Loading...
3 Pulte Homes RezoningCIT¥OF 690 City Ce,ret Drive, PO Box I47 C/;a,hasse,. Mi,,esot,~ 55317 ]%one 612 937. I~00 Genera/E~v 612.~325739 h)~i,eeE,g Fax 612. 932 9152 h~bSc ~fi'O' E~.~' 612. 934. 2524 MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: Park and Recreation Colnmission .,4/ Todd Hoffman, Park and Recreation Director 7/~'/ I)ATE: August 16. 2000 SUB J: Arboretum Village. Pulte Homes - Update The Commission reviewed this proposal initially back in August of 1 999. staff report and resulting meeting minutes from that night's discussion are attached. The commissioner's motion that evening follows: The Karlovich moved, Berg seconded that the Park and Recreation Commission recommend that a large play area encompassing 2 to 2 ½ acres be centrally located in-between the court homes and the village home area, the other totlot location and sizes are fine as presented, the 2 ½ acres located north next to the exception piece not be part of any type of park dedication, the two wetland trails be identified as public corridors, and that appropriate easements would be required and the ciD' should grant full trail fee credit for the construction of these m'o trail segments. Minor alignment modifications would be sought. The interior trails are the applicant's responsibility. And that the woods near the fountain be preserved. Karlovich, Berg, Manders and Moes voted in favor. Lash, Howe and Franks voted in opposition. The motion carried with a vote of 4 to 3. Pray Areas The applicant has not included a 2 to 2 ½ acre centrally located play. The applicant does express in their narrative that "totlots" will be a component of the development. They have not however identified the location of these totlots on the plan. Trail Plan The applicant has identified the trails as recommended by the commission. Again, it is the city's desire to have the applicant locate the wetland trail within a public outlot extending across the wetlands. Furthermore that the applicant construct these trails as a part of public improvements. The applicant can tl~en be reimbursed with trail dedication fees. The construction and maintenance of the "interior trails" shall be the applicant's responsibility. The City of Cha,hasse,. A ~rowinf commu,i~ with c/ea, lakes, e,a/in, schools, a chan,i,~ dow, town. thrivi,~ busi,esses, a,d beautifid /;arks. A ~rcat alacc to h've. u'ork, a,d ,la~ Park and Recreation Commission August 16, 2000 Page 2 Preservation of"Hwy. 5" Woodlot Under the present plan approximately 50% of the woodlot is destroyed. Some of the trees are lost to the MNDOT Hwy. 5 upgrade project. Density Density from last year's plan has been reduced by 35 units from 418 to 383. This equals 4.26 units per acre. Permitted densities (if the rezoning is approved) equal 458 units, 75 more than proposed. The applicant is maintaining the 11.05 acre woodlot and field west of HWY. 41 as open space. Planning staff will seek a conservation easement on this property to ensure its preservation. Staff Comments The proposal as a PUD does a good job of preserving "community" open space on the west side of Hwy. 41. Initial reaction of staff and the City Attorney's Office is that if the city wants to maintain additional open space or play areas, we will need to use park dedication. Approximately 8 acres or $500,000 in cash is required by ordinance for this development. It is my position that two substantial totlots, one located east and one west of the access boulevard in addition to the trail connectors to the wetlands is sufficient. It is very unfortunate that the woodlot on Hwy. 5 is proposed to be altered so dramatically. However, from an objective viewpoint, it is difficult to plan around a square woodlot which protrudes into the site. Recommendation It is recommended that the Park and Recreation Commission recommends the City Council approve the application for the Arboretum Village PUD with the tbllowing conditions: Conservation easements be placed over the "Hwy. 41 Outlot" and remaining HWY. 5 woods. Txvo totlot park areas be identified. Each playground shall have a capacity of 25 children. o The wetland trails be located within a city owned outlot which extends out across the wetlands. The applicant shall construct these trails and be reimbursed by the city. 4. The interior trail system shall be constructed and maintained by the applicant. 5. Full park dedication payments be collected per city ordinance. g:\park\th\pulte.doc CITY OF PRC DATE: Aug. 24, 1999 PC DATE: CC DATE: ~ HOFFMAN:k STAFF I REPORT Z PROPOSAL: LOCATION: APPLICANT: PRESENT ZONING: Conceptual PUD for mixed housing development (414 units) consisting of manor homes, court homes, village homes, and townhomes on 82.8 acres and 3.7 acres ofcorrimercial uses, Arboretum Village, Pulte Homes Located on the northeast comer of Highways 5 and 41 Dennis Griswold, Director of Land Pulte Homes 1355 Mendota Heights Road, Suite 300 Mendota Heights, MN 55120-1112 A-2, Agq-icultural Estate td ADJACENT ZONING AND LAND USE: N - PUD-R, Planned Unit Development-Residential S - State Highway 5 E -A-2, Agricultural Estate W - State Highway 41 INTRODUCTION: Next Tuesday evening, Mr. Dennis Griswold of Pulte Homes will be present to introduce this conceptual PUD to the commission. COMPREHENSIVE PARK PLAN: The proposed Arboretum Village lies outside the one-half mile park service zone of existing neighborhood parks. The site provides convenient automobile access to the Chanhassen Recreation Center, Minnewashta Regional Park, and Landscape Arboretum. Completion of the West 78th Street access boulevard will provide convenient pedestrian access (using two underpasses!) to the Recreation Center/Bluff Creek Elementary campus. Pedestrian access to the Regional Park at Lake Minnewashta and the Arboretum will remain limited until adequate trail connections are constructed. Park & Recreation Commission August 18, 1999 Page 2 The applicant has identified three small totlots spaced appropriately throughout the site. Staffwould like to review a site plan for each of these recreation sites. The totlots located near the manor homes and rental townhomes are situated adjacent to additional open space and are connected to the proposed community by pedestrian trails. The totlot located within the court homes appears to lack sufficient open space and defined pedestrian i'outes to and from the court homes. Residents with small children living in this development will rely on these totlots to provide basic physical and psychological needs. The presence of these gathering spots will enhance the livability of this neighborhood and protect property values. COMPREHENSIVE TRAIL PLAN: The applicant has done an exemplary job of incorporating pedestrian trails as a part of this PUD application. The City's Comprehensive Plan identifies a trail adjacent to the West 78th Street access boulevard that bisects the site. This trail will be constructed as a part of the road project. The trail rimming the large marsh and the north/south trail on the eastern edge of the PUD act as comprehensive trail connections. These specific segments are not identified on the city's trail plan, but are desirable public amenities. Construction of these trails would bring us one step closer to seeing the full loop of this scenic marsh trail completed. The interior trail connections identified act as essential connectors for the neighborhood. Staff would like to see accommodations made for pedestrians in the court homes. RECOMMENDATION: This application represents one of the largest developments to be proposed in Chanhassen. Staff looks forward to the presentation by the applicant on Tuesday evening. Without the benefit of this presentation, it appears the applicant is well on their way to satisfying the conditions of the Park & Recreation Commission. Upon initial review, it appears the pedestrian network is sufficient with the exception of the court homes area. Preservation of the northwest and south central wooded green spaces is essential. A nicely planned pedestrian trail loop through the south central wooded lot would provide a valuable respite from an otherwise busy landscape. The totlot areas are mandatory with additional work needed at the court homes location. The presence of roadway on three sides of the site is undesirable. In addition, a larger more central location is desired. It is recommended that cash park fees be required versus acquisition of a public park site (minimum of 5 acres). Regarding trails, it is recommended that the two wetland trails be identified as public corridors. Appropriate easements would be required and the city should grant full trail fee credit for the construction of these two trail segments. Minor alignment modifications would be sought. The interior trails are the applicant's responsibility. g:\park\th\pulte homes.doc July 30, 1999 Pulte Homes of Minnesota Ms. Kathryn R. Aanenson, AICP City Of Chanhassen 690 Coulter Drive P.O. Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 RE: Arboretum Village Dear Ms Aanenson: Pulte Homes of Minnesota Corporation is proud to present the community of Arboretum Village for the City of Chanhassen's consideration and approval. We at Pulte Homes look forward to providing the residents of Chanhassen with quality housing within your fine city. Please find attached twenty six (26) sets of the submittal package requirements for General Concept Plan review for a planned unit development. I look forward to working with you during the review process. The Arboretum Village plans represent a request for rezoning from A2 - Agricultural Estate District to Planned Unit Development to accommodate a mixed use of 414 residential units within homeowner association greenspaces and 3.7 acres of commercial on approximately 82.4 acres for a density of 5.14 units/acre. Park dedication is proposed to be in the form of cash. The 32 rental townhomes and the 13 acres west of C.S.A.H. 41 will remain in ownership of James Deanovic, the underlying contract holder on the Savaryn property. Details of those areas will be addressed by Mr. Deanovic. However, Pulte's request does not require any density transfer from the property west of C.S.A.H. 41, per our calculations. Proposed timing for the development, as indicated on the Staging Plan, is for Phase One to begin Spring, 2000, timely with the MNDOT project and Phase Two to begin Summer, 2001. Please do not hesitate to call me if you have any questions or comments on this matter. We look forward to the 8/1/99 Planning Commission and the 8/27/99 Council meetings. Sincerely, PULTE HOMES OF MINNESOTA CORPORATION Dennis R. Griswold, R.L.A. Director of Land Encl. 1355 MENDOTA HEIGHTS ROAD · SUITE 300 · MENDOTA HEIGHTS · MINNESOTA 55120-1112 Minnewashta W ~tr~ St. Arboretum AI~flfIRETIIM YILLAG[ SITE DAT,~ / / // / ,' /[ / / / / L / / Village CONCEPT PLAN ! ! / COMM£RCIAL "' IIWY.$ ' CHANHASSEN PARK AND RECREATION COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING AUGUST 24, 1999 Chairwoman Lash called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. MEMBERS PRESENT: Jan Lash, Mike Howe, Fred Berg, Jim Manders, Jay Karlovich, Rod Franks, and Dave Moes MEMBERS ABSENT: None. STAFF PRESENT: Todd Hoffman, Park and Rec Director; Jerry Ruegemer, Recreation Superintendent; and Tracy Peterson, Recreation Supervisor VISITOR PRESENTATIONS: None. CONCEPTUAL PUD FOR MIXED HOUSING DEVELOPMENT (414 UNITS) CONSISTING OF MANOR HOMES~ COURT HOMES~ VILLAGE HOMES AND TOWNHOMES ON 82.8 ACRES AND 3.7 ACRES OF COMMERCIAL USES ON PROPERTY ZONED A2~ AGRICULTURAL ESTATE AND LOCATED ON THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF HWY 5 AND HWY 41~ ARBORETUM VILLAGE~ PULTE HOMES. Todd Hoffman presented the staff report on this item. Mark Gungther: Like Todd said my name is Mark Gungther. I'm the construction manager for Pulte Homes in Minnesota. For those of you who may have known the name Marv Anderson Homes from many years ago, that is us. Pulte Homes purchased Mary Anderson Homes about 1990, so about 10 years ago. Several of Marv Anderson's employees are still with us today and still running our division today so that just kind of gives you a brief background about who we are. So we have been around the Twin Cities for 40 plus years so. The community before you is Arboretum Village. It does consist of four product lines that we have built elsewhere in the Twin Cities metropolitan area. The first product is our single level townhomes or what we call our club homes. I don't know Todd, are these in your packets at all? Hoffman: Not in there. Mark Gungther: I can pass these around too if you wish to take a look at those. Our club homes, which would be located up here on the north side, and around this side of the marsh. Those cater to more of the active adult. People who are retiring or looking to purchase their last home. Typically you don't see any children in these communities at all, unless they are teenagers who just want to stay at home and don't want to leave so. We get a few of them. The next product that we have is their manor homes. This is a townhouse, four unit townhouse building. Three's and four's I should say. They're located right here in the middle of the community. The manor Park & Rec Commission - August 24, 1999 homes cater to move up, target kind of a move up buyer as well as some first time buyers as well. It's about a 50/50 split is what we've seen. Kind of looking for more living space but still not ready to venture out into a full single family. They still want the association care. We're seeing a few more children in here. Typically about .3 children per household in this product line is what we've been seeing in our other communities. The products, the two products to the southwest side is, both are condominium products. One is a two story courthome product is what we call them. And that consists of eight unit buildings. That's this product line right through here. And then our 12 unit village home product, which consists of these L shaped buildings located in the very comer. Those products do cater to the first time buyer. We see young professionals that are purchasing for the first time. They're getting out of rental products. Want to own their own home. We see very few children in here. We're averaging about. 15 children per household in these product lines, and the children are typically all under ages from zero to 5 is typically what we see. So that kind of gives you a quick, real brief area on the product that we're supplying. I think in terms of looking at the buyer profile, the community does provide some good recreational and aesthetic values to this community and areas such as the ponding areas. We want to make sure that we have the ponding area with the fountain. This will give you a perspective of what this entrance here would look like off of the intersection of County Road 41 and Highway 5. This here is the village home product that you'd see with that pond and fountain located in that pond. I don't know if you want to pass this around Todd or you want to let. Areas like Todd alluded to already as trying to save the vast majority of these trees and provide as much green space. We are having to knick a couple of these edges to accommodate those buildings but the vast majority of all these tree areas are all saved. The totlot that Todd mentioned was the one in the middle of the court homes and the village homes. Once again, we don't see a lot of children in these communities. The one totlot we feel is sufficient for in here, as well as the one totlot where we see a few more children in the manor home product. The totlot over here, these 32 units are rental homes. These are not part of our, they're part of this community but we will not be building them. This falls under the owner that we are purchasing the site from. And he will be building those 32 units as well as supplying that totlot. The trail system that goes around, number one MnDOT is supplying the trail system that goes along Highway 5, Highway 41, and also down, do we know the name of this road yet? Hoffman: Arboretum Boulevard. Mark Gungther: Arboretum Boulevard. Denny wasn't quite sure yet what the name was. The other interior trails, Pulte Homes would be willing to supply the easement around the marsh areas, as well as look at installing those trails around there as part of the park dedication fees as well. And then as well as installing all these interior trails. There is one other area that we haven't brought up or mentioned and it's up on the northern, very northern part. Let me slide this down. There's a 2 ½ acre piece up on the north end that is land locked at this time. That we would also like to be considered as part of park dedication. It's not, the other option is we can still provide an easement on here immediately and then that way it's available for future use as well if there's a trail. Trail need later on the north side. So that would be one thing I'd ask the commission to consider as far as that 2 ½ acre piece as part of the park dedication. And then whatever is remaining we can just, in terms of the cash dedication at that point in time. And at that I guess, I now that's a real brief overview of our product. The area. I can go into more detail Park & Rec Commission - August 24, 1999 if you have more detailed questions of me. I want to thank you for your time and I'II just open it up for discussion. Lash: Okay. We'll open up. Jim, do you want to start? Manders: So what you're talking about, your last comment about the park dedication is the green area on the map up on top? Mark Gungther: Yeah, this 2 ½ acre piece. Manders: And evidently that's right against the marsh. Mark Gungther: That's correct. Manders: And it's really not accessible? Mark Gungther: It's not accessible at all at this point in time. I'm not sure of who has the property on the north side. I believe there is a residence on this exception right here. Manders: Okay. That's the residence in that comer. Hoffman: There's a house on either side. Bud Olson, the Sheriff actually lives on the exception, and the other to the north is another single family. If you combine all three of those at some point in the future, that would be a large enough...to support some sort of subdivision. That little exception...and remain as open space... Manders: Is there anything bordering of this to the north? Hoffman: Single family home. Manders: That's right, so there really isn't anything that would be a small 2 acre area. Hoffman: Yeah, we could not provide access to this. The Lundgren trail comes very close but it's separated from this land by a single family lot. Manders: And that's kind of where I'm heading with the next question is the trails around this marsh area, I see what's laid out on the map but I kind of lose sight of it. Is the road that you're heading off to the I believe northeast, does that, right there. Does that kind of go up there and dead-end someplace or is that going to kind of wrap around? Mark Gungther: Not at this point. It will just be a dead end at that point. Hoffman: It would continue with future development. Park & Rec Commission - August 24, 1999 Manders: And so correspondingly then there's a trail on the back side of those homes that will wrap around that marsh? Hoffman: We would pursue that with... Manders: So on the top side it just goes around on the other side of these other homes, that wetland. Hoffman: I'll go grab a trail map and we can throw it up there and show you what's going on with this land map. There's also the, about a 10 acre group home. That kind of sits in the middle of the next piece of land that falls... Manders: Is there anything in, of course this probably doesn't border but isn't there a Highover or something development to the north of this? Hoffman: Yeah, it's Longacres. Manders: But basically this trail is going to be completed around here so all the easements necessary are. Hoffman: We would acquire them, pursue them as future development occurs. Manders: And then the access coming off from TH 5, is this Century Boulevard coming out of the industrial park? Is that going to cross into this? Is that a stop light entrance or am I just not reading this right? Hoffman: Yes. Manders: Is that how that's going? Hoffman: Yep. I misspoke during the, Arboretum Boulevard is actually Highway 5. They tried to get this to be Arboretum Boulevard but right now it's West 78th Street from downtown. I don't know what they're going to do about that. Manders: So that West 78th is going to have a trail on the inside like it is right out here? Hoffman: As far as I know they're slated to start construction next spring...out to this terminus at TH 41. Manders: And so the issue with us being outside the half mile border area for park is something that's pointed out but with all the other amenities around, there's no problem with that? Hoffman: Well, the totlots serve that purpose and without those there...plan for the possibility to provide those services and so if the applicant went before you and said we do not want or we don't believe in totlots, we don't develop them, then it would be my recommendation that we be 4 Park & Rec Commission - August 24, 1999 keeping some sort of public land to develop that but they're providing those recreation spaces for the casual daily use. Short term. Manders: So can you elaborate on what the contents of a totlot is going to be? Mark Gungther: A totlot would be, I guess right now that's open for discussion in terms of what we've done in the past is we've just done a play structure. More of a maintenance free play structure. It would have about 5 or 6 different activities located on the structure. Manders: Kind ofa 5 to 10 year old range type of thing? Mark Gungther: Oh no. It will go from, it will cater to the younger children. Lash: To 5. Mark Gungther: Yeah, more 2 to 5. Manders: And the size of this? I mean as big as this room or this table or how big is this? Hard to tell. Mark Gungther: Right. I mean if you're talking about 5 to 6 different activities on a structure you're probably looking at a structure that may be 30 x 30 or so. 30 feet by 30 feet. So probably about the size of this... Because the area that you have to oversize to accommodate for fall protection, etc. Manders: I guess I have a hard time trying to understand how much is necessary for a totlot but it just doesn't seem like a lot. I guess that's about all I have. Lash: Okay, thanks. Jay. Karlovich: I'm going to start out with the questions about the north 2 I/2 acre piece. What is the property, the exception piece and the other property around that, what is that guided? Is that going to be single family homes in the future or is that going to be multi-family? Hoffman: It's guided single family is my recollection. Karlovich: What does the staff think about, is that something that we want to keep that 2 ½ acres as open space or a future park or, it just seems that you have a large marsh. You have some strange exception pieces right on top of Highway 41. Do we even want that property or? Hoffman: For the loss of park dedication is probably not going to serve the general public. At that same value so I see the property as less... Karlovich: As opposed to these three totlots, would it be wise to maybe put some type of little, small little neighborhood park in there somewhere as opposed to three totlots? 5 Park & Rec Commission - August 24, 1999 Hoffman: I thought about that at the time and Mark can probably speak to that. Each kind of pod is a different product and especially for people that's associated with people and product and appreciate having their own place closer to home... Mark Gungther: Once again, you know they are grouped as separate communities, but it is one big community and they're intertwined. The trails do interconnect the communities as well as the private road system. Trying to get morel of a centralized location, you know try to keep the totlots close to the home where they're not having to go a great distance from their homes, especially with the young children. So it seems to have always worked out better to try to keep this totlot within this community and this one within this one so they're not having to have their children travel away, or where they might be able to see them from their house or they don't have to go a big distance with their children to the park, or to the totlots. Lash: Anything else Jay? Karlovich: I'll pass for right now. Lash: Okay, Fred. Berg: I guess my only concerns are with the totlots too. If they're big enough to handle. Now I know you know your business. I'm not challenging that but we've had so many developers come in here and tell us that empty nesters were going to be filling these things, and we're not going to see any kids and they're just sort of over run. I'm a little bit skeptical about that. Mark Gungther: Well we are going to see kids. I mean that's, you know like I mentioned. We just don't see, try to design it to the amount of kids that you have that we've seen typically in the communities. You know in the first time buyer, a third of our buyers in that community are singles. Two-thirds are couples or, and starting a family or do have children to begin with so the amount of children is very few. What we've seen in our buyer profiles. We've been building our condominiums now for over 8 years so that's about 8 years worth of history to pull from so. That's basically where we get our numbers from. Berg: Todd you mentioned in your recommendation, one of them was, one of the totlots you weren't happy with the location because of the roadway. Hoffman: Yes, this one here. It's surrounded on two sides by roads. IfI was going to send my child there, you know take my child in there, I'd as soon it'd be slightly more protected. Those are private roads. I'm not sure if they can design it. These roadways...get through the review process and you can find a little more protected area. Nestle that in. Then I think we're going to see the majority, since this is the largest area, you'll see the most children here. Plus the numbers... I'd also like to see a plan where...half court basketball in that area. Berg: It's a little bit like a pig in a poke here. 6 Park & Rec Commission - August 24, 1999 Mark Gungther: Yeah like I said, it's typically what we put in is just a play structure so it hasn't been any other court facilities or anything like that. It's just been a play structure that has 5 or 6 activities on it so. Berg: Would you be willing, or willing to at least entertain the option of maybe looking at a more, at a different, more preferable location for this one totlot or are these set in stone? Mark Gungther: We can look at it. Trying ,to, you know our goal is to try to keep it centrally located for the community. Keep in mind that this is, these are not a public thoroughfare and obviously with the roads intertwining you don't get into high speed areas as well. These are all private roads and they'll be all maintained and cared for by the association. So all the snowplowing, etc is all taken care of by the association. We have placed in areas such as this in the past, typically it hasn't been an issue. We can take a look at, you know if we wanted to take it off of, this is the main entrance. If we wanted to flip it and get it away from the main entrance, or take it offso it's not on this main thoroughfare here, we can take a look at that. Entertain that. Hoffman: Mark, is there one of these communities we could go look at? Mark Gungther: Absolutely. You could take a look at, the closest one would be in Shakopee. It's our Western Ponds community. That one is currently under construction right now. That's located on County Road 17 and Highway 169. On the south side there. Right across from the hospital. Berg: Marshall Road or whatever? Mark Gungther: Marshall Road, yeah. You can drive in there. The totlot, there's an existing totlot in there. You can take a look at that and what the play structure consists of. Berg: And then my last question I think maybe you've already answered. Who would be responsible for the maintenance and the upkeep of the totlot? Mark Gungther: The homeowners association. Berg: So the City would have no responsibility there? Mark Gungther: Correct. Lash: I have just a couple of questions too. Todd when we went over and visited Mission Hills, right there. To help me visualize what this is, would that be comparable size? Hoffman: I would think so. Lash: Okay. And I had a question too about, do you ever have, you know there's lots of singles and stuff and buying townhouse deals. Do they not, you don't ever have anybody request basketball or tennis or something like that? 7 Park & Rec Commission ~ August 24, 1999 Mark Gungther: Not to my knowledge, we've never had any requests of that. Lash: Most the time in these associations they're not allowed to put up basketball nets I think on their garages, right? At least in Chaparral maybe. I just thought there's something that if you have a lot of guys in their 20's. Mark Gungther: Each association will vary. I mean to begin with you know each association has an architectural committee. They would make the approval or not approval of those amenities to each homeowner. Lash: In the demographics I was looking through and the typical children living at home are always you know point something, so it's less than 1 child per household average, but... communities based on that because I didn't for sure how many of each type go in. Mark Gungther: In the village and the court home communities, the village is 144 homes. The court homes is 104 home for a total of 248. With point, let's say .15. I think Todd you calculated out what we were talking I think is about 40 children or so for that community. In the manor homes, I haven't calculated that. There are 83 homes located in that area. Typically you run about, like I mentioned, about .3 children per household. 25-30. Lash: What did you say on the first one? On the village? Mark Gungther: About 40-45. Lash: And those are, the location of those? Hoffman: The big block right here. Lash: That big block. Ooh, okay. The other thing I just wanted to point out or ask to get this on the totlot in this, the one that you just pointed to. I noticed that that is in Phase II. Year to start is 2001. Where the ones right across the street are in Phase I. Year 2000. So would you be anticipating that you'd develop the totlot with Phase I so that the people moving in there would have the totlot right away or would they have to wait then a couple of years until? Mark Gungther: They would have to go with Phase II. With the amount of homes in there, you know you're only looking at waiting about a year. At that point in time so that totlot would be developed when this building here is built at that point in time. Howe: Assuming it stays there though, right? Lash: Right. Mark Gungther: Right, yeah. If that's the location that's chosen. Park & Rec Commission - August 24, 1999 Lash: Also I was just curious what Parcel A is? Is that yours? Mark Gungther: No. Hoffman: Susan Markert. Lash: 'Oh, okay. I think that was it for my questions. Thank you. Rod. Franks: Jan you hit on a few things that I noted also. First the totlot not going in in the village home area until Phase II is developed. That kind of concerned me. As we have kids in 21% of · the households, where in the village homes weren't having children in your demographics. Whereas 18% of the homes in the manor homes report having children. I found that a little bit of confusion there. You were talking about the manor homes having more kids, yet more of the households in the village homes report having children so I don't know if that was a typo... Mark Gungther: No, it ties in with there could be more children in one particular household. Franks: More children per household. Mark Gungther: Right. So that's the difference right there. Franks: I can understand putting the totlot in the court home portion of that because you sacrifice...to put it in there, but it seems to me it would make more sense to put the totlot, if you can get it worked out, where the kids are more likely to be living. Very few children you're saying are going to be living in the court homes area. It'd be advantageous I think to really move the totlot in this area down to the village homes. Instead of right on the border of the village homes. And ifthere'd be a way to incorporate that stand of trees down towards the bottom to kind of buffer... Or across the street or somewhere in that comer, more contiguous to the tree stand. Mark Gungther: Yeah, you know the trees is a beautiful buffer and one thing that we were trying to save. I'd hate to lose those. Franks: Well I'm thinking ifthere'd be a way to put it next to. Howe: Is this just green space in here? What would be between. Mark Gungther: In-between there on the village homes there are patios. Those are individual patios offeach of these homes back up in here. Howe: But there's not as much space as you would think from this drawing then that would be open. Mark Gungther: It is all open in this space here, but I don't know ifthere'd be enough space to accommodate a totlot without encroaching upon somebody's patio. Park & Rec Commission - August 24, 1999 Manders: Is it possible build that area bigger to allow for additional space or are we locked into these dimensions? Mark Gungther: These dimensions, the way the buildings are designed are, you know that's how that works out the best because it is a two story house with a tuck under garage. So everybody is entering from the street side. The front doors and the garages are from here, and then these all slope up. And so it's only a two story inside these courtyards. Manders: But I mean it doesn't look like your streets are squared up so if you made one of these blocks a little bit bigger to allow for a totlot, does it matter or does it? Evidently it does. Hoffman: Fine tune it. Franks: I guess that's what I was thinking too...taking out the street. Shifting this. Manders: Yeah, just build it somehow so you'd have a larger area in the center, closer to the trees down there where it's being mentioned to... Karlovich: I just want to interrupt for a second. What about this area in here? ...for a little more substantial park in there for...number of children in this area. Mark Gungther: On Parcel A is not, you know that's not available to us so we wouldn't be able to do anything with that so we're only, we're locked into just what is under our contract at this point. Karlovich: Right. What I was thinking was that if that was just you know dedicated, that area there, then would Parcel A, when or if it does develop then could request the other comer to make it more of a squared off area and have a future park there. It just seemed like a kind of a dead area there in which I don't want to say put a park over here or put a big structure over here and then you're going to lose your density here. It just looks like you guys all were able to shove three units in there, but if a comer parcel lay was added into there, it could be a substantial park area for the future. Hoffman: Commissioners thoughts. Franks: My concern is keeping some more play area down where the concentration of units is down where the villages are. It's a nice idea to have...totlot across the street and farther over to the north. That's where the concentration of kids will be in that section. Karlovich: I guess I just generally think ofa totlot, I mean I have a totlot in my back yard. Franks: That's my next question. 10 Park & Rec Commission - August 24, 1999 Karlovich: A play system and you have 400 units in there, I still think you'd probably get at least 100 kids probably in there. And if you have 100 kids and they have no access to any type of neighborhood park. I just, I don't know if we're just grabbing the park dedication fees, going to use it somewhere else or do we need to supply something to the 100 kids that are going to be there. Franks: Well that's...looking at Mission Hills which is I think is about 208 units, and that totlot. Howe: Is there just one of them? Franks: Just the one it's totally inadequate in my opinion. Totally. And here you're talking just in section you're talking about 200 units for a section, correct? Mark Gungther: Correct. Franks: And so when I think of just that one small totlot, and then it being bordered by the street, the Mission Hills area is next to a pond and stuff and trails but it's also contiguous to the little extra green band. And even then it seems a little tight. I guess my concern is kind of combining with what Todd has mentioned and my own about size and location. I don't know, even if you put it in whether it'd be worth it to you to put it in, even as far as the marketing thing because I don't know if it's going to serve it's purpose. It's not going to be a place that's going to draw families out to play. The ones that are there so you might want to look at reconfiguring that somehow. Hoffman: Mission Hills Mark, I don't know if you know where it's at. Just south on I01. Mark Gungther: No, but I can take a look at it. Hoffman: Take a look at it. You just go across Highway 5 on Market Boulevard, south on 101. Head south, on the left hand side you'll see it. It's there. When Mission Hills came in, that applicant had not included any totlot or combination and the commission worked very hard...that there be one there and so I think it was...little bit more green space and not only could they have their play structure but then also have the small green field so...participate in some small form of...they could do that. The complex sold out and an associations are formed and the association, they had to call us up and they're saying, you know how did we get stuck with this inadequate park space and was the city involved in that? What was the developer's role and what can we do to improve the situation so the commission has heard from at least one other similar product what they...at least in their belief inadequate needs... Franks: I think the placement of the other two totlots, that looks great. Especially the one where the manor homes are. Out in the middle of all three cul-de-sacs. You have the trails and there's a number of homes that are there. I think that's really well placed. And it's also then the green, the open space contiguous to that totlot also. I believe we have some view sheds going out either direction of some open space, whereas you don't have that in the one where the village homes are. I'd like to see that. The other thing too is kind ofthe...development of Highway 5... I hate 11 Park & Rec Commission - August 24, 1999 to see any of the trees that are there along Highway 5 go so. I understand... If there would be a way to try to work with that and work with combining totlots into that tree area closer down to the village home area, that's what I would suggest. Mark Gungther: Incorporating it into this area here? Franks: Yeah. And that's what I'm thinking if you could take this block, or one of these and push them, you know and somehow deal with the street and then add the totlot. Or something. Lash: Or right to your right. Franks: This one here? Lash: Yeah. If you could just take, aren't there just two units? Mark Gungther: This is an eight unit home right here. Lash: How many are there? Mark Gungther: Eight. Lash: Oh, eight. So if you took half, half that closest to the wooded area. Franks: Well you could add the other ones into one where you have totlots. You might...in a couple of units. Because you're sacrificing at least four units for the totlot currently? Mark Gungther: Correct. Lash: Okay, so that would be a trade off then. Four down there. If it was halfa block. And can you make an eight into a four? Mark Gungther: Yes, we can build these as 4, 6 or 8 unit buildings. Lash: Rod, that's a really good idea. It would make it look more like a park. The kids could go through the woods if they wanted a little bit. It wouldn't make it look like just a little play structure stuck in the middle. Plus that is where all the kids are going to be. 45, estimated 45 kids down in that area as opposed to 16 up in the other area. Moes: What do you think about from a centrally located, I was always thinking of a centrally located one. Karlovich: I think we all want to be designers. I want to throw out another idea. Can I ask you just a question about the pond across from the commercial, the 3.7 acres. Does that pond have to be there? From a topographic standpoint or. What I was seeing is that huge, large mass there at the comer of Highway 5 and Highway 41. You know if you could even put that pond in the 12 Park & Rec Commission - August 24, 1999 middle of this large mass, it seems like it would be more inviting to all these homes around here and maybe you could have a totlot next to a pond. I don't know, maybe this could be used for commercial also. You can't have that much commercial there? Or maybe throw in the centrally, 12 unit structure over here and move the pond over here. It just seems like you have a huge, large mass there with just a sea of condominiums and not a whole lot of amenities. Mark Gungther: On the topography, I don't think it will accommodate it since this is all higher ground up here so as far as allowing any need for storm sewer. I'm not sure exactly what those ponds, or if they are established by MnDOT. Hoffman: Well this pond I know is being used for some storm water. I don't know if you're using it as a part of your project for storm water. Mark Gungther: I don't know. We haven't seen, we're not at that point yet. Hoffman: But I know this will be used in conjunction with the roadway storm water management, and as you drive by you notice that this area is, has wetland vegetation in there already. Down here in this field. It drops off down and that's used in the pond for water management. There's a small pond down here in the comer... I had the same impression that this was a large mass of private streets and homes and if you break it up, Kate Aanenson, the Planning Director talking to engineers about attempting to work with the applicant to make this first street feel more like an access boulevard. Taking a look at, we talked about, Mark talked about pedestrian access. Lack of sidewalk access in this area. Mark had a very good idea that over...to connect these communities straight out to the trail system here and then straight out to the trail system to the south. Otherwise you're going to get people to want to walk through a private yard or association...allow that to happen. Mark Gungther: On the perimeter here, this here is a decorative fence with berming and landscaping that goes all the way around and I think it ends somewhere back over in here. So that is, and that's kind of creating a buffer, and then...but there will be a decorative fence...buffer the buildings and the homes here at this point in time as well. Franks: I was just looking if that's where you have..., like the village homes are all three stow? Mark Gungther: They're three stoW on the street side. Two story in the green spaces. You thought it was a two stow with a tuck under garage. Franks: So it's facing Highway 5 it might actually look three stories. Mark Gungther: That's the reason for the buffering and stuff. So your viewpoint really would probably be only two stories is what you'd be seeing. Buffering the garages and the roads. Hofflnan: The commission's thoughts are certainly not out of context. This is a planned unit development application so if the design, the amount of green spaces is all up for negotiation. We're the first commission to provide some input and pass that up to the Planning Commission. 13 Park & Rec Commission - August 24, 1999 Lash: Okay Rod... Franks: Yep, I'm done. Lash: We're still working our way down here. Dave. Sorry. We kind of got off track. Moes: I think all the items have definitely been covered by now. The one thing is the totlot and the court and the village homes, it sounds like the recommendation has been put on the table to see what a plan entails for that type of construction and quite possibly enlarging that and relocating that. It may be less of a traffic. Howe: Not a lot I can add. I like what you've done by saving some trees in some of that wood space. I like the fact that you will incorporate some of the trails in and as I read this, and from what I'm hearing, I also share the concern about the totlot as a way we can move that. Make it bigger. Make two of them in that large area. That needs some work as far as I'd say but that's all I have. Lash: Okay. Jim, do you have something else? Manders: Yeah I do. I just want to make, yeah I just thought of a couple more things. I want to say at this comer of 41 and 5, I think that fountain area, that's a great way to, and I know this isn't the beginning of Chanhassen but 41 and 5 is a very key artery coming into Chanhassen and I think about this looks like, and hopefully it tums out something like that because it would be a great look. And going down 5 further and what you get when you get into Eden Prairie, it's like that mass of townhouses right in the comer there and now they're tearing those trees on the other side. And it doesn't impress me so I like that and the trail. Berg: At Dell Road there, yeah. Manders: Yeah. That's all I wanted to say. Lash: Will you have some kind of an identifying marker or sign or Something that says. Mark Gungther: Yeah, on the monument. Arboretum Villages, right. Right. Berg: Promise it won't look like those townhouses, townhomes that Jim's talking about on Dell Road and Highway 5 where every one of them is exactly the same and they're white or brown... Manders: Yeah, they're not real inviting. Berg: And there's about 5,000 of them. Manders: Do they have totlots in there? I don't know, how big an area is that? 14 Park & Rec Commission - August 24, 1999 Berg: I'm being somewhat facetious but it's an awful. Mark Gungther: The structures, obviously on architecture are very similar. You know between each village home. The court homes look different. There are different color packages associated with them. With the products. On the village homes actually we have, we institute several color packages on one building to make it look like more of a colonial look...building itself so. Manders: This map here just has the dotted lines in for these trails I assume but there's really nothing over here. Is it like on the street trails? Sidewalks or what? Mark Gungther: Once again it's all private roads over there and those act as the... Manders: Talking about hooking up to the outside trail, you'd be on the outside of the fence. Mark Gungther: Well what we would do is provide access through it. So maybe offset an opening so the trail came through like this. Berg: Who would maintain the trail? Would that be us? Or the development. Hoffman: Not within the development. We would just work with them to maintain the one on the perimeter of the site here. Mark Gungther: This one here and here, yeah. Hoffman: ...these would be connected that would be maintained as part of this project. Manders: But I mean the one up West 78th and isn't there a trail along TH 5 too? Hoffinan: Yeah, those would be ours. Berg: Do we have any control over the trails in the interior in terms of the quality of the trail? Mark Gungther: In terms of the specifications as far as what goes in, as far as the base and the mat? That would be open for discussion with staff as far as what...That's going to maintain itself. We don't want it falling apart right away for the association. Because they're going to. Manders: When you talk about trail, are you talking like sidewalk or is it going to go through the development? Mark Gungther: It'd be a bituminous trail. Manders: Yeah, but I mean it's like on the street east as opposed to. Mark Gungther: These dotted things, they go right through the green space. 15 Park & Rec Commission - August 24, 1999 Manders: Yeah, but I'm talking about this other comer where there's no dotted line. Mark Gungther: Over here? Manders: Right, in that area. Hoffman: On street. Mark Gungther: It's on street. Manders: Yes, okay. Lash: The connectors that would, if they were to put in the connector through the green space out to 41...bituminous then. Manders: Okay. That's what I was getting at, okay. Hoffman: And what Kate and I talked about today is the potential as this road became more defined to put a sidewalk on that street... People would tend to congregate towards that. If they're trying to get out to here, they're going to tend to congregate towards that roadway and then there will be more traffic here so they'd have a sidewalk...The Planning Commission will also talk about... Karlovich: This center park right in here that I'm kind of circling, how many units is that? Mark Gungther: That is 12 units. 24 homes. Karlovich: 24 homes. That would just be awfully pretty if that was all just. Hoffman: Central park. Karlovich: A central park right there. Berg: You could sell anybody on that. Sell the rest for $300,000, we're home free. Mark Gungther: I don't think we'll have too many first time buyers in that market. Karlovich: That would just be awfully nice if, I'd be even you know, be up for cutting down some more the trees but I'd be up for even cutting down more trees to get your density out over here and put a great central park in the middle of it all but just my personal 'feeling. Lash: Okay, are you guys done? Fred, do you need a second? Berg: No. I'm just killing bugs. 16 Park & Rec Commission - August 24, 1999 Lash: Rod? Dave? Mark Gungther: Can I kind of summarize as far as where we're at. Lash: We're getting there. We'll try. Todd, do you have anything else you want to say? Okay. So given all of that, I guess what we need to do is discuss a little bit what we want to do regarding staff's recommendation and where we want to go with our recommendation. Berg: Well we need more information on totlots. Mark Gungther: Is there, or can I ask the commission is there a recommendation of what you feel based off of the demographics, approximately 40-45 children, is there a size? Is there something in particular that you really want to see? Franks: Todd, there's formula's for that. Square foot per resident and child and household and all that. I haven't seen those for a while. Hoffman: Playgrounds are... Manders: We had a question. How much park space would be included in this given their worth of dedication? Hoffman: I calculated it. Manders: Is it 5 or 10 or how much? Hoffman: I'll figure it out for you. Lash: If we just figure, while Todd's doing that, if we figure on the village homes. Say we ended up with 45 kids. That totlot, that was the size of this room. Franks: That'd be pretty big though, 30 x 30. Lash: It wouldn't be this big? Yeah, but I mean you have 45 kids playing in an area the size of this room. At the max. If they all showed up some night. Help me visualize what that would be like? Howe: Mark, is your development in Shakopee similar to this? Mark Gungther: In Shakopee it is just the 6 and 8 unit condominiums. This product here only with the totlot. Howe: Village. 17 Park & Rec Commission - August 24, 1999 Mark Gungther: Court homes. Howe: Can we schedule a road trip to see that Todd or should we just do it ourselves to go down Ihere? Hoffman: Oh, we could all go down there. We'll talk about that. Karlovich: I just think if you give up 24 units, I'd say...even be able to give up one of the other totlots maybe over by the rental homes and, take 24 units out of the density but. Lash: What did you come up there Todd in your calculations? Hoffman: Park dedication on this is, land acquisition is right around 9 acres. Cash is halfa million. Karlovich: How much land would be dedicated for this big of a development? Hoffman: About 9 to 10 acres. City Code is 1 for every 75. Karlovich: So that 24 unit area is only about 2 ½ acres or something? Hoffman: Yeah. Franks: Jay, you're looking at two of those blocks? Karlovich: When it was up on the screen. I just think the other thing, you might have a small totlot here and small totlot here but if this was just, right there. If that was just all kind of a big park, they'd lose 24 units right here. But they could have a lot of structures out there. Kids that don't want the totlots will go across the street and everybody else will come over and... It doesn't have to be here but, that's centralized in our large map. Franks: ...is that acceptable Chair? Lash: We can all play designer. Franks: Well I have my similar idea but taking a different approach, being sensitive to like losing out on your profits or the deal, but if you like take and combine these into two blocks and you fix the ones on the comer, and then you take a similar size or little bit larger and make it in this middle area here, at least your view from the totlot is through the green space on either end between the village homes. So we might end up with a space that's actually fairly similar in the center area for...so maybe between the back door to the patio areas to the green space there. Manders: You could have window peepers though. Hoffman: It no doubts needs working anyway. 18 Park & Rec Commission - August 24, 1999 Lash: Yeah. Berg: Needs work. I think you've got the message. Lash: So given that, do we want to table this until they come back? Do we want to make a motion that they come back with some kind of a, you know take into consideration our concerns regarding this one totlot in particular... Karlovich: You know is there a general feeling that we don't need three totlots? That we need one bigger area or no. Lash: I don't have that. Manders: I guess these roads are going to be fairly, I don't know how busy this exterior...I think it's going to be pretty busy so I don't know you want kids running across that. Franks: There are times that kids are going to be going to the park too. I can see some running through Mission Hills in the early morning and then after work and People are coming and going pretty heavily. And those are the times when the kids are going to be heading to the park too so. Berg: To help give you a little direction, I do agree with you. I do see a benefit to having one larger play area. Karlovich: I mean I guess I cross Galpin with my kids and go to parks or whatever and hold their hands but I just think of three totlots as three rainbow play systems out there and for 100 kids, I just, I think that one bigger area there and you know so we don't get as much in park dedication fees. We spent it on 100 children in this area. Lash: I don't have as much of a problem, especially with the one in the manor homes. According to their statistics here. Their demographics, they'd have roughly 30 children but if you look at that particular site, there's a lot of green space all around it. So in essence there would be, even though it's a fairly small play area, play structure, there'd be some green space so if they wanted to fly a kite or play catch or something, they could do that. The one by the townhomes, you know we really at this point, I don't know that we have too much to say about that. But this other one over here is the one that I have the most trouble with and I think it would be good to keep this other totlot in the manor homes area because I think that'd be kind of a hike for, and if the demographics are accurate, the children are, half of them at least are under 5. ...couple little kids in here. Karlovich: Yeah, I think you need something over there but somewhere in the development a larger area. Lash: Oh yeah. 19 Park & Rec Commission - August 24, 1999 Karlovich: I guess I picture, you have the demographic data but the court homes and the village homes, that ones that are closer to Highway 5 and 41, they're less expensive and less expensive so the people can't afford them as much. and the reason they can't afford them as much is probably because they have more children or somebody staying at home with the child. I think you'll still see quite a bit of children in each of these products. Lash: I don't have a problem with looking for something bigger in that area, but I don't want to sacrifice this other one. Kaflovich: I don't think you're sacrificing that much by keeping a totlot. See a totlot as a huge expenditure. Hoffman: Sales amenity. Manders: I think what you're saying basically is leave the other two in there and just make this one bigger. Lash: Right. Pretty much what Todd said to start with. Manders: And maybe redesigning that central area, and that was kind of my question early on. Are these squares in there some preconceived pattern that have to be or can that be redesigned somehow to accommodate the larger open space? Mark Gungther: It would be a complete redesign of the building itself. They do work fairly efficiently in utilizing the green space, you know as a center courtyard. They're designed to kind of create a courtyard effect basically for the residents so when they come out from their patio they have that courtyard effect. So they do have, I mean the residents if they wanted to play catch and that kind of stuff, they do have this green space in the middle to do so. In-between each building so that's really already there. It's already established. Manders: Even if, if taking out both of those L shaped units is too much, what if you took out one of them and left the other half for the totlot. Instead of taking the whole square, just take half the square. Karlovich: I guess what is the, I see the density as 5.14 units per acre. I just, if you have to lose 24 units or whatever, I mean if your density go down so far that you guys aren't going to do that well on this site, it just seems like what we've got here is, you've packed in as many units as you possibly can. Get a nice mix of different products but kind of found a couple rainbow places comes out there for totlots. Mark Gungther: Always trying to create that balance. Lash: Well I think we pretty well talked this to death. I think we're pretty much all on the same set. What I'm hearing we'd like to see, particularly in the court homes and the village homes area, totlot relocated and enlarged. 2O Park & Rec Commission - August 24, 1999 Howe: But I don't think at the expense of that wooded space. No, okay. Lash: Okay, are we in agreement with that? Franks: And somehow bring it in with Phase I. Lash: I would like to see that too. Otherwise people are just going to be coming to hound us for a park. So we want to do, well do we want to get a plan of what a totlot would entail and have something else come back to us showing? Berg: I don't have enough to be able to make an educated. Hoffman: Mark and I talked about that. I really depends on your comfort level on whether or not you send us away with recommendations and thoughts...or if you'd like to table it... Lash: When is this scheduled to go onto Planning Commission and City Council? Mark Gungther: Next week. Lash: So if we tabled this, how much of a monkey wrench does that put into the whole system? Hoffman: Well we would...resolve your issues and come back with... Lash: But we wouldn't have a recommendation to send onto City Council. Can they act on it without a recommendation? Hoffman: They're going to review it but they're not acting on it. Karlovich: Do xve have an idea of the size that would be in there? Howe: What if we visited the place in Shakopee before our next meeting. Is that possible? Mark Gungther: I guess one thing that I would ask is that we would like to kind of keep proceeding with this with the Planning Commission. We do have your recommendations. This is something that we can go to work on right away, as far as larger size. We do know what kind of the amount of children that are going to be in this neighborhood and in this community. With that I think we could probably put something together and submit it with the Planning Commission. Take that in effect, if that would be open to the commission as well. Hoffman: You can make your recommendations specific enough so that they have to meet it. In the conditions... Lash: So if we were to make a recommendation with a minimum 5 and recommendation be that the location be situated and surrounded by streets. Is that specific enough? 21 Park & Rec Commission - August 24, 1999 :Mark Gungther: I don't know if we can get away, not surrounded by streets but try to get it off the main thoroughfare. Karlovich: I don't want to just give our general recommendations and then send it on to the Planning Commission. Unless we're going to say you know, middle of the court homes and village homes that them will be a 2 to 2 ½ acre larger playground area. Not a totlot. Centrally located. Lash: So you would not be comfortable with that or you would be? Karlovich: I would be comfortable with that. Otherwise saying just enlarge the totlot and centrally locate it and so we've got 40 x 40 instead of 30 x 30. I think that's going to do the job. Lash: Jim... Manders: In terms of recommendation or. Lash: Anyone? Fred, you're writing. Berg: I'm just trying to incorporate some of the things that we want to make sure we have in there. Karlovich: I'll make a motion. I'll make a motion that within the court homes and the village home area that there be centrally located a large play area that maybe encompasses about 2 to 2 ½ acres. And the other totlots are fine where they are. And that the 2 ½ acres north next to the exception piece not be part of any type of park dedication. That we just leave that alone with possibly some type of dedication of a trail easement. Berg: Do you want to include anything about preserving the woods... Karlovich: Sure. I'I1 also add in that we're happy with the fountain' and the preservation of the woods would also be preserved as shown in the plan. Lash: Is there a second to that motion? Berg: Second. Karlovich moved, Berg seconded that the Park and Recreation Commission recommend that a large play area encompassing 2 to 2 ½ acres be centrally located in-between the court homes and the village home area, the other totlot location and sizes are fine as presented, the 2 ½ acres located north next to the exception piece not be part of any type of park dedication, the two wetland trails be identified as public corridors, and that appropriate easements would be required and the city should grant full trail fee credit for the construction of these two trail segments. Minor alignment modifications would be 22 Park & Rec Commission - August 24, 1999 sought. The interior trails are the applicant's responsibility. And that the woods near the fountain be preserved. Karlovich, Berg, Manders and Moes voted in favor. Lash, Howe and Franks voted in opposition. The motion carried with a vote of 4 to 3. Lash: Okay, 4-3's the motion. Berg: State for the record why the. Lash: Sure. Howe: Well, I think it's a little early for us to be saying we want a 2 I/2 acre central park in the middle of these. There are other things. I mean are we talking about $500,000. We're talking about trails. I think there's a lot there to look at before we make a recommendation or motion that that's what we want. So I'm not saying I don't like that. I'm saying that I think it's the beginning ora process before we commit to that. Lash: ... Moes: I was for it. Franks: I was against it. Lash: Oh okay, what was yours Rod. Franks: You know pretty similar that I am not a park planner or a park designer so I'm a little bit uncomfortable with automatically taking that approach without seeing if there's a little bit more creative approach that the developer can take hearing our concerns. I don't 'know if they'd be able to do it and I might end up...but I'm not comfortable doing it now. Lash: That would be my... I would prefer to see their plan more. Berg: I would say that I voted yes but in my mind that's what I was sort of assuming was going to happen. This was setting some parameters but not necessarily hard and fast guidelines. Karlovich: I.just want to at least note for the record that I made the motion because the applicant said that they needed to continue to move forward and wanted to move onto the Planning Commission and did not want to come back to us with that plan. And obviously was not comfortable with just moving forward to the Planning Commission with a larger totlot so I think I made it perfectly clear that if we're going to just push ahead with this then we go ahead with that type of recommend, his recommendation. 23