PRC 2010 11 23CHANHASSEN PARK AND
RECREATION COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
NOVEMBER 23, 2010
Chairman Daniel called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT:
Jeff Daniel, Steve Scharfenberg, Tom Kelly, Scott Wendt, Glenn
Stolar, Elise Ryan and Cole Kelly
STAFF PRESENT:
Todd Hoffman, Park and Rec Director; and Jerry Ruegemer, Recreation
Superintendent;
APPROVAL OF AGENDA: Tom Kelly moved, Wendt seconded to approve the agenda
with two additions by Todd Hoffman under Public Announcements. All voted in favor and
the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 7 to 0.
PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENTS:
Hoffman: In addition to the tree lighting, which we’ll talk about under 5, we have Breakfast
th
with Santa which is the following day on the 5 and so that’s at the recreation center. And then
also if you need a Christmas tree visit the Lion’s Christmas tree lot. It opens up every year and
support the Lion’s and they’ll support your community.
Daniel: Excellent. Thank you Todd.
VISITOR PRESENTATIONS:
None.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Cole Kelly moved, Tom Kelly seconded to approve the
verbatim and summary Minutes of the Park and Recreation Commission meeting dated
October 26, 2010 as presented. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with
a vote of 7 to 0.
PROPOSED LAKEVIEW SUBDIVISION, LOCATED NORTHWEST OF THE
INTERSECTION OF LYMAN BOULEVARD AND LAKE RILEY BOULEVARD AND
SOUTH OF HIGHWAY 212: PRELIMINARY PLAT REVIEW, PARK AND TRAIL
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL. APPLICANT/OWNER: LENNAR/KLINGELHUTZ,
LLC.
Public Present:
Name Address
Joe Jablonski, Lennar Corporation 935 E. Wayzata Boulevard, Wayzata
Park and Recreation Commission Meeting - November 23, 2010
Hoffman: Thank you Chair Daniels and members of the commission. Lennar is proposing to
subdivide approximately 50 acres into 61 homes and 4 outlots. This is the John Klingelhutz,
LLC property. It’s, John’s held this property for a number of years in town and the City of
Chanhassen has worked with him throughout, there’s been some other development proposals in
the past. The Park and Rec Commission has had this on your radar for a possible neighborhood
park acquisition for quite some number of years so we’re glad to see Lennar back in here
working on the project. Mr. Joe Jablonski is here tonight representing Lennar. He’ll give a brief
introduction to the project and product that they’ll be putting out in the ground at this particular
site and then he’ll be able to answer any of your questions. We were just chatting before the
meeting. It’s good to see, Jerry and I did some project tours today and there’s lots of nail
pounding going on in the community. It’s kind of contagious. Chanhassen is known in the
metro area as one of those areas where new homes are still being built and that’s good for the
companies and it’s good for the customers. Those still looking for a new home can come to
Chanhassen and look at 4 or 5 different products in one location and you won’t find that. It’s
pretty unique to the Chanhassen area so we’re glad to see that happening. Again 66 homes. The
comprehensive park plan does identify that this neighborhood, you want to pull up the park
service area map there Jerry? It’s one of the few areas left in our community that will have
really a park deficient neighborhood setting right now. It’s an area located, do we have it on the
screen or is it coming up? There we go. Can you get a cursor up there and show them, yeah.
Right in that area. And so it’s generally the neighborhood to the east goes to Eden Prairie in the
Lakeside development and then right next door is the North Bay development and on the west is
the, some residential homes that currently exist and there’ll be some additional development in
that area sometime in the future. It’s bound on the north by the new Highway 212 and on the
south by Lyman Boulevard and the Springfield neighborhood, and so this is a neighborhood
which will run east to west in that area. That does not currently have a neighborhood park. The
closest access would be to Bandimere Community Park which would require that any residents
in this new neighborhood would have to walk through Springfield past the association parks and
then eventually make their way down to Bandimere so the Comprehensive Plan does call for a
neighborhood park to be located here and that again is to meet our ½ mile service area and so the
comp plan says there shall be a neighborhood park, or should be a neighborhood park within a
half mile of everyone’s front door within our community and then accessible to the trail and
sidewalk system to get to their, back and forth to their homes. So that’s the reason we have
looked at this site for a potential park site. We never really settled on the area but the way that
Lennar is working with us on is a very nice park setting. It has some good visibility to the
roadway. Good visibility to the Lyman Boulevard traffic and then also has a nice, natural setting
with some wooded areas and it will overlook on the wetland. So we have a, and then talking
about the trail plan. Again it’s our goal to connect each one of these neighborhoods to the City’s
comprehensive trail plan and we do that through a series of sidewalks that Lennar will put in this
proposed development and then they’ll go east and west over to the North Bay development to
the east and then west into the new developments that continue on and then you’ll walk right out
to Lyman Boulevard. You’ll cross at that intersection with Springfield Drive and then you’ll go
onto the public trail on the south side of Lyman Boulevard. And you can travel west to the park
and ride into the other trail system’s located along 101 and Bandimere or head east and
eventually once the Eden Prairie section of the trail is built, you’ll be able to go back underneath
Highway 212 and find your way up to the northern part of Chanhassen so the project is situated
nicely in the comprehensive trail plan. And then if you want to pull up a plat. Pull up part of the
2
Park and Recreation Commission Meeting - November 23, 2010
plat Jerry. At this time I’ll let Mr. Jablonski come up and explain the project and how the layout
works and the lots and.
Joe Jablonski: Thank you Mr. Hoffman:
Hoffman: You’re welcome.
Joe Jablonski: Good evening Mr. Chairman, members of the commission. My name is Joe
Jablonski, as Mr. Hoffman mentioned, representing Lennar tonight. What you see before you is
our proposal for the Lakeview property as described by Mr. Hoffman in the location. What we
have done to the northeast corner there is the North Bay community where it is a combination of
multi-family and a higher density type of product and then to the south is the Springfield
community. What we’ve done, or attempted to do is transition densities between the two. In
doing so we’ve maintained different lot sizes from 90 feet wide down to about 65 feet wide as
you get closer to Highway 212 as a nice transition between the two neighborhood uses. As far as
the site plan goes, I believe it is Outlot B would be the area that we’re looking at for parkland
right along Lyman Boulevard and it would be at the entrance of the community for us. We
definitely put park systems in a high regard for our neighborhoods and feel they are very
important and beneficial asset and I guess with that I’d be more than willing to answer any
questions you have. We’re excited to get going on it and as you mentioned, Mr. Hoffman
mentioned, the City of Chanhassen has seen some activity, which is very good and we’ve excited
to get back in with another neighborhood out here so. If you have any questions I’d be more
than happy to answer them.
Tom Kelly: I had a quick question. I know Lundgren was known for putting in their own parks,
pools or tennis courts into their developments. I’m curious why you aren’t doing that in this
development.
Joe Jablonski: Really two reasons. One, the neighborhood or the city neighborhood type park
would be one of them. Two, they seem to work better on a little bit higher lot count prior to
association type parks and that work really well if you can get it in the 100 plus lot count range
and this is at 66 so. And rather than trying to force in a private type of park into a setting where
maybe it isn’t necessarily appropriate with the other parks and trails around, we made the
decision at least on this one to, to not do that and to just use the city park system.
Daniel: Okay, thank you Tom. Elise.
Ryan: Two questions. When do you anticipate the neighborhood being completely built out and
have you sold any lots to date or are you not even in that stage?
Joe Jablonski: Yeah, we’re not in that stage yet. We are still going through the entitlement type
process. We have scheduled for Planning Commission I believe in the second week, Tuesday in
December and then it will be to council with the anticipation of starting development work
hopefully in the spring of 2011. We have not sold anything in there yet so.
Ryan: Okay, thank you.
3
Park and Recreation Commission Meeting - November 23, 2010
Joe Jablonski: If everything goes according to plan our projections are that it would be about a 3
to 4 year build-out once we get started on it and that’s a little difficult to predict in today’s
economy but that’s kind of what we’re looking at.
Daniel: Cole.
Ryan: Could I ask one more question?
Daniel: Oh go ahead. Please.
Ryan: Sorry. And so if it’s a 3 year, 4 year build-out, do we, is it, does the park go in right away
or when does the park build-out kind of get phased in?
Hoffman: That’s up to the park commission and the capital improvement budgeting process.
Ryan: Okay.
Hoffman: With the neighborhoods starting, we would want to start the parks and get things
going so we have some activity there for the new residents and you’ll have to work on that as
part of your CIP process.
Joe Jablonski: If I may add to that, we would certainly appreciate or support anything that we
can to get the park going up front and get going on it right away. It’s definitely an asset for the
neighborhood.
Ryan: Thank you.
Cole Kelly: So Joe am I hearing that we’re still waiting on approval from the City Council
before you can move on anything?
Joe Jablonski: Correct.
Cole Kelly: And it looks like you also need some zoning change.
Joe Jablonski: Yes, that is correct. Right now it is, I don’t recall what the classification is. It’s
typically.
Hoffman: RSF.
Joe Jablonski: R1 or RSF which would be a standard 80 foot wide, does that sound familiar?
Type of lot configuration. Because we’re going with a little bit different approach with a little
bit smaller lots in some cases, we did need to do a zoning adjustment with that.
Cole Kelly: And have you talked with any of the City Council people, did you get a feel for how
they feel on that?
4
Park and Recreation Commission Meeting - November 23, 2010
Joe Jablonski: Just at a staff level we have. I’ve not directly spoken with the council.
Cole Kelly: What are the staff people?
Joe Jablonski: They are at this point supporting it as a transitional type of density use.
Cole Kelly: Okay. And are you looking at us to make a recommendation on that also to the City
Council?
Hoffman: No.
Cole Kelly: No, we don’t do that?
Hoffman: No, it starts here for parks and trails and then the recommendation will go to the
Planning Commission. They’ll deal with the zoning and then it goes to City Council so your
recommendation has to do with the comprehensive park and trail plan and then planning will
deal with their issues and then all those get in the packet that will go to the City Council.
Cole Kelly: Okay. Thank you Joe.
Daniel: Glenn.
Stolar: Which area are you going to do first? Which part of the development?
Joe Jablonski: We would start coming off of Lyman Boulevard and like we do the.
Stolar: So the area by the park first?
Joe Jablonski: Correct. That would be our primary or first entrance and then we’d work our way
north and then eventually out to the east there to I believe it’s North Bay Boulevard or.
Stolar: You’re building the road out, correct?
Joe Jablonski: Correct.
Stolar: So you’ll put the sidewalk in at that same time so we’ll have at least that connection
there. And then would they be, and this is more for you Todd. Would they also be some, would
we have them put in the parking lot to the park or that would be part of the whole park
development?
Hoffman: Probably have the curb cut put in and then depending on where we’re at with the site
plan on the park we would probably build that as a part of our development of the park. Or
actual construction of the parking lot.
Daniel: Thank you Glenn. Tom.
5
Park and Recreation Commission Meeting - November 23, 2010
Tom Kelly: I do have one more. Is there going to be an association? Was there going to be an
association like Springfield is?
Joe Jablonski: It won’t be quite the same as Springfield because it won’t have, we’re not
proposing the same type of amenities with the pool structures and things like that. We will have
some type of restrictive covenants to protect property values and that type of thing. We’re still
looking at potentially an entrance monument or some common area type of shared cost or shared
amenity in the center island that comes in off of Lyman Boulevard but it would be minimal
compared by Springfield.
Tom Kelly: And I’ve got a couple more questions. I’m pointing, what you can’t see. The lots 1
through 12, those are going to be single family homes that kind of go along the wetlands.
Joe Jablonski: Sure, yep.
Tom Kelly: And then is everything else going to be, when you say high density, are these
duplexes or?
Joe Jablonski: No, they’re all single family detached homes.
Tom Kelly: Okay, they’re smaller detached.
Joe Jablonski: Just a little bit smaller lots.
Tom Kelly: Okay. Okay.
Hoffman: If you’re familiar with the Preserve, now called Serenity.
Tom Kelly: Yep.
Hoffman: Similar to that.
Tom Kelly: Okay.
Hoffman: The Degler property south of Lyman Boulevard.
Daniel: Okay.
Hoffman: Those are 60 foot wide lots so these are actually a little bit larger but have a similar
product.
Stolar: Can I ask another quick question? The 1 through 12 that’s along the wetlands there, the
homeowners association is also going to have some covenants related to limitations there on
them being able to go further into the wetlands area, correct? I thought I read that.
6
Park and Recreation Commission Meeting - November 23, 2010
Joe Jablonski: There will be like, let’s see. I believe we were proposing a conservation
easement over everything outside of the lot lines.
Hoffman: When it’s designed like that where the lots don’t go out into the wetland it’s much
easier to control what goes on in the wetland so the ownership actually comes back to the City
for Outlot A so.
Stolar: So we’ll own that including the areas right behind those property lines?
Hoffman: Correct.
Stolar: Because is this wetland, it’s shown as being a permanently with water kind of. Is it
always?
Hoffman: Yes.
Stolar: Okay. Because that will be a nice amenity with the park as you walk around.
Hoffman: Beautiful, yeah.
Stolar: So we want to make sure we preserve that.
Hoffman: Yeah. It’s a DNR protected wetland.
Stolar: Okay, good.
Tom Kelly: I do have one more question, sorry. Is this the only property in Chanhassen that
wouldn’t have a neighborhood park?
Joe Jablonski: I believe Lake Harrison, which we are involved in technically doesn’t at this time.
Tom Kelly: Okay.
Daniel: They’re waiting for that water treatment plant to go in. Scott.
Wendt: No. Don’t have any questions. Beautiful site out there. We toured it. Had a good look
at it. Good space for the park along the road.
Scharfenberg: Would there be any reason not to take the additional 1.75 acres and just have the
3.08 acres?
Hoffman: I would not recommend that. The 4.75 that we’re at, or 78 that we’re at is on the, it’s
actually outside the range that the comp plan says should be acquired for a neighborhood park so
it’s substandard already. It’s smaller than we would recommend as an acquisition but it’s a little
bit larger than what we started at. They had some homes on that side of the road which just
7
Park and Recreation Commission Meeting - November 23, 2010
didn’t work well with how the, then the park would be behind the homes so acquiring the full
site I think would benefit not only the site but all the users into the future.
Scharfenberg: That’s all I have.
Daniel: Okay, thank you Steve. First comment, ironically I ran into somebody who was just
talking about that yesterday or lives right across the street from where it’s going to be developed
and they’re ecstatic by the fact that this is going to be happening so I mean it’s not only going to
serve obviously more of your Lakeview but I think obviously there’s other neighbors now that
are really going to be enjoy the park so that’s, that’ll be good to see this coming. Now what is
the average price of the home, or what is the price range going to be that you guys are
proposing?
Joe Jablonski: Our preliminary market research we’re looking at the stuff closer to 212 probably
being just shy of $400,000 all the way up to mid 5’s probably along the back of the wetland so
you know an average price probably mid 400’s. Something around there. Again it’s a little
difficult to predict right now but that’s kind of what we’re looking at based on our market
research.
Daniel: Okay, and Todd as far as the design that I see within the, as recommended in Lakeview
neighborhood park, is that something that’s just preliminary right now and certainly could
change?
Hoffman: Jerry can pull it up. It’s just a concept to show what could happen on this site.
Ruegemer: With the park concept?
Hoffman: Yep. We want to make sure that for the commission and the council that it’s
something that is viable as park acreage and certainly 4.7 or where are we at? 4.83 acres, there
are smaller parks than that. Carver Beach Park and some of the mature neighborhoods in our
community, but this allows for an open field. A little walk in loop. Playground. Half course
basketball. All the amenities that people really desire in a neighborhood park. Someplace to, a
destination that they can walk to with their families and meet their neighbors. Socialize and
make their way back home and have a pleasant experience and again it’s a combination of some
active areas and then the very nice wooded wetland edge that will allow for some pleasant walks
throughout this neighborhood area.
Daniel: Okay.
Hoffman: So that’s conceptual. You’ll work on it with the future neighbors to finalize a plan
and prior to any park being built in our community a proposed master plan has to be finalized.
Recommended by the park board and then approved by the City Council.
Daniel: Now as far as, just so I can or at least give us an idea preliminarily. Best guess. What
will be, from a CIP standpoint our responsibility from a cost standpoint?
8
Park and Recreation Commission Meeting - November 23, 2010
Hoffman: To develop the park?
Daniel: Yep.
Hoffman: Well it depends on how you stage it but, and who builds what. You could do a
neighborhood build on the playground. You could build it yourself and so you’re going to start
at a quarter million dollars and go up from there.
Daniel: Okay, good.
Stolar: But that doesn’t include the land. The private land we have to purchase.
Hoffman: Correct, no. That’s in addition to that.
Stolar: And that would be, we have to figure out what that is. Or was it in here?
Hoffman: Yeah, it’s going to be in the, somewhere in the $200,000 range for the additional
property.
Stolar: And then for the sidewalks, because they’re putting in sidewalks we don’t have any trails
that we have to do for that. For the development itself, nor around the.
Hoffman: Other than the.
Stolar: The trail in the park.
Hoffman: A trail loop would be built with the park correct.
Scharfenberg: With the existing wetland, is that that wetland that just sits to the west of North
Bay right now?
Hoffman: Yep.
Scharfenberg: Right off of Lyman.
Hoffman: Okay. As you’re driving around Lyman, once you kind of get around the corner you
can look back and see it.
Scharfenberg: Right.
Hoffman: It takes up a lot of the site but it’s, it’s really one of the selling points of the property.
It isolates the homes and gives some buffer and some beautiful views back down to the wetland
and then over the lake.
Stolar: The acreage we’re talking about doesn’t include the wetland though does it? It’s
separate from the outlot correct?
9
Park and Recreation Commission Meeting - November 23, 2010
Hoffman: Correct.
Stolar: Okay.
Daniel: I think that’s all I have as well.
Stolar: In that regard we’re getting a bigger park basically when you add in the wetland.
Hoffman: You add in the wetland you’ve got a very large park, yeah. Or at least a parks and
open space area.
Stolar: Open space, yeah. I’m sorry.
Daniel: Okay. Is there anything else for Mr. Jablonski?
Scharfenberg: Is there any way we can dove tail access onto Lake Riley from the north? You’ve
kind of got that existing area the other side of Lyman fenced off right now anyway.
Daniel: Alright. Joe, thank you very much. Appreciate your time.
Joe Jablonski: Thank you for having me.
Hoffman: So again the recommendation to the commission is that the City, that the Park
Commission recommend that the City Council apply the following conditions of approval to the
Lennar plat concerning parks and trails for Lakeview. Did I hear it may be renamed, is that true?
Joe Jablonski: Correct.
Hoffman: Alright. So it might be something else in the future but it’s called Lakeview for the
moment, and that would be successful of Outlot B which is 4.83+ acres to the City of
Chanhassen and that would be through a combination of park dedication, which is based off of a
formula. 3.5 residents per homes times the 66 homes and then 1 acre, standard of 1 acre per 75
residents.
Tom Kelly: So roughly what would that, what would the 3.08 park dedication funds come out to
be?
Hoffman: What would they be?
Tom Kelly: If we didn’t do this, didn’t take the land, what money would that be?
Hoffman: 66 times $5,800. So that’s a significant amount of money.
Tom Kelly: It is a significant amount of money.
10
Park and Recreation Commission Meeting - November 23, 2010
Hoffman: And the developer would pay that, so they would pay, if this park was not being
acquired they would be paying $5,800 per home in a park dedication charge and, but again by
the comp plan, the comp plan says you’re either going to take one or the other. Comp plan
identifies this area as park deficient so by the comp plan we should be using those dedication
abilities to acquire the park. So that 3.08 acres, plus or minus, and then the fee purchase of 1.75
acres for the development and use as a public neighborhood park. Again I think the purchase
price is going to be somewhere right around $200,000. That will be negotiated as we move
through the process. It’ll be presented to the City Council. The current fund balance in the park
dedication fund is $2.74 million and again as a commission you’re sitting here faced with a
recommendation from staff that shows another $200,000 expenditure for park acquisition which
is not currently budgeted in the CIP. It has been budgeted on again, off again for the past 15
years and so we went historically back and looked at the CIP. I think there was a $400,000
number in the CIP for the Klingelhutz acquisition and then that fluctuated up and down and then
it was pulled out when the development market went flat and that money went elsewhere. The
commission felt like you know why should we keep that placeholder in there for X number of
years. I mean we don’t know when this will happen. I think we’re in a great position with the
rejuvenation of the market here in our community to put these things back into place. I can, this
has been on the drawing boards, we pulled up the Klingelhutz file, you’d see park plans going
back to the late 80’s probably, early 90’s on this site so. They were in different areas. They may
have been in this area. I know there was one towards the center of the park at one time. So
that’s the recommendation. Obviously you would then be re-working your CIP for the coming
years. You have not only Pioneer Pass Park to look forward to as a development project but then
you would also have this park yet to be named in this particular location. So staff will be happy
to answer any addition questions of the commission and look forward to your recommendation.
Tom Kelly: I have a, if I can raise a concern. Lundgren typically, when Lennar typically builds
parks in their neighborhoods, I live in a Lundgren area neighborhood, that helps the home values
to have the park. My, and maybe it’s not a valid concern. My concern is that the fact that we’re
taking on this park that I feel that in the past Lundgren, Lennar has already done so we’re losing
$5,800 times 66 homes plus another $200,000 to build the park that if we didn’t come in I would
think Lundgren would probably, granted it would not be a, it wouldn’t be a Chanhassen park but
it would still be a park. I would think that Lundgren would do something with this space to help
the home values in that neighborhood so I just don’t know, so I guess that’s the concern I have.
Are we spending money and not getting money to help the builder with the price of their homes
when they would actually go in and do this if we chose not to take the land.
Hoffman: Yeah. We didn’t have that conversation. It really never came up. The one challenge
there is that, like Mr. Jablonski talked about, you have a low lot count. You build an association
park for 66 and that’s still, then that cuts out the other two halves of the neighborhood and so you
have the other people that are headed to the east and then they don’t have access to a public park.
And the people that would be to the west would not have access to a public park so you would be
telling those people then, you have to walk across the street and go through Springfield to get to
Bandimere to get to your public park so.
Tom Kelly: Right.
11
Park and Recreation Commission Meeting - November 23, 2010
Hoffman: So that I think is one of the benefits of having this as a public parks and open space is
that it’s open to all.
Tom Kelly: I’m just raising, I’m just doing the counter point.
Hoffman: Absolutely.
Tom Kelly: Considering where our funds are right now in the park dedication funds and it’s not
with the $200,000 we’re paying but it’s the significant amount of money that we wouldn’t be
taking in. We haven’t taken in a significant amount of money in a while.
Hoffman: It’s a real issue. Association parks came on in the earlier 90’s, mid 90’s maybe and
that’s long term there’s always that risk of those going away as well. We have a history of that
in our community already. Two of our neighborhood parks, Carver Beach. Both Carver Beach
parks and the Greenwood Shores Park both started as association properties which at some point
in the future the residents no longer wanted to care for or pay for and so they were then given
over to the City. And that can happen to association parks 20, 30, 40 years down the line
whereas a public park space once it’s acquired, people have that trust in that value that it’s
always going to be a public park space. But it’s a valid, the financial and resources that it’s
going to take to acquire and develop this is a real factor.
Scharfenberg: So the money that we would need to purchase this we would have to put in the
2011 CIP.
Hoffman: Correct.
Scharfenberg: Okay. But that doesn’t necessarily mean the developing money, it’s going to be
over $200,000 because you’re going to have to then purchase equipment and other things to put
in there. That can be done over several years if we want to in terms of getting that park up to
speed.
Hoffman: Yes.
Scharfenberg: And you’re approximating $200,000 for that additional 1.75?
Hoffman: Correct. It’ll be right in that area.
Scharfenberg: Okay.
Daniel: And we certainly can make the determination once we move forward. Once the project
moves forward and obviously we do want to tie it, and I think it just makes sense at the time of
development though but what type of amenities do we want to allocate towards the park. I mean
whether it be a full ground playground set to just a basketball court and some parking lots. Just
some open space right at you know the beginning so I would agree, there’s certainly a lot of
things we need to take into consideration because you know the park alone, just the playground
equipment alone is going to be $65,000 or more, correct?
12
Park and Recreation Commission Meeting - November 23, 2010
Hoffman: (Yes.)
Daniel: So.
Hoffman: One thing as a commission, we’ve kind of been out of the park development business
for probably 10 years so I think this is you know new ground for this particular group. We’ve
been building a lot of trails. For about 10 years we built almost exclusively parks. In fact as you
know Pioneer, that acquisition of that neighborhood park was the first acquisition in 15 years so
there was a rapid period of park development. Acquisition and development and now these two,
this may in fact be our last neighborhood park acquisition in the city. It depends on how the
center of our community with Prince’s property and Gorra’s properties develops but we’re
getting towards the tail end of our park acquisition for neighborhood parks.
Stolar: Todd so around this, how many undeveloped areas are around this park that would fall
into the park service area?
Hoffman: All of the undeveloped property would then be to the west. It’s the horse farms. The
Chadwick property and those particular areas. The road that heads off to the, the stub road there
will go to those properties.
Stolar: So the intention there would be those areas, when they develop, would just pay us the
fees and then get this park as their service?
Hoffman: Correct. And there could be another 30 or 40 homes.
Tom Kelly: That’s to the west?
Hoffman: To the west.
Scharfenberg: You know there’s that, Tom there’s that, that fields that abut up against 212
where those homes are up against Lyman.
Tom Kelly: Yep. Yep.
Stolar: And then the developments that are around there that didn’t get a park, they paid their
fees but then we didn’t build anything.
Hoffman: Correct.
Daniel: Alright, any other discussion? Or questions.
Stolar: Just one other thing on the whole, the sidewalks throughout the development there and
along the park. If that were to change, would this change then our recommendation on the, if
they change their lot, how they lay it out with their discussion as they go along if they don’t put
13
Park and Recreation Commission Meeting - November 23, 2010
in the sidewalks? My biggest concern is I want to make sure that that trail along the park there
that connects in would.
Hoffman: That will stay.
Stolar: That will stay.
Hoffman: And sidewalks are a part of the zoning code. One of the requirements of the
subdivision of a plat so it’s just a requirement that sidewalks go in to allow for pedestrian.
Stolar: Don’t those get varied out every once in a while?
Hoffman: Not anymore.
Stolar: Not anymore because of an ordinance…
Hoffman: Yeah. For a period of time in our history, the council was not in favor of sidewalks
and so yeah, some neighborhoods, Chanhassen Hills.
Stolar: Mine.
Hoffman: Yep, your neighborhood did not have sidewalks and, but that is no longer. We had a
few years in the middle when they didn’t build sidewalks and primarily what we hear is from
parents that, it’s both for access to the trail system and neighbor’s houses and other things but
school busing. Safe access to a school bus stop when the kids have to walk in the street,
especially during the snow times when the snow piles are high that they just don’t feel there’s
enough safety there for the kids to get to the school bus stop. That’s why they favor those
sidewalks.
Ryan: And one, just to clarify. So with this recommendation all we’re saying is that we’d be
willing to purchase this land but it doesn’t necessarily mean we have to do anything to the land.
Okay.
Hoffman: Once you own it it’s up to the commission to decide what your development schedule
is. Like Mr. Jablonski said, if I was a developer, if I was a homeowner moving in I’d certainly
like to see a park going up for my investment in the community so, based on the investment that
they’re making in the community and each individual homeowner’s going to make, one house in
here is going to cost more than the initial phase of the development of this park and so I’m not
going to say that I’m going to recommend we wait around for 3 or 4 years. My recommendation
would be to get it started and start building the park so as people drive in to look at a home they
can see that they have a neighborhood park to take their family to.
Stolar: That was part of the reason why as they were putting in that road I was thinking, couldn’t
they just put in the parking lot too for us?
Hoffman: Yep, we could do that.
14
Park and Recreation Commission Meeting - November 23, 2010
Stolar: Then you have the parking lot there. You have the nature area there that people could
walk in once they put in the sidewalk and now you’ve got people walking in there. There’s
parking and so enjoy it.
Daniel: That was actually the same thoughts I had as well. I mean in regards to, I mean the
parking lot at a minimum. I mean that’s why when it comes down to it, I mean obviously we
will need to have something concrete when they move forward with their plan with what the park
plan is going to be as well. So that’ll happen in conjunction so that’s why I was hoping at least
at some point, if this is a conceptual or if this is going to, if this was part of the master plan for
the layout of the park itself.
Hoffman: It’s all conceptual. There is going to be some site grading that’s going to have to take
place. There’s been some filling on this property and it will be, the site will come down and kind
of be squashed out to allow for that open play field and the other amenities.
Daniel: Okay.
Scharfenberg: So is there anything that we would take out of 2011 or would just this be added
in? I mean I know that’s our decision.
Hoffman: Yeah there’d be some things pushed out most likely.
Daniel: Well I don’t know. I mean we’ve got some major commitments going in 2011 as well.
Scharfenberg: Well I know that. Yeah I understand that.
Daniel: I agree with you Steve.
Scharfenberg: Not knowing what’s on the, again what’s on there for 2011.
Cole Kelly: What did you say the money was coming in for CIP for development costs?
Hoffman: $5,800.
Cole Kelly: $5,800, okay.
Hoffman: That’s the current park fee. That will, that park charge will most likely go down for
2011 and approximately 20% because of the current property values within the community.
Those park charges are based on land values and currently they’re based off of $125,000 land
value and that will probably come down closer to the $100,000 range based on the two most
recent sales that we’ve…
Cole Kelly: So we’re looking at income roughly of about $350,000 over a 3 to 4 year period?
For the CIP.
15
Park and Recreation Commission Meeting - November 23, 2010
Stolar: They have to pay it up front.
Tom Kelly: Yeah.
Cole Kelly: Oh they do.
Tom Kelly: It’d be $382,000 income.
Cole Kelly: Okay.
Stolar: At final plat or something they pay it.
Hoffman: Correct.
Cole Kelly: Okay.
Hoffman: You know the whole land versus cash thing, again it’s been around with the
commission for many years. Bandimere was acquired for 6 ½ thousand dollars an acre. The
original acquisition of Bandimere and Lennar offered us $45,000 an acre back when Springfield
was being developed. In this room and the commission for a moment was hesitating on whether
or not they should sell Bandimere Park, or make a recommendation to the council to sell that
parkland to Lennar for development. A few minutes later they came to their senses and said well
what are we going to do with our $44,000? Where are we going to go buy a new park for the
community so they rejected that offer and built Bandimere Community Park.
Cole Kelly: Now is this $382,000, was that in our CIP already?
Hoffman: No.
Stolar: We had like $250,000 total income for 2011 or something.
Cole Kelly: Yeah, that’s what I thought. I don’t have the numbers in front of me so.
Daniel: I think most of them are income that we’re looking at I assume Todd is coming from
commercial. What’s left in commercial.
Hoffman: And some residential properties that are still. Back when you studied the income, the
big $2.2 million dollar spike in 02 or whenever it occurred was because formerly park dedication
fees were paid one-third at the time of the plat and then two-thirds at the time of building permits
so you had this trickle in effect over a period of time. But the accounting just became too
cumbersome to track all of those one-third/two-thirds lots across our community and so the
council said well we’re going to charge it all up front at the time of development. It’s a pass
through charge to the homeowner and so if you’re charging the $5,800, they’re going to pass that
cost through to the homeowner and then it’s the City’s responsibility to invest that money in
parks and recreation and trail services in the community. Now it’s all up front so we had the big
spike in park dedication revenues but now things are going to slow down because we don’t
16
Park and Recreation Commission Meeting - November 23, 2010
collect them over time. We collect them all up front. And if you take the land instead of cash
then you’re not seeing that revenue stream coming into the park.
Daniel: Steve to answer your question, we are committed I do believe next year Todd for close
to $650,000 before the Highway 41 project, correct?
Hoffman: (Yes.)
Daniel: So I think that’s all we had.
Stolar: Then there was the one other park acquisition.
Hoffman: Pioneer Pass.
Stolar: Pioneer Pass.
Daniel: That’s right.
Stolar: Of about 400 did you say Todd?
Hoffman: No, $286,000 and that money was wired over to the closing last Friday.
Daniel: So it would actually go in 2010 wouldn’t it?
Hoffman: Yeah it’s spent and at the $2.74 million as of today’s budget does include the
reduction for that park acquisition that took place last Friday.
Stolar: I thought there was another big thing that we had for 2011.
Daniel: We probably moved it.
Stolar: Yeah we probably did. That’s true.
Daniel: Honestly I think the only thing we had going for next year is the Highway 41 and I think
Pioneer Pass is just something that we discussed this past fall just because of the recent
developments so any new CIP commitments that we’re going to have is going to be, our hand’s
going to be played as someone else more so than what we’re going to make a decision on so I
mean which is understandable given the opportunities but and Tom to what you’re saying about
Lundgren as well, or at least with Lennar, that was the first thing I thought as well. Well Lennar
they’re going to be building their own park.
Tom Kelly: Right. I think if we don’t acquire this land they’re, I would believe that they would
fill that void. They’re not going to build 66 houses and not have some type of a public amenity
there.
Daniel: Well I think.
17
Park and Recreation Commission Meeting - November 23, 2010
Wendt: Maybe send them to Springfield.
Tom Kelly: Yeah.
Daniel: Yeah. No, I do believe…but I do believe it’s going to provide some value. It’s going
to provide value I mean for those over on Lake Riley. Steve I think it’s going to be a benefit for
you and your family or if at the time, you’re off Lake Riley aren’t you?
Scharfenberg: No.
Daniel: Oh, I’m sorry. But I mean it’s going to provide some value to a number of families and
like I coincidentally actually talked to somebody just, who I met through a mutual friend and this
topic came up based off where she lived so.
Wendt: It’s a great spot for a park. It’s beautiful down there.
Daniel: It is. And you know really what we’re looking at is spending $450,000 compared to
acquiring $363,000. Or $382,000.
Hoffman: And to Commissioner Stolar’s, he started to get at it I think a little bit when you
talked about the future. You know you’re looking after future residents. The neighborhood that
I can speak to I think is the, what’s the, I call it the Weather Ball neighborhood. What’s the
official name of that one?
Scharfenberg: Valley Ridge? Yeah.
Hoffman: Valley Ridge? They’re still upset today with staff, with the commission, with the
council that a park did not land on that side of the road. And the commission struggled with that.
It’s a similar sized development. You know maybe 60 or 70 homes and the commission said
well should we acquire parkland over here? It’s not in a park deficient area because there’s
Power Hill Park across the road. It’s in the service area but you have Audubon Road as a major
crossing point and so today we still hear that you know it’s a great neighborhood but they have
the wetland trail but to get to a real park they’ve got to cross Audubon and get all the way over to
Powers and so if you don’t provide those public amenities you know people feel that. Not just
today but into the future as they continue, those neighborhoods continue to expand and mature
and people come in and study the City’s comp plan. There can be some issues if we don’t carry
out what we said we were going to do with our public services.
Stolar: I like the park. I like the idea but to play on Tom’s point which is just collect the money
right now, they have to do something, right? Either they’re going to be impacted by the decrease
value because there is no park or they’re going to build a park and to me there’s a logical
compromise which I don’t know all the legal ramifications which is just donate all the land.
We’ll build the park. Donate all the land. The money we save by not buying that acreage we
can build a park. Right, 250. 250. Same deal. Then they get the park. They get the increased
housing value. We get to build a park without buying land and building the park so, I mean I
18
Park and Recreation Commission Meeting - November 23, 2010
think that that’s, in today’s times when we have to watch our budget too, that’s something to
think about right. The land, when we make that commitment right we’ll, because right now what
we may do is we’ll, if we buy land we may do nothing with this. Then you’ve got a plot of land
that’s not a park. Right. And depending on the budget as we look at it so, you know my
question is in today’s times I would like to see this go forward but I kind of, you know to the
point you’re making, kind of thinking if they donated the land then we’d use that money we save
and build a park. Everybody wins. Versus us just saying we’ll take the money and not have a
park.
Daniel: And not incur the cost for development.
Stolar: Not incurring the cost, right. And you know I understand it’s not, you know it’s a great
land piece but it’s you know we’ve got to balance that with some of the other things that people
want in the various park areas and it’s not all that far from Bandimere. It’s not easy but it’s not
all that far. I don’t know.
Wendt: So how would that work? Would they just be able to build houses and not spot that,
there could be a, I mean that’s kind of going on the assumption that there would be a park in that
same spot. Couldn’t they fit in some lots there and build some houses and put a small park with
a pool back in the you know by that retaining wall or something like that? You’re back in the
middle of the neighborhood.
Stolar: They could. Then we could collect the money on that and then we’d go use that money
to, I understand we may not have another option like this out there but it is tough with you know
the fact that we aren’t going to see much more money coming in.
Hoffman: Well that’s not, that’s not totally true. Remember when we studied the long term park
dedication and we’re estimating anywhere between 19 and 26 million approximately over the life
of our community so you’re going to see another $20 million in park dedication funds.
Stolar: But I’m talking not for this area though. There’s not much more around, right around
there, correct?
Hoffman: No but park funds are collected city wide and used in the totality of the system so
there’s, the fund’s not generating a great deal of money now but there is revenue left to come in
and it’s just, without the land you don’t have any ability. It’s one of those things where you can
buy new playgrounds for existing parks you know for the next 100 years with park dedication
funds or when that runs out with capital improvement funds but if you don’t have the property to
start with you’re really, you’re in one of those situations. Again back to the Valley Ridge
neighborhood where they said… One thing to remember, Lennar paid for this property that
we’re acquiring, we’re getting 3.08 acres of it through dedication and purchasing the other 1.75.
I think we’re in a position to buy it at a fair price. It would be something where we’re going to
pay the same thing they paid to acquire the property. The same type of arrangement we had with
the other folks over on Pioneer Pass so with the Ryland Group. I understand the concern about
the cash but again the total scope of the development of the City’s park and trail fund, park and
trail system, it’s a reasonable expenditure and it’s obviously if we take a look at where our
19
Park and Recreation Commission Meeting - November 23, 2010
development’s been over the past 4 or 5 years we’re talking dollars for acquisition of half of
what they were 4 or 5 years ago so I think it’s fairly reasonable recommendation for the
commission.
Cole Kelly: Todd when does the City Council need to make a decision on this for development
to start when it should?
Hoffman: When they have to?
Cole Kelly: Decision.
Hoffman: That’s up to them.
Cole Kelly: You know I’m wondering if we could get a better look at CIP numbers and table
this for a month. You know does that throw things off dramatically?
Hoffman: It throws this schedule off. If you want to look at CIP numbers we can bring those
down this evening if that’s an issue or you want to re-work the CIP to see where this is going to
go. Things are obviously going to get bumped out. The trail projects that are currently in 012
may go to 013 or 014 but again the CIP is changed annually for the past 25 years.
Cole Kelly: Right. No I understand that.
Hoffman: People set priorities and.
Cole Kelly: Well I think it’s easier to try to make a decision when you can see all the numbers.
Well this is what we had you know. I’m seeing any numbers.
Hoffman: Sure.
Cole Kelly: And it makes it a little more difficult.
Hoffman: You want to grab my CIP book.
Daniel: You know Todd to be honest with you as well, I’m intrigued by Glenn’s thought process
as far as our position of, and I hate to use the word leverage because we bring it up and…but
we’ve, you know is there a compromise to, in order for us to expedite this process for
committing CIP dollars for development of the park, is there going to be a compromise and you
mentioned that we’re looking at a fair market value for the property that we’re looking to
purchase but something that we could further negotiate to expedite this process that would
benefit both the new residents within the Lennar development as well as the City from a cost
standpoint, cost savings standpoint for the acquisition of the additional land. I guess I would like
to have a little more discussion on that because I think it is intriguing and looking at an extra
$200,000, if there’s some sort of compromise that we might be able to do to reduce that. Again I
know we’re talking general figures now and you know nothing is specific but you know, I think
there’s something there that we can further discuss. I’m not certainly trying to delay anything
20
Park and Recreation Commission Meeting - November 23, 2010
but I think it certainly is intriguing from, at least from my standpoint. I don’t know how other
commissioners feel that. If that’s.
Wendt: I think for $200,000…piece of property for a park for.
Daniel: For 1.7 acres. 1.8 acres. And you know again that’s the going rate.
Wendt: Plus the rest of it.
Daniel: But I guess from our standpoint let’s have a further discussion where if we’re able to
come to a good compromise possibly on something of that level then maybe we could, then it
might become more palatable for not only the commission. It might be more palatable for the
neighborhood. I think everything. I think it could be a winner for everybody then because I
agree, I mean if we have to make this commitment, something comes up. As you always say
Todd, a great deal comes up as well that we certainly did take a look at. I hate to see that land
sitting there and becoming nothing more than a field which.
Ryan: To that point could we, in the negotiation process spend the $200,000 to purchase the
land but then on the back end have Lennar/Lundgren purchase, help in the purchase of
equipment or basketball courts or whatever on the back end where we’re taking you know
charge, you know purchasing the land but they come to the table with the purchasing of.
Daniel: Parking lot. Trail. That it’s laid out. Grading. I mean then I mean really all we’re
responsible for is a basketball, then we can start looking at basketball courts, trees, playground
equipment, seeding, maintenance, stuff like that. I mean again I think there’s something there
for us to do that and then certainly if it helps us offset and be fiscally responsible, I don’t know.
I think it’s a good idea. I think there’s more that we could do to discuss and that’s just my
thoughts. Steve, what do you think?
Scharfenberg: I’m quiet. Just listening. Just in listening mode.
Daniel: Okay.
Scharfenberg: But I guess to this point I think we need to as a commission be consistent in terms
of what the plan is as Todd has spoken to that. I don’t think again staff would make this
recommendation without you know having put thought into this. And we did pass approval of
purchase of that parkland in Pioneer Pass so you know to that extent I think we need to remain
consistent and follow the Comprehensive Plan you know so.
Daniel: Very good point. Very good point.
Hoffman: The thought may be intriguing but from a staff’s perspective it’s a formula we use.
Formula we use for acquisitions and so we just got through with a negotiation with Ryland where
we applied this very same approach and now we have Lennar sitting in the room and you say you
want to take another $200,000 out of their checkbook so as a staff member I’m not sure where I
start that negotiation. It’s not something that I’m going to represent. I think Lennar has come to
21
Park and Recreation Commission Meeting - November 23, 2010
the table. Any developer would rather build homes. They can make more money on building
homes then they can dedicating the park and so we’ve been happy with them to this point for
working with us on removing those houses on that side of the road. Coming to the table with the
best possible park plan. Offering up the dedication and then working on us with a, they’d like
more than fair market value for their land but we’re not willing to offer it and we think it’s fair
that we all work together. We pay them what they paid the property owner and then we move
forward with our park development and so I think it’s really an all or nothing thing. If the
commission’s not interested in building a park here then you make that recommendation to
council. Or we go ahead and move forward with a recommendation to acquire the park and work
in the CIP.
Stolar: And Todd to that point, I mean I think I brought this up in other situations where you
know either in the overall fees, which I understand they’re high for the developers per house for
you know the CIP. The park dedication fees but when we look at the values that these things add
to the houses, and I think Tom you and I both have brought this up before in numerous settings
so I don’t think we’re picking particularly on this one.
Tom Kelly: Right.
Stolar: But, and I understand what you’re saying Todd. We just approved one, and Steve.
Scharfenberg: Yeah.
Stolar: One way. I just, I think we’ve said this multiple times. We just, we need to look at, even
though our fees are comparable to market, the value part of it, it doesn’t seem to get included in
these discussions. The values to the developers…
Hoffman: But the real challenge in that is then, you’re going to try to extract that value out of
these 66 houses and when you cross the line to the next property and you take their $5,800
you’re not taking their $5,800 plus a kicker of another $1,000 because they’ve got access to this
park and so you’re really unfairly trying to treat these 66 homes in this particular neighborhood.
Daniel: In comparison to what, to a standard that we applied when we did work with Ryland.
Hoffman: Correct.
Scharfenberg: Well and it’s not only those 66 homes but it’s all of North Bay that you’ve
already collected money for and all of those other homes as well that figured at some point
there’s going to be a neighborhood park here.
Stolar: And maybe that’s the numbers to, to pose the point about numbers. If we had seen the
numbers of that collection and saying well it’s really that collection that’s paying for this 1.75
acres. While this collection of 66 is paying for the 3.08.
Scharfenberg: Right.
22
Park and Recreation Commission Meeting - November 23, 2010
Stolar: Then that’s a different view on this.
Tom Kelly: It is.
Stolar: …right so if how many homes were in North Bay and all that, you add that up and say,
no these guys already gave us the money to pay for that 1.75.
Daniel: Okay, how many homes did we have in North Bay?
Hoffman: I don’t recall.
Stolar: But I mean just in general the concept of.
Daniel: I think it’s a good idea. You bring it up, let’s.
Scharfenberg: You not only have North Bay though, you have what’s the?
Hoffman: Lakeside.
Scharfenberg: Lakeside. You have those large homes that are there that have paid for that so.
Stolar: So in general you might have already collected that money to cover the other acreage
because they’ll now have access to this park.
Hoffman: Yeah if we do the calculation over all the homes in this area, it will probably pay for
this park and more.
Scharfenberg: Right.
Stolar: Which is I think Steve an interesting way to look at it.
Scharfenberg: It is. It is.
Tom Kelly: …so I think the builder would put something there if we didn’t. That’s the thing
that I’m trying to get my head around because they have done it almost every other place in the
past and I like Glenn’s idea about the, right. There’s two really good arguments and the fact that
we set precedent a few months ago.
Daniel: Oh please go ahead Joe.
Joe Jablonski: If you don’t mind I can speak to that a little bit. Because of the economics of this
particular property and the kind of general housing market in particular, the economics for a
substantial community park are not possible for a private setting on this. It just unfortunately
like Todd said what we would do is go back to filling it up with as many homes as we could.
Tom Kelly: Okay.
23
Park and Recreation Commission Meeting - November 23, 2010
Stolar: I mean looking at the CIP I believe the million dollars we have no choice right, because
that’s part of a.
Hoffman: Which million?
Scharfenberg: Minnewashta underpass.
Stolar: The Minnewashta underpass, right. That’s going to be part of a change there anyway
right so we have to do that. If we’re going to do it we have to do it then.
Hoffman: In 2011?
Stolar: Or 2012.
Scharfenberg: 2012.
Hoffman: 2012.
Stolar: The one million.
Hoffman: Yeah and that’s not, that’s a total project cost. That’s not park dedication dollars.
Just a minor part of that is park dedication dollars.
Daniel: Yeah it does. You know I guess, now that 290 for Pioneer Pass, that’s going to come
off, because we already, that fell in 2010 correct Todd?
Hoffman: Correct.
Daniel: Okay so the next year we’re looking at, again as I stated earlier, Highway 41. Basically
all, all CIP major project dollars going towards the Highway 41 project. $75,000 for the
landscaping. What are we changing there?
Hoffman: That’s city hall and that’s a general capital finance. That’s not a park dedication
dollars.
Daniel: Okay, so that’s just replacing that tree.
Hoffman: All the landscaping that have died around city hall and then modifying the existing,
city hall was built in the 70’s and the existing landscaping is going to be modified to more
closely match what has been put up in front of city hall.
Daniel: Alright well you know.
Stolar: We really, the thing that potentially gets moved out, if you look at this is the Pioneer
Pass neighborhood park development.
24
Park and Recreation Commission Meeting - November 23, 2010
Hoffman: Yep.
Stolar: Or that’s really discretion, that’s discretionary somewhat.
Hoffman: 514 Bluff Creek Drive, you have trails 390. The pedestrian trail to the Arboretum a
quarter million dollars.
Stolar: Oh yeah I’m sorry, I missed that.
Hoffman: All those projects. The pedestrian trail to the Arboretum doesn’t go unless we have
you know a project in totality with the underpass at 41 and other things. And the Bluff Creek
trail is an independent, stand alone project so.
Daniel: And we’re also still.
Stolar: Tennis courts we have to do, or is that part of the Minnetonka Middle School West?
Hoffman: No that’s not. These are new construction of courts at Roundhouse Park and then
refurbishing some of the existing courts in the community.
Stolar: So where’s the Minnewashta thing where they asked us, or Minnetonka Middle School.
Hoffman: They’re doing that on their own.
Stolar: Oh they are. They aren’t going to ask us for, okay.
Hoffman: We’re currently working with them to move the water tower. Expand the water tower
and put it on school property and construct, they’re going to build some tennis courts on their
own. Best way to describe this is really, you do first things first and you push things out until a
revenue stream comes back and so there’s going to be some things. As this revenue is, as this
fund balance continues to decline things are going to stop and even in this position, if we were in
this position at some point in the future, even have the cash, you would still be considering a
recommendation to the council to borrow against future revenues to acquire land because the
opportunity to acquire land comes around once. You probably wouldn’t recommend to City
Council that we borrow against future revenues to build a trail section that isn’t there today
anyway. It can wait. There’s an opportunity you can build a trail today, you can build it in 10
years, you can build it in 15 years. But once these properties are platted and the opportunity to
acquire land is gone, that chance does not come back anymore.
Cole Kelly: So I’m kind of, I didn’t hear everything you said when I stepped out but I heard
what Steve said and I, and I’m kind of wondering why are we treating this different than we did
Pioneer Pass. If we want to put our foot down, why didn’t we do it before? We say we think the
developer will do this or that. There was a reason why we passed that and you know, and I don’t
know what the standard practice is these days but I’m assuming what Todd has brought to us is
more the standard practice and maybe in the past it was more on the developer because they
25
Park and Recreation Commission Meeting - November 23, 2010
wanted to get people out to the town or whatever, and I don’t know. I don’t know how it was
done in the past but you know when we did the Pioneer Pass acquisition and I think part of the
reason was because we liked the idea that we can get the land now and now is we got a good
land price.
Scharfenberg: Well Cole I don’t, were you here when we voted on that? For Pioneer Pass.
Cole Kelly: I think I was.
Scharfenberg: Okay. Well just the recollection was, there were members of the board, our
commission at that point that I think were hesitant about purchasing that park as well. I mean the
vote was close. In fact I think some people abstained or didn’t vote so it wasn’t passed by a
majority so.
Cole Kelly: Right. I voted no on that one but I didn’t vote no because I didn’t want the lane. I
voted no because I didn’t like how the process of being.
Scharfenberg: Sure.
Cole Kelly: Because I actually wanted the land but I didn’t like how the process worked, and
I’m the only one that voted no. My reasoning was the process.
Scharfenberg: Right, okay.
Cole Kelly: It wasn’t the, it wasn’t the acquisition of the land.
Scharfenberg: Right.
Cole Kelly: And so my thought is if we, and I think the two, there were two abstentions and I
think the two abstentions didn’t like the process as we were going through it at the time and I
don’t know if we didn’t have enough, I didn’t have enough information so I voted no. But I
wasn’t opposed to the project. So if we thought it was a good idea 4 or 5 months ago to purchase
land, is it a good idea right now to purchase land? Is land going to get any cheaper and how
much more opportunity are we going to have to get land?
Stolar: As one of the ones that was concerned, just to be clear, it’s not about purchasing the land.
It’s not about having parks, as Todd knows I’ve been on this commission a long time. I’m all for
buying land. I’m all for finding open space. I have a fundamental concern with the value
equation of the value that the developers get for the park acquisition that we end up paying for in
the park development that the homeowners, both now and in the future, will drive the value of
that investment but are only paying part of the cost. That’s my fundamental problem. I’ve had
that problem since I’ve been on this park board. I had that problem when I was on Eden Prairie’s
park board. The idea is that if you’re next to a park, if you’re on you know, when we showed
you, if you lived right across the street from that park your home gets a value. But when you buy
that home you’re getting a value that this city, everybody in the city is contributing to. Yes you
contributed your quote unquote $5,800 but you know through your park dedication or the
26
Park and Recreation Commission Meeting - November 23, 2010
acquisition or the donation of the land but that home continues to increase in value and the
equation to me is not balanced. That’s just my opinion is that the equation is not balanced.
Understand it’s not balanced in any other city either. It’s not unique to Chan.
Hoffman: Yeah but Commissioner Stolar I think can satisfy your equation to some. Most
studies of what parks do to communities and why they’re important to communities are based
around tax revenues and so when that housing property, that housing stock goes up in value, the
tax revenues, because that park is there, increase and the schools are then benefitting and the
county’s benefitting and the city’s benefitting from the increased tax revenues because that park
is there so most assessments, most studies about what parks do to your community, an increase
in revenues are based around tax receipts.
Stolar: I understand. Those don’t filter back into the capital improvement budget though that
allows you to buy.
Hoffman: Well…
Stolar: In all fairness this city has done several things to try and do that balance and I do give the
city, you know Todd Gerhardt credit when he paid for some of the maintenance activities that
should have come out of CIP. He actually gave us out of the general capital fund which does get
serviced by those increased revenues so the city itself, Chan has done a really good job of trying
to get to that balance I think in some of the things they’ve done.
Hoffman: But that park will be maintained for perpetuity by tax receipts.
Stolar: Yeah, okay.
Daniel: Well how do we want to move forward? Do we want to move forward with the
recommendation by staff? Are there any amendments that we want to change or any additions?
Stolar: In summary I think this was a great discussion. We needed to have this but in all fairness
as I said before, I’m in favor of getting land. I think it’s a good thing. I think this looks like if
you add the acreage of the wetlands that will abut the park. I understand wetlands can’t be
developed anyway but at least it adds to an amenity, I think we should at least bring this to the
table for a vote so I will propose that we approve the vote on the staff recommendation.
Scharfenberg: Second.
Stolar moved, Scharfenberg seconded that the Park and Recreation Commission
recommend the City Council apply the following conditions of approval concerning parks
and trails for Lakeview:
1. Successful transfer of Outlot B (4.83+ acres) to the City of Chanhassen through a
combination of dedication (3.08+ acres) and fee purchase (1.75+ acres) for development
and use as a public neighborhood park.
27
Park and Recreation Commission Meeting - November 23, 2010
All voted in favor, except Commissioner Tom Kelly who opposed and Commissioner Stolar
abstained. The motion carried with a vote of 5 to 1 with 1 abstention.
Tom Kelly: I want to say I’ve been on this board for 12 years I think. This has been one of the
best discussions that I’ve been a part of so this is great. This is great.
Daniel: I do make one note that the ayes do have it with a 5 to 1 and 1 abstain so, correct?
Alright. Thank you very much. Joe, I appreciate your time.
Hoffman: And I encourage you all in the next week to take a drive by Pioneer Pass Park. It’s, if
not the most beautiful, one of the most beautiful neighborhood parks in this community. It’s
situated just perfectly and it will be very similar to this site where you have, one thing we’ve
learned in our neighborhood park acquisitions is visibility and proximity to where people can see
it. Early on staff and this park commission accepted properties where you had houses in front of
them and they were tucked in, way in back. There’s a variety of them. Pheasant Hills, Power
Hill, Curry Farms and they’re real challenging sites to maintain and service over time. These last
2 acquisitions have been some of the best that I think we’ll ever see so, if this one goes through.
Stolar: I was saying 15 years for one and now two in like 4 months.
Hoffman: Take a drive by. The road is asphalted now where we were up on that field and that
8.7 acres is absolutely just a dynamic park site. It’s really going to be one of the future
highlights of our neighborhood park system.
Scharfenberg: Can you come in Todd off of Pioneer Trail now where the new road is there?
Hoffman: You can. You’ll be driving through a couple barricades and I actually encourage you
to come through that way and then leave out the round about because the semaphore is not
programmed yet to allow for traffic out the south so come in off of Pioneer Drive. Take a look.
They’re building homes there now. Take a look at the park.
Scharfenberg: They have one home up already.
Hoffman: Yep. One home up. Then take a look at the park site. The sliding hill is there. The
park entrance is stubbed out for the parking lot and 8.7 acres on one flat site is just pretty
outstanding looking piece of property so I think what it will give you is a sense of responsibility
for your future CIP discussions because there’s going to be some work to be done on park
development and remember park development doesn’t have to just be a contract. That’s one
clean way of doing it. It’s just bring in a park designer. Work with them. Come to an
agreement on parkland. Package it all up in a bid package and have somebody bid on it and
that’s one way to build a park but most of the success in our park history has been, we’ve built
them with our in-house staff and so you know we contract out. We’ve used ourselves as a
general contractor and we’ve worked together to make things happen and we save a lot of dollars
in that way and it’ll probably be in that same type of situation in both Pioneer Pass and if this
park goes through. That’s been a lot of years but that was most recently for example Lake Susan
Park. The parking lot needed to be expanded. Needed to be doubled in size. We took a look at
28
Park and Recreation Commission Meeting - November 23, 2010
some cost estimates. We said oh my gosh, that’s going to be too expensive. I sat down with
Dale, I said can you guys do this and they do it for time and for materials. That’s it so we’ll
probably be in that same scenario. It will stretch your budget and it’ll ease the pain of having to
pay for those things. And it’s always I think one of those things where you have, would you like
to do everything up front but it’s not realistic and it’s also nice to have some actual residents
living in the neighborhood participating in the process. Coming down to the park board and into
the park and working on their particular park so. I don’t know what timing is on these park sites
but that will be a future decision.
Daniel: Thank you Todd and certainly the input with you and staff has put together on this
particular project. Again this is really our first test in a number of years to go through.
Hoffman: Second.
Daniel: Second test… Fortunately in my memory I was not there for that discussion.
Hoffman: Pioneer Pass.
Daniel: No I was not. That was the one meeting I missed in 6 years so.
Hoffman: The process has remained almost identical and I can tell you the feeling from the
developer’s side has been almost identical. They would much rather develop these properties
into lots and make money on them. They can make a lot more money developing into lots.
Daniel: Absolutely.
Hoffman: And so it goes back to Roundhouse Park. Did they want to give up Roundhouse
Park? Absolutely not. We took park dedication, and it was pretty small at that time and the park
dedication that we took was the lakeshore, back about 100 feet into the property. We said there.
Your lakeshore is gone. You can’t argue about values that you own any lakeshore anymore
because you don’t. We’ve taken it as park dedication, and at the time we paid Harsted
Development about $55,000 an acre for the remainder of Roundhouse Park and so that
application of this formula has been used time and time again for all the park acquisitions that
we’ve done outside of where it’s been a large enough development to acquire the whole thing
through park dedication. The thing that has really benefitted this community and the
commission is that our park charges have remained at a level where it makes it reasonable to
acquire this kind of land. If your park charges were half of what they were today they would
really fight hard to try to give you money instead of land because it’s just so cheap and at $5,800,
and again that’s based off of 125, we’re probably going to end up paying somewhere around
$112,000 an acre, give or take, on this particular property. The last one, Pioneer Pass we paid
less than that and so park charges are going to have to come down. We have a public
responsibility, just as we raise them with land values, to bring them down to be fair to all. To be
fair to the developers and so they’ll be coming down by about 20% so it won’t be $5,800 next
year. It’d be 20%, or approximately that lower than that.
29
Park and Recreation Commission Meeting - November 23, 2010
RE-CAP 2010 PARK AND TRAIL ACQUISITION AND DEVELOPMENT CAPITAL
IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS.
Daniel: Okay. Let’s move on to recap of the 2010 park and trail acquisition. I think with the
exception of the Pioneer Pass Park acquisition, we didn’t spend a whole lot of money.
Hoffman: Let me find the rest of my packet not that I moved it around. Okay, here it is. Trees,
we just finished up the tree plant. The last tree planting of 2010 today at the Recreation Center.
If anybody drove by. 38 new trees were put on the Recreation Center property, Bluff Creek
Elementary School property the past two days. The bids were $10,000 from Hartman for those
projects and $15,000 from Wilson’s Northwest Nursery and so great bid for Hartman to come
and do that work. Other trees were planted as a part of the Lake Ann project and there were
some, Lake Ann stairway project and there were some other trees that were acquired and planted.
Carver Beach, the Eagle Scout. Old Village Hall had a couple of trees put in. Picnic tables and
park benches. That’s an annual allocation. We use it to buy general picnic tables but then also
to buy our memorial benches so if we buy 4 or 5 memorial benches, that allocation of $10,000
pays for them and then the fund is repaid when people purchase memorial benches. Third
allotment of fitness equipment at the Rec Center. $10,000 and those are, that’s a general CIP
project. It’s not a park acquisition project so that’s general CIP dollars like Commissioner Stolar
alluded to in the past. Two different pools of money. Park dedication is used up front, first time
to build and acquire, purchase and acquire parkland. Any time you come back in and you
replace a playground or you purchase new fitness equipment you’re using capital dollars.
Capital replacement dollars to replace those improvements. The Highway 41 are both in there in
010 they’ll be pushed out to 2011. So those are the projects and with revenues the way they are,
there’s just not a lot going on with projects other than the ones that we’re committed to with
Highway 41 with that matching grant. You remember that started out at about $110,000. It’s
currently at $400,000 matching funds. The County’s kicking in 400. We’re kicking in 400 of
the million dollar grant for a million eight. That project should be completed by the end of 2011
and then we’re adding the extension to the north and the sidewalk, and I think we have what, the
$250,000 hopefully. We’re hopeful that those projects will come in under that. Initial
recommendation is to short stop that north extension at Chaska Road. Not go all the way up to
Highway 7 on that side, on the east side because there’s some wetland issues and some other
issues. Get people across at Chaska Road and then allow them to use the existing trail which is
on the other side. It runs from the neighborhood connection up to Highway 7. So that number
hopefully will be reduced and some down a little bit for 2011. So those are the CIP projects with
the exception, even though Lake Ann stairs was in 2009, it was completed in 2010 and so people
will be using the Lake Ann stairs really for the first time next spring. If you visit Lake Ann Park
this winter you’ll see a temporary chain link fence has gone up. That’s to restrict people out of
the planting areas on the hillside for approximately a year or year and a half until they grow up to
the point where they can be self sustaining and it won’t be so attractive to try to cut through the
hillside. People should take the stairs so that chain link fence is not permanent. It’s a temporary
situation. Any questions on this year’s CIP projects? That tree planting project was about as late
as you could get. They worked. They weren’t afraid to plant in the snow.
30
Park and Recreation Commission Meeting - November 23, 2010
Daniel: No, so I mean just again going back on a comment. The 41 project, all that dollars is
moving out til 2011 so really our only major capital purchase this year has been Pioneer Pass and
that’s it.
Hoffman: That’s it.
Daniel: And how’s that comparison to what we took in for revenue at all?
Hoffman: It’s more.
Daniel: It is, okay.
Hoffman: Revenues have been around $100,000.
Daniel: Okay.
Hoffman: We’re spending the bank.
Daniel: We’re waiting to be even steven. Alright.
Hoffman: Remember, it’s been in the bank now. You’ve got another 19 or 20 million in the
future at some point. I can go through those numbers again with you.
Daniel: No.
Hoffman: We can do it in a work session or…
ESTABLISH 2011 PICNIC RESERVATION FEES.
Ruegemer: Thanks Chair Daniels. Last month we had taken a look at the 2010 picnic season.
As part of that process now we’re going to continue on with this meeting and look at the picnic
fees looking at, I did look at a couple different sites here with Eden Prairie and Chaska and I
really feel it’s advantageous for us to kind of just stay the status quo with the fees that we do
have currently and also with the kind of economic times. We certainly do gather feedback from
people on the phone that fees are you know a little high and that sort of thing here too so it is
staff’s recommendation that we look to 2011, that the fees stay the same as 2010 and the fees are
attached on the back side of the memo. So that certainly is my recommendation to the council,
or to the commission tonight that we adopt the same fee structure that we had in 2010.
Daniel: Okay. Any discussions? Comments.
Cole Kelly: I know you had the numbers last time. I can’t remember, it seems to me that usage
was up last year from the year before?
Ruegemer: Actually I think total number of occupants?
31
Park and Recreation Commission Meeting - November 23, 2010
Cole Kelly: Yeah.
Ruegemer: I think we were actually down.
Stolar: Down slightly.
Daniel: 104 to 99 or something like that.
Stolar: But the Hilltop shelter went up right?
Ruegemer: Hilltop did go up, yeah. Slightly.
Stolar: Slightly and the other two went down slightly.
Ruegemer: We were about 6 off the pace from.
Cole Kelly: Okay. So not a big difference, and you have the same fees that you had the year
before last year? So you think we’ll maintain about the same number? Maybe a little more.
Ruegemer: It seemed like with the reservation structure, we are a picture of consistency. We
don’t fluctuate. Even look back in 2007, 2008, we seem to be in that 95 to 105 reservations so
you know if it is one thing it’s consistent. We would certainly look to increase that now with
Hilltop and other locations certainly but the numbers seem to, remains about the same number
there.
Cole Kelly: Okay. So it’d probably be a good thing if we kept the rates the same. Not raise
them but not drop them either.
Ruegemer: Correct.
Cole Kelly: Okay.
Daniel: Glenn.
Stolar: Nothing.
Daniel: Okay. Steve.
Scharfenberg: No.
Daniel: Scott.
Wendt: No.
Daniel: Tom.
32
Park and Recreation Commission Meeting - November 23, 2010
Tom Kelly: Nope.
Daniel: We’re good. Why don’t we go ahead with the staff recommendation. Who wants to
make the motion?
Cole Kelly: I make a motion that we go with the staff recommendation.
Wendt: Second.
Cole Kelly moved, Wendt seconded that the Park and Recreation Commission recommends
that the City Council approve that the 2011 picnic reservation fees remain the same as
2010. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 7 to 0.
RECREATION PROGRAM REPORTS:
2010 HALLOWEEN PARTY EVALUATION.
Ruegemer: Yeah, I was going to talk about this last meeting and I forgot. Saving some time
tonight I don’t know if I’ll go through everything but if the commission has any questions at this
time, certainly will entertain those at this time.
Daniel: Jerry I was trying to remember, was the count up compared to 2009?
Ruegemer: Yeah I think our pre-registration was up and our numbers were up slightly from the
year before.
Daniel: Good.
Stolar: Was this the first year we used DonB?
Ruegemer: No. We used DonB about 2 or 3 years ago and it does seem like he really does
connect well with the crowd. The gym this year certainly retained the people that kind of started
from start to finish on that and he’s pretty entertaining and a pretty good crowd pleaser.
Wendt: My family was there and friends commented that they appreciated having him there.
Ruegemer: He does some amazing stuff on the unicycle.
Hoffman: That in itself.
Ruegemer: That in itself.
Daniel: Well obviously another good, successful event the Halloween Party Jerry so it, we had a
chance to talk a little bit about it at our last meeting so I mean it’s nice to see that it had success
and we hope to grow, continue to grow. Were there any changes or anything that you would
recommend that we should, that you want to point out to the commission?
33
Park and Recreation Commission Meeting - November 23, 2010
Ruegemer: No, just that you know again look to volunteers. We had some different volunteer
groups this year. Certainly with Foss Swimming School came in to help with the kind of treat
area this year. Just continue to engage community groups to come in and help and offer their
experiences and volunteerism to add to the event so. We did change it to a week earlier this
year. It was over MEA weekend this year. Was that maybe an area why we increased a bit? We
weren’t competing with other parties that weekend but it’s hard to say with that but you know we
just continue to look at new ways to maybe spruce up certain areas of the party.
Daniel: Okay. Great. Thanks Jerry. Tree lighting ceremony.
Hoffman: Chair Daniels before we move on can we help Nann out. I know she’s going to be
thinking about this. Back to the vote on 2. We had Kelly, Tom Kelly as a no and who?
Daniel: Glenn Stolar abstained.
Hoffman: Glenn Stolar abstained. Thank you. All others ayes. Thanks.
2010 TREE LIGHTING CEREMONY.
th
Ruegemer: Talked briefly about it already but this year’s event is coming up December 4. 5:00
start with that. Mayor Furlong will flip again, or his family members will flip the ceremonial
switch again this year for that so, a lot of the same businesses are involved again with that.
Mustard Seed and Nancy Lipinski will be involved. Involved again with that. We’ll have the
fire truck again that will bring Santa and his elf and helper down to the event itself so really a fun
way to kind of kick off the holiday season with that and certainly have live reindeer again,
caroling and refreshments. It’s really a nice way for us to kind of showcase our park. Park
maintenance crews have been busy prior to the snow and the ice and all that but we’re decorating
the park and putting up new lights and kind of getting that ready to go. As you can see the little,
the train is already put up already and kind of already to go so. The maintenance crew definitely
will have everything ready to go prior to the event and it will look wonderful again. I encourage
everybody to come on down.
Daniel: You know for as long as I’ve lived in this town, this was, last week was the first time
because I always assume they’re there year round. I actually saw the city staff putting lights up
down the center and I had never seen anybody… It’s just one of those things where I never have
seen it done. I just assume it happens you know and it just, I was watching them work that
boom and I was just amazed. I was sitting at Byerly’s parking lot because I was up there. They
are talented. And all I’m thinking is I wish I had that for my own house. So it will be exciting
th
and obviously it’s one of the beautiful aesthetics the city has. When you see West 78 Street lit
up and then with the City Center here so.
Hoffman: And the trees are getting bigger so there’s more lights.
Daniel: Oh yeah. Have we moved more to LED now?
34
Park and Recreation Commission Meeting - November 23, 2010
Hoffman: Yes.
Daniel: Is it just about all LED or is it?
Ruegemer: Getting close I bet.
Hoffman: Yeah.
Ruegemer: Yeah, just kind of cycling through. Guys typically buy a bunch at the tail end of the
season where lights are cheap and really kind of going that direction now.
Daniel: Wow, great.
Ryan: I have one comment, and obviously you can’t do it for this year but in the years to come
to consider moving up the time. I know the time to light the tree, 5:00-5:15, it has to be dark so
obviously you want it to keep that time but to start it a little bit earlier. A number of families that
I know, including ourselves we, it’s a popular night for holiday parties and so once you get into
the 5:30-6:00 range, you kind of take out a number of people that come down or stay in the back
end of the event so. Particular my family and the fun that we have that are heavy on children
who want to see Santa and come down and see that activity, to be able to come down at the front
end of that you know around the 4:30 mark would be helpful for families that have events,
holiday parties and what not that night.
Daniel: Alright.
2010/11 WINTER PROGRAMMING.
Ruegemer: Just a helpful list hopefully for the park and rec commission. A listing of all the
programs that we have going over the winter season here. Kind of a breakdown, kind of by age
group and kind of category for that. Just a lot of different activities going on. We have a variety
going on for that from adult to youth to family programs to sports so just a little catalog. Kind of
a quick snapshot of what we have going here for the winter season. Hopefully that’s helpful for
everybody.
Daniel: Thank you Jerry.
COMMISSION MEMBER COMMITTEE REPORTS.
None.
COMMISSION MEMBER PRESENTATIONS.
Tom Kelly: I had a question for staff. I had heard, and I don’t know if I’m getting this correct.
There may be some friction between the City and the School Board with regard to using the
fields at the high school and I was wondering if you could comment on that?
Hoffman: No friction between the City and the School Board.
35
Park and Recreation Commission Meeting - November 23, 2010
Tom Kelly: Or not the school board. The school. High school.
Hoffman: Yep. There was some negotiations that we went back through and what was the intent
of the original agreement and there was some hope that, on the District’s side that they were
going to be able to treat the Chaska High School and the artificial turf there the same as the
Chanhassen High School and the artificial turf and charge in Chaska, or charge in Chanhassen
like they do in Chaska but the agreement that we entered into with the school district says it’s all
the fields free of charge. Second priority scheduling for the city organizations and so then there
was some clarification on what means the city sponsored organizations and this all started when
the District sent the football association a proposed billing of upwards of $10,000 for field space
and so we cleared that up with the District. Met with the new superintendent Jim Bauck and his
staff and we have a clear understanding now with both parties and what the intent of that
agreement was and how it will be applied. In the future we will be doing all scheduling for our
city sponsored groups at the City of Chanhassen offices and so we will be acting as the clearing
house for those organizations and that’s to take off that administrative duty at the high school.
At the school district. They said okay, we’re going to honor your agreement and give you all this
free space. We want you to be taking the administrative duties to make sure that it’s scheduled
and rain out’s are notified and those type of things. Otherwise you are not, we’re not going to be
able to give you the space free so we accepted that responsibility. We’re also back charging
associations with lights and for monitors. They wanted to make sure that the lighting charges,
some direct charges were charged back to the user groups and that monitors, only when needed.
For example if there’s two activities going on. There’s a high school football game so there are
staff from the high school on the property, and then there’s an association baseball game going
on. They’re not going to charge for a monitor that night. There’s already staff there so we have
that agreement so there was some friction and we sat down on a couple occasions and resolved
that.
Tom Kelly: Great.
Scharfenberg: Say Todd along those lines, maybe you can shed some light on this. I know, last
year the two softball fields in the back of the school were, one of them was basically unusable
because of drainage issues and that and I know there was talk of putting in drainage tile and that.
Did that ever happen in the fall?
Ruegemer: I can comment on that. I had a conversation with Carl Mattsen with the facilities
division of the school district and no, that has not been done at this point. There has been some
initial plan work done on that and it looks to be completed next spring.
Scharfenberg: Okay, so the plan is that whatever they need to do they’re going to take care of
that.
Ruegemer: It looks like they’re going to do tile along kind of the berm and the railroad track
area and then connect that to a catch basin to drain the water off that field.
Scharfenberg: Okay. So are they anticipating that that far field would be out of commission at
least in the spring and then possibly up and running in the summer?
36
Park and Recreation Commission Meeting - November 23, 2010
Ruegemer: The way, kind of the way the conversation went in my opinion is that the drain tile’s
not going to affect the playing field space area. It will be off I believe to the west of the field.
Hoffman: But still the drain tile’s got to be done because the water’s affecting the field.
Ruegemer: Correct but the.
Hoffman: But the drain tile project…
Ruegemer: Right. I guess I didn’t understand the question. The work, the drain tile work will
not affect the field playing area.
Scharfenberg: Right.
Ruegemer: But obviously that you know, like Todd said, until that is done the water still will be
there because it seems like it’s seeping out of that berm area and then sheet draining over the trail
and there you have it.
Scharfenberg: Right. Right. Okay.
Ruegemer: So they’re, it sounds like the school district is committed to correcting that problem.
Scharfenberg: We just don’t know when.
Ruegemer: We’re hoping next spring.
Scharfenberg: Okay.
Hoffman: And then it’s a wait and see to see if it works.
Scharfenberg: Right.
Hoffman: When you grade a property like this and then obviously the water seen there that you
know potentially didn’t show up right away but then maybe it made it’s way to the surface. It’s
just one of those, we just have to go back to the ground work and re-work it. We’re messing
with Mother Nature’s water system at that point and until you get drain tile and get it pushed to
the side, it’s a challenge.
Ruegemer: Through the course of time maybe it will plug itself but until that happens we’re
going to deal with it so.
Hoffman: Drain tile it.
Ruegemer: Water does funny things.
37
Park and Recreation Commission Meeting - November 23, 2010
ADMINISTRATIVE PACKET.
None.
Daniel: Okay. Todd is there anything you want to point out in the administrative packet?
Alright, why don’t we go ahead and adjourn this meeting.
Scharfenberg: Just one other question. It doesn’t directly relate to the administrative but to
some extent. With respect to the vending machines at the Chan Rec Center. Do we derive any
income from that as part of that or?
Hoffman: (Yes). Jerry manages that contract. He can speak to it.
Ruegemer: Yeah. We regain approximately 10% of the revenue collected from the machines.
Scharfenberg: So I was just kind of thinking out loud as I saw that. Have we ever thought or has
the park and rec staff ever thought about adding at least a pop machine and a vending machine
into the warming house? I know it may be a vandalism target because of the windows and stuff,
maybe somebody would do something but I’m thinking it would be better to do that as opposed
to having a staff person staffing the canteen and selling that way. I don’t know, has that ever
been an issue?
Ruegemer: Are you talking about having a vending machine inside the building or outside the
building?
Scharfenberg: Inside that warming house.
Ruegemer: Okay. I think at one time we did quite a while ago. When we first opened up. I
guess we haven’t talked about that for a while but.
Hoffman: Yeah, there was one in there at one time. It’s a length of duration of season and a
volume thing.
Ruegemer: Yeah. A lot of times it’s not worth the vending company’s time to you know stock
and if it’s a full line service.
Hoffman: Yeah it’s a 2 month season. They’re not going to want to put a machine in there for a
2 month season. In the summer there’s minimal use in there so it’s, the Rec Center’s open lots of
hours in relationship to that warming house.
Scharfenberg: Sure. Okay. I’m just thinking of all those hungry hockey kids that are out there
skating around.
Hoffman: Yeah, it’s just too short a duration for them to be interested in servicing.
Scharfenberg: Okay.
Daniel: Alright, that’s it. Let’s go ahead and adjourn the meeting.
38
Park and Recreation Commission Meeting - November 23, 2010
Scharfenberg moved, Wendt seconded to adjourn the meeting. All voted in favor and the
motion carried unanimously with a vote of 7 to 0. The Park and Recreation Commission
meeting was adjourned.
Submitted by Todd Hoffman
Park and Rec Director
Prepared by Nann Opheim
39