1992 12 15 Agenda
.
e
e
FILE
AGENDA
CHANHASSEN PARK AND RECREATION COMMISSION
TUESDAY, DECEMBER 15, 1992, 7:00 P.M.
CHANHASSEN CITY HALL, 690 COULTER DRIVE
7:00 p.m.
Applicant Interviews for Commission Vacancies.
Fifteen minutes will be allocated for each interview. Upon completion of
interviews, the meeting will be called to order.
CALL TO ORDER
1. Approval of November 24, 1992, Park and Recreation Commission Meeting Minutes.
2. Preliminary Plat to Subdivide 2 Lots into 2 Lots and 1 Outlot, Nez Perce Drive,
Vinewood Addition.
3. Pheasant Hill Park Construction Report.
4. 1992 Park and Recreation Commission Attendance Report.
5.
Commission Member Presentations.
6. Administrative Presentations:
a. Retirement of Wendy Pemrick, and Randy Erickson from the Park and Recreation
Commission.
Wendy Pemrick - 3 years of service, Recipient of a Certificate of Appreciation
Randy Erickson - 10 months of service, Recipient of a Certificate of Appreication
b. Outcome of rejecting retaining wall construction at Lake Ann Park/Recreation
Shelter.
c. Tree Preservation Board Appointments (Verbal).
d. Winter Break Programs.
e. Adult Basketball Report.
f. Skating and Hockey Rink Status Report (Verbal).
7. Administrative Packet.
e
e
e
MEMORANDUM
TO:
C ITV OF
CHAHHASSEH
690 COULTER DRIVE. P.O. BOX 147. CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
(612) 937-1900. FAX (612) 937-5739
If
Park and Recreation Commission
FROM:
Todd Hoffman, Park and Recreation Supervisor
DATE:
December 11, 1992
SUBJ:
Applicant Interviews for Commission Vacancies
The following schedule for Park and Recreation Commission applicant interviews has been
prepared for Tuesday evening. All individual application forms are attached for your review with
the exception of Doug Taylor. Mr. Taylor's application will be distributed prior to commencing
interviews on Tuesday evening. I have also attached the criteria for commission member
selection and interview questions which have been utilized in the past.
7 :00 p.m.
7:15 p.m.
7:30 p.m.
7:45 p.m.
8:00 p.m.
8:15 p.m.
Daniel Carroll
Robert Smithburg
James Manders
Greg Blaufuss
Ron Roeser
Doug Taylor
With Commissioners Lash and Andrews seeking reappointment to their positions, the remaining
five members are eligible to carry out interviews. However, with the recent resignation of Randy
Erickson from the Commission, Fred Berg, Wendy Pemrick, Larry Schroers and Dave Koubsky
are the only four commissioners remaining to carry out interviews. As Sllch, it is essential that
all of you are present at next Tuesday's meeting.
It is the charge of those interviewing to select up to four candidates of their choice which they
would like to recommend the City Council cC)flsider for appointment to the commission. The
Council will then interview these candidates, in addition to Commissioners Lash and Andrews,
in early January, appointing four of them to the Commission.
.'
ft
t.J PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER
I
e
e
ACTIVITIES AND AFFILIATIONS: (Include elective offices, honors and
recognitionsreceived,ifany.)
REASONS FOR SEERING THIS POSITION AND YOUR QUALIFICATIONS:
h<::> '\J <'I&'~~ C~ C.b~(l.{S~l-\ ~c.')r :StVJ ~ ~ln\1E... ~
~, d.. \\t ~l J t. 0 rtt '<< Cf\\if ~ ~ C I. J \ h,o \ h. C;)..J r Co M. ~ v '" J., .3::..c::P W'
'vQv-/ \\{\v)lv.e~ If\ ~~tc.s -- Y6..l t.- 0z-L C\x.,-,-ho}~~r"\.. JO'S. ~ ~\~(.S
VT\tv eYC- (l\(C-\'\l~O.\. -,~ )-t~r.5. \JC>\v~\~ a'\-tJ.dH's ~d!.I.t\~ \..l.~, :I& k~
eCt6.a.t Ii) '{&' J ' 'S~ \\ CH~~ \ l.- S'?~~ ~ , :t . \.oCu)~ \ \ ~ --b ~1- \ 11 v61\JQ6 1 f\
DVr CU~\~f)tv""+l - &) C\. ~)(fo-y~t' J: ~~\ \+- \S f\\( ~~- -H-o.-t.,.\,OU
IN FILING THIS APPLICATION, I UNDERSTAND THAT A COHKITMBNT OF MY
TIME, ENERGY, INTEREST AND PARTICIPATION WILL BE INVOLVED, AND I AM
PREPARED TO HARE SUCH A COHKITMENT IN THE EVENT I AM APPOINTED TO
THE ABOVE COMMISSION. C G>~ C-r <;:.:
C=sI GNATURE
e
.
I~I APPLICATION FOR CHANHASSEN COMMISSION
DATE: 11-.:.-ttJ.J- /)
COMMISSION APPLYING FOR: /--:4/lK. ,A/JIJ ~~,ee/fTltJ../
ALTERNATE:
NAME: Ad€~{ J;,11?'1-I~(/te6
ADDRESS: 8'-51 ~I-IA~. IJl.s. /J,(. ,J,.
BIRTHDATE (optional): ~-3-ro
CITY: C'#A/ ZIP:S"'"S-"7
HOME PHONE: 93 c.I- Y 998
WORK PHONE: '?..U" 1 ~ 7a
e
HOW LONG HAVE YOU BEEN A RESIDENT OF CHANHASSEN?: ,;. "liS
HIGHEST LEVEL OF BDUCATION ATTAINED, PLUS DEGREES, IF ANY:
4 11,( ~t'''Aff !.SAt:.I-!, o~ A.L7~ ./lU'1It'Al. /C/.€~~ I fo<:./DU> 6 ;I
CURRENT EMPLOYMENT: (State position, employer' brief description
of duties. If with present em loyer for only a short time, list
previous employment as well. ) () 1'L7I1WFS-r 1,f,,~E:!J .,)0 ~
5'7oc Ie ~t!'tI'J.'" rk~lI/~e fJA./..7~ ,4/l ,Alt!{,u~ ,41An,'re"'Ad~ rH/~ .I~~.~
.
k? UTI:- AII2'"~I''' ./,Ah$ ~~ ~ ~"'.4~ ~A?' ~uAi.. '1#/l4"~1k1q lJaJA .r~J.,.eA<o1
ACTIVITIES AND AFFILIATIONS: (Inc ude elective offices, hon rand
recognitions received, if any.) ~(.-r C#A(~ ~'" 'Z('C. VJCC-C,tJ4'1!e
/l~-r:: II C;.lNJ. ItI('76~ ~l'IfiPf #~IIIF"~~ .IZ~?{:;AJ Iff.~.
~ll 'H/!Jo~lIw~ &~2 iIId,urtltb'" c;,d~~/U~?O"l
REASONS FOR SEEKING THIS POSITION AND YOUR QUALIFICATIONS:
WE rYI ",!-r U,t)IU(.() A- CoIl7'/-1J~/46 G., 4'1*"( r"""''''IIf7 ~ ~ "",/te'/2u;,- 6
tleA,t.. LA~I) A~;t) ev/r7F,( ft1:...JC4'IUe-S AN,o .r/~. /tJE ~t1J7 ~,,uJ/NA"'F
txI~ €/t'e;L7S /IJ/'fH ,.) er6,,6,,~;1iI6 C, J4JnJeNlff/e5 .k1 7'#A T t;Vt!" Au eM
€1J.w.; ~u~ JlAI'ClMl.- J'''a"t/A~/'''S ~~ "q4r~~u!'.$ A.ut) ~ ~7f;~f:F b~t-'(JA/'/oAS.
tv 6t.~"'J6- A.A.J() j"~I2C1/Atb ol"l A.J"HfE~qf.5 (ctt~/tS M~ 4pf""~J?()4s #.4~
-SHOc:1JAl rJlAi I CA,v W~~J:. 1:~t'1:""c7?4'El'l -r" ACU>"'~'II bcu<<5.
IN FILING THIS APPLICATION, I UNDERSTAND THAT A COMMITMENT OF MY
TIME, ENERGY, INTEREST AND PARTICIPATION WILL BB INVOLVED, AND I AM
PREPARED TO MAD SUCH A COMMITMENT IN THE EVENT I AM APPOINTED TO
THE ABOVE COMMISSION.
~~
SIGNATURE - ;;t
e
e
RECEIVED
NOV 2 5 1992
DATE: J /- ~s_r'PPLICATION FOR CBANHASSEN COMMISSION CITY OF ChANHASSEN
COKMISSION APPLYING FOR: /#~.L ....#tJ ~~E/?/1?/ C:;;:AIY~:s.r,;t?/
ALTERNATE:
NAME: ~h7e5 l1a,Je"'~
ADDRESS: b r7r ()a/b.rrall-q'1e
.
47()"1r~3
HOME PHONE:
BIRTBDATE (optional):
CITY: Chol'JhQJHI1 ZIP: S-S"J/7
WORK PHONE: 9'1)-'1633
L{ yeqrs
HOW LONG HAVE YOU BEEN A RESIDENT OF CBANBASSEN?:
HIGHEST LEVEL 01' EDUCATION ATTAINED, PLUS DEGREES, IF ANY:
ftksfer5 of IkrtYJeu lJj",ln '5tryt;CJI1
e
CURRENT EMPLOYMENT: (State position, employer' brief description
of duties. If with present employer for only a shor~ time, list
previous employment as well.) Sf> n ,'or 1" for/'rlfl'fio"J /1/Ja1vs L. *01"
f
~ To. res f117, ,/;"I,.../-" u.fer de,' . del/ ~ 1-
I
Q nd i ,..;J!elfJel1'0, 1-10'1 a. /D11~ wifl., "'ct",q,t trtf i" f()r~hl1n a."J a J1Q/1/ 5 tJ 6
f ' f (
ACTIVITIES AND AFFILIATIONS: (Include elective offices, honors and
recognitions received, if any.)
HOlk,"'s/'7in"efo,.,~ ~ &4/~( & Eden ~ Q/~;e fee,. LeRf~e for s""'~1/
VtJt(e.r4-(~ f.ry~60~ WaJ/rhQ//J~fr- j Chu,..,,4 !r(}f{,"S .
REASONS FOR SEEKING THIS POSITION AND YOUR QUALIFICATIONS: lI1y !r;h,at-r
f"et:t 5 0'1 fo" s e.elc~ th 13 .fJD1 tha17 i 5 t() reG'if"" em to C/,~Q.,sep/ tar fire
ttro"'y fhi,S 'H,4 i'f hqr, 1t'()(J~JtlJ StllIjP. t>-!- ".}"CJ, t.Il't.!. 'fI,f, 'If/, ()'P T",,~ CcJ.Plrof.q"l Oct''''''fe;~
well V""'A 1J4f'kr, I art,) e.nJlJfSelt~t of -}l,e reeve-kit({ j7IPira"".. f'/v q~i'f;C4TiIJ/fS Qrt q,
~, I I f' I 27
p.e.", {.f j,,~ c..o"c.UoIf t-Dr Me C '7 o.",J hfJleJ if!, v ie..vtJ by 016 erJ a.S 'veIl 0., Q,~~ic
c,Of.V'$e '-VDrl( tho.T ~tU J,e..~~ "'1 ihfe,.et! iH: "(),,tro!/eJJeve.lo.,r1~~ !-It-$'
c,or,.;d()'j vqj-e,. 1M/if, t~d oS :Jfe Q~ s-.f"'cie,,,f- ol'fUt s/lQc.e.. These. fI1ilJ.s
Q.lle.. f> 6e.. G.<h1Si ,. 0. C4r ct. eye. 01'1 Go~'fJ.
IN PILING THIS APPLICATION, I UNDERSTAND THAT A COMMITMENT OF MY
TIME, ENERGY, INTEREST AND PARTICIPATION WILL BB INVOLVED, AND I AM
PREPARED TO MAKE SUCH A COMMITMENT IN THE EVENT I AM APPOINTED TO
THE ABOVE COMMISSION.
e
e
ALTERNATE:
e
BIRTBDATE (optional):
CITY: &Itt~ ZIP: 1:&7~/7
WORK PHONE: 9 ).1? - t!!) f ~
.
0, y~R.c;
(
HIGHEST LEVEL 01' EDUCATION ATTAINED, PLUS DEGREES, II' ANY:
11.11 /,,( P/lcJ41iieTi7RtE-//r1Jt.I~od
CURRENT EMPLOYMENT: (State position, employer' brief description
of d~ties. If with present ~Rloy~ fRr o~ a sho~t time, list
prev10us employment as well. ) t:t.IirBa/\ ~1.J;~C;r:JJIA1
(tiC) ~r~4 .wlK, ~t1K .;~~-ii &~iR: 'f~tHHn:; ~
g,o I (k({)~ tf (J1t1/d6~ IJK, 13,LL /al(&g(
, /
ACTIVITIES AND AFPILIATIONS: (In Iud ,ctiv
recoqnitionsreceived,ifany.)
/
NAKE:iJR1f6 (!jy;(Jr;~
ADDRESS: -, 11& (!T7r,,;:; 6:7~
HOKE PHONE: --A 7 tJ - 01 ~~
HOW LONG HAVE YOU BEEN A RESIDENT 01' CHANHASSEN?:
IN PILING THIS APPLICATION, I UNDERSTAND THAT A COHHITHENT 01' MY
TIME, ENERGY, INTEREST AND PARTI IPATION. LL BE INVOLVED, AND I AM
PREPARED TO HAKE SUCH A COHHIT IN T NT I AM APPOINTED TO
THE ABOVE COHHISSION.
e
SI
J
. I
RECEIVED
e
APPLICATION FOR CHANHASSEN
DATE: December 10. 1992
COMMISSION APPLYING FOR:
DEe 1 0 1992
COHHISSIO~
JTY OF c.;Hf\NHASSEN
Park and Rec Commission
ALTERNATE:
KANE: Ronald M. (Ron) Roeser
BIRTBDATE (optional): 07-21-33
ADDRESS: 222 Chan View
CITY: Chanhassen
ZIP: 55317
HOKE PHONE:
934-7896
WOU PHONE:
445-3239
HOW LONG HAVE YOU BEEN A RESIDENT OF CBANBASSEN?: Lifetime (except for
5 years between 1955-1960)
HIGHEST LEVEL OP EDUCATION ATTAINED, PLUS DEGREES, IP ANY: High School
plus I have taken numerous college courses. I was involved in the Independent
Competency Based Education Program at Normandale Community College when Red Owl
collapsed, forcing me to give it up for the time being.
CURRENT EKPLOYMENT: (State position, employer' brief description
of duties. If with present employer for only a short time, list
previous employment as well. ) Presently employed at Cleve's Red Owl, Shakopee.
Spent most of my working years with Red Owl Stores, Inc. in various capacities
in t'np rorporate Runermarkets.
e
ACTIVITIES AND AFFILIATIONS: (Include elective Offices, honors and.
recoqnitions received, if any.) Involved at present with St. Hubert Parish
and School - Peace and Justice Committee, Loaves & Fishes Program, school plays, et(
I have served on the City Council, and at one time I was the entire Park and
Rec Department (ancient history).
REASONS FOR SEEKING THIS POSITION AND YOUR QUALIFICATIONS:
This is definitely my home town (resident over 50 years) and I intend to stay
here. I haven't done any volunteer work for quite a while. I've always been
interested in being a part of the Park & Rec Department. This seems like a
good time for me to start. I have the time.
e
IN PILING THIS APPLICATION, I UNDERSTAND THAT A COMMITMENT OF MY
TIME, ENERGY, INTBREST AND PARTICIPATION WILL BE INVOLVED, AND I AM
PREPARED TO MAD SUCH A COMMITMENT IN THE EVENT I AM APPOINTED TO
THE ABOVE COMMISSION. ~.I~Q
BIG.ATU . ~
-
-
CRITERIA POR COMMISSION SELECTION
1. Membership should. represent all areas of the City to the
extent possible.
2. Membership should be representative of all areas in propor-
tion to the total population.
3. Membership shou~d 'consider re-appointment of current
, outstanding members wish~ng to be re-~ppointed
4. Membership should be composed of a variety of careers and
interest groups throughout the community, i.e. business com-
munity, CAA, school representatives, lawyers, architects,
maintenance workers, etc.
e
s. Membership should, to the extent possible, include a variety
of age groups.
6. Candidate selection should be based on the interview.
e
/
.
.
INTERVIEW QUESTIONS
1. Do you feel you have the time to make a commitment?
2. What is your impression of the current park and recreation
system and what do you feel you can add (expertise?
knowledge?) .
'3. What do you feel is the role of the Park and Recreation
Commission?
4. What are your feelings regarding conservation and environment,
and passive parks versus active parks?
5. Please elaborate on why you wish to serve on the Park and
Recreation Commission.
e
e
-;'"
CHANHASSEN PARK AND RECREATION COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
~ NOVEMBER 24, 1992
Chairman Schroers called the meeting to order at 7:33 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT: Jim Andrews, Larry Schroers, Dave Koubsky and Jan Lash
MEMBERS ABSENT: Fred Berg, and Wendy Pemrick
STAFF PRESENT: Todd Hoffman, Park and Rec Coordinator; Jerry Ruegemer,
Recreation Supervisor; and Dawn Lemme, Program Specialist
APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Koubsky moved, Lash seconded to approve the Minutes
of the Park and Recreation Commission meeting dated October 27, 1992 as
presented. All voted in favor and the motion carried.
INTERVIEW APPLICANTS FOR COMMISSIONER VACANCIES.
e
Hoffman: Chairman Schroers and Commission members. Essentially I ran
out of time for advertising for vacancies. The first two weeks that I
had requested the Villager, include the notification, they did not so up
about 2 weeks ago was the last time the vacancies was the last time the
vacancies were posted in the Villager. Since that time we've had really
one unsolicited application and then one application from a person that
came into the office and asked about a position. So we have two
applications on file at the current time. We will continue to keep
those, the application process open until a later date, which is not even
listed. We can interview on the 15th. But we'll keep it open until the
week prior to that time. I don't see a date on here. So again we have
Jan who has potentially voiced her interest. If there is not sufficient
interest in those positions, that she may consider running for
re-appointment so we'll just keep our eyes out and look for some members
for the Board.
Schroers: Wendy and Randy definitely are not?
Hoffman: Correct.
Lash: Randy has already been through.
Hoffman: Yep, Randy has resigned. He's still in town but he resigned as
of October 30th.
Schroers: Maybe if we up the salary a little bit.
Hoffman: We might have to.
Schroers: Okay. Thanks very much and since there's no need for anything
further on that, we'll move along to item 3.
LAND DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL. SITE PLAN REVIEW FOR GATEWAY WEST BUSINESS
e PARK. OPUS CORPORATION.
Hoffman: Chairman Schroers and Commission members. As you recall, this
item was last formally reviewed by the Commission on September 22nd.
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
November 24, 1992 - Page 2
J
Action taken by the Commission that evening was put in the form of a
motion by Commissioner Schroers and seconded by Commissioner Berg. That
recommendation as you're familiar with it is listed there. On October
5th, following that meeting, or the meeting of the Commission, members of
the city staff met with Michele Foster, who is here this evening of Opus
and John Shardlow of Dahlgren, Shardlow and Uban (DSU). As documented by
the Minutes which Ms. Foster prepared at that meeting, at the request of
the Park and Recreation Commission, were again confirmed at that meeting.
DSU did present an alternative park plan which depicted a vast majority
of many park components on neighboring properties. We've had various
discussions in that regard and as it is true that we may in fact, as land
develops to the east of this parcel, be able to gain additional park
property, at this time we feel it's proper to address the Opus property
keeping in the back of our minds the possibility of acquiring additional
land in the future. But what we're really doing at this point is the
property in question. The consensus of that October 5th discussion was
that the applicant was to slide proposed Lot 14 to the west to allow for
a larger active park component on their property. The active components
of the park should reflect the requirements as outlined in the report
recommended by the Commission and that the active components listed in
the recommendation be accommodated within the confines of the applicant's
property. In an attempt to respond to these requirements, a new concept
plan was developed by the applicant. The plan was presented to staff
members for discussion last week, which is now two weeks ago. The moment
I saw the new concept plan I could conclude that the applicant had not ..
gone far enough to satisfy the requirements being requested of them by ..,
the Commission. The discussion that day with Ms. Foster and Mr. Uban of
DSU were very straight forward. I simply stated that if the easterly
line of Lot 14 moved to the west, this is the last page on your item 3.
The diagram. Their latest configuration showed the park boundary right
in this location. Simply from a size and space feeling, if that lot line
was moved to the west until it met the lot line to the north of Lot 15,
that would allow for this open flow of space through this corridor.
The Highway 5 corridor feels very good about it because it allows for an
expansive view off of Highway 5, not into this business park area and
then through to this open park space and then back further into the
wetland to the south. I have not calculated the acreage. Potentially
the applicant will discuss that this evening nor have we discussed the
compensation for that property. I have not dealt in any calculations of
wetland area. What portion of this property in Lots 17 and 18 are high
ground and what portions are wetland. So again we left that meeting with
the applicant agreeing that they would take a look at that and bring it
to the Park Commission this evening for discussion. Again it is staff's
recommendation that the Commission require the applicant to dedicate
parkland as depicted on the attached diagram and as we discussed. In
addition to that, that all other borders of Lot 17 and 18 remain constant
prior to approving the concept proposed for Gateway West Business Park in
regard to park and recreation related items in making any recommendations
in this regard to the City Council. In regard to trails, trail
construction and/or trail fee dedication, it is staff's current
recommendation to accept full trail fees as a part of this development. ...
As addressed in the previous staff report, the Highway 5 trail which wil"
be developed initially on the north side of Highway 5 but certainly at
some point we would want to look to trails on both sides of Highway 5.
e
~
~
,
e
e
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
November 24, 1992 - Page 3
That is a major divider of the city. In regards to the Highway 41
segment, numerous questions pertaining to the future road improvements in
that area currently remained unanswered. Obviously the ideal time to
construct a trail along any roadway would be in conjunction with the
improvement of Highway 41. Therefore at this time I do not feel that it
is proper to recommend or to require that the applicant construct that
trail until such time when those questions over the lowering of
improvements to Highway 41, those questions are answered.
Schroers: Thank you Todd. I think before we ask Gateway to show us
their new information, I would like to know how much adjacent area south
and east of that Highway 5 is zoned residential.
Hoffman: South and east and then east of this parcel?
Schroers: Yes.
Hoffman: It's all zoned residential. High densities. High or medium
densities to the north and then lower density to the south. The
particular parcel of property is somewhat difficult if you're familiar
with it. It's high toward Highway 5 and then it drops off sharply down
into, somewhat of a wooded wetland marsh type area. So the site has it's
limitations.
Schroers: Okay.
Koubsky: That's east right?
Hoffman: Right.
Koubsky: North is kind of excluded from the.
Andrews: The area.
Koubsky: Isn't that, the north of this, isn't that what Fleet Farm?
Hoffman: Yeah, north would be across Highway 5 and across a natural or
manmade barrier which you would not want to cross for...park use age
areas.
Lash: How much acreage are we looking at?
Hoffman: In total?
Lash: I mean for the park area.
Hoffman: For the park area, I've not taken a look at the calculations
separating those two. If you compare it to the one of the lots, I think
we're probably, contiguous property there in that one square...probably
Lot 15 which would be about 4 acres. So the flat spot which you're
looking at there is somewhat limited in size but if you take into account
the total acreage of Lots 17 and 18, it's approaching 35, 36, 37 acres.
Lash: So for the active area there, that's what you figured around 40?
~
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
November 24, 1992 - Page 4
/
Hoffman: Correct.
,
Lash: And how, I'm not good at visualizing. How would that compare with
Lake Susan?
Hoffman: Lake Susan Park, the total area there is about 30 acres so it's
nowhere near that.
Schroers: Probably more comparable to City Center. Just the active use
up there.
Hoffman: Correct. Real comparable to that.
Lash: And then can you fit two softball fields on this one?
Koubsky: That's off the property.
Andrews: That's not the applicant's property.
Hoffman: Correct. Yeah, so if you were to, the softball fields there
are to scale. If you were to move one softball field onto the proposed
park area you would fill it so.
Schroers: Yeah that was my concern when I asked about the zoning. If we
have high density moving right basically across the street, and then ~
single family south of that, it could, the park could generate a lot of
active use.
Andrews: I'd agree with that.
Koubsky: So Todd, what does this extra parcel of property gain us?
Hoffman: Somewhere over an acre and a half.
Koubsky: And if we can't really put a softball field on there, which is
something we were looking for. Originally we were looking for two. I
guess again where is it getting us? I see it a compromise but.
Hoffman: It is a compromise. If we were to, the Commission wished to
aggressively look to a larger site in this area, we would need the
assistance again of the HRA through their negotiations pertaining to
negotiations dealing with tax increment and financing packages similar to
Lake Susan. Lake Susan would not have happened without the purchase
agreements and the dealings with the industrial park as it developed down
there. My presumption is even with this proposal and this comprmise,
we're already over what we, the Park and Recreation Commission could
require of dedication. We would probably need some cash compensation
back to the applicant. If you want to continue to look for additional
land, obviously that cash compensation increases.
Lash: So if we looked at this little extension that you have in mind, tt
would we then be able to push everything _over and not be able to fit the
two ballfields on?
~
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
November 24, 1992 - Page 5
Hoffman: Not onto this. No, not onto this piece. At that time it would
be a waiting game. That's one of the difficulties here. If you accept
this and you wanted to go ahead and develop this site as a park, you
would have to make a decision on what facilities went in first and try to
establish some timing pertaining to when the adjacent piece to the east
would develop. How much pressure we would get to develop this park on
the Opus site would depend obviously on how fast their business park
progressed and those types of things.
Schroers: And also when the parcel to the east developed, would that
bordering property in fact even, would we even have an option to get that
specific property that we wanted, depending on how it was designed? I
think that's like buying something that you can't see ordering something
from a catalog and you're not quite sure what it is that you're going to
be getting.
Hoffman: Correct. Those were some of our comments back to the applicant
during discussions is that we have no guarantee. We can certainly
attempt to do that. We don't know how large a parcel will be brought
before the city for development. If it will be subdivided. Where the
lot lines would be. Those types of things so there's a lot of unanswered
questions pertaining to that adjacent parcel. That adjacent parcel and
that's why simply portraying a nice park facility adjacent to this
property and proposal does not...
~ Schroers: Okay. Well at this time why don't we give Gateway an
opportunity to address the Commission and after we've heard what they
have to say, we can continue our discussion and hopefully make a
recommendation.
~
Howard Dahlgren: Thank you Mr. Chairman and members of the Commission.
My name is Howard Dahlgren...As you recall we met with you back in
September. with me is Michele Foster who is Director of Real Estate
Development for Opus Corporation, and I'm sure all of you are familiar
with that organization. We feel they're the best industrial developers
in the metropolitan area. That's why we...gateway to Chanhassen to the
west and also a gateway to Chaska from the north. That's why we call it
Gateway. It emphasizes the fact that this is a very important piece of
land...very important that we handle it well. That we handle it
efficiently and we make the best use of this land for the mutual interest
of the developers... We have tried very hard to work closely with the
city. ..trying to do this carefully and well. Now the question of the
park, which you know... We realize that dedication is required so in
coming up with the plan we felt it was important to take the best land
that had real park potential, that has natural park qualities, and give
that to the city. Not just lowlands but hill land "and trees. The land
in that southeastern corner. Those of you who have gone out there, I
hope you all have, you can see that that's very fine property that has a
lot of qualities. Now it doesn't have a lot of land...for active, for
playgrounds. For that you need flat...land that you can buy for less
price than you're going to have to pay for this prime industrial land.
We're not relunctant to have you have a...park. We think that's fine.
But where our concern is that you're taking valuable industrial land here
and demanding that we sell some of this land in addition to the
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
November 24, 1992 - Page 6
dedication to create this large area. And the reason we did the plan ~
that you have seen showing what happens next door is because it's ~
important to the City to look at what's going to happen next door to plan.r
for this park in thE! future. Before I get into that, let me just show
you this plan and talk a little bit about some of the adjustments that we
have made based on the meeting that we had with you back in September.
First of all we added additional property to the, about 3 acres of land
and added in this corner. We've added land down here which is a heavily
wooded area which gives us access to the trail system to this
southeastern quadrant contiguous to this roadway. You recall this
roadway is all set up to conform to the city's comprehensive plan
requiring...east/west thoroughfare to make that alignment. So we're
doing that. Then we're making a connection out here to Highway 41 and
out here to Highway 7 and that's it. It's a simple plan but based on
those connections to the highways...city's desire to have that
thoroughfare proceed easterly. This creates a plan that we have. We
think it's the right one and will work well and do a good job for the
city and do a good job for development of the land. In addition to this
acreage down here, where they have this wooded area, we had an area here
which opens so when you drove in here you'd see this open space. And at
this meeting last time we talked about, staff suggested that they'd
rather see that open space contiguous over here to future parkland on the
east side. So we've taken that out and moved Lot 14 over. Added
additional acreage here to give you some of this highlight. Now in term~
of the overall park, it is now 32.9 acres. Previously it was 29.9 so ...
we've added exactly 3 acres. All of that addition has been high ground.
14 acres of this 32, approximately 32 acre park is wetland. The rest of
it is high ground. So the remaining acreage is about 18 acres. That's
about 10% of the total acreage, which is 178.3. That's the total acreage
of the site. So 10% of that would be about 18 acres so we're giving
about 10% of the land of high ground as part of our proposed park plan.
Now it's been said that we were presum~tuous in drawing a plan showing a
park on the contiguous property. We did that because somebody should do
it because for the purpose of the city looking at for your future park
needs, and how you're going to handle it, the City probably should have
drawn that plan to take a look at what happens next door because you know
that someday that land's going to develop. The City had to come up with
a sewer plan to bring water and sewer to this property. ..been done. The
cost, all of that's been set up. It's going to happen relatively soon.
Now when that happens this land will develop and with this portion of
land designated for park, obviously it would make sense to get contiguous
property to the east to enlarge the park if you so desire. You're not
going to get a 50 acre park by dedication totally so then you have to
decide which area are we going to buy land to get the park that you want.
And you should have the park that you want. But the question is, where
is it smart to do it. What's the right thing to do here so that the city
gets what they need and we get the best potential out of the land. This
land over here is zoned low density residential. This is high density
residential. What we're saying here is that in this land, much of which
is marsh, if you want to buy additional land, flat land, this is the ..
place to do it and that's why we drew up this plan. We're not trying tdl'
throw the onerous on someone else and say, get it from them. That's not
the point. What we've done here analyze for you a park development plan
that shows you how you can get the large park that you want by buying a
.
e
e
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
November 24, 1992 - Page 7
residential land. Low density residential land instead of expensive
industrial land. That's why we did this. Now it seems to me that makes
some sense. One of our park planners did this. We've design hundreds of
parks in this metropolitan area. We just did a big park for the city of
Rochester. We do it all the time. We have a staff of 10 landscape
architects. We have more landscape architects than any firm in Minnesota
next to... They design parks and a lot of other things. But parks is
one of the things we do a great deal of. So this is a suggestion for
you. It's for you, not for us. It's a suggestion how you can expand
this park. There are other ways to do it and working with the topography
and the lowland as we were able to determine it from the topo maps, the
wetland maps we had access to, this is a park that can be built. And it
would make a marvelous park. It doesn't have to be that large necessarily
but because so much of this land down here is marginal, and this land is
flat and developable for park purposes, it's an ideal place to put
ballfields. The view then as you come across Highway 5, all of this
would be quite visible through here. It's not essential to move this
line over any further and get another acre and a half of industrial land
when you can get the flat space that you need for active ballfields over
here contiguous to the east. And to say that that's a pig and a poke and
you might not be able to get that, that's not really true. You've got
all the power in the world to require dedication for some of this land.
You have as much power and an opportunity with this developer to acquire
land at a more reasonable rate than the high cost industrial land that
we're giving you. So in the overall interest of the community, it seems
to us that it makes sense to try to develop this land for it's best
potential...take the land in it's natural state and use it for it's best
potential. It's great residential land. Use it for...use it for
industrial. Do it well and use it for the land for the use that makes
the most sense. And if it's great apartment land, then use it for that.
Of course get your parklands so it serves all these people. Residences
will someday be here and high density. Those folks and the people over
here to the east as well as folks who live and work in your community,
having a park here makes a lot of sense. We're just saying that why
don't you look ahead and buy the land that you need. You're not going to
get it all for dedication but you'll get some of it. We'll do our share
here. But the land that you need, it should be flat and it should be
cheap. That's your best shot. And here you've got an ideal condition.
We're willing to dedicate this whole contiguous southeastern area. We're
able to, and I'm not saying we'll dedicate every bit of it. I'm saying
that we are proposing in this plan to put up 32.9 acres of land. And I
understand that determining who's and what's going to be dedicate and
what's going to be purchased is something we've got to work out between
your staff and. ..but I'm sure we can work that out with the Council...
All we're saying here though is that we are relunctant to give up
additional industrial land to expand, to force this expansion to the...
have high potential industrial land. That's good for you and good for
us. So we would request that you accept this plan knowing, planning
ahead for the future and that at some point in time when this land will
come in for development, that you'll be able to acquire cheaper land...
purchase to get the park...in addition to this wetland system... Now we
know, we've not worked with this owner directly. We're not out there
telling her what to do. Her name is Betty O'Shaughnessy. But we know
that the land was for sale. A number of developers who have talked to
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
November 24, 1992 - Page 8
.
her and want to buy it and contacted us and talked to us about what's
happening out in Chanhassen. What's the sewer situation. What's the
water situation. We refer them of course to the folks at City Hall to
explore... We would welcome development because this... The land will
come up for development in the relatively near future... If you have any
questions, Michele perhaps can answer them. She knows a lot. She's
good. She's the Director, as I said, developer of the best industrial
developer in the Twin Cities. I've had the priviledge of working with
her now for months on this project. Even though I'm retired from the
firm, I come back and do occasional things. I get to do fun jobs. But
I just want to point this out that Michele really knows what she's doing.
She's first class. I know she's a lady. You don't often find a lady in
that kind of a position. She's Director of Development for a first class
operation and that's Opus and the reason she's the Director...we're happy
to have her on our team and I'm sure if there's questions, we will be
glad to answer them if we can.
Schroers:
Any questions from the Commission?
Koubsky:
all? Is
members?
the road?
Hoffman: To the east? As you can see from this plan, that eastern 4It
parcel on this plan is shown about 2/3 of it as park property. No land
is cheap and as part of a tax increment district, which this Opus
development would be, we have the financial means, the financial tools to
go out and purchase that property. Adjacent to this, when that came in
under single family development, you would not be able to pick up what
you could from park dedication. The rest of it would be cash out of your
pocket. Out of your park acquisition and development fund which does not
have the financial resources that the tax increment district would be.
That is one reason land purchased and negotiations for additional land
for Gateway proposal is a good option. 2/3 of that area is park on this
plan. We, as a city, unless we go out and hold a bond referendum or
something, are not going to be able to purchase that as it's shown on the
plan.
Todd, have you gone over this with the Planning Commission at
this zoning issues here? Have you talked to the HRA board
Would they be willing to buy into any property purchases down
Koubsky: I guess I'm just thinking more Todd about the ballfield area.
The woodland down to the south, I haven't been down in that area. I'm
not quite sure how that would develop. I have driven past here since our
last meeting.
Hoffman: The wetland to the south there is about, under about 2-3 feet
of water at this point.
Koubsky: So that's up to the owner to get rid of it. That may sit there
for quite a while.
Hoffman: Correct. This is all wooded swamp. Wooded wetland.
4It
Schroers: That is now flooded?
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
November 24, 1992 - Page 9
.
Hoffman: Correct.
Howard Dahlgren: That's why we show it as a park. It's not a question
of vast acreage. It's a question of making more sense. The amount of
park we've shown here... You don't have to buy all of it. We're just
saying that because of the terrain, it makes some sense.
Schroers: The potential is there. I mean we do appreciate your interest
very much and showing us that option. The position that we have that is
kind of awkward is if, at some point in time down the road, for whatever
reason, the way it was subdivided or for whatever reason, we could not
acquire that park, we would then be in a situation that we have been in
the past. Where residents who have bought expensive homes, have paid
expensive taxes, have marched in...the way we wanted to and we don't have
the money to purchase it for you. And at that point they tell us that it
was very poor planning. That we should have planned ahead, which is the
same thing you're telling us is to plan ahead. I guess it's difficult
for me to say that we are going to be able to acquire that because I've
been here for a long time and I know what our financial resources are as
far. as the city being able to go out and buy park property and it is
extremely limited.
Howard Dahlgren: Mr. Chairman, could I ask a question?
e
Schroers: Certainly.
Howard Dahlgren: We're not going to dedicate additional land here. We
do not believe that we should move this line... This land is shown on
your comprehensive plan. All that land to the west is shown as
industrial and we propose to make it industrial. You are not. ..position
to force us to try to buy that additional land. Why should you. Can you
buy land easier from us than from someone else? The land is shown low
density residential and where the land is...? Why do you select to...
acquire additional land of us.. .does it really make sense? This low
density residential. This is industrial, high quality industrial. I
don't understand the logic. That's my question.
Schroers: The logic here is that this is available to us now and the
other parcel mayor may not be in the future. We can't sit here and say
that.
Howard Dahlgren: We don't propose to sell this land...
Schroers: Okay, I may have stated that incorrectly. That that isn't
available but the other right now, we don't have an option. We can't do
anything on that property right now because it's not been sold. It's not
being developed and we can only guess or hope at what's going to happen
with that in the future.
e
Howard Dahlgren: Sure but you know the land has to be developed at some
point. You know the city has total control through the plat or PUD...
you have the same controls there as you have for our land. The whole
essence of planning intelligently is to look ahead. If you can look
ahead and see that this land is going to be available for less. It's
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
Nov
mber 24, 1992 - Page 10
e
off
flat...and it would be a fine additional to the park that we started
here with 32.9 acres, all that makes a lot of sense. To say that we
don't...do that, I don't understand that because...all the time. As long
as the land is vacant, it's going to be developed in the future. Sewer
and water is planned. The MUS A line...it's going to happen. You'll have
your chance. So to say that you want to do it with us because we're here
now and someone else will be coming in later, is that really the way to
plan for the best park?..that's the question.
Andrews: Todd, can you tell me how many acres would be the normal
dedication out of this size parcel?
Hoffman: Again, as Mr. Dahlgren has stated, an approximation of 10% of
the land acreage is a good starting point.
Andrews: So that's about 17, almost 18 acres?
Hoffman: Correct. Then again, it may be true that 18 acres of this is
high but it's fairly scattered. The commission thought it was to the
city's best interest to get that 18 acres contiguous, all in one chunk.
The applicant would be standing here in a much more awkward position. A
couple things which I need to reiterate is that moving the lot line again
is a minimum requirement which I feel comfortable with. That's not at
all in my opinion asking too much of the applicant. Mr. Dahlgren and I
have had this discussion in the past. It's his opinion that parkland ~
should be flatland, fairly cheap. Something that is not good for much ..
else. I've stated that if that was the city's position, we certainly
would have Lake Susan Community Park. We certainly would not have Lake
Ann Community Park. Two fine community parks which are well respected,
not only in the city but across the State. In addition Mr. Dahlgren
seems to have different ground rules for the property to the east,
stating that the city has the wherewithal. We would hold the cards in
asking that applicant. It does not seem that he agrees with that same
opinion in regard to the...
Andrews: I'd like to make a couple comments. I'm kind of agreeing with
Todd that we were looking for 18 useable acres. As a Park Board we have
a problem and that is we are park deficient on the western edge of our
city and we have a responsibility to the City Council and to the city to
look out for the best interest of the citizens. I think it's a beautiful
park. I think, it seems to me that it's being presented to us in a
somewhat one sided manner. I feel like the main purpose here is to
develop all the industrial suitable land and whatever is not buildable,
to give that to the city and call it park. There are some trees that you
will be giving us which we appreciate but they seem to be mainly helping
to create landscape opportunity for the development itself and some
benefit to the park plan. But I'm not very satisfied that we're really
getting very useable parkland here at all.
Howard Dahlgren: Chairman, could I correct a point? I didn't say that
parkland should all be flat. ...saying that you pointed out that you e
wanted.. .play space for a ballfield. WeLl that use is a flatland is...
e
e
e
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
November 24, 1992 - Page 11
Schroers: I think we all understand that and I think that we would very
much appreciate having the luxury of having the more natural open space
environment. I personally would prefer that and I would like to see just
green space. More green space that's not developed at all and it doesn't
make me personally particularly happy to see a whole lot of industrial
development come in. I mean I know that that's happening and I
appreciate the fact that it's being done as well as possible but I used
to be able to hunt out here and I won't be able to any more and I hate to
see losing opportunities like that. I would love to see the green space
just stay just that and undeveloped but as the community grows overall,
we don't have that luxury. We have to provide active use as well as some
natural green space and we have to maintain a balance of that.
Andrews: Just as a question. I'm participating in the Highway 5 board
as well and there was some discussion from that group that they were a
little concerned about the industrial development next to the Arboretum,
which would be Lots 20 and 21. And 19 I guess. The three in the
southwest corner of the quadrant. I don't know how well it will work for
our purposes and I can't tell by looking and how big those lots are but
would there be any consideration in using those, that portion of the
development as park space, which might reduce the problems with the
Arboretum and it might provide us with more useable parkland?
Howard Dahlgren: We proposed to have all the way along Highway 5, we
propose to have a 50 foot corridor...
Andrews: That's Highway 41.
Howard Dahlgren: On 41...We feel that that is...along TH 41...We don't
propose that to be parkland or given credit for parkland. We're just
saying that we are suggesting a 50 foot corridor of landscaping as a
transition to the Arboretum...Of course then a great deal of money...
We don't have any driveways coming out on that highway. We serve all of
the development on the interior. 50 you'll have this corridor all the
way along that highway. We propose to do the same along Highway 5...
corridor of open green space along the entire area. Most of those
setbacks are around 30 feet...
5chroers: If I remember correctly from our first meeting, the area right
at the intersection of TH 5 and TH 41 there, the space that no building
is showing in now, that's open, the reason that that is not planned at
this point is because you consider that your prime developing area and
are waiting to see what actually you are going to be able to put in
there. Is that correct?
Howard Dahlgren: We're being perfectly honest and straight forward. We
could show the industrial... What we're saying is, in our opinion...we
feel this is our best site. It's best to leave your best site until
last. This land probably won't be developed until maybe 10 years from
now. We don't know what the best use is in 10 years. It could be an
institution. It could be a hospital. It could be a lot of things...and
we realize that. We're just saying that we'll leave it until last.
Ultimately whatever happens there is going to have to be approved by the
City... We just don't know what the best use is...We do intend to handle
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
November 24, 1992 - Page 12
e
the corner, and this is just a suggestion... We're going to keep this
open and natural... So that's our plan.
Andrews: The point II was trying to make was that there's Lot 20, which
is the lower left hand corner of the drawing. Across the road on the
other side of Highway 41. Yeah, right over there. Those were the lots
that the Arboretum was concerned about. They do appear to be pretty
prime land.
Howard Dahlgren: Well we made changes there. Here's what we've done.
We've proposed this land for residential development. We've taken it out
of the industrial. We propose it to be residential...put a multi family
housing structure here...and leave all of this land...This is a single
family home. Here we propose to leave a corridor of green space to the
north and a corridor of green space to the west. We will move, his road
now goes up here. We will move and build a new road for him over here
and all of this industrial area will oriente towards the east. So as to
create a buffer here to the north side and lining up with these houses
over here so that all of this is green space in this area.
Andrews: I guess my question is, could that be an area that we could
look at for park space on that corner? Over here.
Howard Dahlgren: I think your concept of having a large park in this
area is fine. I wouldn't you'd get a small park here...but the retail ~
next to another city without a park... I think getting all this land,
which is very attractive. A lot of it's wooded. Just a small park...
This whole thing is a natural addition to the land to the east...but to
move, put more of this park function on highly developable land...
You're going to have to buy land to get the larger park. And you can buy
it cheaper next door.
Lash: I want to see if I understand the logic of it myself. - Is the
point here that we could get HRA funding to buy that because it's in tax
increment district? Whereas if we wanted to try and buy it on the other
side, on the east side, that would have to come out of our park fund?
Hoffman: That's the basic logic, sure. You could extend that district
potentially. We do not even know at this point if we will need
additional ability to compensate for this park property. As you see on
the plan, they show in a holding pond, they are going to, the applicant
is going to construct a holding pond on the park property. There will be
some compensation back to the city for... There's so many variables at
this time in regard to what the bottom line is on acquisition of that
property.
Lash: Well if we were to try to get the extra acre and a half, do you
have something in mind that we would be putting there? A need that's not
shown on...
Hoffman: As a design? You could simply leave the functions that are tt
shown on this plan, that being the tennis court and totlot and the
basketball area I believe has been shown there. Or you could simply
leave it with no master park plan at the present point awaiting what
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
November 24, 1992 - Page 13
e
would happen... Or we could go in a design phase similar to this, taking
into account additional acquisition to the east and then...
Lash: Do you have any ballpark idea what the property that's zoned
residential would cost? An acre.
Koubsky: $10,000.00 an acre.
Lash: $10,000.00 an acre, or is it higher than that now?
Hoffman: Probably higher than that.
Lash: And how many, from what they have shown there, how many acres
would that amount to? For a couple of ball fields.
Hoffman: Well again it's, I can't venture. Maybe Mr. Dahlgren could.
Howard Dahlgren: That is this area here that we've shown to develop is 8
acres. So if you took this area, this here where we've shown the
ballfield. ..that might approximate 8 acres. In terms of it's value,
because it's flat and relatively low, the value for high quality
residential is considerably less.
e
Hoffman: So if I could take a ballpark figure at $100,000.00 or less for
that 8 acres. You need to build 200 homes on that site to acquire that
through dedication which you... Now if the piece came in as a single
parcel under a combination of multi-family and single family, the multi-
family would generate considerably more park dedication...much better.
Lash: I like, personally I like this idea. The way it's shown because I
think it makes a really nice buffer between the residential areas and the
industrial park with the wetlands and if there would be a way to...put in
a couple of ballfields in there. I think that would be a really nice
buffer. Our problem is that we don't have $100,000.00 to buy that and we
can't, as Todd said, if a development comes in, it's not going to be
large enough for us to require that amount of property. So we're kind of
stuck between a rock and a hard place. I like the plan but we don't have
the money to make it work.
Howard Dahlgren: Remember, if you're going to get additional land from
us, you're going to have to buy it. Is this industrial land going to be
cheaper?
Koubsky: The question I have Todd is, right now they're proposing 32.9
acres. We kind of have rights to 18 acres. They're proposing 18 dry
acres and about 14 wet acres to come up with the 32.9. Can we say, show
us 18 acres of continuous property that we would have the rights to or
ability to develop into a park system or a park area? Has that been
done or do we have.
e
Hoffman: It has not been done Commissioner Koubsky but as Mr. Dahlgren
has stated himself, we, the City, you, the City have all the clout in the
world to ask for what you would like to see. It would be my position as
we enter into the negotiations over whatever becomes the park property of
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
November 24, 1992 - Page 14
e
this area, that that 18 acres of scattered high ground is not going to
meet the dedication that we need of the high ground in that corridor.
Koubsky: Yeah, that's why we have an additional 14 added in here to
compensate.
Andrews: It's not buildable.
Hoffman: Wetland is not entered into the.
Koubsky: Well that's the off word.
Lash: So if Mr. Dahlgren, you were to say that we would have to buy this
extra acre and a half, and I don't know that we all agree with that, but
say that we did, what kind of a price would be on that? I have no idea
what industrial property goes for.
Howard Dahlgren: Michele, what's the industrial land worth?
Michele Foster: We've not established any prices for the property at
this point but in looking at comparable land prices for industrial
property that's on the market today, my guess is it could be anywhere
from 90 cents a square foot to $1.25-$1.50, depending on the location and
the price of the property. So even assuming some middle ground, say it's
$1.00 a foot, that's going to be $43,000.00 an acre or more. e
Schroers: We're dealing with a bunch of factors here that we don't know
about. We don't know when the land to the east is going to develop.
Sometime in the near future. Sometime in the near future. What is the
near future? Is that next year or is that 5 years? With the new
administration coming on and a fluctuating economy, you don't know what
the land value is going to be worth and what's going to happen with this
5 years down the road from now. It may be somewhat reasonable and it may
be absolutely untouchable. So you know, I think we're dealing with
something that we don't know.
Lash: What I was trying to get at here is the difference in the price
between the industrial properties and the residential properties and the
impact of us requiring an acre and a half of industrial property of the
developer and if we have the power to do that. And it doesn't sound like
everybody's in agreement on that either. But what I'm trying to do is
figure maybe there's a compromise here where if Mr. Dahlgren thinks it
would be beneficial for us to have the park extending into the east, more
towards the residential area, maybe we can cut some kind of a deal where
they'd be willing to offset the cost of us buying that property at this
time and then, so we would still get the property. They would still get
to have their acre and a half in the middle of their industrial
development but it wouldn't have to come out of our pocket. It would be
more out of their pocket and that would be a compromise where we could
still get the property. They would get their property and it would be ~
more in the residential area where I would like to see it anyway. ..
Andrews: I've got two comments. Is this a PUD?
e
e
e
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
November 24, 1992 - Page 15
Michele Foster: Yes.
Andrews: It is?
Michele Foster: Yes.
Andrews: The way I understand a PUD is we're working with some
assumptions that we're not going to deal with minimums here. There's an
exchange of flexibility and development in exchange for flexibility and
what we require. My second comment is, if the land is worth $40,000.00
an acre as an average low point as industrial land, why wouldn't we just
waive taking any of the property. We'll take our $720,000.00, which is
the value of the land and we give you back and we'll buy the property
next door lock, stock and barrel.
Lash: He suggested that at the first meeting.
Andrews: Did he really? Well I think it's making some sense. Because
we're looking at a tremendous disparity inland value.
Koubsky: I think too Todd, we kind of agree as a commission I think that
some type of recreational facility is needed in this area of the city.
And I think we agree that although open land is nice, and it does provide
a nice buffer between residential and industrial, that isn't suiting the
needs we perceive. We perceive a recreational facility of some sort out
here. Can we, we don't have buying power. We can't speak for the HRA
and the Planning Commission who can zone things around the city. Can we
express our needs or perceived needs to the Council, the Planning
Commission and the HRA and let them take what we have come up with and
see what they can do to jockey around and to get a longer term plan going
here? If we need 18 continuous acres or if we're looking for a 50 acre
park facility, then that's what we should tell the city we need and then
let the Council decide if they agree with that need and determine ways to
work with the developer to obtain that.
Lash: Well if we were to have, if we were to have the 14 acres of
wetland along here, their 4 acres. No, how much is that? An acre and a
half or what? No, it was 4 acres I think, of the useable land and the
developer is willing to go and buy the other 8 acres from Mrs.
O'Shaughnessy and dedicate that to us to save them their acre and a half,
which might be kind of a fair trade-off, we end up with a nicer, we end
up with way more property to develop than their other little extra acre
and a half. That really isn't going to gain us that much anyway. We're
not going to be able to put a ballfield on it. A little more green space
but what we want down there is to be able to have space for a couple of
ballfields and we've got to figure out how we can do that and that's
about the only way we can.
Koubsky: If that's what we think we need then we tell them we need 18
acres of continuous property. That's not going to set well you know with
the developers. That mayor may not cancel this deal but I mean if
that's what we need, I think that's what we need to tell the Council.
This is what we perceive is a park and recreational need in this area of
the city.
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
November 24, 1992 - Page 16
e
Schroers: We would be very ill advised to accept park property that
doesn't serve the needs that we need. I mean it's just as simple as
that. Michele.
Michele Foster: Well, at the risk of being called presumptuous again,
which I don't want to do. One of the things I'd like everybody to
remember is in the PUD process, which is what we're in, we truly are just
at the sketch plan level and that's why a lot of these questions aren't
being answered. And I think the goal for this stage of the process
should be to come up with a concept that's not necessarily where all the
details are ironed out and we know exactly who's going to pay what and
where the money's going to come from. But what we're trying to
accomplish is to come up with a concept that everybody feels is worth
pursuing and then try to figure out as we go through the remainder of the
PUD process, negotiate those items within the context of what everybody's
trying to accomplish. And if people feel that this is a concept that
could work subject to certain conditions being met, which is you know the
Parks Commission feels that there needs to be assurances from the
Planning Commission and City Council that there are ways to make sure
that you can get additional land from the adjacent property. Or that a
funding mechanism be developed. I guess I hate to see us get all tied up
in the details of where the money's going to come from because we're
really at the very initial planning stages for the property and I hate to
see us start compromising the plan for what's best for all of us, if we
think that is best, subject to certain conditions. Then what I'd like ~
see us do is try to make something like that work. Maybe we can't or
we're going to have to come back and say, those conditions can't be met
because we weren't smart enough or creative enough or didn't have the
tools to pull those things together. But that's I guess what I'd like to
suggest is so we're not just in a tug of war about who wins and who loses
but if this is a concept that seems to have some merit, can we go forward
on that basis and try to figure out a way to make it work. This is only
the sketch plan model. We still have to come back with a preliminary
plan and the final plan and all sorts of details that none of us here
know tonight. And I think we're trying to have so many suspenders and
safety pins and have everything protected that we really don't know. None
of us do I think. But we'd sure like the opportunity to try to make this
concept work within whatever constraints you feel you have to put on it.
And whether that's sufficient guarantees for acquisition or sufficient
ways to feel that you've got the funding mechanism, then let us go and
try to make it work instead of sort of pre-judging it because it does
seem sort of hard and it's early in the process.
Lash: I sort of feel like that's what we've done. Last time we met and
we said well this is what we're looking for and now the plan has come
back and it shows a tennis court, or enough property for tennis courts
and a volleyball court you know and that's just not going to cut it.
Michele Foster: I think in the context of a larger regional park which
we really didn't have before. All we knew was there wanted to be a par~
and quite frankly this kind of a concept came out of meetings with some'"
of the other city staff who said geez, the City Manager included said,
geez maybe we ought to look at this on a more global scale. And so I do
think that there is some merit and a big distinction between what we were
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
November 24, 1992 - Page 17
e
looking at for, without just looking with blinders on our property and
not trying to figure out what's best for the whole area.
Lash: But what we have to do tonight is decide if we're willing to
accept this as it is.
Michele Foster:
placed on that.
.. .and I'm saying, buy why can't there be conditions
Andrews: We have no control of that eastern parcel. None. We have
none. So it's real, we're in a catch-22. We'd like to develop it
globally but that's not the reality that we have today.
Lash: And these things can come back.
e
Schroers: We've been here a while and I've seen it in the past. Your
point is well taken but with anything else, when you're going to build a
house you need, if you're going to end up with a good house, what you
have to start with is a good solid foundation and that's what we're doing
here tonight. We need a good solid foundation. We need the assurance
that we are going to have enough developable active use property within
the park dedication that we can service the needs of the community. And
to do or to recommend to Council anything less than that would be totally
irresponsible on our part. We have to work with what we have here to
work with. We can't work with what we would like to see in the future.
I mean we have to deal with reality here and now. That what we can do
tonight and for us to propose or to recommend to the Council to accept
this plan without enough developable, active use park space, I know
would come back to us in the future.
Lash: . ..what would happen if we would say yes, this is fine. Assuming
that this would work out in the next 5 years or whatever and then it
doesn't work out. Then what we've got at the edge of this industrial
development is a tennis court. You know and that's it. Then what do we
do with that? That's not what we wanted at all. Then we'd have no
control anymore over doing anything.
Howard Dahlgren: Mr. Chairman, surely when you and your comprehensive
plan just said someplace you need a park, you were confident that you'd
be able to work with the property owners to accomplish that.
Schroers: We were hopeful.
Howard Dahlgren: But the point is now you're saying you're not sure you
can do it. But you should be able to do it. You've got another
contiguous...you're saying you're not sure you can do that. I don't
understand.
e
Koubsky: Well us as a park board and commission have limited.
Schroers: All we can do is recommend. So when you're telling us that we
can't do what we want to do with your parcel, then how is it that we can
do what we want with other parcels?
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
November 24, 1992 - Page 18
Howard Dahlgren: I'm just saying that the land, the additional land you
need for a regional park, you assume from the beginning that you're not
going to get it all from dedication. You're going to have to buy some of
it. What I'm sayin~ is you can buy it cheaper and more appropriate flat
land on the contiguous property. It's a known fact. Why can't you deal
with that? Why can't you accept that? To say, well we don't know if that
will happen.
e
Lash: Well it's sort of the same reason why you can't accept the fact
that we want, we say we want 18 prime acres of your property and you won't
even give us that. You can accept we're unreasonable and so what happens
is we have different goals here. And we know what your goals are and I
think you know what our goals are and what we have to do is figure out a
good compromise that we can all live with. And I think that we can come
up with that but right now we, I'm not comfortable with the idea of
leaving tonight with just an open ended thing unless you guys want to go
back to the drawing board and come back with a whole new thing and give it
to us. That's fine with me. I'm willing to do that. I'm not willing to
just...and make a recommendation that we accept this as it is tonight.
Andrews: It seems to me we're trying to get a piece of property that is
contiguous that can be developed perhaps with some of the adjacent. I
think one of the problems we have right now is we're losing this land to
dedication, which is pretty land. It's really accentuates or amplifies
the value and the beauty of the land here but it takes away the buildab~
land that we could get somewhere else in the development. I think what 1Ir
have to look at is, if our goal is to somehow hook onto an adjacent piece
is we have to maximize what we get for sure now. I think we're losing
some of that power here by giving up some pretty trees and some hills.
And I'm not sure where we can take on some better land. It might be a
rectangle in this area here. That would be flatter and it's prime land.
I know that. But at least it would give us something where we could put a
ballfield if we had to put it there, assuming that this property didn't
work out. And we've got a problem. I like the basic plan the way it is.
If we could pull this all off, I think it'd be great but my concern is
the 10 years from now, if I'm still handing on this Park Board, that some
neighbor is going to come over here and throw rocks at me because it
didn't work out. That we developed this in small pieces and every piece
was too small to get...and we have not had the funding to go out and buy
land. We're out of money.
Schroers: It's probably not you or I that's going to get the rocks thrown
at us but it will be something like the Pheasant Hills development was
where people who previously sat on the Commission didn't plan for what was
going to happen then and we were the ones that ended up catching it for
that and that ended up costing us a good deal of money and it was a real
difficult, awkward situation and we hope that at that point in time that
we had learned something from that and cover our bases.
Lash: Are you interested in going back and coming up with some other
suggestions? ~
Koubsky: It might be up to the city. Todd, what's the, I'm sure Planning
Commission likes this because they like that we've gone over this with.
.
e
e
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
November 24, 1992 - Page 19
Michele Foster: Planning Commission has not seen this. It goes to the
Planning Commission on December 2nd and then it will go onto the City
Council after that.
Koubsky: So if this something that needs motions at this point or is this
something where we've already made a recommendation on what we think we
need in the area. It may be up to the other factions of the city to weigh
out, where does our plan or where does our vision of a regional, if it's a
regional park or not. I'm not sure if it's big enough to be that but
where does it fit in with maybe the Planning Commission's outlook on this
area? We're just telling them what we think ought to be incorporated
somewhere in this area of the city.
Hoffman: To address that question and your previous question, the motion
which you made at your September 22nd meeting, if you do not feel that is
being met, then it is your obligation to relay that to the applicant.
That is not the obligation of the City Councilor the Planning Commission.
In regard to your previous question of simply passing it along to one of
the other factions of the city to deal with your business, I don't think
that is adviseable either. You are the Park and Recreation Commission.
You have the authority to make those recommendations to the City Coucnil.
Jumping over to Commissioner Andrews comments. If you like both those
pieces of land, I would recommend if you think that is in the best
interest of the city, from here until the end of time that is what we
should be after. The portion of property added to the south is very
important because it allows us for a trail link back out to the road
system. It provides a buffer to that entrance down there. It provides
more impact. If you drive in that main entrance, impact of the presence
of that park property. Again I would like to impress upon the Commission
you are not breaking new ground this evening. The previous
industrial/commercial park before you is the Chanhassen Business Center.
The triangle to the west of Audubon Road. There you asked for both land
dedication in the extent of the 13 acre parcels of trees. In addition to
full park and trail dedication fees, the negotiations that time were no
more pleasant than they are this evening but we came through with both of
those requirements. You are the authority to ask for that. To recommend
to City Council that they require that as a condition of approval of this
development. Listen to Mr. Dahlgren. As a city we, as the city performed
with Target. This Target development down here will probably have the
most trees in their parking lot and has more requirements of that
development simply because of the high standards which this city upholds
in it's developments. Not only of industrial/commercial/residential but
also park property. Again, this is adding an acre and a half to this park
is not going to create a Lake Susan. You're not asking for a Lake Susan
or Lake Ann Park here. It's simply, if you look at the property, it's
simply extending a line over on a low knoll which is down in a very low
lying area. This site. This is not prime property. It is certainly
useable for industrial uses and it is zoned industrial but that does
pre-empt you from going in and acquiring a park within this parcel.
Schroers: I kind of like what Michele had to say about seeing what could
be done with what proposed. What we got to work with. What I see here is
not what we asked for on September 22nd. I don't see the availability of
two ballfields with 300 fences, a basketball court, a double tennis court
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
November 24, 1992 - Page 20
e
and sufficient upland area to buffer these amenities. You show us how you
can work that into your plan and we'll be interested in listening. And I
guess that I don't see any specific reason to change what we had asked for
in the first place, therefore I don't see a need for another
recommendation. I want to see a workable plan that includes what we asked
for originally.
Koubsky: I guess that's my oplnlon. There are other areas of the city
that may, you know we may work toward that but I think my feeling is this
part of the city needs this type of a facility. You're the first one in
the area so the city's got to figure out how to do it.
Hoffman: One additional point of information. The target number thrown
out at $45,000.00, it certainly would be staff's contention that that
would not be the price we would pay if we did indeed pay compensation per
acre. We would be much closer to the raw land value.
Schroers: Okay. Are there any members of the Commission that disagree
with that suggestion? Okay.
Lash: I think they have a pretty good idea, don't you think of the
direction we're going. That we want to go with this and if you feel like
your property is worth $45,000.00 an acre, and it probably is if you sell
it to a business. You're going to get that. My suggestion to you would
be to go ahead and get every penny you can out of that but not from us.~
Get it from someone else and then use that money to somehow figure out ~
to give us what we want too, then we're both going to win.
Schroers: Okay. So I'd like to thank Mr. Dahlgren and Ms. Foster for
coming in tonight. The bottom line is, we're going to ask for the Gateway
Development to provide for us the original amenities that we asked for on
September 22nd and we'd like to, we'd be very interested in seeing what we
could work out.
Andrews: Todd, would it give us strength if we were to put tha tin a
motion rather than just sort of a see you later comment?
Schroers: I think the motion already is standing. It's the motion from
September 22nd.
Andrews: I wasn't here for that meeting but I will concur with that
recommendation.
Howard Dahlgren: We propose to go onto the Planning Commission on
December 2nd. I think the recommendation of your board, whatever it is,
should go on the record.
Schroers: The recommendation is the recommendation that was made on
September 22nd.
Hoffman:
Chairman Schroers, you may want to make a recommendation that4lt
A recommendation to uphold the recommendation of September
Schroers:
22nd.
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
November 24, 1992 - Page 21
..
Hoffman: And deny this concept, which is the most recent concept plan.
Schroers: I don't want to deny the concept. I just want to see it meet
the requirements that we ask for.
Hoffman: Right.
Koubsky: Thanks a lot.
Hoffman: You may want to put that in the form of a motion this evening
then with a second and vote. To uphold your September 22nd motion.
Lash: I move that we uphold our September 22nd motion regarding Gateway
West Business Park.
Andrews: Second.
e
Lash moved, Schroers seconded that the Park and Recreation Commission
uphold their motion of September 22, 1992 requesting the applicant to
provide, as a part of their proposal, a community park site. The site is
to include sufficient land of suitable character and topography to include
natural vistas, affording sufficient area for viewing and picnicking, a
designated 8 foot wide bituminous trail loop with multiple access points
connecting the wooded and upland portions of the site with picnicking and
viewing areas, and the street plan and sidewalks; sufficient area for the
possible construction of two ballfields with 300 foot fences; a basketball
court, a double tennis court, and sufficient upland area to buffer these
amenities. This will require the designation of considerable more park
property than called out in the original sketch plan. However, it is
desireable for all parkland components to be contiguous. This park shall
also maintain considerable road frontage to afford visible impact as well
as allowing for sufficient ingress and egress to the park site. All voted
in favor and the motion carried.
PRELIMINARY PLAT: GATEWAY FIRST ADDITION. LOTUS REALTY.
Hoffman: The second Gateway of the evening... This plat, preliminary
'plat is much more straight forward than the previous one. It's simply a
clarification of lot lines down in the area of the Rapid Oil Change, the
Hanus building, those type of areas. There really needs to be no action
by the Park and Recreation Commission other than to recommend that City
Council accept full park and trail fees for any development which should
occur as a result of the platting of the Gateway First Addition.
Koubsky: I recommend the City Council accept full park and trail fees for
any development occurring as a result of the platting of the Gateway First
Addition.
Andrews: I'll second that.
~ Koubsky moved, Andrews seconded that the Park and Recreation Commission
recommend the City Council accept full park and trail fees for any
development occurring as a result of the platting of the Gateway First
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
November 24, 1992 - Page 22
Addition. All voted in favor and the motion carried.
e
APPOINTMENT TO THE CHANHASSEN TREE PRESERVATION BOARD.
Hoffman: Chairman Schroers and Commission members. As you're aware,
Randy Erickson was appointed to this Board and we thought we lost him.
Then we thought we didn't. Now we lost him. So this evening, if again,
I would like that the Commission name at least an acting member of the
Chanhassen Tree Preservation Board. Potentially with only 3 or 4 of you
here this evening remaining on as Park Commissioners in 1993, we may have
difficulty doing that. I feel very strongly that somebody does have to
pick up that role from the Park Commission at least on a temporary basis.
We are going to do interviews for the Board December 3rd, a Thursday
evening and Richard Wing, Tim Erhart who by the way is leaving the
Planning Commission. But the Planning Commission felt strongly that Mr.
Erhart should remain on for at least one year because of his experience
and knowledge in the area of trees so they are doing that. so even if a
member is outgoing...Tree Preservation Board for the first year.
Schroers: I have a question. Is the Tree Board going to act as a
separate, independent functioning body and have monthly meetings the same
as we do?
Hoffman: They will act as a separate advisory body to either the City ~
Councilor the Planning Commission or the Park Commission, depending on
what issues they are discussing. They will also act individually as an
individual entity to sponsor their own events. Tree sales, Arbor Day
celebrations, those type of things. I can't address exactly what their
meeting schedule will be. They'll set their own agenda. I would presume
that will be monthly potentially for a while but then once that Board is
up and running and established, probably less than that. It depends on
how active and aggressive they get. If they want to go out and look at
tree ordinances and tree preservation, etc, etc. It could become very
time consuming.
Schroers: Okay. I think that since I am pretty locked in for another
year here anyway. And in order to get things accomplished and move on
with things, unless someone else would like to, I will volunteer to accept
that position for the remainder of my time that I'm here with the Park and
Recreation Commission so that we have representation and I feel that the
Tree Board is a very worthwhile thing and I'd be interested in finding
something out.
Lash: I nominate Larry.
Koubsky: I second the nomination.
Andrews: I move to close the nominations.
Lash moved, Koubsky seconded to appoint Larry Schroers as the Park and ~
Recreation Commission's representative on the Tree Preservation Board for
one year. All voted in favor and the motion carried.
.
e
e
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
November 24, 1992 - Page 23
CITY TRAIL RULES; ARE DOGS ALLOWED?
Hoffman: Chairman Schr0ers and Commission members. This is an open ended
question, as you can see. The city is getting to the point in it's
establishment and maintenance of a trail system where we need to address,
not only dogs but you will be addressing, continue to address motorized
vehicles, other problems associated with trails. But in particular as it
relates to dogs, when residents call to inquire, I need to have an answer
for them. Currently I do not. I explained my best answer to date in that
if a trail exists within a park, your dog is not allowed. You're in a
park. If it's a sidewalk on Kerber Blvd or a sidewalk on Lake Susan
Hills, fine. Walk your dog. There's nothing under city ordinances that
says you can't, or you should pick up after your dog. None of those things
are there. This really comes to light with the addition of the trail on
Rice Marsh and Lake Susan. ...receiving calls that there's people walking
on the trails with their dogs at large. They come up and harrass my dogs
and my dog in my back yard. Can they be down there with a dog? If not,
I'd like to see a sign. If they have to be on a leash, I'd like to see
that sign. We simply can't sign it because we don't have anything to back
up our signs. So I bring this to the Commission for discussion.
Hopefully with some type of resolve this evening to come up with some type
of a policy as it relates to walking dogs in the city of Chanhassen.
Schroers: If the Commission would be so kind as to allow me to elaborate
on this, just a little bit. I've had some phone calls from residents
concerning this issue. Just recently I had two phone calls tonight. One
last night and this is something that I address continually on a daily
basis in my everyday work. My opinion is that we should have in place a
dog ordinance that says, dogs are allowed on city trails provided they are
leashed and the handler has the ability to remove waste from the dog, such
as a pooper scooper, a baggy or something like that. That is the
ordinance that I think should be in place and where trails go through
parks, if the people are on that corridor just passing through the park
with their dog on a leash to pick up the trail on the other side, I think
that's okay, fine. If they get in the park and they let their dog run
loose and jump into somebody's picnic basket and run around the ballfields
and disturb a ballgame, and that sort of thing, that is unacceptable. But
in Hennepin Parks we do allow dogs in the parks on the trail but we don't
allow them in high use area such as beaches, picnic areas, on groomed ski
trails and that sort of thing. You can turn this into a great big,
lengthy discussion and really complicate it, especially for signage. The
wording on signage can just get to be a real nightmare. The other thing
that is worthy of mentioning here is the City of Chanhassen does not have
24 hour a day staff to enforce these regulations. So just because we put
an ordinance like this in place does not mean that tomorrow or the next
day someone's not going to see someone with their dog off the leash or
something to that effect. But in order to provide the city and staff with
what they're asking for, if we just say dogs are allowed on city trails
provided they are leashed and the owner is responsible for the waste
created by their dog, I don't think we can do much more than that.
Andrews: I agree completely.
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
November 24, 1992 - Page 24
Schroers: Does this have to be in the form of a motion?
it in the form of a motion?
Would you like~
Hoffman: A motion and direction. We will probably, staff would work with
the Public Safety DIrector. I would be working with our City Attorney in
drafting the ordinance as it relates to walking dogs on trails and/or
sidewalks in a leashed fasion. The Public Safety Director would be
dealing with the enforcement and creation of a pooper scooper ordinance
law, that type of thing. So it'd be a joint effort and your motion should
reflect that.
Schroers: I would like to see, one second Jim, that the enforcement be,
not so much as enforcement as an educational or informational type of
thing. When Public Safety sees someone who's animal is not in control or
who is not taking care after his animal, that they be informed in an
educational type of way rather than given a ticket. I think that that is
more beneficial.
Lash: Maybe they could even have, carry with them rolls of bags or
whatever kind of.
Schroers: You know a sandwich bag works great. All you do is wear it
like a glove and pull it inside out and that's just as slick as, that's
handy.
Lash: And it would be nice if it was advertised in the paper. Written4ll
in an article so people could read it or go out in one of the quarterly
things or something. That this is now. You know I can see where there
could be some confusion for people who would say come over to Lake Ann and
someone's coming through there on the trail with the dog and they're going
to go, oh. Well now dogs are allowed in the park and then they're going
to start thinking they can bring their dog into the park so there's a fine
line but we have to just try and educate them so they realize that it's
not the same thing.
Schroers: That where we could get into a real complicated issue with
signage. I don't think that we want to say that dogs are allowed on
trails, including trails that go through parks. I mean we don't want to
specify that. We just want to say that dogs are allowed on city trails
provided that they are leashed and that their owner has a way of cleaning
up after their animal. If people have the wherewithal, what we do need to
do is sign the trail and most people know. If they live in an area and a
trail goes in one side of the park and comes out the other side and
they're walking, that's basically what they do is they make a loop and
I don't think we have to designage or differentiate between the trail and
the park. All we just say is that they're on trails. The dogs are
allowed on the trails. Okay, if the dog is running around in the middle
of the ballpark or the middle of a picnic area, obviously that is not on
the trail and then he's in violation. But if he's walking along the
entrance road to the park, which actually at this point is through Lake !
Ann is the connector from the trail going from your neighborhood to the~
Highway 5 trail, I just don't see a problem with that.
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
November 24, 1992 - Page 25
.
Lash: And maybe the signage at those junction points where the
stops and the park starts but you can't see the specific trail.
could be signage there that just says, dogs on trail area only.
reminder that they don't have carts blanche to start running all
place and walking them allover either.
trail
There
Just as a
over the
Andrews: I'll make the motion, I just wanted to comment. I think the
leash should be specified at not greater than 6 foot in length. I've seen
20 foot leashes on dogs in our neighborhood. If you're riding a bike or
walking, that's not sufficient control. Or if you're on roller blades,
that's a good way to get killed is get the leash wrapped around your
roller blades. So I'd like to move that Chanhassen adopt a leash law for
dogs on park trails with leashes not to exceed 6 feet in length and that
in addition, the owners be required to remove all dog waste.
Schroers: Excrement.
Andrews: Excrement, yeah.
Schroers: Is there a second?
Lash: Second.
e
Andrews moved, Lash seconded that the Park and Recreation Commission
direct staff to draft an ordinance allowing dogs on city trails on leashes
not to exceed 6 feet in length, and that owners be required to remove all
dog excrement. All voted in favor and the motion carried.
Hoffman: ...this is controversial as like the mosquitoes so we can get
some press coverage.
Schroers: We could. This could turn into a big issue if we let it. We
have to change our trails seasonally. In the summer season they're on the
cross country ski trails and then in the winter season we have to re-route
them down through the picnic area so it's changing signs and people get
used to a pattern and then all of a sudden they can't go there anymore and
they have to change their route and that's a big confusing thing. How
come I can't have my dog here anymore? Wait a minute. It's not that you
can't, you just have to go in a different place with them now. It all
gets to be kind of confusing. And a real headache for the signage.
Lash: But at least you have the staff to do that. We don't have staff
even to enforce it.
Hoffman: I had a couple conversations with the City Manager in this
regard today. The conclusion was identical to your points.
Lash: No wonder no one's applying for these vacancies.
WINTER RECREATION PROGRAM UPDATE.
e
Hoffman: Chairman Schroers, Commission members. I will defer to Dawn and
Jerry. This issue, informational item was a city newsletter. You all
received that in your packet and hopefully one in the mail.
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
November 24, 1992 - Page 26
Andrews: Yes. Excellent, yes.
e
Hoffman: And one in the Villager.
Koubsky: It outlined where you can skate in the 'city. That was nice.
I noted that.
Hoffman: City map. And then you had in your packet Senior Center
activities list. The seniors are keeping busy. A lot of activities going
on there. Either of you have anything to say? Or do you have any
questions?
Lash: I'm just kind of getting excited about getting old. ...a lot of
fun stuff going on.
Schroers: I would just like to compliment Dawn and Jerry on their
continued good work. That a boy and that a girl and keep it up.
1992 HALLOWEEN PARTY EVALUATION.
Ruegemer: Thank you Chairman Schroers. Our 1992 Halloween party was a
bit overwhelming...happy with the totals that we did have...Just the total
registration just from the kids that we had was 389 that actually showed
up at the door that night plus their parents. And you know it holds 600
to 700 people approximately in a 2 hour span at the Chanhassen Elementar~
School which was great. It was great to see that the community is gett~
involved with our program. It's nice to, from our standpoint too that,
having this program available and people are taking advantage of it. Just
listening throughout the hallways and I think people were generally very
pleased with the program this year. The new decore. The costumes. I
think they were very pleased...so that makes us feel good as well...
positive response. We'll just make a few registration modifications next
year. We'll keep it open a little bit longer to possibly catch the tail
end of the people that didn't have a chance to pre-register. That will be
open until 4:30 on the day before, which will work out very well for us.
That gives us enough time to plan and buy candy for everyone. Newly this
year, the Chanhassen Jaycees helped out tremendously in helping to plan
for the party. They took over the portion of the friendly hallway as far
as decorating and planning and organizing that which really helped us out
a lot so we could concentrate our efforts for the other hallway. In that
...period of time you really need to act fast and get set up quick in a
relatively small amount of time. So that really helped having them and
next year we just ask that... The new decorations that we did have this
year seemed to fill in both hallways. It really seem to add a lot of new
luster and a lot of appeal. Both hallways and I think by far this has
been our best Halloween Party. There's always room for improvement and we
strive for that in 1993. Just something to add. Just a few suggestions
for next year that we'll concentrate on achieving, and also the breakdown
of the revenue and expenditures totaling for the party for 1992. I'm sure
everybody's had a chance to look at that. Is there any questions
regarding the party or any comments? ~
Lash: What time does the party start?
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
November 24, 1992 - Page 27
e
Ruegemer: 6:00.
Lash: Do you think maybe you could move that back a little bit.
Ruegemer: Back to 6:30?
Lash: Maybe that would solve your problem of getting people there on time
and set up.
Schroers: Yeah, if it's a weeknight, a lot of people have trouble getting
to functions at 6:00. I've tried that personally and it hasn't worked out
that well.
Lash: How long does it last?
Ruegemer: 2 hours, until 8:00.
e
Lash: Well, but I mean they're free to go. If they're done in an hour,
they can still get home. Maybe you want to start a little later. I'm
thinking part of the reason you had the increase was obviously it's
successful but I mean after last year, the blizzard people opted for this.
I'm sure it was a little warmer but also the fact that it was the night
before actual Halloween too. Because this way kids could still do both if
they wanted to. I don't know, if you did it that way because of the fact
that Halloween was on Saturday. Is that why?
Ruegemer: I think it's a little bit easier to get volunteers.
Lash: So next year Halloween's on Sunday. Will you have it on Friday
again?
Ruegemer: Yeah.
Hoffman: We speculated whether that would be a successful or not.
Lash: I think it's an advantage but it kind of depends on what the point
of it is. Is the point to provide a fun night out or is the point to
encourage kids to do that instead of going door to door trick or treating
and I'm not exactly sure what the point of it is supposed to be.
Hoffman: The original intention was to give an alternative to the
traditional trick or treating on Halloween night. I'm not sure, moving it
a night ahead probably still gives you that option too. If you're a
parent you choose to take them to the party and then take them to 4 or 5
doors if you want to on Saturday night as well. I just didn't think
parents were going to dress their kids up twice, but they did.
Koubsky: They're dressed the night before anyway.
Schroers: Okay, good. Thank you very much Jerry and Dawn.
e
Hoffman: The extra half hour, we'd love it too because that's the half of
it.
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
November 24, 1992 - Page 28
Lash: Yeah, 8:30 is not that late for most kids I don't think.
e
COMMISSION MEMBER PRESENTATIONS:
Andrews: I don't have a park comment but one thing I've noticed in the
new neighborhood, and this is just a comment maybe probably city wide as.
boy there's a lot of dogs running around loose. Just frustrates the heck
out of me to have your dog under control and to have people's dogs chasing
your dog around in your yard.
Schroers: That happens to you too huh? I got attacked by a German
Shepard here the other night. Not me, my dog did but.
Andrews: We've got neighbors that say their dogs are under voice control,
which is a joke. They run out and attack dogs. Anyway, that's not a park
issue but it's just a comment. I think the city needs to definitely take
a stronger, if not a inclination stand, enforcement stand. I think even
probably before you have stronger enforcement you've got to restate the
city law in a stronger way. Say this is the law. It isn't just a good
idea.
Hoffman: I know they do chase a lot of dogs around. They're taking calls
and they double team them.
Schroers: Yeah but you know when they get one of those, you would thin~
these people would learn because like the first time it's like $40.00 t~
get dog back isn't it? And then the second time it goes up to like $75.00
or something?
Hoffman: They're professionals. We provide that service as a city to
Victoria, Shorewood and that pays for our CSO's to do our portion of
animal control, so they do a lot of it.
Lash: With the way the city's growing and geez, everybody and their
brother's got at least a dog and a cat. I don't know how they're ever
going to be able to keep it under control. ...but you know, if you're out
for a walk, and this is when it's irritating. You're out for a walk
trying to get a little peace and quiet and then you have every dog in the
neighborhood run out of their yard and yapping at your feet all the way up
the next block, you can't call. By the time you get home, the dog is
probably in the house or whatever. Those are the ones that irritate me
and the ones running loose are bothersome too but it's when they're in
their own yard and then you're just trying to run by or walk by.
Schroers: They come out on a road and annoy you and sometimes attack you
which has happened. You know I kind of think that to me it's more of a
personal issue. Rather than taking it up with the city, I prefer to
confront that dog's owner and when we were kind of attacked by the German
Shepherd here the other night, I told the lady that had a dog, I said if
your dog tore mine up and it needed stitches, I said I'm going to bring
you the bill. She said, oh I'm sorry. It's a nice dog. He won't bite~
anybody. I said, well yeah. He won't aDybody but he just did.
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
November 24, 1992 - Page 29
e
Andrews: I've talked to the dog owners, one in particular and he told me
his dog was under voice control, which is a total bunch of hooey.
Lash: Well if they're under voice control and the owner is in the house
and the dog is out in the yard and the owner has the TV on and they don't
hear the dog barking at everybody who walks by, that's not voice control
anyway. And I know, I used to do it myself.
Andrews: Anyway. Not a park issue but certainly a growing problem.
Hoffman: Okay, anything else?
Schroers: One comment related. It's too bad we're losing Randy at such
an early stage and Wendy and I hope and I'm sure that we will find
suitable people to replace them and I think it would be a great loss to
the Commission to Janet to follow through with her intentions. So if
there's a vote of confidence, I think you're doing a real good job here
and it wouldn't hurt my feelings if you stayed.
Andrews: I agree.
Koubsky: It sounds like we have to beat the street though a little bit to
try to drum up a little interest.
e
Schroers: But that's all I had. I'll shut up so if there's anything
else.
Andrews: Next month's meeting is scheduled for what date?
Hoffman: Tuesday the 15th.
Andrews: Can we maybe go out for some yule glug afterwards on that one?
Lash: How long of a, can we keep it short?
Hoffman: Well we could start interviews at 7:00. We're going to have
some interviews that evening.
Andrews: Let's start at 7:00 then.
Hoffman: Yeah, that was a good-bye party and holiday party. Combine
them.
Schroers: Can staff provide a designated driver so we can have some real
fun?
Hoffman: So planned. And we'll try to get Randy up. Bring him back on.
He's still in town but he's just busy making plans for his move.
Lash: Why don't you put a little note in Fred's packet so he knows too.
4It Plan on a late night.
Andrews: Plan on an early start to a late night.
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
November 24, 1992 - Page 30
e
ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS:
Hoffman: We had a good conference in Rochester. The three days which we
spent down there la~t week. Wednesday, Thursday, Friday were educational,
inspirational. We listened to a lot of good speakers and other
professionals in the field to trade ideas and concepts. We also
highlighted the Lake Ann Park shelter as part of the exhibit hall. All
the ideas...and you'll be glad to know that it was widely accepted as
being very innovative, impressive. They liked the look of the building.
They thought the two levels was a unique blend of facilities which that
shelter brings to the city is going to be a real asset of our community.
And there you go.
Lash: Did you recommend they not use that contractor?
Andrews: You get sued doing that.
Hoffman: Yeah, I had a funny conversation today as well. MnDot, they
also, ALM built the wayside rest on 169 on the way to Mankato. On
LaSeur's bluff right there. MnDot loves it. Loves it, loves it, loves
it. Thinks it's the greatest deal. Bringing ALM in to planning meetings
for future wayside rests. So they have a different opinion. Maybe they
were down there working all summer when they were supposed to be up here.
Lash: Did we skip that?
e
Hoffman: No, that's part of this. I just started off on the conference.
We did see an increase in the number of commissioners down there this year
simply because they had that special Saturday session. I did not stay for
Saturday as no commissioners felt obliged to join me. I wasn't going to
hang around. So I came back with Dawn and Jerry on Friday afternoon.
Verbal update on the Lake Ann Park picnic recreation shelter. It looks
fairly complete. The retaining walls, they're in. Although they are not
acceptable. That will be another battle...the original contractor failed
to perform. He was out of town so they hired local contractors from
Waseca to put up this wall. When the engineer, Max Stoppenburg from
Van Doren showed up, asked them how they were doing. What they were up
to. Can we go over this on the plans. We don't have the plans. Skip
told us to put a retaining wall in here and up there and up there and
that's what we're doing. So we have a wall which is not as professionally
installed as it should. I've told, I instructed Max to inspect that the
day after they began and prior to leaving town to come up with a
conclusion with Skip from ALM as to what they're going to do. Max seemed
to feel confident after discussing it with Skip that they would perform.
Site inspection today reveals that the wall is not acceptable. It varies.
It pitches. It kinks. It curves. It doesn't have straight lines and
that's going to be a very difficult negotiation process to go through.
When you tell a contractor, sorry. That retaining wall which weights 36
tons and now is in place is not acceptable, they're just going to say oh,
fine. We'll go right in there and take it all down and fix it right up~
So it's another head banger. You have to go through and make some type"
concessions with the contractor. Just the simplest wall, which is about 3
1/2 feet high and about 15-18 feet long. Very simple wall. Should be
nice and straight and it just kinks in the middle. It goes up and down.
e
e
e
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
November 24, 1992 - Page 31
It should not be there. It shouldn't vary. We should get the quality
product that we want. We've got this beautiful shelter surrounded by an
unacceptable wall. We'll be dealing with that and other things. Other
than that, happy to report that as staff and City Manager, and any Council
members I've heard from, say that that building is going to be a super
addition to the city. We will work through these other difficulties. In
regard to ballfield irrigation, again not a whole lot of good news to
report to you. When you work under the competitive bid process in the
city, as you recall, we estimated about $60,000.00 for that project. The
low bid came in at $45,000.00 and I was not present at that bid opening.
From what Jerry and the other says, the rest of the contractors dropped
their jaws to the ground because the next low was about $52,000.00 or
$54,000.00. Considerably higher. I report very honestly to the
Commission that that contractor's turned in their first payment request.
That request was for about 2/3 of the, just the materials was $32,000.00.
Dale Gregory worked through the remainding of the materials and materials
alone add up to over $40,000.00. This contractor came in with a price of
somewhere less than $5,000.00 in labor to install that system. Very young
contractor. Second job of this nature. I'm not sure in my mind at this
time if he did not estimate correctly or just came in that competitive
figuring that he had a lot of cheap labor. So at this point I cannot tell
you where that contractor will end up. We are under contract with the
contractor. He did lay pipe out onto the ground and glued some of it
together thinking he was going to do some trenching this fall. Then the
snow came so right now we are on hold. He took delivery of a whole bunch
of irrigation heads and other parts and cuplers and that type of thing.
That is all stored at the Lake Ann shed building. It's paid for. So if
this contractor for some reason does not come through and perform, we own
the equipment. We would simply have to let a new contract in the spring
for the installation. So the book is still open on that one.
Koubsky: An unacceptable retaining wall, that project isn't complete
then, is that correct?
Hoffman: No, absolutely. We have not gone through with the initial...
Koubsky: So, if we had to redo that, that would be a damage?
Hoffman: Correct. But that damage would, something you get into
something of that magnitude, I mean then you're talking attorneys and
battling it out in court, fees and etc, etc, etc. So from the standpoint
of negotiating through on that contract, you try not to get into those
situations but as a representative of the city we...product that we
accepted on behalf of the city.
Andrews: Yeah, I don't want to have to make excuses.
Hoffman: Absolutely not.
Lash: And I have a question about this whole system. You know that this
is just a real burning point for me but is the city somewhere, is it
always their standard practice just to take the low bid? Period.
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
November 24, 1992 - Page 32
Schroers: It's not only the city, it's everywhere.
burned every time.
It is,
e
and you get
Lash: Yeah, so how many times are we going to do this before we figure
out that probably the low bid guy doesn't know what he's doing and we end
up paying in the end, either through time or defective product in the end
and staff time. People getting jerked around and everything else that we
go through. Isn't there some other process where you can look at it and
you have three bids and you take your middle one and assume that that's.
Andrews: Then you get sued by the low bidder. Saying you didn't act in
good faith.
Koubsky: The only recourse is they have to have a complete bid. If
there's something you've asked for in your request for proposals or
request for bids that they didn't supply, like we saw, and let someone win
a contract that didn't have a complete bid, you can reject that bid.
Schroers: I believe that is more of a sore spot with me than it is for
you because I have to work with it every day. And there's all kinds of
angles for trying to get around, like when you're writing bids, say for a
piece of equipment. You know specifically what piece of equipment you
would like to have so you write yo~r specs just to fit that piece of
equipment. Okay. Other bidders read that and they have the right to
contest specs because they can say, well that's not fair to have that i~
the specs because our machine will provide that function without that ~
particular attachment or whatever. So they can, it's a real disadvantage
to have to work under a handicap like that but I mean it's not just the
City of Chanhassen. It's every government agency is stuck with that and
it just kills me that these contractors can come and get paid and get
their money and leave before the job is done or before it's done to
acceptable standards and then when you contest them on it, that they can
go to court and you have to work out some kind of a compromise. I mean it
just doesn't seem ethically right but it happens all the time.
Lash: I used to do purchasing in specs for my job and we were always, see
we were sort of the go between. We were the design and the installation
and we also did the purchasing so we'd put the package together. Present
it to our customer. They'd say okay. We're going to choose you over
other people who had done the presentation. Then we would have to go out
and meet our budget and our deadlines that we had set and if we needed
stacking chairs, we could send out 10 specs to different manufacturers of
stacking chairs and the bids would come in and we'd just pick whoever we
wanted and we ordered them.
Schroers: But that's private industry. That's not government right.
Lash: So is that what the difference is? It's government.
Schroers: That's it.
Andrews: On a good note, seeing that Lundgren Bros came through for us4lt
was, I appreciate dealing with people like that that don't cry about every
little thing and go the extra step.
e
e
e
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
November 24, 1992 - Page 33
Lash: What are you talking about?
Andrews: Lundgren Bros. did come through on their donation.
Lash: Oh okay.
Hoffman: To close up administrative presentation. It's my obligation to
bring you a report on Value Recreation. As you recall the Commission did
award three different awards to Value Recreation. They were $13,000.00-
$12,000.00 play structure for Herman Field. 367 odd feet of border wood
and a swingset. The border wood was, we took delivery on it first. We
had specifications in there which exactly, crossing every t and dotting
every i, stated what we wanted. We nowhere close came to that. It
specifically dealt with lengths of the timber. So I again, contacted Mr.
Janhowski. I said well, I did communicate your specifications to the
manufacturer, or my representative. They obviously didn't meet that.
I'll talk to them and see what we can do. He came back and said well, it
looks like we're going to have to make some kind of concession. We'll
knock off a $1.00 per lineal foot if you intend to keep the wood. It's
really going to be a problem for us to take it back. No, that's
absolutely unacceptable. You had very clear specifications and
directions. We want the wood which we specified. Came back again and
said okay, to provide you the good service which I promised, which I
contend once you screw up and then fix it, that's not providing good
service, but that's his contention. I will take the wood, which you
currently have stored in my facility and I will buy you new. Bottom line
on that one, we did get the new border wood after many phone calls and
reiterations back to... Swingset was delivered but was not delivered to
Chanhassen. It was delivered I believe to St. Cloud. The seats went to
some other portion of the metropolitan area. So Bill stated that he will
personally drive to St. Cloud to pick up the swing and deliver it, which
he did. And since the seats for the swings are in some other area, he
will pick those up and install them for us. Upon delivery of the swing it
was very clear that we were buying a piece of "backyard playground"
material. Not, as you recall the bid was very low. Not equipment which
we as a city would typically install in our parks. We had Mr. Janhowski
out to the location. He stated, oh no. Once you put those poles down in
the concrete, that's going to stiffen up all those loose joints that you
have in making those connections into the top rail. At that point, before
concreting it in, I said I do not believe that is going to happen. But to
give you the benefit of the doubt, we will go ahead and perform the
installation. However, if it is not satisfactory, you will be responsible
for either replacing or preparing the swing to a condition which is
acceptable. Upon getting back to the office on Friday afternoon, a fax
was on my desk from Value Recreation stating that, essentially what
happened, Bill went out. Put one of the swings on. Recognized that this
thing is not going to work out. Faxed me a letter saying that the quality
of the product which I sold you is not the produce which either the Value
Recreation or the City would want to have in it's city. Thus, we will
have the manufacturer's representative down here to take a look at it.
Bottom line is we're going to get some type of retrofitted swing in order
to hopefully match some type of standard which we as a city would like to
uphold for our recreation equipment. In the conversation with Bill, I
stated, you sat down here, or stood down here at least on two occasions
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
November 24, 1992 - Page 34
and explained your top notch, bend over backwards service. You live in 4It
the city. You work in the city. You wanted to give us a product and then
in the same breath you stated that I sold you a product which I really
didn't know much about. I contend that he is not performing as he had
stated to the commission and myself on numerous occasions that he should
be. I would encourage you to go out to Carver 8each playground and take a
look at the swingset which we bought and which we are now either going to
have to live with in some sort of sleeve fashion. Again, the legs are in
concrete it's going to be very difficult at this time to get that thing to
go away. I cannot report to you on the Herman Field playground equipment
simply because we did get delivery 'of it but it's in the boxes and it will
remain that way until spring. So if there is good or bad news to bring
you in that regard, that will have to wait until spring.
Koubsky: If based on that swingset we can determine that his equipment
and quality did not meet the specs, can we just negate that contract?
Hoffman: Again, the specifications, he met the specifications. That's
why he was awarded that bid. Again, you looked at his cost compared to
the other costs and it was very clear that you were going to get some type
of product which he stated was a good quality swing. Something which we
did not...
Koubsky: So why would we let him put in two more playgrounds?
Schroers: Because we already gave him, awarded him the bid.
e
Lash: Can't we return them before we install them and say, based on.
Koubsky: I would have to think in the bid you can cancel a contract at
any time.
Hoffman: The award which you made to Value Recreation was bought and paid
for.
Koubsky: So we've paid for those?
Hoffman: Sure. Now, as we talked about before, now we deal with some
type of negotiation to compensate the city or what we'd like to see. If
that comes down to outright refusal of what we've got out there, then
we've got to fight, you've got to fight every time you turn around. Who's
going to take the equipment out of the ground with 300 pounds of concrete
such on each thing? He may say if you deliver that to my parking lot,
fine. I'll take care of it. Then we're left with digging it out and
taking care of it.
Lash: But you talked to him before it went in and said, if it's not any
good, you're going to have to take it out.
Koubsky: Have we paid him?
Hoffman: Yes. Sure, those are paid for.
e
Koubsky: The other two parks are all paid for?
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
November 24, 1992 - Page 35
e
Lash: But even if it's paid for, can't you say it's.
Hoffman: Absolutely.
Schroers: He can meet specifications but the city can go back and say,
well just because it met specifications it certainly doesn't fit our
standards and it doesn't conform to what we have in the rest of the city.
And ask for some sort...what you would call it.
Andrews: If he doesn't voluntarily go.
Schroers: Retribution of some kind.
Lash: Well okay, then I don't understand this. He came in. He had the
lowest bid and we didn't have to go with him.
Koubsky: Well he didn't have a complete bid.
Lash: So that would have been the only reason we could have rejected his
bid?
Hoffman: Those were our price quotations, you could have rejected those
at any time. They were not in a formal bid.
e
Koubsky: The reason we selected him is he came in here for an hour and
told us how good he was and he was local and we decided to give a local
guy an opportunity.
Lash: Well and he is. He's trying obviously. He's driving allover the
state trying to pull this deal together. But the company is not
performing behind him. He's got a bad situation.
Schroers: Also what we said at the time was, that if we don't give
someone else an opportunity, how are we going to know. And so I think we
learned something. Just like we learned in the past on Pheasant Hills and
some of those other places. And we didn't let Gateway sell us a bill of
goods tonight and hopefully at some point in time in the future, we're not
going to let someone sell us substandard playground equipment. When
you've got something that's good and works well, try to stay with it.
Hoffman: My last conversation with Mr. Janhowski was that obviously you
contended that either I or the City never gave you the opportunity to
provide equipment. That opportunity has been provided to you and things
have not gone smoothly. You're obviously under my scrutiny and the
scrutiny of the city at this time and that is not any fault of our's...
Schroers: I think we even brought that up to him at the time. We said
you have a golden opportunity here to show yourself off.
Lash: Don't blow it.
e
Schroers: We'll let you do it and if that's the best he can do, he's
probably not going to be in business very long.
,
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
November 24, 1992 - Page 36
Lash: I have a question. Are you done, because I have a question on th~
administrative packet. With the submittal of a, is it a grant request or
something for Powers Blvd. Trail. Now is that to complete what's already
started on the east side?
(
Hoffman: Correct.
Lash: Okay. I just wanted to double check.
Hoffman: Yep. From Highway 5 to Lake Lucy.
Schroers: Okay, have we gone from the Administrative Presentations to the
Administrative Section now?
Hoffman: Yes we have.
Andrews moved, Koubsky seconded to adjourn the meeting. All voted in
favor and the motion carried. The meeting was adjourned at 9=45 p.m.
Submitted by Todd Hoffman
Park and Recreation Coordinator
Prepared by Nann Opheim
e
e
,
e
t-
Z
<t
o
::i
0.
Q..
<t
e
~
~
LLJ
t-
-
(f)
e
PRC DATE: Dec. 15, 1992
;L,
.....---.-/"
CITY OF
CHANHASSEN
CC DATE:
-4
HOFFMAN:k
STAFF REPORT
PROPOSAL:
Preliminary Plat to subdivide 2 lots into 2 lots and 1 outlot on property zoned
RSF, Residential Single Family
LOCATION:
South of Pleasant View Road, just north of Nez Perce Drive, Vinewood Addition
(see map)
APPLICANT:
Stuart Hoarn
6745 Amherst Lane
Eden Prairie, MN 55346
PRESENT ZONING:
RSF, Single Family Residential
ADJACENT ZONING
AND LAND USE:
N - RSF, Single Family Residential
S - RSF, Single Family Residential
E - RSF, Single Family Residential
W - RSF, Single Family Residential
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN:
The Comprehensive Plan identifies the subject property as lying within the neighborhood park service
area of Carver Beach Playground. Convenient access to the city's community parks, Lake Ann, Lake
Susan, South Lotus and City Center is also available.
COMPREHENSIVE TRAIL PLAN:
Pleasant View Road is not currently included in the city's Comprehensive Trail Plan as a roadway which
an off-street trail will be constructed adjacent to.
Stuart Hoarn-- Vinewood Addition
December 15. 1992
Page 2
RECOMMENDATION:
In light of the aforementioned information and due to the nature of this subdivision request (small
size). it is recommended that the Park and Recreation Commission recommend that the City
Council accept full park and trail 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 single family residential units at the time of permit application. The current fees are $500.00
and $167.00 per lot. respectively.
;
e
e
e
.
JJ.
e
~
SITE LOCATION MAP
e
l]
\I! a
>
....
'"
~
0.
(;)
...
'" N
'"
.... I:)
"Ot....",.~r..1II a
:It", .o~O)C)C:;II
~~'f?-l.,!.!-t.;"'~
~~~:~g~2~~==
"'''''",.. ,. Ko=-.g
0,. J1t.on"~f'lIl",m
g~~o:~~!ti"'=..
l:Dao~""1I.0C cl
...c; .e; ~.;1 z :It ~
CO alii C I "I
. .-t..~ :t
\ a "'_ -c
I ~. ~ ~/~5 I
~
m
-<
f
-"""0'"
~::D:a)(
~~Oii
.... i i
"u" m C)
00 o.
s~ ~e
;; N -.
-I
.
- ...
Y'.OW
.0..
OUlOO
0000
...en.'"
;-,:,.:,.;-.,
a~a;;
;;:~:o
.
...n
nnn:D
no
I
.
GI
CO,
N
CD
CDI
--
N
'"
--
CD
N
o
Z no
'" ..
no
<
0"'''' "E.-O
SS~ %i.~i
6~~ .~g~!
-I --:'o~-I
.~g Nz~zJ
- g'" """0
~"Q =~....~o
m:,~ E Z;:
imo z ~
D~:f : ..
C!t ~
:DO
..'"
'"<
-Ig
l!!
.
o
o
:3
o
.z
.
z
o
I
---
-..
/
L
'-
e
, .
,~,-~-
"'---
~,)t! - - _ r
/0/0
0,
cP~
/""1010
\;
i
~
.. ,.."
o
r-
o
..-I.
',"
"
:")
',' ~.. ..j
!-;-.''"'~.-:J
z
..:z. I'i ~+, '0
o 09'rl?
. ~I :..~
o Cl'1 "';"
~1 r>(
~"I ~
"~i V> I ..
, 0/ ~
1";
C Ql
I ~., ,
0,; '\
I ;':
'"
',,>
"
(....)
<-
l~"',
J.
'f.... J I
L .
'.1
~ 1~1.'1
o . ::1
. i
~. '.~'j
.. 0
N: :;;
"'~. I I
'I~'
1:= I~ -~~'
10 " .
IV. ,~ . .'=-J
I .
~ . ~: -:-~
!>
~
~~-....
/--
,"
.
" I
C ,',
'- ,
.
...
,
...
~
",0
",.
.... !t';;;
v.I-
ot
~.
;- _ -;;~1 ~__"
~,:~:~~j
'ti,N890~3'oe"E
-."-- U.B. 36-=-~
~
e
..
rf. - ------z:..~ :l:
~ <--~r- t II I' X>
N~ ~ II
JL ./' 0 'jr 1010
'0 ~ -0- ~,~ ! ~ i\l'/I~
Q 0 "~ 'o-rli i5
r-- -..l !.
1--. = _
I
,
I
,
117' 04fOo' E : 1611.114 .....::.,..
:----~ "I
. ... ~ -- '84.~'t---- .
. '" N&7~04'pO"~
. ,-'" ".
j
("")
:r.:
<--
i
!:";!
~
~
z
C>
C>
....
."
:-<
("")
.:' ~
~~
n!l
<~
''I :r.
O~
....
z
e
PFU!UMrNARY PLAT
GRADING I DRAINA9!1 U11LITY ,LAN
'---7__--
....,....----.._-~~
~-=a::~.:..__.
tT'~ .
~~. L~~Vv.'-1-
VINEWOOD ,ADDITION
CHANHASIINo ...aoTA
.... "fi"/9Z-__
l.
e
e
e
3.
C ITV 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
III
FROM:
Todd Hoffman, Park and Recreation Coordinator
DATE:
December 10, 1992
SUBJ:
Pheasant Hill Park Construction Report
With the commencement of construction at th~ Target site in Chanhassen, the city had the
opportunity to obtain excess soils resulting from their excavating operations. With the grading
plan for Pheasant Hill Park calling out a need for fill material, we took advantage of this
opportunity. With the involvement of the city's Street and Park Divisions of Public Works, the
hauling and rough grading of the accepted soils was coordinated. Ryan Construction, Target's
contractor, performed the hauling operations at no cost to the city. Ryan Construction also
provided the city with a loader and cat which city employees utilized in leveling the fill. Hauling
operations commenced on Wednesday, November 25, and concluded on Tuesday, December 1,
1992. Coordination of this activity took place over a very short time period (2 days), thus a
written notice of the impending activity was distributed door to door in the Pheasant Hill
neighborhood on Wednesday, November 24th, the day work began. The entire operation
proceeded very smoothly, prompting calls of curiosity and appreciation for keeping on schedule
with the park's development.
As a result of grading work getting underway, it became .apparent that a change in the park's
original master plan concept should be considered. . The land on .which the .tennis court was to
be built has five mature (12" to 18" diameter) trees upon it. Considering the city will not
sacrifice these trees and that the entry road and parking area originally called for off of Wood
Duck Lane has been deleted from the plan, it is staff's recommendation that the tennis court be
deleted as well. As the Commission is aware, it is staffs position that the construction of tennis
courts should take place in community parks which are accessible to all. Recent legislation under
the American's With Disabilities Act goes further, making this premise the law. Differences in
interpretation of ADA plays a role in these issues, however, labeling a tennis court which is
tucked into a neighborhood park behind residential homes with access to it only via a bituminous
trail which leads to on- street parking as accessible is severely stretching the definition of
accessibility. In addition, by eliminating the tennis court, we avoid introducing 360 feet of chain
link fence into a small neighborhood park setting. Furthermore, this would allow us to locate
ft
~.1 PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER
e
. .. .
i j f f f ; [ i i f i
fll~!jtiil}
! I ; I ill i [
. ~. ~ t r ~
l & i a f
i ~ I! i
: i 1- i
i ~ ~
i .. ~
~ 1
e
/}
".
-'
,.'
).'
1.'0'0 I
,-
;'/[ "~.".
"j . /'
:; 1
} .,:
(I'
)'
-, i'
. ,
\ ':
r-
>
z
",
,
- ,.
"
_,l.-.__..J
"
~I
", ',')
'-: .
,
,v
<"'1-; \....
(' ,
r
I.
- "'.
-------- -
.i.
\'..' ; I,~'
. I ,\0..... \
'\ % t I --.;./ -."..---'
.. ..' J. c_~ ,I I r---t, , ~
'L r,) .',,-_. ----
,;. \ ~" \1 \,1.=:/',:' ------
~,.~;'~ " "~,-~-
,,) .... 0, .1/ \ \ \ \ ~
'/_,!: ~ K, .')0 \,.,',
-/T " /t~'~~ \,\ <
1
"-
,
\
I
//
'<'."J~
"~ \,'-, \
'-, ,:::-. J
-. ,\.-~
~~.- \
--_:~~
,
~.J.-
\" ....
-=-..
c---
\
,
"-
"
\
I ~
I .
I
f. -}l
e
,.:-.:.'......;~.,.~:... ~ffO'.~
<l,.M' ~..:'" "..,.. "..; '~lI' "..
II .j... ....~. ....eo
.._I'" ,,_ ".....c;.~It'".
....... ~
i i V.DDo.... . B...... . StaIU.....lDc.
10 _.--.-
\0, "'l'~' "'" ........
..~.,_.. "" ".n,,',",'" :.'4.1
.. ..~.. ..... ' . ','
PHEASANT HLL PARK
CHANHASSEN. MINNESOTA
MASTER PLAN
-
.-.. ac -,
'-
1111111
_i
(..-.ot.o-
--
. II
\ ',\
\ \ \ --,
-,,;:. ... ....<... ....
~' \J(
'\'....
....-
~~,\-
~...............-
" '--
....--
I ~
J . !
J R ; e
.
"'"
,-
.~
I
e
I
I
\ I
. \ 'I .'\ \ ...
1\ II "~
,// ,.
" ,
,
\
/'....
I '
I
\
I
,
I
I
I
I J
I /
".. ---" -,..,../~~
'-- ~.::-.i =-- - - - J
- -,.. I
"
...."
,."
;"
e
WIil't..
--
lO"d S~:91 ~6'01"~aa
091~-S~8-~19"ON l31
N019NISIOH
e
.~
e
~m~~'_- p~
&.:..J .~\ ' -~
-;" Ii I ~\ " : 8j
-. ....." C7 r.-z;
~ G ~ ~ '
~ ~u ~'-, )' , tl.L.l ~~ ~~ '
.,..,....'. CD l..'1r I ~ ~
( - ~ J---.. ~,.. '-^J
!J2llJ ~~ /~.:-~ ~ \Y-j - -: .
;v l.~ - 1:-"-J "I r
5 i _"-~ ., l-..... .Al _ .. I Cl> I--- .... ... ' lO"
~'_ f.m ~ -....!-' #- IV · I L::. :,::: r _ . ~ ~n[i .- '=
~ ----1 i f( I\~....L....J "'ill"""':.
U ' _/~ r ~
Ii I i ~~ - ~_..........~
i ^ I l ' '\.. I fl-, I -- . 11=1'-
------r..; , r;!5',u-.,' r' '"}:, 1 .. :m- !I~. ,I 2 i~ i
\:> ~ h =...J I ~f - ~@7~.i~!J1 ;.or J ~
~"C./~\J" i_~J;. IU ~ ~~ ..~, ~~._,,'i:ItI..__.l
----91~.- ~ -./..,. '\J
--..:J::::l I r...J #, -- N . , L,
I. 1I ... - iI!r' 1__ .~
._ i..... \ . ./l~'~~
T~ - ]-1- or( 'J / :,/ ~ ~ i~~;
VI r:}~~...f'S _ 17f ::::J rr- l
CHANHASSEN PARK~ I :.Tj'jq ,:'= ~ ....~ 'lfl!li r~ ~
COMMUNITY PARKS I
I
I - j ~ - _._~. . I rr~ ..?
~'-t 'mr ~~~ ' I I'
P ....G) '~~ I Ii ~ ,.aJ) \;
s; litl'.....? ; , C;;~ J::1I J :a. _ ,;]
7 $<iz · ~ LIT~~~ 1"
~.,. mi." ...,Y,y ,
t. ", -' Z .-<
I1f ~ I \~rJ~~ \"- ~!J. ~"e L~l,..
~6JlY /' ~r: i~ V.... ,
X ' -;, J""" I) r
~A~"-~ ~ ~~~
",",~,
,.-..~
.--. ~~~','
~
\'
.
..
~
I.F".
1. LAn: ANN
2. aTY CENTER.
3. SOlTIH LOTUS l.A.KE
4. LAKE SUSAN
S. LAKE SUSAN HIILLS WEST
6. BANDDdERE
7. BLlH c::R.EEK
NElGHBORHOCX> PAltKS
e
I. CA 1B:AJt.T
t. WlNNEWASHTA IEDITS
10. JERMAN FIELD
"
n.
13. CARVElt.IEACH PLA y<JlaM)
14. CARVEJl BEArCH
15. NOR1H LOnJS I....UE
16. ~ SHCltES
17. MEADOW GREEN
I&. aIANHASSEN POND
19. CHANHASSENESTA1lESJllHPAK
20. u:E MARSH l.A.KE
21. SUNSET UXE
22. PRAJRIE KNou.
23. POWER HIlL
24. CHANHASSEN HllLS
2S. :IANDIMERE IEIGHTS
- --
. ",'
f1
"
tJ'"
w
T ~
,. i
_IMP
- -.,.,
-....
.
e
e
z
o
~
rI.)
51
~
o
u
z
o
r.:
<
B
~
~
~
<
~
~
<
=-
~
="
="
.....
Q
~
o
u
~
~
~
u
z
<
~
~
~
~
<
; rI) I
~ ~ ~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
j:l.j < (f') t"'- (f') (f') ~ (f') 8
t"'- oo 00 t"'- 0\ -
Q~U V'l >< >< >< >< >< ><
- I
zo> ~ < >< < >< >< ><
N I
OUE- ~ >< >< I >< < >< ><
rn~~E- ~ >< < >< >< >< >< ><
<::JO V'l >< >< >< < >< >< ><
N
<::JO - < >< >< >< >< >< ><
-
~::J...:l~ 00 >< >< >< >< >< >< ><
N
~::JZ~ (f') < >< >< >< >< >< ><
N
::s<~ 0\ >< < >< >< >< >< ><
-
<~~ 00 >< >< >< < -< >< ><
N
-<~~ ~ >< >< -< < >< >< ><
-
::s-<~ ~ >< >< >< >< >< >< ><
~~j:Q V'l >< >< -< >< >< -< ><
N
~~j:Q - < >< >< >< >< >< ><
-
~-<z 00 >< >< >< >< >< >< ><
N
I
I:: ~ tI.l ~
0
tI.l JJ .~ 8
~ Co) .fi .g
01) .e ~ ~
~ 0 ~
rn ~
j:Q I:: >. >. j
13 -< ] '"8 ! Q)
.s ~ ~ fa
~ ~ ~ Q ~
fIi
01)
.13
~
.s
'"a
~
V'l
t"'-
j
~
<+-t
0
"E
0 M
~ 0\
0\
Q) -
~ II'i'
1 -
~
5
fa ~
tI.l
.~ =
6- 0
~ i
tI.l
a a.
.....
tI.l 01)
tI.l
.~ .s
.8
(3 ~
.... ~
c2 ~
~
;:= ~
0
~ ;;i
~ tI.l
"0 ~
~ ~
-< (lS
..tI.l "0
~
e;. ~
u
Q) tI.l
r= ~
~
z
~ b.
-
.
C ITV 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
111
FROM:
Todd Hoffman, Park and Recreation Coordinator
DATE:
December 8, 1992
SUB]:
Outcome of Rejecting Retaining Wall Construction, Lake Ann Park/Recreation
Shelter
e
Three Keystone block retaining walls were c cted as part of the Lake Ann Park Shelter
project. The original subcontractor retained byALM Builders on this job did not construct these
walls, however. After repeated failed attempt~ to coordinate this work through their
subcontractor, ALM hired a second firm to perform the work.
Upon an initial inspection of the work beiJ;).gperformed~y the new contractor (approximately 5%
to 10% of the wall was in place), I questioned the quality of the installation. The supervisor on
the job stated, "they were learning as they went along. "This contradicts statements made to me
by ALM Contractors, assuring me tllat the contractor was reputable and experienced in the field
of installing modular retaining walls. To confl11ll my initial assessment of the wall's
construction, two independent.appraisals were carried out. Visual inspections by those who both
manufacture and install m04ular retaining walls confl11lled my assessment. The job performed
is simply unaccepta,bleand no concessions for this work willpe made. Mr. Skip Ristau of ALM
has stated to me in. phone cotlversations thalthey will correct this situation and that he will be
getting back to
pc: Max Daubenberger, Van Doren
Don Ashworth, City Manager
e
U"date: Within the past hour, a representative of Shiely Masonry Products, the manufacturer of
Keystone concrete products, has been in contact with the city and will be working with ALM
Builders and the subcontractor in an attempt to resolve the problems with the walls at Lake Ann
Park.
n
~~ PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER
.
e
e
ft; e,
CITY OF
CHARHASSEN
690 COULTER DRIVE. P.O. BOX 147. CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
(612) 937-1900 . FAX (612) 937-5739
MEMORANDUM
TO:
Todd Hoffman, Park and Recreation Coordinator
FROM:
Jerry Ruegemer, Recreation Supervisor
December 7, 1992 / ~
Winter Basketball Update
DATE:
SUBJ:
""
The Chanhassen/Chaska Adult Basketball League 1$ currently in its third week of playing games.
The fourteen teams are split up into an upper 8J1d lower division. With eight teams in the upper
division, all their games are played at the Chaska Community Center. Upper league games have
four games per night starting at 6:00 p.m. and finishing with a 9:00 p.m. game. The lower
division has six teams and will play all their games at the Chaska Middle School. The lower
division starts their games at 7:00 p.m. and conclude\Yith a 9:00 p.m. game.
The upper league elected to revert back to two officials and the lower will stay with one official.
I am very confident that the offici~!~that have been hir~. will perform up to my expectations.
All three have had previous exp~ence, and observing ~e officials last Wednesday, they all
handled themselves well in a ,game situation.
I have hired a time1ceeper/scorekeeper for both leagues. The employees are responsible for the
game clock and trackingthefowsoneachtea.m..Oneof the tunekeeperlscorekeeper is returning
from last seaso~.i~dtheothet~eeper/~rekeeper~~o~~...~..~~~OJ:l~ employee for
the past several oth are relaxed in performing their duties ana are~ping a great job.
The regular season is fourteen wees dconcludes.March.3rd. smgle elimination playoffs
will start March 10th with the top two teamS o'glothe class "0" state tournament at Coon
Rapids High School, March 27 - 28th.
The adult basketball league is operating as expected up to this point I will keep you up to date
throughout the season.
ft
~J PRINTED ON REC'1CLED PAPER
,
.
e
e
ADMINISTRATIVE SECTION
Letter from John VonDeLinde, MRPA dated December 9, 1992.
Flyer regarding Santa's Mailbox.
Letter to Mike Pflaum, Lundgren Brothers dated December 4, 1992.
Letter from Kathy Schrock, Faribault Community Services dated December 2, 1992.
Newspaper article entitled Tennessee Aquarium Enhances Tourism in Chattanooga.
Winter Boredom Busters Flyer.
~tSOTA RECRC"l
~\~ ~p.tt\( ASSOc/"lr/01t
~Q r/O
to' ~
December 9, 1992
Todd Hoffman
Park & Recreation Coordinator
Chanhassen Parks & Rec
690 Coulter Dr
Chanhassen, MN 55317
Dear Todd:
The State Outdoor Recreation Public Advisory Committee (ORP AC) is currently in the
beginning stages of developing the 1995-99 State Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plan
(SCORP). At their meeting on November 12, the ORP AC developed a comprehensive list of 11
issues currently facing public leisure service providers in the State of Minnesota. In early
lanuary, ORP AC will be reducing this list to five to seven priority issues to be addressed in the
forthcoming SCORP document.
The State Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plan is an important long-range planning tool since
it has a major impact on legislative issues affecting leisure services and provides a framework
for ranking grant proposals under the local outdoor recreation grants program.
As your MRP A representative on the advisory committee I think it is important to take
advantage of this opportunity to comment in the beginning stages of the forthcoming SCORP
document.
It would be greatly appreciated if you would review the enclosed material with your board and
staff and report their combined comments, via the Discussion Worksheet, by lanuary 1st to Brad
Moore, Office of Planning, Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, 500 Lafayette Road,
St Paul, MN 55155-4010.
Thanks for your participation and have a joyous holiday season.
Cordially,
~ {po O~fl
10hn V onDeLinde
RECEIVED
DEe 1 0 1992
C'TY OF CHANHASSEN
Minnesota Recreation and Park AssOCiation. 5005 West 36th Street · St. Louis Park, MN 55416-2661
Phone: 612/920-6906 Fax: 612/920-6766 800/862-3659
.. .
.
.
DNR Office of Planning
Attachment A
November 1992
Outdoor Recreation Public Advisory Committee (ORPAC):
Issue Discussion Results
(not in order of priority)
A. Environmental Ethic.fV alue, & Lo.. of Outdoor Skill,
M~y members of the public lack knowledge ~~bout the environment, how
natural processes work, or do not possess skills necessary to enjoy outdoor
recreational facilities and places. In many cases, this lack of knowledge
translates into unacceptable values and activities which may lead to
environmental degradation or deterioration of recreational facilities t~~
improper use, abuse, or neglect. Urban and suburban residents in parti r
need natural places to recreate so they may have opportunities to connect
with the natural environment.
e
AI Outdoor Recreation Programming & Visitor Service. (is,ue #4
from the 1990-1994 SCaRP)
In our increasing I)" urban society, many Minnesotans are becoming further
removed from theIr natural, ecological surroundings. Consequently, many
lack even basic understanding of environmental concepts, outdoor and life
skills, or the ethical behavior and values associated with natural resource
conservation. . .. Building ~ublic awareness of resource issues is critical to
the protection of Minnesota s natural and cultural heritage. . . .
B. Acce., (Barriers to Recreation)
Residents and visitors are experiencing a variety of access barriers to
recreational facilities and activities. Access barriers may take the form of
facilities which are not accessible to the disabled; in other cases ~:~rimary
barrier to access may be a lack of means to travel to the recreatio site
(e.g., no access to a car or no public transportation to the recreation site.)
Access may also mean no place to~pursue a particular form of recreational
activity. For eXAm,ple, users of Off-Road Vehicles (ORVs) are finding it
increasingly difficult to use their machines near the Minnea~olislSt. Paul
metropolitan area and surrounding suburbs. Hunters as well have found
fewer opportunities near the metropolitan area to pursue their sports.
Residential and commercial development, for example, has decreased the
availability of fewer places to pursue these types of recreational ~ctivities.
Finally, an access barrier may be cultural or linguistic. New immi~ts and
citizens with different languages or cultures may not fully understand the
availability of recreational opportunities. As the diversity of Minnesota's
population grows, the types of recreational opportunities sought also grows.
e
ORPAC DRAFT Issues
11112192 Meeting
Page 2
c.
Infrastructure Maintenance & Rehabilitation
.
e
AcrOSE Minnesota recreational facilities are deteriorating or need
rehabilitation. Many.ofthese facilities were build in the 19608 and 19708;
some even were built in the 19308. Heavy recreational use over many years
have caused manv of these facilities to deteriorate. While public officials
have continued to fund development of new facilities, often maintenance of
existing facilities has received less attention. The need for additional
maintenance and rehabilitation touches on all types of facilities from the
primitive to the urban. The need also extends across facilities managed by
federal, state, local, and private organizations. .
Because funding is a critical issue for all types of public programs in the
1990s, there may be a need to determine whether maintenance and
rehabilitation or new development should receive a higher funding priority.
Maintenance a.nd Operation ofEzisting Outdoor Recreation
Facilities (issue #5 from the 1990-2994 SCORP)
Minnesotans have made substantial investm.ents over the past 25 years in
developing one of the finest outdoor recreation systems in the nation.
Unfortunately, many state and local outdoor recreation facilities are rapidly
deteriorating due to their age, increased use and vandalism. In recent years,
funding for facility repair and preventative maintenance has been
insufficient to reverse this disturbing trend.
C1.
e
Maintenance and operations funding for units of the state's outdoor
recreation system has remained relatively constant during the 1980s, despite
the eroding effects of inflation, salary increases, cuts in base-level funding,
increased operating expenses, and costs resulting from growing visitor use
and nev.' facility construction. As a result, visitor safety and satisfaction are
being jeopardized, and public services have been reduced. . . .
D. LoBI of Open Space & Associated Opportunities.
Across Minnesota open space suitable for outdoor recreation is being lost.
Commercial, industrial, and residential uses, for example, are reducing the
availability of natural environments suitable for outdoor recreation. hi other
cases outdoor recreation opportunities are lost for other reasons. For
example, abandoned railrOad grades present ideal. sites for trails, yet some
never become trails due to lack of coordination among public agencies or
funding. In southern Minnesota as well, public landS to pursue a variety of
outdoor recreational activities from hunting, trail-riding to bird-watJ!n;ng are
scarce. Across the state, there is need to purchase properties for recreational
activities or secure easements with private or non-profit landowners to pin
recreational access or open space preservation. In some rural areas wbich
are rapidly developing there is a need to secure natursllands so that these
areas retain their character and natural amenities which made them
desirable to new residents.
The loss of open space is interlinked with the decline of the land and water
base supporting outdoor recreation. Pollution, improper land use controls,
water contamination, compacted soils. diseases (oak Wilt) and exotic species
e
E. Coordination & Connections
Many facets of Minnesota's outdoor recreation system need to be more
effectively coordinated or connected. Several examples are listed below:
.
.
ORP AC DRAFr Issues
11112192 Meeting
Page 3
negatively affect the natural environments supporting outdoor recreation.
The natural resource base and its needs must be assessed to determine how
to protect it and thus sustain outdoor recreation opportunities.
r '
e
Outdoor recreation can be connected with environmental education.
Parks can be educational places as well as recreational sites. Outdoor
recreation can serve as the medium through which youth and adults
alike can connect to the land and learn how to use and conserve the
natural environment.
There are QPportunities for more linkages among recreational
facilities. Trails can connect parks while serving as transportation
corridors (some of them lengthy). Parks can serve both recreational
and educational needs. Natural areas can serve as a means to
preserve open space, unique environments while providing educational
and recreational opportunities to connect these areas.
3) There are opportunities for linkages among providers and participants.
Participation by participants builds in a personal investment into the
recreational system. Coordination and partnerships among private
and public providers can result in better recreatioIlal facilities,
enhanced service delivery to users, and saves financial resources as
well. These efforts may include shared funding, leases, or contracting
for services. There is a need to bring institutional systems up-to-date
with technological systems (GIS).
4) There are opportunities to better coordinate fragmented funding
efforts. For example, funding comes from federal, state, local, and
special district (e.g, IRRRB) sources without planning for how these
activities link with one another.
2)
1)
e
F. Role. & Re.ponsibilitie.
The role of public and private providers should be examined to determine the
roles each provider should play. Overlapping jurisdictions should be reduced
(e.g., wetlands regulation). We need to work within the current bureaucracy
rather than build a new one. There is confusion among the ~rovidersand
legislators on the pro~er roles of providers and founders - SCORP could
provide a framework for this role.
There is also a need to work on data gathering and analysis for the state's
outdoor recreation system. We need a means to look at the social chan&'es
t-91ring ~lace in Minnesota. Who do providers seek out for this data and to
assess the data implications for recreation facility development and
maintenance? For example, 8houldgr~t!.. ~ anm;mstered through DTED
versus the implemen~ agencies DNR/MNDOT? Perhaps grants should not
come through the those unplementing agencies.
ORP AC DRAFT Issues
11112/92 Meeting
Page 4
'"
G.
Showing the Benefu:ial Social and Economic Impact' of
Recreation
I
e
There is a need to more effectively demonstrate the positive economic and
social impacts of outdoor recreation. Outdoor recreation tourism benefits
many local economies in Minnesota; many social and health benefits stem
from outdoor recreational activities as well.
H. Inadequate Funding
There is insufficient funding to finance recreation-related facilities and areas
in the state. Political considerations complicate this issue-certain projects
are funded for political consideration regardless of whether those projects
truly reflect the state's recreation priorities. As a reswt, there are fewer
funds for other priority recreation projects.
1. Program Review & Analy.iII
There is a need to review and analyze why some recreation programs are
effective (e.g., snowmobile grant-in-aid system) so that the strengths of these
programs can be used in other recreational programs. We ought to find the
best outdoor recreation practices and use them across the outdoor recreation
spectrum.
J'. Liability and Litigation
Provider liability has been an ongoing outdoor recreation concern. Liability
and litigation concerns have impeded facility development, caused other
facilities to close, and has diverted dollars from recreational activities to legal
battles. A1:J. outdoor recreation risk management program needs to be
developed to address these liability and litigation concerns.
e
K. Emerging Outdoor Recreation I..ue.
As Minnesota's popwation changes, there are Dew recreation activities being
developed and new mes of assoc:i8:ted issues which must be addressed. For
example, many adults do not have a normal daily work schedule; as a .
consequence, there is a Deed to provide recreational opportunities d~
non-traditional hours. There are new or rapidly growin.i' recreational
activities which create a need for facilities inclUding in.line skating, jet skies,
and soccer to name a few. Recreation providers must address the needs of
these new recreators while balancing the needs for existing recreational .
activities.
a>>rpa1113
e
. r. -. ·
. ,
.'
/
/.
,
.
e
e
DNR Office ofPlaTlning
ATTACHMENT A
November 1992
Outdoor Recreation Public Advisory: Committee (ORPAC) Issue
. Discussion Worksheet
~
",. .
Please review the attached list of 11 issues generated at the recent November
12, 1992 ORP AC meeting. . (We encourage you to share copies of the issue
discussion results and issue worksheets with your constituent groups as
well.) Since ~n!y 5-7 major issues will serve as the basis for the 1995-1999 .
SCORP, carefully review the issues and consider the following questions:
1. Are there changes you would like to see in any of the 11 issues
we have developed?
If anything is missing, please list your additions below, on the back
side of this attachment, or on an attached sheet, or in the margins by
each issue. (Do not be concerned with editing the issue statements at
this point, we are primarily concerned with ensuring that all pertinent
information is included in the issue statements.)
"
2. . Are there issues which should be added to our list?Use the .---
back side of this attachment or add additional.heets.
~.. '::'. , . .
PLEASE RETURN OR FAX [(612) 296-6047] YOUR COMMENTS AND
NEW ISSUES BY FRIDAY, JANUARY 1, 1993 TO: .
Brad Moore, Office of Phmn;ng
Minnesota Department ofN atural Resources
500 Lafayette Road, St Paul, Minnesota 55155-4010
DNR Office of Planning
November 1992
I
e
1995.1999 SCORP ISSUES IDE?\"TIFICATION PROCESS
STEP ONE
Goal: To identify the top four to .iz he,' is.ue. which affect
Outd.oor Recreatwn in Minne.ota.
Outdoor Recreation & Minnesota's Quality of Life:
Outdoor recreation is integral to the quality of life in Minnesota.
People live and recreate in Minnesota in part because of the
state's vast natural environments and associated opportunities to
pursue outdoor sports and leisure activities~ Minnesota hosts a
variety of outdoor recreation activities ranging from wilderness
canoeing and hunting to city softball leagues, volleyball, and
urban bicycling. Birdwatchers, children with fishing poles, e
picnickers, and families visiting state, regional, or local parks all
enjoy elements of Minnesota's outdoor recreation system. These
activities support a recreation tourism industry which
significantly benefits the economy.. The quality of life for
virtually every Minnesotan is enhanced in some manner by
outdoor recreation activities.
Consider the statement above. What key statewide issues affect Minnesota's
high quality outdoor recreation? The issue (or problem) should meet the
following three criteria.:
A. Is it so serious that it would be irresponsible not to address it?
B. Can it be analyzed and eXAm;ned (e.g., can we determine the trends
related to the problem; can we research it)?
C. Can the issue be addressed at the state or local level?
e
I
.
.
DNR Office ofPhmning
ATTACHMENT B
November 1992
Clarification of the 1995.1999 SCORP Planning Process
There was discussion at the first ORPAC meeting about the need to clarify
the planning process used to develop the 1995-1999 SCORP as well as the
plan's audience. Listed below is information which should help clarify these
questions.
PJe.nnin~ UT'Ocess
e
The p18n~ process we are using is outlined in the State of
Minneso ational Park Service Planning Agreement which you received at
the November mee~. It is an issues-based strategic plenning process with
one addition - it willl.ncorporate vision statements.
Once ORP AC and the DNR/DTEDplSTlning team choose and analyze which
issues the plan will address, we will develop vision statements for those
issues. In this respect, the plan will be forward-looking--the goals/strategies,
and project selection priorities will flow from these vision statements to
address the identified priority issues.
F'or example, if the issue is lack of coordination among recreation providers, a
vision statement discussing a s~stem where recreation providers coordinate
activities would be developed. The goals/strategies and project selection
criteria serve as the means to move forward from the issue problem to the
desired vision. A project selection criterion to address a coordination issue
may be demonstration of a public/private partnership as part of the project
proposal.
Finally, use of vision statements provide us with opportunities to use real
examples of that vision actually taking place. Conslder the coordination
issue again. A good example of ongoing coordination is the grant-in-trail
snowmobile system--in this case state, local governments, private
landowners, business, and users are all take part in maintaining a very
effective recreational system. The vision becomes more real if actual
examples are used. As a result, the reader will have real-world examples on
how the issue can be addressed. At our next meeting, I will provide written
examples of results stemming from this type ofpl~mn;ng process.
e
Ela.n Purpose & Audience
Finally, several ORPAC members had questions about the plan's intended
purpose and audience. The Minnesota/N ational Park Service plenning
agreement ~~ecifies two primary p~oses for the plan: a) To meet the
F'ederal L&WCF requirements; and, b) To provide guidance to outdoor
recreation providers including agencies, loCal governments, non-profits,
private businesses, and legislators. The document is not intended to be a
guide for recreation facility users or asa data document for researchers.
Budget constraints are a very real issue in this planning process; we simply
cannot produce the types of SCaRP documents which have been developed in
the past.
<-N ,
~~~
.- e-
'3~
~a .
Co.~ i1'
<(I) 00 e
=
. ~'j..< ,. . ~'.
..;_.
9' . ..f
. .~. . ", , .. ...:..':~::~
~ '",1 ... ~
- "':; . --
= .., '.;;"- .'
~ ""'" ""'"
=" f
=" I
I ..,-"--
.....
f
I
.
~ .!
9'
~ U
9' !
>
I:> r "'Il
~ Z
9'
00 00 00 ~
f'I") = = = tlQC:
=" < < < =.~
0'\ ~ f 0-- ...
- 9' ~ .. -= :..
~ - .
b -; (.l U !1
= """ c -.-
~.= .....
""" -0 .0
I .; ~ Co
N N D.D Jl ..:.
9' 0\ -' -
U ~.- 0
U ~ > -
~ ! ~e-:'
N Q ~ > Co.!l
0==
9' :: Coo!!l
N .J ~ ...= :: e
?' 0 - m r::: .
=
. ..; .~ :~fJ~
- Co.
Co. ~ _(.l>0
N ~ 00 Co') = =~o-
=" Co') C" u ... tlQ.:!
= ~ S..._~
=" < 8 (lS.-
..... L:. = gtlQ
U g"E_~
b ~ 'C = --0
(lS1:>~=
- j Co. rIl.!:! =
""" . (.l
.. c~=:J
fI2 - -O~rIl
- ~ rIl CD rIl
co: ~
!:! >~=u
= ~ -
- -c ,. u.:
e" -
~ Q.= r; ~
~ r--~;;..Q
~
~ QJ
~ (oJ 0 0
= ~ =
rIl ..
~ :: rIl = ~ !1 =..
- ~ oS .00
...
- u ~ - = = \.. ..J
~ = - (lS ~ .9 ~
- co
.~ a .- - s
s .s. = -
os .52 = ~
= s Co') - ~
'- ~ 5 =
> I:> ~ ~
rl~ ~ u u = =
= 0
tlQ = = .!! Co')
- I:> .,c
(,,/= - = Q :B Co. i =
-
.. " u .~ = ..Q
=- - > .:= c: ~ .5
...- E 5 I
~; U .,c '- '- '- u .!::l
4.111I c: ~ 0 I:> I:> .;:
~- = .W; Q
-" (.l - - = u
_ III .co= '- ~ =
_Ill 0 c.:: ca = 0 a:: ~
~< <0 .= u u .-
= = - s - -
-0\ co" 0 = ~ (lS = ca
.:'" =~ .- u < 5- ~ ~ >
- -0
~CP\ .E< = - .g 13 13 0
z- = = ...
=00 c u > > I:> g ~ e
- f s:i = ~ ! Q (.l
='1') 0 rIl ... = Q <
-'" r.:.. rIl r-- -
-
='" .. -
~- .:.: '> .. - - g
'> - - -
= .. .:.: - - > > >
-- - - -
.. IJ U ~ U U ~ U j U U
~ 401 ~ ~ !! !! ~ ~ ~ ~ ,
....~
-:":I -= - -= -= -= ,
'" . s: s: s:
.... ..... ~ s: '- ... c. c..
-- -
,
SANTA'S
MAILBOX
Santa Claus will have a sp cial direct-to-the-North
Pole mailbox at
Chanhassen City Hall.
690 Coulter
Drive. Boys
and girls can
drop off or mail
their letters to
Santa's mailbox begin-
ning December 7 and
continuing through
December 22. Santa's
helpers will then pick up
the letters each evening
and deliver them straight to
the North Pole. Santa Claus
t
requests that each letter
include the full :name and
address of each sender, so he and his elves can
. .
reply to each.one. Santa looks forward to hearing.
from you!!
SPONSORED BY
CHANHASSEN PARK AND RECREATION
.
e
e
e
CITY OF
CHAHHASSEN
i,
,
e
690 COULTER DRIVE. P.O. BOX 147. CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
I
. (612) 937-1900 . FAX (612) 937-5739
December 4, 1992
, \ l
t'i ,"
Mr. Mike Pflaum and Associates
Lundgren Brothers Construction Co.
935 East Wayzata Blvd.
Wayzata, MN 55391
Dear Mike:
Thank you for the generous donation in the amount of $4,000 to the City of Chanhassen' sPark
and Recreation Department As you know, this money was used to purchase the majority of a
play equipment expansion for North Lotus Lake Park. North Lotus Lake Park is a twenty acre
neighoorhood park Serving the northeastern sector of the city, an area which Lundgren Brothers _
Construction has been greatly involved in. We have taken delivery of this new equipment, but .,
are postponing installation of such until the spring of.1993 (the project includes a good amount
of bituminous work). Upon installing the equipment, a notification informing the neighbors in
the area of the new equipment will be mailed. Lundgren Brothers involvement in making this
much needed playground improvement a reality will be in this letter.
Todd Hoffman ',.'
Park and Recreation Coordinator
Again, thank you very much for your donation.
Best Holiday wishes.
m:k
pc: Mayor and City Council
Park and Recreation Commission
e
ft
~., PRINTED ON REC~LED PAPER
..
e
):,
16 SOUTH CENTRAL AVENUE
FAR!BAULT, MINNESOTA 55021
(507) 334-2064
I
.... FARIBAULT
~~ COMMUNITY
_~ SERVICES
:-. l'ii\r-i:) ~
81 .S; r 71\ -~x..
December 2, 1992
Dear Hall of Ideas Participant:
Thank you for "showing off" your stuff in the Hall
of Ideas at the 1992 MRPA Conference.
The best programming ideas I brought to work were
those from the Hall of Ideas. It is my hope that other
conference delegates had a similar experience.
There were some last minute kinks in the setup and
I appreciated the flexibility you all displayed as they
were ironed out.
e
In my evaluation for future conferences I did
suggest that the Hall of Ideas be scheduled earlier
(12-2 pm) or completely set apart from the Exhibit Hal~.
For display purposes, I also recommended that the
use/availability of table covers and signs be made more
specific.
~ ~-
If you have suggestions of your own for future Hall
of Ideas please send them to:
Terry Just
1993 MRPA Conference Chair
Maple Grove Parks and Recreation
9401 :ernbrook Lane
Maple Grove, MN 55369
Thanks again and Happy Holidays.
~
.~ ,
J
Kathy
e
.. ~..
-' ':...,s
;)'1
io .._...., .__.'~ ~...-'
14-
" -,',' ')
'I", ..... 10_
A Program of School District 656 and the City of Faribault
~",'~)j . ,.-J 'ra\;\ ;.1 '7 b1 ~dB ~d,e'jt1
i:lJlijl;bii! srij snibubro t1'(ll.....
nr b93E.'1~ ....,~ ...!:lirh, ,9'l.lIJ
llcrit,x:n !!:ub ' qJ ai!~l:iI ~M
.,u~:) i!}8~'~;:C"g',;.' lU'"<;"f~ ;.~n.f:1
llcilihu"" ',dwhn a dJiw 8iUf
. !lO"'.1I01l 'J~1.6'1I1
V Y Y V" l""" 'y.;It V V
~, ~ .' ~', \ . . , - i r:l~:: '
" '
"'~\:" . V e"
;\.'\' .
CHANHA~SENPARK\AND RECREA nON PRESENTS
WINTER BOREDOM BUSTERS!!
~r' . , L~ ;':>erp1q 1)
,<,> =::=~\~,~~~ti~=::::: V
<::~:: ~ =::~~~=.~~~~-.,' V
,t.,. .~ "rtJ tl'oidw ;Location: Chanhassen Bowl ,
" "rlllO . Time: 1:00 - 4:00 p,m.
!~r ,J; '_I
~ , . ~
,~' ; ..~. ':..~, _. t, ~Jj~;~tbrOOgh'~b~~Y'd;~" Code No. YBRE9310 .
;.';:~,';;It" :,:::d~~,'~'~,o"~:~~g~=.~we~ V
. ' "'" going swimming ,at the Chaska. Co~unity Ce,~ter. ,
~~. '" ," ", ' . ....' V Ages: Grades i-s ," .~~. ...I;.oca~on:. Q.ssen Elementary School V
' . .4, ." :~g:.~' 5~ PnL~:'~:'~" $75.00 for all 4 days t
,.'..:.'.Y' ,:.'. .'., v ,Outdoor'rhwccanbe found a; ~erarlocaSiOI)$ throughout the city. They will be y,.-.' e
tlOoded.8iId open to the public nom approximately December 14 through February
14 as weather pennits. A wmming hOuse attendant will be on duty at City
Center Park during follOwing hoUrs: . ,t .,
~. ~"" . 4:00 - 9:00 p.m.
....~.I" 10:00 a.m. - 9:00 p.m.
''''' 1'00 7'00 pm.
.l, 'S:.cSf>,!::>,."l!sLIG"iil.aJ:.iO': ""!Ba!Y'V,'":"~";iDlbe~"~~~' .'. .
.(~.{ta ,~.'Hl L'''UijH''P~ "'ri1--' a1s1JC, ~u,.. ,: ;.~ : I "'0 ..-f ,
.r~gCl'lI":' .. -" "" ..~ ':'!Ji i:: ,,~v ,",' .', ..~ December 24:. 10:00 a.m. -3:00p.m.
;~,::;;;;'::: ,""." .... '. > V,. . ' 5 ~:30; E a.m. .3:00 pnL ~
'i'. ~, t
". \.t...";;,, c_"j':~:~~REQlIDlED ~
-mi)$ .~tma91e'~i_!iYJ 'y' ,n w...:,. ,0 t
. , '''Pirticipant~ Name: · T'Hl ;!';!lri 'IN" 'h'l' "n. Birthdate: y
. ~.." ~t Nll~ I ~'''l"1. ,~.., i3,..."'.~L~ S""J1~ "U:. .:..
.-'t.~,:,.., ':~. ,'f~,;~{~r ~':1 ~.I.:1 br!J ,.~~j~,titrl f' ~!,) ~r:
, ftUW~S:, > ...,.... ...!I3ot..... '" .1 ,~
~:}HrtI 0: 1~odB b9~~ }ol . -\_ :Ie! lU'-":I
, ! :9'/1~ 'l'lJ ~;rO!.l1 !I,ll "'!lase . , .
marl I!! .SJfltl' "'~. . . ,,ged ~~.'
s.;..001':- I. ,3 n,,"." .., -,J!qqe n.t !l"..... m y
1aoq l-'. QlI ~!ln:,d Jl'" .~ -r; ;;n!ll..'p
.'J,"!U.ll1 I ..h,HomePb~~"'n1-"hlN ':;1;; '~!il.'A1temlllivcPhone:
04f'912 .( ~:~N ~ ,rrsJiad3 ~....... ,J.'. .. ....~,~~ .. i 1 .
f' . -lJi!.," Hit to to [';9111 ".1J 8"11'lll >1 '.
~i~~'mr:, ';1o;:-~~~PersOnatAltem&tiveP;bmicu ""_'. . '
Y ,f)! t. I1lJ!\ (t .~tLJU. Y
1iJS[ .dun bRI~';IS' .' . ,", ',,' '. ','cd f."",
. l' .!',. , ~ jJ, .' ; :J'.. ,1".lOi'l: Jill:': . _ ,
:~~7is.. ;~#'~~;,,~.:.~: ;0. t' 7~.1 dl)l)' . ". ,. :,.. '" .., _'a SigDa... ...
.fsO,,~f.f.:.;I~(J:. '.',., .,. II 3rl'f ..
r."!:;:'
,,:~?~f'~ ':Y~~'Y V y Y V
,"~-:,,6~~'~ .~ '..'~...
(
"
"-.
~ ...~-.
tilIIL'",
Y:<
i'>l", '
~, ',~",:
. :'"'.'_;~i
"'''..1
:"
~,~ .". +
(".......
,... ,', ~
i_._~~::~.,._.
t
~-
'. ,,:
.. .~,,' I
:.. ...,.-"
?1'i..:h~.. :
,3..U'(CIlI~ !!JJj "toHa: '/
a~~2..iBW8 bn.a ~"::9V!t ce,ia910!
,H.'!iJ 11.8 1n daft 'i:d n.1Jirl.sdrti
,pil;ui .~19!H!ee'!'3!"'! .i!d;:'fl
9/lIS1T <;j l!s::ism b::-.l! ,- ,,!S;:;"J
cqqiuio.!:M ';rU I'd ......'1 >1
~ Hiw d'T.~bi'r!ididD &.tIs(]
-joV$b 7ln.sJ .,,,,jR'P,(U 'ltIto 9rlj
cr~M 10 ,'uD 9rU :" d.u1 oj Os
D$!o'l9b TIll 7.:and ':t!n'/T .00
9(\1 "l""1 r""'~l!ll a'bi "oW ,:n!J l)j
~r"...... -!11l.t~'-3:.' ')....&>td.N tlJ(J~~~;1!~..
.. ,.idJ '::-i;\~~ ,_~"<r~lr..; .H~
\:"i t+."t ~ '>"';~ r:~~ ' ibuL-~", .
."
~n~s~ Acqhuarium En.hancis /1fco<~;%,1{ff::~~
=:~m In attanooga_~::~~}~,_(':,.;-t::;;.;~):/vt~tl . ':to I !? .-ftt'! .
"~i~~~:': - 'f4.1.'}!tl.
pnvate donations from Indi. /. J~/P., ,.-
viduals, corporations, founda. 'JlfV"
tion and other o1P!lizatio1V!.
.-. in .lwo8 .-:'Z:;,r!I, '
The city ?L';;!-J~:~~fpoo.J!1 -. Jiarbw'. '-.
was responsible tor &iv~lop- ',,"v'~.
ment and constroction of the ,:;),,11 '0 ,W b,.
$10.2 million Ross La.nding
Park and Plaza, OJ! which the
Aquarium is located.. Of the
$10.2 million, $7.5 million
came from two state appropri.
ations; $2.5 million came from ,
the county issuing bOIidlI:tO> ,t
paid by the hotel/motel tax;
and $200,000 came from rev,)
~nu~ from huntin~ ~~ fiah.
mglicenses. . ...,.) vl'::
The public park ofTers to
visitors a history lesson. ckt.
ing back to prehistoric.~,..
picking up again in the 1600s ;
and leading up to 1992.
Even before the one mil.
lionth visitor entered the Ten-
nessee Aquarium last week,
people in Cl!attanooga knew
the facility would be very pop-
ular. But no one knew inter.
est in the world's first aquari-
um dedicated to freshwater
life would be 80 overwhelming
that first year attendance pro-
jections would be met within
four months.
The opening of the Ten.
nessee Aquarium has proved a
tremendous tourist attraction
for the city of Chattanooga.
The Tennessee Aquarium
opened in May of this year,
and after two months of oper.
ation, 332,086 people had
toured the 12 story, 130,000
square foot aquarium that
rests on the banks of the Ten.
nessee River and within a
city-funded public park. That
figure was already more than
half the projected yearly visi-
tor goal of 650,000.
-' course, for the city,
figures indicate a great
to tourism and the rev.
enues that it generates. The
Aquarium opened featuring
five exhibit areas. The
exhibits-the Appalachian
Cove Forest, Tennessee River
Gallery, Discovery Falls, Mis-
aiasippi Delta and the Rivers
of the World highlight aquatic
and animal life in the Ten.
nessee Valley and nearby
Mississippi. In addition,
aquatic and wildlife are fea.
tured from rivers in Mrica,
South America, Asia, Siberia
and Canada.
The privately operated,
non.profit Aquarium has
more than 4,000 living speci.
mens representing 350
apecies of fish, birds, mam.
mals, reptiles and amphib.
ians. Vilitors can participate
in hands.on, interactive
exhibits at the Aquarium's
200'seat auditorium, two
tully-equipped classrooms and
wet lab.
'"I'he Tennesaee Aquarium
lives visitors their first look
at the underwater world of
the river," aaid William
8Pn, president of the
-.num. "M08t people have
teen aaltwater fish in their
ocean habitats, but few have
seen freshwater r18h in their
natural environment-the
rushing water, quiet pools
and nooks and crannies along
the river 8bore1ine."
Location, Location, Location
The park connects cIo\iliiP"
town Chattanooga and the .
Tennessee River. The city,
added a sea wall along the
street and the river, a 360-
foot floating boat dock and a
fixed peer, a handicap ramp
and walkway along the river-
bank. In addition, there is a .:!:
rowing dock and expansive TIle T_ AqUlll'ium illlUTOIUIded by 0 IIlIUIicipol po1i.
landscaping.
AssOciates, Inc. ofCamhridge, lWim'in iha110w 8treamI and
The park provides a history Maas, which designed the deep sinks and river otten
of Chattanooga as a city and New England Aquarium in entertain themselves in
the area before the city W88 Boston, the National Aquari- JDOUDtain poola.
founded, aaid Madison um in Baltimore and Osaka,
McBrayer, a retired airCorce hcording the facts provid.
general and former communi- Japan's Ring of Fire Aquari. ed by the Aquarium atafr, the
i d I t um. Exhibit designs were state of Tennessee baa more
tdirecto~ econfjomthc ~tyve MOPcBmen done by the Lyol1llZaremba, ...-ies of freshwater ftah than
r or e C1. ray. Inc of Boston, M... and the -r- .
er was chosen aa the volun. -':"""Alabrica' A_ f~ the""'" any ~ Itate in the ~~
tear overIight dir8dl:ll'-rat u........u~........ ' Y' - .. and 18 home to more ~
constn1ction and devel~!~ ~;fhe ~ ~pany of plante and aniJUll thaD
of the park. 'I'UCion, Ariz. any comparable biIiDd, tem-
. . "We have lOne to groa,t...perat.e;lDD8intheworld.
. The bull~1D~ oftb!t.P'U_.-teqth.~ilte lelected ' .' - .,;"
inclh uded JDlVl.kor inf'rasl;ructurtt' rr a habitata and to atrels the ...... ... dwttw~~
c anges I e cu Ing 0 .. ariety nd lnteJicoDneeted . ..If: ,..
major city street;-1ll'ovtIl,..-3r of ~ a1 the. j"- Located about 100 milea
sewage and el~ricalline.1 ::k th:t :::tort~he fro~NJa~ta. Big~linlham
and reconstruc:tingthureL. ,,_..-' Wl1t~- .-............4 ~lia'hV111e,.9hlttenooga
~.......um ....... to appre- wall fCllUDded sa a~ngpolt
Ufe ......the Tennessee 1MIr.; , clate fresh water-rive!~, ;.in the" early 19C11o'lintury.
........ atema;'1akea and ~ Chattanooga wu oDe of a few
The park features a eerles the lifeblood of the conti- Southem towns built on
ofbandsofbrassdepict,iqlife_.~t,g,'" uid Peter Chsnnay- heavy indultry a. a major
along the r~ver, .ineludinl err, fo~ndinl principal or railroad hub. The c~ later
native Amencan life and the . Cambridge Seven AIIoc:iatea. had to rid itlelf of polluted air
removal of Cherokees'tn..tlre' "1De. El!id'damapd water qpality in
1830s to Oklahom,;. The In the Appalachian Cove t1ie 197011. .'
bands reflect the beginninp Forest ahibit, a 70-root-high after the ~
of Chattanooga railroacl-clays, pyramid'lhapecl glass roof ta~' leverlll envirbnmen
and display the words to the helps f8cmlate the b10UDtain A~' 0111" and __" ... .
"Chattanooga Choo Choo .. . f th ... Ri ... c eanup ...e.... mea-
. IIOUl'Cl! 0 e &~. ver, aurea, Chattanooga reOeetl
The Aquarium. was where lome. 15 varlet!ea of the dty'a environJDflDtal COIl'
designed by the architeetural rree-flyinl birds inhabit the CllI1'DI and is home to a ~
firm of Cambridge Seven moiat air of the forest, filh
politan population of 433,210.
-rhe Aquarium not only
reflects the city's environmen.
tal concerns and efTorts, but
lervee as a showcase for the
state'l biological diveraity,"
aaid Flynn.
The Aquarium holds
400,000 pllODl of water, and
through ita ahibita re-ereatel
Dearby and faraway water-
ways iDduding the N~
Lake, which wsa created in
the 193011 to reduce flooding
and provide Tenne.... citi-
IeD8 with a reliable cIrinldng
water 1IOUl'Cl!.
Viaitorl tour canyonl,
foreata, riven aDd awamps
inhabited by ftah of all tizea,
froga, aalamandel'l, turtlea,
alligators and makes to name
a few. In the MiIBiaaippi
Delta exhibit, visitors will ...
the cmly aaltwater tank dev0t-
ed to ftah or the Gulf of Mai.
co. Three tanka are devoted
to the world'llarplt rivw the
Amazon, where ~aitors will
see wildlife from that region
iDcluding nd-bellied piranha.
.
I
I
!
i
i
,
I
t