The URL can be used to link to this page

1 Approval of MinutesCHANHASSEN PARK AND RECREATION COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING APRIL 28, 1998 Chairwoman Lash called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. MEMBERS PRESENT: Jan Lash, Fred Berg, Rod Franks, Mike Howe, Ron Roeser, Jim Manders, and David Moes MEMBERS ABSENT: None. STAFF PRESENT: Todd Hoffman, Park and Rec Director; Jerry Ruegemer and Patty Dexter, Recreation Supervisors VISITOR PRESENTATIONS: None. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Howe moved, Franks seconded to approve the Minutes of the Park and Recreation Commission meeting dated March 24, 1998 as presented. All voted in favor and the motion carried. STONE CREEK PARK TRAIL AND BRIDGE PROJECT NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING. Public Present: Name Address Tim & Lynn Lee 2255 Paula Robinson 2224 Gary & Nancy Evans 8281 ..Brad Fly 2061 O. Kurver 2136 John Bull 1929 Jeff Heine 2071 Diane Kirchoff 8260 Steve Brielmaier 2239 Lori Juelich 2246 Lisa Mastain 2215 Preston Brown 2260 Roger & Gayleen Schmidt 8301 Mary Rumble 2321 Barry Cohen 2274 Yvonne LaPenonere 2274 Steven Berquist 7207 Lukewood Drive Lukewood Drive Barwood Circle Timberwood Drive Boulder Road Bluff View Court Timberwood Drive Benwood Drive Stone Creek Lane E Stone Creek Lane E Stone Creek Lane E Stone Creek Lane E Galpin Blvd. Stone Creek Lane W Lukewood Drive Lukewood Drive Frontier Trail Park and Rec Commission Meeting - April 28, 1998 Nancy Mancino Gene Kruchoski Bill Wyffels Sue Drake Tom Tietjen Greg Krauska Kevin O'Brian Deb & Steven Kind Brian & Shannon Hoese Craig & Patty Mari Bonita Lidfors Colleen Dockendorf 6620 Galpin Blvd. 2030 Boulder Road 2263 Stone Creek Lane E 2277 Lukewood Drive 8278 Benwood Circle 2209 Lukewood Drive 2201 Lukewood Drive 2351 Lukewood Drive 2305 Lukewood Drive 8250 Benwood Circle 8251 Benwood Circle 2061 Oakwood Ridge Todd Hoffman presented the staff report on this item. Paul Page: Thanks Todd. Well here's a plan of the park and also part of...orientation, this is Stone Creek Lane East running near the Oaks neighborhood as referenced up here. The existing asphalt trail stub here. The park boundary here. Predominantly it's about an 8 acre park of which 5 acres shown in this hatched graphic area is wooded. Existing park facilities are referenced. Playground with Phase I was installed here. A hillside slide. The hillside really comes through the park right in this area. A half basketball court and existing paved trail that heads to the east in this direction. And the west branch, a west branch of Bluff Creek comes through this site and.., primarily steeply banked through the entire portion of the site. The trail that Todd mentioned and described, that's proposed an alignment here following the existing...that was used as an access road for grading activities...here to the bottom of the hill, on the edge of the woods and into the woods in a location for those who have visited the site, there's an existing walking trail that follows this alignment to about this point and then it breaks out to the east. This proposal, after walking the site, this area seemed like the logical spot to cross the creek with this...bridge so because of that we broke off the alignment on the top of the grade and follow the top of the grade to this point, right down the hillside with a series of timber risers and gravel treads, a built in stair if you will, to that bridge connection point, that 20 foot span bridge... And then up the other embankment with another set of stairs. On each of the stairs would require a small retaining wall. I had proposed granite fieldstone for it's natural look and I think it fits with the area very well. And then the alignment of the trail is really meandering to respond to the existing tree locations... As Todd mentioned, transfer from bituminous to gravel...would carry all the way down, across the bridge being 5 feet, back up the hill and connecting back to the bituminous trail. The second exhibit in the report...Exhibit B is a section taken at, if you would put...cluster the gravel trail at the top of the embankment near the creek where a portion of the hill and potentially on both sides to minimize the number of stairs should be cut through just to ease the transition from the trail to the stairs and...I don't anticipate that being higher than 8 feet...The impact of the trail with the existing trees is fairly minimal. The exception being where the cut is taken at the retaining wall. Obviously the root zones of trees on the upland side are impacted here so it's cautious or have the alignment respond...to minimize that impact. On the downhill side there's virtually no significant impact to trees because the trail takes off at existing grades. The second exhibit is a section taken through the two sets of stairs Park and Rec Commission Meeting - April 28, 1998 coming down the hillside and through the creek down here. The 20 foot bridge is shown here. The stone abutments, driveway stone abutments...at this point and this point. The highest bridge would have to accommodate the fluctuating of the creek. It is primarily being determined at 4 feet in this area. We'll have to study that a little bit more. The watershed, in phone conversation told me 4 feet so obviously we...and what was shown in conception here. On top of the hill... Otherwise the general approach was about as minimal as you can get to provide a trail that isn't going to erode over time and allow connection between...in question. Essentially connecting the neighborhood to the south with the neighborhood to the north. Both neighborhoods back to the park. Lash: With that, do commissioners have any questions for staff?. Seeing none, we will be opening the meeting up for public comment. Before we do that I'd like to explain that we'll be setting just a few ground rules because there are quite a few people in attendance this evening. First we'd like to thank everyone for sending in their letters and faxes with the different opinions. We certainly appreciate the residential input on this issue. If you wish to address the Commission, you need to come to the podium. State your name and address for the record. We will not be entertaining comments from the audience. If you are not at the podium, we can't hear you and it ~vill not be on the record so you really need to come up to the podium. Speak in the microphone, state your name and address. Okay given that, is there anyone who would like to address the commission? Craig Evans: I'll be first. My name is Craig Evans. I live at 8281 Benwood Circle and I represent one of many neighbors that are against the construction of the Benwood Stone Creek trail. First I'd like to clear up a secondary issue. The trail does cross next to my home. We knew of the trail when we built our home. We were fully aware of it but we did not know what it would look like or when it would be built. We thought the trail a good thing. We like trails but after a closer look at the actual plan, and the personal safety issues that were involved, we have changed our minds. We're hopeful that after reviewing the facts that we'll be presenting to you folks tonight, that you too will change your minds in the construction of this redundant, single section of the Chanhassen trail system. I'd like to start off with a statement to Todd Hoffman and the Parks Commission. First off we applaud your efforts to integrate nature and community in the Chanhassen system. However, in the instance of the Benwood Stone Creek trail, we are concerned residents and neighbors feel that adequate consideration was not given to the personal safety implications of this effort. We would caution you. In your haste to construct trails you must be responsible to the residents of Chanhassen. That by your actions you are not creating serious problems. Problems that over shadow the significance of the original task. We, speaking against the construction of this trail tonight are not against the construction of trails in general. Only those that create environments for criminal activity against residents. The Stone Creek trail represents such a risk. I'd like to read a brief statement now as it relates to some of the discoveries about what this trail would imply. Trails that lead into unobservable wooded areas can become hangouts for vandals. Our homes and even our children can become targets of crime. The proposed trail connecting the Oaks with the back of the Stone Creek playground is a prime example of such a community threat and should not be constructed. As designed, this trail does not afford public safety officers a view of the paths entirety from either end. The threat of creating an environment for criminals is very real, even in good neighborhoods like the Oaks and Park and Rec Commission Meeting - April 28, 1998 Stone Creek. Our biggest fear is one of potential child abduction or child molestation. This proposed trail increases the potential for a nightmare such as this in our own backyards. For those that would argue that this likelihood is small or this an alarmist message, one need look no further than the School District 112 memo that I have copies of here and I'd be glad to give to each member of the commission. In February of 1997 a child abduction alert was issued to parents of children that were attending Bluff Creek Elementary. This is a little over a year ago. The children were warned to take precautions to avoid against potential dangers. This suspect was reported near the Norwood-Young America area, less than 15 minutes from our homes. The hidden nature of the Benwood Stone Creek trail creates an ideal environment for individuals prone to crimes of this nature. By backing directly into the Stone Creek play area, this secluded trail could also provide an expediate conduit to cars parked in Benwood Circle. The facts are as follows. Candid conversations with Carver County Sheriff's officers, as well as the Chanhassen Public Safety Director have confirmed that safety should be a bigger concern than public access. In it's haste to open new trails, the city is unknowingly creating security and crime hazards for the residents of Chanhassen. Loitering and property damaging four wheelers have already forced Herman Field residents to form neighborhood watches to curtail crime in city created, unobservable park areas. Residents of Kerber Creek report trash containers and debris is repeatedly thrown into the pond. Several have taken to cleaning up the nuisance on their own. The city is attempting to control the crime by hiring more police officers to patrol these trails but a wiser, more prudent strategy would dictate not creating an environment conducive to criminal behavior in the first place. A trail already exists without the risks of the Benwood Stone Creek path. The proposed path is not critical to the completion of the extensive Chanhassen system. The desire to build loops between neighborhoods such as the Oaks and Stone Creek is currently being met through the use of an existing trail along Galpin Road. Increasing the threat of personal crime to Chanhassen residents simply to provide a redundant trail is ludicrous and irresponsible. Now I'd like to point out a couple facts that we found when we were researching this whole child molestation issue. And we thought we'd start with things at home. This was taken from Chanhassen Villager. It's simply to point out that each year in the State of Minnesota approximately 350 sex offenders are released from our prisons. 350 doesn't sound like much. In going to the internet and trying to find out more about this subject, since I do have two kids and it directs me, directly to our family, we found out that there were a series of special reports and articles that had been written over the course of the past year but they point out alarming statistics. Child molestation is a national crisis. Abduction was the number one topic among third graders nationally. 1 in 42 children will become a missing child. And according to NBC, the one thing you can count on, there is always a child molester watching. More alarming statistics. This, from the Department of Justice. 1 in 3 girls and 1 in 7 boys will be molested at least one before the age of 18. 4 million child molesters reside in the United States and what that means is, on the average, there is 1 one child molester per square mile across the United States. That means Chanhassen is a city of 23 square miles, harbors the potential for up to 23. I can tell you as a resident I do not one of them hanging out in my back yard waiting as a bivwack to go up behind a park and possibly surprise some children. As a concluding statement, we would hope that tonight you would ask yourself, in constructing this redundant trail for the community, are you going good or are you doing bad? Is a second access worth endangering the children of the Stone Creek's and the Oak's neighborhoods. Better judgment would dictate, no. It's not. We Park and Rec Commission Meeting - April 28, 1998 would hope and pray that better judgment prevails tonight. Please don't build this trail. Thank you. Lash: Thank you Mr. Evans. Is there someone else who'd like to address the commission? Bill Wyffels: For the record my name is Bill Wyffels. I live at 2263 Stone Creek Lane East, which I may add is directly across the street from the park at Stone Creek. I didn't want to come here tonight and talk as I thought this was an issue that was going to progress as previously requested in our issues. But I kept getting these flyers in my door and these flyers are as a result of what, actually one of them was verbatim what Mr. Evans just read here. I am a police officer in the City of Eden Prairie. I'm also a fellow commissioner on the Public Safety Commission, City of Chanhassen. I've been with Eden Prairie for 10 years. We have close to 100 miles of trails in our city. We do a lot of surveys of our citizens and the number one topic, the reason why people come to our city is the beautiful trails, the park system that the city provides, l've had an opportunity this morning to walk through the woods, as you had just preceding this meeting. I've never been back there before. I've lived across the street for 3 years. When I and my wife built the house across the street from the park I went and talked to Mr. Hoffman as I had a concern on what was going to be the future of the park. And it was a promise basically that he provided the plans of the park and the plans included the trail and me and my wife were both looking very forward to that. Having the opportunity going through the woods and crossing the creek and unfortunately today was in an unsafe manner, I realized that it's a beautiful area back there and it's an area that we would really appreciate the opportunity to enjoy with a safe path to walk on. Because of my experience in the public safety area, I feel necessary, although I don't want to, and the last thing I want to do is create an uprising in our neighborhood but I feel necessary to respond to some of the comments regarding public safety. And the only opposition issues I've seen on this park trail plan so far is regarding public safety. In the 10 years I've worked in the city of Eden Prairie, with the number of trails we have, I cannot recall one incident of any kid being kidnapped on any of our trails. I cannot recall one incident of any suspicious looking characters on any of the trails. The only calls I've ever been to on any of the trails was maybe a kid falling down on Rollerbtades or something like that. The people love it. They enjoy it. We would love our trail. We know we would enjoy it. We voted for it in the park referendum. We expected this to continue as progressed. I was surprised at the opposition. One of the first flyers that came out regarding some of the issues regarding public safety, and ifI may quote some of the things that Mr. Evans just wrote to you. And these are just words that are thrown out and I feel these works are an extreme. He claims there's vandals. A community threat. Threats of creating environment for criminals. Child abduction alert, which he attaches by the way. This incident occurred allegedly as a child reports and only as good as a child reports, to the Norwood-Young America area. It has nothing to do with Bluff Creek. It has nothing, outside of it's the same school district, it has nothing to do with the trails in our neighborhood. I can give you multiple specifics as he showed you up on the board here, showing sex offenders and issues within our city, I can tell you I've responded to alleged abductions twice in the past month in our city, and that is only 5 miles away. It has nothing to do with the trails in the city of Chanhassen. The trails I believe is a very safe place. In my experiences I do not believe that this is an area of hazard. I live right across the street as I said. I have a great view of the park from all of the front windows of my house. I can honestly say we would love to have the Oaks neighborhood come Park and Rec Commission Meeting - April 28, 1998 over and enjoy a park. We would love to have them do that conveniently with a trail through the woods. We would also love the opportunity to enjoy that trail. I'll cover my end of this. Mr. Evans will cover his as far as criminals going back into the neighborhood. I cannot confidently say, as I know pretty much every resident in my neighborhood, there's no criminals in our neighborhood and we're more than welcome to share our community with our neighbors. I guess in closing I just want to say that I totally support the plan of the trails. I recommend that you make a motion to continue with this process. I believe I speak for many neighbors in my community. I guess my frustration, and it's my understanding that there's a petition that was organized and offered to you. I believe that that petition was done under some bias issues and those issues revolve around the issue of public safety. If public safety is a concern, as I talked to Chanhassen Public Safety Director, Scott Harr regarding this and he was surprised that the quotes that he was being construed and handed out in flyers. If this is a public safety issue, it's new to me and basically in all honesty is the only opposition I see. And with the continuation of the handing out of these flyers, unsuspecting parent of children that gets notifications of potential kidnappers in the neighborhood, I mean you're sending them back in their doors and locking their doors and of course. IfI didn't know any better as a result of my business, I would probably sign it too xvith the fear ora potential kidnapper out there. It's almost an extorted way of getting signatures and as Scott Harr indicated to you in his memo to Todd Hoffman, I think he will also agree with me. And again, as a member of the Public Safety Commission, I see no safety issues in the progression of this trail. Thank you. Colleen Dockendorf: Good evening. Colleen Dockendorf, 2061 Oakwood Ridge in Timberwood Estates. Well I came here tonight to speak as a member of the Public Safety Commission but Bill more than adequately dealt with those issues so aside from public safety concerns I think it really boils down to two things. One, when the Minger Addition was approved it included this trail as a part of it. And number two, when the Park and Rec referendum was passed it was with the expectation that this would be a part of it so I would ask that you approve this and pass it onto the Council for approval. Thanks. Lash: Thanks Colleen. Nancy Evans: I'm Nancy Evans and I'm at 8281 Benwood Circle and yes, the trail does go behind my house. But I have to tell you that regardless of where this trail would be, if it was coming in the neighborhood and if I lived in any other house on Benwood Circle or Lukewood, I would be here and I appreciate the officers explanation of safety and that makes me feel good. We've talked to Scott Harr. We've talked to a lot of officers. It's wonderful to hear that we live in a safe neighborhood but you know what concerns me is a couple things. First of all, we went in Chanhassen, now Eden Prairie maybe is a little safer than we are but we went in Chanhassen and we heard that Herman Park was an area that people were having some trouble with and Herman Park for those of you that don't know, is over by Excelsior and it's right on the border of Chan and Excelsior. And it's a park that's surrounded by woods. And we heard the people had to start a neighborhood watch because things were going on so we wanted to see how serious, because we like trails. We didn't just want to say we don't want this trail in our neighborhood so we did some research. We talked to them. I talked to two moms who were walking down, about my age and asked them you know, what do you think about Herman Park. What is it in this area? Park and Rec Commission Meeting - April 28, 1998 Is there a problem and both of them said, first of all they tried to fight it. They didn't want it and the city put it in and what was concerning them, they wouldn't let their kids play there and there were two things. There were adolescents and kids hanging around, like we probably all did when we were their age. And then there were sort of lurkers that supposedly their kids had spotted hanging in the woods. They got scared. They ran away. This is two moms, three kids, three different instances. So that concerns me a little bit. They also said they wouldn't even go to the playground because the kids that are hanging out were trying to intimidate them. Now what that means we can all guess I suppose. So it didn't sound like a place these families wanted to go to. Then we called a man that was working on the park commission, or not the park commission, I'm sorry. He works on the park watch and I asked him, you know what's the deal. Are you afraid to go down there? So what he told me was, he said there's certain times of the day that you can go down there with your family. He would never send his kids down there alone because of the things that were going on. The adolescents, we're basically talking middle school, high school. They had figured out, as we all did when we were young, where you can go. Where you can hide where people aren't going to see you and what time. So I guess these kids are down there twice a day. They're down there after school and then they're down there at night. Now, are they going to hurt my kids? No, probably not. But the things that they're doing that bothers me, and these are Chan kids that probably can do the same thing in our trail, what this man told me was, they were having sex. Now I don't want my little girl going down to the playground in Stone Creek and seeing that. They were drinking. They were smoking pot. They were smoking cigarettes. They were doing some of the other things that we did when we were young, but they were also vandalizing a lot of things and the park watch started because they were concerned of the safety of, not only their children but just the money that they had spent down there. They were vandalizing the park equipment. They were vandalizing, they set fire to a port-a-john. Well these might all sound like minor things but if it's in your back yard and some kid comes in August and he's smoking and he has matches and he decides he's going to try to set the bridge on fire because it looks like something fun to do. Now those are the kinds of things that can...but I can't. I can't see what's going on back there. Now that's in Chan. We didn't go to Kerber Pond. I know there's some other things going on. I talked a couple, I guess you were trying to get a couple police officers on bikes. I mean that would be great. Even that would help. But why create an environment where you have to do that. Or maybe you can plow down all the trees and then we could see it and the kids would be safe. But I want to talk to the gentleman here again, just about safety. I think my husband mentioned this Norwood-Young America. I don't know how many of you have school kids but when I got this last year from Bluff Creek, I was very nervous. I have a little girl. I have a little boy. This man is loose. They're saying to be careful. If I was in Norwood-Young America last year and a trail was going to go in and I was fighting the trail because I didn't want...in the woods. Some good looking man like this would probably come up and say, lady. Relax. The facts don't back you up. It doesn't happen. We're safe. I've been here 10 years. It's not going to happen. But you know what? IfI was this mom, these girls were lucky because they ran to a house. But ifI was this mom and the girls hadn't been lucky, I don't think anybody had said would be make me feel any better. So those are my concerns about the trail as a mom. Thanks. Gene Kruchoski: Hi. My name is Gene Kruchoski and I live at 2030 Boulder Road. And I just wanted to state tonight that we voted for this referendum as you continue to expand and enlighten Park and Rec Commission Meeting - April 28, 1998 us with the parks and let us enjoy what we have in our community. Especially to access nature and it's beauty that is set aside by the creek in that area. I think that it's going to be another beautiful spot for families now and in the future to enjoy so I hope that you go ahead and do what we voted for. I also would like to address just briefly that I hope that alarmist, which I tend to hear in this crowd a tad, don't deter you from going ahead and completing the trail. And I also would like to say that my kids are dear to me as dear as anybody's in this city or this room, but they don't go to the park themselves. And the trail is not the responsible, excuse me. The trails don't put children at risk. Parents do. So if your children go the parks and play by themselves in places that they don't feel are safe, go with your gut and go with your kids. Thank you. Craig Kurvers: Hi. My name is Craig Kurvers and I'm a resident of Stone Creek. I have two children. One that's I and one that's 3 and actually I've been a resident of the City of Chanhassen for about 38 years. And I'll just take you back a little bit in time. Actually about 30 years ago my father was a city council member here in the city of Chanhassen and I have four brothers and so we walked around door to door campaigning for my father and one of the issues in the community at that time was parks and trails. And my father had the foresight to say it was going to be important to the city of Chanhassen to have trails. He saw the lakes and the beauty that we have in Chanhassen as an asset to be shared amongst the community. And I say the community to be shared amongst all of us and ! look at Stone Creek and I have a residence there because I like Chanhassen and I really think we have a lot of assets in the community that we should share. We have in Stone Creek a nice community, neighborhood and we have a very nice community park that we built and I say it's a community park for all of us to share. And I look back at that and I say it would be great to have other people throughout our community be able to come and share that park and I look back and say that trail is going to provide access to it. But what really to me is important is that we have a safe trail system and ! said I have two children and it would just kill me to think that if I forced my child to walk along Galpin Road and they were hurt by a semi and if I thought that I could have put a trail system in that they were not forced to walk along that road where they could have been hurt and I did not because I didn't xvant to share my community resource, I would just be devastated and I urge you to look at this as a resource for the community and we should act in the interest of the community. Thank you. Lash: Thanks Craig. Does anyone else in the audience? Greg Krauska: Good evening. My name is Greg Krauska. I'm at 2209 Lukewood Drive and just as it is possible to vote against an idea you previously thought to be a good one, I'm here to oppose the Stone Creek trail. My wife and I in fact make regular use of the extensive trails throughout Chanhassen and into Eden Prairie and in fact having relocated and come back to Chanhassen after not quite a year's hiatus, if you've ever lived in Atlanta you can appreciate the fact that we do have the extensive trail and sidewalk system we do compared to that city. So when we heard about the hearing to discuss this issue at your last session, we wanted to come and hear about exactly how it was going to be proposed because obviously it's coming right through our neighborhood. Prior to the discussion you may recall there's discussion about some of the other problems in another area park and I understand people began to look around and say hey, why do we want this in our neighborhood. Well, not wanting to be, as someone says alarmist, my wife and I began to think well, there have to be some criteria for good trails and Park and Rec Commission Meeting - April 28, 1998 what must they look like. So we did a little research and Ann Lusk, a national authority on safe walks and safe greenways articulated several characteristics of safe trail construction. First of all consider safety first. Locate them near hubs of activity, not in remote areas. Avoid hiding places of dense vegetation and allow full view under trees canopies. Now from your own experience this evening I'm sure you know that property really violates most of those criteria. In checking with the standards that several other cities around the country have in their regulations for, or criteria for safe walks, they also talk about criteria such as access by public safety vehicles, motorized public safety vehicles and also articulates some of these same issues. And a number of residents of Stone Creek and of the Oaks agree. I was one of those people that the police officer mentioned who went around to some of the houses in Stone Creek to solicit signatures on petitions and xve received 16 signatures of Stone Creek residents and 8 of the Oaks residents and whatever the appropriate mechanism is to provide these to the committee, I'd be happy to do so. And among the issues I discussed, and I can't speak for the others who canvassed the area, these were the topics I brought up. It wasn't are you concerned about child abduction. Are you concerned about other specific crimes and what people began to talk about is their own personal experiences. They began to talk about, in fact one was an Eden Prairie resident who said yeah. I remember there was this one park, this one bridge, and that's where everybody hung around to drink, smoke and have their first experience with marijuana. And I think all kinds of other people said the same thing. There was a former resident of Denver who said, you know I love the trail system idea too. We have lots of them out there and this particular property just doesn't meet the characteristics. So just as it's not appropriate to construct boardwalks, or even streets through all the wetlands throughout the city of Chanhassen, I think this is a particular property that doesn't meet the criteria ora good safe walk. A good location for such a trail as being proposed and doesn't warrant this investment right now. Lash: Thanks Greg. Anyone else in the audience? Tom Tietjen: My name is Tietjen. I'm a resident at 8278 Benwood Circle and I as well am opposed to the trail and I as well live at one of the access points to the proposed trail. And my concerns, I would share those of comments that you've heard previously from folks that are opposed to it. I as well have safety and security concerns. I have two small children. We live at the, as I said, right at the access to the trail. Our kids and other neighborhood kids enjoy playing in the street and they enjoy exploring off into the woods a certain distance themselves. So I would tell you that I share the concerns that you've heard earlier about the safety issues. The officer was kind enough to say that he would take care of his end of the trail. Well, I'm not a police officer and I don't see it as my responsibility to police the trail system. I rely upon the city to make good judgments as to where trails ought to go and where safe trails out to go. I'd like to emphasize just a couple of, or speak to just a couple of points in particular though. The one is the notion that residents of the Oaks knew of the fact that this trail was proposed and therefore if you bought property in the Oaks, you should accept the fact that the trail's going to go there and that was intended to go through and you have no basis for opposing it I guess. That's the response I'm hearing. I knew full well of the trail proposal when I bought the property about a year and a half ago. As a matter of fact I talked to the parks department prior to purchasing the property to find out some of the scope of what was being proposed and found out that it was an unfunded proposal by the staff for the parks and recreation department at the time. And such 9 Park and Rec Commission Meeting - April 28, 1998 proposals need to go through this very process obviously before they result in a completed trail. So I guess, for somebody's suggested the fact that I knew as a buyer that this trail was a proposal somehow, I shouldn't feel compelled to speak against it if I'm opposed to it. The trail has, the whole issue of a trail being a proposal and ultimately being a finished trail is what this process is all about. That's my understanding of what the commission's purpose is, is to hear community feedback and to make judgements on that and how these types of projects, whether they serve the community or whether they don't. So the mere fact that I knew that this was a proposal prior to buying my property and somehow the notion is that I'm not entitled to an opinion in opposition to it, I dismiss that. That is the very process that we're going through now. The trail and any other proposals that you folks debate, have to pass on their merits. The second issue I'd like to address is the redundancy of the trail. I believe in fact that it is. In talking to some people myself, I find that the current trail that runs along Galpin Boulevard was designed specifically with a grass median between it and the, between the path and the highway. Between Galpin. And in talking to the Schmidt's, who are long time property owners here and were property owners right up to that point, it was the city's idea to put the grass median there for the very purpose of creating a safe walk path so that it wasn't merely a sidewalk right along side Galpin Boulevard. So the current path that's there, that's on both sides of the street as a matter of fact, was built and designed with some safety, with safety concerns in mind at the time. As a matter of fact, the School District 112 seems perfectly content with it as a safe path since they refuse to bus any of the children from the Oaks or from Timberwood to the Bluff Creek Elementary School. Those children have to walk or be bused by their own parents so presumably the school district's content that that existing path along Galpin is perfectly safe or they would have provided bus service for those who can't be chaperoned to school every twice a day. The city also clearly.thought that it was a safe path when they introduced it or as I say they would have merely made it a sidewalk or no path at all. People might be interested in the distances involved here. Stone Creek residents on average, and I've walked this a couple of times to get a feel for this myself and actually done some approximately measuring. The average Stone Creek resident will actually end up walking further if their goal is to get to the Rec Center or to the more extensive trail system to the west of Galpin. You will, you obviously have to come down Lukewood and get back to Galpin anyway since this trail is not a link in the trail system. It is merely a connection between two neighborhoods. It deposits right directly onto the city streets, Benwood and then ultimately to Lukewood where one would make their way back down to Galpin again. So from about the center of Stone Creek neighborhood, if one wanted to get to the Rec Center or to the school or to the Bluff Creek, or to the other trail system to the west, you'll actually end up walking about a quarter of a mile further than simply going down Stone Creek Drive to Galpin and going south or north on Galpin. So distance isn't an issue that it's somehow reducing it in half or providing convenience for Stone Creek residents. On the other hand, Oaks residents who's destination is the playground will in fact find it a shorter walk by approximately a halfa mile. Now as one Oaks resident with two children who enjoy that playground, I'm perfectly content to walk down to Galpin, take the existing trail and walk the extra half of a mile in exchange for not having the other negative impacts that I believe this trail will bring to our neighborhood. So I would urge you to reject the proposal and appreciate your attention. Lash: Thanks Tom. 10 Park and Rec Commission Meeting - April 28, 1998 JeffHeinz: Hi. I'm JeffHeinz. I live at 2071 Timberwood Drive. We border on the Oaks. I voted for the park referendum partly because I saw this park finally getting done. If we go back to when the Oaks were done, this was part of the package with the Oaks that this park would be there. I'm concerned always with my kids safety. My kids aren't going to be going through that park without me with them, okay. That is still a park if the trail isn't finished. It's still there. It's still can have if we're all concerned about these elements, it's still a park anyway. So I mean you're not necessarily stopping, by not putting a trail in, you're not changing everything. I don't think it is a redundant trail because it's a beautiful woods. You're not out walking down this street looking at cars going by. There's beautiful, it's an absolutely beautiful woods. If you were just out there earlier today. I went out there with my three kids and my wife two weeks ago. We xveren't out there 5 minutes. Saw an owl fly by. Three crows chasing around. The kids just absolutely loved it. 5 minutes later six deer ran by. ! mean you don't get to see that every day with your kids and they just absolutely enjoyed it. That's I guess that's all I've got to say. I think that would just be a beautiful place and my kids will not, they won't go back there without me so you know, I feel my kids will be safe. Thank you. Lash: Are there audience members who wish to address the commission? Paula Robinson: My name is Paula Robinson and I live at 2224 Lukewood Drive in the Oaks. And my husband Michael had wanted to be here tonight as well so I'll speak for the both of us as he travels through the week and wasn't able to come. I have two children. They're both girls ages 10 and 7. Michael and I have lived here just three years now and we love the city of Chanhassen. In fact before we had moved here, when we found out we were moving to Minneapolis we already knew that that was the city. As hard as our realtor tried to make us look at houses elsewhere, we had come to Chanhassen so many times before when we were in the metro area that we knew that that's where we wanted to live. And was determined to do that. Michael and I were the first house that was built back in the Oaks and we were the first ones to move in and we've experienced a lot of changes that took place with all that construction going on and Galpin being finished, etc. Michael and I are both for the Stone Creek Park trail and bridge project. It was one of the factors that we were extremely excited about when our realtor was showing us what was available back there. We looked at both houses that backed up to the wooded area. Our house that we live in isn't one of the ones that's backed up but we're just right by the cul-de-sac that goes towards that direction. We were extremely excited about the trail and we still are and hope that it will be completed. Our family really enjoys nature. We'd like to have access to the trails in Chanhassen for biking and walking for our exercise needs. When we were moving there we were told by our realtors about all the proposed plans and if we had bought a lot that backed up to the wooded area, we've even discussed amongst ourselves that we would try to have a way to make a trail that would break into the trail that was planned. I guess I come here tonight because this whole process, when this was brought to my attention, I felt that by the opposition that a lot of us in the Oaks that are for this and would like to see it happen for our children to be able to go out and enjoy nature, that we were extremely intimidated. I just felt personally when reading all the papers that were handed out, and things that were said by different people that we were intimidated that maybe we wouldn't come tonight and I might have been one of those people but after neighbor after neighbor in the Oaks came to me and said, you know we're for this but we just don't want to be involved with this part of the process. That's 11 Park and Rec Commission Meeting - April 28, 1998 why I forced myself to come. This isn't something that I usually do in a routine basis. It took a lot of courage for me to come here tonight. But we really do want to see this go through and like I said, I'm one of those people that whenever I get to take my time to exercise, I like to use all the routes that go through nature. I've used most all the trails that are in the Chanhassen area. A lot of times I'm by myself or I have my dog with me but by no means is my dog a dog that could protect me. But that was one of the, I get so excited by all the trails that are here and I thank you for all the hard work that you've put into them and really appreciate all those efforts and would really like to see this happen. And one last thing that I need to say that really bothers me. We're neighbors to the developers of this project and so we were really informed right from the beginning because we became good friends with them and people have to realize that this developer, and I don't feel like I have the right to mention his name. That's public information if you need to know who that is, but were financially responsible to put the head of this trail that's already there and there are quite a few financial things that go with that. They had to take less for the lots that were part of their land to make this all work but they were required to put this trail head in and I just feel like if for some reason this doesn't go through, that the people that are opposed to it should really be responsible and need to reimburse them for the money that they would be out that they put into the beginning part of this project. I just felt like I really had to voice that tonight because I just feel bad that you know that they were required to do this as part of the whole project and then now they're just being told that that could all be for nothing. Thank you. Lash: Thanks Paula. Preston Brown: I'm a newcomer to Chanhassen. My name's Preston Brown. Three weeks ago my wife and I bought the property at 2260 Stone Creek Lane East, fight next to the park. IO~owing of course that the park is there but not knowing that there was a proposed trail. Last night my wife and I read through the literature that had been handed out and we were swayed by those arguments. We have two daughters at home, 12 and 14 and their safety is utmost in our mind always. So last night thinking I might not get the opportunity to come here, I sent an e-mail to the council voicing my objection to the proposal. Now having seen the plan and hearing both sides, I now wish to change my position. I do support the proposal. I think the, I concluded that based on what I've heard and know about the area, that the trail will have impact on the safety of my daughters. There are bad people out there and I'm not going to turn them into rabbits in order to avoid them. I'm going to educate them and to make them aware of the dangers and with that awareness go out and enjoy life and having that trail I think will add to our enjoyment. Lash: Other comments from the audience? Lori Juelich: I'm Lori Juelich. I live at 2246 Stone Creek. I'm at the house next to the existing trail. First of all I just want to clear a fact that when Mr. Evans asked me if I'd be a contact person for Stone Creek, I thought that's all I would be is a contact person. I had no idea I'd be a part of the alarmist information that was going around, and I haven't seen that and that my name is on. That I don't appreciate. I don't agree with the alarmist information that is going around. I support the trail. At the last meeting I was concerned that we were at that point $35,000.00 spending on a trail when we really don't have a completed park. That was my concern then. We 12 Park and Rec Commission Meeting - April 28, 1998 voted, my husband and I voted for the referendum and we made that clear to Mr. Evans that we did not oppose the trail when contacted. Todd knows my husband's and our concern about where the hub of this trail is going to be. We already have a trail that's right on our property line, thanks to our builder and we just want to know if the hub of this trail is going to be on the comer of our deck or if it can be moved so they don't have to hear our conversation or smell my bad cooking. Lash: Lori, could you just point out on the map quickly where you're talking about. Lori Juelich: The existing trail is very close to our border. To our property line and down the trail is on the property line but we can live with that part. I would just like to see the hub of this, right here, not intruding on our privacy because it already is. We live with the existing trail and as I mentioned last time, it's a wicked trail because of the grade of that but I can reassure people who will be bordering the trail, if this goes through, you won't because of the mosquitoes, the horse flies, and the other bugs in there, you will not see a lot of people between June I st and fall fi'ost. We are unable to use our backyard because of the mosquitoes so you're not, I don't think you're going to have a gang of hoodlums hanging down in this woods because they will not survive. We can't. But my concern is that it seems odd to me that we're, you know without the Phase II, and this is my concern. Without Phase II, and you've all been out there tonight to look at that. It's a beautiful park but it's not completed. Without the two, it seems like we're, and this maybe can be addressed. We're spending a lot of money to bring people to a park that's not completed. I guess I want to see the park completed then let's make the trail. And this might help. If we have Phase II, which is for the older kids, and the older kids can hang out in the park rather than in the woods or whatever they're going to do there. Yeah, and if Phase II would be completed I think it would help give some of the older kids something to do rather than just hang out. Right now, tonight there were a lot of older kids there and they tend to monopolize the toddler equipment. Then toddlers don't, can't use it and it's frustrating. We need to give the older kids something to do. I would just ask that we look at Phase II. Get that completed. It xvould make the park worthwhile and then the trail would be enjoyable also. I mean it's bringing, right now you're bringing people up to two swings, two baby swings, a tire swing and toddler - equipment. So Phase II could be completed, the trail's good and I can reassure you that you're · not going to have people hanging out there in the summer and the fall. It's just miserable. You see people run up our trail, the trail next to us because the horse flies and the mosquitoes, they are, it's bad so I think that's everything. Thank you. Lash: Thanks Lori. Other resident comments? Steve Kind: I'm Steve Kind. I live at 2351 Lukewood. Been there about a year and a half and we've lived in Chanhassen for 10 years and enjoyed using parks and trails in other parts of the city and it was part of our decision for building our current home in our current location. I want to speak in favor of the trail. I think that this park is a beautiful asset. It's going to be used primarily by neighbors. We plan to walk there with our daughter. We've already been over to the swings and the slide she just loves over on the other side. We know kids are already back in the woods. They're already going in through that area. Some of them are already trying to cross the creek and I think that a safe access really makes sense. We're the house that is closest to 13 Park and Rec Commission Meeting - April 28, 1998 Galpin in the Oaks and I actually tracked it this morning and it's 7/10th's of a mile for us if we go by the road and Galpin and that route. The furthest house that I could figure out in the Stone Creek part of the development was 5/10th's of a mile by road to the park so we're already being the closest in our neighborhood. Further away than the furthest people in Stone Creek and I think actually putting this trail through would be helpful for that. We too plan to be there, as many others have said, with our daughter. I think this is not a destination park. The people in the neighborhood will be the ones using it so I think crime and vandalism and those sorts of things should be much less because of that. I think also, just the last thing I'd like to comment on, I think with the revised version of the trail and the cost being substantially less, that I would love to see us make this a real win, win situation and if we could put some of the extra money towards upgrading the park equipment, that would just really be the sort of the icing on the cake. Thank you. Lash: Other comments? Brad Foly: I'm Brad Foly. I live at 2061 Timberwood Drive. Lived there for about 9 years and just like to say I certainly, we're the only, well one of four lots, 6151, 4131 in Timberwood that actually border on the parkland. One of the problems that has come up and I've talked to Todd Hoffman about this just in the past week is that our yard has been relatively inundated in the last few weeks with people from all over the place. Mostly from the Oaks and Stone Creek. Mostly our neighbors. Not people that we're particularly worried about but a situation that we're a little bit worried about in terms of being the most obvious, our lot is the most obvious access from Timberwood to this parkland. We have had people cross all the way from Timberwood Drive all the way across our 400 and some foot lot into this parkland. Following the creek and the trail probably will actually divert some of that traffic away but no access exists between Timberwood Drive and this parkland except around on the south side, as far as I'm aware and I certainly have not researched this issue but I don't believe there's any easements or accesses. I'm not advocating there should be but I'm a little bit concerned that our lot is going to become the access and that to me is a bit ora problem from a liability standpoint as well as a privacy one. Most of the people in Timberwood have bought 2 ½ to 3 acre lots for the purpose of you know having that lot paid for and paid a lot of taxes on that land and I'd hate to see it become the access point. Berg: Can you clarify for me where you are? Roeser: Yeah, I'm not sure where you are. Brad Foly: Let's see...yeah, right here. We only have about maybe 100 feet of bordering property on the, most of it's on the Oaks and about 100 feet on the park. Lash: So people are coming through your yard to get into the woods? Brad Foly: That's correct. Lash: And they're coming from where? 14 Park and Rec Commission Meeting - April 28, 1998 Brad Foly: Timberwood Drive. Lash: Which is north off the map? Brad Foly: East off the map. Yeah. And you know again, these people are mostly neighbors and that kind of thing and I'm not objecting to their being there. I'm just objecting to the fact that maybe this is going to become a big time access point for this park here and I'm a little bit concerned about that. So I wanted to just point that out. We seem to have the most likely access since our yard is open. Some of our woods that we've brushed out, some of our woods because it's really kind of poor woods until we get some of the trees growing and stuff like that. So we're a little concerned on that part and from a liability standpoint as well. Certainly the safety issue of people on the park is a real one. You know...that's a concern as well and when I saw all the people coming into the yard here in the last week or so, and I do tend to agree that between June and October there probably won't be much of that traffic but it certainly go to be a little bit ora problem. Wc've talked to a couple of people and again, you know hopefully not in a way that created any problems for anybody. Thanks. Lash: Any other resident comments? Tom Tietjen: As a follow up I have a question, and this hasn't been brought up yet. Oh, I'm sorry. Tom Tietjen, Benwood Circle. This really hadn't been discussed over the course of this evening yet other than Mr. Kind's comments about the reduced budget here. As somebody who's particularly interested in fiscally responsible government at all levels, city, county and state and somebody who a year and a half ago here moved here from California and is absolutely shocked at the levels of taxation that exist in this state. The budget for this particular project Mr. Page has summarized here, is $17,850.00 and as somebody who just completed a house about two months ago and I've got a little bit of understanding about costs involved in construction and grading and excavating and that kind of thing, I'd like to ask the question, what are the consequences of being wrong with the budgeting process in this whole debate. And it doesn't necessarily apply to just this project. This particular project let's say for example when it goes out to bid it comes in at $28,000.00 or $30,000.00 as opposed to $17,000.00. What are the consequences of city staff being wrong or consultants to staff being wrong about the numbers? Lash: Todd would you just like to address the process of. Hoffman: Certainly. The revised budget of $17,850.00 is an estimate of the cost of construction of this trail. Certainly, the actual construction cost will not be known until we bid the project. How the commission wants to handle that, if they want to retain the entire $35,000.00 that could be used for this project until the bids are approved, that can certainly take place. If they're above the 17,840, what the consequences is for staff to be wrong is up to the commission and my other superiors to decide. But that is our estimate. It's a professionally prepared estimate...quantities that you see out in the field day in and day out being bid on these type of projects so we feel it's very accurate. 15 Park and Rec Commission Meeting - April 28, 1998 Lash: Okay Tom? Does that answer your question? On how the process works. Tom Tietjen: I'm sure you go through a lot of those... Lash: Other resident comments? Yvonne LaPenoitere: I'm Yvonne LaPenoitere. I live at 2274 Lukewood Drive with my husband Barry and I'm in favor of the trail. First I'd like to say we've lived here, we moved here from the East Coast 2 ½ years ago and absolutely love Chanhassen. We bought there because we love the neighborhood, the community, the trail system was a big plus for us, and all the other things that people have said in favor of the trail. I mean I won't repeat all of those because I agree with them. They've been said. The thing that alarms me the most as I've been sitting here listening over the course of the past hour and a half, is the fear and the alarm and the fact that people don't want to do things because they're afraid of what the consequences. You know there's this feeling of well don't do the trail because our children might be harmed or there might be safety issues or trash or whatever. Don't build it because we might go over budget. I mean what are we going to do? Are we just going to all stay in our homes and not do anything out of fear of what might happen and what I would ask of all my neighbors is that we just have to be responsible. I mean take responsibility for your children. I mean this is difficult. I'm friends with the Evans. They have two beautiful children. I know they want to protect them but that's where responsibility comes in. Don't let your kids walk on this trail by themselves or at night if you're afraid that something is going to happen. I mean I think we all need to take responsibility for ~vhat goes on. If you see something, you know if the trail is built and we see something going on that we're not happy with, then we need to call the police and speak up about it. If we see suspicious characters, call the police. Take responsibility for your children and I ask that the council take responsibility for the budget and make sure that we don't go over. I mean I don't want to live in fear. IfI wanted to live in fear, I would move back to New Jersey. That's part of the reason why I live here. And I just, you know I want us to be progressive and move forward with the trail. My husband and I use the trails. By the way, we walk on that trail behind Stone Creek all the time. You can't see that from all the houses. There are portions of that that are isolated. We never see any trash. We never see any people. We never see any signs that kids have been hanging out back there or anything. So I just want to, I want to think positively and I want us to be aware of the risks involved but be able to go forward and build the trail and then take responsibility for making sure that those risks don't happen. Thank you. Craig Evans: I'm Craig Evans, the alarmist at 8281 Benwood Circle. I'm a Midwesterner and to some degree I'm feeling a need to defend the depth of my convictions. I'd like to say that yes, we're all concerned about our own children. But the depth of my conviction is for children in general, specifically the children between Stone Creek and the Oaks. Trails are a good thing. We all love to commune with nature. The issue here is creating an environment with the potential for more crime. Now some folks could probably ask what are the odds that this crime could happen? I used some national statistics that frankly scared me and the reason they scared me, and herein lies a small story. I have two healthy children right now. They're wonderful children but they, the situation wasn't always that way. My son was born with a congenital cataract in his right eye. Now yes, children get cataracts. It's not just confined to old people. 16 Park and Rec Commission Meeting - April 28, 1998 We were told at the time that it was an idiopathic occurrence which means random. Fluke. Mistake of nature. And we were also told that the odds of this cataract occurring in his eye were 1 out of 30,000. Well I can tell you if you're a victim, odds become meaningless. Second short story. Three years ago I was diagnosed as having a rare form of cancer. A cancer was 1% of all men 21 to 35. Now I don't smoke. I don't drink. I was a runner for 23 years. I've always watched what I've eaten but I was struck. I'm pleased to say that after 3 years I'm still cancer free, but I can assure you if you're a victim, odds are meaningless. Now, yes I'm worried about my children but I'm worried about an environment to create a situation where other crimes could happen. Crimes are more horrendous than my son's cataract which is remedied and my cancer which is in remission. Crimes against children, and I'm sorry to sound like an alarmist because I'd like to think I'm a Midwesterner and I'm sane and I'm logical. But I can tell you being victimized by two odds that are just astronomical by most folks, it's no fun being a victim. And we've somewhat taken this as a personal situation to help prevent crime whether we live here or not. Thank you. Lash: Anyone else wishing to address the commission? Okay. Seeing no further comments we'll be closing public comments at this time and entertaining commissioner comments. Mike. Howe: Thank you. I want to thank everybody that spoke. I know I had a lot of phone calls. A lot of letters. Impromptu driveway meetings with some folks. I appreciate that and as Mr. Tietjen said, that's what the system is all about. Initially I was against this because of the cost overruns and the environmental damage. However, I feel comfortable in going ahead with it and I say build it. Lash: Rod. Franks: One of the reasons why I wanted to serve on the Park and Recreation Committee is I believe that parks and recreation have a lot to do with the community. Bringing that community together. Especially trails. It's always been my ideal that trails are conduits to bring people together and bring community together. And I'm really sadden by listening to Yvonne, I think xvhat you had to say about being friends with the Evans and Craig and talking about how if there's an issue, instead of bringing this community together and bringing neighborhoods together and neighbors together, it may serve as a means to divide people. And it's my hope that this does not become that type of issue. I'm going to be called on to rely on my judgment and I'm going to exercise my judgment. I'm also a parent. I have two young kids and I'm concerned about their safety. I was listening intently to what the concerns were and you know you can think them through in many different ways. There was a comment brought up about walking along side a busy street, Galpin Boulevard. You know what's the percentage of fatalities or severe injuries due to pedestrian car traffic. If you listen to the officer from Eden Prairie discuss his experience in Eden Prairie and not, out of his recollection, remembering any significant kind of injurious problem other than accidents occurring on a trail. We can't say that it will never happen and there's always those chances that there will be a victim, and it may even be in a victim in the city of Chanhassen. Considering all that though, it is a beautiful piece of property that I think the whole community, it would be worth their effort to go out and enjoy that and because of that I am in favor of the trail as proposed going through. 17 Park and Rec Commission Meeting - April 28, 1998 Lash: Thanks Rod. I've been a resident of Chanhassen for 20 years. I happen to live over in the Lake Ann area. We have a trail near my neighborhood that is fairly remote. It goes along Lake Ann. I use that trail very often. It's a beautiful sight and I've never heard of one incident of children who are endangered or adults or anyone. It's a beautiful amenity for my neighborhood and for this city. Trails are not, this city are the number one requested issue to our commission. A trail is not necessarily a strip of pavement that's going to go along side of a street. We need to provide diversity in our trails. Some people commented tonight that this trail is redundant because we have the Galpin Boulevard trail. These are two entirely different experiences for trail users. One is along a road. A straight shot. It gets children to the school safely. It's a destination route. This is not destination. This is an opportunity to be in a natural setting where you can enjoy things. One resident commented he saw deer and owls and there's going to be vegetation that children have never had the opportunity to see. I saw Jack-in-the Pulpit out there tonight. You don't see that everywhere. You don't see that on the boulevard along Galpin. It's an opportunity for people and children experiencing things that they will not experience if this trail does not go through. This is really a difficult issue and it's difficult for us as residents in this town. We are all volunteers and we're very sensitive to your opinions. We respect your opinions. It's always a hard issue for us when we have such a divided group and I'll support Rod's position 100%. That my biggest hope tonight is that this issue will not divide you as neighbors. Please do not allow that to happen. That would be the worst outcome from this trail. Given those comments I would say that I am in support of this trail as revised. Fred. Berg: I too, I appreciate the depth of concern from all the residents who spoke here tonight and who are here. I think it's more of a depth of concern than it is alarmism. I say that as a father of an 18 year old and a 13 year old daughters who I took everywhere and I was very concerned about their safety too .... and I think therein lies part of the dilemma between the opposing groups. One side is arguing I believe as much from emotion and concern and love of their children as the other side is arguing from logic and the opinions of experts. I would like to quote a couple things from Scott Harr, our Public Safety Director in the letter that's attached to the packets which we've got. Two things. First, there are no crime statistics that support the position that trails should not be constructed because they are dangerous. And secondly he concluded by saying I hope I have already clearly stated that I have no opposition to the trail. That I see no unusual safety concerns with the trail. Whenever I'm arguing with myself emotionally and intellectually I try, not always successfully to fall on the side of the intellectual side. My gut tells me that that's the thing to do. Other things. Other comments about things that were made tonight. I heard a number of people, a number of residents saying that their kids are playing down there anyway. There are any number of kids, I've heard that a number of times, that there are any number of kids down there. In regards to the one issue that was stated on the overhead about trails that are built near hubs of activity. It was my first sense at that point that if we were to build a trail through there, that becomes more of a hub of activity. IfI were one who was looking for trouble, if I were an adult or an older child looking for trouble, I would stay away from the potential, a place where there was potential for more people to be. I guess I can be wrong, I know. I guess I see a trail as a contributor to the safety of the area, not a detractor because the children are already there and it is a park and it is going to be a park and those kids are going to continue to play there. Again, I'm repetitive all over the place here. That's why I 18 Park and Rec Commission Meeting - April 28, 1998 teach because I get to fill lots of time. I think it becomes a more active area for people as the use in that trail. And the last issue I would address is the redundancy of the trail and I too have walked through and I've driven many times, pacing this 7/10th of a mile from the comer of Galpin and sir I don't have a crossroad...it is exactly 7/10th of a mile. It's 7/10th of a mile like I had when I grew up in Minneapolis. Very, very dark. Versus the beauty of the area that we walked through tonight with trees and the animals that someone stated and the possibility of having the bridge there was something to stop and actually look and see what's going on with wildlife. I don't see that redundant very many places in this city to say nothing about redundant in this area that we're talking about between the two. Between the new neighborhoods. Saying that, I'm sure it's a large mystery to everyone. I also support the building or the construction of the trail and the bridge. Connecting the two. Lash: Ron. Roeser: Well tonight to be sitting on this end, because well you guys have said most of the things I was going to say but you know not to build a trail or a park because we're afraid of vandalism and criminals and all the horrible things that's going to happen there seems to me that we've lost the battle already. I just think that walking through that tonight, it's a beautiful trail. It's part ora park. You know it's, that's my in favor of it. It should be done. It's a beautiful place to walk. Lash: Okay, thanks. Jim. Manders: I have a couple questions prior to really addressing my own comments. One question is pertaining to the trail itself. I don't know if Todd or Mr. Page could address this. Is access to the bridge and the trail. If we're talking about a 4 or 5 foot width trail. Is there any concern for vehicle access? You know typically if we have narrow trails, how well that might stand up. If there's a concern with that at all. Paul Page: Are you referencing public safety vehicle access? · Manders: Well, just the trail breaking down or you know if there's, because what we typically do is an 8 foot wide trail. Hoffman: Yeah, and this trail would not be maintained in the winter so we're not going to plow it. Most of our 8 foot wide trails we plow in the winter so we need to have them 8 feet wide so we can put the tracks on there. Once this is constructed and in place, routine maintenance will need to occur on any erosion areas that would occur in the trail. We're dressing up the aggregate base or showing up the steps or the bridge abutments. And as long as we access the area when it's reasonably dry, I don't see a real concern with the access as maintenance vehicles. Manders: Okay. And then in terms of, and really what I'm getting at are issues relative to budget concerns because questions have come up in the past that one can put in a facility and realize costs of maintenance down the road and I know we've all asked ourselves those questions. You know what kinds of funds are we going to have to maintain these facilities that 19 Park and Rec Commission Meeting - April 28, 1998 we're putting in. And I'm interested in potential maintenance costs that we might realize from this there are issues that you might see with this. Hoffman: Every mile of trail that we add in this city, bituminous trail, we need to overlay it every 5 to 7 years and that's a maintenance cost that we incur as a part of our summer street overlay budget. This being a 1,700 feet of, lineal feet of aggregate trail, it's more akin to a ballfield which we bring in ag lime on an annual basis and dress up the ag line as it were down and compacts in the earth so. As far as budget, there will certainly be an increase in our maintenance responsibilities and an incremental cost associated with that, but I don't see it being a barrier which we cannot overcome. It's not, it doesn't alarm me. Manders: And in regarding the bridge, you had mentioned something about the water depth. 4 feet or whatever and...that 100 year flood type of scenario or is that. Paul Page: Yeah. The bridge that we're proposing would not withstand flood waters because it doesn't have concrete abutments. So we would be fishing for the bridge if it did flood. I'm not going to say it's not going to flood but I think a 100 year benchmark is probably a good, maybe a foot above that would be a safe elevation to set the bridge. As far as a life span on a bridge as proposed, an environment where it's not going to be maintained in the winter. It's going to have snow sitting on it a lot of the time. A lot of freeze thaw in a shady area that promotes rotting of wood. Life span is probably, my gut says 12 years. Somewhere in there. 10 to 12 years. So while it's not the major factor in this budget, it is a factor down the line. And there would be some routine maintenance to railings and things I'm sure. Manders: And regarding access from potentially the aggregate down to the bridge itself and there xvas some discussion when we were out this evening looking at that in terms of the step access that we're talking about and likely there are going to be people out there with strollers and bicycles and whatever, if that's the case, that going down those steps might not be as convenient. Is there some type of alternative. Maybe not an alternative but in addition to the step avenue to have some kind of a gradual grade type of access. Paul Page: Not immediately apparent, I'll term it that way. The problem is the stairs are there because the grade is steep. They're also there because we don't want to disturb adjacent vegetation. We could certainly run the trail straight down to that bridge and put larger walls in. The problem is, then at the steepest portion of the trail, it feeds right into the creek so the runoff, the highly errodable portion of the trail will impact the creek and I don't think that makes sense. Manders: That would be my concern as well. Paul Page: I think that's the trail that began with the little bridge. The big bridge took all that away. You weren't anywhere near the water level. The trail came in at the top of the bench and spanned the entire ravine. That unfortunately is the sacrifice of the smaller bridge. Manders: So you wouldn't see some type ora gradual slope abutting the step type of approach to. 20 Park and Rec Commission Meeting - April 28, 1998 Paul Page: Unfortunately to make it gradual enough, you'd have to, I mean I guess it's something you'd have to balance with impact of construction. You could certainly do it if you wanted to bad enough but it would probably double the impact zone on the area around the bridge adjacent to the stairs. Lash: That was sort of my idea when I was there and I said, I can picture kids putting board down both sets of stairs just so they have something to drive their bike up and down so they don't have to go up and down the stairs. I thought if there would be a simple solution to that other than rustic 2 x 4 laying there. Paul Page: Well, actually we could look at detailing a sort of a small wing wall out of a timber or something. I've never done it but it could be as part of the structure of the stair. It could at least the width ora timber going down it. I don't know ifI would promote bikes using it. Lash: I didn't mean riding on the path but you know...walk their bikes up and down without having. Roeser: That's not going to get a stroller up and down there anyway. I think what you have in the choice of the great big bridge or the little bridge. Paul Page: It will be a great challenge for mountain bikers. Manders: In all and all, 1 think this is one of my concerns with access there because there are other parks that we've talked about erosion problems and the grades that that erosion potentially addressed appropriately. Those are really my only questions. My comments would be similar to what's been made regarding my appreciation for the community coming together and voicing their opinions and I wouldn't hesitate to submit that, I find it reassuring to see a community coming out and attending this process because that's exactly what this is is a process. And too often we have decisions maybe in people's views aren't as dramatic as this where we're depending our own observations and to hear the feedback is necessary. So I would agree with the gentleman that says that somehow he doesn't have a right to his opinion if the stub is already in. I mean he certainly has a right to that opinion. I agree that this is a beautiful area and as far as bugs and mosquitoes keeping people out of there, realization I think everybody realizes is that that's going to cover a couple months out of the year. I mean the other months, today and in the fall it's a nice area. My bottom line position is that... (There was a tape change at this point in the discussion.) Lash: One other thing I'd just like to comment to the neighbors is, you know there were comments about Kerber and Herman Field. If you see anything going on, make sure you report it immediately. If you have any problems...so that kids do not get the idea that this is a place to do undesirable activities. I just encourage anyone to call if you see anything going on that shouldn't be going on there. Given that...looking for a motion 21 Park and Rec Commission Meeting - April 28, 1998 Berg: I'd move that we authorize construction of the Stone Creek Park trail and bridge connection to Benwood Circle detailed in the Hoisington-Koegler report and that we also adjust the trail in Stone Creek to abut the park... Lash: Is there a second to that motion? Roeser.' I'd second that. Hoffman: Clarification Jan? Lash: Yes. Hoffman: This you want asphalt. Excuse me. This portion you want asphalt and then for clarification you want to start with ag lime here or at the bottom of the hill? Berg: What was the original proposal? Hoffinan: Starting from here. Lash: Is there a second to the motion? Roeser: I seconded it. Berg moved, Roeser seconded that the Park and Recreation Commission to authorize construction of the Stone Creek trail and bridge connection to Benwood Circle as detailed in the report by Hoisington-Koegler, which adjusts the trail in Stone Creek to abut the park. All voted in favor and the motion carried. Lash: Thanks for coming tonight and for sending all your letters. We're continuing the meeting. We'll go onto the next issue now. RECEIVING SITE ASSESSMENT REPORT ON O'SHAUGHNESSY-ARBORETUM BUSINESS PARK OPEN SPACE WITHOUT THE EXTENSION OF COULTER BOULEVARD. Todd Hoffman presented the staff report on this issue. Berg: I have a couple things. Is it safe to say that as we have been acquiring this property, we the commission...Dahlgren recommending that it be acquired. We have always had at the fore front the idea that it would be a wetland. A preserve of some sort. That is in effect was one reason, that was the main reason we were going to buy as much property as possible. Hoffman: Correct. And not only the wetland but with the trail around it was a common theme and then as part of that trail we just didn't want the wetland with some buffers. Some wooded buffer around the outside and we provided diversity of... The City paid near and dear for this 22 Park and Rec Commission Meeting - April 28, 1998 property. You could have easily preserved the wetland for little or nothing. You went beyond that and invested a great deal of money in preserving some of the other features within the park to make the... Lash: Well as I recall, and you know it's got to be accurate. Berg: I'm writing it down. Lash: When we first started all this stuff with Howard Dahlgren back in whenever that was, I specifically remember we had plans for putting in a baseball field and all kinds of stuff because we thought we'd have industrial leagues that would need more fields. So ! do know many, many years ago we had looked at the western portion as being active. Berg: He even suggested that maybe we'd be more interested in a wetland. Lash: Well actually he suggested we put it on the O'Shaugtmessy property xvhen he came in with his plan. Remember that? Berg: Yes I do. Lash: Oh, he was in favor of parks and he wanted it but it was just going to be next door. Not on his land. So I remember that specifically. So you know, I just look at this and I think, you know he's dropped some big coin now to buy some nice spots and you know it just, you know. It just baffles me that we're going to put a road through it... Now we really could have just skipped spending the money. It's not going to be preserved in it's entirety. I guess because I think once the road goes through, the whole thing's going to kind of go down the tube. We're not going to be able to, it's just going to be swamping land on both sides of the road and there won't be much to go with it. I guess I would like, you know City Council knows very clearly how we feel on this. I've talked to them. They've gotten letters. They know at this time the way we feel about this. I don't know that it's in anybody's best interest for us to make you know, a much bigger to do about it... Manders: Jan can I, as long as we have a couple of the City Council members here. I'd like to make my point, position, and really not expect answers but these are questions that I have in my mind about this development and I know there have been a lot of meetings. Whether it be with the Department of Transportation or whoever's position people are pushing on this project, and the questions that I have is really related to the access points. I mean that there are, as I understand it, a plan to control access. A light going in. I don't know if it's Century Boulevard or whatever that would go into this development. To access points off of TH 41. Aren't going to be both directions. They're going to be right turn lane accesses. That's been one point of discussion. So the value of putting this road in here, in my mind, is severely diminished by having these other access points if there wasn't the light access off of TH 5, and if the TH 41 access was a full directional access, I could see this road serving as an alternate corridor given traffic demands. But the way it's constructed, it won't accomplish all that so in my mind that is the primary reason why I'm not in favor of it. 23 Park and Rec Commission Meeting - April 28, 1998 Berg: I could get stoned for this but I think the best way to deal with, well one way to deal with it at this point would be to just hunker on down with the City Council over a pizza and talk about it and just get everybody's opinions out and, because I've never really heard all the members of the Council talking and saying what they feel about it and I'd really like to hear that. It may be a less formal setting than a Council meeting and yet it's still open and everything I know, but I would like to talk about it one more time. Face to face together. Lash: ... Berg: I realize the time constraints may be our biggest limits. Lash: That...but I just drove through downtown Minneapolis. Came in from Wisconsin and... the freeways and the mess it was trying to figure out how to get onto 394 and I thought, why in the xvorld would anybody work for MnDOT. You know I just looked at that and I thought, these are the guys telling us we need that road. Roeser: They built 394, right? Lash: Holy cow, xvhat a mess that was so I don't have a lot of faith in some of those advisors I guess. Roeser: I don't know what we're looking for here. It seems to me that we're already on record as being opposed to it and I don't see myself changing my mind about it. But maybe Fred is right. Maybe the Council has some points or someone has some points that's going to convince us otherwise. Staff: If the road gets nixed, this report indicates that this is not really a pristine wetland like it was 50 years ago so there would be some work to do if you wanted to bring it back to that level. Like actually like across TH 41...Arboretum's done. They built a walkway. We've talked about that. Roeser: Oh oh, Steve is standing. Steve is up. Steven Berquist: ...I've just got a few short remarks. I know it's a dilemma that everybody's wrestling with and I for one, and I think the other councilmember that's here, recognize fully that the Park Commission is against installation of the road. I wish that it were an issue that was easily decided as we don't want to screw up the wetland. Because then it wouldn't, it'd be very simple. It's not. And if I had to decide right at this moment, it would be, it would really, truly be a flip of a coin for me. There are so many issues in my own mind that will, that I have yet to fully weigh and decide that, I mean I'm right on the fence. I could make a compelling argument in my own mind for either. I really could. You talk about trusting MnDOT. I don't trust MnDOT. And one of the, Jim talked about whether or not it was going to be a signalized intersection at Century and TH 5. All indications are that it will be but it's not in the plans set yet and until it is, and until it's ready to be certified for bidding, I think given my personal history 24 Park and Rec Commission Meeting - April 28, 1998 with MnDOT, that it would be foolish to play that card and say we're putting in a road. There's all sorts of other things. Regarding this report, you talk about how to get it to us. Obviously I've read a lot of it now but when I read it there's a lot of questions that come to mind. For instance. I'd like to know when the gentleman talks about separation. Let's see, what page is this? Page 2 under habitat segmentation. I'd like to know a little bit more about segmentation of habitat and what that relates to on the next page. Second paragraph down where he says, the O'Shaughnessy site has significant habitat and of itself and the proposed roadway would divide the site into a northern 30 acre parcel with very little habitat. I don't know what that means. And a southern 70 acre parcel with diminished habitat value. Now there's an ideal and then there's this something less than ideal. I don't know what those mean but for someone like me who tries to consider all things, which some people say is silly. I'd like to have that defined a little bit. The next issue is the traffic safety. He talks about the likelihood of traffic cutting through, particularly truck traffic, cutting through the residential neighborhood. We've got traffic studies that speak somewhat to that issue and they, ifI remember them correctly, they say truck traffic circumventing and using that road. This gentleman says the opposite. Lash: So who's saying that truck traffic isn't going to go down to it.'? Steven Berquist: SRF. The initial consultant that we hired to do traffic studies. Lash: So what's the purpose of the road then? Steven Berquist: Well it's a southern frontage road. Lash: For? Steven Berquist: For car traffic. For cross traffic. For any kind of traffic. But the point is is that they didn't minimize but the amount of truck traffic that they cited, as I remember the report. I don't remember all the stuff exactly. They did not seem to think that there would be a significant amount of truck traffic down that road. There's a number of trips cited and all sorts of stuff, but · i.f I remember it right, it speaks counter to this claim. Lash: So we didn't need a 9 ton? Steven Berquist: Well that would be, if we could get Minnesota State Aid funds, in a perfect world we could get Minnesota State Aid funds and build a 3 ton road or a 4 ton road, it can't happen. If we want to do something less than 9 ton road, engineering says it will have to be out of our own pocket, which obviously is an alternative but. Lash: So just scenario. If you had to do it out of your own pocket. Steven Berquist: We'd wait a number of years and then I would think about it. Which brings me to another question. What may end up happening, when we look at this plan set on the 11th of May, and there's going be a tremendous amount of stuff going on the 11 th of May, we're going to 25 Park and Rec Commission Meeting - April 28, 1998 be asked to make a decision as to whether or not we want to bid it this year. I'd be curious to know what would happen to that site if that thing sits fallow for a year. Lash: You mean as far as revoke or on it's own? Steven Berquist: Yes. Or yeah, what's going to happen. And I'm sure the simple answer is it's going to get weeds. And maybe that's... The last question I had is that, is it your intent, is it Todd's intention or your intention to present this paper along with the plan set from engineering, which I would advocate you do, because I don't look at it as, I mean this is a city project. This isn't an engineering project. This isn't a park and rec project. This is a city project. And all the pro and con data that we can get in order to digest and make a decision that we deem to be intelligent is for the best. Thanks. Lash: Thanks Steve. It is tough. This is a tough issue. I think we all appreciate that. Have you got anything.., well what do you want us to do with this? Nancy Mancino: ...well you can certainly invite me out for dinner. That'd be fine. If it's a good restaurant, I'll come. No. I think you include the report. In all honesty before tonight's meeting I have not read it yet. So I'm going to have to do that but if you include it in the report and if any members would like to call us or again, get together and chat, I think that would be fine. I think between now and May 11th, in all honesty to, I mean if you would like to have a meeting and as many councilmembers that can come... Certainly as Steve said, have compelling reasons on each side. It will certainly be hopefully not only an intellectual but a heart felt decision made by the Council using both and those are the hardest... TH41. The access off TH41 will not go in as this development proceeds until TH41 is upgraded. That's the last thing that we have been told, excuse me. So when Coulter goes across Century, it's going to end at a cul-de-sac. There won't be a right-in/right-out at this point. Because they're going to wait until TH 41 is upgraded and who knows when that will happen. Roeser: I heard it was never going to happen. Nancy Mancino: We don't know. This is County. This is MnDOT. We don't know. Manders: So the access notion that this provides is even further. Nancy Manders: Is not going to be there. So there will be the north/south to Century onto 82nd. Onto Highway 5. And again, as Steve said, we've been told that there's going to be a light at that intersection when Highway 5 is upgraded in the year 2000. We've been told that there won't be a light there when it's upgraded and the last, and this is all in the last two months. The last recommendations that MnDOT has made is that there will be a light when Highway 5 is upgraded. So you'll have those two north/south access points. Franks: So what you're indicating is. Nancy Mancino: But you won't have off of TH41, the right-in/right-out. 26 Park and Rec Commission Meeting - April 28, 1998 Franks: So the Coulter extension was actually just going to end in a cul-de-sac in the midst of the business park'? Lash: No, it's going to go up, isn't it going to connect to Century? Franks: It will cross Century but. Nancy Mancino: It will cross Century but it won't go all the way to TH41. So that the rationale for having Coulter go east/west from Galpin to Century, which again as Steve said, there probably won't be much truck traffic on because they're going to get on Century going north/south and get on Highway 5. I mean the truck traffic is probably going to do that. But there's going to be lots of employees that aren't going to be driving trucks, etc. There's going to be a heck of a lot of employees and that's what the traffic counts show. How do you get the employees out of Century, or out of the business park and not.., so if there's going to be traffic on Coulter, I think it will be mostly car traffic and employee traffic while the trucks go up to TH 5 to get on the freeway. Franks: It just seems to me that if the employees figure out that they're going to save time, the delivery trucks are going to figure out. Roeser: What the truckers figure out is they can get to the back... Franks: ...seem to figure that out first. Nancy Mancino: Well, I mean I'm not going to come to defend or dispute it. Franks: ...traffic engineer either but I mean it's just. Nancy Mancino: All I can tell you is it's very antidotal. When I want to get to City Hall and I think I've said this before. When I want to go from my house on Galpin to City Hall, when I want to come to City Hall, I go the back way. I love the back way and I never get on TH 5. I don't want to go near TH 5. You know I go downtown. I get on 394 every day and come back and forth so when I get home, I don't want to experience the freeway again. So I don't get on TH 5. ! go the back road. But when I'm late, when I'm late I go directly to TH 5 because it is faster to get on TH 5 to come to City Hall. So truck traffic, business traffic that has to be on a schedule and has to get somewhere I feel will probably get directly onto TH 5 as quickly as they can and not go, because our frontage road, as much as it was supposed to be straight. Straight and narrow and you know the fast way, as you know as kinks in it so I don't see truckers doing that. But again, that's. Lash: But Coulter's going to be, that will be a straight shot from Galpin. I mean that road can't, we looked at meandering...that will be a straight shot. I just kind of, I was thinking they could take as an alternate, you know say they get off on Audubon and you know not necessarily big trucks going one destination to that park but say they're dropping off at the Federal Express truck 27 Park and Rec Commission Meeting - April 28, 1998 and the UPS truck and all those kind of guys and they've got delivery...and Prince's studio when all those places, and they'll take Coulter past the school and that way. Or and eventually once that Lake Drive is completed all the way through to CR 17, that will be a connector between the two industrial parks. And I think a lot of those trucks will just avoid TH 5 completely. Nancy Mancino: ...looking at on Coulter as it does go through, putting up stop signs and stop signs...school where Coulter and Stone Creek...so everyone's aware, is that we're looking at a corporate development... Lash: Having been an employee of District 112, I know the walk zone is a mile so all of the kids in the empty nest townhomes, and all the kids down in Stone Creek and all those other houses, they're all going to be walking and they won't be thinking about...less traffic we can encourage for those roads where the kids are going to be walking to and from school... Nancy Mancino: ...Bluff Creek Elementary...for the last three weeks but hopefully... Yeah, she has a concern too about that. Franks: I think that we should find some way to present this report to the Council for their consideration. I appreciate the concern about getting all the information so you can see the big picture. And that's just been my concern too that you get all of the information so you can see the big picture and not just the loudest voice because although some of the voices might not be quite so loud or as articulate or have the numbers and studies to back them up, they may be just as valid. And so I think that's important to kind of get our vision and our thoughts and what this means to us up there also. So now that you bring up the traffic thing, but it just strikes me that this business park gets this privileged treatment of road that basically serves no other purpose than to you know, for their employees instead of some of the other frontage roads like the one just north of the Lake Susan Park. Although that definitely serves the business park down there, yet that also serves all the residential areas that live out and around and on both sides and is a connector and we're talking about this Coulter Boulevard as not really being a connector for the community. We're talking about it being an access point for certain employees who may live or not live in this city. Yet we're looking at running it through what could be a very significant nature area. What is a significant wetland watershed area for Bluff Creek which the City has already expressed an interest in preserving in various ways and through new zoning ordinances and everything so it seems you know, that's part of the big picture for me. Nancy Mancino: And it is for us. I mean don't, please don't think that there is a special select few that we're listening to more than others because I think that in all honesty, for me. I'm only speaking for myself, both sides on this issue, whether it's to be built or not have been vocal, articulate, tenacious. You know all those things so I can tell you I haven't felt out weighed on one side really versus the other. And maybe that's where I naturally come from but it is also, I haven't felt that there is, and I don't know if you can, do you feel the same way Councilman Berquist? Yeah. I feel that both sides are being, giving us a lot of good information and certainly calling and being articulate so. Lash: I'd like to think the one factor that could possibly push you over, not over the edge. 28 Park and Rec Commission Meeting - April 28, 1998 Nancy Mancino: You can push him over the edge easier than over the fence. Lash: I'm trying real hard not to...referendum and on the back of my mind I think that's a real driving force that we need to remember is, that was the number one, strongest point for those who supported the referendum, was preservation of open space. When you think about that, you know that really should be a driving force of what...want. Franks: And what was very...which I heartened, was people knew what they were voting for. They were aware when they voted for that referendum what it included. Even knowing that that trail in Stone Creek, you know. And not only just the people who lived there but they were paying attention which was heartening to me after working on this. To know that people were actually voting for it as a good thing but they were paying attention. Lash: Yeah, you get your park commission and you get your planning commission and you get the engineering, you get the park director. You've got these groups but right in the center are the voters and the residents and I think when they spoke last June, they said the direction they want this city to go. And I think they spoke pretty loudly. I mean that was...when we did it and I think that was the biggest issue. Nancy Mancino: Thank you. Lash: Did I hear a thud? Steve? He fell offthe fence... Okay, well let's try and make a plan how we can do this. Moes: ...some of these questions and comments...? Lash: Sure. Moes: You know kind of get a background of what is the low habitat versus, very low. Lash: Diminished. Moes: Let's try to define that and spell it out. I think we need to do that before we present anything formally. Or informally. Berg: I want to withdraw my offer for dinner. I'm withdrawing my offer for dinner until I see if there's a right or left answer... Franks: Would there be any way to find out what some of the costs of restoration would be and the different levels of restoration. You know like so much by this level of restoration and so much...expect for a final product. Hoffman: Restoration in this area is programmed in the Bluff Creek study. And so there are some estimates identified in the Bluff Creek study so some of that footwork has already been 29 Park and Rec Commission Meeting - April 28, 1998 done. And that's what a lot of the proponents of the no road are starting to point out. Is that the city's gone through the Highway 5 corridor study and the preservation of open space and you said Bluff Creek has gone through that and identified this area as a primary corridor and wetland restoration area. Let's be listening to our previous thoughts and decisions and so we'll package that information. Update this as recommended by the commission and present that as a part of the packet. On the 11th or 26th agenda, whichever it makes. Lash: We'd be more than happy to meet with them...if they want to. You know, you can make that offer... Let's move on. We're in a real slow mode right now. We've got to move... REQUEST FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT~ SITE PLAN REVIEW TO ALLOW A GOLF IMPROVEMENT CENTER/DRIVING RANGE LOCATED AROUND GREAT PLAINS BOULEVARD AND TH212. Todd Hoffman presented the staff report and requested that the item be tabled. EASTER EGG CANDY HUNT. Ed presented the staff report on this item. Lash: Thanks. Can I just ask you a couple questions on this? With a note on the times on the flyer. Jerry, didn't we go to that a few years ago because of the confusion and then people would show up and their kid's time was over and then they were all confused on the time. Ruegemer: Certainly what we try to do is encourage people to come early. They can be out in that area if they would like to. I think with the approximation of times it seems like, you know once we get rolling out there, boy we're rolling and I think. Lash: How about if we set a time? The program's going to end at dah and then the hunt will start at dah. At least they know they need to be there. Because if they show up late, and that's what used to happen. The performance would end whenever and they'd come and say. Ruegemer: Well we certainly had those times stated on the flyers right now. The performance is at 9:00 sharp... The preschool candy hunt will start at 9:35, da, da, da, da and so on. People don't care, they want the candy. And that's why the bossy lady shows up, you know. And you'd better get out there, we're starting the candy hunt. Franks: Just do the drive through next year. Hoffman: Drive through, throw the candy in the car and go. Lash: ...the other thing was, I was wondering in there, would it work if we had, because there was a big, you know you had a big section. Couldn't we have another three sections someplace else for the other age so that you could just do one age. Do the other age over there and while you're doing that one, refill this one and set... 30 Park and Rec Commission Meeting - April 28, 1998 Ed: I think it could be possible. Definitely there's a lot of space out there and it could be divided up. Have a filling station and go station. That's definitely something to look into. The only thing I would see is people that have you know split children. But then again you wouldn't be running at the same time so. Lash: At the same time, no. Right. I don't know. It was just a thought. Just think about it. · ..Okay, thanks. Good job you guys. Let's move on. DANCE RECITAL. Patty Dexter presented the staff report on this item. Roeser: I was going to ask why you don't get Chaska High School for that. For the dance recital. Dexter: We were unable to reserve it for this recital and we'll try again next year. We approached them and. Roeser: Yeah, it seems like...Iong ways from Chanhassen. See that's why we've got to have a theater with the new Rec Center. ADULT SOFTBALL. Jerry Ruegemer presented the staff report on this item. Roeser: You're saying it's down from last year? Ruegemer: 45 down 5 teams. · ..Roeser: The park really looks nice. Ruegemer: ...times today...extremely pleased with Lake Ann Park right now. Roeser: I was out there Sunday and it really looks nice. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS. SOUTH LOTUS LAKE AND THE RICE MARSH ADDITIONS. Todd Hoffman presented the staff report on these items. Manders: That shaded area is the access point? 31 Park and Rec Commission Meeting - April 28, 1998 Hoffman: ...move this swing that used to be up here. Moved it down here. It's still within budget... Roeser: Rice Marsh, you've probably never seen it. Lash: I don't know if this would be a dumb question but why do we have the access down, right next to the wetland instead of up on the side where people are going to be actually coming into it? Hoffman: Well it's'a matter of how the two different phases went together. This was the original phase. So when they added onto it, you could add onto the south because of space constraints so we had to go south. But then to add the access point it had to be on the south so this trail is going to wrap around to the...over here so it just adds to the, or this occurred on site due to plans. The second one is...again additional swings were added to accommodate the requests from the neighborhood. Lash: And did we bump out the border too? Hoffinan: Yep. We bumped out the borders. Howe: It all fit? Hoffman: Manders: Hoffman: So both of them are budget. They've adjusted their plan... So the trail is still through there does not end? Yep, the trail does not end. Lash: Good. Hoffman: Lash: ... Do you want to approve those as presented? Berg: ...really likes the bright colors. As you go down the slide, it gave them a sense of... REC CENTER ANNUAL REPORT. Patty Dexter presented the staff report on this item. (Taping of the meeting ended at this point.) Chairman Lash adjourned the meeting. 32 Park and Rec Commission Meeting - April 28, 1998 Submitted by Todd Hoffman Park and Recreation Director Prepared by Nann Opheim 33