The URL can be used to link to this page

1993 08 24 Agenda . . . FILE AGENDA CHANHASSEN PARK AND RECREATION COMMISSION TUESDAY, AUGUST 24, 1993, 7:30 P.M. CHANHASSEN CITY HALL, 690 COULTER DRIVE CALL TO ORDER - 7:30 P.M. 1. Approval of July 27, 1993 and August 10, 1993 Park and Recreation Commission Minutes. 2. Visitor Presentations. 3. Song Property Lundgren Brothers Construction 935 East Wayzata Boulevard Wayzata, MN 55391 Schoell and Madson 10550 Wayzata Boulevard Minnetonka, MN 55343 4. Mission Hills Tandem Properties 7808 Creek Ridge Circle, Suite 310 Bloomington, MN 55439 Westwood Professional Services 14180 West Trunk Highway 5 Eden Prairie, MN 55344 5. Motel Expansion/Restaurant Bloomberg 2nd Addition Bloomberg Companies, Inc. 525 West 78th Street Chanhassen, MN 55317 6. Program Reports a. September Fest b. Fall Softball c. Summer Discovery Playground d. Lake Ann Park Adventure Day Camp 7. Administrative Presentations: a. South Railroad Corridor /~ b. New Special Event Proposal, "February Festival" Hwy 10 1 Trail Project, Status Update . c. 8 . Commission Member Presentations. 9 . Administrative Packet. . . . ~ '. CHANHASSEN PARK AND RECREATION COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING JULY 27, 1993 Chairman Schroers called the meeting to order at 7:33 p.m. MEMBERS PRESENT: Larry Schroers, Jim Andrews, Fred Berg, Jim Manders, Ron Roeser, Jan Lash and Jane STAFF PRESENT: Todd Hoffman, Park and Rec Coordinator; Jerry Ruegemer, Recreation Supervisor; and Dawn Lemme, Program Specialist INTRODUCTION OF NEWLY APPOINTED COMMISSIONER. Hoffman: Last evening the Council did interview the last candidate as a regularly scheduled item to their meeting. They discussed the appointment and I'm happy to announce that they have appointed Jane Meger to the Park and Recreation Commission. Her term is an odd term. It will last through the end of the year and then choose whether, you have the open then to choose whether you liked your experience or not and ask for reappointment so welcome. . APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Berg moved, Lash seconded to approve the Minutes of the Park and Recreation Commission meeting dated June 22, 1993 as presented. VISITOR PRESENTATIONS: Hoffman: There are none from the audience. I would on behalf of a group of young citizens who I had a conversation with on the tennis courts last evening in regard to inline skating. I won't take the commissions time at the present but I would put that off until Administrative Presentations. They had thought they would have representation here tonight to talk to you during visitor Presentation. They chose not to come but I still would like to discuss that issue with the Commission. Schroers: Okay, very good. If there's nothing further then, we'll go onto item 4. LAND DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL: 115 SINGLE FAMILY LOTS LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF GALPIN BOULEVARD. ONE-HALF MILE NORTH OF HIGHWAY 5: public present: Name Address . Peter Pflaum Lundgren Bros Construction, wayzata, MN Terry Forbord Lundgren Bros construction, Wayzata, MN 1 . . Park and Rec Commission July 27, 1993 - Page 2 .' Name Address Jerome & Linda Carlson Charles & Irene Song Bret Davidson David Stockdale Dennis Jacobson 6950 Galpin Blvd. 7200 Galpin Blvd. 7291 Galpin Blvd. 7210 Galpin Blvd. 6841 Hazeltine Blvd. Hoffman: As the Commission will recall, this item was originally scheduled for review on Tuesday, June 22nd but was omitted from the agenda that evening at the applicant's request. Tonight we have with us Mr. Terry Forbord and Mr. Peter Pflaum, representing Lundgren Bros Construction. This is a proposal to rezone 112 acres from Rural Residential to Planned unit Development Residential. Preliminary Plat to subdivide that 112 acres into 115 single family lots and a wetland alteration permit. The location is west of Galpin Blvd, 1/2 mile north of Highway 5, referred to as the Song property. The...location. Lake Ann Park, ...Highway 5, Galpin Blvd, Swings Recreational Center is located in this location. As you travel north, the Song property is then located just west of Galpin Blvd... Again the present zoning is . Rural Residential. Adjacent zoning to the north is Rural Residential and Lake Harrison, which is referred to as a lake but more of a wetland. Open water wetland, is how I would classify it. South you have Agricultural Estate and then the Stockdale property which will be...To the east you have Galpin Blvd. To . the west more rural residential and agricultural estates and then also the Dolejsi/Johnson/Turner property, which is also being developed by Lundgren Bros. The Comprehensive Plan identifies this site as being centrally located in park deficient area number 3. The map depicting that... As stated in the Comprehensive Plan, the area identified on the map as Zone 3 is presented largely undeveloped. Again, this writing is dated so bear that in mind. According to the land use section of this plan, this area will be serviced by sanitary sewer and water prior to the year 2000. That servicing is currently being coordinated as of 1993. As a result, additional neighborhood parks in Zone 3 should be considered as additional development occurs. Future park plans call for the construction of a trail encircling Lake Ann. The construction of such a trail could effectively link the eastern half of the area to Lake Ann Park. The western half of Zone 3, which lies between Highway 41 and County Road 117 or Galpin Blvd, may require a separate neighborhood park. The land around Lake Harrison would be a possible site for such a facility. That is the text which is included in the City Comprehensive Plan. Attachment C also . indicates the recent developments which have been approved in the 2 ~ . . . . Park and Rec Commission July 27, 1993 - Page 3 area without the.acquisition of public parkland. Put that up on the overhead. The dashed line indicates the service areas of Pheasant Hill Park and the new school park site. Going in across that areas are the Johnson/Dolejsi/Turner property in this configuration off of Highway 41. This is the other development... Both those destinations being Pheasant Hill and the new school site will eventually be accessible to the Song property via the city's comprehensive trail system. However, again both are located well beyond the site service area. In reviewing this application I have made reference to the following documents. Attachment #1 is the staff report dated August 11, 1992. This report addressed park and trail issues as a part of the application made by Lundgren Bros Construction to subdivide 95.19 acres of property referred to as again the Johnson/Dolejsi/Turner property to the west. As presented in this report, staff is not opposed to the development of an association or private park. However, concern over how a neighborhood with a private park would interface with the larger community was expressed and at that time discussed by the Commission to some extent. A position was also presented that if Lundgren Bros confirmed their intent to develop a private park, it was staff's preference to retain park fees generated by the development to be used in a combination purchase, land dedication venture in a future development in the area. Proposal to develop the Song property does represent such a development. To reacquaint you with the Johnson/Dolejsi/Turner property, as discussed this has, it's in close proximity and really ties in with the song property... Johnson/Dolejsi/Turner concept for the east/west connector road which will connect to Highway 41 from Galpin Blvd. For those of you who are familiar with the region... Lash: That's the development from last year? Hoffman: Correct, 1992. units there. Lash: 120? Hoffman: I believe it's less than that. 112. Schroers: Has the application for zoning from Rural Residential to high density residential been granted? Hoffman: That will be approved as a part of the process. The review process when it comes before the Planning Commission. Schroers: Do we have any input in that decision regarding the rezoning? 3 - Park and Rec Commission July 27, 1993 - Page 4 Hoffman: If you wish to pass up a position to the Planning Commission, you may certainly do so. As far as what influence that would have in their decision, I do not know that. Attachment No. 6 is a letter from Mr. Bret Davidson. The content of that letter relates to the need for a neighborhood park in the area of Royal Oak Estates and the Song property. Royal Oak Estates is a 23 home subdivision being developed by Mr. Davidson to the south and east of the Song property. I made reference to that site. If you've been out on the road, they're moving dirt so as these come through you can see the action taking place out there in the community. You also have before you this evening a letter submitted by Mr. David Stockdale, the land owner to the south in this regard as well. Lash: Can you show us where Mr. Stockdale lives again. Hoffman: The Stockdale property is the dotted, 17 acres. Attachment No. 12 is a narrative presenting the Song property, planned unit development concept plan and preliminary plans submitted by Lundgren Bros Construction, received by my office on July 21, 1993. In reading the 16 pages and it's attachments, it can be seen that Lundgren Bros has provided details of their proposal in a very thorough manner. section 10 discusses neighborhood recreation specifically. Prior to discussing this section I will reference sections of the report which are likely to be of interest to the commission. As City Manager Ashworth mentioned in his letter to Lundgren Bros, the issue of whether a developer should be required to dedicate land for a pUblic park if a private park is proposed in the same area has never before been thoroughly debated by our Councilor Commission. We discussed it briefly as part of the last application but it was not the intent or the desire at that time of the Commission to acquire public park properties so this situation is different. The Commission's decision in this regard will in effect be a policy decision which will guide future applications of this nature. Page number 1 entitled History of the Development Proposal. This paragraph, among other things, discusses the relationship between the Song property and the Johnson/Dolejsi/ Turner parcel. Staff concurs that this coordination of efforts results in a unified development making an important east/west connection between Galpin Blvd and TH 41. The applicant will be installing a sidewalk as a part of this connection. The presence of that sidewalk will allow non-vehicular travel to trickle out of the neighborhood, thus gaining access to the future trails on Galpin and TH 41. Again, attached is their overhead 3 and 4 show that configuration...Page 2, in regard to the complicated development purchase agreement and the veto authority by the 4 ~ . . . .. . . Park and Rec Commission July 27, 1993 - Page 5 Carlson's and the Song's and that the Carlson's and Song's do not want any public park. Their concern being that a public park would invite trespass and disturbance to the quietude and the natural environment lake. The City respects the Song's and the Carlson's position. However, the City represents the interest of not only the song's and the Carlson's as residents of the community but all other present and future residents as well. In regard to page number 5, under the Development Summary. The acreage noted for homeowner association recreation is 3 acres. In looking into that, that's just an inconsistency with the labeling of the park. There's 4.6 acres. The conceptual plan submitted by the applicants for the park again labels it as 4.6 acres. This would be the association park as a part of the new proposal for the Song property. It's located just inside the entrance off of Galpin. The northerly entrance. Page number 11 of Section 10, entitled Neighborhood Recreation Area. Staff does not dispute that the private. or association recreation area, if developed at 4.6 acres in size, with amenities noted, meets the park needs of those residing within the development. However, it is the intent of the city's comprehensive plan to provide recreational services for all residents. Furthermore, if that association park were to be given to the city at some point in the future, that's a common practice for the land owned by associations, revert back to city ownership. The park would lack at least one vital component of all city neighborhood parks, specifically that being an open field. Typically the Commission sets aside an area for open field type of applications within neighborhood parks. I do not know whether residents of the city residing outside of this development would be welcome or allowed to utilize this facility. I think the more important question is would they feel welcome. The gross density of 1.5 units per acre is low throughout this proposal. However, open space associated with private lots, inbetween the private lots, the large lots which are being proposed, while providing for sunlight and fresh air, does not meet the public needs for access to open space or public parks. The site does include two relatively large areas of land unencumbered by structures, roads and utilities. These wetland areas are proposed to remain under association ownership as well. Those areas would be the Lake Harrison outlot, as has been mentioned..This section makes reference to the comprehensive plan as identifying a neighborhood park as being 5 acres in size and serving 1,000 people. These standards have not been applied in the city for the past 5 years. The commission is in the process of updating the comprehensive plan. Instead what has been used, or what is now the the applied standard is 1 acre of parkland for every 75 people residing within the community. The narrative goes further in supporting the position of the 5 Park and Rec Commission July 27, 1993 - Page 6 .' applicant that their proposal meets the needs for parks within it's own development. Again, the policy decision facing the commission is whether this "island" approach to development is in the best interest of the city. Recommendations passed forwary by staff to the Park and Recreation Commission. The recommendations of June 18, 1993 remain valid with the noted modifications. Parks in regard to park dedication, the Commission has many options. The three most obvious being number 1, recommend the rejection of the preliminary plat due to it's lack of public open space. Number 2, identify 0 to 4.6 or any additional acreage of land for acquisition as public parkland and recommend the requirement of this dedication as a condition of approval for the plat. Number 3, recommend the acceptance of park fees in lieu of land dedication subject to the private park being developed. Again that condition is recommended that that condition carry with it that the association park includes sufficient land for an open playfield. In regard to trails, in the comprehensive trail plan. The comprehensive trail plan identifies a trail along Galpin Blvd...and traveling south. As you travel south it crosses Highway 5... Schroers: Todd, does that trail corridor go at all north to hook . into the Lake Lucy trail? Hoffman: The Lake Lucy trail. Lake Lucy comes across, the on street trail right here? Schroers: Yes. Hoffman: So there'd be a connection at some point here... Schroers: But along with this proposal, the connection would be made from Galpin to Lucy? Hoffman: No. This proposal we're asking for the acquisition...to allow for future connection. Schroers: Just along the property but then there would be still a connection to be made to the north. Hoffman: Correct. It is staff's opinion that this construction will likely...take place as part of the upgrade of Galpin Blvd when the County comes in and upgrades that to meet the expanding needs of development in the area. It will piggyback on that road project and install the trail at that time. So there's no constrution being recommended as part of this proposal. . 6 ~ .~ '. Park and Rec Commission July 27, 1993 - Page 7 Schroers: Just an easement. . Hoffman: Correct. As mentioned, in a few short years this trail will play a very important role in transporting grade school students to the new school. It is not known at present which side of the road the first alignment of the trail will be constructed. Eventually, however the trail will be desirable on both sides of Galpin Blvd. due to the nature of the north/south collector, that being Galpin Blvd, and it's relationship to Highway 5, Highway 7, the new school site and the proposed access boulevard that parallels Highway 5. In regard to trails, it is recommended that the following conditions of approval be forwarded to the City Council. One, that a 20 foot trail easement be retained along the entire easterly property line to facilitate the future construction of the trail along Galpin Blvd. A note to the commission. The applicant has stated it would be their desire to have this trail constructed within the road right-of-way. The additional 17 feet of right-of-way required for road purposes. The city will also need a utility easement along this alignment, thus the additional 20 feet beyond that 17 would also be labeled as a utility easement where they interface. Again in conversation with the engineering department, they do not feel that we would be capable of installing a trail within that 17 foot road right- of-way. But they would work with us in a combination easement for utilities and the trail. In addition, any trail easements and/or trail construction which would be necessitated by identification of a park site within this plat should be required. Schroers: Thank you Mr. Hoffman. At this point I guess we could ask the representatives of Lundgren, if they wish to address the commission on this issue. . Peter Pflaum: My name is Peter Pflaum. I'm the President of Lundgren Bros and also the principle owner in the company and I'm here, first of all I should back up for a minute. I have not been before a Park Commission in Chanhassen, I think since '78 or '79 when we did Near Mountain, and I had the task of trying to shepherd that project through. The reason I'm here tonight is that I believe there has been way too much emotion exerted on this project to date already, and it's sort of gotten out of hand. I had a meeting with the city Manager and the Mayor yesterday to talk about it. And as a matter of fact, that's the first time I'd met the Mayor and the first time I'd talk to Ashworth in I think 6 or 7 years so the only reason I mention that is it's been a long time since we've had a need to come and chat with one another. My feeling is that what happened, I think 7 Park and Rec Commission July 27, 1993 - Page 8 .' Lundgren Bros is guilty of getting a little carried away and being emotional when we should have focused in on the topic at hand and had our discussions solely on the topic. In talking to Ashworth, the City should have also done things on their behalf that would have straighten this thing out. The reason I wanted to meet with the city was to see if we could learn from this experience and set procedures in place so it just wouldn't happen, because it's not appropriate. I think, and that's why I'm here is to apologize. It happened and I'm responsible, since I'm the senior guy over there and also I'm involved on a daily basis watching what's going on in the land development. So on behalf of Lundgren Bros I wanted to apologize. We'll still fight with regard to issues that we believe strongly in but we'll try to keep the fight toned down and aimed at the issue and no~, and hope it doesn't spread so that's the only reason I'm here tonight. Terry's certainly competent to talk about the project and I just wanted to express that to you all before we got started. Schroers: Thank you very much. Did you have a question Jan? Lash: No. . Schroers: I think that I would like to clear the air a little bit on that myself. My position on this is that we're not here to play politics. We are here to deal with nothing except the park and recreation related issues of this project and our focus' is what we feel are our best efforts in meeting the needs of the entire city of Chanhassen and we do not make any decisions here specifically. We just make a recommendation based on our best judgment to the City Council and they make the final decision so that's the way the process here works and we're not for or against anybody. We're just trying to do the best we can with the park facilities within the city. Terry Forbord: Mr. Chair, members of the Park Commission. I'd just like to add a couple of additional comments to the statement that Peter just made. And I'll keep them brief because I know there's, you want to hear about the project. But the bottom line on this really is, is that no matter who's right or wrong, as adults it should never get to this point and I feel incredibly bad about it and I've come and talked to Todd about it within the last week and I also originally had a meeting with the Mayor and with the City Manager. But really that's the bottom line. I mean what happens is that, you know we're all so busy in the world, sometimes you forget to be level headed and sometimes we make mistakes and unfortunately that's one of the downsides of life is . 8 , .. . . .._~ Park and Rec Commission July 27, 1993 - Page 9 that we make mistakes. And I feel that I've made a mistake here in not keeping my cool. Not taking the additional extra time that it may take to try to get ahold of somebody. To try to meet with them privately. To work things out rather than reacting in the way that I did. And so I feel bad about that and I told Todd I felt bad about it, because I don't think it should ever get to that. And I'm not perfect. I make a lot of mistakes. Really the bottom line is, what do you do after you make the mistakes so I just hope that you'll accept my apology. I apologized to Todd. To each one of you. Certainly to the Mayor and the City Council and it's never my intent, because I do care about Chanhassen. I think those of you who have seen me make my presentations before and those members of the staff who have worked with me on projects over and over again, they know that we work very hard to try to put forth the absolute best project we can. And what happens sometimes, you get so absorbed by it and...somtimes you lose track of the bigger picture. And I think that's what happened here. And we've talked with the staff about trying to improve communications so if these things do happen, that we have opportunities and abilities to resolve them the way we all wish that it would be done. So I apologize to all of you and certainly to Todd. I'm going to talk a little bit about this neighborhood community, referred to as the Song property. Obviously in any project like this, certainly of the scope that this one is, there's all kinds of challenges and I'm not going to burden you with all of those but the primary challenge for us, and something we started a few years ago was how do we do something that would make our neighborhood communities something a little bit special. Now we don't have all the answers so a lot of times what we do, we travel around the country and find out what people smarter than we are are doing and we found that something that's been occurring allover the country is that people creating neighborhood communities, in their pursuit of making them something a little more special than maybe what they have been in the past, is they try to add amenities to them that will benefit the people who buy homes within the community. Well there's also an ancilliary benefit to that and I've dealt with that a little bit within the report that's been given to you tonight. Is that there also is a side benefit for those who live outside the boundaries. It clearly wouldn't be fair to say that the only people who benefit from this are the people who live within the community because there's another aspect of this. When we were looking at how we could improve our communities, there was a phenomena occurring in government and that budgets were severely being constrained in all government, State, Federal, certainly local and they were having a hard time delivering the services that their residents wanted. And I know Chanhassen's not any 9 Park and Rec Commission July 27, 1993 - Page 10 different. I know Chanhassen's going through the same thing that many municipalities locally are. They have some budget shortfalls. They're forced to have to cutback on certain things that they'd like to do in their capital improvement program. And the first community that we had an association park in was Plymouth and they had some constraints too. I mean they can't be everything. The Parks Department or the City can't be everything to everybody in the community because their resources are limited and they have to prioritize. So in conjunction with the fact that we're attempting to make our neighborhood communities something extremely special for those who live there, we also know that the cities, especially in the type of amenities we're providing. Things like tennis courts and handball courts and basketball courts. Those are the things that most cities are really having a hard time providing at a neighborhood level. I mean they just don't have the funds so we realized, how do we do something that maybe not everybody else is doing. That maybe will give us a little bit of a competitive advantage. Give our future homeowners a competitive advantage when they go to sell their home, and hopefully that the city will look at and say, you know there's some benefit to the city in this in that the developer's not just putting forth park dedication in land. They're willing to put forth some monies upfront and build these things upfront, which oftentimes cities can't afford to do, even if they did get the land because they just don't, unfortunately have the money. And so we realize that for most cities, especially in Minnesota, this was kind of a new phenomena. Now you would see it in townhome and apartment units throughout the metropolitan area. This is not unique to a townhome project. There are many townhome, multiple dwelling neighborhood communities in the metropolitan area that have tennis courts and things like this but it's probably a new phenomena, in Minnesota anyway, to single family. You just don't see that much of it. So we realized that most cities would probably say well geez, this is really a departure from what we're used to and we also realized that the cities still have park needs outside the boundaries of our project. We certainly weren't thinking that that problem would go away. And so that's why we've, in the communities that we've done this, we've continued to offer to pay park dedication fees. Even though we'll spend quite a bit of money providing amenities that are within these neighborhoods. So actually it's kind of, the city's getting a double benefit. Now there's also an additional benefit is that the association continues to maintain these so the city doesn't have to. And then to give an example in a new neighborhood community called Woodlands in Apple Valley that we're just underway with. The City had concerns well what happens, I mean the City has to look 10 e. . e .. . . Park and Rec Commission July 27, 1993 - Page 11 at it from a worst case scenario. What happens if something terrible happened and 10 years or 20 years or 30 years or 40 years from now the association wasn't getting along and there was a problem. They didn't want it anymore or whatever. Well we can, just like we did on Apple Valley. There's a couple things that we can do. One is we can actually plat those lots, if necessary, for if the city in some point in time, if there's a problem, that might be able to be lots. Or we can have a document that would facilitate the orderly transition of that property to the city if that event ever occurred. Now we don't think that's going to happen because what we've found is if the ones that have been set up right to begin with usually don't have a problem. And all of them aren't set up the same way. I mean so it wouldn't be fair to say that all association parks have a potential liability of this happening because they're not all set up the same way and we spend a lot of time and considerable funds in trying to do it right and studying on how others have done it. So that's really why it is that we're proposing what you see before you tonight. Now Todd explained to me, or shared with me an idea or a concept today that is a concept that has merit that I hadn't had a chance to talk to him about before. And that is that he thinks it's a good idea that if there was some additional flat area in this association park area, it could even be included within it and that's something we would have to look at in our design, where people could throw a frisbee. They could run with their dog. They could fly a kite and things like that. And that's a good idea and that's something that we had not thought about. And if you, we try to put everything in the kitchen sink in this proposal and that's something we did not think of and that was a good idea and it has a lot of merit and it's something we should have thought about and it's something we should put in there. And what that allows for, I mean that's a desire of the Park and Rec Department that if they ever did, for whatever reason, have to have this little neighborhood park back, then it would have some of that area in it that the Park and Rec Department would like to see, so we think that's a good idea. We pretty much have based our proposal and the size of the facility and everything on our understanding of what the comprehensive plan is. We take that document and we try to read it and decipher it and put forth in conformance with it. And so that's how we've kind of come up with the sizes, etc. At this point in time I think it's, you probably may have some questions about this proposal and myself and Mr. Pflaum will do the best that we can to answer those questions. Schroers: Thank you. Questions from the commissioners. If not I have a couple. What is Lundgren's position on the surrounding 11 Park and Rec Commission July 27, 1993 - Page 12 e. community using these facilities? Are you looking at this strictly as a private entity for your development? Terry Forbord: Would you like me to respond? Schroers: Please. Terry Forbord: On these questions, okay. The park is owned by the association which is comprised of those people who live in the community. The association pays taxes on that property, I believe and they also have the liability that's associated with it and they pay the insurance and all the other things. And they pay for the maintenance of it so these people will be paying an annual fee to cover all of those costs and because of the way the laws are, it's important that the association documents the Declaration of Covenants and the association documents themselves are, because it's a corporation, the association is, that they have to have certain language in there to protect the association against things like people getting hurt and just like, if you owned a business. You have to have some kind of a protection in there for that so the purpose of the park is for the ownership of . the association and for their primary use. Now that is not to suggest that if Janey or Johnny have friends that live across the street in another neighborhood, that they can't come and play with them because of course that's not the point at all. But it would, it isn't something that's advertised as a public park or displayed as a public park. I believe that for insurance purposes it needs to be posted that it is a park that's owned by the association and that it's for the primary use of those residents. But again, there's no policemen. There's no badges that people wear or anything like that to identify themselves. That's not the intent. Schroers: Okay. There was some mention to wetland alterations or a permit for wetland alterations. Exactly what alteration is intended? Terry Forbord: We'll put a bigger exhibit up here. I don't know if you can see this. North would be up. Galpin Blvd, Lake Lucy, the Johnson/Dolejsi/Turner neighborhood...I'm not a wetlands expert so I'm not going to try to represent that to you but I can generally tell you, I assume you're talking about this dark area. . . Schroers: Well my interest is actually to what alteration is going to be done to the wetland. e 12 .. . . Park and Rec Commission July 27, 1993 - Page 13 Terry Forbord: ~o the entire wetland? Schroers: Yeah. Terry Forbord: Okay. Nowadays you do everything possible you can to stay out of a wetland because it's just a lot of cost and things associated with it. All the different agencies that you have to get your permitting from. It's extremely cost... (Mr. Forbord was away from a microphone and his comments were not being picked up on the tape clearly.) Schroers: Thank you for that explanation. I think we all appreciate the progressive thinking and all the work that you've done on the project. The concept looks very nice. However, from our perspective what you're asking of us is to make an exception to policy here and my concern is that if we do that, in all fairness, that is going to set a precedent and each time that a developer comes in with a new idea, that sort of gives them leverage. They can say, well you let other developments do this and you let other developments do that and that wasn't part of your policy and now we feel that we should have the right to do this. And what I feel is that it is going to disrupt the comprehensive plan and really make the acquisition of our public park and recreation facilities a lot harder to acquire, and it's difficult to do right now. I guess what's not clear in my mind is what you think the major benefit to the city is that we should make such an exception to our policy here. I mean my personal feeling is that if you want to develop a private recreation area for the people in your development, I think that's fine but not to exclude the public park and trail facilities that we require of every development. Andrews: Can I ask some questions? Schroers: wait a minute. Would you care to respond to that? Terry Forbord: Actually I guess, I think there's a number of ways that one could look at this to determine what benefit is it to the city. First of all, there will be about 230 new homeowners that will be citizens of the city that will be living within this 200+ acre neighborhood community and actually the density is less than 1.5 gross. It's about 1.1 on this particular site. I mean it's a very low density and those 230 people, if there was no, for instance just on the Johnson/Dolejsi property to the immediate west. If there was no facility there whatsoever, those 112 people would be going somewhere in the city 13 Park and Rec Commission July 27, 1993 - Page 14 to utilize that facility somewhere, if there was one. The people, 115 people who will be, excuse me households. We're talking more than. It will be 230 households times 3, if that's the basis for what we're using for numbers. So it would be 690. About 700 people. What's happening here is that we will be providing an upfront, the facilities for 700 people at no cost to the city. Plus we will be taking park dedication fees and paying them to the city as well.. So I mean just those two things right there I see as a real benefit to the city. When you add in the maintenance component, and that the city will not, the city's budget, the city's park and rec budget will not have to be forced to maintaining these facilities. So a burden of 700 additional homeowners, or residents, will be immediately taken care of by this proposal. I think that's a real benefit to the city. And they get the additional funds from those 230 units and they can take those funds and if they deem that it is necessary in park deficient area no. 3, or any other park deficient area for that matter, they can take those funds and put those to use for those people who live outside the development. Now when they do that, the people, the approximately 700 people that are living within these two PUD's, will not be burdening that new facility as much because they have their own. Now one of the things that I didn't address earlier is that why do we put the type of facilities in that we do? I talked a little bit about the fact that the city can't afford maybe to put in, and the city to my knowledge does have a policy, in neighborhood parks they no longer put in tennis courts and things like that because they just can't afford to. But there's another reason we do it in that in our, through talking with our sales people that sell in our neighborhoods and by talking to our homeowners, these are the kind of facilities they really would like us to put in. It's not necessarily that we have so much vision or anything. We just listen to what our customers are telling us. They're telling us, boy if you're going to build us a park, here's what we'd like to have. We'd like to have what some people call a totlot, but really they're these playground systems. You probably have seen them. I'm sure the city probably has some, an extensive one or maybe more than one somewhere in the city. They're made out of those 6 x 6 timbers and they have all that neat stuff. Well we put those in. We create large sandbox areas around them. The tennis courts, the handball courts, the basketball courts and those types of things we find our homebuyers say these are the systems that we want that the city can't provide us with anyway. So because of those reasons, we think it's a real benefit to the city. Schroers: Okay, I think. 14 e. e e '. Park and Rec Commission July 27, 1993 - Page 15 Andrews: I have some more questions, if I could, for Terry. I guess my question would have to do with talking about 230 homes between the two developments together. 00 you think it would be necessary to provide some parking for people within the development to be able to drive to this tennis court to use it or do you think they're all going to be pedestrian travelers to this park site? Terry Forbord: You know that's a good question as well. In fact I think that we should provide some parking by this proposed neighborhood park. I don't think a lot of people will drive there but I think some people may and I think that if you approve this, we should be required to provide some parking spaces. I think that's a good idea. . Roeser: I kind of get the impression here that you're saying this park is going to provide all the facilities for these people in this area. They're still going to go out of that neighborhood to swim. They're going to have to go out of that neighborhood to play Little League baseball. They're going to have to go out for arts and crafts. So you know, you make it sound like it's going to provide all the facilities when it really isn't going to provide all the facilities. It's going to provide a tennis court and a small picnic area and playground. Terry Forbord: I regret if that's what it appears to be what I'm implying because that's not my intent. I realize that these families will have boys and girls that may want to compete in Little League. I realize that they may be involved in other activities and obviously we can't put in all those types of facilities and I am not trying to imply that at all. But just from our experience at doing this, and from listening to our customers, we do know that these are facilities that they do wish' they could have. And we also know that the other cities that we've done this in, those cities can't provide those needs anymore either because they can't afford it. And I was at a meeting here one night where it was debated here in this chambers about can the city afford to put tennis courts and things like that in local neighborhood parks and it was determined they couldn't. And there were some residents standing here and they really wanted one really bad. And so we realized that we can't provide everything and we realize they will have to go outside the boundaries of the community but we also know that within the certain scope that we're presenting here, we can provide a lot of the things that these people really do want. . 15 ~ Park and Rec Commission July 27, 1993 - Page 16 Berg: I guess I'm looking at it a couple different ways too. If I were a resident of that new development, I'd really be excited. Excited with the possibility of having this park that I could bike to and take my kids to. I'm not a member of that community and I am a member of a commission that has to be concerned about other citizens as well. I just can hear the people coming. Why do they have this park here? What's wrong with you people? Why aren't you supplying a park for us in an area that has been labeled park deficient for a long time. I guess I'm trying, I'm forced to think of the bigger picture at this point. Your benefits to the city are undeniable. But those citizens there are not being served by having that park outside of that development. Terry Forbord: That same thing concerns us too, Commissioner Berg. We think that the city should be providing parks throughout the community and I know the city's rethinking their park plan, or considering it anyway, and contemplating being site specific for specific types of parks. Actually this particular site, I bet you doesn't have a level spot on it anywhere. I mean that's something I haven't talked about. There's virtually, I think you'd be hard pressed to find an acre of land that's level on this particular site. And what's really important for the different types of, I mean there's all kind of different type of park needs that are needed in the city and we believe that it's probably wise to be site specific and find level pieces of property for certain types of uses and other types for other types of uses. And we really do, I think there's a shortage of parks in the city and we have never tried to suggest that there isn't but we think that the proposal we're making, I mean whether it was Lundgren Bros or it was somebody else, if somebody brought in a proposal where they would agree to do this type of facility and still give the money to the city so the city could take care of all those other things, I think they're hitting two birds with one stone. Schroers: I think though the real problem here, what I see is just kind of the idea that this is a somewhat a private park within a community. That's what is really hard to swallow. If the rest of the residents feel that, for whatever reason, that they can't go there and they can't use that facility because they're not a portion of this neighborhood, then we have not serviced the community. We have not done the job that we've been appointed to do here. And that's a real concern to me. I think having a park...is just the fairness of the issue I think is really a major concern and we hear over and over again on every new developing community, when we get to the park issue. What they 16 .' . . Park and Rec Commission -4It July 27, 1993 - Page 17 4It are afraid of is that when we develop a neighborhood park, that there's going to be a big flashy neon sign and it's going to draw the gangs from Chicago. It doesn't happen. Just the people who know about it who live in the area come there and the real problem I have with this whole thing is identifying it or labeling it as a private park. Terry Forbord: You know just to give you an example. I should have may talked a little bit about the math of this. But for an example. There will be approximately $138,000.00, almost $140,000.00 of money generated by park fees with the homes that are built here. And if land in Chanhassen was going for $25,000.00 an acre, that would give you more than 5 acres of land that the city could buy to buy a park right in this area. If they could find, and again I'm not exactly what type of park it is that you need but let's assume for a minute it was for ball diamonds for Little League or something like that. You could put a few diamonds on 5 acres of land right in this general vicinity for the amount of money that would be received in park dedication fees. Now that doesn't include the trail fees. The trail fees I believe are $200.00 per unit and so there'd be an additional sum of money. But this is just $600.00 times 230 units is about $138,000.00. So when you look at it maybe in that perspective. Okay, there'd be two neighborhood parks built by the developer. The developer would contribute the land. They'd put in the improvements when they develop so the facilities are there when the people move in. And then they'd be maintained. Plus the money that would be received from the park dedication would allow the city to buy at least 5 acres of land and pay for the land. And then the city, all they'd have to do is pay for the improvements and then you'd have the other component of that that seems to concern, or appears to be a concern of the city's to serve the other residents. Schroers: Does Lundgren Bros have a real problem with just labeling it a Chanhassen neighborhood park, like any other neighborhood park in this city? I mean we do not put major signs out on collectors saying Carver Beach Park this way. We don't attempt to draw people from other areas into the park. All we do is like at the entrance to the park we put up the sign that says the name of the park and that's all it is. It's a neighborhood park. It doesn't specify that it's for someone or that it's not for someone or anything. Is there a problem with that? Terry Forbord: I don't think there would be a problem with that. I think for insurance purposes, somewhere on that park, and maybe Peter can remember but it seems to me that in the last 4It 17 ..-IJIW,___....m-"'''':0f":~~ -r~'''' ::f;'::>~':>~ <'''''?r?;~~,~-,~"L_~~~.~B' ~- ~'.... . . "", ;.. ~. .. . Park and Rec Commission July 27, 1993 - Page 18 e. neighborhood park that we did in Churchill, the association, or their insurer and the insurance agents would have to clarify this but I believe that they were required to put up like a small sign posted to say it because then if there ever was something, at least they can say well it was posted. It's not like it's identified in a big sign or anything like that. Schroers: What does that sign say? Terry Forbord: Forgive me for not knowing. I can find that out but I believe that had to be done and the person who does the developing of the parks for us isn't here tonight but it seems to me that for liability purposes they had to do that. Peter, do you recall? Peter Pflaum: I don't remember... Schroers: Does it say something like neighborhood residents only? Something specific like that. Peter Pflaum: ...1 think it says a private neighborhood park or ~ something like that. I think the thing you have to remember is a park owned...owned by the homeowners and they monitor and control it. And the only issue, we have one in Churchill right now, Churchill Farm and neighborhood kids come over and use the totlot all the time. The area that we have concern... Lash: How would the association monitor that? And what would they do if they found it was being monopolized by other people? Peter Pflaum: Well I think probably, I would assume they'd do something like this. They'd probably put, either post it and if it was being abused by other people...I supposed they end up putting a lock on it and the combination be given to the homeowners. That's the only one element of the whole park and that's the worst case scenario. You have to also understand that people buying into this area are actually paying for it... townhouse project or apartments or condominium where people have their own swimming pool and tennis court. They pay for it and they maintain it and they monitor it. If the neighbors want to come on it, it's up to the homeowners association to decide if they're going to...this has gone on for years and years and years allover the country and allover the neighborhoods. Everywhere and the only difference is that they're mUlti-family to single family. e 18 '. . . Park and Rec Commission July 27, 1993 - Page 19 Lash: Well I want to just give you a little history and I'll try and make this short. I happen to live in a neighborhood that had an association and had an association owned park that was developed by our association back in the 60's, or late 50's or something. So it was a long time ago. Before I lived there. Before I was born. But anyway, we moved in there and at that time it had already transferred title to the city because of a breakdown of the association and that I see, you know I hear you guys saying that you're going to try and have this association. The rules very tight so these kinds of things don't happen but I personally have seen that happen where our association broke down, and it happens over many years of people moving in and people moving out and not knowing how the association operates and pretty soon they don't want to pay their dues anymore and the whole thing falls apart. And where our park had the biggest problem was with enforcement of outside people coming in, specifically teens coming at night and wanting to party back in an area that's relatively remote. So the neighbors then would call the police to come and try and break up these beer parties and the police didn't want to respond because it was privately owned property. So it got into, it really got into a mess and it ended up with the city taking over the title, which then led to a whole kind of an ownership. Even though it was on paper, the residents still feel like it's partly their own and they're very protective of it. But yet the city owns it and there's been a lot of friction over the years because of this so I have seen how this, in the worst scenario, it does not work. And from the sounds of it, we've had discussions up here of when we put in neighborhood parks, when we require property, of requiring the developers to develop it just like you guys were talking about doing. And in that situation it's a win/win situation because it's developed right away before people, before the development is full. The people like that. We like that. It doesn't cost us a lot of money and we've talked about doing that in the future. I don't know if it's ever really going to happen or not but it's something we've considered and if you people would want to develop this but still consider it, turn it over to the city, I'd be all for that but I am very, very leery of the association owned park because of my own personal experience. Also, I look at this particular area as having other property owners. There's a 23 home development going in across the road and there are other individual property owners out there who have also paid park fees when they develop their homes. Built their homes and they will not be serviced probably by this park and I don't know, even if we get the fees from you, we can't say, we don't know tonight that we will have the opportunity to acquire a nice 5 acre parcel when something else comes in to develop, and we've 19 Park and Rec Commission July 27, 1993 - Page 20 e. been through that problem recently too where developers corne in and try to convince us that it's right to take property for a park but just not their property. They want us to take it from the guy next door. Well the next thing, the guy next door comes in and it's the same, we keep hearing the same story over and over and it just, we can't operate like that. Hoping that tomorrow the property next door will corne in and we'll happen to get the prime property that we want because we got the fees from you. We can't count on that. So this whole thing has me very uncomfortable. Peter Pflaum: Good point. One of the things that's unfortunate ...isn't a master plan that designates in advance which property...because then the property owner would be...they would know. So I think one of the things you have to look at in the future, to eliminate this kind of discussion would be corne up with a comprehensive plan that...and most of the other communities have done this frankly. Schroers: We are doing that currently. Peter Pflaum: Okay. You raised some good points. What happens if the homeowners association does not want to take care of the property...We recently got approval, only like 2 months ago, the same concept in Apple Valley. The Apple Valley Council liked very much the idea of the...What their concern was, suppose the neighbors don't want it, what happens then? They didn't want to take it back and have a problem later on. So what they, in working with them they carne up with a program that said, in the event, and this had to be in the homeowners document before you bought the property...it would go back to the city or the city could elect...to be divided into single family lots...and the underlying zoning was single family lots. e Lash: So what if the association is split? Half the people want to keep the park and half of them don't anymore. Well, they're going to have to, just like anything else. There's no perfect solution. All I'm getting at, the other point. I don't, you're talking about big issues and are important issues and I don't want to make light of them because we sort of learned by working with you people, and our residents. One of the things I think is important for all of us to understand...the way we've done things in the past isn't going to work and so rather than slapping us and telling us we're bad guys for corning in and doing this, I think we may be onto something that you may want to encourage. I think it's time for the private sector...and they're talking about cutting back in programs. All I'm saying is maybe it's a 20 e Park and Rec Commission .~ July 27, 1993 - Page 21 ~ ~ way for, and again...because this community said well other communities are going to have to learn how to work with the private sector. You can't depend on the government to come up with the money. People are being taxed to death. So all I'm suggesting is, maybe this is...but we are going a step forward. We're putting improvements in upfront. There's no...and we're also paying money so the city's got funds coming up. So that isn't all bad. And it's not...perfect but all we're saying is maybe this is sort of a wave of the future...in order to provide this community or any other community with these kind of improvements...I'm just suggesting that because we know what our residents want... We wouldn't be doing this. This costs a great deal of money... Lash: As every developer faces who dedicates property for parkland. Peter Pflaum: Yeah but usually they do one or the other. We're doing both. Lash: Well and, if my comments made you feel like I was slapping your hands I apologize. I didn't mean them to be taken that way. And if you'd like to create a wave of the future, I'd be all for that so if you want to develop the property and put the facilities on there that you have shown and then deed it to the city, we would welcome that and that could start a whole new trend for the developers coming in. That would be our way of working with the private sector. And I know I'd be in favor of that. If you're interested in doing that and then putting, taking away your park fees. We'd have the park and it would be developed but it would be deeded to the city. Schroers: I think you would probably gain all our support on that. That is the one stumbling block. You're aSking us to do a . public thing here for a private entity. It's not ethical. You're asking us to do something here that's unethical and we're going to live to regret it if we do that. I think what you're talking about is wonderful. We'd love to see it happen but just to do it and keep it private for the people who are lucky enough or wealthy enough or whatever to be able to live in that community and just target it for that specific neighborhood and just putting the label private on there, we just can't do that. We can't sit here and do that. Lash: Because we are government. 21 Park and Rec Commission July 27, 1993 - Page 22 e. Terry Forbord: Maybe I could just add a couple of quick thoughts. As noble as that may sound, it really wouldn't be fair to the people who would have to buy these homes because this money to do these things doesn't just come from nowhere. The place it comes from is that all 230 homes there, those people are going to pay more for their lots and their homes in order to have that. In other words, if you look at the cost of developing land nowadays, those of you who have followed it, there's an incredible amount of exactions that are paid by new development that is not paid by the citizens at large. For example, storm water policies that the city's looking at adopting right now. They're not going to go back to all the people who've already lived here to ask them, pay to contribute to the new storm systems that are going to benefit the entire city. The people, the new people that live here are going to pay for that. And there's a whole bunch of those things like that but that's not the purpose of this meeting. But there's all kinds of additional costs that the new people who move into the community are going to pay. So if you ask the people that are going to live here that they also have to pay more for their lot above and beyond what would be typical in a park dedication scenario, really that wouldn't be fair. e Meger: I don't understand the difference in paying a little bit more for your lot upfront than having to pay association fees on a regular basis. Terry Forbord: Because the people then who are paying get the direct benefit. Lash: They still would. Meger: They still would. Terry Forbord: No, it's the benefit is not the same. As a real estate professional I can tell you the benefit is not the same. Roeser: How is it different? Terry Forbord: Because, let's just talk about a different type of facility. Let's say if any other private recreational, whether it's a health club or not. What if the people paid all the dues and they paid everything but then everybody else got to go. Now would that be fair? Would it be fair that everybody got to go but only certain people had to pay? Of course that wouldn't be fair. And I think the issue here, and I think Chairman Schroers really hit the nail on the head when he said e that the biggest issue here, and I'm sure that the thing that 22 '. Park and Rec Commission July 27, 1993 - Page 23 . makes all of you feel the most uncomfortable, is private. It's exactly like what happened with the private golf course, Bearpath and their approvals in Eden Prairie. There were a lot of people upset because it was a private club. But you know if you look in the history of Minneapolis, there's private clubs allover the place but in the olden days people didn't get upset about those things. The fact that it wasn't labeled private, it may make everybody feel better. One of the things maybe that you'd consider is that, if you like the concept of getting the park dedication fees and you like the developer contributing the amenities that we've discussed, if you like that concept, and the only thing that really rubs you wrong is how the terminology or the name, maybe there's a way that we can work with staff to come up with some kind of a solution that may be palatable to everybody. It wouldn't be worth it for us as the developer to go ahead and do this and say it's open to the public. Because there's absolutely no advantage to any of the people above, that live there, above and beyond what any other developer is doing. If you look at our neighborhood communities you'll find that we really make absolutely no attempt to do what everybody else is doing. And I'd be happy to take you on tours of our projects and show you that. We could care less what everybody else is doing. We would like to do something special. Berg: The word private's not what's bothering me. It's the sign you're going to put up that says it's association members only is what bothers me. Terry Forbord: And if we didn't put a sign up like that, would that be okay then? . Berg: You have to have a sign up for insurance purposes. And if you don't have to put the sign up, then what are we talking about here? Then it's a public park. Terry Forbord: Well not really because, if you understand the homeowners association and the state Statutue of how you set one up and what it means, it's a corporation. So it means it's privately owned. Berg: Okay, then okay. Then to back up a little bit further, then I'm not upset with... I'm upset with the fact that it's an association's park and it's not a public park. I'm not upset with the word private. I'm upset with the concept. Lash: And if this development were going in an area that was not park deficient and you wanted to do this, I wouldn't have a 23 Park and Rec Commission July 27, 1993 - Page 24 e. problem with it then even. The big part of the problem is that this is a park deficient area and as these developments or these single homes start trickling in, all of those people are paying the park fee but they will not be getting a park. Because they will not feel that they can go and use this park or the one in the adjoining development, so where are they supposed to go? And it's our responsibility to provide a park for them too and this is not doing it. So then we're not doing our jobs. We're really stuck. Schroers: I don't think the people in your development would sacrifice anything by not labeling that as a private park. They are still going to have the amenities right there and that's what is going to attract them to your development. That's what's going to help them to decide whether or not they want to buy the home there. They're going to like the home. They're going to like the area. They're going to like the facilities that they have. All we are saying is we think it's a great plan. Just don't label it private but also don't advertise it that it's there for the whole world but just have it as a neighborhood park. I'll tell you. Just frankly we cannot sit here and say . it's okay to do that. I mean it's just absolutely not ethical and we will regret it for the rest of the time that we are in existence if we do that. It's just that it comes down to terminology here and what you suggested working with staff to define some terminology so that it is not labeled as a private entity and that people who develop close to your development and pay dedication fees can use that park if they want to walk over and use it. But I just don't believe that you're going to see an influx of undesireable people coming in there and disrupting the residents of your development as a result of not labeling it private. I don't buy that. But at this point I would like to ask if there is anyone else in attendance here this evening that would like to address the Commission on this issue. Is there anyone in the audience that would like to share some information with us? Would you please state your name and address for the record. Jerome Carlson: Jerome Carlson, 6950 Galpin Blvd. And it is correct that this is the Song property. It is not the Carlson/ Song property. I am, Linda and I are the Song's neighbors directly to the north. I suppose, I don't want to belabor this whole concept of private versus public too much. I think that it's a very gray area and I don't feel it's as clear cut as perhaps some of you do. We bought a nice piece of land over looking the Harrison wetland and we're working hard, along with e the Song's who purchased their land some time ago, with the dream 24 . . . Park and Rec Commission July 27, 1993 - Page 25 of relocating to a site overlooking that wetland. And paid all the taxes. Made all the payments to the mortgage company, and so forth and so on and I guess I think there is a lot to be said for the rights of private property owners and I would hate to see an attitude in any commission that feels totally compelled at all times, under all circumstances, to look to the public as opposed to the current owners of something. And what they've paid and what they've, the price and the hard work that they've labored in order to gain something. I'm a...free enterpriser and those are just some of my brief philosophical thoughts. As far as this park is concerned and as far as what's in it for the city, perhaps Todd can tell me. What is the distance between Galpin and TH 41? Mile and a quarter? Roughly. Hoffman: Less than that probably. Jerome Carlson: A mile? It depends on what park you're measuring it from because they're both angling somewhat I guess. Hoffman: 3/4 of a mile. Jerome Carlson: Todd and I discussed the park issue at some length and I won't review that whole discussion. I was there on behalf of the Song's as well as myself because I had been working very, very closely with Charles and Irene to try to preserve something very, very special that we both purchased and we own. We think we have a right to own it. But in my discussion with Todd I learned that the studies that in fact are current apparently show that the distance anybody on average or if it's an average or if it's the greatest distance that the average citizen is willing to travel to a park, is 1/2 mile. Is that correct Todd? Hoffman: That's a standard which is put forth by the National Recreation and Parks Association. It is commonplace in the comprehensive plan. Jerome Carlson: And you know I look at this whole development and I do not have any part of the development but if you were to take these two developments together, and if you were to have put a public park right in the middle of them, do you really think people are going to cross Highway 5 from the south to use that? I seriously doubt it. Do you think people will come all the way in from TH 41 a half a mile, having crossed TH 41 to use a park in the middle of that development? I don't think so. Do you think people from Galpin, east side, would go a half a mile to the interior of this development to use the park? Maybe. Not many. 25 Park and Rec Commission July 27, 1993 - Page 26 Particularly when there's a beautiful school park, a beautiful school park with a wonderful trail system being developed right up there on that corner immediately south of Prince's property and that other development that's going much more close. It will have all of the big stuff, I'm assuming, for kids. Where are they going to go? Well if I'm a kid, I've got my bike, I'm going to head for the big stuff. I'm going to swing on the big swings. That would be my inclination. I don't think I was any different as a kid than most kids. . And so you know, just as a perspective, with all due respect, I've walked over the Song property many times. I probably know it as well as Terry and his engineers do. And I can only assure you that that property is a lousy place for a level park of any kind. It's very, very tough terrain. You know. I wrote the actual numbers down. 112 units and 115. That's a total of on average 3 people. That serves 681 residents. Admittedly they're going to go outside the park for the ballgames and the swimming pool and such. It's $181,600.00 in park and trail fees. If you can do an Apple Valley type thing, take the money and run. Buy some property that is in that zone that's flat. My opinion. You're concerned about the gentleman across the street with 26 lots, just to the east side of Galpin. Add that money to it. Now you're up well over $200,000.00. pick a spot for that community park that is suitable for a real park and equip it with the money. I can't believe that the developers couldn't work out something relative to this, what's the title or name or deed it to the city in the future such as they did in Apple Valley so that if they don't want it, it's history. Schroers: That's what we're asking for. Jerome Carlson: I didn't understand you were asking for the Apple Valley solution but in any event, as a private citizen who pays taxes like all of you, this to me, this is a good deal. Figure out a way to capitalize on it and pick the right piece of property for a real park and use the money that's available. Let the developers have the tennis courts. If that's what their customers, I'm in the business of serving customers. And 681 people. That's a lot of folks. That's a lot of folks and if they're willing to pay for a little extra amenity like a tennis court. If they really get excited about that and they want to foot that bill, and if they don't, it goes back to the city. They subdivide it and create more homes to pay taxes. It doesn't sound like a bad deal to me. That's just my attitude. Thank you very much. Schroers: Thank you. 26 . . . . Park and Rec Commission July 27, 1993 - Page 27 . Bret Davidson: My name is Bret Davidson. I live at 7291 Galpin Blvd. A little history here first and then I'll come up to the present day. I moved here in 1986 and I built a home...paid a $600.00 park fee and so it was the first home I'd ever built. I said, what in the world is the $600.00 park fee. They said well the $600.00 park fee is going to pay for a park. And I said, we have a park. Lake Ann Park. They said, no you don't understand. You're going to, we've developed a comprehensive park plan and you'll have a park within about a half mile of where you live. Okay, that makes a lot of sense. Now if you come to the present day, I'm also developing Royal Oak Estates which is a 23 parcel piece of property and just two thoughts. The first one is, if it's an association park, I don't think we can play with the name and say it's a private park or a public park. If it's an association park, the people that live in the other neighborhoods won't be allowed there. I think that if we start to say well we're going to change the sign, all we're doing is we're playing with words. The other part of it is, I don't know if it's a good idea or bad idea. My feeling is, my people in my subdivision and myself have paid for a park. I think we should have a park within the area. Now if there's a better suited spot than the Song property in the area to develop, by all means. By all means get it. My two feelings are first off, if it's an association park, it's a private park and we won't be welcome. And second off, we're paying a park fee and I think we should have a park within our area. Andrews: I have some questions for Mr. Davidson. When we're in the process of competing for land that has potential for residential development, being that you're an experience developer yourself at this point, or you have some experience. What do you think ag rich would go for in that area? Bret Davidson: Let me back up a little bit. Ask me how to fly an airplane and I can tell you because I'm an airline pilot. I'm not a developer and obviously Terry and Mr. Pflaum have a tremendous amount more experience in it than me. This is my first development so I'm not a qualified developer. Now if you ask me what land goes for in the area, is that your basic question? I can tell you that the average land price in the area is around $20,000.00. Andrews: An acre? . Bret Davidson: An acre, yes sir. I had an offer from the Rottlund Company for my piece of property at $22,000.00 an acre. Prior to developing my piece of property. Of course I had appraisers do 27 ~ Park and Rec Commission July 27, 1993 - Page 28 . an appraisal for the area as part of my financing for my project and it came in at almost $20,000.00 an acre so I think it's very reasonable and fair to say that land costs in the area is going to run somewhere around $20,000.00 an acre. Andrews: Thank you. Bret Davidson: But I'm not a developer, don't ask me. Okay, thanks. Schroers: Thanks for your input. Dave Stockdale: My name's Dave Stockdale. I have the property mainly south of the Song's. I'm here to express some of my concerns. From what I can see between the Song property and the JohnsonjDolejsi property, we're talking a little over 206 acres the city is in the process of letting go into development and in that 206 acres it appears that there may be no public park? Surrounding that between Rottlund, Bret Davidson and the other properties nearby that may be developed, you're talking about maybe 20% of that potential development land. It just seems like if there was any topographic possibility to do it in that development, that would still be the most appropriate . proportionate to the number of lots being developed and the impact it would have on a developer. That said, at some time in the future I may be going for development on my land. I've got roughly 17 acres and it appears that if nothing is acquired from the Song property that I have a hunch my property's going to be looking pretty attractive to some people. Andrews: How flat is it? Dave Stockdale: Flatter. And portions of it are more open. The reality is that if in fact what they're after is 5 acres, that pretty much nullifies the financial feasibility of a development. You'll roughly cut a third of my development plan out of the context of development so I have some personal concerns at that level. Practically speaking, it's probably a lot more feasible to look at my land than the Song's. I don't know all the Song's property at this point. In answer to another one of your questions Jim, what is acreage going for. I turned down an offer of $24,000.00 on mine. But more significant to what is acreage going for, is what is it's potential development return on the finished developed land. And it's a lot higher. Lot higher. So I just want that to be of record at this point. That's mostly what I have to say at this point. 28 . . Park and Rec Commission July 27, 1993 - Page 29 Lash: Can you guys turn this thing on again. I need to have another quick crash course just to get my bearings, so we can see what all is being developed here. The big angled one, is that the Johnson? Hoffman: JohnsonjDolejsi..and again the Commission should recall that...concept of that association park right in that location as a part of that. Lash: And the new development now, the Song property is that whole spot. . Hoffman: The Stockdale property is the dotted region. Prince's property. And Royal Oaks...wetland down in here. I certainly understand the quandry that the Park Commission...Listening to the discussion it comes to mind that if something is placed out before you where you think it's a good deal and you look at it and the other things aside, some people would place a pretty high value on it as a pretty good deal. You get the park servicing this region of the community if you splice that out, so to speak...and you're still needing...thousand dollars to do things elsewhere. But then again...parkland in this region and then again severing this region to the north which is not depicted on the overlay, be it the Carlson property north...It certainly arises an issue on the values placed on each one. It's a difficult position which you're placed in to make a decision. What's going to be the best for the community. Best solution for the community... . Lash: Well I guess I have a comment and we can probably pussy foot around this all night long but if we want to get right to the, cut to the chase here. The private versus the public park is one of the conditions of the sale of the property. We need to consider as a commission if that has any bearing on our decision. And it's putting us I think in a difficult situation. We hate to be the people to pull the plug on a whole development that's coming in but our decision basically has the power to do that. And maybe we need to look at some kind of other options and do some brainstorming type things, and I have complete respect for the private property owner. I have total respect for the Carlson's and the Song's. It's their property. They can do what they want with it. And if they don't want a public park in, and that's a condition of the sale, I don't look at that right now as being my problem. What we need to look at is what is going to service the residents. Serve the residents of our city. If this condition is something that the Carlson's, while they are property owners, are feeling very strong about, we need to 29 Park and Rec Commission July 27, 1993 - Page 30 . respect that but maybe it's something that we can look at as a future solution that if the Carlsons were no longer the property owner, the title could revert to the city. Because that would be a condition of our's at the development of his property or the sale of his property because I look at that as basically the whole crux of this problem. It's a deal breaker and if it's not something that the Carlson's and the Song's are flexible on, and you know Mr. Carlson had good comments on the draw of this property of this park. Who's going to come to it? I think he did the same, he was the perfect spokesperson for us. We were saying it's not going to be drawing in throngs of people from all over the metro area and so therefore that's where we have the problem with not making it be public because we can't understand the problem with it. If the fear is that it's going to be bring in lots of traffic or undesireable people, I dont't think that you're going to see that as the case. As Larry said earlier, and I think you stated it yourself, the only people who are going to come are going to be the people who live fairly close. Jerome Carlson: May I respond to you? Lash: Yeah. And maybe you're open to some suggestions, and I don't know how much you guys have hashed this over. Maybe you've talked it over to death, I don't know but. . Jerome Carlson: I need to clarify. I gave an impression which was not accurate. As I have explained to Terry this evening, and the Song's and I have spoke, I think it's important for the Song's and for myself to make the Song's and my position real clear. We don't know if a public park would necessarily be a deal breaker. If a public park were the decision of the Commission, we would be absolutely opposed to this location because that is not, that would be a deal breaker. We don't want the public park in a place that can be looking into our living room windows. That's not why we bought that land. It's not why we paid all the money we paid and pay all the taxes that we pay. Would the location of a public park somewhere else on the property break the deal? That would probably be largely up to the Lundgren's. They're paying the money and I spoke with Todd. My comments to Todd, there were 3 things that the Song's and the Carlson's were primarily concerned about. If there was going to be a public park in the final analysis, that it would be in a location that would not be viewed or in fact be disruptive to the serenity that we are working hard and paying for to protect. Right around that wetland. Second, that it not have lights. Todd's indication to me was that there may be other alternatives and there would be no lights. And third, that if the Lundgren . 30 . . . Park and Rec Commission July 27, 1993 - Page 31 Bros viewed that ,as a deal breaker, then we would be opposed to that because the Song's clearly have wrestled with the issue of selling their property a great deal and have come to grips with that and have chosen another homesite on the north end of the property. The Song's never asked for the MUSA line to be around their property. That was not their hope. That was not their dream. They never solicited the city. They never came down and supported it one meeting. It simply happened to them. So now they are responding to that and there are forces at work with pipe lines and sewer lines and what have you that need to be dealt with and this whole thing is kind of a big issue, part of which is the question of the park. So I want to make it clear what our position is on the park. We felt this was a fine location for an association park because it would be smaller and it would be bermed and treed in a manner and it wouldn't have the traffic that one could expect that close to Galpin if it were in fact an open public park. And we agreed with that. Schroers: Mr. Carlson I don't, I hope we're not giving the impression here that when we talk public park we're talking about clearing land and flattening out and putting in ballfields and lights. We are saying that the concept of that park is desireable. It's nice in the location. The amenities that you're offering would be fine. We don't have a problem with it. The only problem we have is calling it private. Just make it a public park and that's that. We're not thinking about putting in ballfields and lights and that sort of thing in there. Your plan, your concept is fine. The only thing that we can't buy is private other than public. I mean we just cannot do that. Lash: And if Lundgren is willing, Lundgren Bros is willing to move it to a site that's acceptable to you, I don't have a problem with that at all. Jerome Carlson: I don't know that that's the case. I think they've already got commitments for a park on the other side and my impression is that by providing that uniqueness of the tennis courts and the private park as a part of what people want today, therefore it becomes a marketing tool. As a businessman I can completely understand that approach. Give people what they really are going to use and want and you're going to have good customers and I think that's what I see them doing in this process. Trying to assure themselves that it will have the kinds of amenities that people are really wanting and needing. If there's 4-4 1/2 acres dedicated to a city park, if I remember my conversation with Todd, in lieu of any fees of any kind, there's no date by which it's known that that park would in fact ever be furnished. 31 Park and Rec Commission July 27, 1993 - Page 32 e. And so you know when I look at this I say, take the money and run and with all due respect to Mr. Stockdale, if he's willing to sell his land to a developer for $24,000.00 or $25,000.00 or $30,000.00 an acre, why would you care if you sold it to the park committee? Who do you care who you sell it to if you get, as the initial landowner, if you get what you want. I'm not trying to speak for you. It just doesn't make sense to me that you would be extraplating this out as to the value to a developer once it was developed. Schroers: He's talking his acreage is 17 acres. We're buying 5 of it. He doesn't have enough acreage then left over to develop. It ruins his whole development. We just continually run into this and the same thing that you're telling us we've heard from Opus and everybody else that wants to develop in this city. Take our money and buy someone else's property. I mean I think that it's really generous to offer someone else's property. We can't buy that. I'm telling you, we cannot sit here and do that. No way. Jerome Carlson: Then I would at least suggest to you that you take a look at the property and decide, is this the right property to try to bulldoze and flatten and put a real useable park in for the public? I maintain. Schroers: We're saying that that's not the type of park that we need or want there. We need a neighborhood park. We're not talking about bringing in any bulldozers and leveling and building ballfields and putting up lights. Your concept for the park, Lundgren Bros concept for the park is fine. It would work out, no problem. The only problem is the private and the public. There's the problem right there. It's just that simple. e Jerome Carlson: Well I hope I've made our feelings clear. We are, the private/public thing is not a serious issue to us. If it's public, the location is a serious issue up front and if it's a deal breaker in Lundgren's mind, then it becomes a serious issue. I don't know that that's the case. I really don't. Lash: Thanks for clarifying that. We needed to hear that. Schroers: Okay. Mr. Hoffman. Hoffman: In an attempt to, as we look at the potential scenarios which could be concluded here, I think it's my responsibility to flush out some issues that you would be faced with. Let's take a look at if the association park were to be public. If that would be an alternative. That would then most likely, due to e 32 .. Park and Rec Commission July 27, 1993 - Page 33 precedence setting and handling park and trail fee credit, that then for the acquisition from the use of that property as a public park space, you would pay the penalty of crediting the park and trail fees, or the park fees, excuse me, as a part of that development. So again that would come into play. It would be a penalty. We would have to most likely credit those dollars for the land acquisition itself and the applicant is correct in stating then that we're faced with as a commission and as a city with developing the property. So it comes down to a very difficult value judgment on where you place that value in taking a look and considering all those different resources and all those different issues as you think through the process. Andrews: Just briefly, we talked about $138,000.00 of park fees, plus what we'd have to spend to develop it. I think we're looking at a quarter of a million dollars if we were going to build that park ourselves. And have it ready to use. Schroers: Okay, we're going to take one more statement here and then we're going to move on. . Andrews: We have some new people here too. Schroers: Okay. One moment please. Charles Song: I'm Charles Song. I'm the owner of that property concern. Since my neighbors all expressed their concerns, so I think I should express my own too. Mr. Carlson has stated my concern and my wife's concern very well. I think I need not add much to it. But just my major concern is that since this area is, does not have a flat place and it's very difficult to be a public park there, and if for some reason you force Lundgren Bros to go back on the deal and if our sale does not go through, that's our concern. Then I think the area will not be developed for quite a while. I think Lundgren Bros is a very good developer and that's why we chose to sell it to them. And if this becomes the deal breaker, then I think it will probably take a while, maybe I don't know how many years, before this will come up again and then it will remain undeveloped. Thank you. . Schroers: This is the final say and then we're going to have to move on this issue in order to get along with, move onto other city business. Terry Forbord: Mr. Chair, members of the Parks Commission. I just want to make a couple comments here. There's a misnomer in belief that because you have a large piece of property that you 33 ,. Park and Rec Commission July 27, 1993 - Page 34 can afford to do something like this and if you only have 20 acres and develop, that it's going to impact that person more. It's a deal breaker as much for our development, even though it's 100 acres, as it is for somebody who's developing 20. Lay people who are not in my business may not understand that but originally when park dedication fees, from the philosophy behind that was established years and years ago and the statutes were passed giving the city the authority to utilize that too to collect monies, there was some balance in it. And the Park Director can support that I'm sure because we've talked about it. But Mr. Stockdale stated that if that 5 acres was taken from him, it not only was the cost of the land. There's the cost of lost profit that is lost as a result of the taking. Now that same thing occurs whether you have 100 acres or 200 acres or 400 acres. Now if you look at the Song property, this is something I didn't get into because I wasn't sure if you'd care, but maybe you do care. This is not a normal piece of property from a physical constraint analysis. You can clearly see how much of the property is wetland...Most of this open terrain makes it valuable. Okay now when we go out and buy property, those of you who follow us for years, we try to...we try to buy the absolute best piece of property we can. We pay a premium for the property...but when you look at the net developable acreage and you take the total... you can't use, then if you look at your price per acre, it would shock you. The numbers you were hitting around here tonight would be a joke. I wish I could buy property for that. You can't. So the point...there's this incredible risk when a company like ours tries to make what is not a vanilla neighborhood because we have no desire to create a vanilla neighborhood. There's plenty of other land developers out there that are happy to do that. What we're trying to do is we're willing to go the extra mile and have some time...to put in the most unique things and obviously the city...so what we try to do, to minimize our exposure to risk...minimize that risk, all of a sudden the deal is nowhere near where it was when...I'd like to pose the question, if Lundgren Bros was able. Again, I'm not exactly sure what kind of park you're looking for or if there's some other type of a unique thing that would...and you would consider that an alternative. But maybe Lundgren Bros, because of the total amount of land that we have to...Maybe there's someway we can come up with some other thing that the Park Commission would look at and say well you know, if we can't get a public park there, maybe Lundgren Bros can come up with some other idea...all the residents of Chanhassen. And I was sitting here listening to all of you and I'm thinking about it and I thought of a couple ideas...and you might say you know, maybe Lundgren Bros couldn't do this but they could do this and they 34 e. e e . Park and Rec Commission July 27, 1993 - Page 35 . came up with this idea and if they're willing to do that for public benefit and not private, maybe we'd look differently... And it just hit me as I was sitting here so I really haven't had time to develop and think about it and I haven't had a chance to talk to Peter about it but maybe what I could ask to do is table action on this tonight. Give me a chance to sit down with staff and make some adjustments and then see what they think about it and if they think it's good, maybe we could bring it back... Schroers: I would consider that. I think that that would be a smart thing to do since this is such an important issue. I think that if you like your plan the way it's proposed to us and you want to put those amenities, the tennis court, the basketball court, and all that in your development and sell it to us as is, all you have to do is label that park public. Don't have to advertise it. You don't have to encourage outside people to come in there. I mean that to me is a quick easy sell. Just designate that as public park and we would love to see that development there. If you want to work out some other options with staff, we'd love to see something that staff would be in favor of and we would like and you would like and I'm willing to ask for a motion to table this, if that's what you'd like to do. Lash: So moved. Berg: Second. Schroers: Due to a possible conflict of interest, Chairman Andrews is not going to vote on this item. Okay, so it's been motioned and seconded. Lash moved, Berg seconded that the Park and Recreation Commission table action on the land development proposal for 115 single family lots on the song property. All voted in favor, except Commissioner Andrews who did not vote because of a conflict of interest, and the motion carried. . Terry Forbord: Thank you very much. Just one final comment. I hope that you all accept my apology that I gave earlier this evening. Again, we regret the situation. It's our goal as professionals and certainly as adults to not have these things happen and so I ask each of you, if you would consider that and please accept it and it won't happen again. Schroers: I think you can consider your apology accepted and we would just like to work hard with everybody involved to end up with the best final product here possible. But remember that we 35 Park and Rec Commission July 27, 1993 - Page 36 . have a framework that we have to. Berg: I guess one other thing I'd like you to think about, when you're talking to staff. What I'm hearing is that the practicality of the park that you're proposing and the site you're proposing...certainly respect those too. I guess I wish you'd look at the concept or the thought of a public park somewhere else in the development as a possibility. Andrews: Terry, is the plat finalized for that Turner/Dolejsi property? Terry Forbord: It's in the process of final plat. Andrews: Just glancing at the contour map, is there an area roughly in the center where the two properties adjoint that's relatively, more flat? Terry Forbord: To be honest with you, this is a, and staff will concur with this. Especially engineering department because they've had to live with it too. It's a really unusual piece of property. There's hardly any flat area anywhere on it except for . right by TH 41. I mean it's just a very. Lash: What about by the time you're done? Terry Forbord: Well obviously there will be some grading that occurs. The intent on obviously from our standpoint is to always minimize grading because it ends up costing a lot of money and we realize we've learned through years of experience that we're best to leave it as natural as possible. Thank you very much for your consideration. Berg: I'd like to know too the practicality of any other land that could be developed...so we know what potential we have in other sites. LAND DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL: 20 SINGLE FAMILY LOTS LOCATED JUST SOUTH OF HERON DRIVE ON THE ESAT SIDE OF AUDUBON ROAD. SHENANDOAH RIDGE. SHAMROCK DEVELOPMENT. Hoffman: Thank you Chairman Schroers and Commission members. I would like to move 5 behind 6 and 7. I need to apologize to Mr. Todd Owens who is here this evening. Between noon and 3:30, the timing of the Lundgren presentation went from 7:30 to 9:30 and back a couple of times. Inbetween that time I had talked to Mr. 36 . ....,.. . . . Park and Rec Commission July 27, 1993 - Page 37 Owens and said Lundgren is going to be on at 9:30 thus he would be early on the agenda. Mr. Greg Reed is also here for item number 6 so if we can take those two successively, I would appreciate that. Schroers: Okay, very good. We will put item 5 on hold and we will go to item 6 first and then 7. Is that fine? LAND DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL: PRELIMINARY PLAT TO SUBDIVIDE 4 ACRES INTO 4 SINGLE FAMILY LOTS ON PROPERTY LOCATED AT 6301 CHURCH ROAD, CHURCH ROAD ADDITION, GREG REED. Hoffman: Thank you Chairman Schroers. This is a plat to' subdivide 4 acres into 4 single family lots on property zoned residential single family. Again it's Church Road Addition. This is very near to Cathcart Park which is just across Church Road and to the north slightly, depending on how you look at the configuration of the 4 acres. Adjacent zonings are all residential single family. The City's comprehensive plan identifies that Cathcart Park located immediately across the street fulfills the city's park requirement standard for the Church Road Addition. In regard to comprehensive trail plan. The city's trail plan does not identify any trails immediately adjacent to that property. The property being subdivided. Church Road however is the natural connection between the north railroad corridor trail, which is currently in place and being utilized by the public, and the Minnewashta Parkway trail not being constructed. If there ever was a reason, it's not a good crossing point obviously at Highway 7 but you will surely find that some people will want to come out of the West Minnewashta region, cross the road and come up Church Road and then get onto the trailway. From staff's perspective, typically that probably would be bicyclists who would not bother them to ride on on street anyway but I wanted to bring it to the commission's attention for discussion if you so choose. The recommendation made by staff this evening in regards to parks and trails, is that full park and trail fees be accepted as a part of the platting the Church Road Addition. These fees to be collected at the rate in force upon building permit application for each of the applications made. Current park and trail fees are $600.00 and $200.00 respectively. Furthermore, it is recommended that the Commission consider the merits including Church Road as in the comprehensive trail plan as stated earlier. Lash: So you're just recommending that we ask for trail easement along there or trail construction or what? Hoffman: No. Just to consider adding it to the comprehensive 37 Park and Rec Commission July 27, 1993 - Page 38 . plan. We don't have a plan to put a trail there so asking for an easement would not be justified and the small portion of frontage which this applicant has on Church Road, which is on the east side of Church Road, is a small issue comparatively speaking. If a trail would go in there, it most likely would go on the west side because of all the park frontage. Makes it easy to acquire the rights to put that trail in. Schroers: Would the applicant object to the easement? Greg Reed: No. I wouldn't object to it. Schroers: Okay. Any further commission discussion? I'm ready to entertain a motion. Berg: I recommend that full park and trail fees be accepted as part of the platting of the Church Road Addition. That these fees to be collected at the rate in force upon building permit application. Andrews: What about the easements? Do you want to have that too? . Berg: Also that the Commission consider the merits of including a Church Road trail connection to the regional railroad corridor trail in the city's comprehensive plan and how would I add about the easement? . Andrews: You did but instead of having us consider it, why don't you just have us request the easement. Berg: Okay, request the easement. Schroers: Okay, is there a second? Lash: Second. Berg moved, Lash seconded that the Park and Recreation Commission recommend to accept full park and trail fees as part of the platting of the Church Road Addition. These fees to be collected at the rate in force upon building permit application. Furthermore, it is recommended that the commission request an easement for including a Church Road trail connection to the Regional Railroad Corridor Trail in the City's Comprehensive Plan. All voted in favor and the motion carried. 38 . _'.c- -. '-:,-~.', ~,.. '. . . Park and Rec Commission July 27, 1993 - Page 39 Hoffman: That's it. And Greg, just for clarification. That easement then would be recorded upon the property if a trail ever was constructed and went on the other side of the road. Greg Reed: ...and how big is that? Hoffman: 20 foot easement. Greg Reed: Do I put that in... Hoffman: Correct. It would be recorded as part of the plat. And then that would become a condition of approval of the planning report. LAND DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL. VACATION OF PORTION OF RIGHT-OF-WAY ON HOPI ROAD AND PRELIMINARY PLAT TO SUBDIVIDE A 50.443 SO.FT. PARCEL INTO 3 SINGLE FAMILY LOTS ON PROPERTY LOCATED AT 6661 NEZ PERCE. TJO ADDITION. TODD OWENS. Hoffman: Chairman Schroers, Commission members. They just keep getting smaller. Now we're talking about square feet, not acreages. This is what you would call a remnent parcel of a developable land within a residential neighborhood. Present zoning is residential single family. All adjacent zonings are similar. The location is very near to Carver Beach Park, as the location map. Is there a location map included? Or was that admitted. I apologize for that admission. I'll put. Lash: You know what, it's attached to the packet before. Or wait a minute. Maybe it's the one before that. It's number 5. Hoffman: Collating problem...Carver Beach Park is located then just across Nez Perce and to the south about 600 feet. That, Carver Beach Park does fulfill the city's park requirement standards as identified in the city's comprehensive plan. To get our bearings. Carver Beach Park would be located to the south of here. South and west actually. If any Commissions have questions on where we are, Larry you probably know where it is. Schroers: Yeah. Hoffman: In regard to trails, the city's comprehensive trail plan does not identify any trails immediately adjacent to this subdivision. There is a narrative attached that you could read if you're interested. Recommendation in regard to parks and trails. It's recommended that full park and trail fees be accepted as a part of the platting of the TJO Addition. These 39 ~ Park and Rec Commission July 27, 1993 - Page 40 fees to be collected at a rate in force upon buiding permit application and the current, just for information sake, are $600.00 and $200.00 respectively. Schroers: I think on this item we could just say so moved and is there a second. Andrews: I'll second. Schroers moved, Andrews seconded that the Park and Recreation Commission recommend that full park and trail fees be accepted a a part of the platting of the TJO Addition. These fees to be collected at the rate in force upon building permit application. All voted in favor and the motion carried. LAND DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL. 20 SINGLE FAMILY LOTS LOCATED JUST SOUTH OF HERON DRIVE ON THE EAST SIDE OF AUDUBON ROAD. SHENANDOAH RIDGE. SHAMROCK DEVELOPMENT. Hoffman: This is rezoning of 11.5 acres of property currently zoned planned unit development and agricultural estate to rural single family and a preliminary plat to subdivide that same 11.5 acres into 20 single family lots. The title of the plat is Shenandoah Ridge. The location, have you found the location? This is just south of Heron Drive, off of Audubon. The west entrance to Lake Susan Hills West. Heron Drive and then just immediately south is the William Molnau property known as the... property in question. I think the adjacent zonings are clear in regard to the comprehensive plan. The site is located in close proximity to Power Hill Park and Sunset Ridge Park. The proposed Osprey Lane, as you can see on the blue line print there, will eventually connect to the existing Osprey Lane of Lake Susan Hills West. Once that connection is made, upon entering the Lake Susan Hills West, a trail connection to Power Hill is available within 1,000 feet. So you enter Lake Susan West, travel the ring road there, there's a trail stub which comes out and provides you access to Power Hill Park. Access to Sunset Ridge Park would require a walk or bicycle ride of 1/3 mile. In regard to the trail plan, the comprehensive trail plan does identify a trail abutting this proposed plat along Audubon Road. The trail currently terminates just south of, or excuse me. Just north of the subdivision at Heron Drive, as mentioned earlier. The existing trail is constructed, to the best of my knowledge at this time approximately 1 foot outside the residential property line in the right-Of-way of Audubon Road. Recommendations in this regard. It is recommended that land acquisition not be pursued in favor of park fees. And then the fees to be collected 40 . . . '. Park and Rec Commission July 27, 1993 - Page 41 . at time of building permit application at the rate in force. Just a point of clarification and asside. You'll hear that in my recommendations time and time again but it is going to become very important as park and trail fees are probably going to escalate fairly quickly over the next few years. So it becomes important to clarify that fees to be paid at the rate then in force upon building permit application. The city has found itself in a position where park and trail fees have been quoted at todays rate. That's gone into the development contract. Four years down the road you're stuck with that rate so that's the reasoning for that. Trails. It is recommended that as a condition of approval of the Shenandoah Ridge, the applicant shall construct a portion of the city's comprehensive trail system previously described in it's report. Specifically that being from the southern curb of Heron Drive to the terminus of Lot 4, Block 2. That's at the southern reaches of the development. This trail to be 8 feet in width with bituminous surfacing per standard city specifications. In consideration for this construction, trail and park fees will be reduced by an amount equal to the cost of construction. The reason for that language is trail fees are not going to cover that construction. Said cost to be determined by the application for presentation to the city with documentation for verification. Current park and trail fees again are $600.00 and $200.00 per single family unit respectively. I did receive a call from a representative of John Oliver and Associates today. They did not dispute staff's recommendation and were comfortable with that recommendation. Andrews: Can we do a so moved again? Hoffman: Sure. Andrews: So moved. Schroers: Second. . Andrews moved, Schroers seconded that the Park and Recreation commission recommend to accept full park fees in lieu of land acquisition. Fees to be collected at the time of building permit application at the rate then in force. The application shall construct a portion of the city's comprehensive trail system previously described in the report. specifically from the southern curb of Heron Drive to the southern terminus of Lot 4, Block 2. This trail to be 8 feet in width with bituminous surfacing per standard city specifications. In consideration for this construction, trail and park fees will be reduced by an amount equal to the cost of construction. said costs to be 41 Park and Rec Commission July 27, 1993 - Page 42 .' determined by the applicant for presentation to the city with documentation for verification. Current park and trail fees are $600.00 and $200.00 per single family unit respectively. All voted in favor and the motion carried. ESTABLISH AN AGENDA FOR THE 1993 JOINT CITY COUNCIL/PARK AND RECREATION COMMISSION MEETING. Hoffman: Chairman Schroers, that is your item. Andrews: I've got several. Schroers: Go ahead. Start with Jim. Andrews: This is one I've talked about before and that is talking to the City Council about providing a city budget funding for replacement and maintenance of our equipment that we're now buying with our capital improvement funds on an ongoing basis. I know that virtually all cities are operating that way and I feel that as we add more and more parks, it's going to become more and more important that we have a budget for that purpose. My second item was, and I don't know how the timing of this would work but . would be to discuss with the Council their participation in the Lake Minnewashta Park. The new proposed park. I think that's got to be really important. Third item has to do with the Highway 5 project and that would be trying to relay our wishes as far a the quality and types of underpasses and bridges that would be part of that project. What weld like to see. And the third item I had was a park and trail fee increase. Four things. Berg: I would agree too. The one I would add to that I think in terms of priority to make sure the City Council understands how important we see the development with District #112 with the new park by the new elementary school. I know going with the meeting we had last week, they need some direction from us. I think we have to give that to them. Very, very clearly and strongly that we want to see the city go together with the district and work on a community park up there. Lash: I would want to add to that. I think the point of 2 hours worth of conversation is, in the future if we would like to make a condition that the developers do more development at the direction of the Park and Recreation Commission at the time of their construction of their development. And as long as we spent so much time talking about the merits of private versus public tonight, maybe we should get a little input from City Council and 42 . '. . . Park and Rec Commission July 27, 1993 - Page 43 see if we're on the same track as they are or if they would be more open to that idea than we appear to be. Andrews: Kind of along with what Jan was saying about maybe altering what is customarily required from our developers. I know some of our motions were adding things like benching of the trails. Grading of lots and perhaps that should now become just standard city ordinance rather than an addendum to our motion. It saves us money. It saves us discussing it over and over again. It also puts the expectation out in public and out in front of the developer. So they just know that that's expected. Lash: Well I think Lundgren Bros and Mr. Carlson both said, we need to start working more with the private sector and maybe that means making higher expectations from them. Schroers: And what I would like to see discussed of avenues of possible park funding from the city's general fund. See if we can get allocated some monies to work with. Hoffman: Jim's number one. Andrews: It sort of is but it's more detailed perhaps. We have developed a lot as a city and I think we have to start comparing ourselves to cities that have also gone through the same growth process and what our target population is versus what our current population is. I guess I look at Eden prairie in particular and I see their constant development and improvement of their parks. I get very frustrated with the way that we're funded and I feel like it's, we're not given a real fair opportunity at the city's tax revenue as our city grows. I'm kind of lecturing here but I think the Council needs to re-evaluate where we're at as a city as far as how we fund our park development. That's why that's important to me. Manders: One other big item, and I don't know if this is the time to talk about it being it's come up so many other times. But the community center...anything be resolved in that whole line of discussion. Andrews: We can certainly ask to be consulted before they have a design next time. Lash: I think we were this time. Schroers: Any other ideas? 43 Park and Rec Commission ~. July 27, 1993 - Page 44 Roeser: Is there anything still open on the Bandimere Park? In terms of what we.can do or options? Schroers: You mean with the trade? I think the trade is a done deal. Andrews: It's a dead deal. Schroers: Yeah. Andrews: It's a dead done deal. Roeser: That's the impression I got and that's where it's being left then? Okay. Hoffman: But staff is still pursuing the potential of acquisition of adjoining properties as the property to the north develops. The question of funding certainly still remains for development. Schroers: Okay. Anything else on for an agenda item? If not. Andrews: Anything, Todd do you have anything? Hoffman: I didn't take the opportunity to think through that. As I go through here certainly if we can get through all of these, that's enough. If there's one that sticks in my mind I will make mention of it. I will inform the Commission of when that will be scheduled. I'm not sure if the Council is going to prefer a before Councilor before Park Commission night or if they're going to prefer a separate night. Do you have any preference on location? Where do you feel comfortable? ~ Schroers: This is the easiest. Lash: I feel that if it's scheduled before a Council meeting or before our meeting, we're going to be really rushed. Andrews: I agree. We need a separate time. Hoffman: An off night. In all fairness to the Council, I have discussed the issue of the supplementary funding from the general tax revenues during budget hearings with the Council. We have not presented it from a Park and Recreation Commission perspective so I think they'll receptive and interested to hear but budgetary times are, with the breaking new ground, certainly ~ when budgets are developed, to increase something in one place, ~ 44 '. . . Park and Rec Commission July 27, 1993 - Page 45 you have to justify the increase because something else is going to get reduced so that's going to be our. Andrews: I just think it's really important that we just have to keep after it. I mean it's all, you're right. We're working with a fixed number of dollars and it's an allocation decision and you get allocation by showing that your need is more severe than somebody elses and I don't feel that we could make any mistake by talking to the Council and saying it is a problem and it's going to get to be a bigger and bigger problem. Berg: We might not get it the first time but we've got to start. Schroers: Okay. Well we've got enough to work on there to keep us busy for a work session no doubt. SECOND OUARTER PARK AND TRAIL FEE REVENUE REPORT. PERIOD ENDING JUNE 30. 1993. Hoffman: I'll simply answer any questions that the Commission members have. Again we've got budgeted revenues of $185,000.00. Collected to date, 69, close to $70,000.00 so that is below, percentage wise it's below our 50% end of the year but I participated in a meeting today with the issue of the National Weather Service coming in as part of the Chan Business Center. There's $30,000.00 in park fees on line there, if that project becomes a reality so. Schroers: Okay, good. Any questions from the commission members? 1993 4TH OF JULY CELEBRATION EVALUATION. Ruegemer: I'm sure you've all reviewed the evaluations. At this time I guess I'm going to go through every event stated. If there's any specific questions that the commission members might have pertaining to a certain portion of the 4th of July or this document, I would entertain those questions... Lash: I have a couple of questions and comments. The first thing is, what's the Happy Hurricane? I didn't even know what that was. Ruegemer: The Happy Hurricane was kind of the Moonwalk... Lash: Oh okay. I underlined the comment here where it says, turkey franks weren't great, and that's being polite. Don't ever do that again. And then when you were talking about people 45 Park and Rec Commission July 27, 1993 - Page 46 .' leaving early. I noticed that too and I think, did we, I hate to ask this question but did we spray for mosquitoes? Hoffman: No, we did not. It's against your policy. Lash: I know. Because that was part of the problem. I mean the mosquitoes were horrible. Hoffman: Plenty of mosquitoes, no doubt. Lash: And then I thought, if part of your goal was to get people to stay around longer or if you want to end it earlier, I guess it doesn't matter to me but you know a lot of people leave right after the prize board is over. So we could prolong that a little bit if you want to have people last longer. I don't know. And then, I had another thing too. For the schedule for next year where you've got Friday night the street dance and then Saturday and then Sunday is nothing? Ruegemer: Saturday there will be events and Sunday would be. Lash: Right, Sunday was nothing. SO what if you looked at the schedule as being Saturday the dance, and then Sunday the family kids games and then Monday the same as what you had scheduled. And also that ties in with people leaving early. I think half the people have worked all day Friday. They're shot and they start to run out of gas about 11:00 and trickle home. So if you want to keep people there until midnight and keep the band, then maybe move it to Saturday instead, unless that's a problem with the band. . Ruegemer: No, I don't think...at this point but I guess as Dawn and I worked through this evaluation we tried to kind of map out some different scenarios. Next year kind of maps out the same way this year did as far as kind of being an extended, you know if people are taking an extended or long weekend. I think they're more apt to stay Friday night versus...or wherever they might go for 4th of July weekend. Stay that night and then leave in the morning versus staying Friday night and again Saturday night...but into the plans for the weekend. So we tried to make our, I guess our biggest or our premiere event on the 4th of July and keep that a night when people might be more apt to attend. But we're certainly open for suggestions at this point. This is just a real rough schedule or a tool that we can use for next year. Hoffman: Got no facts to base that upon. . 46 '. . . Park and Rec Commission July 27, 1993 - Page 47 Lash: Either they stay in town for the whole caboddle or they leave Friday night, I think. But if I was going out of town, I wouldn't just stay for the street dance. I'd be gone Friday night but. Meger: Just a general comment about the kiddie parade and the start time. I heard a lot of people talking in the parking lot that they had seen it at two different times and two difference places. One said I think at 5:30 in the paper and then a brochure that was distributed...so there was some confusion there. Hoffman: We were aware of that unfortunately. Meger: My one comment and you were aware of it. Lash: I think there was a little mixup with the newspaper wasn't there? Hoffman: Yep. Schroers: Anything further? I heard, unfortunately I was my basement most 4th of July positive comments so. I think all and all everything that involved with getting water out of weekend but I heard generally very Ruegemer: Commission Schroers too, I'd like to thank all the commission members too that did help out with the celebration. We certainly appreciate going above and beyond the...thank everybody again for assisting in that overall success. Roeser: I thought I read something about having a booth or something as a possibility for next year. Ruegemer: We had, Dawn and I discussed that. Going through the evaluation process of getting involved with the trade fair... (There was a tape change at this point in the meeting.) Hoffman: ...to the north there on the grass. I think that would be a huge draw because as staff and volunteers and we have a difficult time meeting the demand for those type of amenities. And what I encourage staff to do is try to contract or make arrangements to do is have as much done for us as possible on those busy type of events. If we can contract with a supplier of these kiddie carnivals. Have them come in and set up and operate the thing on a ticket basis or whatever, I think we're doing 47 Park and Rec Commission July 27, 1993 - Page 48 .' ourselves a service and I think we're doing the public a service as part of the event. They just love those things. They eat them up. They can't get enough of those little kiddie games. Schroers: I would add that onto the agenda for consideration for the 1994 4th of July celebration and also we need to talk about whether or not we should allow vendors in that event. Lash: I've always been a proponent to the kiddie carnival because I always liked it without that trap. That parents get sucked into. I mean it's just a money trap and I just hate that because your kids just two buck you to death on those things, you know. And even the, I always sound like such a cheapscape don't I, but I am. But the NASA ride cost me $6.00 you know and it's just one thing I've always liked about these city things is you can go up there and there's some activities for the kids and the adults can sit around and visit and it doesn't have to cost you $40.00 to go up there and pop for your kids to go on every ride 10 times. And my kids have always really, really liked the little games and I like that too. They can go and play for a quarter and it keeps them busy all night long. I would prefer . just have a few more games and skip the rides but I'm open to argue with anybody about it next year so. Schroers: Yeah, as long as it's on the agenda we can. Lemme: If I could say something. If we're considering a carnival, especially for 4th of July weekend... Andrews: Let's put it on as quick as we can then. Lemme: I would say within the next couple months. Andrews: Maybe we could get a provider to come in and give us some idea of. Schroers: Also about the vendors on there as well. It's an issue that came up that we're going to be confronting at some point in time. We may as well get a head start on it. Hoffman: I think the Commission's going to find it hard to stay out of the free, not free debate too so you're welcome to get involved in that. . 48 . Park and Rec Commission July 27, 1993 - Page 49 ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS: A. RESPONSE FROM EARL F. ANDERSON/LANDSCAPE STRUCTURES. INC. PLAYGROUND SAFETY. Hoffman: Item 11 represents an important item for what you would call documentation of allegations presented against the city in regard to safety of playground. The letter which went out to Earl F. Anderson included, I think it's 24 pictures. 23 pictures of alleged allegations which were brought to the attention of the Park and Receation Department so the letter is there addressing that. The responses, I've reviewed them. I find the responses justifiable or in line with what I see happening in those pictures. But again it is an important issue. One which we cannot take lightly and one that I continue not to take lightly in light of all the new regulations. CPSC. We just got through with a new 1991 CPSC guidelines and now there will be some new guidelines called ASTM's coming out in the late fall of 1993 so we need to keep abreast of those type of situations. . Lash: that. that? So their comments like installation issue or things like Are we dealing with, is the maintenance staff dealing with Hoffman: Correct. The one, number 5, an installation issue was where they had some parallel rungs, handbars where when they matched up the two components they were off an inch and a half so they put in a 2 x 4. Now you'd be hard pressed, or 2 x 6 to make that. You'd be hard pressed to find a problem with that in a court of law, in my opinion but it simply was alleged that this is a problem and this is the response. I'm comfortable with it. Andrews: Was the person that pointed out all these defiencies somebody that was involved in the sale or marketing of landscape equipment or services? . Hoffman: Yes. No questions in that regard, I think 11, the second issue as a part of 11(a) is in regard to signage. And again here I received a call from a concerned resident and business person in town discussing an issue of, that the city's play apparatus locations are not signed for age appropriateness. Thus when, I think his children happen to be 2 1/2 year old twins. 2 year old twins and the caller stated that they did not think the equipment was appropriate for their children or the children they were supervising to be playing on it. They came down the slides too fast. They couldn't reach the rungs, etc. When asked what corrective action the city was going to take, my 49 Park and Rec Commission July 27, 1993 - Page 50 . initial response was that the caller had said they were the supervisor of these children and that they did not think the equipment was appropriate. Thus they had an option there to make the choice not to allow the childrento play on it. But I wanted the opinion because the CPSC guidelines do make reference to signage and age appropriateness. Thus I asked the opinion of the supplier of all the equipment that the city represents, not including the school site, and that is Earl F. Anderson Landscape structures. Thus here you have the response where they would not recommend that we sign the sites because then you start putting out potentially confusing, conflicting information. It costs a lot of money, etc. That's, all I have there. Schroers: Okay. Are you ready to move to the summer program update? B. SUMMER PROGRAM UPDATE. Dawn Lemme gave this summer program update, which was not picked up by the microphones. c. PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT: FALL/WINTER 1993. . Dawn Lemme gave a presentation on this item, which was not picked up by the microphones. Lash: Last year didn't you have an idea of having, not a flea market but where people could bring produce and like that to sell. Lemme: We did have a... Schroers: How about a softball tournament along with the September fest? Ruegemer: That's usually been coordinated in the past on that same weekend... Lash: It does go into the evening already doesn't it? You want it to go longer? Lemme: In the past we've... Hoffman: We've made arrangement for a two band situation so the umpa bands in there from the dinner hour and then we pick it up with the Killer Hayseeds. Keep the action rolling a little bit. In regard to the farmer's market, we can invite all of the . 50 '. Park and Rec Commission July 27, 1993 - Page 51 individual farmer market people that are around the communities here to come in and do a one day vending option. senior citizens. Roeser: Senior citizens would love that idea. Hoffman: They've been approached. Lash: I mean they could do like canning and pies and I mean you could have all kinds of stuff like that couldn't you? Or crafts. ...Like crocheted things and whatever kinds of things they do. Hoffman: The petting zoo and the horse rides are coming back, so that will be a part of it. We'll be involved with the Lion's on concessions. Again it will, in the past I think we've had two service lines which has been a drawback. We're going to work with the Lions to try and make that thing flow a little more smoothly. . Lash: Maybe we could throw in there, did I read this or, somewhere I thought it was something from school but like a Taste of Chanhassen. Maybe that could pull in Larrys' idea of vendors. Where they could have, you know you could have Subway and Frankie's and Guy's and all those guys come in and have little samples that people could use tickets to buy samples of their things or maybe they'd want to give it away free as promotional things. You could get the ice cream shop. You could pull that in there instead of the 4th of July maybe. . Hoffman: We've had that discussion at a staff level. The problem you have with it is breaks from tradition. The Lions really have come to patting themselves that they are the vendor to make the money. If you bring in a Taste of Chanhassen, typically in those. type of situations, I think in our conversations, you have 10-15 booths set up where that is the food for the evening. You go in there, you pay for it, you buy it. Thus you've cut the Lions out of the deal. Except you could make them the exclusive beverage sponsor which is a big part of it but we would need to approach the Lions and work with them in that regard and that's where we left it. If you think it's a good idea. If you'd like us to pursue it, we will do that. Schroers: I think we should look at it and just close enough to see if, the type of vendors that would be interested would really offer the Lions any significant competition. Lash: Another thing I'd like to throw out for the fall/winter program. Kids touch football, and I know it's been attempted 51 Park and Rec Commission July 27, 1993 - Page 52 e. before and had to be scratched for lack of participation but I wouldn't mind seeing it thrown out again just to see what happens. I think this year was the start of the new Little League in Chan. It shows that that age bracket is maybe expanding now where maybe we would end up with enough interest to have one. I know we went to Chaska last year for it and there were other kids from Chan who had done that. Oh wait, another thing. For Teen Night Out. I remember last year it was getting, the numbers were getting pretty high. If you think that that's a potential problem in keeping control over it, with chaperones and all of that, maybe you want to look at breaking it into grade brackets or something where you have, you could keep your numbers down and maybe keep a little more control going on. Schroers: Anything else on 11(c)? D. 1994 BUDGET PROCESS PREVIEW. Hoffman: ll(d) is an item which I would like to take comments from the commission in regard to questions or resources which you feel you need to discuss the budgetary process. But in addition e to this item there are going to be other items which I will review quickly this evening, which need the attention of the commission, which we obviously cannot get through this evening. The other particular one being the school site, which Commissioner Berg can respond to or enlighten you. On last Monday the Council only had representation by one commission member, Commissioner Berg. Thus I asked this issue of the school site and the recreation component to go back to the Park Commission to be discussed to come up with some resolutions which then can be passed back to the City Council. The big problem is, we're just on a timeframe which even to go the 2 weeks which will get us to the next special Park and Recreation Commission meeting, tentative date is pushing things so Commissioner Berg, if you want to. Berg: There really isn't an awful lot more to add. Just an opportunity that was presented to be able to take, what is it 2.3 and combine it with the school district funds and create quite an incredible park. If the city is willing to commit the TIF dollars. The McGlynn TIF dollars towards that end. They're concerned whether or not they want to do that obviously. They need some feedback from Park and Rec as to whether or not we think that would be important. Schroers: I think that should be on the agenda item for the work e session. 52 '. Park and Rec Commission July 27, 1993 - Page 53 Andrews: I just want to make a quick comment on that. That is that being a member of the Minnetonka School District, there are significant numbers of people that are really wrestling with the two sides of this issue. One is, we'd certainly like to see a nice facility and take advantage of our HRA dollars but at the same time we're providing a school facility that only benefits Chaska School District. It does not benefit Chanhassen citizens attending Minnetonka schools. I'm not going to be the one to ever turn down free dollars but I think we've got to be sensitive to that concern and try to deal with that objection. Berg: In essence what it would provide which would be exclusively for the use of city, during school time and everything else. You might help me as I'm going along here, would be an additional gymnasium. 5 to 6 fields, to be determined whether they be softball, soccer, whatever. That would again be to the exclusive use of the city. . Andrews: I understand. I see the benefit but there are people that are looking at this from the other side and saying, it's a benefit being provided mainly for the benefit of the Chaska School District and not Minnetonka School District. We're paying tax dollars too. Why don't we, how come you don't think about us? And I don't necessarily agree that that's a valid objective but it's out there and I've heard it from more than one person. I'm not one of them but. Berg: It's just that it's such a unique situation. Andrews: Oh I agree. I think we ought to grab it while we can. Lash: And everybody, the kids that go to Minnetonka are playing on the leagues and the things that are going to be using the. Andrews: Sure. I think it's just important that we have the Minnetonka School District people have to be aware that this is a project that will benefit them. Lash: In line with that I think we have to remember that we're having, really struggling with this Bandimere thing. It looks like there's not a big future for that so this is going to be the pressure relief valve that we need that Bandimere was. So you know when you think about the Minnetonka people. If there was a referendum or whatever to do Bandimere, that's coming out of their pocketbook too but it's way over on the other side of town . and how much are they really going to be using that. 53 Park and Rec Commission July 27, 1993 - Page 54 .' Berg: I think it's a matter of selling them too. Making them know what's available there and that it certainly is a 112. Andrews: There's a misconception that it's, you're building a swimming pool and it's being used during school hours and that's the real benefit of the TIF dollars and that's not what's happening but there are people out there that are looking at it that way, and they're upset. And they're just saying, here's just another example of Minnetonka School District being ignored and taking all the dollars and all the programming and. Berg: Yeah but there's school district money involved in that too. Andrews: I understand all that. I'm not saying it's a rational argument. I'm just saying it's out there and we have to make sure that they understand that yeah, it is a facility that's going to be available for non-school use. In fact for. Lash: How would you suggest that we help them to understand that? Put somethng in the paper? . Andrews: tis an irrational argument so I don't know. I think it's a lack of understanding of what's being proposed. I think they don't understand it is going to be a full service park. Manders: Do they have some idea of what we should do with it that would satisfy them? Or is it just anything that happens is not for them. Andrews: I think it's just a matter of educating them that what the facilities that are being considered and that they really are multi-use... Berg: And that it really isn't in combination with the district. The district's building is going to stop here, the way I understand it and what they're talking about with that additional money is an add on to that. There will be 2 or 3 fields, if left alone and the city does not get involved. That number goes to 5 or 6 plus another gymnasium plus a couple small community rooms, a track around the gym and the whole thing. But that doesn't have anything to do with the district other than the fact that the district is going to happen to have a building right next to it. That's what they've got to understand. Andrews: And that's what they don't understand. Anyway. . 54 '. . . Park and Rec Commission July 27, 1993 - Page 55 Hoffman: And we have to all understand that these are just proposals in concepts and if the downtown fell apart, which might too but we hope not. We certainly don't think it will. Schroers: Anything further on the '94 budget process? Lash: Are we supposed to be going through this? Hoffman: I would recommend that the item be tabled. Again I want to hear if there are other resources you need. I know that was a concern last year. To put this on what, the August loth. The second Tuesday of August. Finance has asked for our budgets back by the 6th but that's not a problem with negotiating that. Lash: asked these done. And I have to tell you I'm still, and I'm the one who for this last time, and I'm still confused when I look things. I know you said it but if it's bold it's been If it's italicized, it's what? at Hoffman: Postponed. Lash: Okay, so like as an example if I look at Carver Beach Playground on page 6 and I look at 1993 and it says bleachers, $1,400.00. How am I supposed to know if that's been done or not? Hoffman: The money's there. It hasn't been purchased yet so it's not postponed. Lash: It's still coming? Hoffman: Yes, still coming. Those type of things show up because we're just getting to 1992 backlog work so we're putting picnic benches together that we purchased last year and putting them out on Kerber Blvd. If you've seen those two, they look very nice. So now we're, there was no reason to spend money to take it out of the fund until we have the time to install and put together the equipment. Schroers: Okay. So we need a motion to table this until the August 10th meeting. Andrews moved, Lash seconded to table the 1994 budget process preview until the August 10, 1993 special Park and Recreation commission meeting. All voted in favor and the motion carried. Lash: Also will you make a note. I made a note on the front of this to myself regarding the letter of concern from the 55 Park and Rec Commission July 27, 1993 - Page 56 e. Chanhassen Hills resident. That we make sure and. Schroers: I've got that on commissioner presentations. You're talking about the one from... Hoffman: Excuse me, I do have 4 additional items that I've noted. I think we've talked about one under administrative presentations, which I do need to bring to your attention. I'll make it brief. The school site we have talked about. I would recommend that, if you recall if you've retained your packet of information or you would like additional copies made. I would recommend that we talk about that on the 10th. We will have a schedule from the consultant at that time letting us know exactly. This is the school district document on the elementary school from HGA. Andrews: Are they looking for the wish list from us? Is that what we're trying to accomplish here? Hoffman: I don't think it'd be a wish list. I think it'd be a, they're looking for specific direction because they're going to e be forced to make a decision fairly...quickly after receiving your information so you need to talk about this. Put it on the 10th agenda? Make packets for you. Okay. I'll give you in the updated information. A meeting was held today in the Council . chambers with representatives of the Chanhassen Business Center. You recall that. It's the Audubon '92 Partnership. The Weather Service which I referenced earlier. There's an issue of, they are constructing, as part of their development contract they are asked or required to construct the sidewalks and then the trail which loops around in this conservation easement. I don't expect you to remember it. I just want to explain the concept. Plus they were required to pay park and trail fees. I can honestly not tell you why that requirement was placed on them. Whether it's just, we talked about first about requiring park and trail fees. Full fees and then about development later. I don't recall that the Commission addressed the issue of credit but that's typically been the policy of the commission and Council to give credit where trails are developed by the applicant. They are asking that we consider giving them credit for that. In this instance it adds up to just over $10,000.00 in trail fees. They're constructing just over 600 feet of trail as a part of this application and that ends up to be about $10,000.00 in cost back to the applicant so hear from the commission your opinion in that regard and in fact if you can send me back with some type of information to take to the City council, I will do that. e 56 '. . . Park and Rec Commission July 27, 1993 - Page 57 Andrews: To be consistent we need to give credit. I move that we give them appropriate credit for the construction of this trail that was referenced in the previous comments by Todd Hoffman. Schroers: I will second it. Andrews moved, Schroers seconded that the Park and Recreation Commission recommend that the City Council give trail fee credit as a part of the Chanhassen Business Center in recognition of the e foot wide bituminous trail as described in the development contract between the City of Chanhassen and the Audubon 92 Partnership. All voted in favor and the motion carried. Hoffman: Thank you. Just as a small aside to that. It is interesting that in Lakevi11e they require you to build the trails, if they're identified inthe comp plan, plus they take the fees so we're not the, you have to change the policy but we're not the worst people in the world. I mentioned the in1ine skating issue. That is an issue of concern to a group of young residents who have made the courts available to them for in1ine skating hockey games. I've taken 4 calls on that which I specifically recall, and some of those conversations have been very lengthy, with run-ins with this particular group. They're high school aged people in the community who would like a place to play in1ine skate hockey. They're playing a hockey game on an asphalt surface. So they were very disappointed in having to leave. In fact they didn't show a whole lot of respect for my request that they leave so we were standing there at an impasse They asked me for their options and I said well, if you don't leave while I'm standing here, I'll walk back to City Hall and send over a Carver County deputy to do that. And up one walked, somebody had called on the issue so we continued the conversation- there but once they agreed to depart I wanted it more importantly to talk to them about how we could address servicing that need. I think they came into the understanding that there's a lot of damage to the pressure that that in1ine skate puts on that acrylic surface. That paint surface. It causes damage. It's not proven. It's not researched. It's a pretty new phenomenon and the spokesmen for their group in fact called me today and said, yes I had done some research. I called some tennis construction companies. He said, I dont't think we have much of a case before the Park Commission so we're not going to show up tonight. I said well I would like to bring the issue up. Only had time to call one other city. City of Eden Prairie. They're in the same position. They are amending their park useage ordinance to prohibit that use but they are looking at providing an asphalt 57 Park and Rec Commission July 27, 1993 - Page 58 .' surface in one of their hockey rinks for this new recreational component which we're seeing in our city. Andrews: I am an inline skater who likes to play inline hockey. Tennis courts are the ideal place to play because you have the fences. But if you could come up with an asphalt hockey rink, that'd be heaven. Lash: 50 would you be able to do that like at the hockey rink over here? Just blacktop it but then still flood it in the winter? Hoffman: Not on these rinks. I wouldn't want to do it first of all because they're very old and need replacement but secondly, even if you had new boards there, they're so low that they flood out on a routine basis. They are used more as a natural storm retention pond so we would have to do it elsewhere. Andrews: The other problem you have with asphalt is being that it's black, the melting of the ice will be all that much faster. It could be a problem but. We also have a tennis court in our neighborhood that the kids like to use for inline hockey and I've . skated on it too but it does wreck it and I think our policy should remain as is. 5chroers: Any possibility of doing a temporary think in a parking lot? Hoffman: We suggested, in fact the parking lot was vacant enough there where they could play but they obviously have become accustomed to that nice smooth surface. It's very nice for stick handling, etc, etc. They're spoiled. They don't want to play in a parking lot. Berg: Encourage them to come in. Lash: Well you know, if you get them involved, they may be able to come up with a good idea that we're not seeing, since it affects them so much and if they come with an idea, they take a little ownership there and then they're a lot happier with the whole deal. Andrews: Maybe they could go down to Chaska Community Center and rent out the rink when it's not flooded in the summer and play there. . 58 '. Park and Rec Commission July 27, 1993 - Page 59 Hoffman: Very briefly on the Minnewashta Park issue. I met with a group from Heritage, including their attorneys and laid out the stipulations. Planning commission tabled it. Denied action so they refused the plat because it didn't include park. Right now it's at a point where they'll either come in with an amended plat or they'll walk away from their. Andrews: Can I add to that? They did come in with a park but it wasn't where they were talking about it with us at all. It was on the northwest side away from the lake which is totally away from where they led us to beleive they were willing to put it. And I talked to Todd about this. I was absolutely shocked when that developer came in to the Planning Commission because he went just the opposite direction he told us that they were. Lash: How could he do that? Didn't we specify the placement of the park? Andrews: ...it was soundly defeated and rejected so that's where it ended up. . Hoffman: That's all I have. Thank you. COMMISSIONER PRESENTATIONS: Andrews: I've got one. will be coming out soon? The Highway 101 trail feasibility study Next few days? Hoffman: Next few days. Andrews: I obviously have a very interest in that issue being that I live in a neighborhood along Highway 101 that is isolated. It is a trail that's identified on our comprehensive plan and I think it would be very helpful if as a Park Board that we reaffirmed our desire to see a trail go there. The City Council's in my opinion taking an attitude of that if we just let this thing lay long enough, it will just kind of go away. That's my personal opinion of what's going on right now at least and I just think we need to, I would appreciate I guess a vote of confidence if that's something the Park Board members are willing to do. If not, I think it'd be equally important for us to, if we are not supportive of the trail concept, we should say that because that will definitely make it easier for the Council to make their decision. The way I understand it Todd is the feasibility study will just be presented to the Council. My guess is they'd refer it back to us for consideration don't you think? . 59 Park and Rec Commission July 27, 1993 - Page 60 .' Hoffman: That probably would be the scenario that they're going to take. It's, they'll take public comment at that meeting and wrestle with the issues at hand and send it back down to the park commission or back to staff for some resolution. Andrews: Have you heard any dollar figures come back? Hoffman: No I have not. Schroers: So we will have an opportunity to review it then? Andrews: We don't know that for sure really but. Hoffman: We don't know that for sure. If they like the idea and they simply want a scenario of funding, they would send it back down to management to come up with some alternatives of funding scenarios to bring back to the City Council. If they have continuing questions over the merits of the trail, then they will send it back down to the Park Commission to hold additional public meetings in that regard. Andrews: I guess I still think it would be at least appropriate . at this point to say that we do still consider that to be a segment of the trail system that we feel is important. Berg: Does that need a motion? Andrews: I think it's like a resolution I guess. Hoffman: Do you want me to draft something? Andrews: Yeah, say it. Andrews moved, Lash seconded that the Park and Recreation Commission approve a resolution reaffirming the importance of construction of a Highway 101 trail to the City Council. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously. Andrews: Thank you. I do appreciate it. Schroers: Your welcome. I've got two things that are real quick and short. One is the letter from Skubics regarding the Chan Hills development. Can you shed a little light on that Todd? Hoffman: Sure. Mr. Skubic has been in as he referenced in his letter. I think he set it up like his dentist appointment, 6 months to go to the dentist to come talk to Todd as well, so . 60 '. . . Park and Rec Commission July 27, 1993 - Page 61 we've talked over the years. I've kept him up to date with our backlog of work that we have and what's going on with the scheduling so I think other than the shortage of playground equipment, everything else there which has been discussed will be going in this summer because they're actually 1992 items. So I have high hopes of completing all your 1992 items and 1993. Lash: So the basketball court is going in. Hoffman: Basketball court. Lash: That seems to be one of his concerns. Hoffman: I would want to double check if that was approved as part of the 1993 budget. I've got that right here. I don't know if it was. Chanhassen Hills. Half basketball court. There it is. Schroers: Okay, I do want it on record that this issue was dealt with this evening at this meeting. And the other one, a resident approached me with a great deal of concern regarding the fact that we have a designated beach at Carver Beach Park and no buoys to mark off the swimming area and her children were nearly run over both by waterskiers and jetskiers in what would be the designated swimming area were thre buoys there. I think that it's our responsibility, if we are going to label that as a swimming area, that we have some buoys out there and designate i~ and so the boats and other recreational, motorized recreational people hopefully will give the swimmers a little safe place to play. Lash: We have those in the budget too. We have this year for the mini-beach and next year for the main beach. Hoffman: Replace the ones at the main beach. It always has been the city's policy to put them out at the big beach. They get dragged in routinely because the boaters like to come through that narrow at a wider angle so they move them in. We move them out but then we did come up with the, took the action that we would put them at the mini-beach as well. Lash: Which one are you talking about Larry? The main beach or the mini-beach? Schroers: No, the main beach I'm talking about. At Carver Beach. Lash: Yeah. And you're saying there are buoys there. 61 Park and Rec Commission July 27, 1993 - Page 62 .' Hoffman: There have been in the past. I don't know that, it's a standard practice that maintenance puts them out there. Schroers: Well what the resident told me was that had her daughter not seen the jetskier coming, and dove under to swim out of the way, she would have been struck. And the reason was that there are no buoys at a designated swimming area and she just didn't understand that. Hoffman: I will see to it that they are put in place. However, I certainly would caution that just because there are buoys there doesn't mean we have a safe beach. They disregard those buoys. They use them as as slalom course so we need to. Andrews: That would be something that there should be something written in the paper. That's a major boating offense arid people should understand that. Moving buoys is a major offense and somebody that's running swimmers, they should be hit as hard as the law will allow with no warning. There's no excuse for that at all. Meger: So am I understanding correctly that it's just buoys marking the area? That there isn't kind of a rope with floating . devices strung between the buoys? Schroers: No. They're basically what she's telling me is that there is nothing there. Lash: But if they were there, what would they be? Hoffman: Individual buoys. Lash: Well why don't we get the string ones like we have at Lake Ann? Aren't those stringed one? Hoffman: I think we could attempt that. My fear would be that they're going to be damaged and removed. Andrews: The point here is though that Minnesota law is very specific on those buoys. I tell you if we catch anybody, they ought to be hung out to dry. Lash: It would be a little harder to use a string buoy as a slalom course because then you're getting all tangled up in the rope and everything. 62 . . . . Park and Rec Commission July 27, 1993 - Page 63 Schroers: Well, if staff would check and see in fact what there is there and come back with a recommendation. Or if you see that there's something that you can do immediately to improve the safety, initiate that process and do what we can do until we have time to take appropriate action. Lash: Well we've got money budgeted this year so there's no reason. Hoffman: Take immediate action on it. Andrews: That's an emergency situation. It really is. Somebody's going to get killed there and we'll get sued. Schroers: Alright, anything else? Motion to adjourn. Lash: Well Jerry's got the softball thing on here you want to. Ruegemer: Yeah just, if everybody had a chance to...I'11 be real brief with this...coordinator Don Schwartz approached staff and kind of exploring the possibilities of offering a tournament with the proceeds going to show the appreciation to the Chanhassen Umpires...T-shirt, duffle bag, maybe a Twins game, something on that line. Other communities...do offer that type of a program as an incentive to...have you return from year to year and just to show kind of the appreciation towards the umpires...The tournament is proposed for September 11th and 12th at Lake Ann Park...benefitting the Chanhassen Association, we're looking at possibly the fees are listed. Approximately for 4 fields...I guess I'd like to get some feedback back from the commission of how they'd like to handle that situation in either reducing or having fees paid in full. Possibly waive it in this manner. I'd like to gain some feedback now from the commission so I can proceed with this request. Lash: I'm obviously confused because I figured the point was for them to raise money to buy the umps some kind of a token gift. So if you waive the fee, then how are they going to raise any money to buy a gift? Hoffman: No, waive our rental fee. Ruegemer: Right, the rental. Lash: Oh, okay. Hoffman: Our rental fee for the field. 63 """;;"'-~'....T........ '. ~. '" -.........";;0;"..7 '.'-'~"""",_." ..':;;'-f"'!'~'~'~};::~'''..':''--''~'\~''~'JI,:'''_ Park and Rec Commission July 27, 1993 - Page 64 . Lash: Okay, then they'd have to pay some other kind of cost to play? Ruegemer: Right. The tournament entry fee would cover. Hoffman: Generate revenues. Berg: Is there anything else scheduled for these fields? Ruegemer: No. Berg: So they wouldn't be used if we didn't have this tournament? Ruegemer: Correct, yeah. Berg: More than likely. So we're not out really anything by waiving the fees. Schroers: And it's not going to interfere at some point in time down the road by setting some sort of precedent. Somebody coming and saying that well you waived the fees for those guys. How . about doing it for us. Hoffman: No guarantee against that. Andrews: The cause being the umpires that's, you know that's a cause we can all empathize with. What if the cause were something, some other money raising function? You know I want to raise money for the fire department, the police department, the Little Sisters of the Poor. Where does the good cause cross the line of not being when we waive fees for? Hoffman: We'll leave that up to you. Andrews: I have that same concern that it's going to be, how about a soccer tournament. How about a hockey game. How about a basketball game. Berg: For me the determining factor would be whether or not there's another use for it at that same time. Andrews: I'm concerned about the precedent. I guess I'm in favor of the concept. Schroers: Let's go with the concept but don't let it become a precedent. . 64 '. . . Park and Rec Commission July 27, 1993 - Page 65 Lash: Famous last words...see if it comes back to bite us like an association park. Andrews: We're going to waive the fee? Hoffman: Yep. Andrews: Do you need a motion on that? Hoffman: Please. Schroers: I move that we waive the fees. Andrews: Second. Schroers moved, Andrews seconded to waive fees for field rental at Lake Ann Park for a softball tournament benefitting umpire Appreciation. All voted in favor and the motion carried. Ruegemer: Just real quick. As part of the Minnetonka Community Services...they'd like to get a Lifeguard Olympics out at Lake Ann Park. It would be this coming Sunday out there and it'd be Sunday morning from 8:00 in the morning until approximatey noon. The question did arise about possibly closing the beach just for a couple hours while the commencement proceeds. John Rabe did approach staff and wondering if that request could be granted. Or if the public would be...use the beach area but swimming would be at, his request would be that swimming would not be allowed during that time. That would be, the Commission can consider that request or can certainly make it mandatory that they provide an area on the beach and have lifeguards on duty during that time. Lash: When does the beach usually open on Sunday? Ruegemer: 10:30. Schroers: So how much beach time would people lose? Hoffman: Hour and a half. This Sunday. Andrews: I think we need to maintain regular or some sort of beach service. It could be reduced but I think it has to be available to somebody that has made the choice to come without knowing that there's a scheduled event. 65 ~-... r~ ~ ',.. Park and Rec Commission July 27, 1993 - Page 66 Schroers: That's reasonable I think too. They probably won't have a lot of competition before noon on Sunday anyway. Ruegemer: No, I wouldn't think so. Thank you. Andrews moved, Roeser seconded to adjourn the meeting. All voted in favor and the motion carried. The meeting was adjourned. Submitted by Todd Hoffman Park and Rec Coordinator Prepared by Nann Opheim 66 .' . . '. . . . \_-- 3 CITY OFu CHANHASSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE. P.O. BOX 147. CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 . FAX (612) 937-5739 MEMORANDUM TO: Park and Recreation Commission ;f{ FROM: Todd Hoffman, Park and Recreation Director DATE: August 18, 1993 SUBJ: Song Property As commissioners are aware, this item was reviewed on July 27, 1993, with discussion that evening concluding with the tabling of this issue. The expectations of the commission in doing so were twofold: 1) the applicant desired more time to review internally and to address with staff an idea to enhance the park and recreational components of this application; 2) the commission desired additional information in regard to land holdings south of the Song and Johnson/Dolejsiffurner properties. I had the opportunity to meet with Mr. Terry Forbord to discuss the new idea which he referenced at the commission meeting. The applicanf s preliminary offer was to identify a trail easement along the southern border of the Johnson! Dolejsiffurner property (which abuts the Song property) and to construct this trail. Mr. Forbord and I toured this area on foot the morning of August 9, 1993. The proposed alignment is very desirable for a recreational trail and would offer an experience which is not attainable with a typical on-street trail alignment. This proposed corridor parallels a large wetland and the homes which will be constructed in this area. The trail in most cases would be located at the edge of the wetland sandwiched between the wetland and the homes' backyards. The alignment in most areas follows the toe ofa wooded slopeWhicb acts as a natural buffer. Several sets of photographs w~re taken of this area while walking the .site .and will be presented to the commission in slide form on Tuesday evening. I will also prepare blue-line copies of aerial photographs showing the area in question. Upon concluding our site visit, itwas agreed that the applicant would map this potential trail alignment, providing copies of this map for the commission's review along with a narrative document explaining the applicant's proposal. On Tuesday, August 17, Mr. Forbord called to infonn me that Lundgren Brothers had determined that it was not feasible for them to construct th~ trail at their expense. Mr. Forbord infonned me that the maps were being prepared and that more infonnation would be forwarded to the city on the 18th. The attached information was received on the afternoon of the 18th (Attachment No. 1). Park and Recreation Commission August 18, 1993 Page 2 .' In regard to the land holdings which exist south of the Song and Johnson/Dolejsi/furner properties, a map (Attachment No, 2) was prepared to further acquaint commissioners with this area. The past three weeks have not allowed a complete assessment of the status of properties to be compiled; however, some information is known. I had the opportunity to discuss this topic with some of the landowners, a local realtor, and Mr. Forbord who represents Lundgren Brothers Construction in their land acquisition developments in Chanhassen. As an agent of the City of Chanhassen, and ultimately the City Council, I am restricted to how far I can proceed in investigating potential land acquisitions. However, I believe it is fair to state that there are no properties in this area which are being actively marketed. There appears to be at least one owner who is considering subdivision of property (Mr. and Mrs. David Stockdale). I believe it is also accurate to state that the remainder of the landowners have either been contacted by prospective buyers or have considered selling or developing their property at some time. The following information has been gathered to date. Stockdale (Approximatelv 19 acres): Mr. Stockdale visited City Hall on Tuesday, August 17, 1993. He was interested in receiving an update on the proceeding relative to the Song property application. Mr. Stockdale and I also discussed the potential development of the Stockdale property. . Nelson (Prince R. ): Future subdivision of Mr. Nelson's property is certainly possible, but most likely not in the near future. Roval Oaks (13 acres): Under development. Windmill Run (17.4 acres): Under development. Conway (approximatelv 50 acres): The southern half of this property funnels directly into the future Highway 5 underpass. I have been told that Mr. Conway has been approached. about selling, but that he appears hesitant/cautious in this regard. Gorra (approximatelv 140 acres): Mr. Gorra has participated with vigor in the Highway 5 Corridor Study. The future north access boulevard will have significant impacts on his property, Mr. Gorra certainly has inclinations to develop sometime in the future, possibly in concert with Mr. Conway's property. In conversation with Mr. Gorra, we had the opportunity to discuss the interests of the city in maintaining a greenway around Lake Ann. I believe Mr. Gorra has some concerns in this area, but appears to be willing to work with the city in this regard. VanDaVeire (approximatelv 13 acres) and Swin2s Golf (approximatelv 18 acres): These sites represent the northeast and northwest intersections of Highway 5 and Galpin Boulevard and are unsuitable for neighborhood park purposes. . .. Park and Recreation Commission August 18, 1993 Page 3 Bentz (approximately 14.6 acres and 6 acres). Bentz (5 acres). Turcott (5 acres): The Bentz and Turcott properties are all family related. The southern parcel will be affected by the recommended access boulevard alignment and contains extensive wetlands. The two 5 acre parcels currently exist as estate lots with one single family home being constructed on each. It is staff's opinion that these parcels do not offer an opportunity for acquisition of an active park site. Doleisi (south half): The north half of the Dolejsi property will be developed by Lundgren Brothers Construction. Any future development of the southern half of the property would allow an opportunity for parkland acquisition. Here again, however, the access boulevard alignment will limit these opportunities (Attachment #3). Additional Issues: . City-sponsored Recreation Programs: The potential creation of 234 lots between the Johnson/Dolejsiffumer properties and the Song property will result in increased recreation program demands. A portion of Park and Recreation Department sponsored programs currently take place directly within neighborhood park sites, Le. Summer Discovery Playground, tennis lessons, etc. What will the commission's policy be in regard to providing program services in association/private parks? Trail Easement Along Galpin Boulevard: The applicant's letter of August 18, 1993, references 17 feet of right-of-way along Galpin Boulevard and the grading for a trail alignment within the 17 feet. This position is in direct conflict with staff s recommendation that a 20 ft. easement for trail purposes be dedicated adjacent to the new right-of-way line. The additional right-of-way is being required for future improvements associated with the widening of Galpin Boulevard. Retention of additional trail easements along county roads which are part of the City's Comprehensive Trail System is standard practice. The Depiction of Passive Play Areas on the Attachment to the Letter Dated August 18. 1993: Although these areas are passive in nature, both are deficient in size and contain excessive slopes to be classified as open fields. Staff specifically asked that the applicant include an open field in the private park layout. A minimum standard for such a field is 250 feet square with a maximum slope of 4%. CONCLUSIONS . The applicant has attempted to satisfy the desires of the commission in regard to park and trail amenities, but has fallen slightly short of the city's mark. In regard to the second association/ private park, the applicant has failed to identify an area for an open play field. The question of whether or not other lands in the area are available for development as a public park space Park and Recreation Commission August 18, 1993 Page 4 .' remains unanswered. Future events which will affect land holdings in this area cannot be predicted in their totality. However, it can be said that if the commission's and city's desire to acquire parkland is strong enough, the obstacles to do so can be overcome. This statement is also applicable to the subject property. In regard to the 20 ft. trail easement along Galpin Boulevard, this is a standard requirement which should not be compromised. The offer to incorporate the trail alignment along the large wetland is commendable. These type of trails are desirable in our society, allowing an opportunity to come in close contact with our natural surroundings. However, it is staff's position that the trail should be constructed in conjunction with the initial public improvements in the area. RECOMMEND A nON It is recommended that the preliminary plat to subdivide 112 acres from Rural Residential to Planned Unit Development into 115 single family lots (Song property) be approved by the Park and Recreation Commission contingent upon the following conditions of approval being met: Parks 1. The private/association park be approved only if the additional amenity of an open field with a minimum size of 250 square feet with a maximum 4% slope is added to the park layout. This open field is to be in addition to and not in lieu of existing proposed amenities. . 2. Full park fees shall be paid at the rate in force upon building permit application. Trails 1. A 20 ft. trail easement shall be granted along the entire easterly property line. Furthermore, that this easement shall be included in the grading plan for the project with a suitable trail bed being prepared. This trail bed may meander within the easement alignment at the discretion of the applicant, but the eventual alignment must be conducive to future trail construction and is subject to approval as a part of the grading plan review. Planting of trees shall be restricted to areas west of the trail bench. 2. The applicant shall dedicate lands to accommodate trail construction along the southern boundary of the Johnson/Dolejsi/Turner preliminary plat as depicted on Attachment #4. The applicant shall map and construct a trail paralleling this wetland. This construction is to be completed per city specifications and at the time of adjoining street construction. Final alignment of this trail shall be staked by the developer and approved by the Park and Recreation Director and City Engineer. In recognition for the dedication of this trail corridor, and the construction of said trail, it is recommended that the applicant receive full trail fee credit at the time of building permit application for both the Song property . .. . . Park and Recreation Commission August 18, 1993 Page 5 and Johnson/Dolejsi!furner applications. [Note: This condition will require amendments to the conditions of approval associated with the preliminary plat for the J ohnson/Dolej si!furner properties.] This trail shall include a connection to the street plan as indicated between Lots 16 & 17, Block 2, or a similar suitable location in the near vicinity. ATTACHMENTS 1. Letter dated August 18, 1993, Lundgren Brothers Public Trail Proposal 2. Land Holdings Map 3. Highway 5 Access Boulevard Map 4. A & B Proposed Trail Alignment Map and Aerial Photo 5. Staff Report (Song) dated July 23, 1993, with Attachments 6. Staff Report (Johnson/Dolejsi!furner) dated August 11, 1992, with Attachments CITY OF CHANHASSEN .' 690 COULTER DRIVE. P.O. BOX 147. CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900. FAX (612) 937-5739 MEMORANDUM TO: Park and Recreation Commission FROM: Todd Hoffman, Park and Recreation Director DATE: July 23, 1993 SUBJ: Song Property, A Proposed Planned Unit Development by Lundgren Brothers Construction As the commission will recall, this item was originally scheduled for review on Tuesday, June 22, 1993, but was omitted from the agenda at the applicant's request. To reacquaint the . commission with the application, I have provided an overview of the documents compiled to date in this regard. Commissioners can make their own conclusions as to what relevance each of these documents have in the review process. Attachment No.1. Staff Report Dated August 11. 1992: This report addressed park and trail issues as a part of the application made by Lundgren Brothers Construction to subdivide 95.19 acres of property referred to as the Johnson/Dolejsiffurner property. This property is located to the immediate west of the Song property. As presented in.the report, staff was not opposed to the development of an association or private park. However, concern over how a neighborhood with a private park would interface with the larger community was expressed. A position was also presented that if Lundgren Brothers confIrmed their intent to develop a private park, it was staff's preference that the city .retain >park. fees. generated by. the development to be used in a combination purchase/land dedication venture in a future development in the area. The proposal to develop the Song property does represent such a development. Attachment No.2. Park and Recreation Commission Meeting Minutes Dated August 11. 1992. Pages 10-18: Verbatim minutes of the discussion entertained and the action taken by the commission on the aforementioned applicatiop. Attachment No.3. Staff Report Dated June 18. 1993: This report addresses park and trail issues as a part of the application to subdivide the Song property. During a meeting with representation of Lundgren Brothers Construction on Monday, July 19, 1993, Lundgren Brothers continued to express their displeasure over this report; citing its lack of objectivity and content relative to the positive aspects of this proposed development. I did not deny the lack of discussion on a variety . WACHMt~JT ~, ~ .. Park and Recreation Commission July 23, 1993 Page 2 of subject areas relative to the application, stating that access to a narrative at the time of preparing a report would have proved valuable in this regard. Lundgren Brothers concurred with this reasoning. As a part of this conversation, I offered to admit any wrong-doing, including an apology if I misrepresented previous discussions with representatives of Lundgren Brothers in the report. Lundgren Brothers did not think that the content of the letter was misrepresentative, but cited again its objectivity and lack of positive comment. Attachment No.4, Letter from Lundgren Brothers Construction Dated June 21, 1993: The applicant's request to be removed from the June 22, 1993, Park and Recreation Commission agenda. Attachment No.5, Letter from Paul Krauss, Planning Director Dated June 22. 1993: Response to Lundgren Brothers' request. Attachment No.6, Letter from Mr. Bret Davidson, 7291 Galpin Boulevard. Excelsior. MN 55331 Dated June 22. 1993: The content of this letter relates to the need for a neighborhood park in the area of Royal Oak Estates and the Song property. Royal Oak Estates is a 23 home subdivision being developed by Mr. Davidson to the south and east of the Song property. . Attachment No.7. Letter from Lundgren Brothers Construction Dated June 23. 1993: Rebuttal to staff's report of June 18, 1993, in regard to the Song property proposal. Attachment No.8. Letter from Lundgren Brothers Construction Dated June 23, 1993: This le~r expressed Lundgren Brothers' desire to be considered as a corporate gold sponsor of park and recreation special events. The letter was delivered with Attachment No.7. The Chanhassen City Council maintains a policy of reviewing all donations in excess of $500.00 prior to their acceptance. City Manager Ashworth is recommending that the donation be returned due to the timing of the offer. Attachment No.9, Letter from Carol Berg, 6910 Chaparral Lane. Chanhassen. MN dated July 1, 1993: This letter, addressed to Mayor Chmiel, presents Ms. Berg's opinions in regard to the letter received from Lundgren Brothers Construction dated June 23, 1993, in regard to staff's report. This letter is presented to the commission with the consent of the author. Attachment No. 10, Letter from Lundgren Brothers Construction Dated July 2, 1993: Response to comments and issues raised in staffs report dated June 18, 1993. It provides information on the merits as presented by the applicant of the proposal. Note: The issues presented in this letter are also included in the narrative received by this office on July 21, 1993. As such, I will address issues of concern presented in it during the reyiew of the narrative. . Attachment No. 11, Letter from Don Ashworth, City Manager dated July 6. 1993: Response to Lundgren Brothers Construction in regard to the Song property proposal and related matters. Park and Recreation Commission July 23, 1993 Page 3 .' Attachment No. 12, Narrative Presenting the Song Prooertv Planned Unit Develooment Conceot Plan and Preliminary Plan Submitted by Lundgren Brothers Construction, Received bv this Office on July 21. 1993: The report is addressed to the Planning Commission and City Council. When questioned in this regard, Lundgren Brothers Construction responded by saying the Park and Recreation Commission was omitted from the title page in error. In reading the 16 page report and its attachments, it can be seen that Lundgren Brothers has provided details of their proposal in a very thorough manner. Section X discusses neighborhood recreation specifically. Prior to discussing this section, I will reference sections of the report which are likely to be of interest to the commission. As City Manager Ashworth mentioned in his letter to Lundgren Brothers, the issue of whether a developer should be required to dedicate land for a "public park" if a "private park" is proposed in the same area has never been debated by our council or commission. The commission's decision in this regard will in effect be a policy decision which will guide future applications of this nature. Page L Titled "History of Develooment Prooosal": This paragraph, among other things, discusses the relationship between the Song property and the Johnson/Dolejsi/Turner parcels. Staff concurs that this coordination of efforts results in a unified development, making an important east/west connection between Galpin Boulevard and TH 41. The applicant will be . installing a sidewalk as a part of this connection. The presence of this sidewalk will allow non- vehicular travelers to trickle out from the neighborhoods, gaining access to future trails on Galpin and TH 41. Page 2: In regard to the complicated development purchase agreement the veto authority by the Carlsons and the Songs, and that the Carlsons and Songs do not want any public park, their concern being that a public park would only invite trespass and disturbance of quietude and the natural environment lake. The city respects the Songs and Carlsons positions, however, the city represents the interests of not only the Songs and Carlsons as residents of the community, but all other present and future residents as well. Furthermore, I would conclude that these same . concerns, founded or unfounded, are also applicable to a private park. People, as the primary user, are basic to either a public or private park. Page 5: Under the development summary, the acreage noted for homeowner association recreation is 3 acres. This representation is inconsistent with the labeling of the association park as 4.6 acres under Section X, page 13, paragraph 6. In speaking with the applicant's consulting planner, I was informed that the number is flexible, but that the 4.6 acres more closely represents the proposed park's size. Page 6, Item 3, Suboaragraoh C, Public and Private Oven Soace: Staff concurs with this subparagraph, but would include other citizens of the city in the fold as needing recreational . services. '. . . Park and Recreation Commission July 23, 1993 Page 4 Page 11, Section X. Neighborhood Recreation Area: Staff does not dispute that the private or association recreation area, if developed at 4.6 acres in size with the amenities noted, meets the park needs of those residing within the development However, it is the intent of the City's Comprehensive Plan to provide recreational services for all residents. I do not know whether residents of the city residing outside of this development would be welcome or allowed to utilize this facility. A more important question in my opinion is would they feel welcome. The gross density of 1.50 units per acre is low; however, open space associated with private lots while providing for sun light and fresh air does not meet public needs for access to the park space, The site does include two relatively large areas of land unencumbered by structures, roads and utilities. These "wetland areas" are also proposed to remain under association ownership. This section makes reference to a neighborhood park as being 5 acres in size and serving 1,000 people. These standards have not been applied in the city for at least the past five years in favor of the 1 acren 5 people standard. The report goes further in supporting Lundgren Brothers position that their proposal meets the needs for parks within its own development. The policy decision facing the commission is whether this exclusive approach to development is in the best interests of the city. RECOMMEND A TION Staff's recommendation of June 18, 1993, remains valid. Parks In regard to park dedication, the commission has many options. The three most obvious being: 1. Recommend the rejection of the preliminary plat due to its lack of public open space. 2. Identify zero to 4.6 acres of land for acquISItlOn as public parkland and recommend the requirement of this dedication as a condition of approval for the plat. 3. Recommend the acceptance of park fees in lieu of land dedication (subject to the private park being developed). Trails It is recommended that the following conditions of approval in regard to trails be forwarded to the City Council: Park and Recreation Commission July 23, 1993 Page 5 1. A 20-ft. trail easement be retained along the entire easterly property line to facilitate the future construction of a trail along Galpin Boulevard. Note: The applicant has stated it would be their desire to have this trail constructed within the road right-of-way. The additional 17 feet of right-of-way required is for road purposes. The city will also need a utility easement along this alignment. This easement can overlay the trail easement where they interface. 2. In addition, any trail easements and/or trail construction which would be necessitated by the identification of a park site within this plat should be required. pc: Don Ashworth, City Manager Jo Ann Olsen, Senior Planner Paul Krauss, Planning Director .' . . ~~" . ~,,;.<J_" ' . ~~ ~~~M ' '. ~~\~:~~~~~". .~ , ///,tJ Ie. ~~~ ~",. I ~~ '/ p..--~-iKj~ ~~~~~?1 ~ , J .I,~ ~ ~ '-J ~. '/ ~ I .. CI /j 0 ~ ~ ~~ \ '.1 fA ~ ,~ ~ '<,~~~~\\ ~ ", Y'djtJ..ll '1/t A .. ' .;~ ~~ Jj ,,K,, .; j u ~,'!!Ii:J /I ~-~.~, ~ )3-'~ 1 ~ J~~?- ~~~ \ \.\ ~ 'lJ o//~~ ~ - ~ ~ ~.~ ~ 1'"1. ~\f'-1 .}.... ...... '/11 'I~~~~ '/ "'111 f I~ ~ I ~~r'\ ~ I -- "" \ '-..~ ~ ~ L ~~ -0~: ~ ~ :=- :C~[C N-~"::; ~\ 1 . / i- f T --~ -B d. \' \\ \~~ ~ . ::;j}_~""- ~ \ v-:::::: '2/ ~r,-,"-h \ \i\' ~~\~.z::" .'~ ~-'--~V; ~l \ ~l!)~ J \ 11~~.r.' ,)1: ; ~'er-J: J ~ , .. \. ~t'-\.""'" ~ -/ I D I I ~ _ \ j: :t, .~.u;,;y ~~~ ~ii:'~ -~ ,.., I .,' I..... I//.~'" \l'!~"""'" ~~' ..c.. ~-n' L..... I ,,> 1/11/ .~'.~. ~ \ ~~ ~<,.~ ...... ::7:. ~ "L /(;"'1 J _...~:- ) ~ <- l :~ ' . ' ~ ;', IY 1-'JL' \.- ~ 1 ", ~, ~"'~.'!i ~~<l1. ~~ - ~~ ~ . '~~>, \ ,~.1" ~ ~,3-:h' ~~~ ~ . q.r~ , / . \' \~ ~~ ,,~. i i!. ~ 11 L. A.,: " '- I' \. I 0," ~~" 1m ~''>rz~ /; I '..' ~4... "-.:. 1..1' 7~ ,_,' ( I .~" ~.,. l\ :3..~ WE ~ ~~, rNJ.'7: ..;::: ~ "".~~ ~ ,~ P-LJ '\ _ ....:F I~ NElGH8ORHPOIilR~~~1~$~~ ~;cr _~ _\"Illl!~)" \ ~,)..,.J . ~~tr~. \\ .-..J:>c ":... I ,;' ~~~ ~ ~r:("" ~ - 7 ,- ,- ,(/-~~'~"' ~.~ \""~~ J' ~iJ \ ,T~ ;-.r.Yl' fo~; \ \..~"v~ ~... ______---.....;z'-v- '~ '~~'.6..:. "'llj ~.~ 7' - '\ ~I..:!'W' , ~ l "l--=- \.. .,'~, 0... '"'SX: -L- ~ ~ ~ ;,. ,""-'~~':Z7L ~~ , -,~ . i ----.....-.. . ~~, ~ J "'-1--'; . ~,: ~ ~.-: ~~ ~.~~~ \;'ffiDr(~~ () ..~~~ u' '\ .\y-\. = . " ~ ~~ .' ~ ~ ~ ~\~~~",.I\ I ~ ) ~ \ ~~ ,,_;.J ~ ': --A ~_il ~ .) ~~~ ,~ I)fl) ~,\ ~-"' ~ IL. :~.=-- V/ 11\ ~~ ,~/ _ ~. '- ./._'~ _,-~t) '\ ,l~ ~ - / ~fd~ ~"l~ 7 I ,~::% __I 0" ~-~-'~::--~l~ ~ ,~ ~)" "'-..: E . o ZOO:ZOOfel 'JNI '1150 T09S LCC 619Q, (;C:Cl C6/.!.(;/LO /If( I I I I UI II /~ _. \I) rl~~stN~"p.o 1::;;"- ~ ~-~\\ ~ '~\ . ~ '~) I " /;, ~ ',I rfJ~~ <-"-- v' - - ri - ~Jj. - -. ~ - \'" I '; ~ ~ i)~ 1 ~ . J " r'~' ,j ~ I ~,.\t~~ ... C'-~~.'~. J.fl~\- f\J ,_ u t ~~~ ~.~.~\!m'1 / '---.. c" "'~"~ ' '-; .sr.o1r~ ~~ IT ". I \~~~.i: G ~ I ~ ~~:2i ~~/ ~- - ~. ~~ (D- ~ \ V ~. ~ \ A PIN ~ a ~ (~~ ~(~ ,) ~~ .. ~ ~ ~ f:J - ... .... )..",L.Jl-J T 801.1 ~ - "r-\....."\. I .I.. I...~ ... ~ '" V-4~ll.o.. . O'J J<i! f-pE (' ~- " ((lilt .;1- ~ ~ \ I 'l. ~ -tr'" . I~~P" }-, .g ~~. "0 ~ ~ J l ,~Iliiii ~ ). ~ = ~;;1 l~!I!;; n.~ ~ /~ ~ s VI 1/ I;:; \ii '" ~ '- : t ~ ____v ( / ~ '~~ - v '" ~ ~~/2T ~ J.q'~1 ~ ~~. a ~ . /'~ ... ~;l "~;r~~i~. f1~(( 4:- \, ,.. < (r - . ':~_ f "'"i ~ ...tI 'I!~. \~:: m ," ,"1 ~ ~ ... "'4 , ..0' . , ,,:,:,', ;:--' ... " ~" " \p"'< ,.. ~ ~'~ 1/ ~ 1, ~ ~ YOSElI,L ...l ~ 1 :J " :'LJ . : ,,i \ ~ ~ ~ I 1:?L ~ ~..' I ~ r' \~~", ~~ =- 1~94. 't, ~ i"'( .~ . ~ I:;"~ \\: ,~\ (~, V I r'I ~~ I~~N I ~, . jI l'" ~ ,~ .~ :t L ~p: I; ~,(.,~~I/-4~~~ ~ 4".li ~.'-. 'e ~ 'F-2 , ~~=;~~~ ~ ~y~ I!J i t6 ~~ ~Iy ~-) I ~ <,00 ~. ~ ~~ (J)s :E~E~~~~ ~" f- . I 1.-1 ~ ,,<i-, ~:b~ ~r--I 9"- ~... "X '" ~ \1\ :::::;::= ~ (lljl ~NI., ~ ~ \'*("'r II ~I~ ~~ ~~ ~\..-.jk~~ r<"~ ~ " !( POWERS ~ ...J,1~ &~,~ ~~l'" t. ~ ~g' .. ~ o ~ C1J::rj. m ~' {~~ : ~fI& ~~ ~ ~ ~n;: ~,. "r.=\\-Y Y ~ ~~ ~,f hi., .-- I ~ ...-- r-- i~ l.~bf ~M ;;;;; ~ / 0" ~ .\ f!l7 :" ~'VE ~ \~~ ,--=- i roJ} \ :J~ 7N~ ,t:~ . ", ~ '~ tI ~-,~ ~ "'~ ::i,: III 8 r ~ ~ ~ -- _. -- --- %I> ;n f~;:;:~' i ~ ifE bm ~I (Ii~- (V~ .' . .... ~ ~ b. ~ ~ ~ . (.,...-~ ~ ,." - P_H . - - IVr-.:5 'r7 r r: DATE: August 11, 1992 ~ VJIf'NfJN / t)cJL Lv 5/, ~ t/AltJGL~A/ CC DATE: .<. -~ITY OF CHANHASSEN HOFFMAN:k -4" 6 STAFF REPORT PROPOSAL: Rezoning, Planned Unit Development and Subdivision of 95.19 acres of property into 120 lots, .alteration/filling of 2.81 acres of wetland, Johnson/Dolejsiffumer property; a single family residential Planned Unit Development concept. I- Z <( u :J Q. n. <( . LOCATION: See vicinity map APPLICANT: Lundgren Brothers Construction, Inc. 935 East Wayzata Boulevard Wayzata, MN 55391 Mr. Terry Forbord PRESENT ZONING: A-2, Agricultural Estate District ADJACENT ZONING AND LAND USE: N . RR, Rural Residential District S - A2, Agricultural Estate District E- RR&A2 W - State Highway 41 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: The intent of the City's Comprehensive Plan, Recreation Section for public recreation open space is not being met as a part of this proposal. The provision of a 2.3 acre "private" or association park does not meet the city requirements of providing public parkland as a part of the subdivision and development of a parcel or parcels of land. In addition, open space, which is comprised of wetlands, is not acceptable for park fee credit under city ordinance. City Code allows for the capture of one acre of developable land for every 75 persons the platted land could house based on 3 persons per single family dwelling unit for public park purposes. This city ordinance is derived from state statutes. In this application for land development review a,nd acceptance, that amounts to 360 persons or 4.8 acres. Putting aside the proposed development plan for this ~ 3 l.LJ I- - (/) . J.1. t "'Ci7 ATTACHMENT . Lundgren Brothers Proposal August 11, 1992 Page 2 .' property and addressing the site solely on its proximity to existing or proposed neighborhood based recreation sites, reveals the void currently existing in this area in respect to neighborhood parks. Being historically agriculturally based with intermittent estate residential areas, there has been no impetus up until this point to acquire and develop neighborhood parks. Requiring a public park space as a part of this subdivision may be advisable; however, if the applicant confIrms their intent of developing a private recreational facility in this neighborhood, it is preferable that the city retain the park fees generated by this development as capital to be used in a combination purchaselland dedication venture in a future development in this area. If the applicant chooses not to pursue their private facility, then it is recommended the city require parkland dedication in an amount not to exceed 4.8 acres in a location deemed appropriate and desirable by the Park and Recreation Commission with park fee requirements being reduced by the appropriate percentage. Staff is not opposed to development of a residential neighborhood containing a private or association park; however, there would be no public use or control over such a facility. The types of amenities proposed for the private recreation area, Le. a tennis court, basketball area, and children's play structure, are appealing to the home buyers targeted by this development Lundgren Brothers has found this approach successful in other cities, such as Plymouth, which is why I assume they are proposing it here. For their private parks in Plymouth, Churchill Farms and Stromseth, Lundgren Brothers did not receive any park fee credits, and the granting of any credit was never considered. . COMPREHENSIVE TRAIL PLAN: The City's Comprehensive Trail Plan calls for the future installation of a trail along State Highway 41 (the western edge of the Johnson/Dolejsi/furner property abuts Highway 4l--see attachments). Highway 41 is classified as a Class I minor arterial and currently has a 150 ft right-of-way. The attached diagram details the cross section of a Class I minor arterial showing Highway 41 will in the future be a four lane highway with a median, leaving approximately 27 feet of clear zone at its edges. In many instances, 27 feet will not accommodate the utility and drainage needs and the construction of a trail combined, due to constraints such as the presence of stands of trees or specimen trees, excessive slopes, .uneven terrain, etc. It is therefore appropriate to require the dedication of a 20 ft wide easement for potential future trail construction purposes along the entire western border of the subject property abutting State Highway 41. It is also advisable to install a concrete sidewalk along Street A which will in the future be the thru street in this development The City's Planning Department will address this need. No trails are proposed to be constructed by the applicant, thus no consideration for trail fee credit is necessary. RECOMMENDATION Based on the preceding comments, staff recommends that the Park and Recreation Commission recommend that the City Council: . ;. Lundgren Brothers Proposal August 11, 1992 Page 3 1. Accept full park and trail dedication fees in the absence of land dedication or trail construction. These fees are to be paid at the time of building permit applications at the per lot fee in force for residential property at the time of permit application. The current fees are $500.00 and $167.00 per lot, respectively. The above recommendation being contingent upon the applicant indicating their intent to develop the "private" park area as indicated on the general development plan. 2. The applicant supply a 20 ft. wide easement for potential future trail construction purposes along the western border of the subject property abutting the right-of-way of State Highway 41. 3. The inclusion of the "private" park does not diminish the requirements for public recreation and open space as part of a subdivision, therefore, no credit will be considered for the inclusion of this private facility. . . . D ~: 1 I i AN \. ~I I""TV i - I I -AM, i' " ,",~'9J = ,~.! c..~ ~ Bj' - j j .. " -'" "\ " A c,~rt!CAHr B MIMEwASHrA C ..""'" HCIGHrS I'I4"K7 _f I ' I~ Ll , f lLJ I ! I ~"_l" f- , U J , ,",~ot .,,~ 1\ '~i ~ ~ 1,,' ~~~ 1fT ~~ ~.'~+-. ut ~~~~ ~.' ~\ l~ r >lA~~101\..~ ~tJ+ ~'v- ~I-'l ~ ~ ~ l {, ! ~ .. r- VN II ,"'llllJ , ~,~ 'J. ~ .A '" ,,;f'!"/' ._W ~ U _ j' K( ~~ ~' B ,..<: ---",.''''~ \1.' ~": ~~~~~ ~}:I (~'~.; 'LAKE ~-1,) ,t/{~ ~~,1 ~ LAlft ~i>, lrA; " !...g~(t ro'lt .-I<\U~# " M INN E W A $ H r A ,~~" . - .....iiii~/ f ~. ~ . ~ i } /fEGIONAL / J ' ~~ I" ':"'1~ , ~)) - - r;""."""': h- -~~i ~:~c.~~..~~...~.~. -. r-~<' 'n f-J/ ~r) -; '" i ~:H~,', ~ _Ii I : ~ ~.~) . / -0 l' '~.'~;. ., v )0 ~ \ ~~.. if 1 !:: >- V IL.,}i ':L ---4> 5 ~~' .L Q: ~~ 0 ~ ...... D -.~ L'::::= .... @ ,~;fJ" ILJ " - I'~ . · · 2~i; r - f ,'~= I;:=. :::-" 'l I: I ~ ff ~ l, YJCI ~~:lfl MAFft hJ - ~~~ · Ci5 ,I"~~ I _A. J 1 \S" --L/ ,\ U 1- "':/ ....,..,. I ~ ~ ~. ..... dI n;r:' ;" v-''''F ~ f ~~ . - ~ \ , .. .'I.!~VD"D -.,~ '\\1l oc A / ~/,,\-,,,,,,,~ I l>\~ ~~ I r(~~ ~.~ / \..J.... hJu. ~D'i. ---~1'E5-8~~.\ciU " .J~ i tlt, ! :--lr \ "1 ..,.... I ~ , I" 1 ~ .. " I fi~ ) -:,~ lIMO !'flUff 8 . I ! I I I I ~ ~ .. .. I j o I li ~ f' ~ ... ~ BLvD (ell /81 i)) -~-- T c.~r.O ~' c. . ~n 8 '" .. 8" I . ~ ... .. 1100-, , ... " 1100- .........,...,;~~::~~~.~:~:'iJ~::~..,:.:.;:.';~~flI~:.~~~ -, (') c.... " 1;: %0 !~ >C/) II ~ ~ II" ~ I ~ 8 r.': i: ~ r ~: I.'~. m: c.... ' ~. I ~! 0.- ..., ~~.-" r- ::0 Z m ::0 "'0 ~ ~ z ~ ~II II :1 1'1 I .~ \. f~' , I :__--- __-I-~ i I' I, . .. . ... - ... .~.~.. " t' Ii I ., \, t S' ~ . \ : r .~. ,~"._,,,,.::,- ", . . .' -'-i-iii;I'. il 't' .' 1 >> H t: :! ;~ ;~ ! J w .~ I, I ~. 'i i ! <., ......... " .. II '1 " I ~ .. " ~ ." ": tr" ' ,..- --;; .-.~. I -- ... -- 'f . L :. \._---- .."J. :~~i : i" , .' ,. .: .' Ij Ii .r-r.._". '. r' , . Ii '\ It '. i . fI" u, II' -.-.... . to r '.-i I I I I + i I I I -:.,--. .- ---- ..- ~ " iI '., r. I' . ---.-'-' . . , r . ~ --- , . , ' . ..' " '." l' '. " . ! ;\.""" ~" . . J '. . , " "', ~;..;: "'. . '" ': ." '\ .. 'l '. a .. :;~ I~ - ,. ~~." . , 'II" , ,.~, -:', f t: '. ) Ij ....~ .'. .. 0 " , I ~I'/:,,"" f ~ Z./', ,'" .~4' I ' i" ~' .~. ~ .~.s,C! ~..t.. '. ~ .~., I ~' jr..,.. , .'. "';:-. . ,..~ ~ ~y';)I,... ~ ..~ ' 1'" ~'JiD. ~, '.' .., '. ~ -:=.~.;7' ~'~d "Ie, /." f ;:':'~" _..~/._... ~. . I . '~~"'" I, f ~~. .. """ \. '. j 1 , : '~'l ~" .,.......~, '" '. I J [)l ;.,~ ..'~ ~'--: ..~~ \. ~'~':)o. 1'1';' I ll.~;. '"' ..\\~ ~ f. J : :,~I: ":;,;" ...:. !.<~'1,~~;J.: ~ .~::::.\.>~... -j-- ~, ,... ~',.. 8 '''''r .' "\ ".~, .' /i (~'J~' _ ~~~:a.t":~~J. . .,~'..... .~......... ", i r....'/ . . r~" ~'IJ'" /. I ?;i1~ 'iiil\':-:>"'/ .. ,. ,'Ii,. . {':t. - .';... -. Ii" 't '.' \ S:' , -.;J""" ',,' ~r"".., , ,/'.' '..:... ~ ,I'. :;,............ " ,)~_ ' L~A'(' ,rl,~B ~;'l!d'q~i,~'4../ . , . \ 'z. I(I~ illll' 1~1'~ ~ ~-~'!<'.I:~7ift >..::' "1.': ~ ~J') ,I" '{I\,~, ,I ~ :' :'" ,.k" .(, I !: i ' ,," /1 " it' ~. IJ.If' I,!" CI\ \ 1:\ \.. " , ..r.,:::, ,~" , .-' ~ ,.... :1> '''~ .'. ' ; J ~~~~ - ,~" -f1~--=-=- :,~... '.' ,:J.' a> ,.." I~" l~'~ .r ~))v<~~.~:;;':;~':i ....;!! I ~"'-"'V .. . . :lJi" \ Ii:j ! ~ S. a: ~/ ';! . ...;i~,\..\\\~..~_.~ I : --/ ---l~ ~ ", ~. I:-C ..... ~ii~~' ~~;;~>~'~:J-~ c:J,,(y:v 0'/'" I I r 1 . ,.! -!~7-" :.. ~~~~~. ,/' .' "1/// /' .! 'J'. '~.. '..t;;:t--' -~. ~~ .. i' ),~/ --......-,~ ". ';*.!\> ~. ",',..,.., ~ \ h ~..l'~, ,..:' .\ ~-"-r--T "'1' -"'"'1/: <1. I'~~ I '....e' '.: .. y- :.:..... -:: >_ _ ~ )' . '\' ( . ".-.1. ..IL..Jo:O'\oOW"'. "'.... ~W .. .....~~ *""'~'7"1""'_ '?N',~ '.\'1 .1-. . . . , ~~~ r;' . Jr ~ . .,,- .. 11 '(~ '~,'l 'J ~:-ij;/'-' - -- "-^~:~~:' -~ .,~~: ~.--. .~~~ ,W'I/ ~ .. \' __.. ~i~ ' . (', .. .~~! .I. ~f'~~~ , ~ t, '. , ~~' -", \ J; )))1' ~ ( '~~O"-,_ /. ::~ '\~~;':,:~'~i ~"t-~Ii'~ I .' / "S. " ..., ~~~~ ...~;dt~ 1lI'.~U' ~~ rJ)~' L)~\y",,"; \-..: ~A'" /~ :s~ r,~~.. ~.p ~'))I))l~ ~~- ..'= I' . ~I -;.. .:-:::-:{ 1/4 \r' i) ,.-' /'---:;a'7~ ~:--;;~ \ J'IJ,~~iftm ~~" ~ .~~~ '""'" ~'.J c~ ~ ~" I I. ' . ~~ ~~,,~' If; I;'lj.~." "'f6'\ -:_~I :'\ .. .\: .-..- .1.1_ ?$~., 'i'IT,;~\~IIIj:jr/I.;.._..}~j.,rl':Tf"..'\",-, _.. . -:.J::ioi.J. _ -r..::..__, \/;;~~~~I\~~\\\'IlIIlJ"C" 7'/._J~t::..~..~ I............---"...~~. ,,- ''::'' I :t .-J ':t ...., ,.~ !' -, E ...,~ ~'-'-"...... _. 5' .... 1!l I -. ~~"'C~"~ ca ~ '7 I tn" ca~~~' ~~ 4 ~ r I ~ ~ ~~~~ ~,~ :r i J ~ i i ~~1"~!, !* g ~ ~! f ! I I I I i i I ~ ~ ! ggli ~ IS~ i ~~P,I ~ ~Nl\l ~ ' \-fHJ II~ ' i I rifii 11,11 ql . ~ filii h!ll \. II . III I' ii . , I' ~~ . I ~ I c! :0 Z !B ~ ~ nc.. U ClIO ~z 18 ~ i~Ja ~ i' ~ ~ < ! ~ 1 ~ ij } I ift~ I I!~~. < p' . !'l H if ;J .1 i! ". , ! ;2 . Z ~ . ~ I -' N" ; i,:C · .. .. ~ i ~ ;1;1 ~___.....r..,,_.......... .'t." ,....:.n, " 2J o " o en m o (") .' o ~ ~ m (") -I o 2J ~ ~ C> z I: m z -I . . '. . 7~ ' / ///..~ . I / I / ---74607 S8,.5t'13"W- " j': ....,- j - - ',._/16~~' ~~/ ~ " o 2 WALTER WHIT~HILL IK lit, P 125 "'- ""-'" I ,I ','>.,. / IX,,,,,, I ' '~)./ . gO/ /. /' I 1 I I / '1 / / I //1' " ~ 4-'>f ,/ ,/ ,,'/ "," I .~ " I ;' ~ .. , 8"'uef A GfSIl! lICe 86669 27 ,3,38 "0. o .~ , ; .. l . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . rr' ,/. r4/1, ~ t- ~ ~ I~' '4' If' ,W~ <I C/. ;o~~. 14' H' /2' ~/tI,-, ~ . 'I I I' /517' C/4~5.r Mht)r Ir/~r/4/ , It' 1/' 12' 12' t' /.' &'l rt)A~ ,~ ~ Cl rllA' Idd' C /(/#J.?I Mil,,, Ar/~rl"/ 1 II' 117' It' It' 117' I" CI. rtJl1t' ~,,~ PiAl- C,( 2"/N r~ ~ . ~ 'd' ~ '/"51 I CtJ/I,efllr 2~' C/'t7,,- rill/I , 12" 2~ ' C/lv 24AI ~~ ~ - 1 I .\.k I ~ Id' C/iNS r C"II'erll/" FIGURE 19 TYPICAL URBAN ROADWAY SECflONS 46 . : -' i. . . Park and Rec Commiss~Jn Meeting August 11, 1992 - Page 10 John Dietrich: It is crowded. It is anticipated that a majority of the traffic would be coming off of Powers Boulevard with that interchange there at Highway 5 and Powers. We will have to present that into traffic studies to help show... (There was a tape change at this point in the discussion.) Schroers: ...pass on our concerns to the Planning Commission and City Council as well, we'd very much appreciate it. Thank you. Lash: And Todd, you'll do that also? R/J. ;41 p.~2.. LAND DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL. PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN REVIEW. JOHNSON. DOLEJSI. TURNER PROPERTY; A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT CONCEPT. LUNDGREN BROS. CONSTRUCTION. Public Present: Name Address Mike Pflaum Thomas & Darlene Turotte Bruce Geske Don Roy . Paul Youngquist Marlene Bentz Lundgren Bros. Construction 7325 Hazeltine Blvd. 7205 Hazeltine Blvd. 7105 Hazeltine Blvd. 7300 Galpin Blvd. Hoffman: Chairman Schroers, commission members. Mr. Mike Pflaum, representative of Lundgren Bros. Construction is in the audience this evening to address this issue as is the rest of the members of the audience as interested parties. This proposal is a rezoning planned unit development and subdivision of 95.19 acres of property into 120 single family lots. It includes the alteration and filling of 2.61 acres of wetland and is known as the Johnson, Dolejsi and Turner property. A single family residential planned unit development, PUD concept. Again the applicant is Lundgren Bros. Construction. The present zoning is A-2 or agricultural estate. To the north we have rural residential district. To the south is A-2 again, agricultural estate. To the east or back towards town, is both rural residential and agricultural estate. And then directly adjacent to the west is Highway 41. In reference to the City's comprehensive plan, the intent of the plan, recreation section for public recreation open space is not being met as a part of this proposal. The provision of 2.3 acre private or association park does not meet the City's requirements providing public parkland as part of a subdivision and development of the parcel or parcels of land. In addition, open space which is comprised of wetlands is not acceptable for park credit under city ordinance as the commissioners are aware. The City Code allows for the capture of 1 acre of developable land for every 75 persons platted land could house, based on 3 persons per single family dwelling unit for the purposes of park. The City ordinance is derived from State Statutue. In this application for land development review and acceptance, that amounts to 360 persons or 4.6 acres. If we put aside the proposed development plan for this property and address the site solely on it's proximity to existing ATTACHMENT 12 Park and Rec Commiss n Meeting August 11, 1992 - Page 11 or proposed neighborhood parks, it reveals the void currently existing ~' this area in respect to neighborhood park sites. Being historically agriculturally based with intermittent estate residential areas, there's been no need up until this point to acquire and develop neighborhood parks. Requiring of public park space as part of this subdivision may be adviseable. However, if the applicant confirms their intent of developing a private, recreational facility in this neighborhood, it is preferable that the city retain the park fees generated by this development as capital to be used later on in a combination purchase, land dedication venture in a future development in this area. If the applicant chooses not to pursue their private facility, then it is recommended the City require parkland dedication in an amount not to exceed 4.8 acres in a location deemed appropriate and desireable by the Park Commission with park fee requirements being reduced by the appropriate percentage. You have in your packets the proposed site plan. This can confirm where the applicant is proposing the so called private park or association type recreation area. Here's Highway 41 to the west. The main access road or Street A as it's labeled running east and west. This will be the future thru road to other developments which will be coming along from the east. Again, this is the location. Currently on the plan it shows a tennis court, full size, half court basketball area, a piece of play structure, facilities which are commonly found in a neighborhood park although on a larger site. These are facilities which again appeal to the perspective buyer of these homes. In regard to the comprehensive trail plan, the city's plan calls for the future instal~ation of a trail along State Highway 41, which again is tft western edge of this property in question. Highway 41 is classified as Class I Minor Arterial and currently has a 150 foot right-of-way. The diagram enclosed in your packet shows the future layout of that roadway. And it shows there will be 4 lanes. A 4 lane highway with a median leaving approximately 27 feet of clear zone at it's edges. In many instances, 27 feet will not accommodate the utility, drainage, and construction of a trail combined due to such constraints as the presence of stands of trees or specimen trees, excessive slopes, uneven terrain, etc.. It is therefore appropriate to require the dedication of a 20 foot wide easement for potential future trail construction purposes along the entire western border of the subject property abutting State Highway 41. Questions have been raised by the applicant in regard to, has the City undertaken a study looking at which side of Highway 41 the trail would potentially go on. Staff's response to that is that it indeed may go on both sides of State Highway 41. If not, with the presence of the large land holdings of the Minnewashta Regional Park and then the Arboretum property, some of which is on that side, and the Girl Scout, Campfire location, we would assume that higher density residential areas would be developed on the eastern side or the side of the street or highway which this development is occurring. So potentially in that light, the east side makes more sense. As far as terrain, it is difficult on both sides. One side is no better than the other. In fact, they almost mirror each other. When one side of the road drops off on the west, it typically drops off on the other side as well. It is also adviseable to install a concrete sidewalk along Street A which will in the future be the thru street in this development. The City's planning department will address this need. No trails are propo. to be constructed by the applicant, thus no consideration for trail fee credit is necessary. An additional comment from the applicant in regards to, back of the trail. You'll notice, if you've driven along Highway 41... ~. . . Park and Rec CommissLvn Meeting August 11. 1992 - Page 12 stands of mature pine trees which are there. I can only presume that some of those were planted by the Highway Department when that road was put in forbuffers and that type of thing. The stand in question is in this location to the south of their access road. At the time the applicant assumed that those were inside of the property line. The fact that they are not and are currently in the road right-of-way. If you go ahead in the future when they upgrade Highway 41 and these trees are in the right-of- way, they're on the edge of the right-of-way so they would be left but then if you try to put in a trail behind it, it would be squeezing the alignment. That is one reason it is adviseable to take an additional 20 feet of right-of-way for, if you will insurance policy to the city. The trail issue has gotten a real high priority from the community. We don't want to... The area inside those trees is primarily agricultural. To the south is fairly flat. To the north you see some relief in this area. In light of these findings, staff recommends that the Park and Recreation Commission recommend the City Council, one, accept full park and trail dedication fees in the absence of land dedication or trail construction. These fees are to be paid at the time of buiding permit application at the per lot fee then in force for residential property. The current fees are $500.00 per lot and $167.00 per lot respectively. The above recommendation being contingent upon the applicant indicating their intent to develop the "private park" as indicated on the general development plan. Two. the applicant supply a 20 foot wide easement for potential future trail construction purposes along the western border of the subject property abutting the r.ight-of-way of State Highway 41. And 3. the inclusion of the private park does not diminish the requirement for public recreation and open space as a part of a subdivision, therefore no credit will be considered for the inclusion of this private facility. Mr. Pflaum may have some comments in that regard or either Mr. Pflaum or myself will answer questions from the Commission. Schroers: Okay. I think before we get to that part, maybe the Commission would be interested in entertaining comments from other residents or concerned parties in regards to this development this evening. after which maybe our questions. all of our questions could be better addressed. So if that's acceptable at this point, I would invite anyone that wishes to share some information on this development with us to please come to the podium and state your name and address for the record and share your information with us. Paul Youngquist: I just have a question. My name is Paul Youngquist and I live at 7105 Hazeltine Boulevard which is the 26 acre farm on the north edge of the proposed project. The information refers to a city's comprehensive trail plan and I haven't been at every meeting that there's ever been so I've never seen that. Is that in the room? Do we have one of those around? Hoffman: Currently no. It's a plan which shows all of the proposed trail link systems throughout the city. If you would like to address that. I could certainly give you a copy of it. Paul Youngquist: You don't need to do it now. Is it typically go down TH 41 and all the way to TH 5? Park and Rec Commiss~vn Meeting August 11, 1992 - Page 13 Hoffman: Correct. Typically the alignments are along, as you can see ~o we reference the map behind the Commission. East to west Highway 5 would be a link and then the major COnnectors coming through north to south are part of the comprehensive trail plan. Highway 41, Galpin, Audubon, Powers Boulevard, all On down the line. Typically it incorporates a major roads or collector roads. Paul Youngquist: Okay. North of this site, the east side of the TH 41 gets real hilly. Real high and when you said that the two sides kind of reflect each other, I think that's until you get north of the site. I'm not sure that really means you're going to end up with a trail On the west side though anyway. Is there any concept of where various parks should be? I assume, I mean I know that you've been planning parks around town. Is there thoughts about where parks should be in this whole area between Galpin and TH 41? Is there anything On paper with that kind of stuff or not really yet? ' Hoffman: No. The City of Ch~nhassen has not developed a long range comprehensive park plan. However, now with this portion of the city is inside the MUSA line, we would be addressing that. Taking a look at the potential future development and specifically keying in on geographical features and areas which would be beneficial to a parks creation. So to answer your question specifically, I could not tell you in reference to your property or this subject property where the park would be planned. . Paul Youngquist: Okay, thanks. Schroers: We are aware that there is a need for more parkland in the western part of the city and we are looking for potential places to develop parks in that area and hoping to acquire property along with development as the most viable way for us to obtain property out there. And also I believe in the comprehensive plan we have, are the spurs that go to Lake Minnewashta Regional Park and the Arboretum are included in the comprehensive trail plan so there are proposals to connect the trail to the Arboretum and Lake Minnewashta Park. Don Roy: I'm Don Roy and I live at 7205 Hazeltine Boulevard. The question I've got is, I see my property kind of abuts the north part of this project and I don't know just exactly where the park is going to be and I'm concerned about with the type of park it's going to be. The size and.. .facilities you're going to have for it. So I'd like to know a little more specifics on the park itself. Schroers: 1 think that Lundgren Bros. would have to address that question for you. Don Roy: Alright. Then I have one other question. Is there a time table on the widening of Highway 41? Hoffman: We would not have that information. It's a State Highway. Y. would need to give a call down to the State Highway Department. Don Roy: There won't be any coordination with the development? There won't be any highway widening at that point then? I ' I. . . Park and Rec Commission Meeting August 11, 1992 - Page 14 Hoffman: There may be, not highway widening but allowance for deceleration acceleration lanes. Don Roy: Yeah, that's a very dangerous highway right now getting on and off. Hoffman: Right. And those types of concerns would be addressed by the City Engineer and Planning Department and City Council. Koubsky: The only thing I've noticed is they are widening the intersection down on TH 5 and TH 41 to allow for turn lanes. Don Roy: Well when you want to make a left turn off of TH 41 it's, you've got your life in your hands. Koubsky: Yeah, I do that every day. Don Roy: But the main thing I just wanted to be... I'd like a little more detail on it. Schroers: Okay, we'll make sure that that question is asked. Is there anyone else in the audience that would like to address the Commission this evening? Oka~ then, we'll open it to questions from the Commission. Andrews: I'd like to have the applicant speak here briefly. Schroers: would you like to? Yeah, that'd be fine. Mike Pflaum: I'm Mike Pflaum and by way of a little bit of introduction and an apology. I have not been involved in the planning phase of this project. A gentleman by the name of Terry Forbord, with whom I think you are familiar, has been doing from our end that is, from a corporate end, all of the coordination and planning work on this. And as a consequence I am not in an entirely desireable position to answer specific questions about the proposal. Terry had suggested that this meeting with the Park and Recreation Commission be postponed until he could be here. The Planning Department however wished that this meeting occur so that the results of the meeting would be available for inclusion in the Planning Department report. Hence I am here. Now Terry would have been here but he had another meeting equally important which he had to attend and it was heads. So that's where he is. To answer the question to the best of my ability about what would the park be like. It is not, I'm sure definitely planned at this point. Typically the final planning of features is done at the final stage of plan development which is after preliminary approval. 1 am familiar with similar sorts of parks that we have built elsewhere and I would imagine that the same general facilities and type of use would be carried over here. One such facility is in Plymouth in a project called Churchill Farms and it contains a prefabricated play structure of the sort that you would see a grade school. It is a very sophisticated, efficient in it's design structure. That particular play area also has integrated with it, at a different location actually down the street, facilities for older kids and adults. There's in that instance a tennis court and a half court basketball court. So as far as traffic is concerned, the objective Park and Rec Commission Meeting August 11. 1992 - Page 15 .1 is to have a private facility used by the owners of properties within the development. It is a walking use. Walking or bicycle riding use. It is not a drive in use. And there would be no provision for extra parking for people that might want to drive to it. Fundamentally that's how these things are set up.' They're designed as an amenity to provide close at hand recreational opportunities and in a certain sense provide supplementation to the community's own park plan, park schedule. So far as other specifics of the development I can only offer generalities and kind of muddle my way through. Todd probably knows more about it than I do. But I'd be happy to attempt to answer your questions. Lash: Do you know what the approximately size is? Mike Pflaum: Of this park area? According to the report, it's 2.3 acres. Schroers: And if we were to ask for park dedication, parkland dedication from this development we would be asking for 4.8 acres, is that correct? Hoffman: Correct. The 2.3 acres does contain a holding pond or wetland area so of what the Commission would call park property, it's less than 2.3 but the total which the City or the Commission could require is the 4.8. Erickson: Todd, is this property covered on the map up here? Hoffman: Just the southern tip I believe. You see the large canary gr. type wetland. That is the southern fringe of this area. Schroers: Any questions? Does anybody have any questions? Okay. In light of that then, is anyone prepared to make a motion? Koubsky: I just have one question 1 guess Larry. As 1 look at this, and these are tough to read with the contour lines but it seems like there's quite a lot of relief in here and it is pretty hilly. Am I correct? Is there 4.8 acres of flat land in that development? Mike Pflaum: 1 doubt it. Koubsky: It looks like your park or your play area is the only plateau I see. Mike Pflaum: 1 think that's a fair observation. Koubsky: I'm assuming that your soil correction will just be sufficient to put in the roads and then the building pads. Mike Pflaum: I'm assuming the same thing but I wouldn't be so bold to assure you of that without having seen the preliminary grading plan. We are very sensitive to the value of wetlands, relief and trees and when we lay something out, we try to preserve as much as we can because to us that's value. So I would imagine that the plan... I would imagine thae your observation is accurate. The minimum amount would be done. Lash: From the Tree Board perspective here, are we looking at any stands of mature trees that are going to be getting wiped out Todd? I I I. . . Park and Rec Commission Meeting August 11, 1992 - Page 16 Hoffman: Not to my knowledge. There certainly would be tree loss as part of the development but in staff discussions, it has not been pointed out to my attention that we'll be losing significant stands of trees. Erickson: As far as the alteration or filling of the 2.8 acres of wetlands, is that a Planning Commission issue? Hoffman: Correct. That will be part of their review in Wetland Alteration Permit. Andrews: Is the applicant bound by any of the Federal Regulations regarding park and facility accesses, park type equipment for handicapped people? Hoffman: For ADA? Yes, to certain points. To certain degrees. Andrews: I think you should make it a point and coordinate with the developer about that so they're in compliance if that's an issue. Schroers: Okay. If there are no questions, I guess I'll attempt the motion. Mike Pflaum: Could I ask one question. This is not in connection.. .on the easement for trail purposes along Highway 41. I guess I have two questions. This being a State Highway, is it prohibited to put the trail in the right-of-way? Hoffman: No, it certainly would not be. It would be again a coordination' effort between the State and the City to see that that trail alignment as identified in our comprehensive plan would be built. Again as stated, and as shown in the Commissions packet, once that roadway is upgraded, we have 27 feet of clearance which when allowing for site constraints and changes in elevations, those type of things, tree stands, does not give us the necessary leeway to construct that trail. An additional 20 feet would then allow us only in the areas which are necessary, will allow us to go outside of the road right-of-way to see that that trail is put in in the most environmentally sensitive and prudent manner. Mike Pflaum: Not being familiar with this property, presumably the trail is going to travel some distance along 41, is that correct? Hoffman: Correct. Mike Pflaum: Does this mean that the City would be acqulrlng 20 feet of easements from all the other landowners along Highway 41? Hoffman: Absolutely. As you would, being that this property has just recently been put into the MUSA, Metropolitan Urban Service Area, additional developments will be coming in and we will be obtaining those easements. There certainly will be exceptions but as a rule, we want to take a look at receiving that additional leeway so that that comprehensive trail plan can be followed. Park and Rec Commission Meeting August 11, 1992 - Page 17 .1 Mike Pflaum: Excuse me, I would like to make a request that since it seems to be the general intent to utilize the area close to the highway for trail purposes, that the trail be constructed within the right-of-way wherever it is reasonable and feasible and where it is not constructed on the property of the subdivision, there be a vacation after the trail has been constructed for those areas the trail does not occupy that were set aside as trail easements. So it was only the portion that the trail really needs is set aside as easement. As individual homeowners I'm sure you can see the advantages of not having an easement there. Hoffman: Staff has no objections to that request as long as it's reasonable. We're not going to vacate minor little jogs but as long as some realistic straight lines and that type of thing can be drawn to the easement documents, that can be accomplished. Schroers: Okay. Lash: Mr. Roy and Mr. Youngquist, do you feel like your questions have been answered? Paul Youngquist: Yeah, I do. I was just going to say. I don't know what everyone's thinking about what is happening to the other property along the road but as for our family we'd just as soon, we're just going to keep it as our family.for a while. We have young kids and it's a great place to. live so we don't plan to sell it and I'm not here because I want to see w neatly mine could be developed next year. I'm here just because this is where we're going to live. Schroers: Thanks. Alright, with that let's attempt a motion. 1'11 move to accept full park and trail dedication fees in the absence of land dedication for trail construction. These fees are to be paid at the time of building permit application at the per lot fee in force for residential property at the time of the permit application. The current fees are $500.00 and $167.00 per lot respectively. The above recommendation being contingent upon the applicant indicating their intent to develop the private park area as indicated on the general development plan. Okay. Two. The applicants supply a 20 foot wide easement for potential future trail construction purposes along the western border of the subject property abutting the right-of-way of State Highway 41 and that the City not require that easement to be maintained in an area that is not going to specifically be used for trail. And three, the inclusion of the private park does not diminish the requirements of the public recreation and open space as part of a subdivision. Therefore, no credit will be considered for the inclusion of this private facility. Schroers moved, Andrews seconded that the Park and Recreation Commission recommend that the City Council require full park and trail dedication fees in the absence of land dedication or trail construction. These fees are to be paid at the time of building permit application at the per lot fee in force for residential property at the time of permit application. The. current fees are $500.00 and $167.00 per lot, respectively. The above recommendation being contingent upon: i. . . Park and Rec Commission Meeting August 11, 1992 - Page 18 1. The applicant indicating their intent to develop the private park area as indicated on the general development plan. 2. The applicant supply a 20 foot wide easement for potential future trail construction purposes along the western border of the subject property abutting the right-of-way of State Highway 41. 3. The inclusion of the private park does not diminish the requirements for public recreation and open space as part of a subdivision. Therefore, no credit will be considered for the inclusion of this private facility. All voted in favor and the motion carried. CARVER BEACH PARK. VEHICLE PARKING. Hoffman: Upon receiving the Commission's recommendation in this regard, for the designation of four parking spaces at Carver Beach. I consulted with the City Manager before giving this to the City Council. Finding the Commission's action consistent with the Carver Beach Park adopted master plan, the Manager suggested I include the item in the July 27th City Council administrative packet as an informational item. If no comments were received, I would then move ahead with the designation of the four parking spots. No comments or questions were heard from the Council that evening but prior to moving ahead with this project I received a call from a resident of the area. That resident was at the meeting, at the Park and Recreation Commission. This person stated that they did not believe all their questions had been addressed satisfactorily at the Park and Recreation Commission meeting. In talking with the individual I could not resolve their concerns and they voiced a desire to speak to the Mayor or somebody else on the City Council. He eventually chose the Mayor. The Mayor upon receiving this call talked to the individual at length. Mayor Chmiel then took the time to arrange a site inspection with me. After which a meeting between all parties, this person and their spouse, Mayor Chmiel and myself, was scheduled to discuss their concerns. Thi's meeting was held on the morning of July 31st. The result of that meeting it's his recommendation to reconsider your previous action in recommending a total of 4 parking spaces be designated. Reconsider that action of recommending 4 parking space be designated. Instead designating a total of 3 parking spaces for Carver Beach Park. This is somewhat inconsistent with typical action. Typically it goes to the full Council, there for review prior to a recommendation for action coming back to the Commission or approval taking place. However, it is recommended that the Park Commission rescind their previous recommendation of June 23, 1992 recommending the City Council approve the construction and signing of 4 parallel parking spots on the south side of Lotus Trail for Carver Beach Park. One of the four spaces designated for persons with disabilities as specified and shown on the attached map. And have planning and engineering take a careful look to ensure that there will be no damage done to the existing trees in the area. Instead make the following recommendation. The Park and Recreation Commission recommends the construction of signage of three parallel parking spots on the south side of Lotus Trail at 'Carver Beach Park consistent with the park's master plan. One of the three for persons with handicaps and , , . . . DAHLGREN SHARDLDW AND. DBAN ;Ilil rlR~r UF (JHTIl q!ITI .' ill !vl11':N[;\P()LIS ;\\~~ II h iJ.~ ,.~ )ll il 18 August 1993 Chanhassen Park & Recreation Commissioners City of Chanhassen 690 Coulter Drive Chanhassen, MN 55317 RE: Lundgren Bros. Public Trails System Proposal Dear Commissioners: Terry Forbord of Lundgren Bros. presented the Song/Carlson Property Subdivision at the last meeting of Chanhassen's Park & Recreation Commission meeting on July 27, 1993. The proposed subdivision, in combination with the previously approved Johnson/Dolejsi/Tumer Subdivision, creates two linked neighborhoods between Highway 41 and Galpin Boulevard. An east/west collector road runs through both subdivisions with a public sidewalk on the north side that connects two separate association recreational areas one which has already been approved with the Johnson/Dolejsi/Tumer Subdivision and another is proposed with the Song/Carlson Subdivision. Although these two recreational areas are designed to serve the needs of the neighborhoods built around them, there was uncertainty at the past Park and Recreation Commission meeting that other recreational facilities were needed in the general area. At this time, both the Johnson/Dolejsi/Tumer and the Song/Carlson developments include not only the connecting public sidewalk along the east/west collector road between Galpin and Highway 41, but also includes a public trail easement along Highway 41 and an additional 17 feet of right-of-way along Galpin Boulevard which will be graded for public trail purposes to fulfill the City's trail needs in this area. Lundgren Bros. has always strived to build unique and very strong neighborhoods in the sense that they attract people who want special identity and a high degree of amenity features within their neighborhoods. This is why the association recreational areas are an integral part of Lundgren Bros. neighborhoods. It was apparent that additional issues needed to be addressed based on comments of the last meeting of the Park and Recreation Commission and Lundgren Bros. asked that the issue be tabled so that they could work on some new ideas for public recreational activity in the area. When we looked at the overall open space system and public trail linkages in the area, we concluded that there might be a very advantageous public trail opportunity that has not been talked about or proposed yet for this area of town. The collector road through the Lundgren Bros. neighborhoods generally run in an east-west direction and slightly along the northerly alignment. Although the sidewalk through the neighborhood collects pedestrians from the homes and acts primarily as a transportation type Chanhassen Park & Recreation Commissioners 18 August 1993 Page 2 . function, we felt that an additional public trail linkage was possible that would provide a significant natural experience for the citizens of Chanhassen through one of the nicest features of this part of town. A very large wetland complex lies to the south of the JohnsonJDolejsiffurner Subdivision and affords the opportunity for a public nature trail system to directly link the Highway 41 trail with the public trail along Galpin Boulevard. This public trail system also can provide opportunities for connecting other subdivisions to the trail system which will eventually pass under Highway 5 and to the new elementary school site. . The location of the public trail is at the toe of the slope and bluff line along the wetland complex which provides significant views all along the perimeter of the northern edge of the wetland. On Monday, August 9, Terry Forbord met with the Park and Recreation Director, Todd Hoffman, and walked the property along the wetland. During the walk, deer and hawks were sited and the beauty of the area became apparent and the opportunity, we believe, is a significant one for the beginning of a public trail system around the wetland complex. We have enclosed a map in our proposal that shows the public trail opportunity along this wetland and how it relates to the Johnson/Dolejsiffurner Subdivision. The amount of area that is already being preserved in this area is about 9 acres. The public trail easement granted to the City by Lundgren Bros. would be two-thirds of a mile in length. Lundgren Bros. is willing to dedicate a public trail easement and grade the easement as a part of its park dedication requirements for the Johnson/Dolejsiffurner Subdivision. With the remaining fees generated by both neighborhoods, the City will have significant funds available for the public trail construction. As the remaining areas develop in the future and the wetland complex can be encircled with a complete public trail system, the recreational opportunities greatly increase. We have found that looped trails attract a significant amount of recreational activity from children exploring to aerobic exercising with in-line skating and bicycling. We believe this looped public trail proposal will bring a significant recreational opportunity to the City and residents of the planned neighborhoods in the area. In summary, Lundgren Bros. is proposing, in addition to creating their own association recreational areas with tennis courts, play structures and flat areas for informal field activity, public trail connections that will be the catalyst for a wonderful, natural experience along one of the most attractive wetland complexes in the City of Chanhassen. We hope you will share in our enthusiasm for this idea and we look forward to working closely with the Park and Recreation Director and staff to complete the details on the wetland trail system. We still are proposing to pay park dedication fees for both Johnson/Dolejsiffurner and Song/Carlson in addition to the other amenities they have already proposed. Sincerely, DAHLGREN, SHARDLOW, AND UBAN, INC. U,U~~ C. John Uban, ASLA Enclosures . . . e REVISIONS OA. TE BY REVtS!QN S - composite jtd-song property 1 .ulv 1QQ~ ,--/ ',,', '" ...._~ " -', ~ ~<,. J .; rl_.- -@- I _ ~III"H I t" ~ "- "-1--.... I! I e / - ~1;~jl;1 ~! .., Ij :1 i i : I ! . IttKl ....tn ." u~--: /' =-~.:=-=:.:~~~...::....:--=-=- __0__________ =.-.::-~.':.-_-:.==-~==- ---- ------ ~~~9 U :::::'--:-:=: m =--:::..""'=---=..-= Hf l.i~ PI '~i~~ l~ - ~ - .~ ~~~~~: -------~----_. - -----.-..-----.- --------.---- .- -----.--- --- ----- -._-... -------------- .-----. -- ---. - ---- ------.-- ----- -.---- -.-----_. -.----.--- .--- .---- ---.----- -- -.----- - -.- ---- -----..-- ----._--- -- ---_. -------- ------.-. +- -- ----.-. ---'----. ---._--- --------- ------.---.--. --------------. .----..---. ---.- -. -._---. ---._- _.. ..-.---------. _u___..______ -'---'---.--..-- -- -----------.-- -- _.~-----... --- -.._- -_. ---.- ---.--.------- -- - - -.._-- :...~~::..~--=::=_-::.::..-=~. :-:.':'.'-'=.-=..:.....--,;".-::"':"."";--...:;:::- =="=~"'_.':.:~---=---,::;. - -- --._---- ._. --- -- --._---- '-' n____._._______ -------.. -_.- -.-- .--- --.-. --- --- -".-- ----------- -- ..-.- --- -.--- ----------..-. - --- --._-- -.- ...----.----.- --------.- ------.-. - ---_. _____h_._ .---..---- -.--..-- - -- -.-----. - -.- ---- -.--- ---- ---..---- -------- .----.--- ". -.---.-- -------..- -----'---'--~'- ----_. -.- ----- .---- ------. - ---- ----,.-.----- -----.--- ._------ .-..-- --------- . --- - ~.-.. -------- ------- ----.-.- ----- -.- ------ ----. --------- --- - .------- --- --.---------- --_. -- -.---- ------.----.- _..____ u__ .___ -.--- -.-------- I /. M -@- A =-~...:---:>< possible park trail.';iI~~~~mii;;;n "'.1"'/.1//"""//////"" 'ii111111111111111 ~~~;;;;;;;;;: ""''''/'''//''', /~~.:: '-~4 c 2 (; c .. ;; :s ~ ., ... .2 BUg. 12, 1993 .----Ised trail connection SCALE r - 200" IJ PROJECT NAME I SHEET TITLE CERTIFICATION I ~..w, ... Ii-. _.___. .-----...-.......,. """"'..-... u... 1_..., ~ "--' ~.....u. 1- oJ ..... <._ _,. -~.=- . :11,.' ., --~ ~~ ----- --- ~ \ REGIONAL PARK - . DRIVE DO LE~J\ ~D AY . . / '" . . ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,'\,,,,,,,,,,,, A'\'\,,'\""'\'\''\'\'\''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' z",,\",,,,,\"",\"'\""'\'~'\"'\""'''''' r..""""""'\,,,,\',\""''\'"'''\''''' . ,"""""',"""""""',""'" j '.""""""",,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, ; ''''''''','''''''''''','''''',''''''','''' , .,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, "*" , . """",'",'',''''''''',''''''' " ,""""""""" ,\"""""" '" , ,'..' ",""''','''''''','','''''''''' '~' ),:", '.""""""""""""", "'''' """",,\,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, """ """""""""""'~"""'''' """'''''''''''''''''''''''''' '''''''''''''' . """"'"'''''''''''' ""''''''v """""""",,,,,,,,, """""'" .~ """"'"''''''''~''''''''' I~I ,,""""""'," """""'" ~ .""",,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, , ",'"'''''' \ ' . """""""~' """""""" \ ,,","""','" ""'"'''''' ,,\ ~,"',"""" """"""". '.""""" '~' ,,"'''''''' '\ '\",. IJJ ~ '''''''''''' """""''\',' ,~ '""",'" """ "-"" 'y' ,'::' ~. ",- ~'( ~ ' '.""" '~' ","""','" ',:-,:-,, , 9 ,) ',r '.... ~. l<~'-\' ,. 'P, ',,,,,, ,\" . """'" '\ ~/:..::" Ii 0 """" "" 'r~~.~'~::-:::::':::::'::.;:' '"'''\''' "",,~~.,',..,.,". s :':.~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~:~</t::;: "J .K'. ~~ ~ '~\\.'--~',_-"" "-.....'~ ,'.' .,.".x~~"""""",-:,:'.:'.-:: # ~ ~ \, - '.... --- '_. "'" ~'''''''':--:P'''''''''''r:::' ~ "/"'," ,~~/) .,- -. '. .... .I.~-~ ,,~~~(:' "/"~(~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~:::: "'p -ii". .'\',/ >'':-''\)t1' - .:' .:.:- ~'...., """"". , ..,""'.''\''',....,'''-:. : '<' "/<~~ '. . "- , '\ , , , , , " . . " , , , , " '\ , , , , , , " :. (/ ~ ""'''''''', '."" ":J:;"""....i: ", ' /, >'.., 0/:9"~ """"""'''''''\'\''''~~'J'~{ / Ii . '~~~~~~~~~~'. ~'~~~~~~~~~~~~~ill:~ ~~: tf~' IAl/~, '-.. \~""':D "~: .~: p~l '! ~ ;~! i ; )'''''''''''' .."".,,\ "~, '" !f.'r. '. ~ - ' """,,',,'.... , .'.'.'" .,' """'", , . tv!J"., ';J '" , , , , , , , ' ',,'" . '. ".' '. ,"" ,:'- "-,, ~. . /' ~. -~': ~" ''\, \ - , . '..... (' ",,,,,,,,,,,,,.... ,',"."',' .,...",,,,,,,t.J. 'II"'~', 'j ~ ",\1.., / "',""'.' '.-<' ". ~ /. "';Ii "'>"':,',~.,..;' "', ~.\' ".-- ,,< --r-, , . ' , , " " ' "-,'. \.oJ i ,,., ... -)0,.:- , , , '- '.""-" " ..... ),,1" ..' _"-". . _' .. ,.,"."., . . I """'~)<.',' "',...,......,"'~~',....,""'-,V)o" Y',..:$' ,. , '~,J:".. ;'~ ~ , , , , , , '~ ' ' . . ',,,, '\ , , '\ , , " , , '\ " , '. ' " , '\ '\ '\ '\ , '::J:: ' " ' ' '" -', I ';, ",' If :t' ,. r ~-'" ~t. ,'\ ,\"" ., . ' '.'"""""", .."", ',:~'" ,', 6" , /', m ./ I . , , , , , , " ,,'.' . , , , , , , , , , , , , , , '. . " , , ~ ' ..... ',/ ' ~~.;. r' - ""yt"'...."'.....' """ '''f......'..''-. .~''''''-\.. ," 7 A~'I/ <f . .--' t' II' IN "" ~ ~ -'_.-"-.' ~"'_-_~_..I" . J' """"'..... ",', ".'.'~..... .:. ~....,. .,....."'. / i __ 111 "",,'.>:-. --- :..... . \' 'j '- 0<{ y ,~~~~~",~ N ,,'\ J \~<1 '-, ,,/,/ '.... \/,,~:;, -::', .~:.;::::-:-::~.........' ,,~222~~~~~~~~:~(. ~ ) t~~'1 f 'i\1 ;. i\ ! !\~: r' / "L::>;( -:--1 \/'\... ~~, .......'.:.;..::: ,"',"," """. . "io.., . - . k'" . J Ie)>,. ' .. .\ :;- ," ,,",','," ,,'''' ....... I!'..... . ".. . --Iil.... / ',. /'4 ~ " r," ~1.!' """"""~"",,.... It "-.....---..,., ,1''''''''''& . ~. \.1 _. y' ". , . ' .- ...., 't ~\ . J>' """""". """,. ,t. ~.. ...~~t:r_:~ /.:r ,__ ~. . '-T~ _;~-__:. /,'" ,~ -'".{# ", , ," , , , , , ," ",'" ..... , r> i ':It of. ~ ~ l' : H~' -,;, . -~ \, . _ __ :\_ ,. '.. """""'\*" '\"",. -(', ,f "~. .' '.... - ...:.. /<. \. . 'f---:;; ,""'''''','' "",,,'v J ':,J.. ._'\. '\., ~- '~... ~ , , , , , , , , , , , , " """""". ,~.. -..(( "'.~ I: " " - ~ . - _ , / "',",,",'," ,,,,,,,,,,,.... (' t J:,~ ,.' .\' \ \.-. ,~\~'\,l' """"""~""""'" '.... ... :" '.. ,1 I >\..... .. 't ~ fl .- ","'''', ,,","", """,,,,,,,, - ' f,j ,- .', " "1" .......::. .,., '. '. . \' ~ I """""",''''',' '~:-..."""\'~.. \ [ J _:~::.)..,;,,,\,,,,, i " ~.. LC', I """"",",' ""''''''z'''' ',t.' #0..,.'; \. . ~. .... ~" , , "'''' , , , , , , , " , ' , , , , , , , , 'I . "" ,. . . . ~\.~. I , ' " , , , , , , , " , ... , ~ " ..--"', ~ """""''''''''''''''l''''''''", 'I " ..' f"J,- 'I """"""'''''''''''''',1."""" ":: ,I ,-) . ","""""""""'" "V'\,"'''', Y . " /f:,:: " """",,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,.... ,\""",' ,:'. ", 'T?' .f'. I'"'''''''''''''''''''''''''' ''',''',' ,::"1, .::- .;, 1""'''''''''''''''''''''~~''''''~8'::-'~' """"""""""""'''''',' ".'::::'.'::-': , """""""""""""'~'" '(:-::.''::-., '. '?' \' " , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , " , , , , , , , , , '%:-:-:-:-:';':-:':-: .~ I II""'" " , ,""", ,\"""""", .:::::;:::-:::::-::: I ~..~ I ,""', , " , " , " " ,"', " '" ::-:::::::::::::-:;::: \:'~ ' '" , , , , , '" , , , , """"'" '/-::::::::::::::::-:.-:;;" /' .J ,"""""""""""""" :::~:::::::::::::::::;::::: (../" ~"""""""""""" ..... """"""""""""" I'" , , , , , " , , , , , , , ''''''','''' '" -0':' "',"""""',"""',"""',""'" , ~""''''\""""",,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,~,. :'''''''''''''''''''''"""""""" ... I""""""""'"""",,,,,,,,,, , ~'"'''',''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' """"""""""",...",,,...,,,,, """""""""""""""'" ~"""""""'"'''''''''''''''' """""""""""""""" , """"""""""""""""" r"""""""""''''''''''''''~ ,'" ," "", , " '" " "", , "'" ,," ,,"""""""",""""""'" """""""""""""""",,, ~""""""""""'''''''''''''' """""'\"""""""'''''''''\' ,"""'''''''''''''''''''''''''' I"""""'"'''''''''''''''' , I. '\ , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , " , .""""""""",,,,,,,,,,,,, ~""""""""""''\'''''' ,"",'''''''''''''''''''''''' ,. , , , , , , " , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , I""""""""""""'" ,""""""""""""" ~"""""""""""'" r""'"'''''''''''''''''''''''' " , , , , " , , " " , , , , , , , " , , , , , ~"""""""""""" ~""""""""""'"'' ."""""",,,,,,,,,, , \.'\. \ \- \. \-- '\ -~-->---'- ... -~-' -' -~- -~ -'--~ 15" , , , , , '. .... '. . , " , , , , , , , , , " , , ' . """","" "" .', ", , , , , , , " " , , '. ~"""""""" . J""""""".... ;... '. , " , , , , , , , , , , " ", ' ",...,""",..."...~. .. . , ',' ., ". ". , " " " , , " " ~"""""""'''''' """""""'" ""...""",,,,,' """"""'.' . """""",. , , , , , , , , ",' ' ''''','''''' ,,,... '.. ",', '. . ..."""""...",......,...,. ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,......... """,""""'" """""""",. """"""','" ~""""""",,,,. """"",""" """",'," '\ , , , , , , , , '. "..."" :-""",", ~""', . ~ , , '. " ' .",. . '." . \: """ """",' """"~ """"..." """"..." """"",," ",,,,,,,...,,,,,, """"...",,\,,,,,, ""',""""''','''''' ~, """',',""'" """""",",',""""","',""","\' ,,\',,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, """"',","""""""""""""" """""""""""""""""""", "",...""""""""""""""""" ",""""',"""",',"""""""'" ...'\"""...",......"""""""",...""",,' """"","""''','''''''''''''''''''' .""""",,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,. .,"""''\'"'''''''''''''''''''''' .,"""""""""""""""" ~"""""""""""""'" ' "","""""""""'" . .. ""'"'','','''',''''' """""""""" .." ........ \,,"...""" . . I I "'0 o C/) C/) -. 0- - ('t) "'0 tl) ~ ~ .... ~ ru ) '- .... C ... c: 10 "' u .\ --1_ o ; z " '. , , , , "- . ,", .,,-,, ., ,,' '. " , , , , " , , , ....."" . """'" '. , , , , , , , , , " " '., , " , " , " , , , , , . '."'"'''' , , , "",,,...,,,,,, ."""""" '. , , , , , , , , , , , , , . '.,""""""'" " , , , , , , " , , , , , , , '.""""'''''''''''' ... ....""""""'\",,, ,"'''''''''''''',' . "''''''''''''''''''','' """"""'\",'\""......,, . ,',","""','''''''' .",,,,,,,,,,,,,,,\"~',,,, ""","","',""~,,"~ """"""''',''',','''~ '.""'"'''''''''''''''''''' '..."""""",,,,,,,,,,,,, ",,,,,...,,,,,,,,,'\,,,,,,,,,,,, ,,",'" '.""""...""""",,,,,,,,,"'''''''''''''''' '."',,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, " .,"',""""'"'''''~,~''''''''',''''''''',,'',''''' """,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,... """",,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,... ,'\""''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''','''''''''''' ."""",,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,~,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,... ''','''''''''''''''''''''''''''','','''''''''''' ""","''''''''''''''''''','''''''''''''''''''','''''''''' ~""''''''''''''',''''''''''','''''''' "',"""""""',"""""",",''''',' """"",,\,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,..., ,. .~,l ,- .- I " , . J . \. l .K '-- ., '. ' ,. . ,"" ""," , '. - '-y \ .... ,~- ~ () I I n o z '" ..... ~ c: n .... 1+ <.0 0,) (") , ~ f ,,'... - rr1 )( -t '" z U) Q Z r- - 3 - ::1 '" "f J< - , ---:-;7";.~~-~-=~:'=:'----:-:::'__--::=I;'".-~-;-..~~-: ~: f'!-. '-, :::, , . "',I ~': ~.r;.. . ,:;. ~ . ". . ~-.'/ ....k.. .~., ~; ,;,~~~~! ,,:{';~:-'., , ...."'!,. . .....', ,. ,":t;' ' i , ,1.:r. '\," ,>. (;' :.<:1 ~'. ;;:,- ....; t.::': "~\..;'" ,\'.., :~!., . "':"'.. ':" ..\.~ . ::~1. '. . l. ....:" ..,.<~ ,',C,< ./ . f~."" l;.;' I.: :,)';)- ; .~' , \~:> \;. .' ~'.:' ;'..:.'. . . :. ,'~. stfl!~~~i ..t"".C"';'''.. ........ 1',..,) ~. j~~:;: ~.::.~~~~~;:~~~ ..~.:.~{ "-J N -o........c-t-N N ON::ro 0 '"1' ro::s :z r+c..n ro rt:1 --. ,~ OAlro+:- +:- ::snVl.. '"1c-t- o ~ Vl i;;' -+. ........ -'. , 0.0- N roro o n ::s (") 0 0 ro c: -tI 3 '"1 '-,. +:-'"1r+::s ~::r co --. "TlVl-+. AI c: o '"1 'N ..... ro30..... <Vl::S~ ro ro ..... -0" 0. oAl ro -o-s-s< 3 ,.;- ro (t) ro, Vl ..... ::s ~ -'~ 0 c-t- AI 0.-0 Vl,mm o ::s 0. ......-S c-t- m-,.~ ..... n J:lI -'. J:lIm.....c-t- n::S ' ::T -,c-t-J:lI . ..... -S -S ' .....~ m m ..... J:lI Vl r+ J:lI Vl -'. ..... n 0. ro ..0 ro ro Vlc:X::s -.J. -.I. r+ .... -S Vl .... ::Sror+AI 0.' ..... r+ ~ ::::r -.I. -J. --' __.::S c-t- J:lI Vl ::r ::s ~.....o. AlroJ:llc: ~ .-SVl n. ro co ro -AlmVl Vl ~r+"'" --.ro 0 ..... '"1 r+ 1-1 .....::sVl::s .,-- - --_.'-- .-- ---~'-- . --- I -I m- lI:tli.}i{ . :;~;:;::::::::::;:~:::; :i:Wlf?f~ri "'1_ .\ , ' "-'. ~ : ~ ., , .. ~ AlVlNr+,.,., ro 0 ::r AI c:: "O"O::sroAr+ OAlro roc:: Vl'"1 ro '"1 Vl AI W AI )> ro --. r+ Vl::s o-ro r+::s"O ..... ~ ro. AI (t) ::s ::r -S '"1 (t) ....::s ' '" Vl --. n -I --. CO :;;r::r::r "0 r+ ::r 01 ro ..... (t) 0- ..... AI o ..... -+. n ::s -tI '"1 --. 0 Vl o ::r ro 0 ::s '"10 Vl-+'Vln o r+AI Vio.o-g:'"1..... c: ro c:..... n "0 r+ ro n ::T AI ~ n. r+ -+. '"1 ro - --. 0 AI '" ro ~ 0 -S '::s ::s ..... AI r+ 01-1 r+0::r n ::T::I: 0 -+. ro -J. rD -'. ..... co r- (/) n -'. ..... ::r 01 c: 0 r+J:lI~"'n::s << ::s 01 m ::T Vl o.~ ' J:lIVl~OI~ -S ::Sc-t-I::: O+:-::S-Sn 'C:: .... __ 01 r+ ::s '" --. .... 0. 01..... 0 J:lI-S ::s ,::s '" n OJ 0.' 00 ,.;- c:: -+. ro....-I..... ....::ro.J:lI ;?"-Jroror+ '"1 ~ -+. '"1 "'1 3 ro -+. 01 .... J:lI Vl ro .... Vl ~ c-t- n ..... o ror+ ::s ~ '"1 --. ro ro::s<::S ~ ..0 ::r ~ ~. I::: S. OJ ~ "'1 --' --' n o.;ri-+.--'--' -.I. ..j. C- o::s::s ro OJ ~ '" CO '" m 0 X 0 CI> 0 - ;: ::J C CO, C/) '1J > 0> .., r- 7\ 5' (J> co 0> :::l a. (JJ co .., < o' co )> .., CD 0> (J> -0 0> .., 7\ o CD ~ -,' () -, CD :J () '< )> -, CD m (n n'"1OJC::--f oro'"1::s:;;r ::SVlroo.ro Vl c:: OJ ro ~;:;~~~ ro.. --...... (t) '"1 ..... 0 OJ ro ..... "0 0. ro 0- '0. --. OJ OJ (t). 0. Vl 0. (t) 0. Vl ::s OJ --. ro )> r+ 0. r+ '"1 n .... 0. --. < n -+. -'. 0 -'. 0 -'. r+::Sn'"1ro --. OJ ro 0. 0. o ..... 0. --. ::s ::So OJ ::s 0- CO ::s --' (t) ~ r+ --. 0 r+ 0. CO Vl ::r ro ::r OJ r+ ro < o-::S ro 0 __.::r .....-sr+ro3 o 01 OJ -0 ~ -S ~"O 30~::s (t) 0. 0. 01 ::s Vl Vl r+ (t) C -o~Vl OOJro -N n -S -S ro-o n '" ::s, I:::Vl-o~ro -S -Sn Vl --'c-t-w -'. 0 .... ::s '"1 0 __. ::SVl Nr+ 000"0 ::s N -+. '"1 (t) 0 r+ (t) O:;;rVl w 0 ..... (t) Vl::S r+ --' Vl '''0 :;;r )> ..... ~ OVlOJ c: ::s..... ..... OJ.. OJ 0. '"1 r+co :;;r ro 0- --. --' (t) Vl ~ ~(')() S' :J'" ;::;: ~m'< CI> :J 0 o - -:J'" O>m (J) (n CD :J N o :z n1 -0 ::s Vl '0. 1-1 '"10(t)(t)::s o ""1 ""1 '-t) < r+ <. --. r+ --. ::r (t) n ::r 0. 0. --. ro (t) m o.o(t)::S ,-+. __. r+ Vl < r+, 0 --. , ::r --. c:: OJ,<ro::Sr+ OJ 3 -S __. ~ AI r+ AI n ::s C- (/) Vl o t..c:: r+ CO OJ ::SOr+n ~C::rnn ::s ..... ro m 0 ....m Vl""1 (t) < __. Vl ~ ::s0l::Sr+""1 r+""1VlO o.r+ 01 OI::sO ::s 0 ..... ro -tI 0. ""1 ..... --. J:lI CO c-t- Vl r+::r::r 01 J:lI --. 0- -'. .....nOO(/) ron::s""1 ro ::r r+VlOON "'1 Vl ,-+. 0 ~ 01 0. -' ..... J:lI ro --' r+ "0" o AI Vl ..... -S 01 '< 0 c:: "'::s Vl r+ r+ Vl r+ ::r c:: . (t)(t)-S 3'"1ro w ,AI "'1 -I (1)' ::rAl ::s -0 (t) AI --. Vl (t) ""1 CO AI X '" ::r""1 --. Vl 0- (t) Vl OAlr+ Vl'"1 Vl ::r ::r Vl og::rr+ , Co.O ::r --' C AI 0. --'r+ -00. AI 0-""1 0---. (t) A (t) lJ) ro n ro lJ) "0 3 "0 N)> XOXm""1o::rO--' -o3nnOlJ)AI::sr+ 0I3roc-or+lJ)m::r ::sc::-o""10 ro 0 V1 ::s r+ m V1 N C --'--.--.o.(t) 00 CO 0r+0 o.-+'-t) ::r ::S'<::S3 3 o "'1r+0I0Al g~~~~~-o~V1 ""1 __.""1--. r+Ar+ o......mOco ::r. ::r 0 <::s ro ro -+. ro AI __. -+. __. ::s::so -+. ::s ro r+ 0. C r+ __. o -I < r+ --. Vl::r n '"1 ::r ro ::r AI -0 ..... (t) AI r+ ro ::s ro ..... AI '< ::s ::r r+ -S -' r+ -sC:: "'1o.nAl AI VlroAlmroro-o::sOl --. n .......0 < --' "0 0. 3 0.'"1 CroVl-S 0 ro (t) (t) .......... o::r C AI><"'10 <OI::S o r+ "0 (t) "0 -'. ro -t) __. AI 0. 3 ::s 0. Vl r+ 0::S ro 0 r+ Vl ::s "0 ro :;;r::S --...... c-t- ~ --' --. -+. ro -0 0 01 Vl .... 01 ~ < .....::s ::s.. Vl =' ro 01 ~AlOo. ~-sn --. ::s..... r+ 01 0. AI (/) -+. ::r -S 0- ::s c-t-nr+O(t)roc:mr+ -'. 01 ::r '"1 AI =' m :::s --t rp ("") -,.::s-..l CO..... ..... __. ::r r+ 01 Vl CO c:: r+ AI "0 ~ -0 AI r+ '< < 0. -' OI-+.='c roroAl '"1 0 0. ""1 < r+ "0 "'""1 ...... m 0 ro r+ -S :3 -+'O"--'rom (t) ro 0 0. lJ) AI "'1 -0 (") ro -0 ro roAl::r='30::S N -SAl ro""1r+ U'l.......... "'::s ....::s c: ,(/) ::r::s r+ .... I AI . '" AI n V1 ro ~(/)--' W m --. Vl c: n. >< CO - --. o.....r+m o.ro Vl ,,-..J::r::sro --. 0. n --' r+ AI ..... AI AI lJ) n ro r+ ::r C r+ ""1 '< ::r AI --. Vl (t) --. ro"'-"roVl::sro""1::l , , I N o :z n1 ~ n --'0 r+::l ::r V1 r+ -s-s mc n n ""1M- ro --. 010 r+ ::l ,.-.... N ......... 1.0 I-' "'-" N -'. 00 ::l-t) AI --' r+ ""1 OAl "0 --. "0 --' o Vl ""1 r+ n C 0 ::l ::l --.::s r+(t) --.n mr+ Vl --. ::s --'CO =' r+ f"T1 0 0. ro(") ::s ::r AI ,,::s -S ::r AlAI --. V1 ""1Vl --.(t) m ::l Vl 3 AI w. o ""1 -0 AI -S A lJ) AI ::l Cl. . ." .~.r_. \..::. \, .. \ \ ) \ /' \\ . I ", " .I J / '.. i . I__uu.. ...~', , I I i / / -----~ = ..... ..... o (') o c: .., - 6 / ", ...... ............... ..... ......., Y'''''''''" ". '~".- ~ " --, ....... "'{ ", (JI, . '.u.{J1 ~ o . 0; 0 ,a, ~,.. J+' (Jl :---- ... (J1 0: / 95 "" 95.... \, .......... --,....-' .,......-... ( \. ~...~... .~, ..~~._.,. . / I t- Z <3 LOCATION: :J a. APPLICANT: a.. <( . '. ~ ~ l.&J .... - fi> PRC DATE: 8/24/93 oS CITY OF CHANHASSEN CC DATE: HOFFMAN:k STAFF REPORT PROPOSAL: Preliminary Plat to Replat Lot 2, Block 1, Outlot C and Outlot A, Bloomberg Addition into 3 lots on property zoned CBD (Central Business District); Site Plan Review of a Hotel Expansion and Restaurant between the Country Suites Hotel and Frontier Building South of West 78th Street, East of Market Boulevard Lotus Realty and Bloomberg Companies, Inc. c/o Bloomberg Companies, Developer 525 West 78th Street Chanhassen, MN 55317 PRESENT ZONING: CBD, Central Business District ADJACENT ZONING AND LAND USE: N . CBD S- CBD E - CBD W - CBD COMPREHENSIVE PARK PLAN: This site is currently served by City Center Park and is located very near the proposed Central Park. COMPREHENSIVE TRAIL PLAN: This site is served by the downtown system of sidewalks and trails. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the Park and Recreation Commission recommend the City Council accept park and trail fees for Lots 1 and 2, Block 1, and any subsequent lots of the Bloomberg Second Addition. Said fees to be collected at the time of building permit application at the rate then in force. Current commerciaVindustrial park and trail fees are $3,000 per acre and $1,000 per acre respectively. The respective acreages for the lots are approximately .75 acres for Lot 1 and .35 acres for Lot 2. I I I I I I I I I I I I [ I I I I I ~ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ~~ Ot t-t Z ~ o u ~ - .t cf) - ~r I I I ,.. I .; ,,:,J ~, "'J ; ::::'1 ::::J l~~ I . . . ..' . ...Ep"'l, " ~.s ~ #-5 :::: -t < l'- 0>. C\I , - :'-'~' ,.- S6,~ .. . , " " , .....:......~. , , ' , , ' , .. ,', ....... ... ". " " .,,: ~ ....... ..... ; 0: ..... , , ' , , ' , , ........ " " " " .' . ..... , ' . ' ..... ....... : : : BO'ZS S "OZ ,BSoOO S L'9fL ==1 .r""\ ,,~L ,fSo'PL_,..::::::r 1"\_ t erg 3 "Ot ,9So6B N '. . . JrUU!m~ UfUJ~ 'IJllil!~pl !II!;\ i'!I'!!! i IlIli,J g · ll~" ;: 91 ,tt~ ~Hf!1 a /J t '"' ~ f . ~ ~ ~ I 11,- a i ! I I I I Il ~ f i ! -t- I I I ~ I '!'>~..~Y1l ... ,.1 (::e- o I !11.3~ ~... "I l".:;i"'> .' .~ ~r-2 --. ) . . ~ " \ j'"l I I I I I i I 1Ia lIa' n ~m~ :c ~~~ ~ ~~~ s: a~! ~ ,.. i'5 Z ~ 2: ~ - ~ tt z r . j. i-II ,'I 11111" ~j~lll , I. ~ I~ ~l~' ~ l " If' ~ I! J Iii J~ I , I I I I I I I J I I I I ~ I I I I I I I I I I I ! . f' I . I I \ ~ I I I I ..' I .... I I I I I , to I--~ . I I Q I I I I I I I " I I I I I I I - I I ~ ~ l!' )> tTIi~ ~11 ~ I ;~~ !3<; ww a~ -!L Jl:IJl:I~ n ~~Q ~ ,..~~ z ~ Jl:I"" ::t ~~>< > e~1 ~ ,.. 15 Z ~ z' . ~ lJ Z I. . ~ -< .' . ',. I~ I i II i I . ~ . . = ~ I ~ I " J,JJ~ II~! ~ , Q I J '~ r i 1I1'~ ' '91'lr l~ IE ~ . II II . !~ If: " . ~ ~ 'Im~ ~'iI w ......... ,11"":':";;> .... ~ r-oz ..!J. ~ ~ ~~~ n i~~ ~ ~~"' :t ~~)o( > a~! ~ ~ ; ~ ~ ~ t. -,. 1- ~. i .~ i . q! \l~' ~ .' ~ , . . . CITY OF CHANHASSEN bCi-J 690 COULTER DRIVE. P.O. BOX 147. CHANHASSEN. MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900. FAX (612) 937-5739 MEMORANDUM TO: Todd Hoffman, Park and Recreation Director FROM: Jerry Ruegemer, Recreation Supervisor 1(\ DATE: August 19, 1993 SUBJ: Septemberfest Celebration There is excitement in the air regarding the iill new Septemberfest celebration. This new community festival will still have the same focal point of "celebrating the harvest" as the former Oktoberfest celebration. Septemberfest will be Saturday, September 25 from 8:00 a.m. to 11:30 p.m. and will be located directly to the north Of Chanhassen City Hall in City Center Park. The schedule of events is very close to being finalized at the present time, and will prove to be a huge success with the new additions. Many new components were added. The highlights include, new fun family entertainment by Tricia and the Toons, and the Zuchinis will certainly be a plus. New musical talent was added to liven up Septemberfest. Chanhassen Senior Chorus Group, the Chan-o-Iaires, will perform between 3:30-4:30 p.m., which will give them an opportunity to showcase their talents.. Bruce Bradley, a 3 piece German band, will perform from 5:00-7:00 p.m. Bruce and his band play regularly at the Mall of America, and in the near future will be playing at the Oktoberfest celebration in Germany. Top billing will be the Killer Hayseeds, who are one of the top country bands in the Twin Cities. The four person group will perform from 8:00-11:30 p.m. under the big tent. Other noteworthy events include a line dancing demonstration, adult fall . softball league tournament, petting zoo/pony rides, Rotary Bingo, bake sale/farmer's market, Lederhosen contest, kid's games, and a prize board, similar to the 4th of July. Bringing in bigger named entertainment, the crowds are expected to be larger than other years for this fall classic. Additional advertising through local papers, TV/radio, signs, banners, flyers, etc., will be needed to make this new special festival successful. The schedule of events will be finalized soon, and will be printed around the first part of September. c. CITY OF CHANHASSEN Gb - 690 COULTER DRIVE. P.O. BOX 147. CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900. FAX (612) 937-5739 MEMORANDUM TO: Todd Hoffman, Park and Recreation Director DATE: August 19, 1993 1R FROM: Jerry Ruegemer, Recreation Supervisor SUBJ: Fall Softball After taking off last year's fall softball season, many teams are raring to play more softball. The fall season will begin the week of August 30th.ilf'his year's fall league will include a women's, men's, and a co-rec division. All teams will play double-headers on their scheduled game night. . * Women will play Monday evenings for five weeks. * Tuesdays and Thursdays will be designated nights for the men's open league. These teams may choose whichever night best fits their schedule. Teams participating in this league will play for four weeks. * Wednesday evenings will be used for the co-rec league. This league will have regular season games for five weeks and will conclude Sq>tember 29th. This year, for the first time, the Minnesota Recreation and Parks Association (MRPA) will be offering a Fall Softball State TournamentOctobet 9-10 in Apple Valley. Chanhassen will be sending one team from the men's division to participate in the tournament.. . Unfortunately, the MRPA will not ()f'fer~(:o-Rec or Women's Fall Tournament this year, but play in the future, depending on the interest level. These two leagues will playa longer season to make up for not going to a state tournament. At the present time, the Tuesday and Thursday night league will have enough teams to participate, with the total number being 16. Tl1.e women's and co-rec leagues will need at least 2 more teams to register in order for the league to operate. I'll keep you posted. . The fall softball leagues are generally more relaxing than your typical summer leagues. A lot of people are looking forward to getting a few more games in before hanging up their spikes for the winter. CITY OF CHANHASSEN .) 690 COULTER DRIVE. P.O. BOX 147. CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900. FAX (612) 937-5739 MEMORANDUM TO: Softball Managers FROM: Jerry Ruegemer, Recreation Supervisor 1~ DATE: August 9, 1993 SUBJ: Men's Open Fall Softball The Chanhassen Park and Recreation Department this year under the following guidelines. The regular season lasts 4 weeks starting the week of August 30 and ending the week of . September 20th. be offering a Men's Open Fall Softball League All games will be played at Lake Ann.park at 6:00 p.m. and 7:00 p.m. with a 55 minute time limit, and a 3-2 count with a courtesy. Teams will play double headers one night per week on Tuesdays or Thursdays. Summer In-house rules will apply for the 1993 Men's Open Fall League. USSSA approved umpires will govern all games including the In-house Tournament. The Men's Open League is set up to. accommodate ...~ tefln'lSper night with first priority going to teams which hilveplayed in a 1993 Chanhassen summer softballleague.i>Teams which have participated in a 1993 Chanhassen summer league need to register QyWednesday, August 18th. At 8:00 a.m. on Thursday, August 19th, .any new team maY register. The rules on eligibility for the fall league will remain the same as the Summer rules requiring players to either work or live inChanhassen. Four non-resident players are permitted on each roster. League fees for the fall league will be $200.00. . With the fall season rapidly approaching, everybody must act quickly. If your team is interested in joining, please contact me upon receipt of this letter. If you have any questions, please feel free to call me at 937-1900. ~. CITY OF CHANHASSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE. P.O. BOX 147. CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900. FAX (612) 937-5739 MEMORANDUM TO: Softball Managers FROM: Jerry Ruegemer, Recreation Supervisor DATE: August 9, 1993 SUBJ: Co-Rec Fall Softball The Chanhassen Park and Recreation Department will be offering a Co-Rec Fall Softball League this year under the following guidelines. . The regular season lasts 5 weeks starting Wednesday, September 1st and ending September 29th. All games will be played at Lake Ann park at 6:00 p.m. and 7:00 p.m. with a 55 minute time limit, and a 3-2 count with a courtesy. Teams will play double headers one night per week on Wednesdays. Summer In-house Rules will apply for the 1993 Co-Rec Fall League. USSSA approved umpires will govern all games including the In-house Tournament. The Co- Rec League is set up to accommodate 8 teams, with fIrst priority going to teams which have played /in a 1993 Chanhassen summer softball league. Teams. which .have participated in a 1993 Chanhassen summer league need to register by Wednesday, August.l8th. At 8:00 a.m. on Thursday, August 19th, any new team may register. The rules on eligibility for the fall league win remain the same as the summer rules requiring players to either work or live in Chanhassen. Four non-resident players are permitted on each roster. League fees for the fall league will be $210.00. . With the fall season rapidly approaching, everybody must act quickly. If your team is interested in joining, please contact me upon receipt of this letter. If you have any questions, please feel free to call me at 937-1900. CITY OF CHANHASSEN .~ 690 COULTER DRIVE. P.O. BOX 147. CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900. FAX (612) 937-5739 MEMORANDUM TO: Softball Managers 1R FROM: Jerry Ruegemer, Recreation Supervisor DATE: August 9, 1993 SUBJ: Women's Fall Softball The Chanhassen Park and Recreation Department will be offering a Women's Fall Softball League this year under the following guidelines. The regular season lasts 5 weeks starting Monday, August 30th and ending September 27th. . All games will be played at Lake Ann park at 6:00 p.m. and 7:00 p.m. with a 55 minute time limit, and a 3-2 count with a courtesy. Teams will play double headers one night per week on Mondays. Summer In-house Rules will apply for the 1993 Women's Fall League. USSSA approved umpires will govern all games including the In-house Tournament. The Women's League is set up to acconunodate8 teams, with first priority going to teams which have played in a 1993 Chanhas$en summersoftballleague.jI'eams Which have participated in a 1993 Chanhassensummer league need to register by Wednesday, August 18th. At 8:00 a.m. on Thursday, August 19th, any new team may register. The rules on eligibility for the fall league .will remain the same as the summer rules requiring players to either work or live in Chanhassen. Four non-resident players are permitted on each roster. League fees for the fall league will be $210.00. With the fall season rapidly approaching, everybody must act quickly. If your team is interested in joining, please contact me upon receipt of this letter. If you have any questions, please feel free to call me at 937-1900. . o (!,~&- . CITY OF CHANHASSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE. P.O. BOX 147. CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 . FAX (612) 937-5739 MEMORANDUM TO: Todd Hoffman, Park and Recreation Director FROM: Dawn Lemme, Program Specialist 1);i1 ~ DATE: August 18, 1993 SUBJ: Summer Discovery PlaygroundlLake Ann Adventure Camp Evaluation Summer Discovery Playground . This program, as noted in the July program evaluation, grew tremendously this summer, with 347 children attending at eight different sites throughout Chanhassen and one in Victoria (on a contractual basis). Evaluations from the program indicate that parents and children were extremely happy with all aspects. Next year we hope to expand to Herman Field and possibly one other site depending on demand. The two final Wednesday Wing Dings both went well with approximately 150 children attending the unicycling/juggling act, and well over 200 children and adults attending the mini-carnival. Also, the last two super events had good response with over 20 children attending the U of M Raptor center Trip, and 24 children going to the Twins game. Lake Ann Adventure CamP This was our fIrst year of camp and the program was held for one week (August 9-13). This was also a big hit for the children with 28 children registered for one full .week out at Lake Ann doing crafts, canoeing, hiking, swimming, and mucl1 more. A camp-out was held on Thursday night with 22 children and some parents along with 4 seasonal staff. Weather was perfect and it is anticipated by staff through conversations with parents, etc. that this program will be one that grows. The location is a perfect one wit\:~l the amenities a camp could ask for. . . . . CITY OF CHANHASSEN 7tL, - 690 COULTER DRIVE. P.O. BOX 147. CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900. FAX (612) 937-5739 MEMORANDUM TO: Park and Recreation Commission ;1/ FROM: Todd Hoffman, Park and Recreation Director DATE: August 18, 1993 SUBJ: South Railroad Corridor On Thursday, July 22, 1993, I was party to a meeting at Chaska City Hall between officials of the City of Chaska, City of Chanhassen, and Hennepin Parks in regard to the South Railroad Corridor. Hennepin Parks has completed their design studies for both the north and south railroad corridors and is now engaged in the process of determining a termination point for the southern route. .Discussions on July 22 indicate that Hennepin Parks is committed to coming as far as TH 10 1, and more likely would terminate at Bluff Creek Drive. Their interest for coming at least as far as TH 101 is to fulfill their desire to travel south through Shakopee for future access to their parks in Scott County. However, the justifications for continuing the trail into the City of Chaska are convincing and discussions in this area continue. Mr. Kermit Crouch, the Chaska City Planner, is drafting a letter on behalf of the cities and Carver County in this regard. This letter will be forwarded to the Hennepin Parks Board. Said correspondence will act as a follow-up to a letter of support which was previously sent as a result of a meeting called by this office last fall. I am attempting to secure whole or partial copies of theswdy for the commission. Update. Afternoon of August 18. 1993: Upon calling Mr. Barry Warner of Barton-AschmaIl Associates to inquire about the availability of copies of the Corridor Design Studies, he provided me with a very interesting update on this subject. The Hennepin Parks Board has selected Bluff Creek Drive as the southern (western) termini. This site was selected over the Pion~Trail option because it allows for a safer, more accessible trail head, and by continuing on to Bluff Creek, one of the most beautiful sections of the corridor (overlooking the Minnesota River Valley) is accessed. Preliminary information indicates the trail head will accommodate parking for eight vehicles and will include a map display and picnic tables. This is great news for the City of Chanhassen. . . . CITY OF CHANHASSEN 7b - 690 COULTER DRIVE. P.O. BOX 147. CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900. FAX (612) 937-5739 MEMORANDUM TO: Park and Recreation Commission 1f/ FROM: Todd Hoffman, Park and Recreation Director DATE: August 18, 1993 SUBJ: New Special Event Proposal, "February Festival" The City of Chanhassen has an established history of hosting community special events. Notable examples include: St. Hubert's Harvest Festival and the City's Easter Egg Hunt, Fourth of July Celebration, Septemberfest (formerly Oktoberfest), and the annual Halloween Party. Relative newcomers include the Chanhassen Chamber's Art Fair and Breakfast with Santa, a joint effort between the city, chamber and other civic organizations. These special events and festivals are a testimonial to the fact that the city's residents value the opportunity to congregate for celebration. Special events require a great deal of effort and considerable resources in order to be successful. However, these events provide meaning in our lives and represent a departure from the ordinary. Our society values city, county, state, and national festivals and holidays. It would be impossible to pinpoint what the attraction is to these events for all individuals. But their popularity in communities across the state is undisputable. Special events are also recognized as a catalyst for economic activity and are often heavily promoted for this reason. In short, they are good for the community. Minnesota enjoys (or endures--depending on how you look at it) a winter season of considerable length. In reviewing the city's .special events calendar, none occur during this 5.:t month stretch of unforgiving weather which Minnesota is famous for. In the interest of eliminating this deficiency, Park and Recreation staff is prepared to initiate, upon approvals from the Park and Recreation Commission and City Council, anew winter special event which we have coined "February Festival." We would like to hear the commission's ideas in this regard. Brainstorming at staff level has resulted in the following concept: Date: Saturday, February 19, 1994. The Chaska Fire Department Fishing Contest is typically held on the weekend of February 5 and 6. Park and Recreation Commission August 18, 1993 Page 2 . Victoria Chamber of Commerce's fishing contest is typically held on the weekend of February 12 and 13. Please let us know if you are aware of any events scheduled for this day which could be of conflict. Location: Lake Susan and Lake Susan Community Park. A change of venue from Lake Ann Availability of shelter Access to numerous parking areas, i.e. Empak, Rosemount, etc. Potential Attractions: Outdoor concert Snow sculptures Sleigh Rides Fishing Contest Winter fireworks Bonfire S'mores (marshmallows, chocolate and graham crackers) Cookout . Your Ideas? Funding: This event would be marketed as a title sponsor event Example: Festival Foods brings you February Festival, the Target Fishing Contest, Rosemount: Your exclusive sponsor of the February Festival Fireworks. In addition, staff has, subject to approval, tentatively allocated $8,500 in fund 145, Recreation Programs, for this inaugural event. Please give us your thoughts. pc: Jerry Ruegemer, Recreation Supervisor Dawn Lemme, Program Specialist Don Ashworth, City Manager . . I '. . . CITY OF CHANHASSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE. P.O. BOX 147. CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900. FAX (612) 937-5739 MEMORANDUM TO: Park and Recreation Commission ~ FROM: Todd Hoffman, Park and Recreation Director DATE: August 17, 1993 SUBJ: Hwy. 101 Trail Project, Status Report Please find attached a copy of the staff report which will be presented to the City Council on Monday, August 23, 1993. Also attached is a copy of the resolution presented to the City Council from the Park and Recreation Commission in this regard. I will provide a verbal report of any City Council discussion/action which transpires on Monday evemng. 7~ C ITV OF CHANHASSEN , . \ et 690 COULTER DRIVE. P.O. BOX 147. CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 . FAX (612) 937-5739 MEMORANDUM TO: Don Ashworth, City Manager # DATE: Todd Hoffman, Park and Recreation Director Charles Fo1ch, City Enginee()f- August 16, 1993 FROM: SUBJ: Presentation of TH 101 Trail Project Feasibility Study and Report; Draft The subject study was received by the city on August 2, 1993. Mr. John Horn, Project Manager with BRW, the firm which completed this work, will be present at the Monday, August 23, 1993, City Council meeting to review their fmdings with the council. We wish to inform the council that this presentation represents a work session on the engineering feasibility of the subject trail. As pointed out in the study document, the project is possible from a construction standpoint but would require some design compromises and/or some relatively expensive construction measures. Staff awaits direction from the City Council, if they desire an investigation into possible funding scenarios for this project. If you are in need of further information in this regard, please let us know. e e . , , '. . . CITY OF CHANHASSEN CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA DATE: RESOLUTION NO: 93-01 Julv 27. 1993 MOTION BY: SECONDED BY: Lash Andrews A RESOLUTION BY THE CHANHASSEN PARK AND RECREATION COMMISSION TO CONFIRM THEIR POSITION THAT THE TH 101 TRAIL PROJECT SHOULD BE COMPLETED BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CHANHASSEN PARK AND RECREATION COMMISSION AS FOLLOWS: 1. That the Park and Recreation Commission believes the proposed TH 10 1 trail is vital to the health, safety and welfare of the community of Chanhassen. 2. That this trail represents the only remaining trail segment to be completed as part of the Phase I trail system (1990-95) improvements as identified in the Recreation Section of the City's Comprehensive Plan. Passed and adopted by the Chanhassen Park and Recreation Commission this 27th day July, 1993. VOTE YES NO ABSENT Schroers Andrews Lash Roeser Manders Berg Meger None None " PROPOSED 1994 FUNCTION 410 PARK ACQUISITION AND DEVELOPMENT CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM . Bandimere Community Park Bandimere Heights Park Bluff Creek Park Carver Beach Park Cathcart Park Carver Beach Playground Chanhassen Estates Mini Park Half Court Basketball $29500.00 Chanhassen Hills Park Play Area Expansion $13,000.00 . Chanhassen Pond Park City Center Park Tennis Court Maintenance $4,000.00 Curry Farms Park ". Greenwood Shores Park Herman Field Park Lake Ann Park Trail Extension Trees Contingency $2,500.00 $3,000.00 $2,500.00 Lake Susan Park . 1 .' . Track Ride $2,000,00 Meadow Green Park Minnewashta Hei2hts Park North Lotus Lake Park Skating Rink Electrical Service $8,000.00 With Light Play Area Expansion $12,000.00 Pheasant Hill Park Play Area $20,000.00 Picnic Tables $3,000.00 Park Benches $1,600.00 Power Hill Park . Trees $2,000.00 Prairie Knoll Park Rice Marsh Lake Park South Lotus Lake Park Sunset Ridge Park Other Improvements Picnic Tables, Benches $4,000.00 Eagle Scout Projects $500.00 Contin2enCY $10,000.00 SUB TOTAL J90.600.00 Additional Fund 410 Reauired Reserves . Hwy 101 Trail $15,000.00 New School SitelFumishings $15,000.00 2 TOTAL NOTE: All function 410 capital equipment expenditures are subject to sales tax. 3 '120.600.00 " . . . .. . . . Hoisington Koegler Group Inc. mil flD July 3D, 1993 Todd Hoffman Park & Recreation Director City of Chanhassen 690 Coulter Drive Chanhassen MN 55317 Dear Todd: We are proud to announce the addition of two very talented associates to our professional team. Michael Schroeder, formerly with BRW, Inc., Martin and Pitz, and Ernst and Associates, is a registered landscape architect and urban designer. Michael is an active member of the Minnesota Design Team, having participated in visits to several communities throughout Minnesota and served as project coordinator for the Minnesota Design Team's nationally recognized community manual. He is an advocate of sustainable development, and recently spoke at a statewide conference on the subject. He will head HKG's urban design team. Planner, Tracey Secula, is a recent honors graduate from the Michigan State University School of Urban Planning and Landscape Architecture. Tracey has worked for the Michigan Department of Transportation to update its ISTEA manuals. She is responsible for a variety of planning related functions including comprehensive and fiscal planning support services at HKG. The addition of these associates represents our continuing commitment to create unparalleled value for our clients by attracting the highest quality planning, landscape architecture and financial analysis personnel available. . HOISINGTON KOEGLER GROUP INe. ~~..s..fld R. Mark Koegler, RLA Vice President Land Use / Environmental · Planning / Design 7300 Metro Boulevard / Suite 525 · Minneapolis, Minnesota 55439 · (612) 835-9960 · Fax: (612) 835-3160 CITY OF CHANHASSEN . 690 COULTER DRIVE. P.O. BOX 147. CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 . FAX (612) 937-5739 August 2, 1993 James and Frances Borchart 7331 Minnewashta Parkway Excelsior, MN 55331 Dear Mr. & Mrs. Borchart: Thank you for your letter of July 26, 1993, in regard to the possibility of the city acquiring and developing a neighborhood park at the intersection of Kings Road and Minnewashta Parkway. Your letter is being forwarded to the City Council. Additionally, however, it is my desire to clarify the Park and Recreation Commission's intentions for pursuing the acquisition. of a park . west of Lake Minnewashta. The city has identified the west Minnewashta neighborhood as park deficient since the inception of the City's Comprehensive Plan (please see attachments). This deficiency has received a great deal of attention over the years from city administrators as property has become increasingly scarce in this area of the city. The City Council also recognized this and approved a budget reserve to assist in the future acquisition of a park through a combined purchase/land dedication process (the dedication of parkland as a part of the platting process is routinely required). The desires of the Park and Recreation Commission in this pursuit are to create a neighborhood park/playground, to preserve open space, and to serve the recreational needs of those residents typically residing within one-half mile of the park. Neighborhood park amenities include: open space, neighborhood ballfields (the Park and Recreation Commission maintains a policy of not scheduling league activities in neighborhood parks), a soccer field, sand volleyball courts, play equipment, half-court basketball areas, and accommodations for vehicle parking. As depicted in the attached conceptual park plan, this site would also allow for swimming in Lake Minnewashta at a small beach separated from the main body of the park by Minnewashta Parkway. The City Council is deeply concerned about the safety of the city's residents. The installation of a trail along Minnewashta Parkway will provide for safer non-vehicular uses of the parkway corridor. The park location was selected in part because of its relationship to this new trail. The trail will cross from the east side of the parkway (coming from the south) to the west side of the parkway at Kings Road. This allows for two conditions to occur: 1) a crosswalk between the main body of the park and the beach can be constructed, 2) the park and trail will combine at . this location allowing for convenient access to the park's amenities and the creation of an open- air atmosphere which will complement the parkway's current appeal. Furthermore, the park will n ~~ PRINTED ON RECVCLED PAPER . Mr. & Mrs. Borchart August 2, 1993 Page 2 provide a safe play environment for residents of the area and will satisfy three primary functions. First, parks meet positive human needs, both physically and psychologically; secondly, parks and open space areas enhance and protect physical resources such as the air, water, and soils; and lastly, parks and open space have a positive impact on economic development and real estate values. The alternative if this 1O:!:. acre park is not acquired would be the eventual construction of 18:!:. single family homes. Averaging 8-10 vehicle trips per day, this would result in 144 to 180 additional vehicle trips per day on the parkway. The park would also generate vehicle trips; however, at lower rates throughout all seasons with a significant reduction in fall through spring. Again, thank you for your correspondence. If you have additional comments or questions, please feel free to contact me. Sincerely, ~~~ - Todd Hoffman . Park and Recreation Director TH:k pc: City Council Park and Recreation Commission Planning Commission Don Ashworth, City Manager Paul Krauss, Planning Director . 71 I I , I I I I I I eI I I I I I I - I -I I City Of Chanhassen Minnesota Park Deficiency Areas I>' Existing Parks and Service Areas B 2000 MUSA Line l ,. , - - I ~I=. ~ I - -r , -.- .....~- ------- . (2/91) adequately meet the recreation demand of residences in this area. Developments on the wester~ end of Zone 4 are currently not served by a neighborhood' park and acquisition of such is recommended. l.Q!iU The vast majority of land within Zone 5 is held in public or semi-public ownership such as the holdings of Camp Tanadoona, the Minnesota Landscape Arboretum and the Minnewashta Regional Park. Additionally, the area is not likely,to receive sanitary sewer service until after 2000.' Because of these factors, no additional major municipal recreational development is recommended within the next ten years. Prior to that time, however, Zone 5 may contain trails as a part of the City's overall trail network. lONE 6 . Residential areas within Zone 6 are effectively cut off from ex is t; ng parks bymaj or roadways on the north and south, Lake Minnewashta on the east and by the Chanhassen city limits to the west. At the present time, there are no existing public park facilities of any type within the southern portion of this area. In reviewing the needs of Zone 6, the most significant deficiency is the lack of neighborhood park facilities. Tennis courts, ball diamonds, open areas and picnic grounds are non-existent. Therefore, future acquisitions should accommodate such activities. A potential future park site is the area around Lake St. Joe. As future res i dent i a 1 i nfi 11 occurs, the Ci ty shoul d be prepared through dedi cat ion andlor purchase, to acqui re an appropri ate parcel of land. Prior to that time, efforts should be focused on implementing the Chanhassen Trail plan in order to provide Zone 6 residents with safe, convenient access t~ existing park facilities. ZQ!iLI Chanhassen's 2000 Land Use Plan calls for Zone 7 to be developed in a mi x of res i dent i a 1 and offi celi ndustri a 1 uses. As future development occurs in this area, neighborhood park property will need to be acquired. Development proposals in this area should accommodate the trail corridors identified in the Trail Plan. . 73 ~ I] Il D a I I I I I I I I I I I I I , /' ,./ ,./" / ,./ I ( \ - " \ " ) \ . , , " ~_// ~' ) - ~ ........ '- ........ / - \ \ \ \ \ \. . . ~ Af/nne . - WaShta . . . C ITV 0 F CHANHASSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE. P.O. BOX 147. CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900. FAX (612) 937-5739 March 30, 1993 Mr. Craig L. Anderson 7507 West 77th Street Chaska, MN 55318 Dear Mr. Anderson: Mayor Don Chmiel discussed the concerns raised in your letter of March 19, 1993, in regard to park acquisition west of Lake Minnewashta with me. Labeling the west side of Lake Minnewashta as park deficient is an undisputed designation. Rest assured that the city has identified the need for a park in this area; beyond that however, a special fund entitled "The West Minnewashta Fund" has been established to assist in the procurement of a neighborhood park in this area. This park is to be centrally located along the Parkway, and at least 10 acres in size. The current balance in this fund is $150,000. The Boley property was not considered as a site for acquisition due to its topography, and the fact that it is located south of the central Minnewashta district and borders Victoria on two sides. Four parcels north of Lake St. Joe are currently being considered for acquisition. The city has initiated preliminary discussions with one of these owners, and has been approached by realtors representing a second parcel. The acquisition of park property in this area is a high priority, and the process to facilitate this purchase is underway. If you have additional questions in this regard, please contact me. Sincerely, ~.~~ Todd Hoffman Park and Recreation Director pc: Don Ashworth, City Manager Mayor and City Council I Park and Recreation Commission n ~., PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER . March 19. 1993 Mayor Donald J. Chmiel City of Chanhassen 690 Coulter Drive I P.O.' Box 147 Chanhassen. MN 55317 Dear Mayor Chmiel, As a resident of the west side of Lake Minnewashta, I feel compelled to express the need for a park in our area. As the population expands around the west side of the lake, especially when the parkway is completed, there will definitely be a "Park Deficiency" in our neighborhood. My concern is that the Park and Recreation Commission will keep passing on land opportunities as they come forth. As an example, the choice Boley property, along Lake St. Joe appears to be close to being developed with neither trail nor park around this unique property a possibility. The viable park spaces are going to rapidly dissappear as this prime area gets the attention of developers. . The new trail paralleling the parkway will be well used by the neighborhood residents. I envision a park within reasonable access of the trail as a real gathering spot for families of the area. It would be wonderful if our children could play together within biking distance of home! I appreciate your concerns about our terrific neighborhood, and thank you for considering a park a priority for the area. ps. T'~~ ~ ~~~~ U'\.) 'P<lC.C~~ - \J\)~-r ~ TtTe- '-.RC>~ Tt;-e- 'P~c:.~ I A VY\ es;s . . . . . CITY OF CHANHASSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE. P.O. BOX 147. CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900. FAX (612) 937-5739 MEMORANDUM TO: Scott Harr, Public Safety Director ;# FROM: Todd Hoffman, Park and Recreation Director DATE: June 8, 1993 SUBJ: Hunting Within Chanhassen City Limits As administrator of the city's annual goose removal program, it is my oplDlon that the availability of hunting areas within the City of Chanhassen reduces our dependence on the removal program. The individuals participating in hunting in Chanhassen do so at their own expense, while the removal program relies on general revenues. As you are aware, the Minnesota Landscape Arboretum harvests deer by night shooting as a control measure. Collisions with motor vehicles is another effective, although undesirable, controller of deer populations. In summation, my message in this regard is that although the general welfare of the public is paramount and the landscape of the city is changing rapidly; hunting within the city's boundaries remains an effective tool in controlling undesirable wildlife populations. pc: Mayor and City Council ~and Recreation Commission n \. ~ PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER Gerry W. Maher 7101 Utica Lane Chanhassen MN 55317 . R r- r'. ~.l · t - . ,""~ .ll <-.~, k. ___ .. t '" L. I.; Todd Hoffman City of Chanhassen 690 Coulter Drive POBOX 147 Chanhassen MN 55317 ,',! !t'" ;. ,", 1993 'i \,..- ~ ;J ~ . r'Tv o~ (;H ' ., , -". .. . I ~:\!hj.l.$sr.... 4An7V~ 3""",'/ August 6, 1993 Dear Todd: I am in receipt of your letter dated 8/2/93 regarding the request for the removal of my paddle boat from the property adjacent to the Greenwood Shores Park area. I wish to inform you, as stated above and on several other occasions(both written and verbal) over the past sixteen years to the city, that upon inspection of the appropriate area plat map you will see that this mooring is not nor has it ever bee. on public property. I would have hoped that my previous correspondence with Scott Harr, Don Ashworth, Don Chmiel, Jim Chaffee, wri Sietsema, various Park and Rec. and city council members, would have put this matter to rest by now. Should you have any questions, please feel free to contact me. ;n:;;y;/(.LJ Gerry W. Maher rt1,/~cd c;/~ t??/~ tJ~A3 /.Q/~N~/) /t?'f:.,., 4'~p~ J?Y.;r ??d ~~ /.1' /~/~4~ /# ~~ ~ c;,7r /4'P.4'.e7e ~~ ~"eiIF.J't1 7~r-~ ~#~ ~r'" /?-~iYd Br' 6~3/~.3 ~ - J. - -.J4. .... ~ 1 61" ~6' /r~ ".~} :J!'.<:;.'Aif".-:r //~&! ~' Mw~ rr "" , 6V' ".4c/'.>6&~ ~/,~..d,~~ ~...../~/...~ F~,<'~/(f#'4~ _" -',,~. -;-1 __ _/ ~C"'\..~eY~~.~ ~~~-;- r.Jr,# /~ ~7~'-7 '" , '-,..-p , ~ ..w'/':. .J!!";-~-/.-,,/ ~L""//~A/ *,-- ~7~ v~/~L ~d'".j~b ,-::f =-'~ .. ..... V7 ~ /c;..., . _ · 7#~ /~ ~-tI ~d.;!/6b-c- t/"'''/~ C~~_t:?,e~/A:I~,,(IeJ~ ;IJ:;, I'W:J/ ~,,~,.'!? #?/~T ~~ /# 774 ,Q4'~ t?,;t& //~ ~,Al4"Z--/,,~ ;p -i . . . . CITY OF CHANHASSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE. P.O. BOX 147. CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900. FAX (612) 937-5739 August 16, 1993 Mr. Jerry Maher 7101 Utica Lane Chanhassen, MN 55317 Dear Mr. Maher: In response to your letter of August 11, 1993, I have forwarded this matter to the attention of Paul Krauss, the city's Planning Director. As you are aware, the Park and Recreation Department did not administer this ordinance and in contacting you, was responding to a complaint concerning the mooring/storage of watercraft at a city park. In this regard and as I discussed with you, I ascertained the mooring of the paddleboat was taking place in front of park property with the aid of an aerial photograph. In light of the most recently adopted ordinance, however, this issue is mute. If I can be of further assistance, please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, Zi;~~ Todd Hoffman Park and Recreation Director TH:v pc: City Council Don Ashworth, City Manager Paul Krauss, Planning Director Gerry W. Maher 7101 Utica lane Chanhassen MN 55317 R r. '-', ~ ~I';- '\ U. lor {. i ~ 1. ~J . f.: ,"'. ; , 1093 .-' i,.: '." 1 n :, cn'{ OF ('....,i-'\..;;..~SF". Todd Hoffman City of Chanhassen 690 Coulter Drive POBOX 147 Chanhassen MN 55317 August 1], ] 993 Dear Todd: After further investigation and correspondence with the State Legislative Library and Information Center office, the office of the Commissioner of the Department of Natural Resources, the office of the commissioner of the LMCD and the WBLCD and several other knowledgeable authorities, I wish to inform you that there is a consensus of opinion that the Chanhassen City ordinance #160 Section] section 6-2(b) is considered an "unreasonable restriction" on the riparian rights of the lake shore owners in ChanhaSSen. for the following reasons; - It does not address the right of a lake shore owner that may so chose not to have a boat licensed in his or her name from allowing them the right to allow a non blood relative and or a friend from using that lake shore property to dock/moor and or land store a boat. - It does not address the issue of lake shore rental property, most certainly an unreasonable restriction of the property owner of a home, cabin or apartment. It has been mentioned that unlike the IMCD & WBLCD, Chanhassen is aiming to be ex- tremely more confining and restrictive on the lake shore owner than trying for re- . sonable limitations. The LMCD, in an effort not to conflict with the owners riparian rights and therefore gain legal authority and the power of enforcement, allows one boat per 50' of lake shore, up to 5 boats per lake shore home, of which 3 must be licensed in the name of the mmer or his immediate family of the lake shore home or property. The immediate family does not even have to reside at that location. Moorings and docks are governed by the same restrictions as long as they do not present a navigational hazard . Furthermore please be advised of the following; - The ordinance as adopted and passed by the city council and recorded in the min- utes of 5/18/93 meeting says nothing pertaining to "blood relative". (see page 42 of the city council minutes). Neither does the publications in the Vi lager on 4/9/92 or 6/25/92. The council minutes of 4/27/92 page 25 as written also does not so state the ordinance this way. The 5/] 8/92 minutes addresses the . "PROBLEM" as one of the possibility of people renting space. The previous ordinance of 2/2/92 as written addresses this "PROBLEM" very specifically, "the lake shore owner may not receive or be entitled to any payment for the written permission." An amendment to limit the number of boats would have been more in the public interest, this was done more for private interest. - Although not of any real importance, it does seem interesting that for some un- knO'VIl reason, all of the council packets for all of these meeting are nowhere to . Gerry W. Maher 7101 Utica Lane Chanhassen MN 55317 " (cont. ) be found? . _ Sections 86B.205 sub 3-4 and Sections 103F.211 & .221 of the State of Minnesota statutes provides, among other items, that the city must sul::mi.t any water surface zoning ordinance to the Commissioner of the Department of Natural Resources for his 'review and approval BEFORE adoption. According to the DNR records and the city council meetings records, this has in most cases, this case in particular, been done after the ordinance has been passed and adopted. In this case the DNR approval was not until 5/26/93. It should also be noted that the copy of this ordinance that was sent to the DNR~ that was approved by the DNR and in their file, IS NOT the same written copy that is in the file at the Chanhassen City ~alll - Through very little effort, I have now accumulated a list of 23 boats, their owners and the property owners of which these boats are in violation of the current (as a point of law quite possibly invalid) ordinance,' sane of which are very praninent communi ty members. . . It was brought up in conversations thati t'S'9ems~ that a Cl ty may liml t the number, type, size and duration that vehicles may be in your driveway in the front of your hane and place those same limitations on your back yard, especially in the case of your back- yard being lake shore, but totally unreasonable should those restrictions specifically confine those vehicles to those that are registered in your name or the name of a blood relative. It would seem to me that in their haste, the city staff and council lost sight of the purpose and objective of such an ordinance, to REASONABLY LIMIT the number of boats while upholding the riparian rights of it's citizens with an ordinance that was founded on sound legal principles through the proper legal process and maintain enforceability. I would also like to state for the record that I along with several other people I have now talked with, find it incomprehensible that although you had, in the process of tagging my boat, been rather certain as to it not being in compliance with the 2/2/92 ordinance, where however unable to specifically inform me how far to move it in order to be in compliance. I have, as previously discussed with you, in the presence of several other people, located the metal surveyor stakes for that parcel of property. I wish to inform you that the boat mooring was not on public property, that only on occasion could the boat possibly swing in the wind to cane in contact with the property line. I would appreciate a response from either you or the city to this letter so I may determine what further course of action I may wish to take. Sincerely , i ~~V; t~'. J(c)~ Gerry' W. Maher . cc: Mayor Don Chmiel 7/19/93 6"-,,,w ~~3" 7~ ~;;~~~ ::>e:&d~/",?, -;' I 8~ ~~ 0''- ~r'~e:::?"::r "'" 1-" t ~ , ' ~.~; ';,- i.';4 ~ . -t" r"l....... !.'::,~ ": . '---~~."~.; Bob Skubic 8619 Chanhassen Hills Drive North Chanhassen, Minnesota 55317 934-8445 Larry Schroers Chanhassen Park and Recreation Commission 1020 Carver Beach Road Chanhassen, Minnesota 55317 Dear Mr. Schroers: As a resident of the Chanhassen Hills development I have kept in touch with the Park and Recreation Director Todd Hoffman regarding park development in our neighborhood. I am disappointed with the lethargy of which the scheduled additions are being implemented. . The planned tennis courts were eliminated in favor of a basketball court. Three years later there is not yet a basketball court. . . The baseball backstop and infield are not yet installed even as the development is nearing completion. . The number of playground activities is substandard relative to some comparable developments. It is my understanding that some of these deficiencies are still many years away from being corrected. My greatest anxiety relates to the absence of a trail to connect with other parts of the community. We are locked into the corner of highway 101 and Lyman Blvd, two highways hardly navigable by youngsters seeking other play areas. Yes there is the planned trial to connect with the Lake Susan development and points beyond but based on past delays I fear this will not happen until too many individuals take undo risks traveling less safe routes. Our development is nearly complete so there are hundreds of children seeking playful activities. I ask that you consider the safety of our children in seeing to it that the park and trail commitments of the Chanhassen Hills development be completed promptly. Warmest Regards, .~.J.. S~ Bob Skubic . cc: Todd Hoffman . CITY OF CHANHASSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE. P.O. BOX 147. CHANHASSEN. MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 . FAX (612) 937-5739 MEMORANDUM TO: Don Ashworth, City Manager 4/ Todd Hoffman, Park and Recreational Director ~ FROM: DATE: August 10,1993 SUBJ: Joint City Council/Park Recreation Commission Meeting . lt~.:, !ii' The Park and Recreation Commission discuSse9tl1eir annual meeting with the City Council on July 27, 1993. The commission listed the folloWing ten items as possible agenda/discussion items for this meeting: ' , f. 1. The provision of general funds to fm~ce the refurbishment and/or replacement of capital equipment in existing parks./' S; , . 2. The proposed Lake Minnewashta~innewasht("Parkway) neighborhood park. 3 Hwy 5 corridor - non-vehicu1ar'~omponents. (Le..trails, underpasses, open space) 4. Park and trail fee increase, including a discussiongn the inequities between the value of fees verses the value of land dedication which could be assessed against any given plat. 5. The new Chanhassen ~~entary School. .... 6. Setting higher expsctiltlons of developers in regard iijpark and trail issues. 7. Exploration of park and trail project funding sources:: 8. The urgency;of~.Making;PlanSy,nue3()2d1e,rapidpace'()f development. 9. The Corom.... u..m. 'ty.:Genter ,ili!sue"~}7~~'''j;~itli3''''''.'.'.''*.'.'.'"-''..'...''.''..<"..'......'....... \_vh _ ,.,-...-- ,',. ..-,' -- -,u~.~.,"'''.,...,;;;;:~:,;~:~~~J;;;~if--,>-;;~Ft:~$/''1'r:;^.--~ 10. Input on Pub1ic1~e;rses private park issue. _.' "_OM' -~~4X';:;':r> ". ,,"'f:<~,::;~-,,:~'!"'. The commissions desire would be t({~hedu1~the meeting .onan'~off' 'mght. I will await your direction in scheduling this meeting and in '. om piling' , all supporting documents/preparing a packet. ' pc: Park and Recreation Commission . I"", {- ,. . .. CITY OF CHANHASSEN . 690 COULTER DRIVE. P.O. BOX 147. CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900. FAX (612) 937-5739 August 11, 1993 Mr. Dan Herbst Pemtom Westwood Professional Building 14180 Hwy. 5 Eden Prairie, MN 55344 Dear Mr. Herbst: The City has retained Hoisington Koegler Group to prepare a concept plan for a multi-faceted project which includes a community parle. site, a loop trail system with multiple connections to the city's comprehensive trail system, and a large expanse of open space on properties being proposed for . development and referred to as the Opus/Pemtom!I'andem site. This planning process is being initiated in anticipation of continuing negotiations with individual applicants in regard to parle. and trail system planning. Your participation in this process is necessary and welcome. Please feel free to contact me with your comments and input You are also welcome to contact Marle. Koegler of Hoisington Koegler Group directly. Mr. Koegler can be reached at 835-9960. Hoisington Koegler Group will be completing their study within 25 worldng days, for presentation to the Parle. and Recreation Commission on September 28, 1993. An agenda of that meeting, including a copy of all support materials, will be forwarded to you. I look forward to your participation in this effort. Sincerely, a~?C---- Todd Hoffman Parle. and Recreation Director TH:v pc: Parle. and Recreation Commission Hoisington Koegler Group Kate Aanenson, Senior Planner Paul Krauss, Planning Director Don Ashworth, City Manager . .. . . . C ITV OF CHANHASSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE. P.O. BOX 147. CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 . FAX (612) 937-5739 August 11, 1993 Mr. Jim Ostensen Tandem Properties Suite 310 7808 Creekridge Circle Bloomington, MN 55435 Dear Mr. Ostensen: The City has retained Hoisington Koegler Group to prepare a concept plan for a multi-faceted project which includes a community park. site, a loop trail system with multiple cormections to the city's comprehensive trail system, and a large expanse of open space on properties being proposed for development and referred to as the OpuslPemtom/Tandem site. This planning process is being initiated in anticipation of continuing negotiations with individual applicants in regard to park and trail system plarming. Your participation in this process is necessary and welcome. Please feel free to contact me with your comments and input You are also welcome to contact Mark Koegler of Hoisington Koegler Group directly. Mr. Koegler can be reached at 835-9960. Hoisington Koegler Group will be completing their study within 25 worldng days, for presentation to the Park and Recreation Commission on September 28, 1993. An agenda of that meeting, including a copy of all support materials, will be forwarded to you. I look forward to your participation in this effort. Sincerely, ~~~ Todd Hoffman Park and Recreation Director TH:v pc: Park and Recreation Commission Hoisington Koegler Group Kate Aanenson, Senior Planner Paul Krauss, Plarming Director Don Ashworth, City Manager \, C ITV OF CHANHASSEN . 690 COULTER DRIVE. P.O. BOX 147. CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900. FAX (612) 937-5739 August 11, 1993 Ms. Michelle Foster Opus Corporation 800 Opus Center 9900 B ren Road East Minnetonka, MN 55343-9600 Dear Ms. Foster: The City has retained Hoisington Koegler Group to prepare a concept plan for a multi-faceted project which includes a community park site, a loop trail system with multiple connections to the city's comprehensive trail system, and a large expanse of open space on properties being proposed for development and referred to as the OpuslPemtom/fandem site. This planning process is being initiated in anticipation of continuing negotiations with individual applicants in regard to park and trail system planning. Your participation in this process is necessary and welcome. Please feel free to contact me with your comments and input You are also welcome to contact Marle Koegler of Hoisington Koegler Group directly. Mr. Koegler can be reached at 835-9960. Hoisington Koegler Group will be completing their study within 25 working days, for presentation to the Park and Recreation Commission on September 28, 1993. An agenda of that meeting, including a copy of all support materials. will be forwarded to you. . I look forward to your participation in this effort. Sincerely, M:#~ Todd Hoffman Park and Recreation Director TH:v pc: Parle and Recreation Commission Hoisington Koegler Group Kate Aanenson, Senior Planner Paul Krauss, Planning Director Don Ashworth, Qty Manager . " In the morning. junior high students will ride the bus to Wayzata High School and then be shuttled to their respective schools. In the afternoon. the system will be reversed, with the high school student shuttled to either Wayzata East or West junior high and then bused home. The aim of this change is to use the buses in the most cost-effective and efficient way '. ..... v.... ua.... ....&""..........e. Prior to the vote, Board Chair Paul Landry stressed, "This is the first of a two- step process. This step is to determine what our needs are-it is not the award- ing of the job to an architect to design the school.. Litchy explained to the board that as To Page 4 Nature Conservation Areas will be selected by the Mound City Council By Drew Willdnson . A plan for designating suitable public lands as Nature Conservation Areas was adopted by the Mound City Council at its Aug. 10 meeting. In the same motion, the Park and Open Space Commission was ordered to recom- mend six to eight sites, of which council will select two or three for designation. A Nature Conservation Area (NCA) is defined by the commission as .city owned and/or controlled lands which are, or could be, essentially natural and would conserve flora and fauna. Such areas are to be established in recognition of the benefits of preserving natural open space for present and future generations." * According to the plan, a survey com- pleted in March of 1992 identified 255 parcels as potential NCA sites. The list includes 67 wetlands, 64 park and open space areas. 94 city-controlled parcels- including public buildings-and 30 tax- forfeit properties. Councilmember Andrea Ahrens and Mayor Skip Johnson explained that most of the 255 sites are not even being consid- ered for NCA status, but could not say exactly how many were. City Attorney Curt Pearson added an NCA is for passive use and anything now under active use is probably unsuitable. The plan states that the City of Mound will be responsible for the administration and maintenance of NCAs, and also sug- gests other options for preserving open spaces. These options include: adoption of parcels by neighborhood groups; estab- lishing conservation easements on parcels sold to abutting property owners; and deeding various sites to organizations such as the Nature Conservancy. Teal Pointe housing development was back on council's agenda. The comment period for the Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) expired last week and council now has to decide what to do next. Teal Pointe is a swampy area in south Mound between Cook's Bay and Phelp's Bay. An EAW was ordered by the city council in FebnJal')' as a condition for pre- liminary plat approvals for a Dew sinsle- family home project proposed by Teal Pointe Development Company. City Planner Mark Koegler first explained council could make one of three decisions. They could order an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS), require modification of project plans. or allow the development to continue as planned. He then read a summary of the comments received along with responses prepared by staff. Comments were received n-om the Metropolitan Council, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, the Department of Natural Resources, Thomas E. Casey and John C. Edewaard. Lots I, 2 and 3 in the 9-10t development are considered to be the most sensitive. Council has been split on whether to allow these three houses to be built. Before council could make a decision, Casey explained he had submitted 37 pages of comments and council hadn't even seen them. He asked council to post- pone its decision'until members had thor- oughly reviewed the comments. Pearson acknowledged that Casey had a case and council tabled the decision until the next meeting. Staff was ordered to prepare a package of documents for each councilmember. In other action, a 'public hearln8 was set for Tuesday, Sept. 14 to consider the pre- liminary and final plat request for Dakota Rail 2nd Addition; and council approved the final draft and summary of the rental housing ordinance approved for prepara- tion at the last meeting. Councilmember Ahrens, who was absent from that meet- ing, voted against the ordinAnci: mat we neea to proVlae less UUU1 IW CClI trailer spaces," said Carlson, urging coun cil to get behind the effort. - , Carlson said that any proposals for changing the LMCD's operations or its funding weren't likely to be considered seriously by the State Legislature until the Victoria hires publ to replace striking By DIaae DuBa~ The resignation of one of Victoria's two striking public works employees early this summer has led to some restructuring of the city's tiny public works department. Rather than replace Keith McKinley, who resigned in June, the Victoria City Council decided at its Aug. 5 meeting to hire an additional public works supervisor. The new supervisor and the current one will supervise two public works employ- ees and any independent contractors hired by the city. Though he voted in favor of the hiring, Councilmember Dale Lindgren had some reservations about it. .1 wish the timing was better,. he said. Councilmember Tom Walsh cast the single dissenting vote, but acknowledged the efforts of the personnel committee in considering the matter. Though he said he agreed that the current public works supervisor needed additional laborers, ...J cannot justify the expense of the salaries,. he said. The city's public works employees went on strike last March over wage issues. Council also took action on another Personnel matter, voting to include the administrator's position in the city's pay equity plan, at a salary range of $45,203 to $57,692. "This action is simply complying with the law," said Mayor Dale Palmatier. "This is the way these cities must act. If we take some other course of action, we're gonna get our knuckles rapped.. Councilmember John Bigalke said the job classifications and job desaiptioDS ill the plan were extremely good ways 01 communicating to employees what i! expected of them, and he also expressecl confidence in the personnel committee. ARNE CHIROPRACTIC CLINICIRIDC ~""E . Auto/Personal Injury · Certified Acupuncture . Work-Related Injury · Day and Evening Hours . Sports Injury · Insurance Accepted . t:WHEN''y6ti HAVE BAct<:~PAiN. un:: n1:'l:1:D ~n RJ:J: r-TMMT("K~L. S' -<; . ,/ '. ,:v,_~~,:>/ Qerestoried corridors, the rotunda and the sloped standing-seam metal roof combine with the masonry walls to recall the Chaska Village Center and the historic rural build- ing forms of the surrounding landscape. SMALL TOWN I A""BITIONS by Sue Schmid AhhCL'2~ prese~.ir:2 a small-town river heri:oge was 0 priority. for Chosko, I\tn'~ , ci~ CIf'Cids they definitely th~ ~I.-" J..,c,.., :r tr: r,"\ tro ,r/; n f the . ,-,,')~j I, L...'::,: " oj ,e ,"-v.'lS I V........';O,1 Or $85 m!i2r 99825'soJore-foot I Ci-Jsi,c CCyf)'Tiv",t/ eerier 3: :."-~r::;. S ',,:~3 )E-:e-:->:?' '". Reprinted by permission copyright 1992 Athletic Business Magazine Wen officials of Chaska, Minn., (population 11,(00) began planning a new community center, they decided the best way to get a facility residents would approve of was to let resi- dents have a large role in planning it. Shortly after the construction of a new city hall and a municipal ser- vices building in the lat~ 1980s - and backed by a progressive mayor - the Chaska city council hired a firm to survey residents to determine interest in a community center. When more than 73 percent indicated their approval, the city hired an architectural team to assist with programming and bud- get, and appointed a community center adviSOry committee. More than 25 user groups were asked to make presentations to the commit- tee and architectural team, and from this information, priorities were established in relation to pro- jected dollars. Architects: Ankeny, Ken, Richter and Associates SL Paul, Minn. Consultants: Barker-Rinker-Seacat and Partners, P.C. Denver, Colo. . PhotDs by Shin Koyama City officials didn't stop there, though, in making sure they shared the same vision for the facility as Chaska residents. "Once the program was done and it looked like it was set, we went back a second time and asked the public, 'Do you concur with what this community center is going to beT and once again, about 74 per- cent said that it was exactly what they wanted," says Tom Redman, director of the Chaska Park, Recreation and Art Department. "We thought we heard them, but we wanted to make sure we did." The opportunity to build an $8.5 million facility in a small community resulted from several unusual financing strategies, while the suc- cess of the center has allowed it to operate at a profit, rare among city park and recreation facilities. About halfway through the plan- ning process, the opportunity to " . . . t' .. . . use tax increment financing arose, which allowed the city to hold tax dollars generated by new industry for projects _, like the community center. PIt "One reason we got to that ~~ $8.5 million is that we had a means of financing it outside of.. a referendum," says Redman. Officials also took steps to provide for the center's finan- . 1 cial future. . '!" "Chaska has its own utility department, so we set aside $100,000 per year in a capital ~,.~.- fund and over a 100year period, we hope to build up a million- dollar reserve, so when the roof needs replacing, we have those dollars to work with," says Redman. "When we went into this, we wanted to break even. Now we're looking at reexamining that goal and considering if this should be a for-profit facility." Redman attributes the city's ability to meet its financial goals A ] J().foot spiral water slide loops down into the leisure pool area, which also includes a lap pool, diving plat- to the popularity of the facility, form, sauna, steam room, two whirlpools, internal river and a variety of water fun features. particularly the leisure pool. The 1992 projected revenue of $968,000 (which does not include the $100,000 transfer from utilities or con- tributions from the school district) includes $330.000 from memberships, $300,000 from daily admissions (pri- marily from non-residents), $110,000 from ice arena rental and fees, and the balance from gymnasium, racquetball and day-care fees, among others. Projected 1992 expenses are $924,000. Since Chaska is just 18 miles from Minneapolis-St. Paul, there's a large influx of non-residents who use the facility. "We're having a continuing discussion Don't Damage Your Gym Floor... With The WRONG COVER! din the U.S.A. All products rna e ELIMINATES syste'" R our our oor... II' g old debriS ~nto Y .prnent which · Ro '" d expensIve eqUI rts . HeavY on d scratch sorne spa con gouge on Rooring. b frorn social events. Th toUghest 0 use · e . e offered ~e the beginnlng....w econolTllccd In h o~ers.... . finest hi-tee AC; hClndling eqUIp- Clnd COMP we .till do! t AND.... ."en ... \ \ \ '\ \ l----/ CClII us! 21 0146 800-6 - TOLL-FREE . __-----~ERMAN & co., INC 4834 South Oakley · Chicago, Illinois 60609 · 312/927-4120 Circle 37 on Reply Card December 1992 ATHLETIC BUSINESS 51 'I III ~ ti on how we can accommodate Chaska residents while, at the same time, bring in the non-residents and the revenue that comes with them," says Redman. ~ 8 i '} ~ t~ I " A trip he took to tour recreation cen- ters in the Denver area made Redman realize the importance of community involvement in planning a community center. "I remember somebody gave a talk about how they were going to show their community what a community center could be and that just surprised me - to have an individual or even a group of people take it upon themselves to show the community. "I intentionally brought back ideas on how we could Involve the community. I didn't want to show the community, I wanted them to show me what they thought a community center could be." Redman says it was this level of put>- lie involvement that determinecl the facility would focus on more than fit- ness - becoming a social and meeting place as well. True community usage abounds. The city leases space to St. Francis Hospital for its sports medicine and Working Well staff and progmDls, and has a shared-use agreement with the school district. Since the center is located adjacent to the middle school . and high school, it is used extensively for physical education and water safety .~ l .~ , " Supplier's List (The following companies are suppliers of the Chaska Community Center; advertisers in this issue appear in boldface type). Gymnasiurn/l'rack Basketball Backboards/Supports: Porter Athletic Equipment Co. Basketball Floor: Robbins Inc, Batting Cage: ' Aalco Manufacturing Co. Divider Curtains: Porter Athletic Equipment Co. Gymnastics Equipment American Athletic Inc. Trock & Field Surface: Robbins Inc. Volleyball Nets & Standards: Schelde Sports Group Wall Padding: Aalco Manufacturing Co. RacquetbaD/HanclbaD Courts Flooring: Robbins Inc. Weight Training Area Cross-Country Ski Machines: "IcePro knew exactly what the Washington Capitals needed from a new facility. Now that it's built, it's apparent that we made the right choice to go with IcePro." DAVID POIlE, Washington Capitals The National Hockey League's Washington Capitals now enjoy one of the first dedicated practice and training facilties in thl' NHL: Officl'S, weightlraining, video center, playl'l'S' lounge, and ice rink all under one roof. And to build a facility suitable for an NHL team, they called on IcePro, the number one builder of quality ice rink facilitieS in the United St~tes.lcePro is proud to have been associated with this unique project, and prouder still that we offer you the s.1me high quality engineering, construction and attention to detail for your important ice rink project. Contact Jim Hartnett today for information or video presentation. "lee Rinks Engineered For TIle World's Best At1l1etes" LICE1J}1JiJ A DIVISIO~ OF CW OA \'15 ICE RINK DESIGN, CONSTRUCTION, RECONDmONlNG &r MAI~1tNANCE 15 Dwight Park Drive, Syracuse, NY 13209 (315) 453-2056 14909 Magnolia Blvd., Suite 202, Shennan Oaks, CA 91403 (818) 994-6018 52 ATHlETIC BUSINESS December 1992 Clrcl. 31 on ..pl, Card . NordIcTrack Rowers: NordIcTrack Stair/Step Machines:, SIaIrMaster Spor1a,IMedk:aI PrOducts Stationary Bikes: "', Schwinn Bicycle Co.t-'" UnMDaI Gym EquIpment Inc. ", Locker Rooms Lockers: , Republic Storage Systems Co. Sauna: He)o Sauna & Atness Inc. Ice Arena Dashers/Enclosures: Holmsten Ice Rinks Inc. Refrigeration Units: Holmsten Ice Rinks Inc. NYlwlwnum Water Slide: Miracle Recreation Equipment Co. . ~.. \ . MONEY MAKING CONCESSIONS \!e!..~!!: \ 1 .' CENTURY INDUSTRIES, INe. p.o. BOX U SELLERSBURG, IN 47172 USA .121241-3371 Clrcl. 39 on ..pl, Card '" . \ I l . \ ,t . classes, workshops, high school b'Ym- nastics, hockey and girls' softball teams, and after-school volleyball and basket- ball programs for middle-school youth. In return for using community center space, the school district contributes a minimum $15,000 annually toward oper- ational costs. If the center has an oper- ating deficit, which it has yet to experience since its opening in January 1991, that figure can rise to a maximum of $85,000 annually. "There was some concern that the school and city shouldn't be mixed, but "You have senior citizens walking on the track and watching phy ed classes below. " it allows the public to observe educa- tion in progress," says Redman. "It's worked out great; you have senior citi- zens walking on the track and watching gymnastics or phy ed classes below." Social areas of the center include a 25O-capacity community room with a stage, kitchen, access to the lounge area and a separate outdoor entrance; wet and dry craft rooms; and offices for the city, school district and hospital. The three largest components of the facility include a 15,500-square-foot gym that can accommodate eight adjustable side basketball courts, four regulation courts, five regulation volleyball courts, floor plates for gymnastics equipment and a batting cage with pitching machines for softball and baseball; the leisure pool area, which contains a four- lane, 25-yard pool, diving platforms. rope swing, a 11 O-foot water slide, a vor- tex pool, water sprays, current channel, two whirlpools and an outdoor sun deck; and an 800-seat ice arena with four team locker rooms, a skate chang- ing area, and ticket, lobby, office and concession areas. From April to August, the arena accommodates conventions, exhibitions and picnics. Other active spaces include a strength conditioning area with single-circuit strength equipment and a mirrored wall, a cardiovascular equipment area over- looking the leisure pool, a sauna and steam room, locker rooms, a dance and fitness area, two racquetball courts. a three-lane elevated jogging track, a child- care room, and lobby, reception, lounge and video game areas. Outdoors, the facility is connected to a I,OOO-acre trail system and a sledding hill for children. "We get comments that there are too many kids, but that's coming from pe0- ple used to a health club atmosphere." says Redman. "We never wanted it to be a heallh club, we wanted ilto be a family gathering place." It is that concept that has made the Chaska Community Cenler so success- ful. Hedman also attributes much of the success to city leaders. "It starts with the city council," says Redman. "We have a very proactive, visionary-type mayor who professes the search for excellence, quality and com- munity values. Some people say that doesn't mean anything, but it does. It causes people to think and to hold a dialogue and I think that's how a lot of this happened. "Many times, the city and school dis- triet are afraid to put it into a plan because they think there's no way you're ever going to fund it," says Hedman. "I can see city councils saying they're not even going to waste their time talking about it, but then all of a sudden, it happens." What's up next for the visionary folks in Chaska? Redman says plans are underway for a cultural center with a SOO-seat auditorium, to be attached to the community center. "We want the kids to be here, the grandmas and grandpas; we want every- body," says Redman. wrhe cultural cen- ter will make it a total complex." 0 CamStar 3000 . machines that look great and cost less. Call Hoggan Health Industries for your free CamStar 3000 catalog or for information on any of our commercial exercise equipment. 801 5.72-6500 800 078- 7888 . p.o. BOX 957, DRAPER, UTAH 84020 Supplierto the U. S. Olympic Training Centers Clrcl. 40 on Reply Card December 1992 ATHLETIC 8USINESS S3 I I I : I I I I . I, II I' II II II I I ~\ .. C ITV OF CHANHASSEN . 690 COULTER DRIVE. P.O. BOX 147. CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900. FAX (612) 937-5739 MEMORANDUM TO: Charles Folch, City E~gineer Todd Hoffman, Park and Recreation Director ;;0/ FROM: DATE: August 12, 1993 SUB]: Power Hill Park Access Road and Parking Lot During a discussion by the Park and Recreation Conunission in regard to the Park Acquisition and Development Capital Improvement program, Commissioner Manders raised a concern over the aforementioned improvement. As you recall we visited this project to address this issue on the day the asphalt was installed. I informed Commissioner Manders of your intentions to ensure that corrective actions are completed. In addition, I expressed my belief that it is the city's policy . to perform in-house work at standards equal to or above those of other contractors. I also referenced the difficult working condition which crews experienced on this project. Please keep me apprised of any actions in this area. pc: Park and Recreation Conunission ~'//~ '70 ~U"#~;/ _ z!'E/ ~///PC/",IT~~A// ~~~.~ d/~d/;~I ?/~ / ,. ,1 J /! .......r..Jo, -"'.I'l ~/J& ~x/,~5f/h(.p /TI.J *~J CA::'''T, ....."'" J e:> Y rr.- ~ .--./ .-_ /~r,ur.?~ 77 ~,t!:.e&?l 7/~ 5/FJ/,I'/-!ld. # c1 ;;"1/1~ . " , . Kenneth J. Lucas 6735 Nez Perce Drive Chanhassen, Mi~ 55317 August 16, 1993 -- COpy-- The Chanha<;sen Villager P. O. Box 99 Chanhassen, ~1N 55317 Subject: DEA TH TR.\PS IN LAKE A1'TN PARK Gentlepersons: \.\bo would think that a trash barrel in a public park could pose a threat to anyone? . To a human it probably wouldn't: but to a smalL furry, forager, it can be fatal! On Saturday. August 14th. My,vife and I attended a picnic at the new pavilion in Lake Ann Park. We arrived early to help with preparations for the picnic. \Vhile moving one of the beautiful new tra<;h barrels the City has provided. I happened to look inside and wa<; startled to see a pair of frightened eyes looking up at me from a little gray and black, masked creature cringing in the bottom of the barrel. Immediately it was clear that the unfortunate raccoon -- a teenager from the look of him -- had been prospecting for food. Having managed to climb through the trap door at the top of the baneL he had satisfIed his hunger, only to tmd, when he was tInished, that there was no way out. The spring-loaded trap door opened in\vard, but not outward, and the barrel cover was too heavy or too high to be bumped free by a franticly leaping little bandit~ Probably the young 'coon had not been trapped long, for when I removed the cover and laid the barrel on its side, he had the strength to streak out of its mouth and into the nearby woods at amazing speed. A few momentc;; later he was joined by two more of his tenified colkagues as we released them from nearby trash barrel'). ~-... Three trapped creatures in as many minutes was not a good sign; so several of us set out to systematically check every trash can in the park. In one can, I found f'>>.'o very young, very \veak raccoons. How many days they had been held in that dark metallic cavern without water and \vith the hot Summer sun raising the temperature to unbearable heights is anyone's guess. They were so weak that they remained in the horizontal barrel for some time before dragging themselves out to freedom. . There must be fIfty or more tra'ih barreL'i in Lake Ann Park. We checked each one of them. The final count was nine freed raccoons and two dead ones. And this was only one weekend! As trash barrels go, the ones chosen by the City are quite attractive and functional. They have domed tops with panels that you can push in to deposit trash. I believe the City was trying to give its citizens the best, and that it never occurred to anyone that there could be a threat to the fluffy little fellows. But considering our weekend experience, I hope the City of Chanhassen \\ill revisit the trac;h can question, and acquire new, 'coon safe lids. The hinged kind that you have to raise to deposit the trash should be effective, as they would keep the little ones out and could be opened trom within if one somehow gained entry. Although these are slightly less convenient for humans, it seems a small sufferance to avoid the dangers to our forest friends. As for the cost of new lids, I personally have no problem with paying a couple of bucks extra in taxes. cc: Chanhassen Parks Department ~~ , .... . . . /?~/I1{/V -- "" / .... .. .- . It was a tough year for the Chaska Mickey Mantle Team. ~he flood took away our home ballpark and made it difficult to get to games across the river. Thanks to Victoria and Chanhassen for helping us out by scheduling us at their beautiful ball parks whenever they could. A difficult situation was made a lot easier because of the cooperation, reliability and enthusiasm of the players. ~ On behalf of the players, coaches and parents I would like to thank you for your support. Players eligible are 16 and under who live in Chaska School District #112. . Mike Farrington - Chaska Eric Mattson - Carver Barney Shatek - Chaska Josh Preiss - Chaska Kyle Kukowski - Chaska Joe Mundt - Carver Cory Dauwalter - Carver Ben Liestman - Chaska Tim Heiland - Chaska Steve Bunnell - Victoria sincerely, Dan Dauwalter - Carver Tim McCoy - Chaska ~ Steve Berquist - Chanhassen~ Tom O'Brien - Chaska Shawn Anderson - victoria Eric Caldwell - Chaska Andy Fox - Chaska Justin Robinson - victoria Chad Churchill - Chaska Dale Welter 421 Ash st. Chaska Other coaches helping: Bill Preiss Barry Fox Don Kukowski 42,ick Liestman ..,,1::1 :tk do- tft. ~ ~ /J ",.., ()A.t. .;) fIJl. tIfH . R t.:: :"'i. t." ~ ~f f' ~~ l.,. I" 2'"1. - OF l~~. '. , ,~.:;.... 1993 c! i v~ v\ If-.....\ \ I !"4,~,"":\i . . . ~ STATE Of f}::{] !NJ rn ~ @ iY ~ . DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES 500 LAFAYETTE ROAD · ST. PAUL, MINNESOTA · 55155-40. DNR INFORMATION (612) 296-6157 August 13, 1993 Mr. Todd Hoffman, Director Parks and Recreation City of Chanhassen 690 Coulter Dr. Chanhassen MN 55317 Dear Mr. Hoffman: As Luke Skinner promised, enclosed for your records is a fully executed copy of the Cooperative Agreement for Herbicide Application to control Eurasian watermilfoil on Lotus Lake (D.O. W. 10-0006). Since I am the new coordinator of the Eurasian watermilfoil program, please address any future questions regarding management of milfoil to me. Sincerely, ~ 4 ~~9l1",^(( Charles H. Welling Coordinator, Eurasian Watermilfoil Program Division of Fish and Wildlife Ecological Services Section (612) 297-8021 c: Sandy Lueth ~.~ E ;"":~ i AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER rr . L /' 3308'.-'- Eurasian Watermilfoil Control Joint Powers Agreement for Herbicide Application Between . Department of Natural Resources State of Minnesota City of Chanhassen Local Unit of Government THIS JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT, made and entered into, by and between the State of Minnesota (Department of Natural Resources), hereafter referred to as the "Commissioner", and the City of Chanhassen (c\o Todd Hoffman, Parks and Rec Director, City of Chanhassen, 690 Coulter Drive, Chanhassen MN 55317) hereafter referred to as the "Local Unit", WITNESSETH; WHEREAS, the Commissioner has determined that Eurasian watermilfoil lMyriophylum spicatum) is a nuisance plant, detrimental to recreation and native plant species; and WHEREAS, the 1989 Minnesota Legislature appropriated funds to control the spread of Eurasian watermilfoil; and WHEREAS, the Commissioner of Natural Resources has particular responsibilities with regard to the control of aquatic vegetation in protected waters; and . WHEREAS, pursuant to Minnesota Statute 103G.617, the Commissioner has the authority to coordinate control programs with local units of government, special purpose districts, and lake associations; and WHEREAS, the Commissioner, pursuant to Minnesota Statute 84.026 is authorized to enter into contracts with any public or private entity for the provision of statutorily prescribed resource services; and WHEREAS, an infestation of Eurasian watermilfoil exists in Lotus Lake (DOW #10-0006), Carver County, NOW, THEREFORE, the Commissioner, and the Local Unit agree as follows: A. The Commi~sioner shall: 1. Direct a private contractor currently under contract with the Department of Natural Resources to carry out appropriate control of Eurasian watermilfoil in Lotus Lake. Pay the first $2,000 of the treatment cost. Pay 50% of the treatment cost above $2,000 up to a maximum treatment cost of $15,000 (total amount the DNR would pay on a single lake is $8,5(0). Bill the Local Unit for their costs of the control work. Conduct an aquatic vegetation survey on Lotus Lake. . 2. 3. 4. I "" . . . B. The Local Unit shall: 1. Pay to the State, upon completion of control work, 50 % of the cost of control work above $2,000, up to a total treatment cost of $15,000. If the total cost of the control work is greater than $15,000, the Local Unit must pay the balance. This agreement shall be effective from the date of execution by the Commissioner of Finance through November 30, 1993. This agreement may consist of more than one treatment. This agreement may be terminated at any time by either party upon 10 days written notice to the other party. IN WITNESS THEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this agreement as of the last date written below. COMMISSIONER OF ADl\1INISTRATION Original signed By Mayor Date City Cle Date Title AUG 03 1993 By Gerald T. Joyce r /10) (f'l3 Date STATE OF MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL_ RESO~ES /J;:c j,P By R(b~-<-5(.(; .~--/~~:L-~ AssiT/\NT COMMISSIONER Title FO~ fo.JMIf\JISTRATlnN COMMISSIONER OF FINANCE By Title Date ( - .)-f -- f:3 Date Approved as to form and execution by the ATTORNEY GENERAL By ~A~~ ~ c ..\.)~ ...:.;:';'" c:~.. Title Date -4vv1N-.-- I 1 U Iqqs e --------~- .~-- ... CITY OF LAKE ATLAS 1993 . . 'salls 5U!UMOds so sal,\4doJ:JOW asn a>j!d so 4:Jns 4Sjj awos UO!l!PPO UI '4lMOJ5 ao51o JalOM uado az!w!u!W uo:) pUO uwnlo:) JalOM a41 WOJt SnJ04ds04d a^owaJ ao51o pa4:Jono a41 '4lMOJ5 ao51o pa4:Jono JO) sa:Jo)Jns so aNas sa^oal J!a4l asno:Jaq sa>jol U! SUO!l!puo:J JalOM Joal:J 5u!U!OlU!OW U! P!O SlUOld 'spasu! :J!lOnbo JO) lOl!qD4 lUDtJodw! UD aJD pUD sa>jDI awos U! S!Sa41u,\sol04d a41 )0 lSOW JO) luno:J:JD ,\OW (sal,\4doJ:JDW pallD:J OSID) SlUDld a>jDl 8lU'8ld 9)1'81 < '4Sjj IIDWS JO) swal! pOOl lUDlJodw! aJD 'UJnl U! 'UOl>jUDldooZ 'SJawnsuo:) ,\JDw!Jd so Ol paJJa)aJ aJD puo aD510 lDa UOl>jUDldooZ 'ado:)soJ:J!W JaMod MOl JO Suaj PUD4 0 4l!M p,MJasqo '\I!soa aJOW aJO ,\a41 45n04llD 'a'\a pa>jou a4l 4l!M uaas aq UD:J sa!:Jads awos 'ap!4 ol SlUOld a>jDI asn pUO JalDM uado U! lnoqD W!MS 104l sws!uo5JO IIDWS aJD U01>jUOldooZ UOl)lU'8ldOOZ 'ua5'\xo pa^loss!P U! 4:J!J UO!UW!I -!da uo 41Dauaq ua5'\xo pa^loss!P MOl 41!M UO!UW!lod,\4 0 U! sllnsaJ S!41 'saqOJ:J!W '\q dn pasn 5u!aq ua5'\xo Sl! SD4 4:J!4M 'UO!uw!jod,\4 a4l puo 'ua5'\xo :Jpa4dsowlD ol pasodxa 'Uo!uw!l!da a4l uaaMlaq Ja!JJDq jO:J!S,\4d D SO spo UO!uw!IDlaw a41 '(uO!uw!lDlaw) sa5uD4:J ,\IP!doJ aJnlOJadwal a4l aJa4M JalOM )0 Ja,\DI 0 ,\q palDJDdas (uO!UW!lod,\4) JalOM Japlo:J to Ja,\DI D JaM slsaJ l04l (UO!UW!I!da) JalDM Jal45!1 'JaWJDM )0 Ja,\DI a4l S! a>jol 0 )0 S:J!lS!JapOJ04:J 10:J!S,\4d 5u!lsaJalU! a4l )0 auO 'luaWUOJ!^ua a>jDI a41 01 anb!un aJO lD4l sws!uD5JO )0 '\l!Unwwo:J 0 lJoddns 'uJnl U! 'walS,\S a41 )0 sluauodwo:J ID:J!wa4:J pUD IO:J!S,\4d 'sluaw!pas a>jDI wonoq puo 'U!SDq a>jDI a4l )0 adD4s aLll 'pa4SJalDM aLll '\q pa:Juanl)u! S! wals,\sooa a>jD[ V 9)1'81 'SlUDld a>jol puo 'UOl>jUDldooz 'a0510 'slua!Jlnu '\q papajjD S! ,\l!Unwwo:J LIS!) aLll )0 '\l!IOnb aLl1 'L1S!t JallDWS aLll uo '\aJd a>j!d a>j!1 LIS!) Ja5JDl 'U01>jUDldooz loa LI:JJad SD L1:Jns LIS!) IIDwS 'IDap lOaJ5 0 .\JD^ lOl!qo4 puo POOl JO) SlUaWaJ!nbaJ J!a41 'L1S!t S! SJawnsuo:) :J!lDnbD to dnoJ5 UMOU>j lsaq a41 48!::I '. ..... . . . .... '.:" .:: ,,':', :.:" ..': .::', ." :.:.... .::. :':. ::'::" .::. '::. :::':" .:. ',:', ::':':" .... "~';;if~~~l~~ir .... .::. "-:'::'::" . '::...::.',:',.:':' ':.:::.'.::':. '::.. ':'::...::.' . ::":...:,', 'JaWwns alol ol P!W U! a:)uDJoaddD JalOM uaaJ5 aLll JOt alq!suodsaJ aJO ,\lIonsn aD51D uaaJ5-anl8 'a05[D uaaJ5-anlq pUD 'aD510 uaaJ5 'SWOlD!P aJO a051D )0 sdnoJ5 lUDtJodw! aaJLl1 ''\:JuaJDdsUDJl MOl a^OLl II!M pUO UMOJq JO uaaJ5 '\lqoa:J!lOU awo:Jaq II!M JalOM aLll 'asuap aJD Suo!lOlndod J!aLll tl 'JalOM 5u! -punoJJns a4l WOJ) slua!Jlnu dn a>jDl pUD JalDM U! papuadsns MOJ5 lDLll SlUOld :)!do:JsOJ:)!W aJO aD51V 9'86rv .(;..!J'{':,.,{;;'\r"" ........:...: ,': " . '...... .......:...: ,': :,', ..::.........:...: ,': . .....>>t..,}:\.:...Y 'SUO!lOJlua:)uo:) SnJ04ds04d a^!ssa:Jxa a^04 uassDLluD4J U! sa>jol )0 '\wofow aLl1 'In:):Jo UO:J swoolq a0510 ,M!Ssa:Jxa 'uo!ll!q Jad SlJDd at a^oqD la5 suo!lOJluaouo:J snJ04dsOLld uaLlM 'Ja^aMOH 'L1lMOJ5 lUDld aLll JalOaJ5 aLll 'a>jol D U! swa!Jlnu )0 lunowD aLll JalDaJ5 aLl1 'sJaz!I!lJa) a>jot aLll aJO asaLl1 'ua50Jl!U pUD SnJ04dsOLld aJO a>jol D U! sluaplnu lUOtJodw! lSOW aLl1 SlU9!JlnN e )I~OM 83)1'11 8,N3_S8'1HN'IHO MOH e e~ HOW CHANHASSEN'S WETLANDS WORK Wetland Vegetation * stabilizes and binds the substrate with roots * dissipates energy in moving water * traps sediments * takes up and stores nutrients I :oody trees and shrubs o to 2 feet '---.\./ .. I Floating and emergent. I.. o to -1.5 feet I I I Floating and submergent -;: to -6.5 feet -I 2.0 1.0 ..... 1.5 ~ +0.5 "+-. 0 .I: b.. -0.5 ~ 1.0 m 1.5 -0 2.0 ~ 2.5 3.0 " "'. . ..',. " . ", .. .." " " " . .' .... Root Zone Environment . '" ., Wetland plants have special adaptations for living in a harsh environment such as saturated soils. Plants such as cattails and bulrushes capture oxygen through openings above the water line and then send oxygen down ta their roots to help growth processes. Wetland Sediments Wetland sediments that contain calcium, aluminum, and iron bind-up phosphorus. However, wetlands that have peaty soil have poor phosphorus retention and actually release phosphorus. Bacteria Bacteria have dromatic impacts on soil chemistry. When oxygen is present, oxygen-using microbes flourish. If oxygen is not present, an entirely different microbe community is active. Bacteria can in- fluence nutrients, pH and other variables in the soil, which impacts the types of wetland plants that grow. Wetland Wildlife A variety of birds, animals, and insects use wetlands for food and shelter. Wetlands are not as well studied as other eco- systems. There may very well be species that are as yet unknown to science. e - e, e e e WHAT CAN CHANHASSEN RESIDENTS DO? TO PROTECT LAKES AND WETLANDS '- . Mow often enough to leave grass clippings on the lawn. The phosphorus from these clippings will be used up rapidly. This may improve your lawn while reducing the need for fertilizers. . Don't overfertilize. Limiting fertilizer application to necessary levels will benefit residents by helping preserve the water quality of Chanhassen's lakes and wetlands. Have your soil analyzed. The analysis costs $7.00. Soil sample bags and instructions can be picked up at the City Hall or Extension Office in Waconia. You may find out you don't need so much fertilizer. Soil test results indicate 60% of lawns don't need phosphorus. . Keep fallen leaves out of streetside gutters or ditches. Use leaves to cover up bare dirt to reduce spring time erosion. As a bonus, this will provide phosphorus to the soils on which they decay. . Direct roof downspouts away from foundations and driveways to planting beds and lawns where the water can safely soak into the ground. Use a rain barrel where practical. . Clean up after pets. Pet feces left on sidewalks, patios, or in street gutters can be washed into surface waters, causing significant bacterial contamination and increased nutrient levels. . The only recommended way to dispose of used oil is to put it into a sturdy container (preferably the container the replacement oil came in), label it, and take it to your local garage or oil recycling center. A list of disposal sites is available from City Hall. . Erosion at construction sites is the leading source of nutrients and sediments to lakes, wetlands, and streams. The City has made great strides in managing these sites, but please report any problems you are aware of to the City. . Erosion control is important even for home sites of an acre or less. If soil is going to be exposed for any length of time, consider these tips: -Use silt fence or straw bales to trap sediment on the downslope side of the lot. -Locate soil piles away from any roads or waterways. -Preserve existing trees and grass wherever possible to prevent erosion. -Revegetate the site as soon as possible. -Contact City staff if you have questions or need assistance. ----- -------' ~ ~ e 1:131 V M~I:I01S OlNI130 SlNV 1nll0d MOH - - J CHANHASSEN'S WETLAND INVENTORY * Chanhassen has 351 wetlands within the City limits. The majority of these wetlands are Urban. Definitions of the three classes of wetlands used by the City of Chanhassen are shown below: 12421 Ag/Urban Wetland-68Y. Wetlands that have been influenced by agricultural ar urban (residential, commercial, or industrial) land usage are called AgjUrban. Influences include: excessive nutrient loading, soil erosion and sedimentation, and water quality degradation. As a result of these influences, there is a loss of plant species diversity, overcrowding and domination by invasive species such os reed canary grass, and reduction in wildlife habitat. * WETLAND CLASSIFICATION - Natural Wetlande-30y' Natural wetlands are still in their natural state and typically show little sign of im- pact from surrounding land usage. The vegetative communities of these wetlands are characterized by 0 diversity of plant species with mixed dominance of species. Other key factors include: presence of natural indicator species, good wildlife habitat, and aesthetically pleasing environment. Wetlands that exist in a natural state and have special and unusual qualities worth protecting at a high level are called Pristine. These qualities include: outstanding vegetative community, native species populations, rare or unusual species, good wildlife habitat, and aesthetically pleasing environment. FROM CHANHASSEN'S WETLAND ORDINANCE - e IMPACTS OF SEDIMErfTS AND NUTRIENTS ON LAKE AND STREAM WATER QUALITY :. .......~ ..t (. Sediments . Muddy or 'murky' water contains millions of soil part- icles. In murky water, a pred- ator's visual field is reduced, making it difficult to see prey. .~...~.~ ". '. ,I : . . ',..' . ." . '!::"~ . .'. COOL, DI'I'P +FAST ~. Sediment deposits cause >.N~"" ~'" streams to become more shal- low and wide increasing flooding problems. The shallow water is . also heated more efficiently by ) the sun. This causes water temperatures to rise and in time cold water fish such as . trout are replaced by warm water fish such as carp. .Excessive sedimentation limits the use of some water bodies for boating and canoeing. Swimmers are also affected. Silted swimming areas are undesirable and can be dangerous if deep holes are filled with loose sediments. ---.., . Sediments cloud the water and cover plant leaves, reducing sunlight penetration and inhibi- ting photosynthesis (plant food production). Without photosynthesis, desirable plont populations ore i1~~duced, leaving no place for fish and small ~J?)~;;; (fish food) to live :..: ...~o_;'., , _ ~. Sediments reduce populations of food -8'; ~=d::;.~ plants for ducks by blocking sunlight and creating soft, unstable beds for plant roots. Sediment deposits also harm duck populat- ions by filling in wetlands used for breeding. . Sediments corry and store toxic materials that can contaminate small organisms. When fish and waterfowl eat the contaminated organisms, the toxins accumulate in their bodies 'and cause illness, birth defects, or death. .e ....... Nutrients . Nutrients such os phosphorus and nitrogen come from sediments, manure, pet wastes, improperly maintained septic systems and misapplication of fertilizers on lawns or farm fields. When these nutrients reach our lakes and streams they turn the water green with weeds and algae. o o o . When algae and aquatic weeds die, they are broken down by bacteria. Bacteria consume oxy- gen during decomposition and make it difficult for fish and other aquatic life to survive. Excess weeds also contribute to winter fish kills in shallow lakes. . When organic materials such as manure, pet wastes, leaves and grass clippings enter a lake or stream they are broken down by bacteria. The decomposition process reduces oxygen levels in the water and may release am- monia. Low oxygen levels and ammonia combined with warm temperatures con kill fish. . Phosphorus contributes to the eutrophication or over-fertilization of lakes. This leads to an increase in undesirable weed and algae growth. Excess weeds and algae ore harmful to fish and make lakes less attractive for swimming, booting, and other activities. o . Excess algae can reduce populations of bottom- rooted plants by blocking sunlight. Bottom-rooted plants provide food and habitat for fish and waterfowl. ~~~ CQ~~~ ACKNOWLEDGMENTS City Staff Kathryn Aanenson Paul Krauss Charles Folch Jo Ann Olsen Dave Hem pel SURFACE WATER QUALITY PLAN TASK FORCE Donald Chmiel Mike Mason Tom Workman Richard Wing Mark Senn Coleen Dockendorf Gerald Paulsen Donald Sitter Ursula Dimler Steven Decatur Wayne Holtmeier William Engebretson Michael Klingelhutz Gary O'Neill Brian Batzli Ladd Conrad Tim Erhart City of Chanhassen City phone 937-1900 J1t 8onestroo ___ Rosene ~ Anderlik & . \J' Associates Engineers & Architects Sf. Paul. Milwaukee ., t . PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER ..., 15% f'OSTCONSUMER WASTE el e, JI - I ~ CITY OF CIARRASSEI LAKES N ~ - - LAKE LUCY - FISH POPULATI. WAlLEYE ~ NORTHERN PIKE ~ Yl!1C lARGEMOUTH BASS ~ SMALLMOUTH BASS ~ BLUEGILL SUNFlSH ~ WHITE CRAPPIE ~ BLACK CRAPPIE ~..,. POOR FAIR GOOD EXCELLENT FlSH NUMBERS COMPARED TO REGIONAL AVERAGES NOTE: CHRONIC WINTERKILLS PREVENT ESTABUSHMENT OF SATISFACTORY GAMEFlSH POPULATIONS LAKE DATA: o LAKE 1.0. #: 10-7 oSURFACE AREA: 90 acres OMAXIMUM DEPTH: 20 ft o WATER CLARI1Y: FAIR (4.3 ft) OPHOSPHOROUS: HIGH (74 ppb) WATERSHED: (LAND AREA DRAINING TO THE LAKE): 907 acres LAKE CONDITION: EUTROPHIC (HIGH NUTRIENTS) COMMON AQUATIC PLANTS: o WHITE WATERLlL Y o COONTAIL oNORTHERN WATERMILFOIL BAD MESOTROPHIC 3 GOOD OLIGOTROPHIC (LOW NUTRIENTS) WATERSHED TO LAKE RATIO: 10:1 HIGH RATIO: POTENTIAL TO HAVE ADVERSLY IMPACTED WATER QUAL.JTY FROM THE WATERSHED o 500 1 000 I I Approximate scale in feet Lake contours in feet LAKE ANN FISH WALLEYE ~ NORTHERN PIKE LARGEMOUTH BASS ~ St.4Al..LMOUTH BASS ~ BLUEGILL SUNFISH WHITE CRAPPIE ~ BLACK CRAPPIE LAKE DATA: o LAKE I.D. #: 10-12 o SURFACE AREA: 112 acres o MAXIMUM DEPTH: 45 ft o WATER CLARITY: GOOD (6.2 ft) o PHOSPHOROUS: LOW (33 ppb) POPULATION ~~. ~ ~ WATERSHED: (LAND AREA DRAINING TO THE LAKE): 132 acres FAIR GOOD EXCELLENT FISH NUMBERS COMPARED TO REGIONAL AVERAGES COMMON AQUATIC PLANTS: o BUSHY PONDWEED o YELLOW WATERLlLY LAKE CONDITION: EUTROPHIC BAD (HIGH NUTRIENTS) MESOTROPHIC GOOD OLIGOTROPHIC (LOW NUTRIENTS) N o 500 1 000 J:. I I , Approximate scale in feet Lake contours in feet . WATERSHED TO LAKE RATIO: 1: 1 LOW RATIO: POTENTIAL FOR MAINTAINING GOOD WATER QUAUlY - - . . . FISH POPULATION LAKE SUSAN LAKE DATA: ~ oLAKE 1.0. #: 10-13 ~ o SURFACE AREA: 93 acres ) o MAXIMUM DEPTH: 17 ft o WATER CLARI1Y: LOW (2.4 ft) oPHOSPHOROUS: HIGH (59 ppb) DR WALlEYE NORTHERN PIKE ~r ~ lARGEMOUTH BASS ~ SMALLMOUTH BASS ~ BLUEGILL SUNFISH ~ WHITE CRAPPIE ~ BLACK CRAPPIE LAKE SUSAN PARK BOAT ACCESS WATERSHED: (LAND AREA DRAINING TO THE LAKE): 1215 acres POOR FAIR GOOD EXCELLENT FISH NUMBERS COMPARED TO REGIONAL AVERAGES COMMON AQUATIC PLANTS: o AMERICAN LOTUS (ENDANGERED o YELLOW WATERLlLY o WHITE WATERLlL Y o LITTLE YELLOW WATERLlLY 15 LAKE CONDITION: EUTROPHIC (HIGH NUTRIENTS) MESOTROPHIC N 0 500 1000 ~ I I Approximate scale in feet Lake contours in feet /" GOOD OLIGOTROPHIC (LOW NUTRIENTS) WEST 86TH STREET WATERSHED TO LAKE RATIO: 13: 1 HIGH RATIO: POTENTIAL TO HAVE ADVERSELY IMPACTED WATER QUALITY FROM THE WATERSHED LAKE MINNEW ASHT A LAKE DATA: o LAKE I.D. #: 10-9 o SURFACE AREA: 680 acres o MAXIMUM DEPTH: 70 ft o WATER CLARITY: GOOD (8.9 ft) o PHOSPHOROUS: LOW (21 ppb) COMMON AQUATIC PLANTS: o EURASIAN WATERMILFOIL o NARROW LEAF PONDWEED o MUSKGRASS o LARGELEAF PONDWEED WATERSHED: (LAND AREA DRAINING TO THE LAKE): 1863 acres ~~ ~ FISH POPULATION WALLEYE ~ NORTHERN PIKE LARGEMOUTH BASS SMALLMOUTH BASS ~ BLUEGILL SUNFlSH WHITE CRAPPIE ~ BLACK CRAPPIE ~ POOR FAIR ~~!~ ~ ~ GOOD EXCELLENT FlSH NUMBERS COMPARED TO REGIONAL AVERAGES WATERSHED TO LAKE RATIO: 3: 1 LOW RATIO: r FOR MAINTAINING GOOD WATER QUALITY ...... o 2000 4000 I I Approximate scale in feet Lake contours i_<:let N ~ LAKE CONDITION: BAD EUTROPHIC (HIGH NUTRIENTS) MESOTROPHIC GOOD OLIGOTROPHIC (LOW NUTRIENTS) e - . LOTUS LAKE LAKE DATA: o LAKE I.D. #: 10-6 o SURFACE AREA: 240 acres o MAXIMUM DEPTH: 29 ft o WATER CLARITY: POOR (3.0 ft) o PHOSPHOROUS: HIGH (51 ppb) Q COMMON AQUATIC PLANTS: o EURASIAN WATERMILFOIL o WHITE WATERLlLY o LEAFY PONDWEED o AMERICAN LOTUS (ENDANGERED) WATERSHED: (LANDING AREA DRAINING TO THE LAKE): 1033 ACRES WATERSHED TO LAKE RATIO: 4: 1 LCJN RAllO: POTENllAI... FOR WATER QUAUlY IMPROVEMENT I l_____ - ~ FISH POPULATION ~qu~-jC ~~ ~~ ~ WALLEYE NORTHERN PIKE LARGEMOUTH BASS SMALLMOUTH BASS BLUEGILL SUNFISH WHITE CRAPPIE POOR FAIR FISH NUMBERS COMPARED TO REGIONAL AVERAGES ~ o ~ Ii U BAD GOOD o 1000 2000 I I Approximate scale in feet Lake contours in feet BOAT ACCESS GOOD EXCELLENT LAKE CONDITION: EUTROPHIC (HIGH NUTRIENTS) MESOTROPHIC OLIGOTROPHIC (LOW NUTRIENTS) FISH POPULATION RICE MARSH LAKE LAKE DATA: o LAKE 1.0. #: N/ A OSURFACE AREA: 79 acres oMAXIMUM DEPTH: 11 ft oWATER CLARllY: POOR (1.5 ft) o PHOSPHOROUS: HIGH (178 ppb) WALLEYE ~ NORTHERN PIKE ~ ~ ~ lARGEMOUTH BASS BLUEGILL SUNFISH WHITE CRAPPIE BLACK CRAPPIE SMALLMOUTH BASS POOR FAIR GOOD EXCELLENT FISH NUMBERS COMPARED TO REGIONAL AVERAGES NOTE: CHRONIC WINTERKILLS PR[VENT ESTABUSHMENT OF SATISFACTORY GAMEFlSH POPULATIONS COMMON AQUATIC PLANTS: o PONDWEED o CATTAILS MAXIMUM DEPTH 11 FEET LAKE CONDITION: EUTROPHIC (HIGH NUTRIENTS) WATERSHED: (LAND AREA DRAINING TO THE LAKE): 1065 acres MESOTROPHIC o 600 1 200 I I Approximate scale in feet Lake contours in feet N ~ GOOD OLIGOTROPHIC (LOW NUTRIENTS) WATERSHECWO LAKE RATIO: 13: 1 ~ HIGH RATIO: POTl..u. TO HAVE ADVERSLY IMPACTED WATER QUAUTY FROM THE WATERSHE. . - LAKE RILEY LAKE DATA: oLAKE I.D. #: 10-2 o SURFACE AREA: 300 acres oMAXIMUM DEPTH: 49 ft oWATER CLARITY: FAIR (4.6 ft) oPHOSPHOROUS: HIGH (48 ppb) COMMON AQUATIC PLANTS: o EURASIAN WATERMILFOIL oCURLED LEAF PONDWEED o COONTAIL o PO N DWEED oNARROW LEAF WATERSHED: (LAND AREA DRAINING TO THE LAKE): 1355 ~~ z::J ::Jo gu a:::Z w- ~8J <Z UZ w :r: WATERSHED TO LAKE RATIO: 4.5: 1 LOW RAllO: POTENTIAL FOR WATER QUAUTY IMPROVEMENT e e FISH POPULATION WALLEYE ~ ~~.dC BLACK CRAPPIE ~ FAIR GOOD EXCELLENT FISH NUMBERS COMPARED TO REGIONAl AVERAGES LAKE CONDITION: BAD EUTROPHIC (HIGH NUTRIENTS) MESOTROPHIC GOOD OLIGOTROPHIC (LOW NUTRIENTS) o 1 000 2000 I I Approximate scale in feet Lake contours in feet N ~ J