PRC 1994 11 15
I
I
I
I""'"
CIIANHASSEN PARK AND
RECREA nON COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
NOVEMBER 15, 1994
Chairman Andrews called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT: Jim Andrews, Jan Lash, Fred Berg, Jim Manders, Ron Roeser, Dave
Huffman and Jane Meger
MEMBERS ABSENT: None.
STAFF PRESENT: Todd Hoffman, Park and Rec Director; Jerry Ruegemer, Recreation
Supervisor; and Dawn Lemme, Recreation Supervisor
Andrews: To make the best use of the time of the people in the audience, we'll jump
immediately to item 5 which is a land subdivision proposal.
r-.
CONCEPTUAL PLAN AND SUBDIVISION. REZONING FROM A2. AGRICULTURAL
ESTATE TO PUD. PLANNED UNIT DEVEWPMENT FOR AN OFFICE
CAMPUS/RESIDENTIAL USE ON 20 ACRES OF PROPERlY: LOCATED AT 1350
FLYING CLOUD DRIVE (FORMER ASSUMPTION SEMINARY PROPERlY);
FRANKLIN SVOBODA ASSOCIATES.
Todd Hoffman presented the staff report on this item.
Andrews: Thank you Todd. Is the applicant here? And if so, please step forward and tell us
more about this proposed development. For those people who just arrived, we skipped to
item 5 but we'll be going back to the beginning of our agenda here in just a few minutes.
Steve Schwanke: Mr. Chair, members of the commission, my name is Steve Schwanke with
RLK Associates. Weare serving as consultants for Mr. Svoboda for site planning and his
landscape architecture and engineering services relative to his proposed redevelopment of the
Assumption Seminary site. I just have a couple of comments here and what we'd really like
to do is take care of a couple of things and actually have Brian come up and speak relative to
his vision and some of his thoughts that he has relative to the redevelopment of the property.
Actually Frank is, as many of you know, a nationally renown wetland and wildlife biologist
and has a company here located currently in Shorewood and through very good fortune the
company has grown considerably and unfortunately he is unable to continue to office out of
the Shorewood residence that he's in right now, which has created a bit of a good problem so
to speak, but unfortunately what he needs to do is find some new office space. This site here
actually creates the perfect opportunity for Mr. Svoboda given the type of work that he does.
JfI"""- In many cases the natural features and some of the environmentally sensitive areas that create
1
1
)
Park and Rec Commission Meeting - November 15, 1994
...,,;11
problems for the more traditional developers actually serves as a benefit and a major attribute
to people like Mr. Svoboda and the type of work and the business that he's in. So I'll actually
let Frank speak to that, and of course he speaks to that much better than I ever could. A
couple of items though, and Todd actually has set this up perfectly relative to the subdivision
that is shown here. When we first began working with Frank and the city on this proposal
here, and you can imagine the number of major environmental redevelopment issues
associated with this property here. You're all familiar with it. As part of speaking with city
staff about the possibility of granting a redevelopment district for tax increment and in doing
so we realize to subdivide the property as generally shown here. Since then, and specifically
related to a conversation this afternoon with city staff, we've chosen to no longer subdivide
the property and no longer show the property as shown as it is in three lots but continue
through the process without any subdivision and without any further division of the property.
Primarily because we've chosen to discontinue our efforts to, at this time anyway, to pursue
the redevelopment tax increment project. So that part will be revised as we continue through
the concept PUD process. We will be continuing with that obviously because we do want to
rezone the property to PUD and as Todd mentioned, the comprehensive plan amendment that
is required, we've already met and of course everything else that will be required as part of
the redevelopment process. So with that in mind, unless there's any questions for me, I'd like
to introduce Frank and have him come up and talk about his proposal.
.....-'
Frank Svoboda: Thanks Steve, members of the commission. Before I elaborate on what we'd
like to accomplish here I'd like to just bring to closure the issue of the subdivision. On
Monday we had an appraiser out at the property and he's looking at two things. One is the
rehabilitation of the existing 3 story building on the property. Secondly, and what it might
cost to rehabilitate that. And secondly, the other option would be to demolish the building if
it's not possible to rehabilitate it. Late this afternoon when I had a conversation with Todd
Gerhardt, that also came up as a subject in our conversation and that is, if the building cannot
be rehabilitated for some reason or another and it has to be demolished, then we would not be
able to put up another building within that footprint based on the Met Council's guidelines
and requirements. So in light of that most recent information I had to rethink the concept of
the subdivision because if we subdivide this and a portion of it is residential, a portion is
commercial, and then later we cannot use a portion of it as commercial property, I think it's
ultimate value, should our business continue to grow and we can no longer remain at this
location, if we can't use that building, then we would have to look at selling that property as a
20 acre residential parcel. Right now our intention, as I think this is a good transition into
what our business is all about. Right now our intention is to remain on this property over the
long term assuming that we can make commercial use out of that building. From what we
have been told it is an extremely sound structurally. The bigger question relative to the
property are some of the environmental concerns given the particular location and as the
configuration of the landscape. So with that I'll explain a little bit about who we are as a
2
...""
J
'"
Jf1'1"
,
J
Park and Rec Commission Meeting - November 15, 1994
business. What we do and what our vision is about this property and then from there I'll
explain to you what we're faced with in terms of some of the very serious environmental
constraints that occur on this parcel. My background is in wildlife management. I received a
degree from the University of Minnesota in 1966. A masters degree in 1987 and have had a
variety of sort of employment experiences ranging from some work with the University. For
several years at the Department of Natural Resources. Department of Transportation. Then
back in about 1979 started working for the private sector and we came to get more and more
involved with wetlands starting about the late 1970's as the Clean Water Act passed and
wetland permitting began more and more of a, and wetland mitigation, wetland impacts, just
began more and more of an aspect of doing business. So in 1991, August of 1991 I left a
consulting company here in the Twin Cities and ventured out on my own with the
anticipation of remaining a one person operation and it's doing what I like doing. That was
getting out in the field and working with wetlands and going out of doors. That wasn't quite,
or so far the plan hasn't quite turned out that way. We now have 8 employees. This past
May, or this past summer we added about 5 employees and the result of that was that
originally we were operating as a home base business in Shorewood and we are now the size
that we can no longer operate out of our home. About the time we realized that we were
going to have to make a change, this property came up for sale and so we began the steps to
acquire that. So the attributes that really attracted us to this particular parcel of land is that I
was looking for some permanent office space that was essentially similar to what we have
now in Shorewood. We have a wetland that's right outside the back yard. We have a
wooded area. A lot that's quite sizeable and a house certainly that's large enough to
accommodate the individuals that we have in our employment but we can't run a business of
our size in a residential neighborhood. So I was looking for something similar to that. A
wooded area. High quality wetlands. Some space in which we could have an opportunity to,
like if our employees need a chance to just get outside and walk around and do some
thinking. . Have a place that has that kind of a setting and. also the other. attractive part of this
particular site, in addition to those features was that perhaps as most of you are aware, there's
a large tract, a large marsh that surrounds this parcel on the north all the way up to the
railroad, the regional trail. That is one of four calcarious fens in the Twin Cities metropolitan
area and so being in such close proximity to that fen would be of our individuals, the people
on my staff, a chance for us to start doing some research being that close to this particular
resource. In addition to myself, other staff members have disciplines in aquatic ecology. One
of my employees, the aquatic ecologist has a very strong background in doing some research
on trout. We have a could of terrestrial ecologists. Water quality specialists and then some
graphic support people. So we have a good solid nucleus of individuals that could really start
making some interesting studies of this particular fen. Also I'm sure as you're aware, this
trout stream is perhaps one, or one of two or maybe three trout streams in the Twin Cities
area. And this particular trout stream as reported has a naturally reproducing population of
native trout so it makes it a fairly unique resource. And again, it's something that we would
3
~
/
.Iark and Rec Commission Meeting - November 15, 1994
~
be very interesting in managing and maintaining the quality of that resource and our staff has
the knowledge and expertise to do that. So this particular site was especially attractive in that
regard. Then as we began to start examining before making some commitments in terms of
purchasing this property, originally our closing was set for December 1st. Now that likely
will be pushed back for a couple of weeks because of some environmental problems but
particularly given the shape of this land. You'll notice that it's confined on one side by
Highway 212. On the other side by the trout stream so it's a triangular peninsula and we
don't have a lot of space to work with. What we discovered was that back in the late 80's
there was a report of solvents being disposed of on the property. This property has been
cleaned up as near as we can tell. We don't have any documentation from either the EP A or
PCA. That essentially closes the book on that clean-up process so we're pursuing that. The
houses, most being fairly old residences have old hot water systems with asbestos lined pipes.
The floors are covered with asbestos floor tiles so again we're told that asbestos is not as
much of a concern as it was historically but again the asbestos lined pipes, or the asbestos
covered pipes will have to be removed. The septic systems are old and antiquated and those
will have to be replaced. These are all things that we're faced with environmentally. I think
also as you're aware the building probably is, I don't know, it has a reputation for being a
hangout for young kids. Last Halloween the Carver County Sheriffs Department issued 30
citations to some individuals that were there for a party. Typically they'll get 2 to 3 calls per
week for trespassing so we have some security problems we have to deal with. So there's
some real challenges ahead of us in terms of developing the property but presuming that we
can overcome those in the purchase process and get some of these environmental problems
either resolved or get a mechanism in place to resolve them, it's our intent to move into the
home and occupy that as both a business and a residence. We would remodel the upstairs,
the third floor into an apartment for my wife and myself and then the first and second floor
would be available as office space for our staff. And again right now, given the size of that
house, which is quite sizeable, it would meet our needs for we would anticipate a year or two
years. And as we would restore the house, which is also in a fairly severe state of disrepair,
there's no insulation. The wiring is all old wiring. It has to be replaced. The furnace is
broken down. There's no central. heating so we'd need central heating here. It's going to take
a lot of work to bring the house up to specifications. So we would occupy that for about 2
years and then depending upon what the results of the appraisal are, we would start either
making a decision to rehabilitate that large building and under that option what we would
intend to do is part of our business, in addition to doing wetland delineation and natural
resources studies, is also to organize and sponsor information and education programs in the
area of natural resources. Our company has sponsored over the last two summers 5 classes
instructing individuals how to conduct wetland delineations and we also sponsored a statewide
conference last February for the Wetland Conservation Act... regulations. At that conference
we had about 167 in attendance. This March we are planning a National Conference for
wetland delineators with some of the major players in the wetland delineation process who
-'"
4
...."
i
J
)
,......
,...,
Park and Rec Commission Meeting - November 15, 1994
have said that they will attend this conference. We're expecting somewhere in the
neighborhood of 500 to 700 people from throughout the United States and we've also had an
inquiry from Madrid, Spain about this conference so we're pretty excited about that. So part
of this office, this front building has a space within it that could accommodate somewhere
between probably 50 to 75 individuals so we would continue to have, or offer training
sessions on a day use basis. For example, when we were doing our wetland delineation
training classes we would rent space at the Chaska Community Center for our classroom
training and then we were using the picnic shelter out at Minnewashta Park for field
exercises. Given the fact that we have a fairly sizeable wetland on this side of TH 212 and a
fen on this side, I think we could probably meet most of our training requirements right on
this site, although there's specialized requirements... We have to look for an alternative
location as far as the field exercises but certainly the classroom training we could accomplish
in this building. Beyond the conference space we would then look to rehabilitate the building
in stages with rehabing the front part of the building first and then perhaps, depending on the
demand for office space, doing it in three phases. The front part of the building first and then
each of the wings separately. The building does also have a full basement under it and it's a
walkout basement out the rear so there is also natural lighting in the basement so there's some
possibility that that would be useful for class space or something like that. So our long term
plan is perhaps over 5 to 6 years would be to rehabilitate that space into a combination of day
use conference and office space and we think that the amenities surrounding that building
would make an ideal location for sort of a natural resource base. Environmentally oriented
companies with similar hours as office space. In fact the Department of Natural Resources, a
year or so ago had looked at purchasing this house and using that as their office space for the
West Metro headquarters but it was going to be too costly in order to make it handicap
accessible so they dropped that. But we think that this building would be attractive for
tenants of that sort. Again we're faced with several constraints because of the configuration
of the property. In order to make that happen, right now as we understand it, there is a sewer
system in front of this building. We had that checked Sunday. We don't believe that that
system has the capacity to accommodate even office use, which is fairly limited in it's water
usage. We haven't checked it out completely. That's something that we would still intend to
do at a later date but assuming that that system would not have adequate capacity based on
the current code requirements, what the individual told us that examined the system was we'd
have to go to a mound system, which would have to be placed somewhere in this area. And
again, because of the wetland requirements from the wetlands to the south of TH 212 and the
wetlands to the north, we would likely be encroaching on that parking lot and as it is right
now, this dimension to the west is about as far as people would be willing to walk to get to
the building. We also, again because of my experience with storm water ponds and the fact
that this is a natural trout stream, I didn't want that storm water pond discharging through a
single point outletting into the stream so what we designed is a pond that will essentially
overflow in a deep flow fashion and then flow over land with the water gradually dissipating
5
Park and Rec Commission Meeting - November 15, 1994
...."I
and filter into the ground so that...fairly significant events that we get any sort of direct runoff
into the stream. So I think we've been fairly innovative in dealing with the storm water
storage problem but again, because of the configuration and shape of the space, it's sort of
like pushing a balloon around. If you squeeze it in one spot, it sort of pops out in another
spot and so if you're trying to get a mound system in there, then we're going to be starting to
pinch the pond and parking so we can't really move the parking much in this direction
because even to accommodate the small amount of parking we have here, we would have to
do a modest amount of filling off of this terrace and then removing some of the natural
vegetation which occurs there which I'm very reluctant to do at this point. And if we try
pushing it any farther here, we start coming up against the existing residence so it's a very
difficult site to work with. But I've worked with developers for close to 20 years and I know
the problems that they've had to contend with. Now I'm here standing before you having to
deal with the same problems and come up with some creative solutions.
Andrews: I guess I have a couple questions. This is a long discussion and I think I need to
get back to what the facts are at the moment. Right now you are not asking to divide the
property, is that correct?
Frank Svoboda: That's correct.
......"
Andrews: So at this point it's a non decision for us, the way I understand it. I mean I
appreciate and I agree with a lot of things you'd like to do and I'd love to see those things
done if this property were to be developed. I guess I look at your background as being ideal
as someone to own a piece of property like this. I think the one thing that Todd had
mentioned about looking for an easement along that trout stream, that'd be something we'd
love to see done but at this point we have no way to do business between us and yourself.
Frank Svoboda: At this point you know I appreciate your attention and what I really need is
as much support within the city as I possibly can get because this is going to be a tough
project. You know the more people that are aware of what we're facing here and want to
support...I think the more chance we have of success.
Andrews: If this goes to PUD though, that would still come back for some sort of fee for
park and trail or would that be all part of the negotiation of the PUD contract?
Hoffman: Only if the property is subdivided do you have to...and considerations for park and
open space as part of the project.
Andrews: I think a PUD is certainly a better way to attack this piece of property. More
flexibility and I think from what you've described here, what you're trying to accomplish is
..."
6
j
",.
l
l
Park and Rec Commission Meeting - November 15, 1994
along the lines that we're interested in seeing happen. I guess my biggest fear, if this were to
be divided and we did not take any action, is that we have no assurance that you may not
turn around and sell the property. I mean you could be unfortunate enough, as the owner of
Nash Finch was recently, and get hit by a bus and the property be liquidated. So from that
standpoint I guess I'd say as a park board we probably would still be looking to extract fees if
this were being divided. I guess I'd feel like we have a responsibility to do that. Also I
would not want to be sued by other developers that have asked us to do the same thing and
we have consistently really given no favorites.
Frank Svoboda: No, we're not closing the door on this. On the subdivision at this point. I
think given what we've recently discovered, I think it's premature for us to do that because if
we have to demolish that building, then we can't put anything else on that property, then
we're stuck.
Roeser: You're saying if you would demolish the building that you wouldn't replace it? You
wouldn't build there?
Frank Svoboda: From what I've been told, we can't replace it because the city, Todd told me
",....., this afternoon the city has about 300 acres of excess commercial/industrial and the Met
Council, in whatever fashion it gets involved in the process, with that excess. I mean
assuming that excess was still there in 2 years or wherever we are, they would never approve,
even if we built right within the existing footprint of that building, they would not take a
favorable view towards replacing that within the commercial structure.
Andrews: That's only if it's split that this becomes an issue, or subdivided?
Frank Svoboda: Can't have the building?
Andrews: Yes.
Hoffman: No, it's an existing non-conforming use.
Andrews: I guess another question I would have is if there's a fire that destroys the building,
where does that leave you? Are you out of business?
Hoffman: Just as you have a non-existing use in any other cabin that's within a setback,
where now you have a more restrictive setback. If the cabin bums down, they're going to
make you build it back...
~
Andrews: You've got a lot of complicated issues to tie up here at once.
7
/
Park and Rec Commission Meeting - November 15, 1994
--'
Frank Svoboda: I'm just going to take them one at a time.
Andrews: Well I commend you for the project and I for one hope it happens. I think this
would be a fantastic use of the property. It certainly would enhance and protect the wetland
area and perhaps give us a centerpiece for other people to come and study.
Frank Svoboda: And certainly it's a gateway to Chanhassen down here in the southwest
entrance right off of TH 212 so our intention is to...
Andrews: Any other comments?
Manders: Sounds good to me.
Berg: Good luck.
Frank Svoboda: I need a lot of that.
Andrews: We thank you and we hope we get a chance to see this come to pass.
Frank Svoboda: Thank you.
.....,.,
Huffman: You know the plan we just saw Todd is a great idea. If you're going to do the
Bluff Creek charette, it's something that we're going to do, and for the plans that Mr. Svoboda
has in terms of an interpretative center and research and nature, I mean maybe that's
something the city could tie into and help eventually classes, learning. The trout stream...are
the goals that the commission has.
Andrews: Okay, now we're going to turn back to the beginning of the agenda.
VISITOR PRESENTA nONS: None.
METES AND BOUNDS SUBDIVISION TO SUBDIVIDE WT 3. MINNEWASHTA PARK
INTO 2 WTS WCA TED NORTH OF ORCHARD LANE AND SOUTII OF mGHWA Y 7.
OBED AND MILDRED MEWM.
Todd Hoffman presented the staff report on this item.
Andrews: This is a routine item. I think we can just move on this one. Is the applicant
here? No, okay, fine. Let's just move on this one then.
--'
8
'I
1,
/""""
~
Park and Rec Commission Meeting - November 15, 1994
Lash: I would move that we recommend to City Council that full park and trail fees be
collected per city ordinance in lieu of land dedication or trail construction in regard to the
metes and bounds subdivision.
Roeser: Second.
Lash moved, Roeser seconded that the PaIk and Recreation Commission recommend that the
City Council require full palk and trail fees be collected per city ordinance in lieu of land
dedication and/or trail construction (1 lot, current residential palk and trail fees are $900.00
and $300.00, respectively per lot) for the Melom Subdivision. All voted in favor and the
motion canied.
PRELIMINARY PLAT TO SUBDIVIDE 8 ACRES INTO 2 SINGLE FAMILY LOTS
ZONED RSF. RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY; LOCATED WEST OF HIGHWAY 7.
EAST OF HENNEPIN COUNTY REGIONAL RAILROAD AUmORffY. AND soum
OF PIPEWOOD CURVE; DELWICHE ADDmON.
Todd Hoffman presented the staff report on this item.
Andrews: I guess I look at this again as a routine item. If the applicant wishes to add any
comments, you're free to do so. I'm not sure it's really. I don't know what questions there
could be here. Is there a motion to take action on this item? Or any discussion that would
like to need.
Lash: I move that we recommend to City Council that we recommend the Delwiche Addition
subdivision with conditions of full park and trail fees be collected per city ordinance in lieu
of land dedication or trail construction.
Meger: Second.
Lash moved, Meger seconded that the PaIk and Recreation Commission recommend that the
City Council require full palk and trail fees to be collected per city ordinance in lieu of land
dedication and/or trail construction, (1 lot, current residential pmK and trail fees are $900.00
and $300.00 respectively per lot) for the Delwiche Addition. All voted in favor and the
motion canied.
CONCEPTUAL AND PRELIMINARY PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT TO REZONE
89.59 ACRES OF PROPERTY ZONED A2. AGRICULTURAL ESTATE TO PUD;
PRELIMINARY PLAT ONE BLOCK (48 UNITS - 14 TWIN HOME BUILDINGS AND 5
9
./
-/
i
(
Park and Rec Commission Meeting - November 15, 1994
.....",
FOUR PLEX BUILDINGS). AND 2 OUTLOTS: WCA TED IN mE SOUTIlWEST
CORNER OF TIlE INTERSECfION OF HIGHWAY 5 AND GALPIN BOULEVARD:
AUTUMN RIDGE. GOOD VALUE HOMES. INe. (O'SHAUGHNESSY PROPERTY).
Todd Hoffman presented the staff report on this item.
Andrews: Is this the property that's directly to the east of the Opus property?
Hoffman: Exactly.
Lash: I've got to get some of this stuff clear because I'm clearly confused. Are we only
looking at the thing that's on the first page of the blueprint as the proposal? Because that
doesn't look the same as what's on the overhead. Are we just looking at the bottom?
Hoffman: Just the bottom half.
Lash: Okay. And so is that sitting up there the way we're looking at that, is that Highway 5
to the right?
Hoffman: Highway 5 is to the north? Sorry, this is to the north.
...."
Lash: Okay, so it's turned. Okay, this is why I'm confused. Highway 5 on this thing is
running along the right hand side. No, the other way. Yeah. So now which one are we
looking at now?
Hoffman: It's subdivided here and you're looking at the lower half.
Lash: Okay, that's what we're looking at here. And the blue thing that you filled in is what
they're saying they're proposing as open space.
Hoffman: As a land transfer, yes.
Lash: And isn't that all wetland up there anyway?
Hoffman: It's all wetland around this. This is that marsh...talked about during the discussion
whether or not we should put ballfields down in there. It's kind of the low, sandy low spongy
stuff. It's really...if we did a lot of corrective measures and.
Lash: Essentially no one else would ever probably build on it and we wouldn't either would
we?
10
...",
I
j
I
J
c )
!ark and Rec Commission Meeting - November 15, 1994
Hoffman: No, we decided as a commission that we wouldn't do that.
Lash: So why would we then accept that 2.8 acres or whatever to remain open as something
that's going to transfer density when it probably would never be built on.
Hoffman: Sure, it could be. It's buildable property. The thing we're not discussing is that
this is just one piece of this and that we're attempting to make the land transaction with Mrs.
O'Shaughnessy and the rest of the property. So right now Good Value Homes does not even
own this piece of property. It's under the ownership of Betty O'Shaughnessy and I'm not sure
how the City Attorney would ask that to happen. Whether or not Good Value Homes would
have to go ahead and transfer ownership of this to the city at that time so they would have to
have ownership of both of these sites. So there's still some of those type of things to be
figured out as far as the land, overall land transaction.
Lash: Okay, and then one last question. On the northern, or the edge of the wetland, or the
development where it abuts against the wetland. Is that supposed to be just a walking path or
is that a road there with a walking path?
r- Hoffman: This one is just a road. This is a trail. This is a road.
,.....
Andrews: That's that proposed south boulevard?
Hoffman: Yep.
Huffman: Todd, is there also another development just to the, I want to say east of that.
There's also a multi-residential area we talked about a month ago. 94 twin homes or
something.
Hoffman: Oh yeah, across from the school property. You have to come all the way back to
this direction.
Roeser: To Audubon?
Hoffman: Yeah.
Lash: So it's on the other side of the creek from the school property.
Hoffman: Yeah, the other side of the creek.
11
)
Park and Rec Commission Meeting - November 15. 1994
--'
Andrews: What's interesting is that during the Highway 5 study that most of the developers
were coming in and saying this was not going to be developable property and it's coming in
before the road's even being built.
Huffman: My question is. and I want to be delicate about this but you're building a school
and you're jamming a lot of things in and around the school when one of our main concerns
is ballfields. open space. scenic area. We're cramming a bunch of stuff in there. I mean is
that any of our business? Do we care?
Andrews: It's kind of what was zoned or anticipated for the property.
Lash: We care. I think we all care. Whether we can do anything about it is.
Berg: Are you concerned because of the use? That we're getting so many people in there
that the use is going to be overwhelming.
Huffman: I'm concerned about. you know you've got your school. You've got some open
space and then all of a sudden we keep saying. well this is dedicated to the school. This is
dedicated and then all of a sudden you've got the school's use is already taken over by
neighborhood. You've got so many families in there and I've got nothing against duplexes -*'
and twin family homes and things like that but the use has already piled up. I mean you have
already loaded that school down to it's max and we haven't even opened the thing up. I mean
if I'm not mistaken. I was told the other time. there's got to be a ramp built under Highway 5
to get to the school. There's got to be this way coming to the school. Maybe it will be
natural because. well no only old people are going to live in these things I've been told. So
there won't be anybody there so that's not an issue I guess.
Hoffman: I just got...with our planning department and in fact it came up in conversations
that the landowner can market this as a commercial property. To nurture that residential
type...you have a school on a state highway so we wanted to try and mitigate that back a little
bit and push around the...surrounding the school is a good thing. The fact that it's zoned
medium density. that's what it's zoned currently so that's what the applicant is coming in at.
Now they're squeezing things slighting because they're asking for this land transfer.
Andrews: It's not a huge variance.
Hoffman: Yeab. the residential mass that will be around the school will obviously
accumulate in the future but right now it's fairly limited.
12
....",
I
(
.,..,
;--
,..,
Park and Rec Commission Meeting - November 15, 1994
Huffman: Okay. I mean the hard thing is you want to put it right. I don't have any
underlying reason. I'm not trying to keep out any income level. I'm not trying to keep out
anything anywhere. I'm just asking, that many people in that area for what we've got as a
dedicated space, I mean is it already built up? I mean is the land use already obsolete with
the amount of families and bodies of people who will be coming in there. I don't know.
Manders: I guess one observation that I have is that the concentration is certainly a thought
and you've expressed it well but I wonder if the appeal of the open space by having that extra
open space and be assured that that isn't going to be developed inside that wetlands isn't of
some benefit. I think it is to have that entire area assured that it's going to be open instead of
having some site or whatever might be put up in there. But that would be nice.
Andrews: In my opinion this is a pretty good use of the property. It is sort of an anticipated
use. I mean you've got a commercial development to the west. The school to the east and
this provides some sort of a transition between a residential and a commercial use. To try to
sell single family houses perhaps right next to a large industrial complex would not be easy,
and probably inappropriate. So I guess I'm okay with this one. I guess the trick is to get the
100 acres from the O'Shaughnessy's to close it all up.
Roeser: It rides on that anyway, right? That they have that property from the
O'Shaughnessy's. That they acquire that property.
Hoffman: Right. That piece of land.
Roeser: Otherwise it would have to come back and be done allover again right.
Lash: I have one more question then and, if I'm still fuzzy about this then I'm going to guess
other people are too. This is a PUD, right?
Hoffman: That's correct.
Lash: Okay so, and I've seen this other times. And my understanding of a PUD is that a
developer is granted flexibility in. what they're trying to do in return for providing us above
and beyond what we would normally be able to ask. Is that correct? Okay. And then how
come when we're, and I'm not picking on this specific proposal. I'm just trying to find this
out for myself. When we look at this and the recommendation then would be that we would
collect full park and trail fees and that we would ask for a 20 foot easement for trail purposes
and then ask the developer to construct, which the first two to me would be just normal.
That's what we would ask of anyone. Then when we ask them to construct an 8 foot wide
trail, why would we then reimburse them if we could, under the PUD agreement, we are
13
)
Park and Rec Commission Meeting - November 15, 1994
-"""
entitled to ask above and beyond what's normally required. Why couldn't we just ask them to
do that without reversing them?
Andrews: We could.
Hoffman: We have typically in any of the PUD's we've not asked for that piece of the pie.
We've gone ahead and championed an unwritten policy that we're going to...construction in
PUD's and surrounding development...comprehensive plan and you have to build it as part of
your development. The city is going to take responsibility for that. There is quite a bit of
flexibility in the planned unit development process that most of these comes in zoning in
other areas. The one item which...park and recreation as parks and open space...we're giving
you I think it's 2.1 acres of it...
Andrews: I agree with Jan.
Lash: Thanks Jim. I mean that's the one time we can ask above and beyond and we haven't
been doing it, I don't think.
Andrews: That's right.
...",
Lash: We get what we would normally get and then if we ask them to do anything else, we
turn around and reimburse them for it so I don't think we've been asking above and beyond.
Huffman: I lived in a townhouse for the first 7 years we were up here in St. Louis Park and
when we hit a piece of swamp over off of TH 101 that's not even a useable swamp. I can't
even see it. Every day I drive by there, I don't even know where it is anymore. I mean if
you can show it to me because there's nothing but dirt there. But you know it was required
that they have a natural area at our place and when they talk about the amenities of park, we
had a swimming pool, two tennis courts. The association, everything took care of. I mean
there was something there besides a little duck pupal. And I guess that's what it comes back
to my concern is that yes, they can get over to the school. They can get all these things but
people live in the neighborhoods too and what do they do in their neighborhood when mom
and dad look out the window or grampa or gramma, especially in these areas look out their
windows. You know where are they going to go? And that's my concern. I guess I haven't
caught onto that one yet and if it's zoned for that, that's fine but you know, where will the
children play, is that what Cat Steven's says. .
Hoffman: Your observations are right on. We have not leveraged PUD's nearly as much as...
14
...."
I
l
I
""""
I"""'-
""""
Park and Rec Commission Meeting - November 15, 1994
Andrews: Well couple points. That 2.81 acres, is that an area that's, is it hilly or is it flat?
Is it an area that could be, not necessarily turned into a playfield but it is a field that's
suitable to play on?
Hoffman: No, it's a knoll with box elders on it. Pretty much...
Andrews: I guess the other comment I was going to make is as we saw in our last exercise at
the City Council, land is scarce. Land is valuable. We're the ones with it. Why don't we get
what we can from it. I mean we're having to pay more and more to get the land that we need
as well and I agree completely with Jan here. I mean they'd be here under a standard
proposal if that was to their advantage. Now they're coming to us with a PUD because that's
to their advantage. I think we need to extract the extra piece for that for the privilege. I
mean why should they do all the winning and we just sit here and say well we'll be nice and
we'll just treat you the same as any other developer when they're not coming to us the same
as any other developer. So I guess in this particular situation I think that the developer
should construct the trail at their cost and if they don't like it, they can appeal to the City
Council and the Council has the authority to do what they wish. In my opinion I think our
recommendation should be that point number 3 be done at the developer's cost.
Berg: I would agree. Past practice is fine but there's time to change past practice too. I
think the time has come to do that.
Andrews: Any more discussion?
Lash: I guess I would, the other thing with this.
Huffman: Oh don't change your mind.
Lash: I won't change my mind Dave. But on this site, if it is 2.8 acres, is there a possibility
of, I'm going to back Dave up on his comments...mutual admiration society here. It gets kind
of sickening. But is there a possibility in the future that we would just at least be able to
clear out a portion of that if it's not, if it's just some scrub trees and put in a little play
structure someday in the future if the need arose? Could we use it for something? Would it
support that, or will it support nothing?
Hoffman: We can, we're not accepting it as parkland...open space due to the fact that it's a
land transfer. There's other locations where you could put play equipment on in the city
property which we're pursuing to the west and the Opus site where we want to obtain that
peninsula. Essentially the first industrial lot which they have identified would be a location
for a parking lot and trail head, nature center, if you wanted to do that future piece of play
15
:~
I
)
l
Park and Rec Commission Meeting - November 15, 1994
-"
equipment...kind of a central location. ...it's essentially right in the middle of this big 100
acre site and that's exactly what Jim was saying. We're trying to keep...out of that and keep it
as a whole...
Lash: But there is the future of the potential for future something somewhere besides the
school site?
Hoffman: Yes.
Lash: You think to the west, okay.
Andrews: Can I have a motion? Does somebody want to make a motion please? Well I'll
make the motion that we accept the staff recommendation as proposed with item 1 and item 2
and I would change item 3 only in that our recommendation would be that we do not
reimburse the applicant. That the applicant install the trail at their cost.
Huffman: To city specs.
Andrews: Well yeah, that's, I'm not modifying any of that. I'm just saying that they not be
reimbursed for that being this is a PUD. ....,,;
Lash: So item 3 would go all the way to the end of the sentence where it would say Director
and City Engineer?
Andrews: Yep. That's what it would say. Is there a second to that?
Lash: I would second it.
Andrews: Any further discussion?
Andrews moved, Lash seconded that the Pam. and Recreation Commission recommend the
City Council require the following conditions of approval in regard to pmks and trails for the
proposed Autumn Ridge planned unit development:
1. Full park and trail fees be collected per city ordinance.
2. Dedication of a 20 foot easement for trail purposes as identified on the preliminary plat
for Autumn Ridge dated October 18, 1994.
--'
16
I
J
j
r--
JII""
Park and Rec Commission Meeting - November 15, 1994
3. The developer shall construct an 8 foot wide asphalt trail per city specifications within the
trail easement. This construction shall be completed in conjunction with street
construction. Final alignment of this trail shall be staked by the developer and approved
by the Park and Recreation Director and City Engineer.
All voted in favor and die motion canied unanimously.
Andrews: Land is too scarce for us to be.
Lash: Well and money's too scarce and for us to move forward and try and accomplish
anything, we've got to get it where we can.
PROGRAM REPORTS:
A. LAKE ANN PARKING/GATE ATTENDANT YEAR END REPORT.
Jerry Ruegemer presented the staff report on this item.
Andrews: You're looking at like a billboard map or maybe.
Ruegemer: Some kind of a handout.
Andrews: Postcard? You know postcard, drive to here. Okay.
Ruegemer: There's always ways, we're looking for ways to motivate the people that are out
there.
Andrews: I've got an idea for that one. Put them on a commission.
Ruegemer: Other park and rec commissions, or other park and rec departments do have, as
far as some type of commission, they do it on a per hour basis. You work x amount of hours
over the summer, you get a bonus of some kind. I don't know if the Park and Rec
Commission would entertain anything like that.
Andrews: I meant like a commission on what they collect. Really motivate them. If you
want to see your revenues go up, boy that'd do it.
Jerry Ruegemer continued with his staff report on the 1994 gate attendant report.
17
/
I
~
Park and Rec Commission Meeting - November 15, 1994
....",
Lash: I had one question about South Lotus. Do you remember the gentleman who was here
earlier this year who lived adjacent.
Ruegemer: Mr. Melby?
Lash: Yes, that was his name. I guess I just want to follow up and see how things are going
with him. Is anything new? Did the problems get solved?
Hoffman: We went ahead and completed what was requested.
Andrews: Put up some screening was it?
Hoffman: Put the sign back up.
Lash: And does he seem to be content with the situation now?.
Hoffman: I would expect that he'll be calling us again.
Ruegemer: We haven't heard anything, or I haven't heard anything for the rest of the
summer.
-'
Todd Hoffman made a comment that was not heard on the tape.
Manders: Jerry, that speedboat. Number 677. I assume that it's talking about Lotus Lake?
Ruegemer: Correct. Lake Ann Park is a non-motorized lake. We don't keep those kind of
numbers out there. People bring their canoe, that type of thing...
Lash: Are you still going to do some kind of brochure or handout or something for Lake
Ann? I think it's nice if on it there was some way to condense it and have the rules and a
little map layout and maybe the amenities, all printed so people would know what was
available there.
Ruegemer: Does anybody have any other questions in regards to that?
Andrews: Let's move on to item B then.
HALLOWEEN PARlY EVALUATION.
Jerry Ruegemer presented the staff report on this item.
...."
18
,.... Park and Rec Commission Meeting - November 15, 1994
Lash: How about a contest? Costume contest. Creative and maybe do it by age brackets or
something. We always have a big parade. It's not for Halloween. It's for Fairy Tales, which
just happens to fall at the end of October every year so we have a costume parade and boy
you see some really creative things come through. And you see 75 Power Rangers but you
see a couple of really creative ones and I think it'd be kind of fun. It maybe would encourage
kids to get a little more creative too in their costuming.
Andrews: I think moving it back to Saturday will be a big help too. I had a number of
people in our neighborhood mention that was the very reason they didn't go so.
Lash: And you may have a better time getting volunteers too.
Ruegemer: Yeah, it was tough getting volunteers this year. Very tough. We got by...the last
half of the week here it really was nice that we had the people but like you said, that will be
easier to get. It'd be easier for set up too. We'd have more time to set up. You don't have to
worry about the after school programs that was there, which really wasn't a problem. They
were very flexible and that but it worked ouLto have more time would be great too so.
Those are just the type of things that we were experiencing this year. I think people really
I""""'" liked the touch and feel area that was added. I know some kids were scared in putting their
hands in the box. They weren't sure what was going to happen but I think kids really enjoyed
it. So that was quite fun. Some were gory in some areas but the kids seem to get a kick out
of it so, and the...so that was a good time. We'll definitely do that again. Just looking ahead
to next year too you know we're going to be having a new school site next year so that's one
area too that I'd like to get the commission to become really involved in that and we
discussed possibly doing a ball of some kind. Where the parents can come with their kids
and have entertainment and possibly a meal. I know that hasn't worked much in the past but
we'd certainly try to offer new activities for that. And then we have some entertainment type
of thing and I'd love to have the commission get involved in that. We will certainly try to
plan that for the... Do you have any questions on this or general comments? I think parents
really liked the door prizes. We gave away probably over $150.00 in Festival Foods gift
certificates and some other gift certificates as well sO...Do you have any questions?
Andrews: No. Dave wanted to make a comment. He has to leave here briefly to attend to
some sick kids at home.
Huffman: I'm sorry. You're going to talk about the agenda for the City Council and I just
wanted to get on record that the five things we had talked about beforehand, or four, whatever
your better discretion comes up with, you know so I support 100% whatever I can do to help.
I would absolutely be delighted to and I think Todd and Dawn and Jerry should be
commended for what they did at the City Council meeting. They did a great job. It was fun
""
19
Park and Rec Commission Meeting - November 15, 1994
"""'"
for me and if I can do anything to help, whatever. And I support everything 1 00% and I will
let Fred vote in my best conscience on every bit and piece and article that come out here.
Whatever he says goes.
Andrews: That means Dave has just volunteered for any committee that gets formed.
Huffman: I didn't say that.
Andrews: He said he would help any way that he could. Alright, thanks for that comment.
Let's move to item 6( c) and that's with Dawn.
FEBRUARY FESTIVAL CROSS COUNTRY FUN SKI.
Dawn Lemme presented the staff report on this item.
Andrews: You know the Ski Patrol of Hennepin County has a cross country patrol and they
usually would be happy to help with something like that.
Lemme: Yeah, that's in some of our notes...and possibly get the snowmobile club out there
too have a few snowmobiles in case we really need to get out there. -'
Berg: Yeah, they owe us.
Lash: Yeah, I was just going to suggest them because I'm sure they'd be happy to do that.
To have some strategically located or some walkie talkies or something in case you really did
have an emergency, it'd be nice to have.
Lemme: Yeah, people we have on the course all have walkie talkies...
Manders: What is the route?
Lemme: Excuse me.
Manders: What is the 4 mile route?
Lemme: It's actually a combination of two that you have and that's another reason we have
to have people all along the areas of the course because there's areas where people can come
in off of their property and if we're going in the opposite direction that you might normally be
going in, if you were to hop onto their trail.
....."
20
,.... Park and Rec Commission Meeting - November 15, 1994
Manders: So it's all within the Arboretum?
Lemme: Yes. It's all within the Arboretum. Basically...the half mile just cuts off, it's a very
short route. If people want to do it 2-3 times, they can do that. If you're a beginner skier,
children. We want it to be really...
Lash: Talking about February Festival and not necessarily the skiing thing but I know I've
said this before and this sounds like a broken record. I still think that it'd be fun to try a
sweatshirt sale or maybe more of a long sleeve t-shirt. You know have a thing set up where
people can buy those things. I think those things go pretty well and if we had a sweatshirt
and maybe it was more generic and didn't say February Fest or something on it, were the
ones that didn't sell, we could put out again in the fall at Octoberfest or.
Andrews: Say Chanhassen on it with the maple leaf or something.
Lash: Yeah, something a little more generic maybe would be fine. Or maybe a beanie thing
for February Fest. Or mittens. I just think it'd be kind of fun and I think a lot of stuff goes.
People tend to buy that stuff.
,......
Hoffman: Beanie?
Berg: A beanie has a propeller on it.
Lash: At least I think it's worth checking into. If you think they're really cost prohibitive or
something.
Berg: Well I liked the shirts last year.
Lash: You know those new Lake Ann ones, the just generic Lake Ann, those were very
popular. I saw a lot of people who won them as prizes wanting to know where they could
buy them. They were nice. Sometimes the ones with the ears are nice but then it's a little
embarrassing when you wearing a nice...and everyone knows it's 7 years old.
KREA TIVE KIDS.
Dawn Lemme presented the staff report on this item.
SENIOR CENTER.
Dawn Lemme presented the staff report on this item.
""
21
Park and Rec Commission Meeting - November 15, 1994
-'
Andrews: I see the sweatshirt making item there. I just wonder if there's any coordination
between that and some sort of a theme for the February Festival. Maybe do something with
the seniors to make something or do something.
Lemme: That's possible and possibly do, we have a small crafts room and something like this
is really just a specialty thing. They come in for 3 hours and they just...paint on the
sweatshirts and generally low cost...
Andrews: Alright, thank you.
ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTA nONS:
PROPOSED PARK. OPEN SPACE AND mAIL ACOUISmON AND DEVEWPMENT
REFERENDUM.
Todd Hoffman presented the staff report on this item.
Andrews: I guess I'd like to see this particular item, which really wasn't prepared for tonight
but to have that come back like a grid of millions bonded or voted in a referendum. Home
values across the top. Approximate estimated tax implication of that. That was something
we could probably just keep with us every time we meet because that's going to, that's going
to give us some guidance as to what might be possible. And then you said you're going to be
working on some estimates, Bandimere and some of these other wish lists.
~
Hoffman: Land acquisition.
Andrews: Yep.
Hoffman: Development of lights.
Andrews: Trails.
Lash: When we put this package together for the Council, how specific do you think we
need to be? Not dollar amount but say we wanted to earmark x amount for land acquisition
for community park or open space preservation. Do we need to get site specific as far as the
open space or I know specifically we had two large treed areas in mind. Do we need to be
specific about that?
Hoffman: We'll be site specific based on the work that we you did last year...and without
that...say we'll buy 150 acres over the next 5 years somewhere out in Chanhassen, it's going
22
,.".
,-..- Park and Rec Commission Meeting - November 15, 1994
to cost you this much. I think you can see from the first editorial in the paper, that's not
going to fly. People want to know. In fact we want to take them out, walk them on the
property so we'll schedule as part of this, if it goes forward, public tours of the property
which we're taking a look at. And I will be including the Prince Nelson's property and the
Camp Tanadoona property but there being a caveat that these are probably not available at the
present time so you couldn't go out and purchase them.
Lash: So how do we address that problem?
Hoffman: Well I've approached some of the land owners and they're willing to sell.
Lash: Yeah but take those two specific sites. Do we put that then on the referendum so that
we've got the money in pocket in case they do come open? Because otherwise then if they
come open, say they come open in 3 years and then we don't have the money.
Hoffman: It's a tough sell to put something on a contingency. It's a really tough sell in a
referendum. People like, when they vote, at least and history tells you they like to see it
happen and continue to see...
,.....
Andrews: It will go somewhere else. I think the position we would have to perhaps be in is
to have some money available where we could convince the owner to hold it and then you
scramble. Emergency referendum. If that peninsula at Lake Ann came up and we scrambled
out and said this is our one shot. One time to do it, I think you could get support for it.
Hoffman: ...Eden Prairie in 6 weeks.
Andrews: Yeah, I think for us to say we need to hold $3 million in the bank in case
someday that comes, that ain't going to go. People aren't going to vote for it...
Lash: So if we get site specific, we need to identify a site for a community park too? I
know the last one was, it was general. It was community park in southern Chanhassen.
Hoffman: We don't have that any longer. I'll take a look at some of those and offer up some
recommendations.. .
Meger: Can you give us more information too. It seemed like Mayor Chmiel had quite a bit
of concern about our Chanhassen tax, was it...I mean I don't understand it that well so I
would like some more information just to be able to.
'"'"
23
Park and Rec Commission Meeting - November 15, 1994
....",
Lash: Well they're going to say, would never authorize something that's going to jeopardize
our bond rating so I don't think we have to worry about that.
Hoffman: Typically when Moody's comes out and says you...does not hurt your bond rating.
Andrews: I don't have any concern at all about our bond rating. With the amount of
construction going on out here, the tax capacity here is growing far faster than what's been
projected.
Hoffman: ...$6 million dollar, that doesn't even touch our coverage.
Andrews: Then if you look at what it is you just bought with that $6 million, I mean if the
city ever did go in the tank, they could put one of those pieces of property on the market and
sell it for a profit.
Lash: So how far down our wish list, just ballpark, do you think we're going to be able to go
with a $6 million figure? If that were the figure we went with.
Hoffman: I don't have a priority yet so I can't tell you how far it would get down there.
You'd be able to choose...Bandimere is over a million dollars to develop so there's a...but we ......"
shouldn't be disappointed in what we can accomplish for that amount of money and obviously
we need items which are...community which we're serving right now...We need to be able to
market those as...
Andrews: We've got to move fast because District 276 is talking about another school bond
referendum. If that comes out before this comes out, there's no chance that will go in
Minnetonka. They're already starting to do it. There are a lot of disgruntled property owners
that said, why couldn't you talk about this a year ago.
Lash: We would have had a different referendum a year ago.
Andrews: Well, they knew it was coming. I mean it's just how to politically solve something
In pIeces.
Berg: 112 has another one coming too.
Hoffman: ...the Council will hear your comments on December 10th and what you'd like to
receive, so if you have anything else on that.
Andrews: So our project, on the lOth is going to be.
,..,I
24
,.... Park and Rec Commission Meeting - November 15, 1994
Lash: Is that our last meeting?
Andrews: Yeah, this is it for this month.
Lash: I guess I figured we'd have on in two weeks. That'd be the 29th.
Manders: That's Thanksgiving week.
Lash: No, it would be the week after Thanksgiving.
Manders: No, it's the third week which is Thanksgiving week.
Andrews: So the 10th would be focusing on the referendum primarily or other tasks that
we've kind of let slide too or.
Hoffman: There'd be any subdivision proposals which come forward, year end type of...
,.....
Lash: That's supposed to be our Christmas celebration so we aren't going to want the meeting
to go.
Berg: Do you want to start a little earlier?
Hoffman: Yeah, we can meet on the referendum at 6:30 to 7:30...
Lash: Dave took on that, the job of planning that and he mentioned to me that he was going
to, he's thinking of Frankie's so I did voice my concern about their limited menu after
following our meetings here. We had a little trouble there. I think he knows Frankie
personally.
Andrews: Oh there's Byerly's now too and that's another place we haven't tried yet.
,....
Hoffman: Another short thing under Administrative Presentations. If you notice the Green
Sense. The publication. There are a lot of tie in's into our proposal for a referendum. It
covers...they're also starting a west metro chapter which...out of the Eden Prairie referendum
effort. They're having a meeting tomorrow night in City Hall of Chanhassen, up in the
courtyard conference room. I will be at the school. Our planning staff will be at Planning
Commission meeting and thus we don't know who is going to represent the city of
Chanhassen... If any of you are interested at 7:00, and what they talk about is other ways of
preserving open space, which is private, as really public open space as a professional
presentation. They do a lot with easements. Special easements over the property and they're
25
Park and Rec Commission Meeting - November 15, 1994
....."
very active and this does mention I believe the Eden Prairie effort...In regards to tomorrow
night's Planning Commission meeting, the item of Heritage Development which is the east of
the Timberwood Estates is on the agenda. Typically that is my responsibility to represent the
Parks Department and the Commission at that meeting. However I do have to attend school
tomorrow evening. I missed last week due to the other meeting so I can't miss a second
week. I will have somebody there from the staff level to represent us. Any park
commissioner who would like to represent the commission there, you're more than willing to
do that and you know how effective that can be.
Andrews: That's back at Planning you said?
Hoffman: Planning Commission and their contention is that they don't want to cough off the
open space for the park. The little comer of trees and so they've submitted a proposal
without that and we will be defending that as a position that we want that as park.
Lash: Is this the one with the boulevard and we asked them to move it east so that it was
more along the creek?
Hoffman: And they did not do that and our final position was we'll continue to have a trail at
the back side of the homes and what we want is to preserve those...and they're still showing 3 ""'"
or 4 lots in that area...
Lash: And this is the Planning Commission, right?
Hoffman: Correct.
Manders: What argument do they bring forth?
Hoffman: Well they're meeting their land dedication through the dedication of easement and
trail.
Andrews: Hooey. What a bunch of hooey. I want that on the record, hooey.
Lash: Could you spell that?
Hoffman: Does anybody want to go to that meeting?
Andrews: Tomorrow night?
-'
26
,..... Park and Rec Commission Meeting - November 15, 1994
Lash: Personally I don't want to go to the meeting if I don't have to but can you have the
staff person who represents Park and Rec, again say that there's a consensus with the
commission that this is a bunch of hooey and if they go along with that, you know then we'll
have to bring it up when it goes to City Council and make a major stink at that level so why
not just nit it in the bud at the Planning Commission level and be done with it.
Andrews: It's inconsistent.
Lash: You know I really think the commissions seriously need to respect each others
recommendations and back each other up when it's in the planning stage rather than have to
wait until it goes to City Council so I would respectfully request that they respect our
recommendation in this situation.
Andrews: You don't have a copy of the agenda do you for that meeting?
Hoffman: No, but I could call you tomorrow night.
Andrews: Give me a call. I may be able to make it.
,......
Hoffman: Okay. And lastly, you will have a year end date, up to date update on the revenue
charges for the park and trail acquisition and development but it was just dropped on my desk
today so I thought I'd spread the good news. Collected year to date is $432,526.31. So we
have budgeted revenue of $170,000.00 this year so we're obviously able to bankroll that
money but we also have been very aggressive in setting aside reserves so where we're at
now...we're able to meet our...which we had set aside so you can be happy about that
situation...but we don't have that big old nest egg set aside just yet for something such as the
Lake Ann...spend everything that we make. Although we do get a lot of pressure from
neighborhoods to continue to develop the neighborhood parks. We...
Lash: I have a question regarding the applicants for the commission. Did Jane and I need to
do anything with the information we gathered tonight?
Hoffman: Yeah, you should update the rest of the commission as to your thoughts and if you
feel that we should forward this, if you want to make a recommendation...City Council.
Lash: Well I guess what I want to know is what we're supposed to do. Generally we
prioritize the candidates or something.
"....
Hoffman: You can do that as well. I'll handle this one. Obviously we have applicants who...
we had one application coming in thus far and that person is...a Planning Commission
27
Park and Rec Commission Meeting - November 15, 1994
-'
applicant with a park and rec as an alternate. And Jane and Jan interviewed...and I have a
feeling that the City CounciL.will probably choose to interview Mr. Stubic regardless of any
recommendation here so and then they can make their choice.
Andrews: At this point, both Fred and Jim have re-applied?
Hoffman: Correct.
Andrews: Okay. We commend you. And we wonder why but.
Lash: So you want us to tell you now how we're feeling or do you want us to write it down
or what do you want us to do?
Hoffman: If you want to make a motion to the City Council, you can do that. And the
commission has done that in the past where they've prioritized people or recommended
people. The policy for reappointment is noL.to that specifics. It says you shall interview on
this date City Council shall interview on this date but the process between there is somewhat
gray. And we are entering into a political realm there so if you want to make
recommendations, let's say you push for your two candidates right now, they might say well
why are they pushing their two candidates now... -'
Lash: Although part of our criteria here is membership should consider reappointment of
current outstanding members wishing to be reappointed. So I mean we'd be following criteria
if we recommended Fred and Jim.
Todd Hoffman made some statements that were not heard on the tape.
Andrews: I'd like to see us, personally I'd like to see us make a motion to support
reappointment of those reapplying.
Lash: Yes, I would second that.
Andrews moved, Lash seconded that the Patk and Recreation Commission recommend that
the City Council reappoint Fred Berg and .1m Manders to the Patk and Recreation
Commission. All voted in favor and the motion camed.
Meger: I would just suggest that, seeing as Bob does obviously have a great interest and he's
applied for the two commissions, that should we get to the point where we have a task force
for a referendum, that we strongly consider him as a viable candidate.
""""'"
28
~ Park and Rec Commission Meeting - November 15, 1994
Lash; And if there needs to be any back up support as to the recommendation, it would be
based on a criteria of current members of the commission being reappointed, and I think also
on the face of the referendum, or possible upcoming referendum, that it would be in our best
interest to have experienced commissioners here who are already knowledgeable in the
process.
Andrews: Agreed. Any other business?
Manders: I had a couple questions. One, I just wanted to recognize the Cub Scouts on the
tree thing. My question there was, did they come to you with this option and is there similar
things out there that they just don't know enough to come into the city and ask about trees
and plantings and whatever else?
I""'"
Hoffman: Sure, to kind of align yourself with Fred's comments on the Friends for the Parks
and that type of an organizational effort and our response being that we need to go down that
road but typically where...in districts which have matured somewhat. You don't have to take
that. We have a growing...this person went out and made some contacts. You can't
develop...so they go out and make some contacts and...benefits for the Boy Scouts or Girl
Scouts as well.
Manders: Well it was great.
Hoffman: And we try to encourage that through our contact. If Public Safety doesn't get
them first, we pick right up on it.
Manders: Second comment was on the Lake Ann irrigation. Have you gotten a response
back on that?
Hoffman: No, I have given him his last notification. Sent the contract over to the City
Attorney. The City Attorney said you, if you want to close this contract you need to get
them certified mail notification that they have 10 days to complete their contract.
And...basically we will do it at our own expense and we will retain that money from their
contract retain age by $5,200.00...
Manders: And my last question is on the status of the playground equipment.
~
Hoffman: At Pheasant Hills? Pheasant Hills playground equipment was delivered 2 1/2-3
weeks late so it really came in more than what Earl F. Anderson would have expected for
delivery so it did not meet the promised date to be delivered. I've always...satisfaction with
them. In fact...
29
Park and Rec Commission Meeting - November 15, 1994
.....,/
Manders: So is it installed then or what's the?
Hoffman: Yeah, the equipment is in about the 75% finished stage, 80% installed. We're
installing it. They did not deliver a couple of posts. That counts up for about 2 days on the
installation. That came a week ago last Friday and then the slides, which were delivered to
the, I'll call them Jet Slide, our installer Dean Schmieg is very quick to catch these type of
things and when he installed it before...basin holds water. The runout of the slide...shallow
enough so after a night of rain and they slide down, the person is going to get soaked pants
so this is not a good thing. So then he thought, well a couple of things...our installer drilled
homes into the slide and let the water drain out of it and my response was, direct response
was that, I'm not going to bring my Park Commission out here and say I just bought
$20,000.00 worth of play equipment and now we have to bring...drilling holes in the slide to
let the water drain...so we'll go back to the fact where we ask them how we can solve this
and I asked them to create a change order in that regard that they can solve this with
factory...they'll redo those slides for you but they're coming out with brand new slides which
are slightly different. A quicker runoff and then level off after that and these slides will be
available in January or February. Would you like those so I said, well typically when a
company manufactures something new and improved, it's new and improved for a reason so
unless you tell me otherwise we'll take the new slide so we'll be getting a change out on those
slides to get the new slides. ....."
Andrews: No extra cost?
Hoffman: No extra cost.
Lash: So how does it look?
Hoffman: It looks great.
Lash: Good. Any comments from the residents about it?
Hoffman: ...again, it's not that we don't get the service. We have to twist arms...to make
things happen.
Lash: That's a tough one because, and we were all in full agreement that we were getting
more equipment for the money and we want to do that but yet on the other hand, the trade off
for us should not be arm twisting to get service. I'd like to continue to get the most
equipment for the money I can but sometimes the headaches just are not worth it.
....""I
30
,..... Park and Rec Commission Meeting - November 15, 1994
Andrews: I guess I'd like to see a letter go from you Todd, basically expressing just that.
That we saw their bid as providing a greater value of equipment and that in the future if they
wish to have favorable consideration, we'd appreciate the service to be.
Berg: Yeah, and he stood 15 feet away from us when we told him that face to face and then
he still comes back and says well we don't consider 2 weeks to be a problem. We told him 2 ·
weeks was a problem. We told him the date, we needed it on the date that he specified.
Lash: Yeah, I think I was pretty.
Hoffman: You were specific.
Lash: Very.
Berg: And you didn't change your mind 4 times.
Andrews: Any other comments? Motion to adjourn.
,.....
Berg moved, Lash seconded to adjourn the meeting. All voted in favor and the motion
canied. The meeting was adjourned.
Submitted by Todd Hoffman
Park and Recreation Director
Prepared by Nann Opheim
,....
31