1 Approval of Minutes 1-27-98CHANHASSEN PARK AND
RECREATION COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
JANUARY 27, 1998
Chairwoman Lash called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT: Jan Lash, Fred Berg, Ron Roescr, Jim Manders, Rod Franks, Jane
Meger and Mike Howe.
MEMBERS ABSENT: None.
STAFF PRESENT: Todd Hoffman, Park and Rec Director; Jerry Ruegcmcr, Recreation
Supervisor; Patty Dexter, Recreation Supervisor
VISITOR PRESENTATIONS:
Lash: Do we have any visitor presentations that are not scheduled items on our agenda this
evening? Anyone in the audience?
APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Berg moved, Roeser seconded to approve the Minutes of the
Park and Recreation Commission meeting dated December 9, 1997 as presented. All voted in
favor and the motion carried.
Public Present:
Name Address Phone Number
Mary Kraft 8711 Flamingo Drive 368-3375
Cindy Will 2730 Sandpiper Trail 474-2667
Ron Frigstad 9270 Kiowa Trail 496-9038
Frank Scott CAA 471-0785
John Linforth 7471 Canyon Curve 474-1722
John Hennessy 7305 Galpin 474-7345
Joe Scott 1578 Lake Susan Hills Dr. 368-4768
Jeff Seeley 9366 Kiowa 496-1020
Greg Hromatka 7580 Canyon Curve 474-3417
Barry Bershow 9271 Kiowa Trail 445-6691
Marlie Johnson 6621 Galpin Blvd. 470-0632
Robert D. Naughton 7591 Chippewa Trail 974-0925
Maureen Fan'ell 7336 Fawn Hill 474-2886
Rick O'Connor 6261 Galpin Blvd. 474-4145
Rich Otto 6291 Hummingbird Road 470-2202
Sam & Nancy Mancino 6620 Galpin Blvd. 474-3861
Bruce Tripper 1895 Partridge Circle 470-8054
Park and Rec Commission Meeting - January 27, 1998
to serve the whole complex with a built structure here. Keep in mind that we're going to leave
open ample space in the center of this core for a concession in the future. Whether that is a
trailer that one would bring in or some other built structure that might come along. Now after the
discussions with the City Council last night, with respect to the desire by some of the members to
see more facilities that are geared towards a wider variety of users, we went back and did a few
minor changes to the plan here, and I'll just overview that. And I think the real focus there was
to just allow for other users aside from the youth organizations to have some amenities out there.
And what we did was increase this and created more of a family picnic area. Introduced the idea
of a hard court adjacent to the play area. Brought in volleyball courts and instead of having two
tennis courts, we're showing one tennis court with an adjacent basketball court. The idea here
being is just to simply provide more amenity opportunities, not only when the park is being used
for, during athletic periods of time, but when it is really the community park aspect that people
will be coming to use. We did, as a note on the entrance to the park here, we've begun our
conversations with the State as far as safety and concerns related to the entrance here. This is, I
still believe to be the best entrance spot from the perspective of servicing the complex, it not only
allows us to get people in and distributed very quickly, but it avoids bringing people all the way
around and bringing them back into the back end of the project, which really was not held up in
high regard by the neighborhood residents along this stretch. As with City Center Park, our
initial cost estimates is a little bit high. We're at about $1.3 million for everything that we see in
this park, and if we start to take away from some of those things, we whittle it down to about
$1.17. So xve obviously have some work to do budget wise on this park as well, keeping in mind
that it is our obligation to you to make sure that we work within the budget that you have and
we'll make sure that that happens as we go along.
Lash: What was our budget?
Jeff Schoenbauer: $1.1 or so here, and it's a little bit fluid between the park. Referring back to
City Center Park, perhaps maybe start there with questions that you have. One of the things that
we'll be looking to do as we move forward here is to refine exactly the space requirements for
some of these axnenities here, and we'll be working not only with Todd and Jerry here at the City,
but with Helen and so forth at the school district to kind of define that space a little bit more.
With that I'II turn it over for questions.
Lash: Okay, thanks. Are there any commissioners who have quick questions on the
presentation?
Berg: This overlay that you had, after last night. That doesn't sacrifice any field?
Jeff Schoenbauer: No it does not. It just takes more advantage and changes the space that
already was green space if you will.
Lash: I was interested in the dollar amounts that you gave us. The $850,000.00 anywhere down
to $600. Does that include relocating the telmis courts or leaving those?
Park and Rec Commission Meeting - January 27, 1998
Jeff Schoenbauer: That's leaving them in both cases where they are. What xve're doing
essentially to get doxvn to that $609, as far as big item numbers, is parking areas. I guess as vve
move into our next phase after tonight, we'll be bringing forth what we think to be a best way to
approach it, and largely, just generally speaking, we're going to be suggesting that you take care
of your core. Make sure that you deal with those issues first and then work out from there.
Unfortunately some of the nice cities are in the periphery but that's just the reality.
Lash: Anyone else with questions for Jeff?. Okay, we'll open this up for visitor comments and I
will ask that you come forward to the podium and state your name for the record. I think we'll
do City Center first and then move on .... questions about City Center?
Helen Merchant: My name is Helen Merchant and I just want to comment on the youth facilities
for the baseball field. The one that's directly behind the school, I know in the note here it said
that the youth baseball association had a real strong desire for one rnore field and we've, we
talked about it over at the school and we really believe that we need that flexibility as far as the
soccer fields for the phy ed activities that are taking place behind the school so that was our only
concern that xve not add another baseball field directly behind the school.
Lash: I bare a question for you Helen. I was just wondering, xvith the playground location and
then that row of trees to the west, are you okay xvith that or does that block your sight lines too
much for?
Helen Merchant: We're okay with that because our phy ed activities take place directly behind
the building, so I had talked to the phy ed teachers about that today and they were fine with that.
Thank you for removing the other trees right in tile middle there. That really helped. Thanks
Jeff:
Jeff Schoenbauer: Sure. And we move forward, keep ill mind that we're very cognizant of the
issues of safety and visibility so those trees that we select will be very, kept that in mind.
Frank Scott: In response to the last question. My name is Frank Scott. In response to tile last
question. We can use those soccer fields for t-ball. I mean that's, basically that's what we would
do is lay those out for the t-ball if somebody hasn't reserved them roi' soccer. So the ballfields
we're looking at are the beginning baseball and beginning softball and the soccer fields would
be... I gncss the only question, on tile map I got, on the, they talk about...there may be a...field
or something. I can't locate that...
Jeff Schoenbauer: Yeah, that would be right here. We're not anticipating that because of
budgetary constraints, that this will happen under this phase. So essentially we'll have another
soccer field in this area. At least in the short tenn. What is expected at this point, given that the
area in front of City Hall is likely to be designed in the next few years, is that this concept will be
can'ied forward into that process and tie everything together would be the intent.
Lash: Then we would lose the soccer field?
Park and Rec Commission Meeting - January 27, 1998
Jeff Schoenbauer: Then you would lose the soccer field at that point, right. And I really wanted
to stress that I appreciate this, what the associations are trying to achieve because they do have
needs but in the overall context of the park, I do think that this access drive is going to be very
important in the long term. We are introducing more organized, usable space in the concepts that
we're showing and in order to eliminate some of the parking pressure on here, we simply have to
I think provide reasonable access to these back parking lots. And if this does not exist, forcing
people to go around several blocks and come up, they're just simply going to start dispersing out
into these... So that's just something to be kept in mind longer term but realistically.., in the
shorter term.
Lash: Could you just point out where the existing new parking lot is up there?
JeffSchoenbauer: In here?
Lash: Yes. No, no. The City Hall one.
Jeff Schoenbauer: The new part of the lot would essentially be here.
Lash: No, what's there now?
Jeff Schoenbauer: Oh, the existing lot...
Manders: How much additional parking does that afford tls in that location?
Jeff Schoenbauer: I don't know, Jason do you recall? 30, give or take in here. In our opinion I
guess, the parking is the side benefit of the road going through to access this parking.
Manders: Is that road intended to be both directions?
Hoflhmn: The long term plan for the entire City Center Park...in fi'ont of the building and create
a green town square, and then this road would play a very important role here at City Hall to
allow for cross traffic between Kerber Boulevard and the postal service...
Frank Scott: While I'm up here, do you want a run down on these sheets I gave you or do you
understand? I'll probably be back but if you want me to stay up, I'd be happy to.
Lash: Do you want to run down them?
Frank Scott: Run down them. The first one that's called, the stats of Bandimere. It just shows
what our numbers were last year. The baseball numbers have been expanded about 10% a year,
and that's based on the last few years we've done it. The softball numbers are expanded about
7 ½% a year and I've put them out 7 years. It seems like 7's always a neat number for the next
referendum or whatever so I moved them out 7 years to show you we're we'd be. I listed the
fields as we call them. Now I want to, I listed all the fields. These are not necessarily all the
fields we get assigned to us, but in order to make, to show you what our needs are against what
Park and Rec Commission Meeting - January 27, 1998
you've got, I listed all the fields. The small ones ~vould iuclude Carver Beach and Rice Marsh,
which of course you'd like to take out of service if you could. I also listed those two soccer
fields at the City Center that we would use for t-ball. And on the mid-sized fields, I listed Lake
Ann 2, 3 and 6. We do get access to those fields, although 6 is not necessarily... Meadoxv Green
1 and 2 and the new one at Bandimere. I said would come on line in 1999 and I guess I got kind
of optimistic but that's, I stuck it there anyway. The other page, I then took these numbers of
teams, one more thing. The number of teams were, I divided all those by 13 so I said there's 13
kids per team so the number of teams then are on the other page is based on that. I then brought
these over to this other page. The only thing I added to it was the city has a t-ball program that
they ran last year and they used 8 segments for their, and we use 8.7. And also for t-ball we do
play two games a night on each field so when I total them up at the bottom, I cut those in half so
where it says total of small fields needed, I've got 34. That's half of the t-ball numbers and then
a full one of the other ones. And the fields we have, then I took off of the sheet before here that
says, I've got these many small fields. As you can see, we go out 7 years from now. We need
65, a little over 65 and you've got 65. But again that's including Carver Beach, Rice Marsh and
it also includes Bluff Creek. All of them, 1 through 5 and we did not have access to all those
fields but those are small fields and they would fit our needs. Under the mid-sized fields, they
also, interestingly enough, and I did not lay that half on there until I got the other part done but
out 7 years fi'om now we need 29.7 and you've got 30 so, that came out pretty good. The other
thing we do have is, on this bottom one, which is the larger boys and it really is like that Field #1
over at Lake Ann and one of the new fields at Bandirnere. There is the lights on the field at Lake
Ann. I did not add that so where it shows under 1998 that we have five, xve really do have 10
because xve can use, we can have...and so each one of these would go up by five because xve do
have another field I didn't count so. So as that turns out, that also would last us out through that
period of time. Questions?
Lash: So irt sun'unary you're saying that the plans that xve have will meet your needs for the next
7 years out.
Frank Scott: If the growth isn't greater than 10%, but now again that's saying we're getting all
these fields and I'm sure Jerry's not going to agree to that. I mean, because he's got South Tonka
Little League. He's got some girls softball... Some of these fields actually are given up for fall
soccer. Not fall soccer, spring soccer. But yes, if we got all the fields we have enough but.
Lash: And going, and working just week nights and not having to use weekends like you've?
Frank Scott: That's what this is predicated on.
Lash: Okay.
Frank Scott: Noxv weekends we do use for practices because this way, these are all games.
These are game nights so if anybody wants to have a practice, they have to ask for the field on
weekends.
Berg: Frank, that also includes three fields, you anticipate three fields at Bandimere?
Park and Rec Commission Meeting - January 27, 1998
Franks Scott: You'll see, actually the large field, I did not put on here. The large field is the 14
and up. It's like the Lake Susan field and right now we don't, we, CAA do not have programs at
that age group. They have them in Chaska and we go along with them. But this year the 13 year
olds, last year we had like one team of 13 year olds. This year they're going to have probably
about five and that's, so next year the 14 year olds are going to have that many and it's going to
be...so I don't have the numbers to justify those so I left one of them. But I did use one at
Bandimere for the large size. That's the one that adds in year 2000 here, put it up to 10 and the
one, I did add the total mid in the year 2000 that brought that up to 30 so those are the two fields
that I, for Bandimere.
Lash: Okay, thanks Frank.
A.J. Dordell: I'm A.J. Dordell. I'm involved with Frank with the CAA. I just xvanted to stress a
couple things that maybe weren't clear in what Frank had indicated. The reason we don't, he's
not budgeting the large fields is we do send our kids down to Chaska, but it's a joint program
negotiated basically with the CAA, but rather than, at those age levels there aren't the numbers to
each have our own programs so I've got to believe that as our numbers are, and they're
ballooning coming up, that they're going to need see fields out of Chanhassen in order to allow
those Chanhassen kids to play down there. So, while we are not budgeting for them, there will
be the need there. The second thing I just want to make clear is, for example in the five fields at
Bluff Creek last year, we were given access to only two of them most of the time and I don't
know of anything that's going to change there so I kind of wish Frank wouldn't have included
those three fields in these numbers because two of them were tied up exclusive for soccer.
Because when you do these soccer overlays, it works fine for our programs which are in spring
we offer baseball and fall we offer soccer but the spring soccer association is booming and so
they, you know when you have these overlays, you can't count these fields as both baseball fields
and soccer fields because you know only one of them can use it at a time. And then the other
field was basically taken by the city's t-ball, preschool program. We had deternfined that the
CAA be, to conserve on fields, that we didn't feel there was a lot of value to offering 5 year old t-
ball and we dropped the program but xve, you know to save on field demand, but that didn't come
true because the city then just filled in at the 5 and under with t-ball so there's the same field
demand as if we would have kept offering it so, you know, whatever it is, I wanted to make those
points clear.
Lash: Anyone else from the audience with comments about City Center.
Bob Naughton: My name's Bob Naughton. I live at 7591 Chippewa Trail, which is at the top of
this chart. If you look at that, my property is up here...right there. My concern, being a new
property owner, especially here, which I moved in in September, was not aware when I
purchased the property that this park was being constructed. We look at this diagram, you have a
lot of coverage around the park with trees, except up at the top where my property is and there's
several other homeowners there. I don't know why you haven't considered us. You know what
we're going to look at. The noise issues that we're going to face with these parks. I'm very
concerned because basically I'm surrounded by this park. I'm concerned about my property
Park and Rec Commission Meeting - January 27, 1998
values, that they're going to drop. If you look at my assessments, I did receive value for the trees
and the views out the back of my house when it was assessed. I'm sure that you're going to tax
me on those. You know I wish we'd look at that upper portion of this park and at least move it
and give it some more coverage so we don't have to see this out the back of my home. The other
thing is, I don't know what I'm going to deal with, have to deal with people walking across my
property. I have a dog. I'm going to have to control that dog, even though I have, I'm going to
put in an Invisible Fence. I'm going to have children walking from the park, you kno~v through
my yard, I'm sure. So I'm concerned with those type of issues. You know I realize that we have
to have parks. I realize that this is something that the community wants, but you have to take
into consideration what the people that live along the back portion of those parks are going to
have to contend with. And in this plan, I don't think that you have. You have not assessed what
affect this is going to have on our property value. You obviously have not taken care in the way
you design the park to shield us from it's view. I talked to Todd on the phone. I sent all of you
letters, which you should have received yesterday. These are my concerns. I don't know what to
do. You know, being a new resident, I didn't know that this was happening. Thank you.
Jeff Schoenbauer: ...I did talk to Bob a couple days ago and Jason and I looked at it a little bit
and what we'll do before xve come back again is look if we can shift these fields around a little
bit to give more ora buffer in this particular area here and see what we can accomplish in that
regard. We may have to give up some green space here that xve've been tentatively preserving, if
you will, but xve'll look at that and see if we can't make that more acceptable to the residents.
Lash: Is there possibilities ofbennings and?
Jeff Schoenbauer: I think for sure we can probably move this over this direction a little bit.
Maybe pull it back a little bit this way and increase the distance of buffer here. That v,,ould open
up opportunities for ben'ning, trees.
Lash: Having trees and shrubs or xvhatever, all tile way along on both.
Jeff Schoenbauer: On both edges here?
Lash: Right.
Jeff Schoenbauer: Yeah, we can look.
Lash: And that would eliminate the possibility, or the temptation for people to cut through his
yard.
Jeff Schoenbauer: And as we move along in tile design process, we'll get more detailed as to
what that will look like and we'll meet with the residents and talk about those issues.
Lash: Mr. Naughton, are you a little more comfortable with?
Park and Rec Commission Meeting - January 27, 1998
Bob Naughton: The only other concern that I had was the drainage. I have a drainage ditch that
runs through that property. When anything...
Jeff Schoenbauer: As far as the grading goes, it is our obligation to control off site runoff so we
won't look to increase it certainly, and if there is a drainage problem that's associated with the
park, we'll look to resolve that when we grade it.
Lash: Because I see if we put berms in, that would only exaggerate his problems.
Jeff Schoenbauer: Yeah, yeah. See we may not have that luxury, if in fact he's draining this
direction. We'll have to that into consideration and that's the next step as we move forward.
Bob Naughton: It's draining from the top...
JeffSchoenbauer: Right here?
Bob Naughton: ...that water's moving...
Jeff Schoenbauer: Sure. Yeah, and again we will certainly deal with any of those complications
that are related to the park itself. I can assure you that we wouldn't look to go onto a residential
property to deal with those.
Lash: I guess I would want to feel secure that we are going to be sensitive to those residents in
every way that we can work with them however we can.
Jeff Schoenbauer: Yes, and we'll look to do that as we move forward.
Lash: Okay, thanks. Anyone else with comments for City Center?
Gary Koskey: Hi, I'm Gary Koskey with the Chan Chaska Soccer Association. The baseball
people took up a good point xvith the overlay of the soccer fields and the baseball fields.
Actually ~vhat ends up happening is they, soccer and baseball end up actually kind of losing out
on the deal. You know with the baseball field there and the baseball people not being able to use
it because soccer is there, we get to use it but at the same time it's designed also as a ballfield so
you have the gravel infield and we'll end up, some of our fields end up going into the gravel
during a soccer game and that's not safe or whatever you want to call it. It doesn't work real well
with soccer running from grass onto the gravel of the infields. So I don't know what you can do
except to keep maybe somehow the baseball fields as baseball fields and the soccer fields as
soccer fields.
Lash: And have fewer?
Gary Koskey: Excuse me? I guess, like in the fall I would think that baseball cuts down and
soccer picks up. You know and then you could use some of the baseball fields, if you put the
soccer field out further or something. But like I say, right now it kind of, with both baseball and
10
Park and Rec Commission Meeting - January 27, 1998
soccer end up kind of getting the short end of the stick on the deal because like you say, with the
design as a baseball field with that gravel infield, hitting into the soccer field, it just doesn't work
real well.
Berg: Are you better offifyoujust designate that an area for soccer and a designated spot for
baseball?
Gary Koskey: Better, but like I say, in the fall I know that the soccer program gets, Chan and
Chaska, really goes crazy and they need a lot of fields. So we take whatever we can get, you
know.
Berg: But you're asking for fewer fields.
Gary Koskey: Well, no I'm not asking for, well in that sense yeah. But as a real soccer field, like
I say, we take whatever we can get and if it ends up that we have to put our field onto tile gravel,
that's what we do. But what I'm just trying to point out here, and like what baseball pointed out
too, is that you can't really put two fields onto one because obviously only baseball's going to
use it or soccer's going to use it at one time.
Manders: ...something on this overlap betxveen the infield gravel area and the soccer. I mean it
appears to me that there isn't that concern. Because the infields are designated by those small
lines around the diamond and your soccer's outside of that.
Gary Koskey: Well that was one thing I was going to point out is that on, which one is it?
You're right on these ones. If you don't...but on other fields that we've used, like over at Bluff
Creek. It cuts in there. I mean they xveren't, the way they were set up, that's the xvay it ended up
but.
Lash: But this particular plan.
Gary Koskey: This one isn't too bad, yeah. But one thing I also xvanted to point out was that the
40 x 80 oil the two soccer fields that arc, yep. We actually need like 10 more yards on that. Our
9 and 10 year old kids need a 50 x 80 yard field, and 1 noticed that on the Bandimere one, it looks
like they're going to be turning the existing 9 and 10 year old soccer field into a green space. Or
that's xvhat it looked like anyxvay. I'm not sure. Let's see. This is where the soccer field is right
now. So we would be losing a much needed soccer field right there. There's eight, yeah there's,
let's see. Four at 9 year old and four at 10 year old that need that field and if we lose that, we
need to go somewhere and we also have to go according to the rules of the soccer league for field
sizes and we need a 50 x 80 for that age of kids. And if we lose that one at Bandimere, we need
to put it back in somewhere.
Lash: Which way, what are you talking about losing,..?
Gary Koskey: Okay, there's a, on the Bandimere field, there's already a 9 and 10 year old soccer
field there.
11
Park and Rec Commission Meeting - January 27, 1998
Lash: Oh, down. The one down.
Gary Koskey: Right. That they're going to turn into a green space or whatever so, and you know
we're going to end up actually losing a soccer field with that one going to green space.
Howe: You're gaining soccer fields. You're losing a soccer field but I see six...
Gary Koskey: Wait, but what I'm pointing out is if this one stays at 40 x 80, we don't have any
for the 9 and 10 year old kids. We need at 50 yards wide.
Lash: The one at City Center.
Howe: There's one at City Center here that looks like it could be expanded to 50 x 80.
Gary Koskey: Yeah, if we can get you know, it would be nice on those two if they could
somehow make them 50 x 80.
Lash: Well that doesn't look like it'd be too hard to do with that.
Jeff Schoenbauer: ...There's a 40 x 80 and a 35 x 65 was the size of fields that were defined for
tls in the program. We'll look to enlarge at least one of those to 50 x 80.
Gary Koskey: Well I think what they're pointing out is for the even younger kids, but the 9 and
10 year old kids, like you say, use that field at Bandimere right now and it is regulation size and
like you say, for the traveling soccer we have to get the fields to size according to the MYSA
rules and that one already fits those rules.
Lash: But you can see on the City Center plan it'd be.
Gary Koskey: Those would be a little bit small.
Lash: I mean it's easy, it'd be easy enough to make it 50.
Gary Koskey: Well yeah. Well I just wanted to point out though. If for whatever reason you end
tip putting the trees in there and it ended only being 40 yards, we'd end up losing a field then. So
thank you.
Lash: Okay, thanks. Anyone else in the audience with comments about City Center? Okay.
We'll move on to Bandimere.
Jeff Schoenbauer: We'll look to incorporate those as best we can. Just to refresh, the real
struggle for us internally in our office has been trying to accommodate as many athletic facilities
as we can. The realities are we have the Williams Pipeline and we're going to be testing their
patience already with what we're proposing. And we have limitations with TH 101 as far as
12
Park and Rec Commission Meeting - January 27, 1998
access and so forth. So in my mind, in my mind I think the plan has achieved a reasonable
balance between community, athletic and neighborhood concerns and we'll work from there.
Berg: Are you saying that based on the overlay that you shoxved us?
Jeff Schoenbaner: Yeah, yeah. I think we can reasonably include the overlay and add a few
amenities to it.
Lash: This doesn't have the overlay on it, does it.'?
Jeff Schoenbauer: Yes it does.
Lash: Okay. Can you just go through it, offand on again?
Jeff Schoenbauer: Essentially xvhat we're suggesting here, and really all we're doing is just
manipulating what we are proposing. We're essentially looking at this much more closely as a
family recreation area and by doing that really, what we're doing is adding a hard court area that
just expands the play opportunities for younger kids in this area. And this could become a family
picnic area. And in here we're essentially taking out one tennis court and adding a basketball
court, which in recent years has proven to be very successful because there is more ora demand
for basketball than tennis outdoors these days. And then we've also added a sand volleyball here
as well, and that really, one of those quite frankly should serve the purposes here quite well. Oh
yeah, in talking with Todd and his discussions with the trail here, this is an awfully nice spot, in
this general location for an overview of the wetlands across the road, and what we're trying to do
is play upon the existing silo and see if we can't turn that into a picnic shelter, rest stop type thing
for along the trail. Just a small type of amenity.
Berg: Is that a full court basketball court?
Jeff Schoenbauer: Yeah that is at this point. And I just wanted to point out that we are looking
to preserve as much of this buffer as we can along here, and then obviously a naturalized buffer
itl through here which again maintains that separation between the neighborhood component and
the community park component.
Lash: Anyone on tile commission with quick questions regarding Bandimere?
Berg: Are you confident with the way you've got the parking configured, etc, that the concern of
tile residents along tile west side...east side?
Jeff Schoenbauer: This side here?
Berg: No.
Jeff Schoenbauer: Exactly opposite, yeah.
13
Park and Rec Commission Meeting - January 27, 1998
Berg: They were concerned that there was an awful lot of traffic coming in through there ~vhen
they were using the neighborhood park.
JeffSchoenbauer: Oh yeah.
Berg: Are you confident that that will be alleviated now?
Jeff Schoenbauer: I am confident that we'll alleviate probably most of that. Especially if we
really go with the recommendation to change this to just a neighborhood green space versus a
soccer space. These are designed to be big soccer greens so it's reasonable to expect that at any
given time these could be cut into a number of different sized fields for whatever purpose you
have and demand you have. As could this one as well.
Lash: I guess my concern is for parking. I think on tile original plan you had 300 or plus spots
and it's now down to 276?
Jeff Schoenbauer: Yes. We have about, we're going to assess that again but I think the other
plan, with the greater number of parking spaces, had more facilities too. Yeah...but I think we're
quite comfortable that we can accommodate the parking that we'll need xvithin these two spaces
for the site.
Lash: Okay. Any other commissioner comments or questions?
Manders: This is probably not an issue because we have enough other road problems but is there
any concern with TH 1 O1 in terms of that road configuration around that park?
Jeff Schoenbauer: Well it is not going to be an easy nor cheap thing to deal with. In all
likelihood we're going to have to go into TH 101 here and change the grading from this road. It
isn't so bad as far as the sight lines, except for the fact that it drops off and comes down. And
it's in all likelihood we'll have to go in and change that so the sight lines in either direction are
more appropriate. Once we get beyond this stage of accepting the master plan, then we'll move
in with traffic engineering and MnDot to look at that intersection more seriously. I can't stand
here right now and tell you that everything is going to be accepted carte blanche and xve may
have to come, be forced to come back and look at that again. But for right now this would be
what I would recommend as our starting point and we'll work from there. Yeah. It is our
concern too with the traffic movements in and out of here, that it be a safe intersection and we'll
start that assessment real soon now.
Lash: Anyone else? Okay, we'll open it up for public comments and questions. If you have any
about Bandimere.
Resident: I noticed that over there in the handouts is a plan with four baseball diamonds that has
not been addressed here. And I guess I'm not quite sure why. But I know that one of the issues
was, on the note on here that it would remove a soccer field and parking lot because ~ve're
concerned with how many. I guess it seems to me like the parking estimates are kind of high oil
14
Park and Rec Commission Meeting - January 27, 1998
these as to what we need on a field. I mean you've got 26 kids playing. I can't imagine that, you
know mostly there's a couple grandmas and grandpas there but not a whole lot. And most of the
kids themselves, I'm sure there must be some basis for that but it seems like there's some desire
for 46 cars per field seems excessive to me. I don't know, but I'm not the expert. But I'm just
wondering why, I guess I'm a little disappointed in all of our anticipation that we have a net gain
here of three baseball diamonds and two soccer fields by this park, because there are three soccer
fields planned there. There already is existing one that goes away so that's really only a net gain
of two from the referendum, and three baseball diamonds and I guess I'm, you know as the
President of the association, kind of disappointed from where I thought we were heading.
Lash: What did you think we were going to get?
Resident: I don't have those original deals with me and I don't know if they just got all turned to
soccer fields or whatever but I know there was a lot more ball diamonds anticipated than this. So
I guess I'd like to consider the four baseball diamonds planned and it was not addressed here and
I don't know why.
Lash: Were you at the meeting last, txvo xvceks ago?
Resident: I was not able to.
Lash: Okay, and I can answer that quickly for you I think. We had some concerned residents
along the northern boundary line regarding parking right along their property.
Resident: But this plan changes, is a different parking schematic than what you had last meeting.
Lash: But it still has got the park, is the one that you're looking at?
Resident: Yeah.
Lash: Yeah. It's still got parking right up to their property line, and I'm assuming Jeff; was that.
Jeff Schoenbauer: The realities of the site, and I can appreciate when the original concepts were
done, the exact dimensions of the site were not surveyed and on and on. The reality is that we
have to make choices and if we make a choice to put another ballfield in here, the only choice
that remains is to remove this soccer field and increase parking. And the other side of that coin is
on the budgetary end of things. To add another field and accommodate that field, we're talking
somewhcre between $50,000.00 and $80,000.00. In a sitnation where we're already going to
have some ha:'d choices to make as we go forward so. So that is what the realities are.
Lash: Frank.
Frank Scott: On this, the one that we're not looking at. The designer chose to editorialize on this
one and I'd like to speak to that. They didn't take the soccer field off of there and put a parking
lot in there. Originally he left it there and wrote across it that if we xvere to get another ballfield,
15
Park and Rec Commission Meeting - January 27, 1998
the soccer people would lose their field. I think it's very evident and irresponsible that he chose
to do this in this manner. I think the soccer people and the baseball people were trying to work
together to come up with a nice plan and I think it's his choice to cause some friction between the
two and I certainly don't like that. Another thing that he did, on this one, he said that he's got
this many cars in there and he's short 70 places. When I went back to the last ones we used last
week, if there's 315 parking spaces required here, last week on V1, which also had the same
number of fields, you only required 266 parking spaces which is only 21 different than here, not
70. And on B3 he needed 280 parking spaces so in no case last week did he need this many
parking spaces for the same number of fields and suddenly on this one, he requires 315. ! guess I
have a little problem with that.
Lash: We only have 276.
Frank Scott: He's saying down here, he's got it circled parking lot. Approximately 70 spaces
needed for the, or 70 spaces need to be added for the 315 that are needed. And 315 is not a
number that I'm, that I am accustomed to. Another editorial you chose to make is the, that the
local athletic associations are adamant about a fourth ballfield. That is not true. We're adamant
about using and getting the best number of facilities in this area that we can get. Whether it's
soccer fields or baseball fields. I don't think at that time it was true and I don't think now it's
true. I think he could have done a much better job and could come up with more facilities than
he did. Thank you very much.
Lash: Is there anyone else from the audience? Jeff, did you want to make a comment?
Jeff Schoenbauer: Well it just, nay job is to try to maximize the facility as best we can and there
are choices to make. It doesn't rnatter to me if the space is used for a softball field or a baseball
field versus soccer. All I was getting at is the choice had to be made. It wasn't meant to cast
aspersions or anything like that.
Ann Moksnes: Ann Moksnes and I'm a resident on Kio~va Trail. Part of the neighborhood park
area. We happened to buy the lot from Art Bandimere's estate when he passed away so we knew
that the city was purchasing this property back in '89 and then thrilled about it. Only concern,
and a very small one. I'm hoping it can be considered. When we had a meeting following the
last open forum meeting, at the suggestion I think of the city people to get together and just really
talk about and brainstorm on the neighborhood park, the only suggestion that we made that's
important to some people that couldn't be here tonight, as well as it is to myself, is the
connecting, the trail. Kiowa Trail is a pebble, dead end street without side~valks and we, in some
ways we love that but there is no place, no place for children to ride bikes or trikes, except the
street or the driveway. If you have a flat driveway, that's great. If you don't, you've got a
problem. So the one thing we mentioned, and as you look at the trail going around the
neighborhood park, connecting up to the community park, I mean it looks fabulous. There's a
very short distance between here and here whereas if there was a connection, both for adult
walkers and for young children on trikes or bikes or that type of thing, it would get them off the
street in some sort ora pattern where they are visible. They're not on the streets, this park area is
visible from the homes on Kiowa Trail, especially the people on this side of the street that live
16
Park and Rec Commission Meeting - January 27, 1998
down closer to the park. I'm up here but down here. Again, it's just a request and I was asked to
bring it up again tonight if, I realize we're going to be tinder budget constraints but I don't know
how much that much path would cost.
Lash: You're talking about linking the two?
Ann Moksnes: Linking the two so that at that lower level, the people here that aren't aware, need
to be aware that there's quite a great difference between this community park and where this is.
This is a steep hill right here with these trees on it. I don't know how that grading will all come
about but you can't, you won't be able to at eye level to see up here from down here, so.
Lash: Okay, thanks Ann.
Jeff Schoenbauer: From a master planning standpoint, we can reassess that and perhaps add that.
There is a significant grade change between the two. The reason we didn't do it initially is we
had concern about people wandering into the neighborhood, just because they were folloxving the
trail. But if it's their desire to have that shown, we can look at that.
Lash: Okay.
Manders: So if I understand that comment, that trail would be on the bottom piece of the
original?
Jeff Schoenbauer: Yeah. This would essentially.
Manders: ...be put in xvhere you're pointing.
Jeff Schoenbauer: Yeah, this here we anticipated ah'eady to link the neighborhood to this trail
system through the park. What is being suggested is to bring that trail and link it up here so you
essentially have a small loop right here and that's something that we can certainly add and
whether or not it makes in the budget is something to assess later but that can be added.
Lash: It also can be in the budget now or in a year in the budget or whatever, okay. As long as
we knoxv that they want it in...
Jeff' Schoenbauer: Yes.
Lash: Okay.
Kitty Sitter: Kitty Sitter. I'm a resident over in the Bandimere Park area. One athletic facility
that has not been brought up yet, and that's the football fields. We have kids playing right now
in the Eden Prairie district and perhaps wc may be looking at starting something here in Chan
because of the fact that there are more kids playing that and the fields are getting less and less.
So it's something that I'd like you to consider. There isn't anything cut and dry yet as far as
athletic association backing that information yet, so I don't have any facts or figures for you, but I
17
Park and Rec Commission Meeting - January 27, 1998
would like you to consider that because it is something in the future that may happen. Perhaps it
can be done in the outside of those field areas. It's something to consider. The other thing ! want
to find out, it's one other question for you, is Finger's property, have we heard anything as far as
if he's accepting the buffer zone that's along there? We've got a whole bunch of parking up in
that area. I know that was a consideration before.
Lash: We did receive a letter from them.
Kitty Sitter: And could you comment on that for us Jan to find out how he's accepting that?
Lash: Yeah, he was not able to come to the meeting tonight and it's my understanding, he says in
conclusion it looks like xve're very close to a concept that will satisfy all and I think that there's
been discussion with him regarding some berming and vegetation along his property line that I
think he is satisfied with.
Kitty Sitter: Thank you.
Lash: Am I correct?
Jeff Schoenbauer: ...that point, yeah. We have increased the distance between the property line
and the parking area and it is our intent to do a pretty intensive job of landscaping through there.
We'll work with them on trying to make that work.
Greg Hromatka: My name is Greg Hromatka and I'm a resident in the Saddlebrook area. My
concern is the ballfields and the space. The use. The intelligent use. Ballfields, soccer fields,
it's a reality. They need a fairly level area and their space is somewhat large and defined. What
I'm seeing is then, it'd be better to forego some of the green space in a way that you mentioned
around the silo. Utilizing that for picnic shelters and areas. You can see another example in the
limited area space along Kerber Boulevard, the pond park. There's a picnic table along some
trees there. You don't need great areas of space to use in that nature, but you do need a larger
imprint of area to create the ballfields that are needed, and ifxve don't look ahead, we're going to
be short in a year's time, txvo years time for sure.
Lash: Greg, do you understand about the pipeline?
Greg Hromatka: Yes I do.
Lash: Okay. And that we can't put any type of facility like that where the pipeline is.
Greg Hromatka: I understand but there was a facility, a picture with four spaces again so I mean,
you know shifting or utilizing the green like towards the silo like you mentioned and you know, a
picnic area or whatever. However you define those.
Jeff Schocnbauer: Yeah. This, quite frankly this space is very difficult for us to use because of
the pipeline situation. The only way that we could gain any space, if you will, is to reorientate
18
Park and Rec Commission Meeting - January 27, 1998
this field back the way it was on an earlier concept, which throxvs it out of sync with the common
space area here that's desirable, and it also raised concerns that people going to this ballfield, if it
were switched over here, would be going through the neighborhood to access it versus parking up
here. So it really is a judgment or a balancing of the different things that we're contending with
and I wish, I wish we could. Jason and I spent many hours playing with different field
configurations trying to squeeze something else on here and it just is not going to happen without
something con'ting out the other end.
Lash: Thanks Greg. Anyone else?
Barry Bershow: Barry Bershow. I live on Kiowa Trail. Everybody gets a lot of criticism for
doing this so I've kind of been a silent participant as you've unlaid these plans over here. I think
he did a brilliant job. This is, to me is a masterful compromise over all the complaints and the
problems that we've been addressing and I would like to speak in favor of this configuration
that's up on the board instead of the four diamond. Not only do we lose the soccer field by going
to that fourth baseball diamond, but we also apparently lose the tennis court and the basketball
court so xve're kind of losing three athletic activities to get one baseball field under that new
configuration. So I really like this approach and somebody who lives you knoxv, across the street
from what's going to be...
(There was a tape change at this point in the discussion.)
Lash: Anyone else from the audience?
Jeff Seeley: My name's Jeff Seeley. I also live on Kiowa Trail and I would agree, this works
very well and I can tell you, having five families from the street over Sunday, they were all very
happy to see this change. My question...parking if we take out the landscaping in the center
here...for outside but we get to an issue that's important to everybody... That's it. That's a
question.
Jeff Schoenbauer: What we try to do is quite frankly take a little bit of liberty with parking lot in
part, if we can, to change the configuration so it isn't as though you're pulling up to the local
convenience store. And what we're trying to do here is just make a parking lot a little bit more
interesting. It still allows us to deal with the pipeline that goes through here. So instead of
having a...lot right in front of the houses and so forth, we broke it up with more landscaping and
so forth. As in the parking lot here, we'd rather lose a couple spots and increase the amount of
landscaping in this lot, than have it a big monolithic isn't that appealing in a setting like this.
That's the reasoning behind it at least.
Lash: Other questions or comments from the audience?
Cindy Will: Yes, my name is Cindy Will and I was here at the last meeting and there's a concept
that you didn't choose. The concept...but it shows a field...nobody however chose that because
of the parking that went in and out. So I don't understand why they came up with these different
19
Park and Rec Commission Meeting - January 27, 1998
concepts that the fields are in different areas and yet the pipeline's a problem in some of them
and it wasn't in the other. Is there?
Jeff Schoenbauer: Yeah, a reason for that. In this particular case, it's just that the very way that
this field was placed. It's surrounding the pipeline on a point that was relatively level on the
pipeline. It's literally about the only spot that the field could possibly happen, and that's what
essentially...this concept then is you start building around that and you bring vehicles into here.
As you can see, the net gain when you look at this, the number of facilities of four ballfields
spread out and one soccer green space, the net gain is less than what you have in the other
scheme. In this case we indicate four ballfields. If the choice was made to go with four
ballfields, that could also be accommodated here with again less soccer space as shown on the
other concept. So it's just that juggling act that we've looked at a multitude of different ways to
successfully.
Lash: And that also pushed the fields pretty close to the neighbors.
Jeff Schoenbauer: Right, and it also brought the road internally and knowing now what we know
about the cost estimates, that would have been a more expensive infrastructure to build to begin
with so we had more problems there as well.
Lash: Anyone else from the audience?
Ron Frigstad: My name is Ron Frigstad. I live at 9270 Kiowa Trail. I guess my question is
about the infrastructure cost. How long, how much is it going to cost just to realign...
Jeff Schoenbauer: We don't know that yet. We're estimating several thousand dollars obviously
but we haven't gotten to the level.
Ron Frigstad: Is there anything in that $1.33 million that should affect that at all yet? Or is that
going to come offthe one.
Jeff Schoenbauer: That would come off the $1.1 at this point. But we have to work with both
MnDot, and in all likelihood Carver County will get involved in that discussion.
Ron Frigstad: Will they pay any of that? Can we get any money from them?
Jeff Schoenbauer: Not too likely at this point.
Ron Frigstad: Okay. So if we're looking at full double left turn lane and realigning the sight
distances, we can spend a couple hundred thousand dollars on TH 101.
Jeff Schoenbauer: You could probably spend $60,000.00, yeah.
Ron Frigstad: And that won't change no matter where we address it along TH 101 ? We have to
accommodate those turn lanes for the traffic movement.
2O
Park and Rec Commission Meeting - January 2'7, 1998
Lash: Anyone else? Okay. Seeing no more comments on Bandimere, oh.
Resident: For the soccer fields. Over at Lake Ann, it's our only soccer field actually. And it's
got a watering system on it. It's a fabulous field because of that xvatering system. I think we had
like 68 games on that field last year and it held up quite well but it was because of the watering
system. On these new fields, and I realize the watering system is expensive and would add to the
cost, but in the long run I think it would help keep the fields in better shape because I've seen, for
instance in Chaska fields that we're using and they don't have a xvatering system and they're just
chewed up by the end of the season.
Lash: I think we have planned on it.
Resident: Oh it has been.
Jeff Schoenbauer: I suspect that's a higher priority than a lower one so it's like to be.
Resident: Oh for sure. I just want to bring it up. I didn't know.
Lash: We learned that lesson the hard way already so that's not something we want to cut.
Okay, anybody else. We're going to try and move this along. There are other issues that we
xvant to try and get at yet tonight. So I'm going to close public comments regarding Bandimere
and City Center and open this up for any more commissioner comments. Hoxv about if we just
start with City Center and make a motion on that and then do Bandimere separately. We'll go
doxw~. Look for comments. Start with Jim.
Mandcrs: I guess my only question pertains to the tree line structure in the kind of the center of
the park. If.
Jeff Schoenbauer: Along here?
Mandcrs: Yeah, I think kind of that L shape in there. How much that compromises the use of
the park for whatever else. School or for the city or.
Jeff Schoenbauer: We see this as basically a promenade that's...behind the overall aesthetic of
the park. We recognize though that we don't xvant to impede the usability of it as well. I think
we can achieve a balance between the two and we'll try to illustrate that for you next time how
we plan to do that. And if you're not comfortable with it, we'll revise it.
Manders: No. I guess that's my concern. I guess I don't mind it being there but is it an issue.
Otberxvise I like the idea of retaining the tennis courts where we can minimize those costs. The
idea of adjusting the ball diamonds on the top a bit to accommodate some kind of barrier I think
is great.
21
Park and Rec Commission Meeting - January 27, 1998
Jeff Schoenbauer: We'll definitely look to alleviate some of those concerns that the gentleman
had.
Manders: And as far as the soccer fields, from what I recall, I mean having two or potentially
three independent soccer fields that aren't overlaying ballfields, I thi~ that's as good a plan. I
think this accomplishes that.
Jeff Schoenbauer: Yeah, we tried to lay in the size of fields that the association had given us
initially and recognizing if you can get a 40 x 80 it'd be great and 35 x 65 isn't as big. But that is
xvhat we can get on.
Manders: Well to the extent that you would make one of those 50 yards xvide or to that feet
yards. How xvould you accomplish that?
Jeff Schoenbauer: Well I think the realistic place to try to do that is in here and that's all, this
xvhole space is essentially tied together. As we get into finer design detail, this may actually
shrink up...but we have to look at what all the needs are for these spaces as well so it's, we'll
look to fine tune those things before we come back and see what we can put in there safely for
everybody's sake.
Manders: Alright.
Lash: Ron.
Roeser: No, I feel the same way Jim does. You can adjust those two small ones to 50 x 80. I
think the plan is fine. No problem with it.
Lash: Fred.
Berg: I would agree. As long as you meet the concerns that xverc raised, and I know...I have no
problem with that part. I guess my comments are more general, directed to both. I think it's
going to have to be and understood, and it probably already is. We're never going to have
enough fields. We can't put limitations at Bandimere and size limitations at City Center, we're
never going to be able to come up with what we think is the perfect number. Have to worry
about this seven years from now. ! like the idea of the overlay at Bandimere simply because of
the fact that we're getting some balance between the two. I think xve've maximized the amount
we can use for these activities plus still maintaining some sort of balance for the rest of the
community that we have an obligation to.
Jeff Schoenbauer: And I apologize to the gentleman, if he felt that I slighted him in any way as
far as fields go. It was not my intent. I was just trying to find that balance so ! apologize for that.
Lash: Okay. I would agree with the earlier comments. You know being sensitive to the
neighbors and as far as Jim's comments with the trees too, you know I love trees and parks are
the place for trees and all of that but sometimes you know we need to be pretty careful how
22
Park and Rec Commission Meeting - January 27, 1998
they're placed so they don't end up being some kind of maintenance nightmare or kids running
out to catch a ball smack, you know running into a tree. That kind of stuff. So when it comes to
the actual landscaping, some of these trees, sometimes I think they're not always, I think of Bluff
Creek as an example where they, what got put along Highway 5, apple trees or plum trees or
something. You know it's a maintenance nightmare on the ground and you know so some of
those kind of things I want to be kind of careful with where we place those and the kind of trees
xve put in. So we're not screwing up the use that xve have. But otherwise I think you really did a
great job of utilizing the space. I like the layout a lot, and ! like the flexibility down. That soccer
field with the parking, and actually the open space up to the north end, I think when we're talking
about wanting some balance for open space, picnic area. You've got that open space up in the
north side and down on the south side where you have the ice in the winter. So I think you did a
great job and I like those and I think that gives us some flexibility for the future if we need to
expand things or whatever so.
Jeff Schoenbauer: Okay. Well, we'll take those into consideration, your comments.
Lash: Rod.
Franks: I really don't have anything further to add. The only comment I have, I also share the
concern about the trees in the central square area. Along the promenade area and I'm just
wondering if, there's a way to switch those to the other side of the sidewalk.
Jeff Schocnbauer: Yeah, and I think that's what we'll look at. We'll definitely look at this in
more detail noxv that we're moving ahead and that is a good way to look at it and xve'll do that
~"or s[lre.
Franks: The only other question I had was with tile baseball field that's directly above the central
square area. To be able to kind of invert that so tile outfield is actually out towards the
neighborhood area...and decrease thc number of participants that would be directly across.
Jeff' Schoenbauer: We can take a look at it. The doxw-t side of that is that we transfer the green
space...space inside the park. This particular backstop location relative to the property line, I'm
personally very comfortable with. I do understand the need to look at this one again and try and
pull this. If it works for you we'll get this out of here a little xvays. Show more ora buffer along
this edge here. I tried to play that down. If that does not meet your expectations...
Lash: Okay, I think that's a good, very good comment because also that's where the majority of
the fans arc going to be sitting and the teams and the cheering and all of that so.
Jeff Schocnbauer: Right in here.
Lash: Yeah. Right along.
Jeff Schoenbauer: We'll take a look at that.
23
Park and Rec Commission Meeting - January 27, 1998
Lash: So if that's farther from the homes it would be, it would cut down on the noise a little bit
for the residents right there.
Franks: That's all I had.
Lash: Jane?
Meger: I really don't have anything that hasn't been already said.
Lash: Mike.
Howe: I like the plans. I'd like the neighbor's concerns taken into account. I think Jeff will do
that. I also want to say, I think we may slowly be losing sight of the fact that this is going to be
about compromise. In a perfect world we'd build 15 soccer fields and 18 ballfields and xve can't
do that and that's the reality in Chmzhassen in this day and age so we're going to try and find,
that's our task and everybody's had great input, is to find the best combination ofballfields,
soccer fields, community space, parking and if that means my kid some day plays soccer on a
field that's halfa baseball diamond, then that's a reality. And maybe someday that will change
but keep that in focus.
Lash: Okay, is there a motion on City Center?
Manders: Would it need to be included with the motion, since there's a lot of things that we've
talked abont on this particular park? Do we have to specify all those adjustments? Or can we
say look at them. Go with those additions. Othcrxvise I'm fine xvith this.
Lash: With the things, with the comments we just made regarding trees, the neighbors, possibly
flipping a couple of those infields.
Jeff Schoenbauer: Yeah, and I'll just run through them very quickly. Moving the north field a
little bit...
Lash: I was thinking the other one too.
Jeff Schoenbauer: This one here?
Lash: The second one down and then the one that build, is right adjacent to it. Yeah. Yep, that
one.
Jeff Schoenbauer: ...I do think that we Call maybe move it up here and once we do that, we'll
see what we can do there to alleviate that as lnuch as we can.
Lash: So Call we make a motion then based on those commission comments...?
24
Park and Rec Commission Meeting - January 27, 1998
Meger: I think we also talked about looking, the soccer field, making one 50 x 80 and then
also...to make sure that their concerns are taken care of.
Manders: With those concerns I would move that we move forward with this proposal.
Lash: Is there a second?
Howe: Second.
Manders moved, Ho~ve seconded that the Park and Recreation Commission recommend
approval of the City Center Park plan as proposed with the concerns noted by the
commission and neighbors. All voted in favor and the motion carried.
Lash: Let's move on to Bandimere. Jim, let's start with you again.
Manders: A number of comments, and I guess I wrestled back and forth with quantity and
quality and to my compromise, maybe you minilnize some of the, or cut back at least on some of
the quantity to attain some degree of quality. And if our effort is to put in ballfields and soccer
fields and everything else without consideration for maybe the less active component of the
community, you xvould have a different alignment but I am attempting to satisfy both so I think
xve do lose a bit of active use to attain some of those requirements. So actually personally I like
this alignment. There's a few things as far as parking that I think have been addressed,
particularly getting parking up towards the upper soccer fields. One question I have on the
soccer field that xvas moved out. Was the purpose of that just to minimize the traffic on Kiowa?
Jeff Schoenbauer: And I'm, in my mind I'm only suggesting that fi'om a pro.., standpoint. From
a practical standpoint, that is something that is really internal, whether or not you use that space
for soccer, programmed soccer or not. As far as the development of thc park site itself goes, it
doesn't matter. So that is an issue that you can resolve internally once you see if these three
soccer fields, once they're on line, meet the needs of the user group. And those pressures I'm
sure xvill manifest themselves one way or the other. But fi'om our perspective, we're not going to
change the st>ace in any way under this phase that will affect it's use.
Lash: Is that it Jim?
Manders: Yeah.
Lash: Ron.
Roeser: I guess I have a little problem with the single tennis court .... always tried to group our
tennis courts. The loneliest place in the world when I go biking is an empty tennis court, single
tennis court. They seem to me, and I know maybe people that live in that area say oh, we would
use them. We use them. They don't. They just sit there and... The basketball court doesn't
bother me. The tennis court I think is a waste. That's just my opinion.
25
Park and Rec Commission Meeting - January 27, 1998
Jeff Schoenbauer: Well, if it's any consolation, it probably won't be built under this budget so.
Lash: Yeah.
Berg: I've said what I wanted to say before.
Lash: I think I'll agree with a couple of the rest comments. I think this is a very nice plan and I
think it's a nice compromise. Like Mike was getting at. We'd love to be able to have a whole
soccer complex and a whole Little League complex and everything all over and have community
park with nice picnic shelters but you know we have to go with what we have and this particular
site had a lot of constraints on it and I think you did a great job of getting in as much as you could
and then maintaining some aesthetic qualities to this whole thing, because I think it was really a
tough job and I think we were trying to be very sensitive and I think we are very sensitive to the
residents who live there and I think that we put in as many quality facilities on here as xve can
without making it look like just a massive complex. And I think this is very nicely done, So I
don't have, I have nothing that I would suggest and I think you did a great job.
Franks: I don't have anything else to add.
Meger: I xvould echo Jan's comments and I'm especially pleased with., .and the adding of some
of the smaller amenities. For instance the idea of being a small shelter spot or resting spot down
by the silo, along the trail I think is very nice and adding some of those smaller things.
Lash: Mike.
Howe: 1 would just again, I just mentioned it but thc northern neighbors...
Jeff Schoenbauer: Sure, and we'll do that.
Lash: Okay, is there a motion regarding this plan?
Howe: I move we accept this plan.
Lash: Okay, is there a second?
Meger: Second.
Howe moved, Meger seconded that tile Park and Recreation Commission recommend to
accept the plan for Bandimere Park. All voted in favor and the motion carried.
Lash: Thanks to all the residents for your comments tonight. It's very helpful.
1998 TRAIL REFERENDUM PROJECTS.
26
Park and Rec Commission Meeting - January 27, 1998
Lash: ...meeting and begin xvith the trail segment on Galpin Boulevard first and we'll start with
a staff presentation.
Hoffman: Thank you Chair Lash, members of the commission, members of the audience. Last
Tuesday, January 20th, the Park and Recreation Commission tabled action on txvo sections of
trails as a part of the 1998 trail project. Those being Galpin Boulevard and the Powers
Boulevard trail. That evening, upon completion of staff presentation, extensive public comment
and commission review, you took the following action. Regarding the Galpin Boulevard trail. It
was tabled until this evening to allow additional information be gathered and presented to the
commission and public. The specific request of the commission included analysis of the
following. In this handout, which I am reporting from, has been distributed to all of the
commissioners and the audience as well. If you're in the audience and you do not have a copy,
they're available at the table. And what we talked about tlnat evening regarding Galpin xvas tine
staff recommend to delete tine northern section of trail from Lake Lucy Road north in an effort to
save costs and keep the project, the entire project, all six trail segments within budget at $1.24
million. In response to that, one of the directives was to look at in lieu of starting the trail near
Highway 5 and progressing north to Lake Lucy Road, what would be the implications of starting
the trail from tlne north, near the city limits, or Mayflower Drive and...on a southerly
construction route, perMps to Long Acres Drive, the northern access to tlne Long Acres
neiglnbortnood. And again the note ttmt I made in the report...why that inquiry was made. The
second directive was regarding fine project budget for the Galpin Boulevard trail. What cost
savings would be deleted by either, would be realized by deleting either that northern segment,
which was recommended north of Lake Lucy. Or the south end, and that being south of Long
Acres Drive. And then thirdly, what are the current and future implications of both those
options. What would they in fact, today as a part oftlne project, and what xvould tine short term
and then long term future implications be of attempting to get those segments constructed if we
passed them by today. Fourttn item was what are tlne variables in both the east and west side
alignments nortln of Lake Lucy Road. There was extensive public comment about looking at, if
we=,,o north of Lake Lucy Road, there was concerns about trees on the west side aliglnment. If
xve would construct the trail as originally proposed, which was off of the shoulder and out at the
ditch line. And residents took a look at the east side in an attempt to assist tine commission, staff
and the City Council consultants, taking a look at anotlner option. Ifxve go on tine east side, take
out tlne hedge which is there today, and then they went so far as to seek signatures for granting of
easements on that side. That was looked at and so, or tlnat was discussed last Tuesday and the
commission asked us to look at that in more detail for presentation this evening, which xve have
done. Tlne comn~ission also requested an analysis of tradeoffs that would be encountered under
either, any of these scenarios and presentation of funding alternatives. With that, I'm going to
introduce Dave Nyberg who is with Howard R. Green Company. Howard R. Green has been
retained to manage this project on behalf of the City Council and Dave will respond to these
issues and then I would like to take a few minutes after tlnat and talk to the budget, the overall
project budget and talk about some recommendations...to assist the commission and council in
getting this project underway.
Dave Nyberg: Chair Lash and commissioners. I can really start with almost anything tonight.
We've got a lot of information in response to some of your requests from last week's meeting a
27
Park and Rec Commission Meeting - January 27, 1998
week ago tonight. I could go through the letter first or we could get out the maps with some of
the changes that we made, if you remember on Powers Boulevard there were some changes to the
area through the townhomes with trees and such.
Lash: Let's start with Galpin and can we have the map and the letters. Do the letter but use the
maps so that we can see what you're talking about.
Dave Nyberg: Sure. If you remember from the last meeting, we were talking quite a bit about
what were we going to do north of Lake Lucy Road, and that's what one of these strip maps is of
is that area north of Lake Lucy Road. It's a similar map to the one we used at the December
neighborhood meetings. We really haven't carried on with the design since that point but we still
have those drawings and maps so I can get those out. This is the area on Galpin north of Lake
Lucy Road. IfI wide it down...have Lake Lucy Road... this was our termination point that we
discussed last week...that included the trail offset from the road...northward. This Crestview
Drive, Lakeview Drive... By the time we get in this area, we're very close to the edge of the road
here. 5 feet between the trail and the edge of the road... And in response to your request from
the last meeting, we prepared a letter that I handed out there with just the cost, some different
cost summaries and alternatives. The first section of the letter talks about Galpin Boulevard and
the three options that we considered. We clearly heard from the commission last week that you
wanted both the east and west side studied so what we've come up with is three alternatives.
That first proposed alignment of about $74,000.00 includes an alignment that's very similar to
what you see here. It's a trail that's offset from Galpin Boulevard, north of Lake Lucy Road on
the xvest side, all the way to Mayflower.
Lash: How far offset?
Dave Nyberg: Again, about 15 to 20 feet on the south end towards Lake Lucy Road, but by the
tilne we get heading down the hill, towards Mayflower, we're very close to the existing road.
There's maybe about 3 to 5 foot separation between the edge of the bituminous and the edge of
the trail, but no curb. The next option considered was again the trail extending on the west side.
However this...the edge of the existing pavement. We would construct curb along that edge of
the road and put the trail right behind the curb. Almost giving it a more urban section look. And
the last, that option by the way was $86,000.00 or so, or roughly about $12,000.00 higher than
this option. And that may be confusing but the reason why that cost is higher is the curb and
gutter, there's a cost for that. It's true that you have rnuch less clearing and grubbing. However,
with installation of that curb and gutter, you're going to catch storrnwater in that curb. You have
to have some kind of storm sewer collection system in the form of probably a few catch basins to
route it somewhere. That's a whole nother, really a design that we haven't looked at yet, but we
could certainly do that. And the last option we considered was an alternative on the east side of
Galpin Boulevard, north of Lake Lucy Road. This is very similar to what we just discussed. A
curb would be built on the east side, right off of the edge of the bituminous and then the 8 foot
trail would be paved right behind that curb. And that cost is even more than on the west side,
primarily because there is very expensive clearing and grabbing that would need to be done and
the road drops off very steep in several areas from the edge of the road right now, and in a sense
28
Park and Rec Commission Meeting - January 27, 1998
you'd have to build out that en-~bankment even with putting the trail on, right on the side of the
road.
Lash: So these are just construction costs? You haven't taken...easement costs?
Dave Nyberg: Yeah, absolutely. And that's something important to consider. The least
expensive option is obviously from a construction standpoint, is this preliminary design we've
shown you. However, with that design you do have some significant easements you'd need to
obtain. This area of Galpin Boulevard only has 33 feet of right-of-way. That's definitely not
enough in most areas for a lot of the temporary easements you'd need to take for grading and the
like to match in with the existing slopes. The other two options, at least on the west side anyway.
Putting the trail right behind the curb. We'd probably still need some temporaries in a few areas
but compared to the first option, it'd be much less.
Berg: On the east side you've got the curb, you've got a constructed curb. Would you have to
have a curb on that side?
Dave Nyberg: The reason for the curb is to give some kind of barrier. It may sound crazy to call
a curb a barrier between cars and pedestrians but in effect that will hold a car on a street, if the
car's traveling slow enough. Obviously people, from what residents have said, travel pretty
quick on Galpin Boulevard but that does serve as a barrier that provides some protection.
Typical bike trail guidelines like this recolnmend a trail offset 10 feet from tile edge of a curb,
even on a road with curb and gutter. Obviously we can't do that but.
Berg: So the reason you don't have a curb on the one option, on the west side is that you could
offset it far enough back that it wouldn't be needed?
Dave Nyberg: You're offset farther but you're still within that clear zone we've been talking
about, but you are offset farther than being on the cdgc of the road so.
Berg: No Ct~l'b on the east is not an option?
Dave Nyberg: I really don't think it is. I think tile only way to build it on tile east side is to put it
right along thc road and thus xve'd recommend you construct curb and gutter. You certainly
wouldn't have to. We're really, we're bending the guidelines with any of these options because
of tile tight constraints.
Berg: That curb look like, when you talk, it's about that high and just cement.
Dave Nyberg: Yeah, 6 inches. 6 inches high. Vertical face.
Lash: Is it cement or is itjust a tiling of blacktop? A curb of extra blacktop.
Dave Nybcrg: You could install bituminous curb. However we'd recommend a concrete curb
design, at least a narrow gutter probably like 6 inches high, 12 inch gutter. And the reason for
29
Park and Rec Commission Meeting - January 27, 1998
that is that there's a steep hill here and if you trap water along that bituminous curb and it's
flowing down that hill towards a collection system, 1 really don't think that pavement is going to
last through many winters unless you have concrete curb.
Lash: And then we move on to, if we put it on the north end instead of the south end, how far ~ve
would get.
Dave Nyberg: Yes, certainly. That's the next section that I'm discussing. If you remember from
the last meeting we had a proposed cost of roughly $235,000.00 for Galpin Boulevard, from the
south end connection to the existing trail on the east side of Galpin, extending north to Lake Lucy
Road. So what we've done is we've tried to develop just some logical break points for the trail
along Galpin Boulevard, roughly we've divided it into four segments. A segment south of...
North of Lake Lucy Road is one segment...and then the last segment is the Long Acres Galpin
connection point. The trail, this map actually shows the trail extending completely to Highway 5,
but in reality there is...
Lash: That green spot is the park, right?
Dave Nyberg: Yes.
Lash: And Brinker Street is where again?
Dave Nyberg: Right here. And what we've found, when we break the costs out in those sections
is that the area from Long Acres, the trail segment from Long Acres south to our termination
point, which is about 2,200 feet, is roughly the same cost as the option we talked about before,
the preliminary option of about $74,000.00 tbr extending the trail north of Lake Lucy Road.
Offset from Galpin Boulevard. So what that means is that if you were to start at Mayflower, you
had that much money to allocate for this trail, you would get down to somewhere by that south
entrance on Long Acres. I believe it's Hunter Drive.
Lash: South entrance. Can you just point to that on the map?
Dave Nyberg: Yeah.
Lash: And Brinker is just on the other side of the park, right?
Dave Nyberg: Yeah. Hunter Drive is on the north.
Lash: And then how much distance is there from Brinker to where the existing trail is on the east
side?
Dave Nyberg: I would guess about 1,000 feet or so. Yeah, that's really what you're.
Lash: That's what would be missing?
30
Park and Rec Commission Meeting - January 27, 1998
Dave Nyberg: Yeah, if you say that if somebody gets to the north end of the park, you can get
them through the park because you're building the park, yeah. I know what you're getting at.
That's a good point. Yeah, and actually that, all along here we've been showing this project
constructing the trail through the park area, and that is an area where it's not a real expensive cost
but it is a cost that there probably is some overlap here between your park dollars and this trail
project so it's something to consider for the price there.
Lash: And how much do we figure per foot? For construction. Did you say $40.00?
Hoffman: About 34 estimated for the referendum.
Lash: So if I'm doing my math right here we could, say we were to put the segment of the park
during park construction. We could get from Brinker down to our existing stretch for about
$35,000.00 extra. And we'd have the whole thing done.
Dave Nyberg: To the park.
Lash: No, with an extra $35,000.00, we'd get from Brinker.
Dave Nyberg: Oh okay, yeah. Yeah although that's, there is an expensive part of that trail and
it's through the Hennessy property. There's a pretty large retaining wall xve're proposing so you
may, I think you'd see a little increased cost through that area, other than S35,000.00.
Lash: Okay, and how much property south of Brinker is coming in for development in the near?
Hoffinan: South? The Walnut Grove area is developed today.
Lash: Okay, so I'm talking footage. About along Highway 5. And that could be, not do that
within the trail tees, have that constructed down there.
Hoffinan: It's an approved subdivision xvithout that.
Lash: Already been approve?
Hoffinan: Yes.
Lash: Okay.
Berg: But with retaining wall we're talking, not $35,000.00 but.
Dave Nyberg: I'd add about $8,000.00 for the retaining wall. Maybe closer to $45. And there
are easement costs associated. That's just like areas north of Lake Lucy Road. These are only
construction costs we're talking about and those casement costs are.
Lash: Well we should have easements along there, should xve not?
31
Park and Rec Commission Meeting - January 27, 1998
Dave Nyberg: Some. The Hennessy property we do not, we need a temporary from them to do
some grading. We do have plenty of right-of-way through the development.
Manders: What does that development cost from Longacres to the south? Walnut.
Dave Nyberg: Walnut Grove, yeah. We have an easement through there and Longacres, there's
plenty of right-of-way platted so.
Hoffman: Plenty of right-of-way on this side to this point.
Lash: Okay, is there anybody else with questions that we ~vant to get answered before we open
this up?
Roeser: Have we completely forgotten about going to Highway 5 north? I mean the section past
the old line. I guess I'm missing something here. I missed a couple meetings.
Lash: No, we were just looking at, you know a lot of the people up on the north end with high
population concentration there, wanted the segment extended up there so what we wanted to try
and figure out was, would it be smarter for us, given a finite number of dollars, to start at the
north and see how far south we could get. And then how we could add onto it in the future or
come up with some other way of completing it. We'rejust trying to flip flop it to look to see if.
Roeser: That doesn't sound very practical to me, I hate to say it, but you know we've got the trail
coming right up to Highway 5 from the south now. Now you're going to leave a great big section
of empty trail and then pick it up down by Longacres? There'd be nothing between TH 5 and
Longacres...
Lash: TH 5 and Brinker, which is across fi'om the Hennessy park...and then it would come up
from the park. I think we're not really talking about having any gaps. Ultimately what we'd like
to do is just have...
Roeser: Okay. I guess i just, I didn't realize that ~vas going on, yeah.
Lash: Jim, do you have anything that you need to find out? Fred? Anybody else? Okay. Before
we open it up. One of the things I was looking at when you were talking about the northern
section. The first option, which was the original plan. Could that just be modified somewhat,
and ! know we'd be going outside of the recommended guidelines but in some areas if we were
to fudge closer to the road. Not be right up next to the road, you know what I mean? Just
eliminating some tree loss. We're eliminating maybe some expensive easements or expensive
retaining walls so this thing would be a straight shot but would have, kind of meander around a
little bit more and in some areas be closer to eliminate some of those obstacles that we had.
Dave Nyberg: Would you also want to eliminate curb?
32
Park and Rec Commission Meeting - January 27, 1998
Lash: Yes.
Dave Nyberg: So you'd kind of split the difference between the txvo? Something like that. It
may be possible. The problem with doing that is if you run in the middle of these two areas,
where one xve're pushing way out and one we're holding it in, you lose that ditch area that does
trap water behind the trail. It's possible that you could try and grade that area in xvith almost an
urban type section so that you'd have curb, a trail. Well, for the one option you'd have curb, a
trail and then you'd almost fill in that ditch and get the water to run over everything into that
curb. Much like many of your new city streets.
Lash: No, but without the curb.
Dave Nyberg: Yeah, without the curb you could do the same thing. Try and grade everything to
drain into the street and then maybe trap it into some kind ora small swale. I mean drainage is
the key. That's what I'm getting at. Tojust run a trail do~vn the middle of the ditch,
something's, the trail's got to get up higher. The ditch is now filled in and it creates some
problems. It might be able to be done though. What's a key thing that's happened since our
neighborhood meetings, I would guess some residents would likely ask tonight xvhy wasn't this
proposed before. A trail closer towards Galpin Boulevard to save easement costs and the like.
What's happened since these December meetings is we've got a real good indication from the
County, Carver County, that they will allow whatever the City desires on this trail segment
provided that the City will continue to be in line to take over the road. And they have requested
us, or the City to prepare to enter into an agreement with the County, to accept the road after the
trail is complete. It's almost, it can almost be looked at as a city street that's going to have a trail
on it.
Lash: You don't have to go by county guidelines? We can use our oxvn common sense ofhoxv
we can best accomplish this with the least impact, least dollars but being somewhat safety
conscience?
Dave Nyberg: Yeah, in a sense. Yeah. The key, everybody wants to use the same guidelines.
The State, counties, cities, but you are probably in a position to do this trail in the real world so to
speak, better than the County would be because it would be in your city so.
Hoffinan: In the same breath, we will be subject to review by our city engineers and their
comments as well. There are regulations, guidelines. We need to meet the city to keep these
roads under State Aid guidelines...
Dave Nyberg: Yeah, they may require, I mean your city staffmay say if we want this road to be
on the State Aid system someday, we really need that curb there to try and meet that guideline of
having some form of barrier if the trail is 10 feet or less towards the road so.
Howe: I'm getting ahead of myself here. The Commission is. I think if we're doing this, I
missed last week's meeting, do the whole thing. You have money, you can do that. If that's the
staff's recommendation.
33
Park and Rec Commission Meeting - January 27, 1998
Hoffinan: Chair Lash if I could speak to the memorandum regarding finances and budget. Does
everybody have a copy of that? Again it's referring.
Lash: This one?
Hoffman: Correct, that one. The cost estimations again are based on an estimated high and
estimated low cost for what we would classify as hard construction costs and those are listed
second for each segment, Highway 7, Galpin Boulevard and so on. And then the other associated
project costs that are...project. Preliminary survey, project design, easement preparation,
easement costs, project management, construction staking, legal fees, appraisals and project
construction, total again in our best estimate, $657,000.00 on the high side and $390,000.00 on
the low, and that would assume, the low assumes easement costs which run in accord with recent
projects in the city. The high, an estimate based on a worse case scenario or a, we hope it will be
a scenario for easement acquisition. We would hope that those wouldn't go any higher than that.
I'm not going to go through the specific highs and lows for each segment. If you go right to the
back page and talk about option 1, 2 and 3, that's for the north side. If you add the trail on
Galpin north of Lake Lucy Road and those options xvere covered by Mr. Nyberg in his
presentation. They include a high and a low with a staff recommendation to pursue the option 2
which is the west side alignment, at back of curb. So install a curb and install the trail for the
most part, at the back of curb throughout the entire alignment. Some areas that xvill deviate.
And then Powers Boulevard, when you add the north section of Powers Boulevard, which is
north of Pleasant View Road, and for an additional cost, it's somewhere between $37,400.00 and
$32,300.00. The Highway 101 trail, the Bluff Creek trail, Pioneer trail. Those totals including
option 2, that northern segment of Galpin on the west side, and the Powers Boulevard addition,
north of Pleasant View Road, total on a high side $1,728,400.00. On the low side $1,314,350.00.
Those estimates which are outside or above the project budget of $1,240,000.00, so we have
differences there ranging of somewhat slightly under a half a million dollars, down to about
$75,000.00. And again, as I have spoke to earlier, it was certainly my intention as Director of the
Parks and Recreation Department and as thc secretary of the park task force and as the appointed
department staff member to this board, to manage this project as presented in the hopes that we
would accomplish all these projects. We did some careful cost estimations based on other
projects and other feasibility studies which...in this city and in other cities, but again we missed
by again anywhere from $75,000.00 to $500,000.00, depending on the exact parameters of the
project. However, we feel, or I feel, or as an avenue in light of these intensive lobbying that you
are receiving to see the project through to it's entirety, that the commission can look at. You
have alternate sources of revenue. One which we spoke to includes the million and 3A for land
acquisition. Talked with the Council and with the Park and Recreation Commission about
accessing that component of the referendum to bowl through this part of the referendum. The
trail project. It was not met with favor and so we moved onto the second alternative which
xvould be your fund reserve. Currently the commission has a general fund reserve of
$300,000.00 which has a long history rooted in the fact that in the 70's and early 80's the City
received many grants from the federal LAWCON programs. Land and water conservation. And
other grant programs which were applied for on an annual basis and were never guaranteed to be
axvarded. However, if they were awarded, by and large they included a requirement that 50%
34
Park and Rec Commission Meeting - January 27, 1998
local match needed to be made and so in order to be in the position to accept the grant, the City
Park and Recreation Commission, the City Council, started setting aside money to bolster that
reserve, to build that reserve. It started out at a very modest...$50,000.00 range, which
$100,000.00, $200,000.00 and over the years, now you established that $300,000.00 in reserves.
But the original intent of that reserve has kind of gone by the wayside. The federal grants are no
longer the method of acquiring and developing park and trail systems. So it has sat there as a
nest egg, as a fallback position and I think it's reasonable again to access, or to recommend that
the City Council access that reserve to hopefully, you know $300,000.00 is short of the worse
case scenario of just under $500,000.00, but again that's worse case scenario. Considering
easement costs, which are normally high and then a not very competitive bidding climate and we
would hope that that would not occur. So access that, to construct the project, as bid in it's
entirety. Acquire all the easements and then over the next 3 to 5 years build that reserve back.
The best way to explain it is, as far as the ability to do that. The City will invest over $5 million
in literally a single year in parks and trails and open space in this community. That will alloxv the
commission the elbow room to use that money in future years to build back your reserve. Right
now your annual cash flow of park and trail dedication fees hovers around $300,000.00 or a little
better. In a slow year it edges back to $250,000.00. This past year it was over $350,000.00. You
can certainly find the means to bankroll, even $150,000.00 of that on an annual basis to build that
reserve back up. Due to the fact that you have just completed 18 neighborhood park
improvements, trails, community trails totaling 7 miles. Construction two community parks.
You will have the ability to build that reserve back. So again that is my recommendation for you
this evening and how you would like to take audience reaction to that I'll leave up to you.
Lash: Quick question. Wily are you recommending the west side, curb side?
Hoffman: The cost, and I think tile overall alignment on tile outside of the curb is a better
alignment for sight lines and the cost is lower.
Lash: Than the east side?
HoFfman: Correct.
Lash: But it's more than with the setback?
Hoffman: Yeah, with the setback we're back to cutting down trees which...
Lash: And then also, I haven't heard a strong lobby for the Powers segment north of Pleasant
Viexv. Have any of you7
Hoffman: One call from a resident who...nearly in tears but was just waiting for this trail to
come up north to their residence so they could get down south and so yeah, to answer your
question. There's not a substantial lobby. It's a more isolated area but again in fairness, if we're
adding back the Galpin north piece.
Roeser: It's the worse part to ride if you ride to Excelsior. Along that guardrail and.
35
Park and Rec Commission Meeting - January 27, 1998
Berg: ...hook us up to Pleasant View up.
Hoffman: It goes beyond Pleasant View.
Lash: Well it was going to go to Pleasant View anyway.
Hoffman: To Holly Lane, and there are a number of houses off of Holly Lane which would enjoy
that access.
Lash: But then it dead ends? I mean does Shorewood ever have a plan of...?
Hoffman: ...contemplate they do but I don't know when that would be.
Lash: Okay. Are there other commissioner comments or questions for staff?. I guess I'll open
this for public comment but I'd like to just have some guidelines. I mean the first one obviously
is that you come to the podium and state your name so we know, so we have some kind of
orderly fashion here. The other one is, I think you can tell from what we've said tonight and
what staff has said tonight, you know we really heard your comments and your concerns last
week and we're trying to do, we want to do what you want to have happen. You know so we
don't really need to hear you know that you want the trail. You know we already heard that part
so, just because we have to go onto Powers and it's already 9:30 okay.
John Hennessy: My name's John Hennessy, 7305 Galpin. I'm on the south end of the trail
proposed on Galpin. It seemed to me to make some sense, since we have the Bluff Creek school
down there and trails going across there, and ending with my southern property line, that xve
continue the trail that way first. I'd like to see the entire trail of course but it doesn't make sense
to have fi'agmented pieces of trail that don't connect to anything. It makes a lot of sense to start
and continue trails and then as we have the money, continue. As we get to tiao top, I think it's
Melody Hill, MmTay Hill area, before it goes down the big hill. I'm having a hard time
understanding why we want to take that trail all the way down that dangerous road. That's a
hazard for cars much less people going up and down that hill. It seems to me the back side of the
hill is a much safer way to travel ifxve're going to put any kind of trail system, rather than taking
them down that dead mans curve as several residents refer to it as.
Lash: Can you point out the area you're talking about on the map there?
John Hennessy: ...if you've been down there.
Lash: Well, I've been down there but I don't know... You think it should go where?
John Hennessy: Well if anything...
Lash: Dave, do you have any response to that?
36
Park and Rec Commission Meeting - January 27, 1998
Dave Nyberg: You could certainly do what Mr. Hennessy is saying. I'm not that familiar with
the road that leaves Galpin there but I know some of those residents have talked to me about this
trail being deleted or what have you but part of the trail that would be extended, if we do go all
the way to Mayflower, is in the City of Shorewood. And there may not be, if the true use of this
trail is to bring people down to the future Highway 5 trail and eventually into the downtown area,
if that's going to be the flow and it's for your residents, than the value of that trail north to
Mayflower is minimal probably.
Lash: So where would you end it then?
Dave Nyberg: Is that Hummingbird?
Hoffman: Or Pheasant Drive.
Dave Nyberg: On the west side. It's Pheasant?
Hoffman: No, Hummingbird is on the west side.
Dave Nyberg: Yeah that's, Hummingbird's on the west side. That's what I thought.
(There was a tape change at this point in the discussion.)
Heft'man: ...but I think prudent to alloxv the option to go down the hill at least at Pheasant Hill
and then to consider a potential terminus at that point at Pheasant Hill, instead of going all the
way to up north to Mayflower.
Lash: Like hoxv far is that?
H()ffinan: From Pheasant Hill to Mayfloxver? Oh, 800 feet. 600 feet...
Maureen Farrcll: Hello. My name is Maureen Farrell and I'm a resident of Chanhassen in the
Longacres development and I'm also quite involved with what I would consider assets in our
community for youth. And one of the things that I agree with what Ron said and also this other
comment. To me it seems kind of obvious not to have these fragmented pieces. I believe the city
has kind of created a hub, not only with the elementary school but they have created their
recreation center just across TH 5 with Galpin also. So you have the natural area where youth
would be trying to get to and it appears that we're trying to expand those programs each year so I
would see the volume going steadily increasing. I think it's very important to develop that south
end piece. I'm not saying to take away from pieces up north but I really see, you have three very
soon high density developments that will be almost at that corner, and to have this phase, for
those of you who may not drive that road every day as I do several times a day, as the segment
that comes up fi'om TH 5 leaves and just goes out into the road, you would have a part that goes
up and then you have almost like a blind turn with a hill and it's very narrow and if there's any
type of winter. I mean as winter comes, I'm not saying that this trail's going to be open through
37
Park and Rec Commission Meeting - January 27, 1998
the winter, but that road is not known for having wide shoulders or areas for kids to go. And I
just see it very vital on having that whole segment done as soon as possible. Thank you.
Lash: I think that's the direction that we're all you know hoping to accomplish so.
Rick O'Connor: I'm Rick O'Connor. My property is the last property in Carver County. Right
by dead mans curve. Mr. Hennessy's remarks regarding safety of the trail and his reasons for not
having it there is exactly our reasons for having it there. Safety is our main concern and right
now people are using the road as a pedestrian way. There isn't even 6 inches of anything to walk
on so it's a tremendous safety concern right now so our concerns are, access to the trail not for
convenience sake but definitely for safety. And even though ! am the only resident that would
access the trail from Pheasant on down to Mayflower, there is a tremendous volume of traffic,
pedestrian traffic that does use the road along there so there is a definite, how to go to Excelsior
along that way and a lot of people usc it so, you know we want to throw our hat in the ring for
safety and we want to see the trail extend all the way north to Mayflower so, thanks.
Benno Sand: Good evening. I'd like to echo, my name is Benno Sand and I live at 1910 Moline
Circle which is about two houses up from O'Connor's residence as well. And I guess last ~veek,
you know we delivered the petitions from the neighbors in the Pheasant Hill area, and we're
pleased to hear that the commission would like to extend the trail all the way to Mayflower. 1
still would like to appeal to the commission to consider putting it on the east side of Galpin from
a safety standpoint. I think people coming down Pheasant that would have to cross over at the
bottom of dead mans curve, it's going to be very dangerous and I still believe it would be safer
for residents to be crossing from the Melody Hill area at the top of the crest of the hill as opposed
to crossing at the bottom of that curve. A further comment, you know xvith respect to the cost of
taking out the buckthorn berm that's in there. I think that would actually improve the safety
aspects of that road because you would have a better sight line for not only pedestrians that are
accessing the trail, but also for automobiles that are entering onto Galpin Lake Boulevard from
Pheasant. Looking up the hill, they'd have a much better sight line if that buckthorn berm was
out of there. So I guess I would again ask the commission to consider, even though it's a little
more expensive, to locate the north end of the trail segment on the east side of Galpin Lake
Boulevard. Thank you.
David Struyk: Hi. My name is David Struyk. I'm at 1941 Crestview Circle. I am also on the
northern part of Galpin Lake Road. And just response to a couple comments and some
questions. Some of the comments regarding that there's, well why would we run the trail there?
You know no one lives there beyond the last house in Carver County there. There is a fairly high
density of people that do live in that area, and they do use the hill there extensively to get into
Excelsior, and I realize this is not the city of Excelsior, but there are a tremendous number of
Chanhassen residents that do use that to get to Excelsior because that is closer to us than
downtown Chanhassen. It's going to be used regardless of whether there's a trail or not. So it is
primarily a safety issue. The one question that I, or another comment, which I guess goes to
Todd and Dave. I think they've done an outstanding job and I appreciate their recommendations
and the cost issues I don't think were as great as any of us thought they were going to be. And
the last question I have is, has there been any sort of comprehensive plan to tie in this trail system
38
Park and Rec Commission Meeting - January 27, 1998
to other cities? You know we're next to Shorewood. We're next to Excelsior. We're next to
Chaska, or whatever. I really don't know all the surrounding cities. But it seems to make a lot of
sense to have a comprehensive plan that would involve many cities. I heard Todd say that he
couldn't contemplate what Shorewood was going to do but it seems to me that would be an
obvious question. As a committee, why are we not working with the other cities to lay out a
comprehensive trail plan so we do not have dead ends. It just seems to be kind of an obvious
issue. So I don't care if you want to respond to that now or later.
Hoffman: Yes, I certainly would. My comment regarding Shorewood is more of a response to
how advance they are in their trail system. They simply do not have a trail system in place in the
city of Shorewood. Now when xve speak to Chaska, the city of Eden Prairie. Our comprehensive
plan certainly does address co~mection points at all corners of our community. It speaks to those.
We've talked to those other communities. I certainly have had conversations with the City of
Shorewood and as the plan indicates, we're starting to point all these things out in all sorts of
different directions. In the fi~ture, we have an existing connection with Eden Prairie. Future
connection with Chaska are coming on line and as we move out to Shorewood, I really don't
foresee, you know it's a cities without curbs and just literally any city street they are not very
advanced in their trail system and I see that, I would...that the residents would have to leave
Chanhassen and then find their way on city streets in Shorewood.
Roeser: We're very well connected with Eden Prairie's trails. All the way across.
Lash: And Victoria too.
David Struyk: ...right-of-way.
Hoffman: Tile LRT trail. Yeah. Really txvo ways to access it. The best way is to go to
doxvntown Excelsior and then get on the LRT. The other route would be to, wind your way, xvell
I can just point it out. By taking Melody Hill to Murray Hill and then coming back on Chaska
Road. Cross over TH 41 at that location and access a small trail behind...continue on internal
streets down to Orchard and then eventually to Washta Bay Road where you could take the
Highway 7 trail which will also be constructed out to an alternative crossing point which would
be Church Road. Cross Highway 7 and then you can get onto the trail... Yes, but you will be on
the new trail in the ditch line of Highxvay 7. Cross at this point to access tile LRT trail. In tile
future Hennepin Parks would like to build an overpass here, a bridge overpass. At that point it
would be a nice amenity...down to the overpass which will be where it crosses Highway 7. So
you really have two alternatives. I lived in the city of Victoria for a number of years and biked to
work and that was, those were my only two options. Either go all the way to Excelsior, doxvn
Powers Boulevard or try to make this cut through which was not very pleasant...Highway 7
COiTidor but with this trail...
Lash: And that's one of the new ones we're putting in under this referendum.
Hoffman: Right.
39
Park and Rec Commission Meeting - January 27, 1998
David Struyk: So you can certainly take the Galpin Lake all the way across...
Hoffman: It would cross TH 7...
Lash: I have a question for Dave regarding the east side. You know with the buckthom and all
of that. Do you look at one side or the other as being you know aesthetically more pleasing and
more safe as far as getting off the road? If we do it on the east side, before they're off the road
and it would be a little bit better experience or do you think it's the same, going to be the same
on either side? You said you had some steep drop offs on the east side to contend with.
Dave Nyberg: I should have that park guy here to talk about aesthetics and appearance. I'm
probably not the best one to comment on that. But what we really look at there is the difficulty of
building that trail on the east side. Mr. Sand indicated last Tuesday, I think he had a petition of
some people that would give an easement but the way that drops off in some areas, you'd need an
extensive easement to bring your embankment down into those yards. There's a house there.
I'm not sure who's house it is but it's very close to the road. There's utility poles all along that
side that are very close to the road. There's just some, you get down towards Mayflower and we
have that ~vetland to contend with that's quite extensive. Very close to the road. We need to fill
in a considerable portion of that. There's just many issues that would make me recommend to
you to leave it on the west side. At least from the preliminary plan.
JoAnn Neff: Hi. My name's JoAnn Neff. I live on Majestic Way and that's the southern part of
Galpin and I just want to reiterate that I think all of us that live off of Galpin have no place to go.
We're really isolated and to fragment it would really be a horrible thing because I don't think it's,
even a pleasurable thing for us. We use the road right now. So whatever you do, it should be
done for safety. Everybody else in town has something. I mean we're sort of, ~ve're going to be
disconnected because of size until Arboretum goes all the way through into, what is the new
development going in there? Walnut Grove. And Longacres, I mean we're going to be putting in
the park across from Brinker so it'd be silly, and the school is there so it's silly not to have access
for everybody there. And we really, I mean there's just no place to go so I think, whatever you
do, you should do it for safety issues and just to give everybody a way to get out, whether it's to
get us downtown or not, but we really have no place to go. Everybody's on cul-de-sacs and I
mean there's a lot of kids out there. So thanks.
Bonnie Mahelko: Hi, my name is Bonnie Mahelko. I live on the comer of Brinker and Galpin
and I guess I also wanted to talk about the fragmented, but I don't need to say anything. But my
question is, because there's a lot of runners and I used to run a lot and I had a 3 mile path and it
seems like people like to mn, not necessarily past the same point all the time. Running back and
forth and back and forth, and there are people that just mn around our cul-de-sac but I was
wondering if we can somehow connect the trails more within our own city so that people can run
a 3 mile trail and mn around in a circle. You know go down Galpin and cruise down Lake Lucy
and then come back down Powers. You know so there's somehow a 2 or 3 mile trail that people
can actually access so I'm not sure if you guys think about that but that might be a thought. And
also I wanted to state that I'm really hoping that you're not going to go with like a blacktop curb
north on dead mans curve or whatever because I have been in an area where they put in a curb
40
Park and Rec Commission Meeting - January 27, 1998
system xvhere it's all like asphalt and it broke away and it looked like a nightmare. I mean people
would look at it and say, boy. They don't keep up their roads and it just looked really tacky so I
hope that you xvould go ~vith a nice concrete curb and for safety purposes to keep the cars away
from the people so.
Lash: I think that's what Dave was saying, and that's the whole point of a trail is to make these
connections. So you could do a loop. You know you can go down Lake Lucy. Go down
Powers to TH 5 and TH 5 to Galpin and that's your, I don't know how many miles it is but.
Bonnie Mahelko: Yeah.
Lash: Make those connection points and that's our whole point here for doing this.
Bonnie Mahelko: Okay. Sounds great. Alright, thanks.
Lash: Thanks. Anybody else?
Sam Mancino: Hi. I'm Sam Mancino from 6620 Galpin Boulevard and we live sort of, just
north of Lake Lucy Road on the west side and a couple of years ago my wife was actually a co-
chair on the park and rec task force that tried to get the referendum passed and in a way, fi'om my
point of view, it's like no good deed goes unpunished because the first that we knew about ~vhere
the trail was going to go was xvhen we woke up and found stakes right through the middle of our
arborvitae trees that go about 600 feet there on Galpin. So we're concerned. I'm concerned
about the loss of the trees. I'm not concerned that they should be or shouldn't be a trail there. I
think the trail's a good idea but I am passionate about wanting to preserve the integrity of the
trees because they're a laudmark feature of the area and they're older than I am, which is getting
up there now. So I'd like to see the commission be able to help direct whoever has to advance
this, to do whatever we can to minimize that impact. One of the things you've talked about so far
is moving it right to curb side, which is I think a very good idea. I'd also like to explore options
making it narrow, as narrow as humanly possible. As close a setback as possible. Also perhaps
be able to get some kind of provision so that during the construction xve're not having Bobcats
rulming over the root systems and killing the trees xvhich is always a big danger xvith those kinds
of trees and they have extended root systems. There's also some grading that as you bring that
ditch up to level, you change the grading and the drainage to those trees that I'd like to see
carefully considered. Because so long as the trees are preserved, l'm very much in favor of this.
But to the extent that the trees become that risk through some process here, I'd really not like to
go forward with it .... Okay, thank you. Great, well I'd appreciate everything you can do.
Alright, thank you.
Lash: Thanks. Anybody else?
Jim Ronning: Good evening. I'm Jim Ronning. I live at 6640 Galpin and that's on the west side
of Galpin. We're sharing pretty much, the same driveway as the Mancino's. I would like to just
reiterate the fact that I would like you to take every step you can to try to preserve thc arborvitae
trees there. Also, I would just like to suggest one thing about the east versus west. When I ride
41
Park and Rec Commission Meeting - January 27, 1998
my bike down the hill, down towards dead mans curve, I always ride on the right side of the road
because you really pick up speed going down there. And it's almost suicidal to ride on the left
side, opposing traffic. And I think that you should investigate the possibility of doing a cross
over at one of the peaks in the grade there where the visibility would be good, not only for traffic
to observe the pedestrians and bikers, but for the pedestrians and bikers to see the traffic. And it
seems like the west side alignment is the best on the southern part of the northern route, and it
seems to me that the east side alignment would be better on the north part. I think you should
consider a cross over because most of the users on the north part are going to be crossing over to
the west side of the road anyway and if you give them a place to cross over with better vantage
points, ! think would be in the interest of public safety. Thank you.
Lash: But isn't that where the xvetland is? On the, at the end of the east side.
Jim Ronning: It's at the bottom of the hill though.
Hoffman: The large wetland is right...
Lash: But isn't that where you're saying that you think we should be on the east side? At the
end? But that's where the wetland is.
Jim Ronning: Going down the hill he thinks we should be on the east. Yeah, and that wetland is
at the bottom, yeah.
Resident: I have one question. If it's a curb side...or Colnbination of both? Because one
safety...on my property it's technically wetlands that it would be sitting on because the grade of
the road had already been...possibility of keeping a curb side plan on the east side...
Dave Nyberg: So would the trail then be on the east side all the way to Lake Lucy, but you'd
move it out and in?
Resident: ...drop off that you're referring to as so expensive.
Dave Nyberg: Okay. Put that on the curb and then move it out later? ...yeah, the commission
can consider that option but again, any option we do on the east side is going to be considerably
more expensive than the west side. Yeah, safety, you know I can't argue with these residents that
if they're going to cross Galpin, they have to cross if the trail's on the west side somewhere ....
Yeah, but we could, you know maybe some kind of compromise could be, put striping another
crossing at one of these intersections farther down the, or to the north or the hill to get people
across in a common spot to the trail if it is on the west side. And then leave the trail on the west
side because it would be cheaper to build there. Again, that's something that vce have to talk to
the city, or your own public works and engineering staff. They would have to approve that and
we can work with them on that. Any crossing on that hill is going to be dangerous. I wouldn't
argue with these people at all on that. It's a very dangerous hill .... yeah it would. Anybody
living on the east side, to cross the road to use it on the west, it's not desirable but we'd at least
get the trail built and down that way to the north.
42
Park and Rec Commission Meeting - January 27, 1998
Manders: What component of having it on the east side makes it so much more expensive than
the west side?
Dave Nyberg: It's a lot of the clearing. Clearing and grubbing. The earthwork to build that
platform if you will, for the trail. The power poles could become an issue. NSP has told us that
they will move poles slightly one way or another to accommodate the trail on a segment such as
Powers. On something like Galpin there, what we're talking about is a major moving, maybe 10
feet one way or actually it would have to be back because there really isn't any room to move it
closer to the road. They may charge a fee to do that. We haven't discussed that with them so.
Even the residents that say we can take those trees. That certainly helps. We wouldn't have to
compensate them for those removals if they xvould agree to that but there is still a cost to taking
those down.
Hoffinan: There'd likely be some retaining walls and fencing on that side as well. For those in
thc audience who can visualize, if you drive down there, the alignment on the west is very visual.
It's there. You see if the alignment on the east is a severe drop off. It will take a good deal of,
I'm not sure if the resident who lives in that house but there's a home there in the east side which
you open a door and it will about open up onto the trail. So there is that concern if that resident
is not here this evening. But I think if you would like, this area has not been studied...that could
then be reported back at the Planning Commission or City Council for further review.
Jim Ronning: I think I need to see it myself. I drive that road a lot and some of the details
you're, I'm axvare of but I need to see it more closely. I'd like to go out there is what I'm saying.
I think we need to do that.
Resident: Is il necessary to make that decision, as to xvhat side of the road...
Resident: ..budget issues. The recommended plan...is S86,000.00. The east side is $95,000.00.
$9,000.00 on a million and a half dollar project, that's irrelevant...make the decision that you're
going to either extend the trail or not extend the trail. And work that one out...
Lash: Jim, did you have something else you xvanted to add?
Jim Ronning: For about 13 and 14 years, 15 years, whatever I've been driving what's, I never
knew it was dead mans curve and the right side of the road as you're going up the hill, which is
the west side where the trail would be, a perennial problem. It has, I've and the County working
on that maybe 2 to 3 times a year. Every year. Patching it. Putting gravel down. Regrading it.
Having it bloxvn out with the water. They're there all the time. There are springs in there so I
don't know if your costs take into account doing a permanent fix on that because that's a pretty
substantial problem that the County's been unable to fix. When you think about the cost of that
right hand, western alignment, you might want to look at that.
43
Park and Rec Commission Meeting - January 27, 1998
Lash: Any other burning comments or can we move on? Okay. Let's close the public cotangents
on Galpin. Take commissioner comments and then we'll be looking for a recommendation on
this. Jim.
Manders: Personally I'm in favor of extending the trail all the way to Mayflower. And the cost
issue I would, I guess I'm not going to sweat whether it's a cost issue with east side versus the
west side. It just seems to me based on other discussions that we've had, that we put the trail on
the side of the road that's going to pull in most of the use and to me that, how far we go on the
east side, I guess there is a concern putting it along there. I'm not sure where that turn over point
to the west side would be but given that it could be worked out, I'd go all the way up to Lake
Lucy. Go to the west side at that point but I don't know if that can be arranged so I guess that's
my concern and that we do go all the way to TH 5 and do the entire segment.
Lash: Okay, Ron.
Roeser: Yeah, mine is the same. I think we committed ourselves with the referendum to do this
trail and I think it should go from...
Berg: Well Todd, says we can make it up...
Lash: Okay, Fred.
Berg: Well I'm certainly not going to disagree. Itjust makes all the sense in the world if we can
possibly afford it, to do it the whole way. I'm a little bit concerned if we go lnuch over the
$74,000.00 bottom line. We don't have enough to fi~nd it if it's anywhere near the top of the
scale. That concerns me a little bit that we could possibly be building false hopes here on one
other so I guess we have to get a handle on that. Obviously you're going...that's the part that
concerns me the most.
Lash: I would agree with that point, and however I would make the Galpin extension to
complete the whole project my first priority. And so it looks like we're getting into the
$488,000.00 range, then I'd be more likely to want to cut back on the Powers one back to
Pleasant View if we need to make a cut. And I'd be interested in, you know the point of putting
this up in that area is for safety and so if it means an extra $9,000.00, I really would want staff
and Dave to look at the east side and with all of the different issues involved, look at what xvould
be, make for the safest route for those residents on the east side of Galpin. That's where the
population is, and should they be crossing at the top of the hill or the bottom of the hill or dead
mans curve or Lake Lucy Road, or wherever. I'm not that familiar with it, but you guys if you
study it will be able to tell from the sight lines where the safest spot is to cross. And then work
within that I think it should be driven by the safest crossing. Yeah we have to work around some
of these other kinds of things but, you know and it may be, if you look at the top end of option 1
and the low end of option 2, it's only a difference of...hundred dollars and if we can get
cooperation in easements from the people on the east side, you know there...it's a horse apiece as
far as money between cast and west sides so I'm looking at safety as my main motivation and if
44
Park and Rec Commission Meeting - January 27, 1998
it's safer to keep it on the east side, I would be interested in doing that with the crossing at a
place where there's the best sight lines. And I'm not...
Hoffman: Clarify an assumption I think we all can make. If it goes on the west side, it's going to
be on the west side of Lake Lucy to the end and the east side will be from Lake Lucy to the end.
I would not advocate an additional crossing in that segment.
Lash: Rod.
Frm~s: We're already talking about taking money out of the...extend the trail to where I'm
thinking it needs to go. I think going into our reserve here and then spend more time on study
which means more money and pushing things out further, it's been my experience it's just going
to push...and we're already talking about going...and so I am concerned that the commission act
on...but I do, I xvould like to say again that I would like to approve the trail...in it's entirety and
then do a little bit more...west side with some of this new information but I guess I'm
understanding that the decision is going to be made...and I'd just like the commission to keep
that in mind also.
Meger: There's always nothing left when it gets down here. I guess I would echo everyone's
thoughts. Safety is the big concern for me as well. I'm definitely in favor of this being a trail
along a constructed curb, a concrete curb. Definitely one of the reasons for that is to do things
like safe some of these trees and I'd like as well and I think having a curb, I would.., a big plus
in comparison to some of them that I've ridden on before. I think that...so that's about all I have.
Lash: Mike.
Howe: I say build it. We've come this far. Do it. Tile reserve is fine for this use. I worry that
we really know how much over we're going to be and then we're...but I think it has to be dealt
xvith. Including studies fi'om tile staff on which side.
Lash: And we'll be getting this...right Todd? Thc bids we'll know exactly xvhcre we're at and if
we need to cut something back, we can. Even if we've let...
Hoffman: Right. As the numbers get closer, xvc'll add in some, add alternates throughout...
Lash: Okay. Is there a motion for Galpin?
Berg: I move we recommend the City Council utilize park and trail acquisition and development
reserves to cover the cost for Galpin Boulevard trail north of Lake Lucy Road in conjunction
with the remainder of these trails, which means specifically for Galpin only to Highway 5.
Roeser: Second.
Berg moved, Roeser seconded that the Park and Recreation Commission recommend that
the City Council utilize park and trail acquisition and development reserves to cover the
45
Park and Rec Commission Meeting - January 27, 1998
cost of the Galpin Boulevard trail north of Lake Lucy Road in conjunction with the
remainder of the trails. All voted in favor and the motion carried.
Lash: ...what are we going to do with the east/west thing?
Berg: ! assume you're going to come back and tell us about east/west.
Hoffman: I'll tell you about it but by the time you ~vould have another scheduled meeting, the
decision would be made.
Lash: So it's going to go onto City Council?
Hoffman: I'll send you copies of it when it goes to Planning Commission and City Council.
Lash: Thanks, for all your comments. Okay, let's move on to Powers and look at the staff
recommendations for Powers .... the east west issue come back to us before it goes to City
Council.
Hoffman: And you'd like to schedule a meeting to do that.
Roeser: Just call us and have us...
Franks: Is that what we want to do because it seems to me, if we're having discussion that the
City Council's going to make thc decision without any recommendation from us...
Manders: I mean where does...
Howe: This body recommends right?
Roeser: Well I just want to make sure that as a body we're doing what it is that we are...and that
came kind of quick for me and I wasn't...is that what we're choosing to do.
Meger: I would agree. I would like to see it come back only because I would hate to see another
Greenwood Shores type issue.
Berg: ...special session maybe and do it, rather than wait for our next meeting.
Lash: When does this go to City Council?
Hoffinan: February 9th, I believe. Next Tuesday.
Lash: I can't next Tuesday. I can only have two other... You guys can do it without me.
Hoffman: You could combine that with the first Wednesday of February and meet just before the
Planning Commission.
46
Park and Rec Commission Meeting - January 27, 1998
Lash: Well how about just before the City Council? But it has to go to Planning first.
Howe: It goes to Planning first, right?
Hoffman: Yep. I think it's February 3rd and they meet at 7:00. You could meet at 6:00. Is that
alright Rod?
Lash: Next Wednesday...before it goes to the Planning Commission.
Franks: Okay .... I didn't mean to push that...
Lash: ...very good point .... okay, let's move on to Powers.
Hoffman: Thank you Chair Lash, members of the commission. Powers Boulevard xvas also
tabled last week and the issue of contention on this segment was the proximity of the proposed
alignment to mainly Chaparral townhomes and then some properties to the north as well.
Specifically what the commission asked is can a guardrail be installed in collected areas, south of
Kerber Boulevard and north of Butte Court, allowing the trail to be constructed closer to the
road. You will note, or Dave will note that he also looked at the construction or guardrail along a
more encompassing segment of the road. Second, to reduce the encroachment on the dwellings
in this area, the trail be less than 8 feet in width. And if this is the case, could the trail still be
cleared for winter use or would it have to be closed during the winter. Dave will respond to
those two issues. I think I'll include my recommendation at this time. Dave and I talked
throughout last week and really today, the entire day to bring you these recommendations. But it
would be again lny recommendation, due to fairness, to keep the Powers Boulevard trail intact in
it's entirety. Go north of Pleasant View to Holly Lane. In addition, that we attempt and move
the trail outside of the private lots in the location of the Chaparral townhomes, and xvhen I
described that, it would be north of the, we've ah'eady moved it out in the area of the trees, and
then at least this plan calls for the trail to come back down and more or less straddle the property
line fi'om an area north of those large trees to Kerber Boulevard. You have the costs, or Dave
will present the costs for a guardrail in that area. Again the County, aesthetically, maintenance,
for a variety of issues, snow removal, summer mowing, just they are not comfortable with it.
Our city engineers and city management is not comfortable with just artificially placing a barrier
on Powers Boulevard to allow a trail to move out of the ditch section and up along side the road.
So what we xvould propose as a compromise, to move that trail out and beyond the property line.
The fence in some areas is already outside the property line. They're in the right-of-way by a
foot. 2 feet, 3 feet, approximately in those type of ranges. We would move that fence back onto
the property line and then propose to the county that the trail would be constructed just outside of
that and await their response. Again, there are no guarantees that they will accept that and that
xve'll certainly, that proposal would certainly be a point of negotiation in what appears to be a
more formalized agreement with the county. Instead of simply signing off on a permit for these
projects, they have indicated to us that they would like to sit down and hammer out an agreement
with more specifics and so again we can talk about that in the future. But in short that's our
47
Park and Rec Commission Meeting - January 27, 1998
recommendation. I would like Dave just to touch on specific numbers which he put together per
your directive.
Dave Nyberg: Thank you Todd. Chair Lash and commissioners. I can talk about the drawing
and some of the confusion from last week with the trees on several properties, or I can talk about
the cost in the letter, whichever you prefer that I do first.
Berg: Trees.
Dave Nyberg: Okay. We start down by Butte Court. There were several trees missing...
con'ected that over low trees and...segment dropping back out...have that transition by the
Pettinger property. Now I've changed that to show the transition south of the Pettinger property
so that we save.., south of Kerber Boulevard there's several lots here that do have trees along
this...of the proposed trail and at the last meeting I indicated that I thought that was probably the
case...shown here are well outside the... Obviously we had a limit of how far we...
Lash: Because they would not be impacted.
Dave Nyberg: Exactly.
Lash: Okay.
Audience:...
Dave Nyberg: People that are familiar with the area...
Lash: So overall what we've done is moved it closer to the road. In places where xve can
because of privacy and we've saved a couple different groups of trees.
Dave Nyberg: Yeah, in a sense. I mean the trees really, we weren't proposing to take them out
anyway but we verified that they are protected. And they'll just be more protected now by
moving the trail out.
Berg: ttow close is the trail to the road now?
Dave Nyberg: Well through this area, the trail, if you can compare that with this segment, you
can see... This trail does meet the 30 foot requirement of the County...about 10 feet maybe to
the west, closer to Powers Boulevard.
Lash: 20 feet off the road.
Dave Nyberg: Absolutely, yep. Yeah, you're 20 feet from the edge of the driving lane. It's
closer to the edge of the bituminous. There's a four foot shoulder on Powers. It may look closer
but go by the edge of the driving lane, not the edge of the pavement.
48
Park and Rec Commission Meeting - January 27, 1998
Lash: So we're not going, we're saving the berm. We're saving the fences exactly in the same
position except for it's out of the right-of-way where it is, and in some places it's in the right-of-
way now by a foot.
Dave Nyberg: Yeah, there's.
Lash: All the evergreens and stuff along there.
Dave Nyberg: Yeah, we were never intending to move any of those or remove any of those
evergreens that are there. That evergreen row. We do have a couple trees that we may have to
remove that are in the right-of-way or right on the line. There's a tree right by the power pole. If
the pole gets moved now, we'd probably have to move that tree. Or cut the tree down so.
Lash: What about right on the comer of Chaparral and Powers? There was a concern from the
residents that there was a fence already, and I looked at that the other day myself to xvhere the
fence already kind of angles towards her home. Is there a way that we can then keep the trail
outside of that fence as it is?
Dave Nyberg: I think it's possible. Yeah, the fence is quite a ways into her property actually and
it was built that way to keep it out of that large low area. Hole. That collects runoff there. I
would say it's about, at the end of the fence anyway it's probably 35 feet or so into her property.
And there are a few places where the fence, as you come out of those pine trees, it tends to have
some more sharper comers. It's still rather linear but'those corners there, if we have to do some
minor grading, we may have to take a post down. Move it back a foot. Put the new rails in.
Lash: You xvouldn't be going any closer into her yard than what's already there?
Dave Nybcrg: No. No.
Hoffman: It appears that the fence will remain in it's existing location in that segment.
Dave Nyberg: Yep.
Lash: Okay. Any commissioner questions or comments quick before we open it? Okay, we can
open this up for public comments, if you have.
Dave Nyberg: Would you like me to comment on the cost and letter before we do that? On the
guardrail or, okay. The commission has in front of them just a letter from, it's the same letter we
xvere talking about on Galpin where I just briefly summarized the costs for the guardrail options
that you requested at the last meeting. For the guardrail along the townhome areas, the area we
just looked at between Butte Court and Kerber Boulevard. There's an increase in cost of
approximately $24,000.00. And for the segment, or the trail with guardrail along the entire
length, it's an increase in cost of approximately $96,000.00 or so.
Manders: When you say the entire length, what does that entail? From Kerber to Butte?
49
Park and Rec Commission Meeting - January 27, 1998
Hoffman: ...private driveway. It's not a city road. And Jenny Hayes was here, the other
resident who spoke is behind her lot...
Dave Nyberg: ! don't think we could move the trail much closer to the road there, and the reason
is that there's an existing culvert under Shenandoah that we need to keep the trail on the back
side of that, and what I was explaining to Ms. Hayes when we met at her site, out at her property
is that what we're going to try and do is tip that trail and build it up a little bit to in a sense create
a ditch between Powers Boulevard and the trail. So that when the runoff comes off of the county
road, we can send that water down to the culvert rather than letting it come over the trail and
continue in that direction that it does now towards her property. There are a number of drainage
issues on the project like that. Most of these roads, well all of them, really are county or MnDot
roads and they've been there for years. Been upgraded. There's always these kind of drainage
problems with roads like this and any time we can improve a situation, we're going to try and do
that so. On the one hand I don't think we can move the trail closer because it'd be right in line
with that culvert. But I think we can improve the drainage. Does that answer one of your
questions anyway? As far as the road crossing. The road crossing will not be impacted. We
would ramp the trail up and cross the road at the existing grade of the road and we are
investigating, upon Mrs. Hayes' request, whether that road is private or a public right-of-way and
as I indicated to her on Monday, we'll be getting back to her with an answer on that once we do
some. If it is private, that's important for us because if it is private, we need an easement to cut
across it. Does that answer your second question?
Audience...
Dave Nyberg: Where the trail is? Yeah, what we're going to try and do is tip the trail towards
the road so that runoff from the trail flows into that, somewhat of kind of a swale that we would
create between the trail and Powers Boulevard.
Paul Pettinger: Paul Pettinger, 7267 Pontiac Circle and I have two questions. Where the stakes
are right now, and I know that we're talking about moving the trail outside of xvhere they're
staked but I know that there's orange, blue and green or green and blue, however it goes. Is the
last stake, the inside stake, is that as far as you need for construction zone work, or whatever it
is? Is that the idea or will you actually have to go further inside of that?
Dave Nyberg: What Mr. Pettinger is alluding to are the stakes that we put in... stakes are really
valid anymore... What I'd anticipate now is just a very, if you were to...that way and then any
grading...
Paul Pettinger: Well it would be moved correspondingly, the 6 feet or 8 feet or whatever it is
from the center?
Dave Nybcrg: Yeah. And there may be places where...
Paul Pettinger: Okay. In connection with the fence is what I was thinking of. If you run the trail
fairly close to the fence, and the way it's staked right now is you actually would have to, you'd be
52
Park and Rec Commission Meeting ~ January 27, 1998
running over, or move the fence or xvhatever it is, but that, you don't envision that really being a
problem in most cases?
Dave Nyberg:...
Paul Pettinger: Right, I understand that part. I don't have any problem with that. And the
second thing xvas, last week Mr. Berg asked about the 8 foot versus the 6 foot, and I know Todd
you just, but I wasn't sure I understood what you just said about that. If you could reiterate that
for me. The 8 foot trail versus the 6 foot trail.
Hoffman: Sure. We really, in proposing to move the trail out, offofthe private property, we
advocate for the 8 foot width for a variety of reasons. It has to do with consistency throughout
the corridor. The variety of uses we can see on these trails. You know bicycles which are non-
commuters which like, enjoy using these trails. Rollerbladers, walkers. An 8 foot width is in,
you knmv nationwide as far as trail development, really the minimum for these multi-use trails.
You see many more trails going to 10 feet, 12 feet and in the City of Minneapolis, up to 16 feet
in xvidth to accommodate the volume and variety of uses on these trails. And so in moving the
trail out, we did not even consider the possibility of reducing. We did not think that, xve would
not recommend that option. We do not think it's...
Lash: For usability and maintenance.
Hoffman: Plowing, yeah.
Patti Pettinger: Thank you. And if in fact we're not going to lose any trees except that scrub tree
around the pole and the other 57 trees do thank you for their, for saving. Thank you.
Lash: Thanks. Okay, anybody else?
Mrs. Hamilton: Once again I'm not sure whether you xvere talking about my property.
Hoffnmn: Yes we were.
Mrs. Hamilton: Oh! Well you said on the corner of Chaparral.
Hofflnan: Oh excuse us.
Mrs. Hamilton: On Kerber?
Lash: Kerber and.
Mrs. Hamilton: Yeah. I'm most concerned about privacy and safety there and would like to
request that the city might put up some kind of hedge or.
Lash: Do you guys in your association, do you have any kind of, I mean?
53
Park and Rec Commission Meeting - January 27, 1998
Mrs. Hamilton: I've asked the association and they say that's up to the City. I ask the City, they
said that's up to the association so you tell me. I don't know.
Lash: If it's in the right-of-way, we would be able to, if we wanted to put up a couple of trees or
something, we could, couldn't we?
Hoffinan: Not in the right-of-way.
Audience: You have turned people down about this before...
Hoffman: Any additional shrubbery needs to be on the private property for the most part. That's
the reason for the big, the...address Ms. Hamilton's issues directly. You can look right at her lot
here and the survey shoxvs the existing fence. And this trail alignment would actually be moving,
if we're successful in our venture, moving out off of the property line, and traveling, it's to the
outside of that large depression in this area.
Mrs. Hamilton: Oh, so the ditch would still be there? If the trail would be on the outside of
that?
Hoffman: Correct.
Mrs. Hamilton: Because we do have a drainage problem thcre. We've been flooded also. And
we have asked that some kind of drainage piles be put in there or something. No one has done
anything I think probably knowing that this was in the works.
Hoffman: Yeah, that may or may not be the case. It's our hope, we don't want to build this trail
in a drainage, an area that doesn't drain and so.
Mrs. Hamilton: It's all clay there so it's.
Hoffman: All of Chanhassen is.
Lash: There's clay everywhere.
Mrs. Hamilton: But there is a huge drainage hole right on the corner.
Hoffman: We hope to improve that drainage pattern with the construction.
Mrs. Hamilton: But the berm is what's keeping the water on our patios from going down in here.
So it just stays on our patios and it gets, last year it was in my neighbor's door.
Hoffman: Those are either on private property, which would be the responsibility of the private
property owner.
54
Park and Rec Commission Meeting - January 27, 1998
Mrs. Hamilton: I still don't understand why it's not on the west side. Is Eckankar involved in
that at all? I mean, is their property a no no? I just don't understand because they're talking
about crossing over on Galpin. Well, there's a lot of crossovers and now we have a new stop
light that's down by Target and I don't understand what the connection has to be from our side.
It's so condense there and I can't believe my neighbors are here to protest this. Where are all 940
of them or whatever? But anyhow, I'm concerned about my safety on the comer and xvanted to
request that maybe the City could work with us on some kind of barrier. Whether it's green or a
fence or whatever. To give us some, a little privacy because we aren't lucky enough to have the
trees that are down the way. And we've been planting some but you know, it takes years and
years for those to grow. And other than the drainage, the plows do throw the salt a long way.
That's the disadvantage of the trees but we really need something. I'm glad to see you've moved
it out. I guess that's all I was concerned about. If the City could work with us on some kind of
barrier there, to give us some privacy and some safety because I do see bicycle traffic increasing
and that usually means teenagers. And teenagers do the vandalism and we've already had it there
and we're very, we're so obvious because we don't have any trees that it's easy to egg the house
or, xvbich was done before. And that kind of thing. And being alone and that's the only way we
can look out so it is a concern to both my neighbor and me. Thank you.
Lash: Is there anyone else with comments?
Audience: Really...I still haven't heard a reason that...why it is not, on the east side rather than
the west side...
Lash: We have addressed it, yeah.
Audience: I still haven't heard.
Lash: And I, we know you don't understand but the point that we're trying to do, and I think
staffput this in a letter and we talked about it last week, is we're trying to make the connection,
the flow, the density of population is on the east side of the road. The flow of pedestrian and
bicycle traffic will be gravitating towards town. We have ah'cady started, we already invested a
hnge amotmt of money at the southern end of Powers where we had to go across the, you know
where the big gully is. You know what I'm talking about? Okay, with that retaining wall. That
was a tremendous amount of money so there's no xvay that we would do that on the west side
again and just abandon that. So there are some different pieces that xvhen you put it together,
that's the logical way and it's the way of eliminating crossovers on a busy road.
Audience...
Lash: No. The plan always was to have it on the east side of the road.
Audience...
Lash: Well you know, in your opinion yeah. But the planners. You know when the
comprehensive plan was done, it was logically looked at as being on the east side of the road...
55
Park and Rec Commission Meeting - January 27, 1998
And there was thought put into that and you know there's differing opinions and obviously xvhere
it goes, it impacts your yard. You know so you have a different opinion and xve understand that
but...and it depends on where you're going.
Roeser: There's a light down here at the comer.
Lash: Yeah, you can go down.
Roeser: If they're going to Lake Ann, they're crossing at a light.
Lash: Okay, sure. Thanks for your comments. We're going to close public comments now. Do
we have, we'll start at...
Howe: I think again, having missed the meeting last week, 1 think it's commendable what, if
we've done if we've moved that trail over to save trees and perhaps appease some of these
residents fears. As it stands now, I agree with the staffs recommendation.
Lash: Jane.
Meger: I guess I would agree with comments too. Obviously I'm in favor of the 8 foot trail
versus 6 foot and that seems pretty well taken care of already. I do hope that as xvt're planning
and it sounds like there is a lot of problems, both here and on Galpin with drainage and making
sure that we don't put something in there..the way that we drain it or xvhat we do there actually
causes us to have to get out there and...what not. Or cause damage to, fimher damage to
property owners so those would be my big concerns.
Lash: I guess I'd like to hear both your comments as far as terminus point. Did you want to go
all the way to Holly? Do you want to stop at Pleasant View'? Do you have opinions on that?
Meger: I kmew that you could get to the lake from Holly since I've done that. But I kind of
would like to see it...
Lash: How about you Mike?
Hoffman: $32,300.00 to $37,400.00.
Howe: Again, we're doing this now. I'd say make...build to the max. So I would say take it to
Holly.
Lash: Rod?
Berg: In talking to my bike experts. Obviously they do more exercising than me.
Lash: But it's not your turn.
56
Park and Rec Commission Meeting - January 27, 1998
Berg: Then what did you say my name for?
Lash: I said Rod. Can you please wait your turn?
Berg: Sorry. Rod, I apologize.
Franks: I'm glad we are going to take the chance and push that trail out and...that's the way we
should go so I'm really glad to see the staffrecommendation because I think it's the right xvay to
go and... I would be in favor of the trail, I also agree that as discussed, it should extend all the
way to Holly Lane.
Lash: Fred.
Berg: Thank you. As I was saying earlier. I don't know what my experts are going to say, now
that I'm, l've asked the question. They're suggesting that in temps of safety, there's a not a lot of
benefit to be gained by going all tile way to Holly past Pleasant View. So I think I'm inclined to
lean towards stopping at Pleasant View and taking a look at that $32,000.00 for additional
expenses we may have other places on Galpin or other places that we don't know of that may go
tip when the bids come in.
Hoffman: ...resident on the phone record that 1 noted her name on here. Charles and Felicia
Strickhauser...to Holly Lane.
Lash: Hoxv much past Pleasant View are they?
Hoffinan: The first property south of Holly Lane. If you recall early on when we talked about
deleting that segment, I noted there ,,',,as one property owner that the only one who ever called
and told tls to tear down their fence, their trees, and take their property, wanted tile trail and that's
thc property owner.
Franks: Is the speed limit still 50 mph on that part of the road?
Roeser: No, it's down to 45.
Berg: Yeah. I mean that doesn't mean they're not going to speed. Pleasant View just seems to
be a natural terminus to me. I mean it links us up to go around Lotus and whatever and make
cormections that way.
Lash: I could easily agree with you Fred. I could be persuaded. It seems logical and if we don't
have any hopes of Shorewood ever doing anything, it's just going to stop there.
Berg: Realistically I don't know when we'll have any 1Tlore 1honey to get to Shorewood.
Roeser: 1'11 go along with staff's recommendation. I don't care really if it ends at Pleasant
View... I don't feel strongly about going to Holly, you know.
57
Park and Rec Commission Meeting - January 27, 1998
Lash: Jim.
Manders: Holly is not, or is Holly the end?
Hoffman: No.
Roeser: Oh it isn't?
Manders: How much further is it?
Hoffman: Just that one more lot, right?
Lash: And then is there a street there too?...
Manders: So is it right at that transition fi'om 45 to 30 is where that happens at'? Is that where
you're saying for...?
Berg: You live before the long white fence, right?
Audience...
Berg: How far are you from wherc the speed limit drops to 30?
Audience...
Manders: I guess my preference would be to take the trail all the way but if there's a
consideration to money, whatever, I can back off.
Lash: I don't even want to necessarily look at the money thing. I mean not that money isn't
important but I want to sort of look at the logical. I could be...
Manders: And the only reason I say that is that, if it isn't done now, it will never get done.
Lash: Right.
Manders: And ! realize we could put it in at some point, it won't happen. That's the way I'm
thinking. So either we're going to do it or we're going to not do it and it just won't get done.
And I'm, I guess I'm not so nervous about it not being done because I think that area of the road
has fairly good sight lines and so it isn't. My other question is pertaining to the road around, or
the trail around the townhouse area from Kerber to Butte. So we're talking no guardrail?
Hoffman: Co~Tect.
Manders: Talking 8 foot trail on the east bank of the ditch line.
58
Park and Rec Commission Meeting - January 27, 1998
Hoffman: Correct.
Manders: And that can fit in there with something like 20 feet clear to the center of the road. To
the edge of the road.
Audience...
Lash: Okay, who'd like to make a motion?
Roeser: I'll take staff recommendation for Powers Boulevard bike trail.
Lash: ...going all the way to Holly?
Roeser: And we'll let perhaps the engineer decide...go to Pleasant View or Holly...
Lash: We decide.
Roeser: We decide?
Lash: I'm not going dowrl that road.
Roeser: Alright, Powers Boulevard to Holly.
Lash: Is there a second?
Franks: I second.
Roeser moved, Franks seconded tlmt the Park and Recreation Commissiou recommends to
approve the bike trail for Powers Boulevard per staff's recommendation to llolly Lane. All
voted in favor and the motion carried.
Hoffinan: Jan can we note on the record, before we leave trails, the response to Mr. Kimble's
concerns on Highway 101 ?
Lash: Yes.
Dave Nyberg: Chair Lash and commissioners. We heard a concern from a resident at the
meeting last Tuesday, Mr. Kimble who lives at the sharp bend on TH 101 near Kiowa Trail. He
asked us to consider doing something, I think were his words at that comer. He's had a lot of, or
wimessed a lot of vehicles going offthe road there. We contacted MnDot, the same people that
are reviewing that segment of trail. We really have to get their permission to do anything there,
including putting in the trail and their response was, that anybody that goes off the road at that
comer is traveling too fast. They have that, it's posted 40 mph. I believe it's, yeah 30 mph with
a speed caution sign that's signed for 30 mph southbound, 25 northbound, and that's their
59
Park and Rec Commission Meeting - January 27, 1998
position on it. They are very opposed to constructing a guardrail for some of the same reasons as
the county and I really don't think they would approve it and I probably wouldn't recommend
installing guardrails there. ! think what may help the situation there, and you have to get beyond
the idea that a car's going to go off the road and hit somebody on that trail. If you can think of
what we're doing to the trail there, we're extending out quite a wide boulevard beyond that road.
Right now it drops right off into the ditch. Once our trail is constructed the culvert will be
extended at the ditch. The trail will be maybe 15 feet off the edge of the travel lane. What we're
doing in a sense is putting in a flat recovery zone and granted the trail will cross through that
area, but I'm assuming a lot of these cars are probably going off the road at night. They can't see
the turn as well, or they're new to the area or just passing through, what have you. So the
chances of pedestrians being at that point when a car would go off the road, we're really not
making the situation any more dangerous than it would be now I don't think.
Howe: A 15 fbot recovery zone?
Dave Nyberg: Yeah, I'm not even sure what the actual dimensions are but I think the trail is
about 15 feet from the edge of the travel lane, whereas right now once you get off the road it
drops straight down and this is where the, you know all these cars go off into this ditch. We're
going to flatten that out. Bring an embankment out across the creek, put our trail in and then
drop down.
Lash: If a car went off, would it still go down the embankment before it got to the trail or is that
embankment going to be filled in?
Dave Nyberg: The embankment will be filled in, that's right.
Lash: No, I mean the difference between now and then is that we're going to be encouraging
people beyond, in that area.
Dave Nyberg: That is the difference, correct.
Lash: Right now we're not encouraging them and most people aren't insane enough to xvalk
along there, especially at night. So that's a big difference.
Dave Nyberg: It is a difference but you know there are sidewalks and trails all over along
highways and along curbs where that can happen. I mean there's really nothing yon can do about
it. It's just a fact of how roads and trails are built. They're always along corridors together.
Lash: You know...to indicate that if they leave the road, it's because they're going too fast.
Well, dah you know. But that isn't going to help the poor person that's walking down the trail
when you kmow somebody who doesn't know where they're going flies off the road. And you
know they're kind of making an assumption that I'm a trail. I'm off the road. I'm somewhat
safe, you know and then here comes the car flying off the road. You know and I don't know how
often that stuff happens but once is quite often you know.
60
Park and Rec Commission Meeting - January 27, 1998
Dave Nyberg: Yeah. We've got the same problem on TH 101, the connection trail segment by
A1 Klingelhutz' house. There's a very sharp bend there. It's signed 20 mph. I'm sure there's
several cars have slid off the road at that corner. And we're putting the trail through that comer
on the outside. We had proposed guardrails at that location but ! doubt whether MnDot will
allow that.
Lash: Would it be possible to just sign it, you know ahead of time, pedestrians or some king of
thing that just heightens people's yeah. Heightens people's awareness to the fact that there's
people walking and biking there so maybe.
Dave Nyberg: We could address that with MnDot at the time of our review of their comments.
Manders: Is the right-of-way there, because you're saying that there's a drop off...you're
proposing to put the trail inside of that drop off. Is it just not possible to put the trail outside so
that if they go off the road, they end up in the drink and you get the trail on the back side so we're
safe?
Dave Nyberg: We could possibly do that but I think the trail would have to move even farther
into the Kimble property. Right now we're obtaining an easement from them to construct the
trail really at a minimum distance away fi'om the travel lanes and like you're saying, if we push it
farther into their yard, we can leave a, it'd be maybe like a hole.
Manders: That's basically our option.
Dave Nybcrg: Yeah. And then the vehicles would continue to drop into that hole and then it
would go fi'om that to the trail.
Lash: I would prefer that.
Dave Nyberg: We can present that to the resident there because that would be, if he would be
acceptable to that. We have to get an easement from him. His house is quite a ways back fi'om
the road there so he may be receptive to that. Okay, thanks.
Lash: Thanks Dave. Okay, let's move onto new business.
Hoffman: I'd recommend you go ahead and ask any questions. Take action on any items which
need action and then ask any questions on any other items.
PARK AND REC COMMISSION CANDIDATES.
Lash: Okay, we need to make a recommendation of three candidates to be interviewed by City
Council.
Manders: How do you want to handle this?
61
Park and Rec Commission Meeting - January 27, 1998
Lash: Well the people who...did you rate yours 1, 2, 3.
Franks: We each ranked our top 4.
Lash: And then did you meet already to come to consensus on your top three?
Manders: Well the issue is not, us three didn't see the same people...
Lash: ...and Jim, did you interview all of them too?
Manders: I guess I know all of them at some point so it isn't like I don't, it's just that I wasn't
there for the two interviews. And I'm open to their recommendation on the two people that I
didn't see so I can, if they're favorable with that, I could go with it.
Lash: Okay so Rod, you saw them all, right? And you ranked 1, 2, 3. Okay. Why don't you
wrap them up and.
Franks: Number one ranking was Lindell... Number two was David Moes. Number three was
Jennifer...
Lash: Hoxv does that compare with yours Jim?
Manders: I didn't talk to Lindell but I could certainly put him in the top four. My top choices
would have been Curt, David Moes, Jennifer and one of the others. Cindy or Lindell, and Lindell
would be the top one out of that.
Lash: Mike.
Howe: Do you want bio's on these people or opinions on them or just my rankings?
Lash: Just your rankings.
Howe: I thought Lindell xvas very impressive. He'd be my number one. I think it's important to
keep a woman on the commission and that's not from a politically correct standpoint.
Lash: ...feminine side whenever he can.
Howe: You'd better shave the beard then. Anyway. I just don't k~ow if I saw a candidate that,
who was a man that was better, I don't know ifI could take that route. But I do think it is
important that we retain at least two females but I'm going to recommend three men here. So
Lindell would be number one for me. I thought Mike Mullins, I don't know him well but I
thought he did a great job on the referendum. I like Mike. He's my number two. Number three
would be Dave Moes because I did interview him. And my fourth pick would be Jennifer...
62
Park and Rec Commission Meeting - January 27, 1998
Lash: Can I ask a point of...because I don't knoxv where any of these people live. Did you know
the criteria and you're supposed to look geographically and all that kind of stuff, right?
Howe: Yep.
Manders: I don't know where all of them live but Curt has lived in three places in Chanhassen.
He presently lives out off of Pioneer and TH 101. Doxvn in that direction. Mike lives over I
think off of Galpin south. David Moes is in Lotus North. Joseph Baloney I believe is in Chan
Hills I believe.
Lash: Where we have some gapping holes in some type of representation is the northern, which
xvould be like the north Lotus area, or west. That would be Cindy Hanson would be west... And
south.
Howe: Well south, somebody by Pioneer would be...
Lash: Because you're as far south as we go Mike, and that's down Galpin. But I mean we
don't have anybody south. We don't have anybody west. We don't have anybody north. So I
don't know where any of these people live but it'd be one of my goals to try and get somebody
from one of those areas, and I don't know where...
Howe: How are we going to do this? We've got to agree on three, right?
Hoffman: Yep.
Howe: Do we have common names for?
Lash: You had Lindell. Didn't you all have that?
Manders: I could go with that.
Franks: And Curt, did you have Curt?
Howe: I didn't have Curt. I wasn't there for him. If you guys have a high opinion of him...
Manders: Curt is out off of Pioneer and TH 101, out there.
Lash: And you said Dave Moes is up by North Lotus? It'd be nice if the other ones is from out
west.
Howe: Jennifer.
Lash: Or Cindy, she is too isn't she? Minnewashta.
Howe: I'm okay with that.
63
Park and Rec Commission Meeting - January 27, 1998
Manders: I didn't talk to Cindy but I did talk, meet with Jennifer and so I can guess...so I guess
based on the meeting that Cindy was at and some interest going, I would potentially go ~vith her.
I guess it doesn't matter.
Howe: Jennifer, didn't she, she had an interesting background in like therapeutic recreation or
something which I thought was a different perspective. That was a plus for me.
Manders: I mean I can go either way so | don't know that I can make a choice because ! didn't
talk to both of them.
Berg: I wouldn't want to be saying a year from now to myself...
Lash: No, but if they're all three of them are on their list to start with. Aren't they?...
l-toffman: You're going to have another appointment coming up shortly I think. Eventually.
Manders: Potentially I ~vould also go, I mean David isn't out of my running either.
Howe: Well we've got him.
Berg: Moes and Lindell, right?
Howe: Yeah, I thought those were the two...
Manders: Curt is in the running too.
Franks: Curt is very professional. He's the Director of the Eden Prairie Recreation Center.
Howe: Can we give them four?
(There was a tape change at this point in the discussion.)
Lash: I know I didn't interview but l'm going to throw in my opinion anyway. I probably would
have considered who does it as their job, just because I think it's, not that that wouldn't, not that
they don't knoxv what they're talking about, but I think that our role up here is basically novice
residents rather than educated staff. More staff, you know and I think it's difficult sometimes to
switch your gears between what you know as a professional and what you think as a resident...
Franks: ...but Lindell, just didn't come across. I had the same bias going into the interviexv you
know.
Lash: I just suggest that the next time we do this...all be there.
64
Park and Rec Commission Meeting - January 27, 1998
Howe: I wonld move, ifI may, that as a commission we recommend to the Council for
appointment to the Park and Recreation Commission, for the Council's consideration, David
Moes, Jennifer Linn and Curt...
Lash: Is there a second?
Hoffinan: Okay, we need four to vote.
Berg: We'll vote but the second should come from one of you two.
Manders: I think it's a tough choice and I'm not opposed to it, so I'll second it.
Howe moved, Manders seconded to recommend to the Council for appointment to the Park
and Recreation Commission, for the Council's consideration, David Moes, Jennifer Linn
and Curt. All voted in favor and the motion carried.
Lash: Next time let's try and make it so that there's more of us who can go, so we don't have to
run into this I guess. I knoxv this xvas a bad month becanse we had so many meetings and it xvas
hard you know, but postpone it or something.
PROGRAM REPORTS:
Lash: We've February Festival. Jerry, are you looking for volunteers?
Ruegemer: Yes. I was going to get to that, but I mean do I need to go through each report?
Berg: No.
Ruegemer: Are there any questions on Feb Fcst at this point?...
Lash: Are you looking for voltmteers?...
Ruegemer: ...Fred, Jan. Rod, is that a hand up? Or like, oh my god?
Franks: No.
Howe: I'll be fishing. I'll be there.
Lash: We don't have to draw prizes every 30 seconds, right? Okay.
Manders: I think so but I can't guarantee it.
Ruegemer: Jim and question mark...
Lash: Summer tennis. Yes, anything we have to know or can we just.
65
Park and Rec Commission Meeting - January 27, 1998
Dexter: All I'm asking is that if you go ahead and approve the recommendation.
Berg: So moved.
Lash; Is there a second?
Berg moved and the motion was seconded to approve the summer tennis recommendations.
Ail voted in favor and the motion carried.
Lash: Okay, we'll move onto the 4th of July celebration. We're talking about nexv bands, right?
Ruegemer: Well this is, yeah. That'd be a separate item. This is just when the days are going to
be and then they just talked, you know the parade is going to happen again this year on the 4th Of
July.
Berg: That would be Saturday then.
Ruegemer: That would be Saturday, the 4th of July. There was talk last year about potentially,
you know what do we do with all these people. We have them up town. A parade to come up for
an hour, hour and a half. Boom. The parade's done. Everybody says, now xvhat do we do?
Lash: Here's my idea when I read this. I didn't know you already had the dates picked. Have
the parade and the street dance and the kiddie parade and everything Friday and then all the fun
stuff at Lake Ann and the fireworks Saturday. Can you make the parade Thursday or not? I
mean Friday?
Hoffman: Friday's...
Lash: No, but then you've got people you know flip flopping all over. There's no, if you come
For the parade you've got the kiddie parade, you know and we've got some stuffset up here...oh,
you don't think most people will be off Friday?
Howe: No, they'll be offon Monday.
Ruegemcr: I think a lot of people will work Friday...
Lash: Well okay. I guess I just was assuming most people would have Friday off. So if that's
not the case then.
Ruegemer: I guess what we're trying to do is reallyjust get direction. You know what the
thoughts of the commission are. I would like to start, you know we want to get the fire going on
the 4th of July already and really get going on that and secure, if we need to secure for that. And
we don't have to make that decision tonight. I'm just looking for you know, some parameters.
66
Park and Rec Commission Meeting - January 27, 1998
Berg: ...utilize downtown and use that as the core of the city.
Lash: Well we have the street dance and everything here. You know the parade and all that stuff
is here. It'd just be nice to have it all, you know in a continuous flow.
Ruegerner: Would it be helpfid to potentially call a special meeting to deal with that other than
tonight, if we don't have time to go through that type of thing. Bring in other key people to go
through that.
Manders: The question is whether to have the parade on Friday or Saturday?
Ruegemer: Well no, it's not so much in question. I think if the parade is I think somewhat set on
for the 4th of July. It's just we're securing entertainment and those types of things at this point. I
think what we're trying, I think the big question looming out there is what do we do for that I
guess Lake Ann day? I mean there's no reason why the fireworks, well I guess the fireworks will
probably have to stay at Lake Ann. But just continue then from the parade in a downtoxvn
manner. Whether we, Jan...carnival of some kind or you know additional food vendors.
Hoxve: ...days up in Champlin and they had that whole kids carnival...
Ruegemer: Carnies run around, no teeth, that type of thing?
Hoffinan: I think Jan should sleep on it. You should all call tomon'ow and we'll...
Howe: You had a recommendation for a band though didn't you Jerry?
Rucgemer: I do.
Lash: Yeah let's, we'll think about it.
Ruegemer: Alright, we'll talk. Just keep your thinking caps.
Lash: ...and find out like for sure what they xvant to do and when...okay,
Ruegemer: Would the commission like to hear any demo tapes or is this satisfactory?
Roeser: If you want Casablanca.
Ruegemer: Ron knows.
Berg: What did the High Tops cost last year?
Rucgemer: 16.
(The commission listened to demo tapes nt this point.)
67
Park and Rec Commission Meeting - January 27, 1998
Ruegemer: Hot Rod is more like a High Tops type of a band.
bit more progressive. Little more, more horns. More people.
staff report.
50's-60's. Casablanca is a little
More action .... the listing in the
Lash: Is there a motion on that? Do we need a motion? We have enough money to do it, I'm
assuming. Okay.
Ruegemer: Yeah, I have over $3,000.00 in monies for entertainment so to adjust, if we do
need...I'11 just adjust my budget in other areas to accommodate the entertainment.
Meger: I move that we select Casablanca Orchestra for the July 4th.
Howe: I second.
Meger moved, Howe seconded to select Casablanca Orchestra for the 4th of July
entertainment. All voted in favor and the motion carried.
Lash: Adult softball league eligibility. Did everybody have a chance to read it? Yep, I thought it
was good.
Ruegemer: ...because it's 11:257 You know everybody...we took care of the residents first
and...
Lash: Good job Jer. Do we need to do anything with that?
Berg: Motion to approve.
Lash: Motion to approve staff's recommendation for the adult softball league eligibility.
Howe: So moved.
Lash: Is there a second?
Berg: Second.
Howe moved, Berg seconded that the Park and Recreation Commission approve staff's
recommendation for the adult softball league eligibility. All voted in favor and the motion
carried.
Lash: Okay, next one is the Rec Center monthly report. Is this Jason?
Jason: Yes. Do you have any questions?
Berg: Why the heck did you come?
68
Park and Rec Commission Meeting - January 27, 1998
Lash: Looks good. Thanks...Jason. Okay, commission goals.
Hoffman: I'd like to take the next hour and a half and establish 1998 commission goals.
Hoxve: I move that we table.
Berg: We have them already.
Lash: Okay, is there a second to that?
Howe moved, Berg seconded to table the 1998 Park and Recreation Commission goals. All
voted in favor and the motion carried.
COMMISSION PRESENTATIONS:
Roeser: I think there's going to be a problem without lifeguards...
Hoffman: I think the Council's going to bring it up next Council meeting.
Berg: At least there was some semblance of order when you have a lifeguard out there. With
nobody there it's going to be...
kash: ... I had a whole room full of people and I said...
Hoffman: lt's the town talk. They went until quarter to midnight last night at their meeting so
they ran out of time too to talk about it.
Lash: Did wetop that? No.
Howe: Did they find the guys that broke into'?
Ruegemer: No. I don't think we will either, to be honest.
Lash: Any other commission members? We don't have any city presentations I don't think...
Ruegemer: Commissioners, I have one quick item. If people remember last year we had the INT
water-ski touruament out at Lake Susan. There will be, they are requesting another event again
this year. That weekend will be May 30th and 31st At Lake Susan again. I think they were
extremely pleased with that location. We'll be, I'll be writing that report for City Council and
that will be on the February 9th agenda for that. Does anybody have any questions prior to that,
please call me.
Berg: Would you let the people around Lake Susan know that? That it's coming.
69
Park and Rec Commission Meeting - January 27, 1998
Ruegemer: Last year we had a letter from myself and from the tournament director kind of
laying out the tournament. The weekend time line. All that type of thing. What I would propose
to do is write that agenda, or write that memo for the agenda and then also include that. We have
the mailing list from last year and we can certainly update that and then get that information to
the residents around Lake...
Lash: Okay, anybody else with anything on their...
Manders moved, Howe seconded to adjourn the meeting. Ali voted in favor and the motion
carried. The meeting was adjourned.
Submitted by Todd Hoffman
Park and Recreation Director
Prepared by Nann Opheim
70