Loading...
PRC 1993 06 22 "... CHANHASSEN PARK AND RECREATION COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING JUNE 22, 1993 Chairman Schroers called the meeting to order. MEMBERS PRESENT: Fred Berg, Jim Manders, Jim Andrews, Ron Roeser, Larry Schroers~ and Jan Lash STAFF PRESENT: Todd Hoffman, Park and Recreation Director; Jerry Ruegemer, Recreation Supervisor; and Dawn Lemme, Program Specialist APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Roeser moved, Andrews seconded to approve the Minutes of the Park and Recreation Commission meeting dated May 25, 1993 as presented. All voted in favor, except Lash who abstained, and the motion carried. VISITOR PRESENTATIONS: John Dietrich: Thank you Commissioners. John Dietrich, RLK Associates. 922 Main Street, Hopkins, Minnesota 55343. In regard to the proposed park development on the Wenzel, Ziegler and Headla properties. Andrews: Mr. Chairman, I think the intent was for this to be an open ~ presentation for items not on the agenda , correct? Lash: Right. So you have something for item 3, correct? John Dietrich: Yes. Schroers: But you didn't want to present it at this time. When we get to item 3. John Dietrich: Yes. I apologize. Schroers: I'm sorry. That may be part of my confusion as well. Is there anyone else that wishes to address the Park and Rec regarding issues that are not on tonight's agenda. If not, then we will move on to item 3. LAND DEVELOPMENT 'PROPOSAL FOR 57 SINGLE FAMILY LOTS. LOCATED NORTH OF KINGS ROAD AND' WEST OF MINNEWASHTA PARKWAY .MINNEWASHTA SUBDIVISION. HERITAGE DEVELOPMENT. RLK ASSOCIATES,;, Public Present: Name Address Alex Watson Don Yeager John Dietrich Sue Morgan 1""" Li nda Scott Jo Ann Hallgren Dave Headla 7080 Kings Road 6310 Castle Ridge RLK Associates, 922 Mainstreet, Hopkins 4031 Kings Road 4031 Kings Road 6860 Minnewashta Parkway 6870 Minnewashta Parkway Park and Rec Commission Meeting June 22, 1993 - Page 2 Name Address Larry & Nancy Wenzel Oscar Anderson Bill Muni ng David J. & Margie Borris Janet Carlson 6900 Minnewashta Parkway 7115 Kings Road 6850 Stratford Road 4071 Kings Road 4141 Kings Road Hoffman: Mr. Chairman, members of the Commission. First off I would like to let the audience know that this is a diagram of what the concept plan we're discussi ng looks like on the board.. Please take an opportunity to come up and look at that. There's also one copy, the public copy of tonight's agenda that is around the corner. This proposal is a concept site plan to subdivide 37 plus or minus acres of property into 43 single family lots and a 10 plus or minus neighborhood park for Minnewashta Subdivision. The location is north of Kings Road and west of Minnewashta Parkway. To get everybody's bearings on where that is. You have Highway 5 to the south. Obviously Lake Hinnewashta. Highway 7 along the northerly border. And the parkway 'running between Highway 7 and Highway 5. The dashed line on here indicates the trail which will be constructed starting at Highway 5 on the east side of the parkway. Crossing at this point, which is the...proposed park, then extending north. Just a side note on that trail. It will probably be going in in about the next month. They have a, from my understanding in talking to the engineers, they have a lot of work left to do on the underground... The properties in question are outlined in this fashion right here. This being the Ziegler property to the south. The Wenzel parcel from this line back and then the Headla property from this line back... The applicant is Heritage Development, being represented by John Dietrich of RLK and Associates. Present zoning in this, in the vicinity of this plat specifically is RSF, residential single family. All adjacentzonings.and land use are identical to that. The City's comprehensive plan identifies this site as being centrally located in a park deficient area. Specifically that area being number 6. That's shown in a diagram which is on the city's comprehensive plan. The diagram is labeled park deficiency areas. The development is located in an area number 6 which is typically referred to as the west Minnewashta region. That area bordered by Highway 5 to the south. Highway 7 and the far edge of the lake. The Park and Recreation Commission and the City Council have focused their attention on this deficiency over the years, and that specifically about the past 5 to 8 years. The critical nature of the need for this park acquisition in this area led to the Commission's action of establishing a park fund reserve for land acquisition west of Lake M1nnewashta. That reserve has been up and running for about 6 yeaTS. This reserve carries with it the criteria that it be used in co~jun<?tion with park dedication and that the park be of at least 10 aCr!Sln slze: The thinking there is obviously we want to leverage our options of gaining par kland through both purchase and then dedication requirements.. The . public's desire for this park was reaffirmed throughout the publlC meetlngs held to review the upgrade of the parkway. Otl at least two separate occasions we were asked, that being the city, when ~hat.p~rk would be developed. My response back to those questions or.lnqUlrl!S echoed the consensus of the Park Commission. That the City wlll acqUlre a park of at least 10 acres in size through a joint park dedi~ation purcha~e arrangement at a time when any combination of the parcels we re here to dlSCUSS ....." -' ...." ~ Park and Rec Commission Meeting June 22, 1993 - Page 3 """ tonight, the Ziegler, Wenzel, Headla, and/or the Hallgren properties were acquired and presented for development. As you and everyone else is aware, that time has arrived and thus the need for this discussion. During the period after this goal was established and concluding within the past 2 weeks, the City explored an alternate land acquisition possibility, namely the acquisition of the Hallgren property. The Hallgren property is to the north. These three properties...for everyone's information. This configuration. Ms. Hallgren is here tonight. Ms. Hallgren was cordial throughout these inquiries, and those inquiries span about the past 2 years when we had conversations about this possibility but in our last meeting she respectfully declined the life estate concept which we were discussing. It's her present position that if the land, if her land use is to change, it would be through an outright sale of her property or some other real estate action of her choice. I informed Ms. Hallgren through a follow-up thank you note that the City was not in the position to acquire her property and with that case being closed, we focused our attention back onto the. southerly three property parcels and subdivision proposal at hand. Many of the conversations held over the years among commission members, City Council members and staff included statements reflecting the desire to locate the West Minnewashta Park, as it's titled, on the Parkway, or adjacent to it. As negotiations with Mr. Dietrich of RLK Associates intensified, the city retained Hoisington-Koegler Group, the firm which we use routinely in these type of matters to draft park. studies for three defined areas. Two of these study areas included all or portions of the Hallgren property, thus the plan now being recommended. The plan which has been defined is shaped by years of discussion, is Park Study A. plan A was subsequently refined. and is represented full size in your packet by the document dated June 17, 1993. For everyone's information I'd like to flip that up so you can see what that looks like. Again, this is tne area that we thought about for park. 10 plus or minus acres...to include open areas for soccer fields, open play area...Tne parking lot will be off of Kings Road adjacent to the play structure. A picnic area and volleyball courts. A ballfield probably with an aggregate infield nature did not fit...also as an area defined here to the west which would be left open for potential future improvements... The final element would be...We have an overhead of that for your reference. The amenities depicted on this plan again represent those identified as desireable for this park in the city's comprehensive plan in which we typically find in our neighborhood parks. One exclusion to that is a tennis court. Recent policy decisions of the Commission recognize that neighborhood parks are not the optimum location for construction of tennis courts. The best location is community parks of a greater size and such that has restricted said construction. One issue which needs to be discussed and resolved is the issue of the lake frontage which is included in this property. The property being looked at for park purposes includes approximately 480 feet of lakeshore on Lake Minnewashta. This property is very narrow, being separated from the main proposed park site by the Parkway. The area totals Just under 20,000 square feet.. This property was not displayed on the applicant's concept plan as being included in park. I don't know why. We could ask Mr. Dietrich that question. I am recommending that it be included as a part of the park to be maintained as a small, low impact type swimming beach. City Code does not allow the applicant to utilize the area as a recreational beachlot and that is because of a stipulation for boats. A size. You need 30,000 square feet to be able to put docks in there. It could be utilized for the ,.... Park and Rec Commission Meeting June 22, 1993 - Page 4 ....", association as a swimming beach if 80% of the homesites fell within 1,000 feet of the site, and it does not do that. I believe it's 1,000 or 800. Tne documents nere. 80% falling within 1,000 feet of the recreational beachlot so in the current configuration it does not meet that standard. By taking public ownership, both the new development, the new homes and families <;:.oJning in and the existing neighbors would benefit from that lakeshore. In regard to the comprehensive trail plan, again I'm pleased to report that the city's efforts to upgrade the parkway included the installation of an 8 foot bituminous trail. This trail will parallel the entire parkway and it satisfies the comprehensive plan requirement of a trail along the parkway. We've talked previously about the other trail issue would be the internal trail loop which would filter you through the different park amenities found on this site. Proposed site. The recommendation to the Commission this evening in regard to parks, is that the Commission recommend the City Council approve the concept site plan as presented with the inclusion of the acquisition of the lakeshore property. The acquisition of this park to be accomplished through park dedication. That being approximately 1.72 acres and a purchase arrangement of approximately 7 1/2 acres. This acquisition shall be a condition of the final plat approval. Purchase price arrangements would then be negotiated and. approved by the City Council. Full park fee credit would be granted as a part of these negotiations. In regard to trails, it is recommended that the Park and Recreation Commission recommend to the City Council that they require as a condition of approval for the proposed Minnewashta Subdivision a 20 foot trail easement connecting to the proposed north cul-de-sac. In addition, the construction of such trail segments from the cul-de-sac to the park, the applicant shall be compensated for such construction through the reduction of trail fees at a rate of $12.00 per lineal foot. The remainder of the trail fees to be assessed equally among the proposed 43 lots. And again that trail connection, we would ask that it be completed from the cul-de-sac radius, through the easement here, to the park property and then down to the border of the park where we would pick that up and continue it through the park... ......" Schroers: Thank you Todd. In looking at this and being involved in the past for several years here trying to find available park space in that area of Chanhassen, do you feel that this approximate 10 acres is going to be large enough to service our needs out there? Hoffman: It's always been stated that that was the goal. Our comprehensive plan identifies neighborhood parks at that 10 acre plus or minus range. Many of our neighborhood parks fall below that. It certainly would be nice to acquire a larger park. However, that becomes both unreasonable from a development standpoint to some degree, but the biggest fact9r is obviously the financial abilities of the city to acquire additional property. Schroers: Why don't I at this time, we take any visitor comments on item 3. John Dietrich: Thank you Commissioners. Again John Dietrich, RLK Associates. We are the landscape architects and civil engineers who have worked with Heritage Development. on the proposed Minnewashta Subdivision. ...", and when we began putting this project together, there was mention that a 10 acre park was going to be developed up and within this area of ~. Park and Rec Commission Meeting June 22, 1993 - Page 5 Chanhassen. It was made very clear by Tedd and Kate Aanensen, that this is a park deficient area and a park would need to go in the area. We are not eppesed to. a park or a park develepment. We realize the impertance ef parks in the neighborhood and in the communities and we have a few reservatiens just in the way this process has gene abeut. The Wenzel, Ziegler and Headla properties constitute approximately 37+ acres and when we began eur discussiens with Mr. Heffman approximately the first part ef May, it was made, directed to us that we were looking at closer to the nerthern part ef the properties. 'Up towards the Hallgren prepertiesfer where the park would be developed. On that concept, Heritage Development was executing purchase agreements with the Ziegler, Headla and Wenzel properties. Their intent was to work with the park dedication necessary on that 37 acres. But also. leeking at eriginally ceming in with a subdivisien totally approximately 57 acres. Throughout the arrangements that were put together,it apparently became clear that a werkable selutien was net going to be reached with Mrs. Hallgren on her property. Our initial preliminary plat submissien which was dated June 7th had identified the Hallgren property as the proposed park area with our park dedication on the north end ef the Headla parcel which weuld basically preserve the enly stand ef trees that are existing on that parcel to being used in conjunction with the Hallgren preperty. The issue where the park changes from the Hallgren down to the Ziegler property is a point that my client has raised that if that's in fact the direction ef the commissien, that's hew it will go.. 'They .~. were basically, they purchased that property with the intent that there weuld be a park dedication and net a 10 acre parcel er less park dedication. 8 acre parcel, plus or minus taken away from the single family homes and put into. parkland. The Ziegler preperty had, been on the market over the past 2 years and there has been communication with the city staff that identified, this preperty was available in different ferms and fermats and we feel at that time, before Heritage Development became involved, that weuld have been a geed time to. identify that as a streng likeliheed ef a park location on the parkway. And in conclusion we would just like to say, we had attempted to. werk with the city staff and make a preliminary plat submissien in the first part of June. From that time the plan that you do see in frent ef yeu that is dated, I believe June 16th, was a resubmitted preliminary plat concept plan that identified the 10 acre parcel and the 43 heme sites versus the eriginal prelimInary plat submissien that identified 57 single family homes within the Wenzel, Ziegler and Headla properties. 50 eur intent is to werk with staff. Werk with the commissien. We just feel there was, it would have been cleaner for everyone involved if the parcel on the parkway would have been identified as a petential park site prior to. Heritage Development becoming involved in that property and looking at the petential develepment ef single family hemes in that area. Thank yeu. 5chreers: Thank you for yeur time. Is there anyone else that would like to. address the Cemmission on item 3? .~ Margie Borris: I'm Margie Borris. I live at 4071 Kings Road which is on the seuth side of your park. Just so. yeu can get an idea. This would be about here. Now according to all our abstracts, the people on the south side of Kings Road actually own Kings Read. I didn't knew if you were aware of that or not. Nobody has asked us about this increased traffic or what they plan en deing with this read. Plus the natural waterway that goes dewn...through their property there, feeding all the animals and stuff Park and Rec Commission Meeting June 22, 1993 - Page 6 ...."I that live out there. I guess I need to know what the developer, or whoever has this design...nobody asked us anything and we own it. Schroers: That's an interesting point. I guess I'm not aware that that road was privately owned. Margie Borris: It used to be a cow pasture and was transferred to a road" It's a dirt road. There is not enough. Schroers: I know what road it is but who made it into that dirt road? Margie Borris: The families that live there. It's part of an old homestead" The Trombles homestead owned all of that property. Plus the yellow house... If you look at the plat, it's very difficult to determine. Scnroers: Excuse me. We're having a little problem hearing with the confusion. If you would speak into the microphone and state your name for us, we'd appreciate it. Sue Morgan: My name is Sue Morgan and I live at 4031 Kings Road. And if you look at the plat it's very hard to determine where the road ends and properties begin. All of this area was part of an old family homestead which belonged to the Trombles and it's been sold off through the years. And I know when we bought our property there was some discussion as to where the property boundaries were and working from the corner of Minnewashta Parkway all the way down Kings Road" We're all very much concerned about the development of this road. Margie had mentioned the wildlife. It does, there is a, I don't know if it's a runoff or a natural waterway that runs under Kings Road and empties into Lake St. Joe and it runs across our property at 4031 Kings Road. And according to the drawings here, it looks like it's going to be straighten out. There are some trees along Kings Road that have been, not valued but aged at OVer eo or 90 years old and I don't know if those red cedar trees are going to removed or what. But we've not been approached at all about the development or how that's going to impact us. The wildlife. The environment. So I guess that's an issue that some of us here would like,to have addressed. Personally my thoughts are, I would prefer to have a park across the street from me rather than 20 or 30 homes.. And I'm sorry if that doesn't agree with the development but that's my own personal opinion. -' Hoffman: Chairman Schroers and members of the Commission, and as well members of the audience. Issues of concern as to the road, I would encourage those people to give a call into the city planning and/or engineering department and talk to them about that scenario. I'm certainly unaware of those type of things which are being discussed this evening. In regards to issues of the subdivision i~~lf and planning issues. In the packet you have a copy of the letter which was distributed to the residents, if they received one in the area. This will come before the Planning Commission probably the first or second meeting in July. That would be the forum at which many of these questions, the ones I've heard here in the past few moments. That's the forum where those type of questions should be asked. --' ~ Park and Rec Commission Meeting June 22, 1993 - Page 7 Schroers: Thank you for that clarificatio'fl Todd and to simplify it even more. Is that this Commission deals with only park and trail related items and we don't have anything to do with the design of the development or placement of roads or that sort of thing. That's all taken care of at the Planning and City Council. Sue Morgan: I did have one other item...that's included in the packet here and it shows that there's a nature trail. I don't know if you want to address this map here. That runs right across our property and no one's approached us about putting in any kind of nature trail. Or acquiring our property to do it. It's called a trail plan. Hoffman: Yeah, the comprehensive trail plan. I don't have an overhead of it but the trail plan has in the past identified a nature trail running around in the back side of Lake St. Joe in this type of configuration. That's all but been ruled out due to the type of terrain which is found in there. This comprehensive plan dates back 12 years...possible trail connection. In addition, with the proposal for the Boley property, this was reviewed by the commission probably 8 months ago. At that time again they reaffirmed that their position on that trail would probably not come true. Sue Morgan: Okay. Is that property across Lake St. Joe on the south side, .~ is that part of the development? Hoffman: This is part of a separate development here. This property and it extends down farther here. It's a proposal by Lundgren 8ros Construction and. . . Sue Morgan: Okay, thanks. Thank you. Schroers: Thank you. Does anyone else have a comment on the Minnewashta Subdivision? Okay. How about the commission response to this item. One thing that I would like to say is that we went out as a group of us and viewed these sites about close to a month ago now. What we found, that on the northern boundary of the Headla property there is already a street stubbed in with a cul-de-sac on the end of it and we found out that that street is probably going to come through and connect future developments in there and that would have cut straight through the middle of the park. plan that we were looking at in the northern area and that sort of ruin the prospects of havi ng a par k up on that end of the development. I don.'t know if you wanted to respond to that. John Dietrich: If I may just comment on that. May I put this overhead up? This is not the plan that you have in front of you. This was a previous plan that we had. The road that you were speaking of is the Hallgren driveway I believe. ,..... Schroers: No. Not the road that I'm talking about that cuts through.. It goes on the north of the Headla property and cuts straight through their property north to south. which would cut the park property or the proposed park property right in half. Park and Rec Commission Meeting June 22, 1993 - Page 8 ....."I John Dietrich: Okay, currently that roadway is in and this roadway. We had originally looked at making a connection from Stratford Road and having the access or easement on Headla. This is not public property at this time so there would be potentially, we had to hold some type of option. There would be a shared of the park location versus all 10 acres within this development that is being proposed. Hoffman: And the Commission, you do have a variety, I think you have 9 or concept plans which show a variety of those possible park configurations which were looked at. They were essentially, involve 3 different areas. One being the Hallgren property...this does necessitate the acquisition of at least the front portion of this property. And finally the last... Schroers: Just to help orient us a little better, would you point out the Headla home site on there. Hoffman: Headla home site? Schroe'Fs: Yes. Hoffman: Those folks live on the Parkway right on this lot here. And the Wenzel's home is here. And then Ziegler's parcel are right there. Chairman Schroers, if I may bring up some clarifications in regard to comments brought before you tonight. We certainly did lead Mr. Oietrich and their client to believe that we were looki ng at a par k site there on the Hallgren ....."I property. That is one of the reasons, that is the reason we expedited those conversatio'ns with jo Ann and came to the conclusion that we did.. It is also true that Morehouse Realty has approached the city. I think the i ni tial conversation was from the city to MOT"ehouse Re~l ty and that dates back a number of years, probably 5 or 6 years ago. And at that time conversation was held with the Parks and Recreation Commission concerning the potential acquisition and the purchase price at that time which exceeded $700,000.00 so again, it was assumed that we were not interested in the purchase at that time. What that actually did is reaffirmed that in order to make this thing happen, we would have to do it jointly between dedication and acquisition and continue to bulld on our reserve, which the Commission then did a couple; years down the line. The speed of the process, we were aware up front that the applicant and Mr. Oietrich wanted to expedite this as quickly as possible. Staff has attempted to work with Mr. Dietrich in doing that but again it certainly does take time to go thrOUgh all the steps to communicate with all the parties involved and we're doing the best possible Job we can. In regard to the comprehensive plan. The Commission-is fully aware that our comprehensive plan is deficient In that it doesn't identify specific parcels. 'Currently it identifies park deficiency al"eas. Thus, we get lot-Qt,he situation where we have to then attempt to work with the applicants and the parcels of land which are coming in for development to identify a park which best suits both the neighborhood, it's needs, the short and long range desires of the city andtheni n addition, it fits into- the development which they 're approving. For everyone's knowledge, other than the commissioners, the Commission is working on amending and updating that comprehensive plan to identify specific parcels throughout the city and then so for everyone's ~ knowledge, when they come in and proposals developments or people take a ~ Park and Rec Commission Meeting June 22, 1993 - Page 9 look at land sales or land purchases, they're fully aware of the city's intentions in that area. Schroers: Thank you for that clarification. Is there any more commission discussion on this item? Resident: I have a couple more questions. If you did the park, no matter where it is, would there be any sort of sound barrier set up so the other residential people would not be bothered by the ballpark~ sc>ccer field and all the other stuff? Hoffman: There are certainly plant massings which are depicted. This is very conceptual. Put some plant massings which are depicted along here. This is called existing vegetation and this would show' plant massings in this vicinity. So my response would be yes, we'd be aware of that situation...to meet those type, of concerns. One thing as the park.is obviously used very intensively during the summer and the remainder of the year is less active and actually provides very nice view, if you will out your home. Take a look at it, at the park site at least in my opinion. Resident: Well most of those...lights also. I"""'" Andrews: The intent of this is to be a neighborhood park. As a commission we are not in favor of lighting neighborhood parks as active use parks. Nor is it the intent to use the park as a destination park for various group activities. The intent of the neighborhood parks is to service the neighborhoods. Schroers:, That's generally, each time that we develop a neighborhood park, the neighbors come in and are concerned and they think that because we're developing a neighborhood pal"k, that half the people from the state are going to converge on that park. That is usually not the issue. It's just really not a whole lot more noise than,the neighborhood kids make every day. Resident: We don't have any kids out there now... I mean we're all old. Schroers: Well it may increase the activity there somewhat but I don't think it would be to the point where it's going. to. Resident: ...like team sports or team soccer or something that... Schroers: Generally speaking the neighborhood parks are not used for league or organized recreation events like that. Resident: I'd like to ask one question. How do you decide that a park is needed? Is it just that every district or...? ,... Schroel\s: No. We have a formula and a plan that's called a comprehensive park plan or master plan of the city, and correct me if I'm wrong but it states what we would like to do is have all residents of the city be able to access a park within a half a mile of where they live. Is basically what. it is and we use that for a guideline and we look at the maps and we decide where parks are needed and where they aren't needed and if you can Park and Rec Commission Meeting June 22. 1993 - Page 10 ....."., show me a park on the west side of Lake Minnewashta that services that community, I'd love to see it. We've been looking for one for a long time so we know definitely that that is a park. deficient area and we have had a lot of requests from people to develop a park in that area and that's what we're trying to do with this development. Any further discussion? Andrews: I have one comment. I guess I'd like to thank the applicant for being understanding and patient with the Park Board and the City.as we try to solve the problem of a park in this area. Appreciate your flexibility. Bill Munig: My name's Bill Munig. I live at 6850 Stratford Boulevard in the Stratford development. Just for what my opinion is worth. This is all new to me. I just heard about this when I got your letter in the mail and I haven't been in on what all the options are for all this but what they were just showi ng, with the pa.r k on the west side of the Stratford development would be a whole lot more interesting to me than down there on Kings Road. Just for the point of view that this, the...access road right now is along Stratford Ridge and Ms. Hallgren has an easement to.M.se it indefinite. Forever. We're just concerned that some day this is going to be houses up here and this will be condemned and I'm right here. I've got a street on three sides of me. And.so if the park goes here, with the road connection right through here, it'd be much preferrable to having a park right down the trail here than to have this be a main street feeding to all these houses out here. So a park right up here would be a whole lot better than a par k down here as far as I'm .concerned. . . ......,tI Schroers: Well we like that idea up there but another problem was access in to it off the Parkway. You had to circle around through the neighborhoods in order to gain access into the park, which is pretty undesireable also. It makes the park difficult to find and it also increases traffic in a residential neighborhood. Bill Munig: My neighbors, to make this look, if this becomes park here, to make this a pedestrian trail with access down into the Minnewashta Parkway trail would be fine. They can have a pedestrian trail and then access to the park. This is actually closer to Highway 7 up here coming off of this way than it is coming all the way down around Minnewashta again. This is your short cut up to TH 7 with that. Schroers: Thank you. Can I ask staff if there are options at this point regarding looking at the northern ha1fof the park, or of the proposed development? Hoffman: At the concepts, which include the Hallgren property? $chroers: Yes. Hoffman: As I addressed in the staff report, we have a closed case on those type of negotiations due to the response we received from that property owner. If you would like to instruct me to open those type of discussions. ..."". Schroers: No I don't. I just wanted a reftel"ation on that so we were sure and that it's clear in people's minds here that we just can't sit here and ~ Park and Rec Commission Meeting June 22, 1993 - Page 11 do anything that we want to do. We have to work within reasonable bounds that are available to us. Okay if there are no further discussions, is someone ready to make a recommendation on land development proposal item 3.. Lake Minnewashta subdivision. Andrews: For the purposes of identification, these are labeled aren't they? Hoffman: Correct. Andrews: We have A and then what? Hoffman: The option being recommended.... is A,. Andrews: The rest are unidentified. Hoffman: The identification is, again the document dated June 17th... /""'" Andrews: I'm the designated person to make the motion. I'd like to make a motion that we accept staff recommendation that we aquire 1.72 acres in dedication and enter into discussions for purchase of additional 7.48 acres as shown on concept plan, which I call A. Which I think is the one that's shown on the detailed drawings. And that we accept trail dedication again as outlined in the staff paragraph, do I have to read it all Todd or can we just refer to it. And also, as far as the comprehensive plan goes, that we use that to issue credit as part of the process. Is that consistent with your recommendation? Hoffman: Yeah. Credited as detailed then in the trail report. Andrews: Do you need me to read that for you? Hoffman: Again, part of the negotiations for purchase of the park,full park fee credit would be granted. Clarification in that regard is that those acreages noted are not definite. Those would be flexible depending on. Andrews: Approximate. Hoffman: Approximate. And then in regards to the trail construction, we would ask that during street development, they install that trailway which I would call a trail segment between the cul-de-sac and then the border or the edge of the park proper and then will be compensated for that at a rate of $12.00. per lineal foot. The remai nder of the park fee is to be then distributed equally among the proposed 43 lots, or however many lots are finally platted. Eventually platted. Lash: Do we want to have added In there that the acquisition be a condition of the final plat approval? ~ Andrews: It would have to be. Lash: Right. In case the, well he's got that in there. In case acquisition broke down, we would need to. Park andRec Commission Meeting June 22, 1993 - Page 12 ....." Andrews: 1 would accept that as clarification. Schroers: Okay. Is there a second to the motion? Roeser: I second it. Schroers: Okay, there's been a second. Andrews moved, Roeser seconded that the Park and Recreation Commission recommend that the City Council approve the' concept site plan as presented with the inclusion of acquisition of the lakeshore property. The acquisition of the park to ' be accompl,ished.through park, dedication of 1.72:t acres and purchase of 7.48+ acres. This acquisitionshalli'bea .oondition of final plat ,approval. Purchase price arrangements to be negotiated by the Park and Recreation Diyectorin consultation witht.,he City Manager '.s office and City Attorney, contingent upon City Council approval. Full park fee credit is to.be.granted'as apar,t of these negotiations~' It is also recommended that a20 foot trail easement connecting to,the proposed cul-~sac north of the park. In addition to the construction of such a trail,segmentfrom the cul-de-sac to the park, the applicant shall be compensated forsuchconstructi'on, t.hrough"the, redUcti-enoftrailfees. at a r.ateof $12.00 per lineal foot" The remainder of the trail fees to be assessed equally amon9 all the lots in the'subdivlsion. All voted in, favor and the motion carried. ...", LAND DEVELOPMENT ',PROPO$ALFOR >11.5 SINGLE FAMILY LOTS. LOCATED ON THE WEST . SIDE OF GALPIN BOULEVARD. ONE-HALF MILE NORTH OF HIGHWAY 5. Hoffman: First off a point of informat.ion on item number 4. Tentatively, in speaking with the applicant, they are interested incoming back before the commissiolil at the July,o regular ly scheduled meeting. I am unclear at this point what they intend to do between that time and, or this time and then. .10 Ann Olsen, the Senior Planner working the application at the city level, has made contact with Lundgren Bros Developers and certainly considerations and decisions by the Park Commission play a big role in how the Planning Commission addresses this issue sol think at the current time staff is leaning towatds getting this issue of parks and trails resolved pr ior to .taking it onto Planning Commission. l'm not sure what type of reception that's going. to meet with the applicant. However, it was their decision this evening to remove it from the agenda so I'll keep you updated. LAND DEVELOPMENT,PROPOSAl::' 12 SINGLE'FAHILY.LOTS.LOCATED ;SOUTH OF- PLEASANT VIEW ROAD ANDEAST<OF PEACEFUL LAND . TOWER HEIGHTS. .JMS DEVELOPMENT..' '., . Public Present: Name Address Jim & Mary Stasson Renelle Ulr ich Julius Smith 6400 Peaceful Lane 6581 Nez Perce Drive 7600 France Avenue, Suite 108, Minneapolis ...", ~ Park and Rec Commission Meeting June 22. 1993 - Page 13 ~ Hoffman: Item number 5. Again. as a preliminary plat to subdivide 6.1 acres into 12 single family lots on property zoned RSF, residential single family. It also includes a vacation ofa portion of right-of-way of Peaceful Lane which is of interest to the commission obviously for potential trail purposes. The title of this proposed subdivision is Tower Heights. The location is south of Pleasant View Road, west of Troendle Circle and then east of Peaceful Lane. To get everyone's bearings. We have Powers Boulevard, County Road 17 coming in off of Highway 5. Passing Kerber Boulevard in this location and heading north into Excelsior and then to get to the site, currently it is proposed that you need to travel Lake Lucy Road. Get onto Nez Perce and then the st'reet in the plat would extend through in this configuration out to Pleasant View. So this is the site in question. To further orientate, you, this is the water tower which is located just off of Powers Boulevard. Again the applicant is JMS Development. Present zoning in all adjacent land zoning around the site is single family residential. The comprehensive plan identifies this section, in regard to recreation, as being within the neighborhood park service areas of Curry Farms Park, Carver Beach Playground, and Carver Beach Park. You can see that in the attachment. The developments which are just to the east of this site, the Troendle Addition, Vineland Addition. Those ' similarly were reviewed by the Commission and the same information applied there. In regard to the comprehensive trail plan, the nearest segment of the city's comprehensive trail plan parallels Powers Boulevard, County Road 17. Access to that proposed trail would be on street via Peaceful Lane and then Pleasant View Road. As I mentioned, this proposal does include the vacation of a portion of Peaceful Lane which allows the city the opportunity to consider the creation of a trail along the street right-of- way. I had a conversation with Sharmin AI-Jaff, the planner who is handling this application and secondhand information from Sharmin indicates that the applicant would not have a problem with that trail connection. Now we may be ab-Ie to get information from the applicant's representative here this evening in that regard. Under the current site plan however. that would require a narrow separation between Lot 13 and the trail. However, the terrain found in that area and the fact that it's a road bed, it looks very much Ii ke a corr idor . A travel corr idol' of some type '. Would allow for a nice trail corridor. I want to bring that opportunity to the commission's attention so you, can cons.ider it in your recommendatIon this evening. The recommendation is that the Park'and Recreation Commission recommend the City Council accept full park and trail fees as a condition of approval of Tower Heights. The subject fees to be paid at the time of building permit applIcation at a rate then in force. Current par k and trail fees are $600.00 and $200.00 per lot respectively. In addition to that then I would ask that you consider that,trail connection. To explain that...information. The segment of the comprehensive trail plan which they talk about, travels along Powers Boulevard. Currently to access that from this site you would have to travel the new road configuration onto Peaceful Lane north to Pleasant View and then out to the main trail segment. We have an opportunity here. This is Peaceful Lane. Area of Peaceful Lane which will be vacated. You have an opportunity to take the easement to acquire an easement here for a very nice connection, trail connectlo.n. For no other reason than to provide some diversity, it gets you out into a wooded region which overlooks a ponding area in this vicinity. It gets you off the street. So those would be the issues in regard to trails. ,.... Park and Rec Commission Meeting June 22, 1993 - Page 14 --" Roeser: So the remaining link from that corner to CR 17, down further. Right in that corner of the site plan. A little higher up. Hoffman: Right here? Roeser: Yeah. That distance from there to CR 17 is already? Hoffman: That would be part. Roeser: Part of the water tower road? Hoffman: Part of the water tower property there. Schroers: Basically what this connection would do woul-d be to. provide an access from the residents living in that area to access the main trail corridor along Powers Boulevard. Hoffman: Correct. Schroers: So it would bean avenue for the neighbors to come out of the neighborhood and access the main corridor. It wouldn't be a connecting point between two major trails. . Hoffman: That's correct. .....", Andrews: Would you prefer an easement, not construction? Is that what you said? Hoffman: Again I would think, typically. construction has been advocated as part of the road improvements. It's the time to do it prior to residents moving in and then coming in after the fact and attempting to put that trail segment in there. So as part of the vacation it woul.q.be,youcould retain an easement for. trail purposes and then. require .the construction of that trail segment. Again depending on the length, we may run out of, we've got 12 homes. 12 single family homes at $200.00 so about $2,400.00 to work with. If we run short of credit, then we would have to chip in at a city level but that can be taken care of. Roeser: So you're saying the quality of that road bed is not satisfactory for a trail bed!? Hoffman: On, sure it is. Sure it is but just in asphalt and aggregate, you know $2,400.00 doesn't go too far. Schroers: Okay. Thank you Mr. Hoffman. Andrews: I've got a couple questions before we get, because I.wanted the trail issue clarified before we get more comment. Is the intersection of this proposed trail back to Kerbersa suitable connection? The terrain is quite rough there isn't it? Right at the. Hoffman: The intersection with what road? ....." Roeser: You mean Powers.. ~ Park and Rec Commission Meeting June 22, 1993 - Page 15 Andrews: Pow&rs l' mean. Where the extension would connect with Powers, right along the property line. Isn't that pretty rough territory right there? Or is the road bed in good shape. there? Hoffman: As you drive north there, you can look down on the road bed there and it's... Schroers: Okay, are there any visitor comments on this item? Anyone in the audIence this evening that wishes to comment on this development. Jules Smith: Hi, my name is Jules Smith'and I'm just curious. what you're really talking about is vacating Pleasant View from wherever pleasant View isn't needed for a public road. To connect it over. Whatever's left of, not Pleasant View. Peaceful Lane. Because presumably they have to come up part of PeacefuL Lane so it's just whereve-r that's not needed to have more over to the trail...I think there are utilities in that... Hoffman: 'tep.. Utilities that run through there and those utility easements would be retained by the planners so this would be, many applications where you have those utility easements in addition. A trail easement is a plus on top of that because it provides you access to maintain those utilities which are down in that corY'idor. ~ Resident: So how wide would this trail be? Hoffman: Depending on what the commission felt was appropriate, it may either be 8 foot bituminous or more of an aggregate path. Andrews: It might evendbe wide'f wouldn't it for possible maintenance or utility easement? Hoffman: 8 feet is standard width. schroers: The total distance we would be talking about there would be less than a couple hund'fedyards I would guess. Hoffman: Yeah, I did not scale that off. Roeser: It's about 200 yards. Hoffman: Sounds about accurate. Schroers: 'teah, I would, say. it's about 200 yards. We're not talking about a major trail. All it is is an avenue. It's a way for people to get from the neighborhood out to Powers Boulevard without winding a'found on Pleasant. Roeser: Is the trail plan along Powers intended to be on the east side of Powers? .1""'" Hoffman: Currently at the southern terminous of Powers Boulevard, at Highway 5, it comes up along the east side so it would most likely continue because we have-some pretty significant segments going in there on the east side. Park and Rec Commission Meeting June 22, 1993 - Page 16 -' Lash: You know and that may be the only way that we'd.ever be able to have some kind of an off street trail right along that area because there's not a l-ot of space between CR 17 and the pond. Roeser: . That's what I'm getting at. Lash: Yeah. So that may end up being the only way we could get up and around the pond and then back down over by Pleasant View. Hoffman: That's a good point. In addition. when people talk about trails, trails of this type rank much more highly in people's opinion of how aesthetic and howni'cethey are to walk;; than Just along a, highway~ Andrews: I have one concern and that would be, this may sound funny. If you build thisdtrail connection, it would logically connect people between Pleasant View and Powers. The section of Pleasant View from Peaceful back over to Powers again is a really dangerous area. There's a hill and curve where you can't see people there at all. I guess I think there would likely be a demand and I don't think it's necessarily an improper demand that we do something with Pleasant View there as well to make it a safe connection. If we're going to put people on there, I think you would have a responsibility to provide a safe path back to Powers. And I don't think we could do that without improvement. Hoffman: Yeah, as a part of the review of this proposal, those road questions are being addressed to take care of those situations. ..."", Andrews: They need to be dealt with I think at the same time. Scnl"'oers: Okay. Anything else? I guess I would be pr,epared. to move on this one. I'll recommend that the Park and Rec Commission accept full park and trail dedication fees as a condition of the appx'oval of Tower Heights. Subject fees to be paid at the time of building permit applicant at the rate then in force. And also to require a trail easement on that portion of Peaceful Lane which would connect to Powers Boulevard that is not being used" in the development plan. Lash: Easement and construction? Or Just easement? Schroers: Easement and-construction. Is anyone interested in seconding that? Lash: I'll second that. Hoffman: Point of clarification would be that the trail fees would then be reduced accordingly. Either reduced or a full credit given accordingly for the construction of that trai1-. Schroers: Okay. Then is there a second? Lash: Second. ......" Schroers moved, Lash seconded that the Park and Recreation.commission recommend the City Council accept full park fees as a condition of approval Park and Rec Commission Meeting June 22, 1993 - Page 17 I""""'" of Tower Heights. The subject fees to be paid at ,the . t:ime.'" of building permit application, at a rate then in force. Current. park fees are $600.00. Also, to require the trail easement/and construction on that portion of Peaceful Lane.whichwould connect to Powers Boulevard that is not beingusedi'A,the development plan and that.thet.T&i,l dedication fees be determined accordingly. All" voted in favor and the motion carried. CONSIDER HOSTING HRPA STATE TOUCH FOOTBALL TOURNAHENl'~;. Ruegemer: Thank you Chairman Schroers. Recently Jon Burlingame, the Assistant State Directol" of the Minnesota Recreation and Parks Association approached myself and the City of Chanhassen with the possible...for hosting the 7 person touch football league which. would encompass 30 to 40 teams. In that consideration we did check out potential sites within the city of Chanhassen. Lake Ann Park would lend itself to be thehest location...would lend itself to tournament headquarters. In an effort to generate interest for a league that I will try to establish this coming fall, there would be an opportunity to show exposure for the league in hosting the State Tournament coming> in October. It also would benefit OUl" business community as well as far as gaining additional revenue from that weekend and would help our our Association. the MRPA in, assisti n9.. . In addition to Todd's comments, I did have an opportunity to visit the fields on site and take a look at the turf damage that exists as we speak. With the past rain here in the last 4 or 5 days, it's beyond the saturation point. It's...it's really a mess. Right now also with the irrigation project not progressing as we had once hoped would be completed at this time, I feel would be a detriment in considering this possibility for this ~ coming fall. I would like to ask that the Park and Rec Commission, that they would favol" this at a future time. Once the turf does get established. I think it really would be a benefit to the city of Chanhassen to premiere our Lake Ann Park as one of the best kept secrets really in the southwest metro area. So that would be my recommendation and at this point in time that we not progress with this consideration at this time. I would like to, as well as Todd, would like to see that grass develop and the irrigation project take effect without causing permanent turf damage to the site. Schl"oers: Thanks Jerry. That sounds reasonable to me. Does anyone else have a problem with that? Berg: I'd like to see you look, wherever they have it this year, I'd like to see you go up and investigate when they're done. Ruegemer: It's been...in the past 2 to 3 years. Berg: We can get some sort of feel for the impact that it has on these fields. Ruegemer: Yeah. Hutchinson said, I did talk...the people in Hutchinson really felt that it really didn't do a whole lot of damage but with established turf I think it would be less of a factor... Hoffman: Hutchinson is the same community that scoops out their sand ,....., volleyball courts and fills them with 4 feet of mud for a mud volleyball Park and Rec commission Meeting June 22, 1993 - Page 18 tournament. They're not opposed to just about anything. Schroers: Okay, are you. looki ng fol". some formal action on this Jerry, or just a general consensus? -" Ruegemer: I thi nka general" consensus. and I can relay that consensus back to Mr. Burlingame with the MRPA. Schroers: Yeah. 1 think if you pl"esented this the way that you Pl"esented it to us. That our turf isn't ready yet but check again next year and we'd like to be able to accommodate. Very good. PRESENTATION OF CITY OFCHANiASSEN 1993 FOURTH. OF. 3ULY CELEBRATION SCHEDULE OF EVENT'S. Ruegemer: The memorandum is just kind of a schedule of events. We've just highlighted some of the new events that will be on the schedule. The memo is just.. .if there's any questions.,Iwill'field those at this time. If not, we can go on. Lash: Did you guys decide what you're going to do with. the fees fol" the food? Hoffman: I think we're at,again a major change this yearts that the city will no longer be serving the free food. We have turned that over through a cooperative arrangement.. with the Rotary. So the Rotary<, they served .concessions in previous years. They' 11 be hosting the community picnic so it will be the same type of format but we've concluded that it would eithel"" ..' be $2 .50 for an adult and $1.50 for a child or $3 .00 for an adult and $1.00 --" for a child. So my l"eaSOnin9behindthat is. this is obviously a community function which benefits the community from having it but it's also an opportunity to. build upon the activities which we have in the city. By providing free food we're taking revenues out of typically the HRA funding so we take $2,000.00, $2,500.00 out of there to buy t.he food, which is a nice thing to do. It was initiated to generate interest in the downtown. But if we go to this scenario. Now, not only do we not spend that $2,000.00, but we probably generate $3,000.00 or $4,000.00 which then gets fed back into the community so our net impact is really about $6,000.00 which gets fed back into the. community. $0 I think it's a positive approach. We'll probably certainly take a few comments but mY.l"esponse would be, after getting free food for this many years, I mean paying a real reasonable fee. Lash: Let's make sure, that it's listed in the advertisements so peop~e who come. Hoffman: It is. Lash: Okay. And the price is too so they':re not coming thinking they're going to spend a buck a person or something and then end up. Hoffman: The price has not been set. The flier. will go in this Wednesday but we can get the price in the advertisements and then post it that day too. ......, Park and Rec Commission Meeting June 22, 1993 - Page 19 ,.... Lash: Well when we talked about it the other night, I think we kicked around the $2.50 and I mentioned that to some people and they, I know somebody said the other night to round it off so you don't have to fiddle around with change and I heard a couple comments from people that it would be nice. But I don't kno~, I think we need to get into this kind of gradual where people are going from paying nothing to all of a sudden if you take your family up there, it's going to cost you $10.00 or $12.00 as opposed to in the past you're paying nothing. Roeser: well isn't it going to be up to the Rotary anyway? Lash: Is it up to the Rotary? Hoffman: Well, we put a stipulation on there. We would certainly like to participate in that and allow them in future years to make up their own mind but Jan's comments are well taken. We want to make sur& we're not jumping overboard. Andrews: I have one comment, if we are going to charge a fee, let's make sure we don't run out. I think it was last year or the year before we ran out. Hoffman: With Festival Foods right across the street, taken care of. Lash: Well is the kid's meal is a hotdog, are the proportions going to be the same except for just an adult gets one more hotdog? ~ Hoffman: I think adults have always gotten as many hotdogs as they wanted. Lash: No, no. But now if you're a kid, you get one hotdog, beans, chips and watermelon. If you're an adult, you get two hotdogs, beans, chips and watermelon. right? Hoffman: Correct. Lash: Okay. So if you go from one hotdog to two hotdogs, I think I~d squawk over paying $2.00 more for one more hotdog. I'd get a kid to, you know really if you think about it. If all you're getting is just one more hotdog and you have to pay 2 more bucks for one hotdog. Andrews: Alright, $2.00 for a kid and $3.00 for an adult. Hoffman: Cheaper than anyplace else in town. But if you want to make a specific recommendationr I'll certainly take that to the Rotary. Schroers: I guess it depends on how you look at it. If you just focus on that individual thing. Last- year I got it free. This year it's costing me $3.00. But then if you compare it to one ice cream cone costs you over $2.00, you don't get much for $3.00 so. I would say that you know, go with it For a year and see what kind of response we get and if it'~ n4..~.iUlj make some changes. Any other? Ce~6ary, Berg: I agree but I'd like to see us go $1.00 and $2.00 J.ust to ;t ~ because it's been free for so long. lowball ~ Park and Rec Commission Meeting June 22, 1993 - Page 20 Lash: Yeah, I think so too. If they can still make money off of $1.00 and $2.00. ......" Hoffman: In my opinion we can't go that low because then we're asking the Rotary to take on a huge work responsibility to make a very small profit back into their funding. So we have to be. reasonable, from that perspective as well. Roeser: Maybe they can work out some kind of family thing too. Hoffman: I think they're planning on selling 50 cent tickets. They're going to have ticket booths to make it very easy. Everybody can buy tickets and everything's going to be rounded to 50 cents and whether you go to their concession stand or you go to the food line. $0 I guess maybe with the variety of opinions here, I would be comfortable if the commission could reach a consensus on what a recommended price from. this body would be. Lash: Well maybe it shouldn't, be by kids. 1 mean I know a lot of women that would eat what a kid would eat but a kid would eat what an adult would eat. So I mean are they going to. Manders: $3.00 for everybody. Lash: Yeah. I mean are they going to make, maybe we need to say a one hotdog meal is so much and a 2 hotdog meal is so much and a 3 hotdog meal is so much. Do you know what 1 mean? Instead of doing it by age. Roeser: If they're going by tickets, I'd say $1.50 and $2.50. That'd be ~ my preference. Lash: And $1.50 would be a one hotdog meal and $2.50 would be a two hotdog meal? Hoffman: But again, you might as well buy two one hotdog meals for $3.00 and get all that extra beans and potato chips. Manders: Why don't we get off of this thing...Why not go back and let the Rotary do what they want to do. Schroers: Do you want my opinion? You couldn't pay me to eat a hotdog for $5.00. Lash: See I don't like beans so I'm going to go in there and pay all this for a whole big pile of beans that I'm going to throw out. It,~~'~ U~'d nQttaT tell you too. they're going to be turkey hotdogs. 'Lash: Oh, I'll eat at home. Roeser: What did we come up with; besides increasing his headache? Manders: $1.50 and $2.50. ...",tI Park and Rec Commission Meeting June 22, 1993 - Page 21 ~ Lash: But instead of saying kids and adults, just have it. Manders: A and B. Schroers: I like that too. That's simple. If you don't want to eat too much, you take A and if you're hungry, take B. Hoffman: ...1 don't want to carryon but they're very well taken in that, you're paying, I don't care. $2.00 and $2.50 as far as pricing goes. Retail pricing would probably be more appropriate. Andrews: Why don't you do it. Schroers: Yeah, 50 cents for an extra hotdog. Lemme: We sell a hotdog at Lake Ann for $1.45. Andrews: Look what happens. People break in to get the money. Schroers: Okay. Any other comments on the 4th of July. REQUEST. FOR STREET. LIGHT. . NORTH LOTUS LAKE PARK. ,..... Hoffman: Chairman Schroers, commission members. Real straight forward. Took one phone call from a resident who was concerned about the parking after park hours in the lot. Obviously when that occurs we get the request that we light those parking lots. The approximate cost, as'you can see estimated by Northern States Power is in the ballpark of $2,000.00 to do that. It's a 220 foot run. If the commission wishes to act on this improvements, an appropriation of funds would need to be made in the 1994 CIP. Schroers: Has there been any noticeable problems as a result of not having a light there or has it just been a one time concern from one resident? Hoffman: The one request to install a light there prompted this. As noted, traditionally we do not provide lighting in our parks. Certainly there are occurences which do take place. Potentially putting in a light there would eliminate but if we started here and if you made, this would be a policy decision. If you said yes, we want to do that. You've essentially made a policy decision which said you'd like to do that through the city in the parking lots. Maybe they want your pay in this one. Andrews: I vote no. Lash: So for how many, we have one person asking for the light and how many people are going to complain if .we put it in? I mean how many people come to these meetings and say, and are you going to be putting lights in my neighborhood park, because we don't want lights. Berg: Let's wait and see if it develops into more of a problem. Schroers: Okay, 8 is no. ,..... Park and Rec Commission Meeting June 22. 1993 - Page 22 ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS: B . UPDATE. BANDlt1ERE'PARKISSUES. ,....", Hoffman: Chairman Schroers and commission members. 9(b) is of interest to the commission. It's the update of the Bandimere Park issues. As you read in the report, upon receiving direction from the commission to do so, I intensified my inquiry with Lundgren Bros Construction. Specifically Mr. Terry Forbord in that regard. He explained it to me in a phone conversation of probably 15 to 20 minutes. Essentially what it comes down t.o is, when comparing the two parcels and how it would layout for lots, you have more lots which are negatively impacted in the southern region, or the Bandimere Park issue because of the pipeline and :theTH 101 frontage. They look at that because it impacts their pricing for those homes which can go on those lots so if you have to put the pipeline in back yards, you know that impacts a lot of homes which many. people would say oh big, deal but it is a real depreciation in their opinion. And then Highway 101, additionall you would have a lot of backyards on Highway 101. The funny thing which occurs is when you go to the north parcel, or the one that we looked at that day, we parked right in front of it. When you get into that region, the lots which would go on TH 101 are the same lots that would have the pipeline in the back so you get a double whammy but you really only have to appreciate the lot once. So that's in their favor. But at this time they declined to investigate further the possibility of a land swap with the city of Chanhassen. Lash: That's too bad. Roeser: Yeah, that was a good idea I thought. -" Lash: Can I go back to the 4th of July thing for just a second. Are we to understand that you don't need any volunteers then? Ruegemer: I was going to get to that. Lash: Oh, okay. Never mind. Jeff Shingleder: Park Commission? HOffman: Yep. Jeff Shingleder: I'm Jeff Shingleder with JMS. Sorry. I was not the one that was supposed to be here but I got home tonight and had a call that the one who was broke her hip. Schroers: Okay. Let us back up here. Lash: Should we just give to him our motion and see if he's got anything. Schroers: Yeah, what we did. There really wasn't a lot to do there with the JMS development so let's see here. Hoffman: Larry, should I just briefly go through that? -" Park and Rec Commission Meeting June 22, 1993 - Page 23 .,,-... Schroers: Yeah, you can do that. Hoffman: Did you receive a copy of the report? Jeff Shingleder: I have. I did... , Hoffman: Essentially it's very similar to the Troendle and Vineland Additions...ln the issue of trails, this will be a major trail corridor at some point in the future so we want to get these folks in these neighborhoods out onto that. Currently we talked about getting out onto Peaceful Lane. Going north to Pleasant View and then out onto the corridor. The opportunity that was brought to the attention of the commission is that with the vacation of Peaceful Lane, we could bring that trail connection down through here to add some variety to the trail system. In talking with Sharmin, she indicated that the applicant, and that would yourself, and you could clarify...that that would not be a problem. Jeff Shingleder: That's not a problem. Hoffman: Okay. So that was the recommendation. That we would work with you to have this installed. The utility easement there. Jeff Shingleder: Actually you already have the...from a platting standpoint...and I'm not as up to speed on this as I'd like to be but the vacation of the old right-of-way there has occurred. The city retained an easement for water and sewer purposes there. There's actually a water and ~ sewer project that's running through there with stub services for maybe half a dozen sites. And I assume that your trail network can certainly run on that same easement. So rather than platting back or changing all the survey and title work we've already completed. What would be simpler is just to overlap the easement. Hoffman: Correct. Just add language. Jeff Shingleder: Rededicate the exact same easement that already exists. Hoffman: With trails. Jeff Shingleder: That legal's done and I would think that that would make your engineering department feel pretty good about having access to that for maintenance and it would also serve no purpose to us to not grant the easement. That will be an added amenity to the plat and it certainly additionally, it doesn't hinder us in any way. We can't build on the easement and it's a setback that exists anyway. So it seems like a win- win. Hoffman: Great. That would be very easy to do. We would just work through the engineering. The attorney's office to put the appropriate language in there. We just can't plop a trail on a utility easement but we can just add the language to include trails on this same alignment. The same legal description for that easement. Well taken. II'" Park and Rec Commission Meeting June 22, 1993 - Page 24 Schroers: Then the only other part of that was that we were to accept the normal park dedication fee in lieu of park property. ...", Jeff Shingleder: Those are paid at the time of permit to Chanhassen? How much, out of curiousity, is that? Hoffman: $600.00 currently per home. In addition we'd like to work with you, and it was included in the motion of the commission to have you construct that trail segment as part of the road improvements and then you'd be compensated for that as a part of a trail fee credit. Trail fees would be $2,400.00 on this site. If that doesn't meet our costs, then we would owe the remainder of those costs. We like to hear it stated, it's a win-win. It certainly is but we like to see them in while people are out viewing lots so you get the appropriate buyers who think that is an amenity so it doesn't go in after the fact. Jeff Shingleder: You'd give us a credit for $2,300.00 against our future park fees? Hoffman: There's a trail fee assessed to this site as well, and it's $200.00 per lot. So it's a total of $2,400.00. Typically we'd have to take a look at the cost of constructing that $12.00 a foot or something of that nature depending on how easy it is to construct it. Jeff Shingleder: How wide of a trail? Hoffman: 8 feet. So we'll take a look and make those calculations and then approach you with an agreement there. Trail f~es would either...and then we would need to chip in with some additional if we felt that ~ appropriate because of the cost estimates. Or if it came very close, $2,200.00, simply give you a full credit in that type of situation. Jeff Shingleder: ...agreements? Hoffman: We talked about that. Schroers: We're guesstimating about 200 yards. I live very close to there and it just basically runs across the back of that pond. That pond's not very big. I don't think it's much over 200 yards. Jeff Shingleder: That's 600 feet. Schroers: But that's just my guesstimate, realize that. I didn't step it off. Jeff Shingleder: So that would be. Hoffman: $7,000.00. Jeff Shingleder: Yeah. Hoffman: ...and allocate resources appropriately. ~ Park and Rec Commission Meeting June 22, 1993 - Page 25 ~ Jeff Shingleder: Does every plat in the city of Chanhassen pay a trail fee? Hoffman: You bet. Either pay a park and trail fee or dedicate land as a part of the plat. . Jeff Shingleder: Are there any other fees associated with the plat? Park fees. Trail fees. Hoffman: No fees. No, not unless you want to make a donation for a playground structure or something in the area. Jeff Shingleder: Okay. And you... Hoffman: Yea, we certainly would. It's most appropriate and again, for the reasons we discussed, you're in the area. It's done. People come to view the lots and see it there, they say boy. That's a nice deal. Schroers: That's pretty much the long and the short of it. Jeff Shingleder: Sorry I'm late. Sorry Rosemary had a, I saw her leave the office with a nice big plat. It was all colored and project and I get home at 8:30 and there's a message. Fell. Broke hip. Can't get to Chanhassen. Been with her 8 years so I said well, I guess I'd better get my shoes on and get to Chanhassen. Hoffman: For your information I should let you know that a representative ~ of Frank Beddor, Jules Smith was here today. He did speak in regard to the road configuration. I think they have made contact with the Park commission and it was in regard to some tree issues but they did not bring that up this evening so. Jeff Shingleder: Obviously...not involved directly with all these people but I will assure you that...and I certainly hope that our project will achieve your city's goals... Hoffman: We have so far. Berg: Appreciate your coming in. Jeff Shingleder: Yeah, sorry someone wasn't here about 2 hours ago. Thank you. Lash: Todd. can you just sho~ me on that map where Mr. Beddor lives that he has so much concern over. Hoffman: I don't know which lot it is specifically. It's right up here. Lash: What's the big deal? Hoffman: Traffic on Pleasant View... Manders: That was Smith that w~s here...represents Beddor? ,.... Park and Rec Commission Meeting June 22, 19~3 - Page 26 Hoffman: Correct. Jules Smith. Lash: Okay. I wondered. Okay. ...." Schroers: He really wasn't pushing an issue. He just had a couple questions and I explained to him, Beddor called me at home. I had about 3 messages on my machine and his concerns were actually more related to the Planning Commission. Where the entrance to the development was going to be. Where the exit to the development. He didn't have park and rec related concerns so I just kind of referred him to the Planning Commission and City Council. Okay. Were you finished with the update on Bandimere? Hoffman: Yes, unless the Commission had any further comments in that area. Schroers: No. I think we're treading water on that deal. If they don't want to negotiate, we can't do much about that. C . INTERIM USE PERMIT FOR SWINGS GOLF. Hoffman: Again, as noted, this was forward to only. As you can see, the planning department There's a lot of things going 01'101'1 this site. recreation, thus I gave you the report. you for information purposes is recommending denial. It has to do with Berg: Should I feel guilty about going and using this place? Hoffman: Make up your own mind. D. ANNOUNCEMENT OF DNR GRANT. LAKE SUSAN-AERATION:.. --' Hoffman: In regard to 9(d), it's straight forward. I believe the Commission at the grand opening or the dedication of the building was informed that this had been granted by the Department of Natural Resources. It does carry with it some implications or the stone continues to roll on, if you will. As you recall, the HRA did authorize purchase of this with funds from the HRA last year, if need be. But at the same time the DNR said you know, we're sorry. The grant didn't get funded but we'd like you to resubmit next year because we think there's a very good opportunity so we were playing this balancing act I mean. We were testing the lake aeration or the lake oxygen level every couple of weeks and we wanted to keep that balancing act. But we made it through the winter. So the $20,000.00 from the HRA did not have to be expended to buy this. Thenlwe get the news from the DNR that the grant is coming, so that's all good news. The issue is that the Park Commission did authorize the expenditure of approximately $60,000.00 for lights at Lake Susan. We held off on that until this cleared up because i,t would be my recommendation that we pursue conversations with the HRA in regard to tax increment picking up the bill for the lights instead of paYk acquisition and development. As you'ye aware, Lake Susan has been just about wholly developed with tax increment dollars. In addition, as you certainly can see, that $60,000.00 could be used out at West Minnewashta for land acquisition. So I'm not interested in running the bank out of money. It certainly is not advantageous to the park system so at every juncture that we can extend our purchasing power, I'm certainly interested in doing that. So if it does not displease the -"" Park and Rec Commission Meeting June 22, 1993 - Page 27 ~ commission, I will be approaching the HRA in that regard. I've had conveYsations with the City Manager and his only comment was, let me get this straight. You came and asked for 20. You got that approved and you didn't spend it so now you want to come back and ask for 3 times that much. Sure, okay. That's fine. Just so I understand. So that's where we're at , and that should be pursued. Probably in the month of July or the first part of August so then we can address the issue of lights because that has been included in a CIP and thus we have a responsibility to address that issue. Schroers: My vote would be go. Do it. Lash: We'll ask for the 60 and if they say no, get the 20-that they promised you before and use it. It still saves us 20. Schroers: ...down on that wonderful fishing pier that we put down there and within 15 or 20 minutes personally witnessed 5 walleyes caught out of Lake Susan. Wonderful. Put in the aerator. Keep going. These are little ones. They're little but there's hope. E. REGIONAL RAIL CORRIDOR. INTERIM USE PERMIT. Hoffman: Item 9(e) is again, I think can be addressed in short ,order but it does carry with it some lasting effects and some important information. Hennepin Parks has assumed the lead role in developing that, which was a positive undertaking from the city's perspective. Obviously some of the commission members will recall, we addressed that issue and these certainly ~ were not, simply were not in a position to fund that type of improvements. We had bridge questions and getting rid of the ballast and bind just to hold a bunch of rock to put down in there and then ongoing maintenance and trail heads and all sorts of things. So when that news came about, we were certainly willing participants and cooperative in that venture. The two trails which we have are the north trail, which is just barely hits the corner of Chanhassen. In fact it's our corner border. City of Chanhassen goes halfway in the center of that thing so that's in place. It's being used. People are utilizing it for recreation. The southern trail is just in real rough shape. They came in. They took out the railroad ties. There's some washout areas in it which erosion's a significant problem there and there's some major improvements which need to take place. So Hennepin Parks is talking about those issues. They're as well battling with fundings. They're not receiving the allocations from the legislature that they thought they would be. So they had indicated that the trails were top priority, so even if they got some money, that the trails would be first because they didn't want to get involved in these big regional parks. The Minnewashta one and the Bryant one prior to having <;lll the necessary resources to get the job done, so they thought they could get these trails accomplished. Now for the first time it is my understanding that Hennepin Parks will sell bonds to acquire the cash neccesary to do some of these improvements. Schroers: That has been approved for Bryant Lake. Hoffman: That has been approved? Okay. ,..... Park and Rec Commission Meeting June 22, 1993 - Page 28 Schroers: That has been approved for Bryant Lake. And I don't mean to interrupt here but something that has really caught my attention here is to request a resolution and 1 don't think the action that we would want to take. Maybe a letter of support and encouragement. I think if you push them up against a wall, they'll pull the plug. I think a letter that states something to the effect that the City of Chanhassen is eager and anxious to work with Hennepin Parks in-the development of the trail. You know, are in support of. Would very much like to see the trail process get underway but I don't think we want to try to back them up against the wall because they don't like to get pushed around. -'" Hoffman: Larry's in a good position to give us a recommendation in this regard so I would certainly heed that. Lash: I have just a couple of questions on that. Now I was down on TH 101 the other day and the bridge is gone so what are we supposed to do about that now? Crossing TH 101. Hoffman: That's the reason that, one of the reasons that it's more of a battle to get across there. It's obviously a major expenditure. If you want to continue it on and so that is probably a terminous point which they're looking at strongly because you can come down on grade on TH 101 and get down into Shakopee which is their ultimate goal. So to conti nue this beyond there you have to convince them, which we have sent a letter of interest already from the City of Chaska, City of Chanhassen and Carver County stating our interest in participating in being full backers of the project. Schroers: Probably another letter of interest and a request for a status ~ update. Where they're at with it, would be kind of you know. They'll say well these people are interested out here. Let's get on the band wagon and see what we can do, or else. Hoffman: Whatever we do, we need to get the City Council involved. It's obviously a very important issue and we want to get equal boards talking to each other and the City Council and the Hennepin County Board are in some way equal. Schroers: But to answer Jan's question. If that project is taken on by Hennepin Parks, and I suspect it will be a joint effort between them, the Metropolitan Council and you know a number of other factions. But they'll build a bridge over that like they've got across 169 north from Coon Rapids downtown Creek Park. I mean it crosses a major connector. It's just this dam bridge that goes across everything you know and so. When we get into it, it won't be a small time deal. Hoffman: It's a pretty easy one because you've got two abuttments. I mean you're right there. You're already at the elevation you want to be so. Manders: Wasn't that rail route once considered for light rail transit? Hoffman: Still is. Lash: It's just sort of an interim use isn't it? ....,., Park and Rec Commission Meeting June 22, 1993 - Page 29 ,..... Hoffman: Interim use. The agreement is between the Metropolitan Rail Authority and the Hennepin Parks for this interim use. Schroers: The metropolitan area has a trail plan as does the city of Chanhassenhave our own trail plan and this is a connecting link from Minneapolis. The trail comes down from Coon Rapids Dam, through Elm Creek Park and all down through connects. It goes through Medicine Lake and into Theodore Wirth and the city Chain of Lakes and then it would come out this way. Hook into the Minnesota River. Get on that Minnesota River Trail. Go down to Mankato. cut over to Cannon Falls. This trail's going to go everywhere. And it also connects into the Munger Trail that goes up to Duluth and probably another connection down to the Root River trail which is in far southeast Minnesota. And it's all in a great big master plan. It may take a long time to complete but if it ever does, that will be really neat. Lash: Then I just can't get my bearings here with the last couple of lines. Referring to the high school campus. So that's located... (There was audio equipment trouble at this point.) Schroers: Okay then, have we covered the item of the trail corridor? Anything further needed on that? Hoffman: I would prefer a formal recommendation from the commission. Lash: Okay. I would move that we send a letter of support. Ask the City ~ Council. You want it from the City Council right? Hoffman: Correct. Lash: Okay, that we send a recommendation to City Council to write a letter of support and encouragement to. Schroers: Hennepin Park Board of Directors. Lash: Yep. To pursue the trail rail system. Hoffman: The full Chanhassen link. Lash: Right. Schroers: And request our current status. Lash: Right, and updates. Schroers: Very good.. I'll second that. Lash moved, Schroers seconded that the Park and Recreation Commission recommend tha~ the City Council write a letter of support and encouragement to the Hennep1n Park Board of Directors to pursue the Regional Rail Corridor throughout the city of Chanhassen and to send update ontha current status. All voted in favor and the motion carried. ,..... Park and Rec Commission Meeting June 22, 1993 - Page 30 F. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE. ON HOLD. Hoffman: We're in a eaten 22 unfortunately and there's not a lot we can do about it. The same applications which we need this update for are just bombarding us and now we're into the summer season. From a workload standpoint, if I can pay the full attention needed to an item, which I think the comprehensive plan needs, I don't feel comfortable addressing it so I would prefer to put it off until fall. ...." Schroers: Good plan. Good judgment I think. COMMISSION MEMBER PRESENTATIONS: Ruegemer: Larry, I just have another point of interest. here if I can just interrupt for a minute. Schroers: Sure. Ruegemer: Just to satisfy my own curiousity I did check out some numbers as far as the use for using the Leisure Line that we have available for checking on programs, adult softball rainouts, playground programs, senior information. I did collect some numbers and I was quite surprised with the number of people that are using the line. If I can just go thY'ough those numbers real quickly then we can go on. From April 10th to the present time, and this is June 21st, the main number collected 7,674 calls with that. From May 10th to June 10th, or excuse me from May 10th to June 21st, softball calls were 987 using the phone line. Seniors using the line from May 10th to June 21st was 77 people and then the playground program from June 10th thru June 21st was 93 people with a grand total then of 8,831 ...", people using this phone. So on that type of volume, you can imagine the relief on our department on, support staff not answering phone calls. That really has been a blessing in disguise with that phone line so, that's just an FYI. For your information and I thought I'd bring it to your attention. Lash: That's money well spent huh. Hoffman: You approved that. Good goin9~ Schroers: We did good. Someone had a good idea. Very good. Any presentations from commission members. Roeser: I had one. The trail from Lake Ann over to Greenwood Shores. Hoffman: Is an absolute mess. Roeser: No, the trail isn't so bad. It's the end of the trail. Lash: I've heard complaints that the whole thing was pretty messy but the end is for sure. Roeser: I can deal with the trail but it's the end of the trail. It's just a real short area. . It wouldn't take much I don't thInk. It's just a mud hole. --' Park and Rec commission Meeting June 22, 1993 - Page 31 ~ Lash: It would have to be filled or something. Schroers: You could put a drain tile in there and run it right down to the lake. It's right next to the lake. Run a drain tile out the end of it. Lash: You know now that you mentioned that, I noticed,l was walking over there the other day and there's two little culvert looking things coming down one from Greenwood Shores and one kind of looks like it comes from the Eckankar property and then all that crud just runs under the trail and goes in the lake doesn't it? Do we want that happening? Hoffman: Well, it's how it's addressed. I mean water flows downhill and I'm not sure where it's coming but it's probably coming out of some sheet drainage areas. Lash: Street drainage? Hoffman: No, sheet drainage. You know just running across yards and collecting in these drainage swales and coming down into the lake and that's being addressed as pa'rt of the surface water management prog'ram. Schroers: That's what they're talking about fertilizers getting into the lake. Lash: Oh I know it. No wende'r it's all cruddied up. Hoffman: It all goes downhill but new developments, you know now with "..... these storm water management plan, t.hey have to discharge into a filtering basin prior to going into these type of areas. Sch'roe'rs: But the old stuff still makes sense. Hoffman: How would you like to solve the Greenwood Shores thing? Would you like to just do another 50 foot segment or would you like to take it up to the road? Roeser: I think if you just got it up to that gravel driveway. It'd be a fairly short, I mean that's all you'd really have to do is fill it in with some type of agg'regate. To take you up to that harder surface g'ravel area. Schroers: I think that that is...but I don't think that that's the only thing that you can do because a mud hole is a mud hole and it's going to be there unless you drain it out. To extend the trail would be a good idea but also you're going to need to incorporate some drainage in that particular spot. Otherwise the trail will go to pieces there. Hoffman: We'll take a look at that. It's right on the lake too. I mean there's not a whole lot of elevation there to work with just for drainage but we'll attempt to do that. Roeser: I think that trail gets used a lot and it just really screws up the whole thing. ,..... Park and Rec Commission Meeting ; 3une 22, 1993 - Page 32 Schroers: It does. I get off my bike and walk around it. There's one place, if you take one big giant step, sometimes you can make it without ~ getting your feet wet. Hoffman: We talked about it in the past. The park maintenance and public works crews had a list of asphalting from last year which they're just getting to this spring and that includes Lake Ann and Power Hill Park. The parking lot up there. They put a trail down to Lake Ann Beach to provide accessibility and then also to make it easier to service the beach for refuse and that type of thing. Received one call on it. Looks like we restricted, took a lot of sand. We really didn't. What's happening, the lake is so far up that we lost about 10 to 12 feet of our beach so if you're down there on your next visit, you'll see that there's a trail there. It looks different. It certainly does. Manders: You going to run that all the way up through the trees then? Hoffman: Yeah. At some point the commission has talked about that. $0 we'll bring the garbage cans out onto that. They leveled it off. It provides great accessibility for strollers. People in wheelchairs. Those type of things and it provides a kind of like, I don't know what you'd call it. A boulevard area. Access point. Lash: I just thought of it tonight, during the course of the meeting when we were talking about that Tower Hill or whatever it was called. And I was looking at the map over at Lake Lucy on the west side of Powers Boulevard. And I know when that started coming in for development, we kind of went round and round and I think I lost on that one. The park on the south side of Lake Lucy. Now has anything more been coming in or, are they just corning .....,I in, are they just dribbling in so we're never really seeing, because we talked about once it got further west we'd try to get some park property on the south side of Lake Lucy but I'Ve never seen anything else corne in. $0 has nothing come in? But it seems like when I drive over there, it's really starting to fill in and I don't know if we've missed an opportunity or. Hoffman: Wi llow Ridge came in,. That was a pretty big one. Lash: Yeah. And that was on the one that I wanted, I think I wanted to get some property and I' got voted down on that one. But isn't somethi ng else going in, or is that that big? Hoffman: Then there's all those large lots with long driveways and there's really no other vacant developable land until you hit Lake Lucy Road and Galpin. Other than the corner directly on Powers and ,Lake Lucy but that would be directly, that would be right in the vicinity of Carver Beach and Curry Farms. Lash: So how did I get schmuckered into that one because I already way saying when development west of this one then we'll get some there. Well, okay. But we can't get anything west of there because it's all just great big lots right? --,' Park and Rec Commission Meeting June 22, 1993 - Page 33 ,..., Hoffman: I undeistand your desire but again, I think if you move farther west, the Commission would have a tough time approving parkland because then you have Pheasant Hills directly across the street. Lash: Okay. Schroers: Yeah, I had the pleasure of running into a former commissioner, Curt Robinson and he was all smiles about a tennis court in South Lotus Lake. And some other neighborhoods, there are some other neighbors that happened to be there at the time said, is that what they're cutting those trees down for along the lake and TH 101? And they're along Highway 101 and they all looked at me and I didn't know. I said I can't imagine that we would be cutting down trees to put in a tennis court. We wouldn't put a tennis court that close to the road. I wouldn't think. But I didn't have any positive answeiS but why are they cutting those trees down? Hoffman: For that huge interchange there of TH 101. I mean if you've driven there, it's the look of eastern Chanhassen there has changed dramatically. That's a huge project there. You know the rerouting of TH 101. Bringing it straight. Schroers: That's what was happening. Hoffman: That's all part of that. schroers: I didn't realize that that was going on currently. ,..., Hoffman: In my complaints today about the financing for improvements of park development, the Assistant City Manager took the opportunity to remind me that that tennis court is fully paid for again by another parent tax increment project. Schroers: So Curt has 'reason to smile. Hoffman: Yes. tennis court. Curt has good reason to smile. That's going to be a nice It has water and lights. Double courts. Lash: So now you just need to run into Ed Hasek. We've got it make. We''re getting a park out west now. schroers: Okay. Anything else. Anything on the Administrative Packet? ADHINISTRATIVEPACKET. Manders: Yeah, what's this land use, park road propeity article about? I didn't understand that at all? Hoffman: The situation there is, that is going to be a trail connection which comes under Lake Ann. The culvert there. And then if you travel south and there's Prince's property there. His Paisley Park studio. There's a cul-de-sac back in there which both the Assistant Manager, Todd Gerhardt and Don Ashworth have talked to me. about. That the city owns it. It cannot be developed. or it's not developable and that's why we ended up ~ owning it. And as we develop that corridor, think about some park issues Park and'Rec Commission Meeting June 22, 1993 - Page 34 that you, some park applications that you could use that for. In the interim the public works people found out, found it to be a nice stock . piling site and that type of thing so they made a formal request to make ......",. that a permanent stock piling area for their salt and sand needs and those type of things so that's why this letter came out. Schroers: Okay. If there's nothing else, a motion to adjourn. Manders. moved. RoeseT seconded to adjou.rn the meeting:o All voted in favor and the motion carried. The meeting was adjourned. submitted by Todd Hoffman Park and Recreation Director Prepared by Nann Opheim .--, ...""