing is the right-of-way... Right of way is 50 feet from the center line. It's 100 feet right-of-way in that area.., trail easement but again we're not proposing to... Sharon Gatto: When they measure, do they measure from the edge of the road? Middle of the road? Because it says 20 feet of our property. So we assumed from the street end is how we were told to measure. Dave Nyberg: It's really, it's 50 feet from the center line... That really extends along the entire development. Everybody along there... Great Plains Boulevard... was platted for whatever reason the developer was required to make that easement... Lash: What will be our course of action should the County decide negatively on any of these things? Will this all come back to us... or what? Hoffman: If you want to continue with the construction of the trail then the trees are going to have to go down and they'll have to plant it on the inside of that trail. Lash: That would come back to us if we have to make that decision? Hoffman: Correct. Dave Nyberg: Yeah I don't think, I think it would be a huge mistake to make a change like that without involving the public again. I will say though and I think I mentioned this at the meetings in early December. When we originally talked to the County, prior to the meetings in December, of the three segments that were involved their coordination, Powers Boulevard, Galpin and Pioneer Trail, this was the one they were most receptive to allowing an encroaching that 30 foot clear zone because of the wider right-of-way. Because of the wider shoulders on Pioneer Trail. If there's one segment where we'd probably likely to be allowed to move in towards the road, it's probably this one. 2 Special Park & Rec Meeting - January 20, 1998 Sharon Gatto: And any trees, if they do take them down, because you said in the neighborhood meeting, if the budget can hold it, they'll replace them. It sounds like there's no money in the budget so does that sound like if they have to go, there will be no replacements? Hoffman: I couldn't say today. Sharon Gatto: I mean just hearing from cutting the trail down, it sounds like the budget is already gone. Hoffman: Yeah, it's limited and those trees, if they're within the right-of-way or the easement, you know are at the discretion of the City Council to remove without replacement. But would come down. Sharon Gatto: Okay. Just doing the what if's so, okay. Thank you. Lash: Anyone else with comments on this segment? Rod Kimball: My name is Rod Kimball. I live on the TH 101 section right, just before you get to Kiowa and the only thing I wanted to point out, we've talked about it. Been with Dave and the crossing of the creek is of some concern, and I don't think we've come to that and that's what I'm wondering is. That's on the curve right there, just as you get to Kiowa. We've got, now this winter we had three 6 inch trees knocked over by cars going off to where the trail would be. So we've got some concerns to work on. I just wanted to bring that up that that concern's got to happen. Lash: Are you talking about people getting mn over on the trail? Rod Kimball: I've got news for you, yeah. I hate to plow my driveway. I'm the only one on TH 101 right there. I've got the driveway right on the curve and I know the Sheriff's Department by name you know. They're there often and I think the audience knows where it's at so we've got to work on that and I don't know how we're going to work through that but, and how does that get approved by the County and also by yourselves as the park commission. That's just something I think we've still got to do. Lash: Do you have any ideas or suggestions regarding that? Dave Nyberg: Every property owner on that, well here. Let me know you. Every property owner on this curve is going to be talked to individually by the attorney. Probably myself as well. The plat ends right here. Lots have been in existence for quite some time. They're all... The right-of-way here is very narrow... At that time, in talking the easements and square footages with each property owner, we'll talk about individual trees. Compensation for the.., so you can save wood for firewood. Special Park & Rec Meeting - January 20, 1998 Lash: I guess that wasn't, that wasn't really my... question. I was thinking more about, his concern is, cars are not making the curve. People getting mn over on the trail. Dave Nyberg: There's really not a lot we can probably do there. I mean we tried to... the problem we're always faced with on a curve like this.., we have the same problem. We've got a driveway right in the middle of the curve. So every time you have driveways, you're very limited on putting a guardrail up. A guardrail has openings. MnDot for instance installs guardrails with... I'd be curious to see what MnDot's comments on this. I think this is a thing where... highway. We can't put anything in the right-of-way like guardrails until... I'd say let's wait and see what they come back with. It's possible that they may recommend putting curb and gutter through here, but again the.., going to be lost wherever you have a driveway opening. Lash: Any other comments about this? Berg: Can you make a note to refer to that specifically when you come back the next time? Dave Nyberg: Sure. Berg: So we can see how that, that specific recommendation. Lash: And also to, if MnDot doesn't bring it up to you, bring it up to them as something we're concemed with. Dave Nyberg: Certainly. Lash: Okay. We'll move onto the Bluff Creek portion. Is there anyone in the audience tonight here to go ahead on that? We'll move onto the Galpin Boulevard trail segment and we've already had a couple of comments. Can we just get your name for the record. Jerry Carlovage: My name is Jerry Carlovage. I live at 1910 Whitetail Ridge Court...back off of Galpin. Lash: And are you north of Lake Lucy Road? Jerry Carlovage: Yes. Lash: And sir, you had? Benno Sand: My name is Benno Sand and I live at 1910 Moline Circle and the original trail proposal was that the trail would mn north of Lake Lucy Road on the west side of Galpin Lake Boulevard and I suspect that the reason the trail was terminated at Lake Lucy Road is the cost of putting retaining walls in along that hill. And so we put together two petitions in the neighborhood. The first one reads, we, the undersigned want the Galpin Boulevard segment of the Chanhassen trail to extend from U.S. Highway 5 through Mayflower Road. This would provide trail access to residents in the developments north of Lake Lucy Road. We voted in favor of the 4 Special Park & Rec Meeting - January 20, 1998 referendum because we had the understanding that the Chanhassen trail would serve our neighborhoods. And at this time the trail would not serve those neighborhoods and so we've obtained signatures on a petition from over 100 residents in that area suggesting I guess to the commission that that trail be extended. We have a second petition that is signed by four of the residents who's properly line, or properly is on the east side of Galpin Lake Boulevard because we actually believe that that would be safer for residents in the Pheasant Hill development, or I guess in White Dove and some of those other residents, to access the trail from the east side and I think it would be much less expensive to mn the trail along the east side and so, four of the residents along that side already have signed a petition saying that they would be willing to have the trail mn through their properly. But we think that you know, it's important that those neighborhoods have access to the trail as well. Having voted in favor of the referendum. So I'm wondering what we do at this time to get that back on the plan. Lash: You can certainly submit the petition. Todd can take that. And you know you bring up some good points and I think what we can do is talk tonight with Todd and Dave just to see what some of the possibilities are. You know unfortunately, you know if the money's not there, the money's not there. It doesn't mean we don't want the trail extended there and I think part of the suggestion was that, not that this be forever eliminated from our plan but that this segment, for this particular project.., put it in as soon as possible as the funding would be available through our trail fees and things like that. We've got another segment in the southern part of the city that we'd like to do that with. You know so it's not that we don't want to see it put in. We do. You know. But it's like eveything else in life. If you don't have money, you don't have the money you know. You have to do what you can. Do the best you can with what you have, but I'd certainly be interested in seeing what Dave and Todd have to say about your suggestion on what.., and the easements. How many other properly owners are involved? Benno Sand: I think there, I am aware of at least 3 or 4 others north of Lake Lucy Road that would have to approve that but I think it'd be much less expensive because you wouldn't need the retaining walls. And it would be much safer access to the trail on the east side. The people on the west side would you know, still have to cross over but they could do it at the top of the hill. I don't know if you're familiar with Lake Lucy, or Galpin Lake Boulevard there but it's very dangerous and similar to what we were talking earlier. Many cars mn off the road on that curve in the summer and in the winter time and, but it's, so to cross it down at Pheasant would be you know ridiculous. So even if it doesn't go through in the future, I think it should still be considered to be on the east side because it's much safer. It's safer crossing at the top of the hill versus at the bottom of that windy road or curve. But I guess I would ask the commission to consider looking at other segments of the trail perhaps on Powers Boulevard or elsewhere, where perhaps the residents are less in favor and you know we certainly have a lot of people in our neighborhood that are in favor of a trail access. So I guess that would be my request. Lash: Todd can you. Hoffman: We'll respond at the end of the comments on this section. Lash: Okay. Anyone else have comments on Galpin? Special Park & Rec Meeting - January 20, 1998 Julie Thomdycrafl: My name is Julie Thomdycrafl. I live on 1940 Whitetail Ridge Court. I've been waiting for 9 years for this trail and I'm, to say the least, a little disappointed that it's being cut off about you know, a halfa mile too short. One of my concerns is that the road section along there is very dangerous, past Lake Lucy. A lot of us have, like to take walks. We have children or, well not myself but many of the other people that live in the area have children and we're all kind of land locked. We're all on dead end streets so we have a little one block street. We can't walk anywhere without going onto Galpin. Unless we truck past through our neighbor's back yards to get access to some other part of the city, which sometimes we do. But it would be nice if the trail extended at least down through the Pheasant Hill segment so that it would connect all of those different one block or dead end streets and gave access to all of those houses because we're all very cut off and it's been an issue for a long time and I'm really disappointed that it's been stopped at Lake Lucy. How many residents are going to be affected by stopping it there? The bulk of the residents are really beyond that at this point in time. So that's my two cents. Lash: Okay. Anyone else? Jane Schlangen: My name is Jane Schlangen and I live on 1941 Melody Hill Circle. Also on Galpin. I'm going to just throw this in here. I don't know if you can see it too well but my point is the distance, the area right here.., along Galpin, other than the new developments, this is the highest majority of people.., and we too have lived in... we've lived in this area since '87. And we have four small boys. We have no parks that we have access to unless we come off Galpin Lake Road. And the speed on that road is terrible, and you've both commented that you can't change the speed. But you can make it safer because right now you can't get ofl~ what you see is what you hear if you want to cross that road .... if you want to cut out a part of this project.., people who have been there for a long time. Many people have been here for 20 years and we still have nothing up there. With those petitions, that was a couple days work. We could have gotten more but we didn't have enough time. As you can see, as you walk out, we're all caught. We can go... go up the hill and down the hill and that's it, unless you want to go on Galpin. Lash: Can your neighbors, can you access a park? Pheasant Hills Park? Audience: ... we're cutting through somebody's back yard. Lash: So you're not in Pheasant Hills? Audience: No. Lash: Okay. You're like north of that? Jane Schlangen: And there's many streets there. There's Crestview. There's West 65th, Melody. Hummingbird, Murray Hill Road, Chaska Road. None of those places can access any parks unless they go through Galpin. That's why we propose that you continue, or start it at Mayflower and go as far as you can. Don't stop at Lake Lucy. Go to Mayflower to Lake Lucy. Now I understand Nancy Mancino, I don't blame her with those trees. Don't cut those trees down. 6 Special Park & Rec Meeting - January 20, 1998 Don't need to. There's plenty of room. There's plenty of room on that road. On Lake Lucy. Or on Galpin Boulevard that you don't have to cut those big arborvitaes. They're an asset to the community. Don't go through those. Go right on, there's plenty of room. Manders: Can you point out the neighborhood that you're talking about? Jane Schlangen: Melody Hills is... Manders: East of Galpin? Jane Schlangen: ... and this is the area... Lash: And was it to continue to Mayflower... Can you show us where Mayflower is? Oh, that's not Highway 7? I thought that was Highway 7 up there. Jane Schlangen: This is the Chanhassen city limits. Lash: Oh, okay. Manders: So what you're saying is your neighborhood, you don't have access to Pheasant Hills Park unless you go onto Galpin? Jane Schlangen: Correct. Manders: So your access road, you have to go onto Galpin to get out? Audience: ... two blocks, dead end and they have 6 to 10 houses... Jane Schlangen: ... but then you're cutting off the Chaska Road people .... Chanhassen though is this, Chaska Road. You're still Chanhassen. I used to live there. I used to live on Chaska Road. Lash: No, beyond that. Above that. No, no, no. All the way up. Manders: But this is the neighborhood that they're talking about that they don't have access, that has to come out to Galpin. Lash: No, go further up. Where it's DIL. Up in there. Yeah, that area. Resident: ... as are all of these streets. They only access to Pheasant, but all of these, you have to come out to Galpin so we have nothing. This is really a treacherous curve. If you have any children at all, that is, you're going to have kids killed there. There's a slight rise. Right here, this is the peak of the road and Jane mentioned something that I hadn't even thought of but I have always taught my children to hear rather than look. I mean this, when this area was under construction and we had big gravel trucks and semi's, I swear, I'm so surprised that a child did 7 Special Park & Rec Meeting - January 20, 1998 not get killed. And all of these kids are mobile enough and there are enough young kids coming up that they come over and their nearest park is over at the, it's this little. Lash: Oh that dark, yeah. Resident: Right in here. But that is the closest park and you have to go all the way down Galpin and across Lake Lucy, all the way down to here. Actually all of this route to get over to this park, which is really not a pleasant ride. This is treacherous. I think that this is exposed. This is 50 mph maybe and those cars come barreling and then there's a little change of speed limit sign with a little orange car. I think it says 40 mph and I'm not saying they don't slow down until here. Lash: How about the Middle School? Is that not on? Resident: No, that's over here ....right here. Lash: But I mean there's park facilities there. Resident: Well actually that is all soccer. That is all planned activities. There are rarely times... Resident: There's no place for little kids. Lash: No playground equipment there? Resident: A tiny, this big. Lash: I know there's something there. Jane Schlangen: Yeah but there's no swings or slides. I mean if you had Middle School kids, it's fine but. Resident: Yeah, but the people who were on the east side of the road... Audience: You have to go up to Melody Hill in order to get across.., coming down into the ditch to get out of the way of cars.., there's no shoulder and... Resident: I don't think it's an issue of access to playgrounds as much as having a place for.., they can't do it on the road. They have no place to go and it's not whether they can get to a playground or not... Resident: I really would like to show one thing. I think if you really want to... I live on this comer, which is a rather large comer and I can tell you that these people go through my yard because that's the natural path, and they have actually last year the snow was plowed so high up against my trees, they would actually come tear the bottom of my trees up because it was a real thrill to ride on the angles of the snow plow residue. And they crossed the comer. They come 8 Special Park & Rec Meeting - January 20, 1998 way into my yard, which is exactly where the path would be. So I mean that is what's going to happen.., go stand and drive this stretch of road. It's terrible road. Vicky Franzen: I will just for the record, my name is Vicky Franzen and I live on 6260 Hummingbird, which is the neighborhood on the west side of Galpin which is right over this section. And like my neighbors on the other side, the east side, we too have to cross Galpin and that presents the safety hazard and yes we do have the Middle School open area but the playground equipment is, with the new construction, the addition to the middle school, there's about three pieces there. None of which are suitable for children that are not middle school age, which is what? 11-12 years old. Something like that. So we're talking about small children. I have, I was never notified of this. I never received a mailing and I think that our planner here did a disservice to arbitrarily decide that this section of the trail should be one that should be eliminated. I feel that perhaps some options to present to you. Some cost figures with this. I'm also a proponent of taking funds, shifting it from some additions to existing parts and completing this. When you said you'd like to do this as soon as possible, in the near future, whatever, whatever, you know the funds are not going to be there for many years. The costs are only going to escalate to put in this trail at that point and I guess that's what I'm voicing my concern about. Resident: A couple questions. Start out first of all with David. David, what is going to happen with Galpin Boulevard in the future? Dave Nyberg: I assume you mean who's going to own it? Resident: Who's going to own it? Who's going to widen it? Will there be shoulders in the near future? Those type of issues. Dave Nyberg: As far as who owns it, it is a county road right now but they are in the process of getting an agreement together with the City of Chanhassen to turn the road over to the city. Two of the segments of the trail on Great Plains Boulevard or MnDot 101, those segments, just to mention it, were turned, or those highways would be turned over to the County. Just a trickle down effect, MnDot tums roads over to the County. The County tums roads over to the City. And correct me if I'm wrong Todd but the proposed trail segments on Galpin and Powers Boulevard were both selected, or one reason anyway was that the roads were not in any short term capital improvements program to be widened or improved within the next 10 to 15 years. That way we can put the money into a trail. Know that it's going to have an effective life. We're not going to rebuild the street and put in a nice grass boulevard where we'd rebuild the trail anyway. That'd be a waste of dollars so on the one hand the road is county road. It should be turned over to the city maybe in the next lwo years and there's no immediate plans for reconstruction. Resident: Todd, I just had a question for you. If you've been working on this... Long Acres development... Hoffman: We've been working on the referendum proposal and this alignment is an alignment of the comprehensive plan which says that there will be a trail along Galpin Boulevard in the future. Construction of that segment in a piecemeal fashion, with the pieces being so small that would 9 Special Park & Rec Meeting - January 20, 1998 from on either, over Royal Oaks or those two developments, or Lundgren, really wasn't in the long term project...handed to us. What we did instead was plan for the alignment with the trail bench and landscaping outside of that trail bench to allow for future construction of the trail in a more single project oriented manner such as you see in this reference. Resident: What type of figures do we have on how much would it cost to extend? Hoffman: About $40.00 per foot and that's an estimate. Audience: On the west side or the east side of Galpin Boulevard? Resident: How much money are we talking total? Can you give me a rough estimate? Hoffman: David... Dave Nyberg: Yeah, just preliminarily we've estimated maybe $100,000.00 or so, but that included money for easement acquisition without overhead costs. You know depending on how you construct that trail, or try to do what a lot of you are suggesting about putting the trail right up on the road. Maybe put a curb, a paved curb in with an 8 foot, you know right behind it. That's vastly different construction costs than trying to keep the trail back as far as possible where you remove trees and have right-of-way to buy. Lash: What about on the east side? I mean has that even been. Dave Nyberg: No, we haven't even, it hasn't even been considered. Audience: Why is that? Dave Nyberg: The primary reason is the wetlands on the north end. There's a large wetland there. Part of this whole trail project, we had to show trying to minimize the impacts as best as possible. The trail fits on the west side. We save a lot of wetland impacts by keeping it there. Hoffman: Many of the people here tonight will also recognize there's a large row of shrubs on the east side. A hedge almost which at least we would feel that's significant as far as a barrier for these residents. And that shrub, at least in a design where we can push the trail on the outside ditch, would need to be cut down and removed as a part of this project. Audience: ... and the sight lines coming off of Pheasant, it's very dangerous... As far as wetlands, I think there's enough shoulder... Hoffman: Yeah, you have this touch down point is Pheasant Hill to allow those people access in and out of Pheasant Hill and then the trail, you could look at either extending it or terminating it. Dave Nyberg: The problem with putting the trail on the east side is then you have another crossing to deal with. You know given my druthers, I would have eliminated any crossing on 10 Special Park & Rec Meeting - January 20, 1998 Galpin all together because it is a dangerous road. We have one crossing at Brinker and really it should be kept that way if possible with the trail staying on the west side all the way. Berg: That's a nice flat stretch there so you can see cars coming from both. Dave Nyberg: Yeah. That's why we move it down. We used to have it to the north a bit but with the parkland there, we can move it to Brinker and it's a better sight line. Audience: ... a street. That was a primary issue. That is a very dangerous, I mean all up and down Galpin Boulevard. You know Galpin Boulevard itself is no picnic anyway but there are many places where that is wide open and here you get.., down a hill. It's a terrible stretch of road... I am amazed that the city will allow that to happen. Something is going to happen on that hill and something is going to happen on the hill. There is so much gravel by that watermain break and that shoulder constantly moves. It's just going to be terrible. And boy, when I hear you just said it's not even on the agenda, I'm really very... Hoffman: Well yeah I want to be. Audience: And you know the traffic, if you count the traffic on that road against these other developments, that's their access to Highway 7. And it funnels. Audience: ... It goes through part of Shorewood which eventually goes down... Audience: And the cops are always at TH 5 and Galpin Lake Road picking up people.., whatever, picking up speeders because everybody speeds on Galpin. Hoffman: Chair Lash, I want to make the comment that it's really irresponsible for us to be commenting or dreaming about when Galpin Boulevard will be upgraded. That's really not the issue that we're here to discuss. We don't have information to present to the public on that. But again, David is correct. The reason that these segments were selected is number one, for their desirability. They were very obvious segments as a part of the comprehensive plan to go ahead and propose as part of the referendum. When we talk about why the decision in an attempt to reduce this cost and bring it to the City Council on budget. Why take the north half and not the south? Again, a major driving point behind the trails is to make connections. Circular connections and Lake Lucy Boulevard, Lake Lucy Road east and west is an east/west connector to the Galpin trail as proposed, and then the Powers Boulevard trail. Dave and I would both certainly like to construct these trails and we will hear from the commission on your decision in that area. If you would like us to recommend to the City Council, and recommend yourselves to the City Council that we go back and study that section. Again, take a look at the east side versus the west side. There's difficulties with the east side as well. Obviously there are. You know we selected the west side alignment not only to stay on the west side but because there's impacts which were less than on the east side. Now if the entire row ofbuckthom can come down, those are good things that can help a project like this move along. Lash: If we can acquire easements arno cost. 11 Special Park & Rec Meeting - January 20, 1998 Hoffman: Correct. Absolutely. Lash: That would help. Hoffman: That will help the project along. And so there's money. The entire package of the referendum, you know the $4.9 million, we feel, I feel an obligation to get the projects done and if it can't happen, and the Park Commission and City Council does not want to break up the segments and steal from one to pay for the other, that's going to be a decision which needs to be made but then there should be future plans.., feel that obligation to get these segments done. So as we continue down the road here, things are coming at everybody very fast and we understand that it's difficult for the residents to gather up that information. To determine how it affects them personally and as a neighborhood and then to come in here and discuss that with us. That's just the nature of these projects. You know it all comes out at one point. The information and so we're here to make.., but we would not have proposed the trail obviously if we did not want to construct it. We feel, you know this disconnected type of nature, we feel very strongly, very personally as a staff member that we want to get those people in and give them those opportunities to get on those trails so this dialogue has all been very helpful and we'll look forward to... Audience: ... different budget options to you... Lash: It's our decision. You know he gives us recommendations. Ultimately it's our decision to recommend to City Council. And then ultimately the City Council's. Audience: ... contractor with regards to... to go back and turn on Dave and have him finish... One of the things about city government is, the commissions and city councils... Todd's already made his decision without hearing from the people in the neighborhood. Berg: You may be a bit premature in your judging of this commission. I would suggest maybe it'd be a good idea to wait and see what happens before you make that comment, statement or that judgment. Part of this process is designed to include the citizens of Chanhassen in the decision making process. As representatives of the citizens of this city, our responsibility, as I see it, to listen to what your concerns are. I'm learning things tonight I had no idea about. That to me is the purpose of this commission. I don't think it's fair, I don't know that it's accurate to imply that this is a done deal because staff said so. Audience... trail that's being deleted... Audience: There is a question... Dave Nyberg: No, and I apologize for putting you on. A couple of things I just wanted. Audience: That's okay... Dave Nyberg: I'd say about 15. 12 Special Park & Rec Meeting - January 20, 1998 Audience: I have a real concern.., couple concerns that I have... Lash: I would imagine there's county regulations, the same as what we had on Pioneer. Dave Nyberg: Yeah, that's correct. Lash: Powers. There's, you know the County, you have to get the County to agree to let you. Audience: But if they're turning that road over... Dave Nyberg: Could I draw a picture? Resident: I'm just going to make one more comment and I'm going to sit down. It just seems to that this is an issue that probably some numbers should be put to. We're only talking about, he's estimating $100,000.00 out of $1.24 million. I would think that the city too, if you're not the proper commission but either the Planning Commission, maybe even the Council would want to vote on the deletion, this deletion of the plan. I would think the Mayor would want to recuse from that vote before it's just kind of summarily done and there's kind of a bad feeling in the people's taste of their mouth that maybe they weren't heard and Todd was able to make this without any type of input or vote, City Council or the Planning Commission if that's the proper. Lash: Go ahead Dave. Dave Nyberg: Take a minute here to show you the.., plan. What we're faced with on a street like Galpin. I don't think there's one foot of that trail on Galpin...just to show you the drawing. This, these right here are the edges of the travel lanes. A 30 foot clear zone extension ends from the travel lane... The idea of that clear zone is that the city.., a car may go off the road and should come to a stop... All objects out of that. It's very rare that a car would go offa road and hit anything. That's the whole idea. It's not anything to do with safety of pedestrians. Everybody's got an idea of these trails. Keeping them off.., but what hazard is there really on a trail if a car goes off the road... What we're proposing here is... a trail right about in this area .... areas on Galpin where there's a wetland... A trail fits real well in this area. The problem of putting it up here is... offa travel lane in an area by Mayor Mancino's house. In that area.., and you have to come down here at a 3:1 slope and if the trail's out far enough, we can almost completely fill in that drainage ditch and... Plus sometimes in areas like this we can push the water into areas that are outside the.., so even if you have the trail right on the edge of the road, we may have to buy additional easements. That's some of the problems we're faced with. We can certainly buy and sell a trail to the county or MnDot that's right on the shoulder. There's nothing that says we can't do that. Do I think they're going to approve that? No. But Galpin Boulevard you may be able to make the case better than other segments. Lash: The curb and then. 13 Special Park & Rec Meeting - January 20, 1998 Dave Nyberg: Yeah. Yeah most the time they require a curb and their guideline with curb and gutter is still to have the trail 10 feet back of the curb. They eliminate the 30 foot clear zone but you're still required to follow the guidelines. Lash: So just in, you know when we're talking about, oh you know there's 15 feet from the side of the road to this or that and the other thing. For me that makes perfect sense. I think an 8 foot trail, 15 feet. No problem but you know we don't, I'm not an engineer and I don't know all the regulations and most of you are not I don't think. You know so it's not always as easy as what it seems in our head that we should be able to mn a slab of trail down you know a 10 foot segment and let's just do it and be done with it and what's the problem. But like Dave just explained, you mn into all kinds of other factors with you know ditches and runoff and all those kinds of things that can really turn this into a nightmare so sometimes it's not as easy as what we would like it to be. Audience: ... one other comment .... I worked for MnDot for about... Audience: The real bottom line here is, Todd has made his decision and Dave is... Lash: So you know, just to back up what Fred said. You know we don't have difficulty making decisions up here that don't go along with what staff recommends. You know we've done it in the past. We'll do it and to say that Todd has made this decision and it's rubber stamping and that's how this is going. You know I've been on the commission for 10 years and that's not the way things work. If this can give you any comfort, this is the process. You know Todd makes a recommendation. We look at it. We take your input. We're here to represent you. Todd's here, this is his job. You know he does, he has to keep things in budget. He has to be accountable to us and to the City Council and to the residents of the city and we are too. But this is the process. He looks at it. Looks at over budget. Gives a suggestion. We look at it. We take your input and base our decision on all of the factors. So it's not just a, you know my fear is that you're impression is that staff runs the city and that's not a correct impression. Audience... Dave Nyberg: And just quickly, in defense of Todd. Todd never at one time told me one way or another how to design this trail. That's why he hired us. That's why he's paying us. It was all, I'll take full responsibility for the recommendation of where the trail is on the plan. Audience: ... that creates more of a risk than... Lash: Are you talking about residents from the, if it was on the west side? Residents from the east side crossing to the west? Audience: When you cross... Lash: Rather than the people from the west side crossing to the east. 14 Special Park & Rec Meeting - January 20, 1998 Audience: But they would be crossing at the top of the hill where they have better sight lines. Hopefully you can take all of your... It's the bottom of the hill that I think is more dangerous than at the top of the hill. Lash: Okay. Any other comments? (There was a tape change at this point in the discussion.) Lash: I think at this point in time, any of the plans here that have not received public input, that we can assume and would also agree, you know are on the track and can go onto Planning Commission. It would be, I mean I'm premature in saying this until we make a vote. It would be my guess that any that we feel need changes, will not go onto the Planning Commission tomorrow night because they won't be ready to go onto the Planning Commission, unless.., rough scale and I don't see how that could happen with something that would need some amount of review. So we'll have to get commissioner comments before. Can we deal with this one now? ... then move on because we have kind of momentum. Rod, do you have any comments... ? Franks: I think the input tonight was really good. It's good for me to hear exactly from the residents. I was not able to attend any of the neighborhood meetings in that area so I'm glad that all of you came out today to give us your input. We've got the rough numbers, $40.00 a foot and $100,000.00 to build the rest of the project and it seems to be that there's some input that we weren't aware of about some concerns, the residents may be... bit more open about the trail on the east side of Galpin as opposed to the west side. I would like to say though that those are planned to complete the comprehensive trail program in the city, which would include the entirety of Galpin Boulevard and before the referendum we were certainly planning to complete trails. The referendum of course allows us to do a lot all at once. But there's certainly other trails other than the ones that the referendum laid out that we still want to complete and we still plan on completing. I'm not so sure at this time how I feel about looking for further study. Part of me says that we need to really get going. I'd like to get what we can get done, done. Yet at the same time, I guess I'd like to hear from the other commissioners too about proceeding maybe with some further study. Having staff look at cost breakdowns as far as extending the trail northward from Lake Lucy. Manders: I would respond in much the same fashion that you already commented about process. That it's really the responsibility of the staff and the consultants to attempt to bring proposals to us that are within the budget. Now it's certainly your responsibility as city residents to voice what should be done and where those alignments should fall. And to the extent that the city has the ability to adjust those alignments within right-of-ways, and avoid loss of trees and whatever, that's great. As far as my opinion on examining the cost of this trail, I'm certainly in favor of following through to see what the cost of extending that trail is. That doesn't mean that I would vote for it but until I see those numbers it's hard for me to draw an opinion. So I'd like to see a cost on both sides of the road to see what the difference is to extend that trail to the terminus. Berg: A lot of comments. I found this to be very enlightening this evening. Either through my own ignorance, which I'm always willing to profess to, or the fact that I was counting on citizens 15 Special Park & Rec Meeting - January 20, 1998 being here to tell us exactly what it was. Where the problems were. What I learned tonight more than anything else was that you don't have access to any park. That was the most enlightening thing for me. I should have known that, but I didn't. So I appreciate that happening. I think for most of us, safety is always an issue and that's what strikes me when you talk about the kids going down Galpin. A number of us up here are parents. We can appreciate that. You strike a nerve with that one. I guess I have one question, and maybe this is just too simplistic. One of you mention when you were up there, what would happen if we just started the trail on the other end and went as far as we could the other way? Maybe you want to, can we look at that? Hoffman: Go south? Berg: Yeah. That's so simplistic it's, it's my naviety, it's probably not even any kind of whatever but it was mentioned by one of the citizens and I thought of that too. Could we also get kind off and this is really mystical I realize. Get any idea on comparing potential costs for finishing the trail on the south end versus the north end. In other words, if you started on the north end and went towards Highway 5, would the potential cost to finish the trail there be any different than they would be if you went the direction that it's proposed now? And I don't know if you can do that. But that might be, you might be able to legitimize it. If we need a legitimizing factor, that might be something that would help us make our decision. If we knew that it would be cheaper to eventually complete one end versus the other. I hate to reduce this to cost, but the unfortunate reality of life is that if we didn't have to worry about the cost, we wouldn't have any of us be here. Lash: Can I tack on? Berg: Yeah. Lash: Right at the southern end of Galpin... not developed and is that, are those portions that we could complete as development comes in there? Because that's proposed in the very near future, isn't it? That whole comer. Hoffman: Down near Highway 5? Lash: Yes. Hoffman: Yeah, the connection to the south, for the future frontage road connection, going back east to Lake Ann. Then for the crossing at Highway 5 for those who choose to cross the controlled intersection onto the recent trails that have been constructed on Galpin on the south side of Highway 5. Audience: ...that segment of road... Berg: That was all I had. If you could look at those two things, I would appreciate that. 16 Special Park & Rec Meeting - January 20, 1998 Lash: And I guess I would agree with those comments too. I'd be interested in seeing how far we could get. I mean for sure we can get to Lake Lucy Road... further south. And look at then our potential of just putting in the remaining sections as development comes in down there. I'd also be interested in seeing, you mentioned two different options for the west side. One, would be... curb and then the trail right next to it. So then you can eliminate all the retaining walls and things and all that fill. So I'd be interested in seeing what kind of cost projections you have for that roughly. And also the east side, just to see, and I understand your.., crossing. But I think at Lake Lucy, I wouldn't be as uncomfortable with the crossing right there... And that would also eliminate the problem with arborvitaes and having to get on the east side of the road. And I'd also be interested in, as long as the residents are so interested in this, if you know already that there's four properly owners along there willing to donate the easement that we would need, you can find out who also along there is willing to do that. To back that up. I mean any cost savings we have, that can be a big piece of it. Certainly help us move forward. So I'd be interested in directing staff on this. I don't see why we couldn't, well no I guess we can't. If we're going to look at north and south end kind of things, we couldn't then direct that it go to the Planning Commission as proposed but then study the other end. Now this is going to be the whole picture.., including the south end so we really can't. So I guess I would suggest that this not go onto Planning tomorrow night until we are able to meet. Is it possible to get these numbers for next week? Hoffman: Yeah, perhaps let's take a look at it a little bit differently. If the commission is interested in preserving this segment as a part of the project, I would simply instruct staff and Howard R. Green to go ahead and pick those steps up. There's not very many steps that we're missing here. You know the entire segment was surveyed and had preliminary trail alignments. But then instruct, make the recommendation that you want to find the money out of the referendum. Lash: I'm not interested. I'm not interested in diverting funds from any other project. I'm really not. I don't want to take away from land acquisition. That was our number one goal in this whole referendum. Buying land for the future so I would never support diverting any money from that fund. And I think we're really committed in... park development projects probably to the max there. I don't know how we could get it from any other... Manders: I would respond that there is a, you know a committee or a group that's charged with making sure that the funds from the referendum are spent according to how the referendum was voted and there's X dollars for trails. Now how those trails are distributed really is the question. Are we going to have funds that we can exceed one trail to finish off another one in terms of cost? You have to understand that early estimates on how much we could accomplish with those funds and if reality comes in that says we can only finish parts of these trails, then the question becomes do we cut out a complete trail to finish another one? You're going to have an argument from those folks. So do we scale back an existing trail? It isn't that this trail has a magical $500,000.00 that we can spend on it. I mean if we have $600,000.00, we can spend that. That means that money comes from some other trail and that's where we have the difficulty adjusting where those funds are going to go. 17 Special Park & Rec Meeting - January 20, 1998 Lash: But until we know what the figures are, you know we really are in the dark right now. We're talking in circles. Audience: ... all the other trails, are they on... ? Lash: I heard earlier tonight that the Powers Boulevard one was and that's being scaled back from Shorewood to TH 5. Hoffman: Let's getus back. Audience: ... we all need to know that because... Hoffman: Sure, I'll respond. First of all to the issue that this was an arbitrary decision and that's simply not the case. I would liken it to the fact that you're attempting to preserve the integrity of the system and then you look to the extremities for your cuts and that is the case. As painful as it is to the people who live on the northern side of this segment, that to preserve the integrity of the remainder of the segments, if you cut a piece such as cutting this area, the trail really doesn't function any longer. These trails are not budgeted by individual segments. The $1.2 million is a lump project budget to accomplish all of the trails. The Galpin Boulevard segment happens to be the longest, and again we're in a situation where it's about 30% or more of the budget. 30% to 40% is in easement acquisition, and that number is going to fluctuate pretty dramatically depending on where those 90, plus or minus, easements are settled with each individual property owner. And so again with our preliminary budget numbers tell us that we were at about a million three and so a million three four. About a million, or $100,000.00 over the budget. And so we looked to segments such as the north side of Powers, north side of Galpin. Now we don't know, based on preliminary budget numbers, whether that's going to solve it or not. The Galpin segment in just as it sits today happens to be the most expensive. It's the longest. The construction estimate is about $435,000.00 segment that you have there today. So it's going to be difficult. You know we can go back and bring you those hard costs, you know and again, the $100,000.00 is close. We looked at the.., some three weeks ago. But if you're basing the $1.24 million budget, you're going to delete something. And if we make the recommendation to delete, or you looked at deleting other segments, then we'll have a different set of stakeholders in here talking about that segment. In addressing the process, you know this certainly is the time for staff to make recommendations on how we're going to keep this project on line and on budget for your initial review. This is the first public review that we've had of the project in a public body meeting and again, how long that takes is certainly up to the process. We would like to keep the project on schedule because we are also on a very tenuous situation as far as the bid letting date. The farther this would push off into the spring, the contractors start gaining work and they're not as hungry for the project and our prices, on a 7 mile trail project, you know they go up incrementally. The impact on the budget again can take you out of line and you will not get this accomplished. So those are all issues to wrestle with and for the information of the audience. The commission has approximately $300,000.00 in general CIP money. Capital Improvement Program money on an annual basis at best. And in 1998 they saw the referendum projects as a real priority for the community and so you take the referendum money and they have dedicated $100,000.00 of that $300,000.00 to City Center Park project and an additional $100,000.00 to the 18 Special Park & Rec Meeting - January 20, 1998 Bandimere Park project. Just as these trail projects are a one time opportunity, those two park projects are a one time opportunity to do it right. To get the projects underway. You have all this momentum which all of you certainly recognize. We have this momentum on the Galpin Boulevard trail. You know can't we just preserve that entire segment and get it in place. And so they have dedicated those. The only other place they have to look to is the referendum. The other referendum allotments, and Chair Lash has already given you her opinion on that, so we are left to struggle with the fact that all of the segments as proposed cannot occur... Dave Nyberg: There's an access point to the north that kind of serves as a frontage road... By doing that you would kind of... Lash: Unfortunately the park in Longacres is not a city park so... diverting a lot of other residents into that. We would prefer to be getting the people to the city park... Dave Nyberg... Lash: It's an idea and it's something that can be you know. Are you looking for a motion... Todd or can we... direction? I think we would need to have a motion. Hoffman: Yeah, we can have a motion on, and you can do that, the entire motion at the end for all the segments or you can do it individually. Lash: I think I'd prefer to do this one individually because then if there are people who are, if... they'd be free to leave and not have to wait til the end to make sure they're here. Is there someone.., make the motion? Berg: I'd move we recommend to staff to look at alternatives for Galpin Boulevard trail... One being, and please offer any kind of friendly amendment here or help. One being, starting the trail from the north and moving south. Two being, if possible, compare costs of finishing the trail on the north versus finishing the trail on the south. Three, the latest proposal. Looking at not constructing the trail along Longacres development. And I guess what I'd want to hear from that too would be, what is the likelihood of ever finishing the trail then if we did that? Would we be more likely and would it be more economically feasible to finish it on the south end or the north end? Help me. Lash: East or west? Manders: West on the north end. Berg: Switching from west, is that correct? On the north end and then where we would put the crossover, whether it be down at the bottom or the top, I would recommend in the motion that it be at, at this point anyway, preliminarily, at the top of the hill. Not the bottom. Lash: The crossover would be at Lake Lucy Road. To me that's the only place to put it. 19 Special Park & Rec Meeting - January 20, 1998 Audience... Lash: ... you know what, we've got to keep going with it. Berg: Anything else? Lash: Okay, also yes. The other option on the west side of not doing the retaining walls and all that and curb with the trail right, abutting... Franks: Is that just for the north end? Lash: Yeah. Audience: ... motion only deal with trade-ofl~ s on Galpin Boulevard south.., issue of importance of a safety issue, and it requires diverting money from... Lash: No. I don't think I'd want that as a recommendation. Tonight we want to get the information. When we get the information, we'll decide what we're going to do with it at that point in time. I don't think we could. Audience: ... information gathering is only... Lash: Okay, this is commission comments right now. I'm sorry but we're in the middle of a motion so we're not going to. You're not allowed to make friendly amendments. Only we can do that. Okay, are you ready? Do you think. Berg: Yeah. This is not necessarily a formal part of my motion but my motion, that's good. Part of my motion but I do want this to be understood to be information gathering motion. I'm trying to give direction. Trying to give staff and Dave direction on alternatives to what we looked at this evening. So at that point, then take the next step, whatever that next step happens to be. We can't make any authoritative informative decision without hard data and looking. That's the purpose of my amendment. Lash: Yeah, is there a second to that? Berg: Whatever it is. Manders: Second. Berg moved, Manders seconded that the Park and Recreation Commission direct staff to look at the following options regarding the Galpin Boulevard trail: 1. Starting the trail from the north and moving south. 2. compare costs of finishing the trail on the north end versus finishing the trail on the south. 20 Special Park & Rec Meeting - January 20, 1998 3. Look at not constructing the trail along Longacres development. Provide information as to the likelihood of ever finishing the trail. Would it be more likely and would it be more economically feasible to finish it on the south end or the north end? 5. Look at comparisons of having the trail on the west versus the east side. All voted in favor and the motion carried. Hoffman: I would propose that we'll bring that information back to you next Tuesday evening at your regularly scheduled meeting. We will mail notification. You will replace this group with a new group of people to take a look at proposals to delete the southern portion. You all heard testimony to the importance of that segment as well so it will continue on the process. What this generally does, with the exception of Powers, which we have not discussed, is isolates Galpin Boulevard as kind of a study itself on the alignment and the proposed alignment as a part of the process. Lash: Okay. We'll move on. The next trail segment, by the way, thanks for all the input. You know we really can't do these things without hearing. We don't live there and you do so you know. Thanks for coming. Okay the next trail segment we'll be discussing is Highway 7. Are there any audience members that are here to discuss the Highway 7 segment? ... to the next one which is Powers Boulevard. I hope you're all as enthusiastic and want that through as the last group. Franks: Excuse me Chairman. Are we making motions on each individual? Lash: No, I just wanted to do that one so those people could leave. I think any that we don't have neighborhoods comment on, we can. Franks: At the end. Great, thank you. Lash: Okay, we'll use the same essential procedure where I'd like you to come up front and state your name so that we know who we're talking to and that we're getting one person at a time. Paul Pettinger: I'm Paul Pettinger. I live at 7267 Pontiac Circle. And I've had several conversations with both of these gentlemen earlier today. But three things that come to mind right away is, something that was made in comments is whether people earlier was that this does seem like it's almost being rammed down our throats. I mean everything seems so quick and I don't quite understand the, when we don't know what the County's going to say or the State's going to say on any of these projects, how you can even make recommendations that might in reality be totally negated. And that gives me concern. The issue that we brought up earlier, and has kind of been put by the wayside again or has been ignored, is the fact that we felt that the west side of Powers Boulevard was a better option obviously than the east side. The reason we say that is because in our townhome association, and we've already talked about the variance for the trees. 21 Special Park & Rec Meeting - January 20, 1998 You're going to go outside the trees. But prior to that we had issues with the fact that some of our, some of the decks in some of our residences are actually within 20 or 30 feet of our fence line. And if you were going to put the trail there, people would actually be right at eye level looking in people's kitchens or living rooms or so on. We've solved part of that problem with the fact that, hopefully we're not going to take any trees out of there. Or most, not all of the trees. But we still feel, a lot of us feel that we've never really looked at, the staff apparently has not really looked at or has not given us what we consider valid reasons as to why they haven't looked at the other side of the road and we'd like to have some concrete answer to that. Lash: Did you receive a letter? I read all, this evening I started reading through this packet and these are all letters that were sent to residents who were at the public meetings earlier and I did see on many of the ones to the people regarding the Powers segment, exactly the reasons why the engineer. Paul Pettinger: I didn't get that particular. I got a letter but it was concerning a whole different issue. Lash: Okay. Paul Pettinger: Which apparently was resolved to my satisfaction since I didn't bring that up. Lash: Anyway, there's a, if you're interested in reading this. You certainly can read that and because I think people who brought up that issue at the meeting, it was addressed for them. The reasons that staff is recommending. Can I have it back when you're done? Paul Pettinger: Yes, and I will turn over the podium to someone else while I read this. Lash: Okay, thanks. Anyone else? Christa Wilson: Hi. I'm Christa Wilson. I live on 6956 Pima Lane. I think Dave got my letter and the Mayor got my letter. I guess my concern was, I'm right on Kerber and Powers Boulevard, on the comer there. And that street, I've been there 9 years and since then Target has come in and Byerly's has come in. That traffic is hideous. You can't be on your deck or have the windows open in the summertime because of the traffic. Then they have the motorcycle races in the summertime, you know to Excelsior because it's a straight shot. Then we get the snowmobilers in the ditch all winter long and if I understand it correctly tonight, you did say that you will be moving 2 feet outside of the fence? Is that what they're planning? That I can live with. Hoffman: Well that was the discussion in reference to where the, in the area the trees are. I think... Lash: ... where she's talking. Hoffman: I think the fence is located on this segment in relation to the trail. 22 Special Park & Rec Meeting - January 20, 1998 Dave Nyberg: Here's her proposed... Christa Wilson: It's on the inside right now of three stakes. Dave Nyberg: The fence doesn't show up very well. It kind of comes like this.., split rail goes all along... There are a few areas where we would have to move that... Christa Wilson: ... towards the road? Lash: No, towards your house. So the fence would be two feet closer. Dave Nyberg: This is an area where we are leaving the trail.., move the trail closer to Powers Boulevard... They said if you want to save trees, we cannot... Lash: So you feel like we'd have a better shot at getting them to be flexible. Dave Nyberg: Yeah. You've got to give and take. You know unfortunately we don't have trees.., trail 5 feet closer so. Christa Wilson: I guess my concern was where they cut off the evergreen trees, they ran out of money to put trees in for the rest of us and so the association then has the money so I planted a bunch of the trees. Anyway, I'd hate to lose those because you don't have any privacy. So if they still have the fence there, that's what they're planning, right correct? Dave Nyberg: Yeah. We'd never put the trail on the home side of the fence. Christa Wilson: Okay. See and that's what I thought was the plan was. Berg: You are planning on moving the fence though at the comer where she's talking about, you're planning on moving it in how far did you say? Dave Nyberg: Probably closer to 5. 5 feet. Christa Wilson: 5 feet? Dave Nyberg: I can't tell from the scale on the drawing. Christa Wilson: That's, right now that's about 20 feet right now from my door to where the stakes are. So that'd be 15 feet. Dave Nyberg: From your patio? Christa Wilson: Yeah, from the patio. 23 Special Park & Rec Meeting - January 20, 1998 Dave Nyberg: Yeah, from her patio. Her patio sits right there and it has been rather exposed. And... because there's a huge hole right there.., and so they have to come up on the high ground as opposed to staying up on the road. Christa Wilson: I mean what we ought to do is scrap this trail and give it to. Lash: To the Galpin. Yeah. The question to the fence. If the fence is moved, say the fence is moved 5 feet. That's not, that is not on her properly, correct? You'd have to get easements. Dave Nyberg: Exactly. If you go back to her lot. The trail comes right.., so we'd need at least 5 feet for the trail and then another couple feet... Paul Pettinger: ... We're happier that it's further away from us and they're happier... Lash: That seems logical to me but I just don't know that the Counly's going to buy it. I mean I agree with you, that'd be the way to go. John Farr: John Farr, 7325 Pontiac. There's already a really wide.., for walkway and bikeway. Joggers, I see them every day of the year... Lash: Have you ever walked your dog and biked it? John Farr... Lash: I think, because I do. I live... It's like taking your life in your hands. John Farr: That's why I go to Kerber. IfI may address. Christa Wilson: No, I'm done. Paul Pettinger: Okay. Once again in connection with what has just been said here and in connection with what you gave me to read, which was a mistake on your part. These findings reveal the majority of pedestrian, bicycle trips will originate from the east side of Powers Boulevard. Now, we've lived there for 11 years. Some of these people have lived there for 15 years. We've never had a problem getting to Chanhassen because we never use Powers Boulevard... we take Kerber. We all have Kerber from where we live. That's contrary to the argument you're using with people on Galpin. Where they had no access except Galpin. And you know, so I'd take obviously exception to this argument. That the findings reveal that pedestrian bicycle trips will, I mean I agree with the fact they originate from there. I disagree with the fact that we use Powers Boulevard. Now I too am a biker. Too bad all those poor Galpin people left because I've been in their ditch on my bike because of the way that traffic... I agree with them. But you know... I too bike down there. But it's not near as bad as... but we have the option of using Kerber Boulevard. Or we, on the east side, all have access in some way, shape or form. Every home there has access. Even on the streets that are dead end, or circles or whatever they are, there actually are trails that will get them over to Kerber right now existing... 24 Special Park & Rec Meeting - January 20, 1998 Beth Hamilton: I live right on the comer of Kerber. I'm Beth Hamilton. I live on Pima but I'm on the comer of Kerber, right next to Christa who just spoke. And privacy is, we only face west and north. I do. So I face Kerber with a lot of traffic and I face Powers with a lot of traffic. And in the winter the snowmobilers, yes. We get a lot of them. But our windows are closed. In the summer we get bikers. We get walkers. If you take 7 feet off of my yard, they're going to be right on my patio. I live there alone. They can walk right into my house. Safety is an issue for me, as well as the privacy. And yes, everybody on our side uses Kerber. I don't understand why it wasn't proposed on the west side of the street, of the road. But I guess at this point it doesn't make any difference. They're not going to do that. But on our side of the road just seems to be ludicrous. With 900 and some people living that close to the road in the first place. Then to move our yards back even further, and possibly lose trees, and definitely lose any little bit of privacy that we have is just, it doesn't make any sense. It just doesn't make sense when across the road they have deep yards. It only affects 200 and some people instead of 900. And in some places there aren't any houses. And not only that, the lakes that they want to access are on that side of the road. So why us? It just doesn't make any sense. So that's my biggest concern is, I'm going to have to move. You just, it's just closing me in too much. I have no yard now. And the privacy is, and the safety factor is very, very important to me. And to have people walking and biking by, and Christa and I have already had vandalism. You know we're just that close to the road that the kids can do that and get by with it. I can't even put up one of those lights that goes off automatically if people get too close because the road is already so close that it goes off all the time. So I can't use it. So please consider that in this. And the walking trails are great but if they're going to be right on some people's patios, then people are walking by watching you eat dinner and you have no recourse but to pull your drapes in the middle of the summer. That's no way to live. That's just no way to live so, thank you. Jean Pfleiderer: My name is Jean Pfleiderer. I live at 7267 Pontiac Circle. I am definitely not in favor of this trail. I'd rather see no trail at all than to see it there. I don't see any reason in the world why it can't be on the other side of the road. There are a lot of good reasons to put it over there. Lot of them were brought up tonight. We have a privacy issue, which is very important to us. We also have a problem with people cutting through our yards. They do it now. Can you imagine what it's going to be like if we have a trail right there? You have to consider this. You have to consider this and you have to make them believe that they can be put on the other side of the road. There's no reason not to. There's a lot of reasons not to put it on the east side. Paul Pettinger: One more comment that both of these ladies brought up is that the access to lakes. I remember at the December meeting there were some people who had not gotten notice of this meeting or that meeting who lived on the west side of Powers Boulevard, but they showed up at the meeting because they said their children right now don't have access to Lake Ann and I didn't think of that until just now because somebody else said a comment about that. Is that, other than what you and I talked about, you have to walk down the road so that the children, if there was a trail, at least those people live on that side could get to Lake Ann ifa trail was on that side. Now we have to cross Powers Boulevard to get to Lake Ann no matter what happens. So that's not an issue for us. But the people that do live on that side, who have no access to Lake Ann, other than 25 Special Park & Rec Meeting - January 20, 1998 walking in the road right now, like we do. I assume you must live on the west side so you're very familiar with what I'm talking about there. Lash: I live right on CR 17 so I know exactly the issues you're talking about. Audience... Lash: I moved. Audience: You know what? We'll have to move too and guess what our properly value's going to do? ... Steve Peterson: Steve Peterson. I live at 7305 Pontiac Circle. Could we put up that map, that had the one we had with Galpin on there? I also am opposed to it. I'd rather see it on the other side of the trail, or the other side of Powers. I guess I was particularly looking at this area right here. How do I find that? Lash: Are you talking about Powers? Steve Peterson: Well, there's an awful lot of people right in here that if they need to go to Chanhassen, they have to cross the road. I mean that's the only way they're going to get onto this trail proposed on this side. All these people who live on this side would never take this trail to Chanhassen because Kerber is so much more efficient and it leads you right into downtown. And it has a path. We have a path that runs right down Kerber Road, Kerber Boulevard into Chanhassen. That's all these people here. We're off the map here now. As all these. Now anybody that's going to access the trail from in here has to come out, up to Kerber to get there, or cut across my properly and climb my fence. Audience: Which they do. Steve Peterson: Which they do, but it's not going to benefit them. They're still, they're going to be backtracking to get into Chanhassen or get down that trail. It would be much more efficient for them to go down Kerber. But you're cutting off all these houses that are back in here that would like access to downtown Chanhassen and have no way to get there other than out on Powers Boulevard. Or crossing the road. Something to think about. Lash: Thanks. Anybody else? John Farr: I'm John Farr from 7325 Pontiac. I remember from the meeting that we had earlier, that it seemed to be an issue with the planning folks that were there, involved with planning, that the path be on the east side versus the est because of the number of people that were going to access it. And it didn't even occur to me that.., that really he's got a good point that nobody on the east side is going to ever use the path... Kerber as you go to Chanhassen. Because I've gone both routes with my kids and trail on the bike and so forth and going in on Kerber, you've already got the path and on Powers running down a highway. You know you're only this far from the 26 Special Park & Rec Meeting - January 20, 1998 next sign going a little bit over the speed limit. And I started a petition I had people sign it when that first meeting came along. They're just basically saying that this is... going through our yards and cutting down all the trees and putting it, you know a stone's throw from our decks and patios and so forth, but I think I would have to re-evaluate now. It sounds like there's more opposition to having it on the east side altogether. And I guess I would, I'm not opposed to the path but if it can go on the west side, I'd really prefer it because there is... for me on the east side. With the split rail fence, I know I'm certainly not going to hike the berm. Jump the fence just to use the path. I'll just go to Kerber. So there's a number of people who haven't had a chance to talk to you yet but it sounds like a couple of them are here tonight would probably oppose the path on the east side altogether so. I was going to turn it in but now it sounds like there's more input to go into it. (There was a tape change at this point in the discussion.) Lash: Just Dave I guess. Dave Nyberg: On the one side... Audience: ...how many of our trees... Dave Nyberg: I don't have an exact number but it's very few compared to. Audience: You are going to take some of our trees? Dave Nyberg: Well the problem is, there are a few trees that are located in the right-of-way. If you go through the alignment. Audience: We have few trees now. Dave Nyberg: Right here's the proposed alignment. Right at the south end, just north of... Court. I talked to the manager today and... All along here, those trees can probably.., there's two others right here ....what we propose here is to move that fence back. Your drawing shows no trees on her properly. Audience: Yeah, you're saying that the trees.., is that what you're proposing was my. I guess my... Dave Nyberg: I think we can modify the plans to show that. Audience: Well I would like that because that's a... Dave Nyberg: And I apologize for that. That's a mistake. Audience: So they would be saved? 27 Special Park & Rec Meeting - January 20, 1998 Dave Nyberg: Yeah. If that tree row extends.., and we'll get that changed on the plan.., as long as we can show minimal amount of... Dave Drealan: My name is Dave Drealan. I live at 1110 Chaparral Court. It's on the northeast comer of Powers and Kerber. As long as we started talking about trees, there's a number of them right along here and I think it shows clearing and grabbing. There's one here. Probably one here but there's I think probably 5 trees along there and I'm just curious what the plans are there. If that will, will you take that row of trees out or to try and move around them a little bit? Dave Nyberg: ... yeah clearly we've got to get that shown on here. We need to do some more investigation of where those rows of trees are. What happens is our survey crew goes out and they pick up the end of the... If that's true here, we can try to leave that trail out and then bring it back around. Dave Drealan: Because it would take just a few feet and I don't think there'd be a problem with a 30 foot clear zone there. I don't mind having a trail back there. I would just if possible like to maintain some of those evergreens back there. Thank you. Lash: ... open it up for commissioner comments. Rod. Franks: I would like to see maybe, as soon as we can get that information, Dave maybe the updated drawing of where the trees are and everything because it seems to be one of the major concerns from the residents along this trail segment is to see exactly which trees might have to go. Which ones are going to be saved. So I would really like to see kind of more accurate information if we can on the plat drawing .... not right now. Manders: My thought is really relating to the stipulation of maintaining the 30 foot easement. How it's going it and how the tree line and I'm not sure how this is going to...the trail to meander or what, if it makes some sense to just maintain that whole section out because of the sensitivity of trees and closeness of the residences there.., pulling it in, just keep the whole segment. That makes some sense to me. As far as addressing the question of the trails on Powers being on the east side versus the west side. Really, it's similar to almost the concept of parks that, you know a neighborhood park is obvious that. For that neighborhood. But it isn't built exclusive for that neighborhood. It was built for the city and the same thing with this trail that people that are using trails aren't necessarily using the trail because they live in that neighborhood. They're using it to accomplish a loop concept or whatever. So the purpose of this trail, your view to go downtown really doesn't accomplish that and I agree that Kerber is a much simpler way to get downtown if that's all you want to do is go downtown and come back. But the direction here is to accomplish a loop and hook these trails together. And my question to Todd or to the rest is to maybe speak to the need or the value of the trail on the east side versus the west side. That's probably the only question I really have. Hoffman: The points that are, as far as user destination and where they're starting and how they're flowing around the community to downtown, Lake Ann Park, those type of things. I'm certainly aware. I walk this. I walk Kerber or Powers to work on most given days and obviously 28 Special Park & Rec Meeting - January 20, 1998 there's no trail along Powers Boulevard for comfort. It's not a very likely choice. I take it about one out of five times that I come downtown to City Hall and walking along that shoulder, although it's wide, you'd better keep your eyes on those cars to make sure where they're at. With the inclusion of this trail, will it be the first choice? Perhaps not but will it be a part of the trip going downtown on Kerber and then coming back on Powers? Potentially so. More importantly are the connectors that it makes back to the, what I would call the east side community and those are at Saddlebrook, Kerber, Carver Beach and then north at Pleasant View. Again the reason for the recommendation to terminate at Pleasant View is Pleasant View drains all the way back into the north side of Lotus Lake and there's hundreds of homes which would front out onto Powers from that residential street. Not that Pleasant View Road in itself is such a great pedestrian access, but it certainly will drive pedestrian movement out to Powers Boulevard and then coming down south. We have a start on the east side at the downtown location which the city has invested a great deal of resources and then to cut across that gap and Powers Boulevard to get down closer to the intersection of Highway 5 and Powers Boulevard. And so we're starting on the east. If we need to switch over to the west, running a trail along the Eckankar property is certain, does not have direct impact on, have direct impact on a single property owner, but it doesn't provide that, you know that connection to a neighborhood community that it does on the east side. The point is well taken, as you move farther north on the west. The folks who live on Lake Lucy are very similar to the population that lives off of Pleasant View. They would like to come down to Powers Boulevard and then access the trail system to get south into the.., neighborhood and into Lake Ann Park. So we had one time talked about taking that out as a single segment on the west side from Lake Lucy down to the north side of Utica Lane. Obviously in our budgetary situation, that is not an option to take that out. Create that segment as a secondary segment. All of the issues which we're talking and we're hearing about tonight also occur on the west side to some severity and so again, similar to the Galpin argument, if we take a look at the study the west side, you will have a different group of individuals in here talking about the same issues. Audience: What are you saying?... Berg: Maybe we can let Todd finish. Hoffman: And I believe I did make in that statement to some sort of... at the townhomes is obviously closest proximity to any homes. But there are other reasons along with this that we perceive the calls. People call in as they watch the public process go forward. They're not here this evening but they're voicing their opposition or the City Council look to the put this trail on the west side already and there's always those two sides of the issue. In the letter we addressed really, those were you know the strongest points. The population density on the east and how many people today and in the future, due to the constraints we have on the west side, would access that through those four trail connectors versus the one trail connector on the west. The fact that we have a start on the trail on the east side, down at the downtown location. The lack of real desirable crossing locations for that trail. The fact that we need to reconstruct that section in the Saddlebrook ditch which was put in by the developer, unbeknownst to the city at that time and it really needs to be corrected. It was not built properly. And it's a good indicator of when we talk to the commission and to the citizens about the fact that you just can't build a trail anywhere in a ditch. That little segment is buit right in the bottom of the ditch. It is difficult to maintain. We 29 Special Park & Rec Meeting - January 20, 1998 lose equipment in it and it just falls right through the center of the trail because it is in the bottom of the ditch.., retains water and it will not, it did not serve it's.., in that location. It's not as easy as just pushing the trail off of that outside bench into the bottom of the ditch. If you push it out to that location and then again you need to go up adjacent to the roadway and that opens up an entire new set of review by the County. You know where's the alternative to put the trail? Out in that clear zone area or closer to that clear zone.., simply again to, you know these residents are not going to allow that trail on, they simply won't permit it. They have this roadway and looking at that same issue on the opposite side of the road as well so. I don't know Fred, if you have any more specific questions or questions about that assessment but we would certainly, you know we've studied on the east side and I would hesitate to recommend that we simply again take a look at an indepth study on the west side, but if that's the choice, then we just need to recognize the commission that that means significant delays to the Powers Boulevard trail. Perhaps entire construction season and would it change the recommendation. It wouldn't change our recommendation but would it change the eventual outcome of the public process. Berg: ...just about dealt with every question or concern I had. What are you planning to do Dave with the gullies on both sides of Kerber and Powers? Do you know what I'm talking about? Dave Nyberg: Do you mean the. Berg: The drains. Dave Nyberg: That deep hole there? Berg: Yeah. And really there's another one on the other side... Dave Nyberg: Yeah. What we've got to do at intersections like that is move the trail up towards Powers Boulevard. That will keep the trail out of the bottom of that ditch. Keeps it up higher and what we really try to do at all intersections is get the trail closer to Powers Boulevard behind the stop sign for vehicles so it's more like a typical pedestrian crosswalk situation. Berg: What exactly does the County say about how close you can be to the road? What I'm asking you, to cut to the chase. Does it say it has to be 30 feet? Or does it say it can be less than 30 feet if there's some sort of protection? Dave Nyberg: The City, or the County really doesn't have set policy but they operate with this issue much like a city does with zoning code. What we're really doing is showing a trail constructed in that clear zone that's a variation of their typical design standards. It's nothing like an adopted policy the City, or the County has. It's just a design guideline.., by any road authority. The City of Chanhassen would go by the same guidelines. Berg: I'm assuming that it's guidelines based on protection. Dave Nyberg: Yeah, I mean it's really, it's guidelines established by MnDot that the counties and the cities. 30 Special Park & Rec Meeting - January 20, 1998 Berg: What I guess I'm driving at is, is it possible to look at the potential cost of widening the shoulder a bit on Powers on the east side and putting a guardrail up? So that in effect you're creating a trail, a walking area on the east side of the rail. Whereas you're not, you wouldn't appreciably move any closer to the homeowner. You still maintain the berm. You still maintain the trees, the fence, the whole nine yards but put a, from wherever we're not in accordance with what the county suggests to put a railing. Is that feasible cost wise to look at? Hoffman: Feasible cost wise is my concern. I don't know what.., guardrail is. Dave Nyberg: Yeah, guardrails are, I mean they're.., but what would happen there is the County probably wouldn't allow you to do that. What they'd say is, if you want to put a shoulder there, we need a bituminous curb at least, or even a concrete curb and then the trail behind that. Because that guardrail, and maybe I'm mistaken but if you're saying the trail would be on the back side of the guardrail? Okay. Then yeah, I was mistaken then. I thought you meant the other way around. If you did that, the guardrail has to be... off the travel lane so then you've lost your shoulder. Now you've got to build out an embankment to that trail. You know really the road stops dropping off too soon to put an 8 foot trail and it's got to be two feet behind a guardrail. It's probably on the edge of that drop off anyway. Then if you go down at a 3:1 slope, probably matching in across the bottom of the ditch, you may have some of the same drainage problems like I illustrated on Galpin. Lash: ... trail right on the other side of the guardrail. Berg: I was looking for a way to get it as close to the road as is feasible safety wise, which is my issue. Dave Nyberg: Well the guardrail would protect pedestrians from traffic inbetween. Lash: See I was thinking what you were leaning to was the guardrail would allow them to let us... in 30 foot. I think anywhere we want. Not right up next to the guardrail but anyplace where we are a few feet. Dave Nyberg: It does. It does allow for that because just like the Highway 7 segment where there is guardrails, the property by the Boyer's, or owned by the Boyer's, we are allowed by MnDot to push that trail very close to the back of the guardrail because there is protection there. And it's not, they don't look at it as protection for pedestrians. They look at it as there's protection there for vehicles that don't go off the road and down the new trail embankment of 3:1 slope or in that. Berg: We know what we want to put the guardrail... Lash: There's nobody left here that works for MnDot. 31 Special Park & Rec Meeting - January 20, 1998 Berg: ... Can we investigate the possibility of that? I hadn't thought of what Jan was saying. Either one of those. Either my original thought or Jan's, in terms of being able then to. Lash: Fudge where we need to. Berg: Fudge where we need. Fudge on the 30 feet. Also, this is a really dumb question. Do we have to have a trail Todd that's open 12 months a year? Hoffman:... Berg: Does it have to be an 8 foot trail? Or can we close it during the snow season? Hoffman: Sure. Audience: The snowmobilers aren't going to... Lash: Oh the snowmobilers aren't supposed to be using this trail anyway. Audience: They will... Berg: I'm just trying to brainstorm here and try to come up with something. Audience: ... ask a question. Why has a study never been done for the west side?.. Lash: No, I think really staff has addressed that question. They've said, you know for the connections it makes to the other trails. Because of the fact that we've invested so much money already down towards downtown, you know where the big gully is, you know. There's a huge retaining wall up. You know those kinds of things cost a lot of money and to just can all of that and start over again and have to do it on the other side of the road, you know that would be. Audience: ... wrong side of the road when people... Lash: And I think that's an unfair statement. I really do. I think it will be used whichever side of the road it's on .... that's the point. That's the purpose of having it is so people. Audience: ... at our expense. Lash: Well, I'll tell you what. We sit up here all the time and we hear these comments all the time. Everyone's in favor of the trail system who comes in here, that's not in their yard. They want it in someone else's yard and there's no way that we can do that. I'd love to be able to put a trail system somewhere in this city so that it didn't have to be close to anyone's house and everyone could be happy, but it cannot be done. It just can't. Audience: You know what, we would not be unhappy... 32 Special Park & Rec Meeting - January 20, 1998 Lash: And I understand that. I really do, but on the other hand we need to stop and look at the fact that you have a small yard. You know, you have a small yard. You know those townhomes have small yards and a lot of them are close to the highway. But they were close to the highway when you bought them and that has nothing to do with us. You know, you bought, and I bought a house on CR 17. Audience... Lash: No, that's not my point. But when you, you know you made a conscious decision. I did the same thing. When I bought my house on CR 17, I made a decision to buy a house on a county road. There's things that come along with that. When you buy a house on a busy street, there's going to be traffic. There's going to be people walking. You give up lots of privacy and that's part of what goes with buying a house on a busy street. You know and we can't control that. No matter what we want to do, we can't stop that. We can control the trail, you're right. But there are a lot of other people in this town who want that trail. We have to look at what best serves everyone. Audience: ... there's far more people I think that would use it... far less property owners to deal with. Lash: ... you know we can volley this stuff back and forth all night and we're all basically stating our own opinions, you know. Audience: ... all the people that live in that area. Lash: Will not use it if it's on the east side of the road? Audience: ... between them. They're not going to take their bike up the berm, jump the fence with their bike just so they can use the trail... Kerber right out their driveway. No one in our area is ever going to use that trail unless the other road got hit by a nuclear weapon. Lash: Well and again, you're making the assumption people will only go to town to go to the store and come back again. Now people use, people want to take walks. They want to take bikes. They want to make a circular fashion and then turn around. Audience: ... myself. I don't know how many people Dave's talked to in our area. I've talked to over half the people that live right along that section of roadway that have decks that are.., and there's not a one of them.., especially people that have pine trees that now.., go through a pine tree with their 10 speed to try and get to the road. Lash: And they would use it if it was on the other side of the road? Audience: No... My point is none of these people would...by having it on the east side doesn't serve, it serves just the people on the other side. Because they then would have a way to get to... They're going to have to cross the road either way to get to downtown Chanhassen... no matter 33 Special Park & Rec Meeting - January 20, 1998 what they do, they'll have to cross, depending on their side.., their backyards to a trail without having to go to the next crossing. I think it'd be more convenient for them. I mean none of... Lash: You know and the other thing, and this is a big, big factor. On the other side, Eckankar, where that huge thing is. You know we don't have the money to do that again. It's been on the other side of the road. Now what we would be forcing everyone to do is cross at some point down there. That would be near suicide where that sight lines are. Audience: The truth of the matter is, x number of people are going to have to cross the road no matter where you put it. Lash: Right. Audience: So I don't buy that argument you just made. It's the same thing you just did on Galpin Boulevard. You're talking about having a crossing at the most dangerous point on that road. You just talked about it a little while ago. You talked about having a crossing at the most dangerous point on that road. But you're going to have a crossing because you've got to do something different about it. Lash: No, we didn't talk about having a crossing. We talked about having it at Lake Lucy. Audience: ... here said, no... place to have it is back at Lake Lucy. Lash: That was my intention all along was to have it at Lake Lucy. Audience: ... someone had said let's cross.., up here at the top or the bottom of the hill. Berg: I said that. Audience: Okay. Lash: And the residents said that. They said if you're going to cross, cross at the top. Not at the bottom. Audience: Yeah, and this guy sitting right here in front of me said no. Do it at Lake Lucy. Manders: And just because it's talked about doesn't mean that everybody agrees with it. It's just part of the discussion. Audience: Right. Well it's the same thing about crossing, you know why can't you have it cross over. You're talking about this bridge and retaining wall and everything here. And then the next connection to it is that piece of garbage you're going to tear out anyway, right? I mean the end of that trail, wherever it is. You're going to tear that piece out anyway. So you've got a lot of area in there where you can make a crossover. That's not an argument. There is a, you have good 34 Special Park & Rec Meeting - January 20, 1998 sight lines somewhere down in here. Now granted, when you get up here, the sight line isn't as good. As far as seeing traffic coming. But then we get back to the issue, something that we... Lash: You know and I'm not a safety expert with sight lines and all that kind of stuff but I've lived there for 20 years. I wouldn't want to cross Powers down towards Eckankar. I just wouldn't. There's just not good enough, with.., and it goes like this. I don't think it's. Audience: We've got streets that come out on Powers right now. People have to cross every day in their cars. Audience... Lash: Is there someone who's interested in making a motion? Franks: Are we motioning on just Powers Boulevard itself? Lash: Right. Berg: Are we looking to make a motion to make a final recommendation or... ? I would move, I'm getting awfully brave in my old age. I would move that we look at staff} direct staff to look at the following recommendations and again I'd accept all help from you. The possibility of a guardrail. The possibility of looking at a guardrail in two areas. Either making, having the trail come right up to the guardrail or being... Taping of the meeting ended at this point in the discussion. 35