1986 06 23 Special Meeting
Park and Recreation Commission Special Meeting
Minutes
June 23, 1986
.
A special meeting of the Park and Recreation Commission was
called to discuss the park issue of the proposed development
called Chanhassen Vista. The meeting was called to order by
Chairman Mike Lynch at 6:00 p.m. Commission members present
were Susan Boyt, James Mady, Wallace McKay, Mike Lynch, and Mike
Rosenwald. Members absent were Charlie Robbins and Curt Robin-
son. Staff present were Lori Sietsema and Bill Monk.
CHANHASSEN VISTA:
Lynch explained that the Park and Recreation Commission had
reviewed this proposed development and had requested that an
appraisal be done on the sloped area to determine its value.
Sietsema said that the appraisal had come back and the fair mar-
ket value had been determined to be $147,500, including the
slopes on both the north and south side of the pond.
Mady said that in the last development reviewed, the developer
was required to give almost 8 acres of flat park land. He said
that to be consistent, the City should be getting more land than
the area around the pond to the 952 contour line.
Rosenwald asked if Bud Andrus is a certified appraiser. Bill
Monk said that Mr. Andrus was as qualified as anyone and has done .
appraisals for the City in the past and always had reasonable
opinions.
Lynch said that the slopes were totally unusable and questioned
whether the City really wants to own them at that price. He
suggested that perhaps a conservation easement will achieve the
same thing, which is to preserve the slopes.
McKay asked if an easement were established, would the City be
able to have trails across it. Sietsema said that a park plan
should be developed that would identify trails and vegetation
along the slope that would promote passive park use and wildlife.
She said that this type of plan could be designed in conjunction
with the DNR and u.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
Rosenwald asked if we could approach the Kerber's to purchase the
property from them instead of the developer.
Monk reviewed the background of this proposal stating that the
developer was asked by staff to bring the lots back at least to
the tow of the slope. The plan was then reviewed by the Park and
Recreation Commission., who asked for the slopes to be dedicated
as well. Monk said that he had consulted with the City Attorney
and an appraiser and they agreed that the City would have to com-
pensate the developer for the loss of lots if the slopes were .
taken. Monk further explained that it was not unusual for slopes
to be included in lot area and the appraiser indicated this to be
reasonable.
.
.
.
Park and Recreation Commission Minutes
June 23, 1985
Page 2
Monk said that the developer is in favor of the easement and that
no credit or reduction in park dedication fees has been
discussed. He said that he felt it was reasonable to ask for the
southwest corner of Lot 1, Block 2 for a trail leading to Kerber
Boulevard, as this would not dramatically impact that lot.
Boyt asked if developers in the past have ever disagreed with a
land dedication request. Monk said that it is very common for
the developer to object land dedication when it involves the loss
of lots. He said that the City worked with the Chanhassen Hills
developer to determine the park land dedication as well.
McKay indicated that he could go along with the easement if the
City's trail rights were maintained. Lynch said that he was only
interested in owning what we can use.
Mady said that he was afraid that the conservation easement would
work fine for the first five years, but would be forgotten with
second and third owners of those lots. McKay asked if the
restrictions could be enforced.
Monk said that the easement would be recorded on each title of
property and can be enforced. Developing a landscape plan and
implementing it now will make that area very defined.
McKay asked if all the past recommendations would have to be
reinstated. Sietsema said no, only the recommendations regarding
the easement.
Jay Johnson, resident, asked if this easement would leave enough
back yard space for these lots. Monk said that it would be tight
in some cases, but it could work. Lynch indicated that this
could be a selling point as well.
Mr. Johnson indicated that the neighborhood was not against the
conservation easement.
McKay made a motion to recommend the following:
1. The City acquire the land around the pond from the
waterline to the 952 contour line.
2. The City prepare a park plan for Chanhassen Pond Park
with the aid of the DNR and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Ser-
vice that will preserve the slopes and promote wildlife
in the park.
3. The City establish a conservation easement from the 952
contour line to the top of the slopes that will allow
plantings and trails outlined in the park plan, and
restrict the placement of buildings or structures,
Park and Recreation Commission Minutes
June 23, 1986
Page 3
filling or grading, application of fertilizers or chemi-
cals, depositing waste or debris, and outside storage of
any kind.
4. The City allow no reduction in park dedication fees.
The motion was seconded by Rosenwald and carried unanimously.
Rosenwald moved to adjourn the meeting at 6:55 p.m. The motion
was seconded by Boyt and carried unanimously.
Prepared by: Lori Sietsema
June 26, 1986
.
.
.