PRC 1992 02 25
CHANHASSEN PARK AND RECREATION COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
~FEBRUARY 25, 1992
Chairman Schroers called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m..
MEMBERS PRESENT: Fred Berg, Jim Andrews, Wendy Pemrick, Larry Schroers and
Jan Lash
MEMBERS ABSENT: Randy Erickson and Dave Koubsky
STAFF PRESENT: Todd Hoffman, Park and Rec Coordinator; and Jerry Ruegemer,
Recreation Supervisor
APPROVAL OF MINUTES; Berg moved, Lash seconded to approve the Mi~utes of
the Park and Recreation Commission meeting dated January 28, 1992 as
presented. All voted in favor and the motion carried.
RESOLUTIONS:
A. STATE OUTDOOR RECREATION GRANT PROGRAM.
B. FEDERAL LAND AND WATER CONSERVATION FUND PROGRAM.
Hoffman: Chairman Schroers and Commission members. These resolutions were
previously, at last evening's meeting presented to City Council as well.
It's simply responding to a plea from the Minnesota Recreation and Parks
Association to show our support in favor of these programs. Both the
LAWCON and the state program. We have discussed just as recently as last
meeting the parks which have benefitted from the LAWCON dollars being South
~Lotus Lake, Lake Susan and Lake Ann Park. Funding is becoming critically
short in these two programs so they're reaching out to the communities.and
asking staff people, commissioners, council people to give a call down to
their representatives and then as well to sending these resolutions down to
MRPA so they can be presented to our state legislators. So upon adoption
and approval by the Commission, I'll have Larry Schroers, Chairman Schroers
sign the originals after the meeting and send these to MRPA.
Schroers: Okay, thanks Todd. Is there any discussion regarding these
issues? I can't see why we wouldn't want to show our support for these
resolutions. If no one has any reason why we shouldn't, I'll ask for a
motion to support the resolutions.
Andrews: So moved.
Schroers: Is there a second?
Pemrick: I'll second.
Andrews moved, Pemrick seconded that the Park and Recreation Commission
approve a Resolution urging the State of Minnesota to expand the Funding
for the State Outdoor Recreation Grant Program and a Resolution urgaing the
expansion of of the Federal Land and Water Conservation Fund Program. All
voted in favor and the motion carried.
,.....
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
February 25, 1992 - Page 2
SItE PLAN REVIEW: BLUFF CREEK SITE. KEYLAND HOMES. JAMES R. HILL. INC..
PLANNERS. ENGINEERS. AND SURVEYORS.
...",
Hoffman: As noted in your packet, item 3 has been pulled at the request of
the applicant. It's not due to any mischievious dealings. Simply a death
in the family of one of the partners and the home builders so it's taking a
little bit more time reviewing the homesite and the entire project prior
to bringing it in for final approval. So no action is necessary at this
time.
FINAL AMENDMENTS. CHANHASSEN PARK AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT FIVE YEAR
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM. NEIGHBORHOOD AND COMMUNITY PARKS.
Hoffman: Chairman 5chroers and commission members, it's been a few
since you've seen this document. It's changed in it's appearance.
"final version" although it does contain amendments which I've made
document after reviewing the information which was discussed at the
Commission level. As I've stated in my staff report, it would be necessary
for the Commission to review those changes and then as well the items which
were discussed by the Commission. Make any noted changes, deletions,
and/or additions and then go ahead and adopt the 5 year capital improvement
plan. We'll revisit this on a yearly basis and continue to update it. I
would presume we would simply just quickly page through these. Take a look
at each park. Refresh our memories and...potential new items which you'd
like to discuss, we'll take time to do that. Just go ahead and run right
through the entire document.
months
It is a
to the
5chroers: Okay. Do yo~ want me to take this Todd? Okay. We'll start
with Bandimere Community Park. It asks for complete a needs assessment
study in 1992 and proceed with development of park based on results of the
study. I would hope that the results of our survey would help us decide
what kind of things the community is going to be looking for in Bandimere
Park and from that hopefully we could move forward and start to develop.
Does anyone want to add anything in particular that we want to pay
attention to in regards to Bandimere? I think at our special meeting we
were all pretty much under the impression that unless we're able to get
some kind of referendum funding, that we're going to have a problem with
funding Bandimere so I guess at thi~ time we'll have to wait and see how we
progress on that. Okay, we'll move along to Bandimere Heights Park. It's
a neighborhood park and we're looking for an identification sign and I
think we have budgeted fof that correct?
...",
Hoffman: Correct.
Lash: This $8,000.00, that's something that you put in right Todd?
Hoffman: Correct. The dark in there, the bold figures are items which as
we worked through the 5 year capital improvement plan, it's really a
planning process so we take a look at what we potentially would need in
that time period. Play equipment at Bandimere Park is approximately 6
years old at this time with a refurbishment of $1,700.00 put in last year.
At some point in the future we're going to need to add additional equipment
or reburbish the old equipment. That's the only reason for bringing that
in.
...,.,
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
February 25, 1992 - Page 3
,....
Lash: Is this ultimately when Bandimere is designed, is this going to be
incorporated into that somehow? Or will that be separate?
Hoffman: It's been talked about in both veins. Incorporating it and then
as well not incorporating it. The senses which I feel is most recently
been discussed is keeping it separate from the community park as a
neighborhood site.
Lash: What do you think about that Wendy?
Pemrick: That's what the neighbors want. They're real concerned about
keeping that a separate little play area, open space for the kids.
Hoffman: It would cause us some parking access problems if it developed as
part of this community park. Simply if there were facilities close to
Kiowa Trail, people would be accessing the park off of Kiowa instead of
parking up on top and walking down to the facility.
Pemrick: And it also has quite a steep grade to get up to the Bandimere.
It sits down there so it'd be tough to do something. I know I'll be asked
this Todd and I know with weather and everything it's hard to say but any
idea when they hope to complete that upgrading?
Hoffman: The grading?
Pemrick: Yeah. The regrading.
,....,
Hoffman: It's work which is being completed at a public works/park
maintenance personnel. They were chased out of there by the snowfall as
well. I've encouraged them to be in there as soon as possible this spring.
However it will be planned in conjunction with street sweeping and other
activities in the springtime. I would hope that by the end of June the
park would be all buttoned up. Reseeded. The soccer field is going to be
reoriented to north/south instead of east/west. And then the play
equipment which was removed will be pulled to the front of the park.
Pemrick: To the street more?
Hoffman: Yeah.
Pemrick: Oh, that will be nice.
Hoffman: For those commissioners that don't know what occurred, Bandimere
has always been kind of a low wet area. Public works informed me that they
would be accepting some excess fill material from the TH10l project coming
through from Market Blvd. down through that new TH 101 piece past
Rosemount. I did not anticipate that they would take the amount of dirt
which they did. I was quite displeased when I saw that, however public
works people know that. The dirt was there. We looked at the option of
removing it would be very costly. So what we did in the end, we picked out
all 8 trees which were in there. Caliper trees of about 2 1/2. Had those
moved up to Chanhassen Hills Park. Pulled the play structure out of the
corner of the park which was really down in a low area and now we
,.... completely began the process of regrading the entire park. So in the end
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
February 25, 1992 - Page 4
it will be a much nicer site but it was a round about way of what I
envisioned as a refurbishment turned into a total regrading of this park.
..."""
Schroers: We also voted to put in like a 20 spot aggregate parking lot
right off the street there didn't we?
Hoffman: Yeah, there's an asphalt parking lot which would probably
accommodate about 10 cars.
Schroers: Oh it's asphalt?
Hoffman: Asphalt, pull in parking pad.
Schroers: Oh I thought we were going to do just aggregate there?
Hoffman: Put in as aggregate and then asphalt it.
Pemrick: And then the sand volleyball court. I don't think that happened
yet. That was listed as being done.
Hoffman: In 1991?
Pemrick: Yes.
Hoffman: I'll take a look at the information which I've given to Dale
Gregory and see if he made note of that. There would certainly be room for
it with the changes being made down there.
Andrews: Speaking of volleyball courts, have we looked at methods of
securing our nets, dlfferent methods for next year? Cables or.
-'
Hoffman: Yep.
Schroers: Are you talking about tennis nets now or volleyball?
Andyews: The volleyball nets.
Schroers: What we do is take a plastic coated wire and run it along the
top and then in the eyes where it attached, use like U bolts. U clamps and
just screw them down tight and they seem to stay in place. But it does
take a cable. 1/8 inch coated cable.
Hoffman: Okay.
Schroers: Okay, let's move along to Bluff Creek. classas
to be incorporated into the Bluff Creek Preservation Zone.
I guess I've been here about 5 years now and Bluff Creek is
always has been.
open space and
It seems like,
where it's
Lash: Where's that again?
schroers: Well that's still somewhat in question too.
~
Patk and Rec Commission Meeting
February 25, 1992 - Page 5
,....
Hoffman: The thing that threw me off on it was that the park boundary as
shown on our engineering city map was incorrect. So where I thought the
park was off of Bluff Creek Drive, it was not so now that's been corrected.
It's really just a lowland back down in here.
Schroers: So basically what we're doing is hoping that somehow we can just
incorporate it into a passive use, green space and at this point there's,
for the next 5 years, no intent of spending any money on it?
Hoffman: Yeah. That's part of the greenway for Bluff Creek and the
eventual trail construction. Hopefully that will occur.
Schroers: Carver Beach Park. It's a neighborhood park. $2,200.00
additional in refurbishment in 1992. Now we did do some work in therein
1991 right?
Hoffman:. In 1991 we did work at Carver Beach playground. The park up on
top. This is refurbishing and installing resilient pea gravel.
Schroers: Oh down at the beach?
Hoffman: At the beach, yep. The only additional items noted in here are
swimming buoys. with the activity, boating activity which we see on
Lotus Lake, I feel it's imperative that we mark those beach areas for some
safety aspects. Staggering those purchases of additional marking buoys in
1993 and 1994 and then there is a absence of park benches along that trail
.~which goes from the mi ni-beach to the mai n par k.
Lash: Do you feel that the bouy situation is a safety hazard that we maybe
should be addressing this next year instead of waiting?
Hoffman: There's currently buoys at the main beach and they're getting old
and one sank halfway down last year and so this would be replacing the
buoys at the main beach in 1994 and then purchasing buoys for the mini-
beach in 1993. It's important that we move ahead in 1993 to purchase buoys
for the mini-beach. We can do that. The mini-beach has always been that
situation where have we officially adopted it or have we have not? The
neighborhood which performs much of the work there for the improvement. The
city purchased the materials for the swimming raft. The neighborhood put
it together. So the raft is out there floating and without a defined area
around the swimming area so it's something that we may want to look at.
That's my reason for including it.
Schroers: Who deals with the liability issues of the city? What I'm
concerned about is if we actually mark off a designated swimming area and
we're sending that message out and yet it's an unguarded beach. If there
would be a drowning or a boating accident in the area, who from the city
deals with those liability issues and should they be addressed before we
start putting bouys out?
Hoffman: The City Attorney would. I'm not going to act as even to ponder
what the City Attorney would tell us about that but if you want me to
investigate that, I certainly will.
,.....,
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
February 25, 1992 - Page 6
Schroers: r think that it certainly would be to our advantage to cover our
bases before we go o.ut and start putting out buoys and I know that there
are State 6rdinances regarding beaches and that sort of thing. Distances
from designated areas to buoys and that sort of thing. We would be in an
awkward situation if we just went ahead as a park commission and threw a
bunch of buoys out there and then we have something unfortunate happen and
they came back to us and said, well who told you it was alright to do
that? Are you going to assume the liability?
....",;
Hoffman: O~ay. The buoys are currently going out each year for the main
beach at Carver Beach. I would believe that we'd just as much at fault if
we didn't mark it as if you did and it's certainly going to be if somebody
pushed that issue, it's the major fault is going to fall back onto the
person causing the injury.
schroers: Well would it be a big deal just to ask the City Attorney?
Hoffman: Not at all.
Schroers: If we're out of line to do that just so we have our bases
covered here and they can't come back at us and accuse us of some wrong
doing at some point in the future.
Andrews: Are those posted as swim at your own risk beaches?
Hoffman~ Currently there are no posting. I have to take a look at the
sign. There is a sign that's placed 5 or 6 years ago at Carver Beach.
Andrews: I'm sure that'd be part of the coordinated effort would be proper
signage about assumption of liability.
.....,;
Schroers: No lifeguard on duty, swim at your own risk.
Hoffman: We should include that as part of the swimming buoy. and maybe
raise that to $1,500.00 each. Signage.
Lash: I would think if anything would ever happen there, we would be more
liable for negligence by not having it marked than we would be. I mean not
that I'm an attorney or ariything but that just seems.
schroers: Yeah, that seems logical but things tend to get twisted around.
so much, I mean you think you're doing the right thing and then all of a
sudden you didn't.
Andrews: What we've got to be careful of is if the law says 150 feet and
we only put 100 feet out, that's worse than probably doing nothing.
Schroers: Yeah, if you do it wrong you know.
Hoffman: Consider that investigated and do you want to set some increased
amount on those then to include signage?
Schroers: Okay. So on the swimming buoys at the main beach, you want to
increase it from $1,000.00 to $1,500.00?
....""
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
February 25, 1992 - Page 7
JI""
. Hoffman: I would propose that.
Lash: Is that getting a park sign?
Hoffman: Rule sign?
Lash: Is it too late to get that incorporated into that?
Hoffman: The general park rules sign? Those are being ordered in a bulk
basis. Manufactured each one. I have taken the position that I don't want
to sign the parks to death either so we'll try to incorporate it underneath
that sign or at the beach location.
5chroers~ 50 if this for both the mini-beach and the main beach then?
Hoffman: Correct.
5chroers: The additional $500.00? Do you need a motion on that?
Hoffman: No, we'll simply adopt the updated as a single motion.
Andrews: Just out of curiousity, what action was taken on the boat issue?
Hoffman: Last evening?
Andrews: Yeah, was it the old rule or new rule?
,.....
Hoffman: Older rule.
Andrews: Okay.
Hoffman: With some negotiation taking place because there's dispute
between what the city says was. out there and what they think is out there.
50 they're bringing in aerial photographs and family photo albums. Ready
to move on Larry.
5chroers: Okay, does anyone have anything else on Carver Beach Park?
Okay, Carver Beach Playground is next. We have the ID sign. Replacement
of the swing. Addition of two spring animals.
Lash: Can I back up for one second? I don't see the park ID sign for
Carver Beach Park in 1992.
Hoffman: The park rule sign?
Lash: Yes.
Hoffman: The rule signs are all incorporated under other improvements.
Miscellaneous park rule signs.
Lash: Okay, well Carver Beach playground has wood park ID sign.
Hoffman: Oh, that's the large sign, wood sign identifying Carver Beach
~playground. Identifying the park. Carver Beach Park has that sign.
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
February 25, 1992 - Page 8
Schroers: It's not a rules sign?
--'
Hoffman: No. Not a rules sign. It's a park ID sign. Labeling the park
as Carver Beach Playground.
Schroers: I guess I'm not totally sure what 2 spring animals are.
Hoffman: Playground equipment. They're great and they're $500.00 a piece.
Lash: Do we have diggers over there already?
Hoffman: Not that.
Lash: I like diggers much more than the spring animals but they're a
pretty good price aren't they?
Schroers: Some little animals dig. Maybe these will be diggers.
Pemrick: They can be dangerous though.
Lash: The diggers?
Pemrick: With cast iron buckets on them and come down on someone's foot
or. Not that it happened to us but.
Lash: They're very popular.
Pemrick: Yeah, they're great.
....".,
Schroers: I guess in order not to dwell too much on this, if each of us
just kind of glance down the improvements and the dollars propose and if
you have a cqncern or suggestion or an. idea, please state 6r else we'll
just move right along.
Andrews: Let's go on.
Schroers: Okay, here we go.
Hoffman: Larry, just to interject. I think it can help you if you look at
the totals. Certainly not that we're trying to calculate this based on a
presumption of what we want to spend in each year but the totals at the end
of the, as calculated there give you a little bit of an idea. In 1993
we're above what we can spend. In 1994, $66,000.00, 1995, $85,000.00 and
1996, there's some leeway there. Just to use a baseline.
Andrews: We're a little heavy in 1992 and 1993 and a little light in 1994
and 1995 and then kind of back on, quite heavy really in 1996. In today's
dollars right?
Hoffman: Yeah.
Andrews: I think it averages out though pretty close to what we need to be
at right?
....",
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
February 25, 1992 - Page 9
I""
Hoffman: It really does.
Schroers: Alright, then let's move on to Chanhassen Estates Mini Park.
Lash: There's been requests for play equipment there?
Hoffman: ...question posed to the Commission. Do you feel that it is
necessary or not?
Lash: It seems like the things that we budgeted to come up in the near
future were intended more for the employees over in that area. Then in
1996 we've got the play area which then is flipping it back more to
neighborhood use so I don't know if we're targeting it more for the
industrial area than if we want to start putting playground equipment in
there or not. I'm just kind of thinking out loud. I really don't have a
feeling.
Hoffman: Those are all good thoughts and another thought is not a well
defined access to it. There's access through the cul-de-sac but that is
not an official a~cess. It would be through somebody's yard. The other
thought is McDonald's is right across the street and if you had picnic
tables and a piece of play equipment in this area, you're certainly to see
use by people getting their lunch and going over to the park. The mini
park to eat lunch and play on the equipment. Just a matter of what you
would like to develop 'there at that site.
I""Andrews: That playground right now is kind of screened off by the trees.
You really can't see it from the houses. I guess one of my concerns there
would be that we have to remove a lot of trees out of there to give I think
safe supervision for the parents. I'm not sure, also we talked about
putting a basketball court and a couple of picnic tables on a 1 acre piece
of land doesn't leave much left.
Schroers: I'd be real happy with the park ID sign and a couple picnic
tables and just look at what use it's getting when that's in place and then
maybe at that point We would decide that that's adequate for the area and
we would not need the basketball court or the play area. Or one or the
other.
Hoffman: Okay.
Lash: Yeah, I think I could live with taking that $10,000.00. I think
there's other places that need it.
Andrews: I agree. I'd like to see that go.
Hoffman: Okay. And the basketball court? That was discussed by the
commission.
Lash: That's something that possibly employees might go use during the
lunch hour and if that's the direction we're taking it is more as a place
for employees to go, then I don't have a problem with that. And also if
that's also for neighborhood use. That's adults and that's older kids
""" whereas play equipment I look at as more for younger kids and I 'f!"' not
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
February 25, 1992 - Page 10
comfortable, I wouldn't be comfortable as a parent sending a kid over to
play on the play equipment when it's screened so much from the homes but
yet it's so easily accessible to the businesses. So I don't have a problem
with the basketball.
--'
Schroers: Should we just eliminate then the proposal for play area?
Hoffman: Already done.
Schroers: Anything else? Okay. Chanhassen Hills Park.
Lash: Didn't you say tonight that you took some trees over and installed
them?
Hoffman: Yeah.
La~h: Are we still planning on putting in more then in 1992?
Hoffman: We'll take that money to replace, make the trade back to
Bandimere. So it's already been established in the Chanhassen Hills
budget. We'll just leave it in there and spend the money in Bandimere to
replace those trees. The only addition here is again the play areas in a
first phase. There's a second phase designed and planned. If it's the
Commission's wish to see that carried out in 1996 or beyond, it can be
labeled there either asa 1996 or 1996 and beyond.
Berg: When you say play area expansion~ what exactly are you talking
about?
...""
Hoffman: Play areas are typically designed in two phases. Two or three
phases and when the area is bordered off and the pea gravel's installed,
it's built large enough for all phases. In the first phase the play
equipment is built, purchased and constructed and usually it's for, either
the older age group kids or younger age group and then the second phase is
deferred. Purchase of that is deferred until some point in the future and
when it can be purchased and installed as a second phase, the space is
already there. The surface is there. You just go ahead and buy the
additional equipment.
Schroers: That's nice in a new development with people moving in with
younger kids. You can install the young, the small for younger age group
equipment first and then the second phase...as the neighborhood grows,
their facilities grow along with it.
Lash: You' 11 fi nd Fred that $10,000.00 does .not buy much playground
equipment.
Berg: I wouldn't think so.
Schroers: When you look at $10,000.00, you go oh boy.
Lash: Right. And typically Phase 1 is about $10,000.00 so there's not
much there.
....."
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
February 25, 1992 - Page 11
"
Hoffman: A side note. We're going to be looking at less for our money
with the new ADA, American with Disabllities Act. We'll be needing to
address access to these new play structures which would include a hard
surface from an accessible parking area or on street parking or bituminous
trail, into the play structure with then a resilient mat. A rubber mat
surface up to either a transfer point or a ramp on the play structure...
swings in your area and then the play structure, you have to provide ~he
access to both of those.
Lash: I'm afraid our budget won't even be covering putting in totlots
anymore.
Hoffman: Equal access becomes an expensive. Looking for some Community
Development Block Grant monies again in 1992 for remodeling or refurbishing
Lake Ann structures in our major community parks to bring those up to speed
but the jury isn't fully out on what compliance is but reasonable
compliance has been labeled as providing reasonable access to transfer
points on play structures for persons with any type of disability. Whether
it be physical, mental. It's the law.
Schroers: They should pass a funding amendment along with the law. Okay,
does anyone have other concerns regarding Chanhassen Hills?
Hoffman: Is there a feeling, should that be 1996 or should it be beyond
that?
~Schroers: For the play area expansion?
Hoffman: Yeah.
Lash: That's as far away as I'd like to see it. That park would be near
completion then wouldn't it?
Hoffman: Near completion and as well Chanhassen Hills development will be
fully developed by then.
Schroers: Well as he said, we'll be looking at thi~ each year and as we
get to like 1993 or 1994, we'll have a better idea if we want to put it
beyond so I don't think we need to be concerned with that.
Lash: And typically our pattern has been give them something this year and
skip the next year. And 1993 is pretty heavy because of the $30,000.00 but
then they've got 2 years with nothing so I think that's kind of a nice
balance.
Schroers: Alright. Chanhassen Pond. 16 acres of open space.
Lash: We've got in 1992 a park ID and in 1993 a park rD.
Hoffman: That would be to facilitate signing of all entrances of the park
so there's currently a sign at Laredo. The sign this year will go in on
Kerber Blvd.. That park in 1993 would be installed down off of... The
only other item of note there is the $4,000.00 to replace the stairs. Those
~wele constructed by an Eagle Scout. They are becoming increasingly, each
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
February 25, 1992 - Page 12
year they're just falling apart. We pullout rerod and rerods are being
bent over and continue to wash out. We may in fact not even want to .....,
replace the stairs and just allow that area to be traveled without stairs.
Just using incline. For any.of those who have walked it, you may have an
opinion on that. If we just take out the stairs when they've lived out
their livelihood and either replace it with asphalt or the aggregate base.
Larry, you've probably been there.
Schroers: Yeah.
Lash: I've been there too but I can't remember where the stairs are.
Hoffman: They come down off of Laredo. Laredo, the traill access is
blacktop to the top of the hill and then the stairs go down. There's a
trail alongside the stairs which probably receives 75% of the use, which is
just,a gravel trail.
Schroers: You almost have to believe though that if we put in an aggregate
trail in place of the steps, with a heavy rain we'd be constantly trying to
push the stuff back up the hill. I think on a grade like that we'd be
further ahead to throw out an asphalt patch on it.
Hoffman: We can asphalt that down to the bridge and then the little short
segment on the other side and that would then complete that asphalt trail
link through there with that giving access to the turf walk around the
entire look of the pond.
Schroers: Well there again we're talking about 1996 and we can just kind
of monitor the rate of deterioration. Take a look at it end season this
year and see how it looks and I guess if it gets to a point where it's a
safety concern, we may have to address that before 1996.
....",
Hoffman: Okay.
Schroers: Otherwise I like what I see about pretty much leaving it as is
and not developing.
Hoffman: I received one call there, actually requesting the wood park ID
sign in 1993 after it was included. This person informed me that she
thinks her neighbors don't even know it's a park. They just think it's a
big open space behind their yards and they can use it however they want.
For the park rules sign and the park ID sign, will help alleviate those
kind of thoughts.
Schroers: Okay. We'll move onto City Center. The play area expansion,
50% shared. So we are doing a $20,000.00 expansion?
Hoffman: In '92 hopefully. The school district has not gotten back to me
on that as of yet. If they fund their $10,000.00, we'll go ahead and'
purchase and have that installed. The Commission needs to discuss if they
would like to enter into an additional agreement with the school district
to purchase the third and final phase and if so, when that should be.
That's what the $12,000.00 represents in 1994.
-'
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
February 25, 1992 - Page 13
"...,
Schroers: I think that that may have some question regarding what happens
with a development of the City Center Park, if it's going to be included
with the new plan with the bandshell and all that sort of thing.
Hoffman: That would have no effect on this structure.
Schroers: None whatsoever?
Hoffman: None whatsoever. This is strictly dealing with the play element
which is on the west side of the school. The border is wholly developed.
It's already there. It's just Phase 2 and Phase 3 are left to be
purchased.
Lash: I think 1994 is the soonest that we'd anticipate looking at the
numbers. The totals that on the last page, that's the soonest we could do
it. I have a question on the basketball pOles and standards. I thought
those went in already?
Hoffman: They did go in. The condition of them,
and we may in fact be able to get by with those.
they came through the winter. Those were the old
reinstalled so they were bent back into shape and
simply will not purchase those...
we remanufactured them
We'll take a look at how
poles which were used and
if they hold up, we'll
Schroers: Okay. Any other thoughts regarding City Center?
~Andrews: The warming house seems to be kind of an issue. We're not
allocating anything to patch that up year to year. Is that just one of
general maintenance dollars?
Hoffman: We allocated money for reshingling. The building has gotten to
the point where general maintenance can be included in our maintenance
budget. It's not worth doing anything elaborate simply because it's
getting to the end of it's livelihood.
Lash: How about the tennis courts?
work?
Are they going to be needing more
Hoffman: That's a good point.
crack repair. Redone in 1991.
As far as to repaint, resurface, do some
Probably by about 1994.
Lash: Did we put wind screen up there or are we putting plantings around
there or what were we doing?
Hoffman: Generally my recollection on what the commission has been talking
about is to do away with wind screens. Just too expensive and does not
last and go with plantings.
Lash: Have we done that?
Hoffman: Yes...What tennis courts, I would estimate there's 4 courts
there. Probably $3,000.00 to $5,000.00 in 1994 eventually for an
,..... expenditure.
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
February 25, 1992 - Page 14
Schroers: Well we do want to keep those up and give them maintenance as
needed, when needed or it's going to turn into a lot larger cost.
...""
Andrews: About $3,000.00 or $4,000.00 will resurface and repaint, on those?
Hoffman: Yeah, $4,000.00 in 1994.
as time goes on. since it was not
which we did" we'll monitor that.
may last. Keep whipping Lar.
That's saying we'll take a look at that
replaced yet but was a patch operation
Those cracks may come back earlier or
Schroers: Curry Farms.
Lash: It looks kind of bleak.
Schroers: It does.
Lash: Are we done there?
Hoffman: Essentially the commission has responded to their desires and the
park is essentially complete.
Schroers: Why are we doing the soils test?
Hoffman: That's for the tennis court.
Lash: But then we don't have any money budgeted anywhere in there for it
so you're assuming it's not going to pass the test?
....."
Hoffman: I'm assuming it's going to fail the test. There will be a
recommendation along with that to what action could be taken to remedy
that. That would be considerable excavation. In fact, it's at the
commission's will to even make that decision at the commission level and
say we just really don't believe that a court can ever be built there and
withstand the poor soil conditions and weather that so we may want to take
the position that we don't spend the $2,500.00 in the soil study either and
amend the master plan for Curry Farms through a neighborhood meeting.
Lash: Is there something else you could think of that we could do there
instead of a tennis court? Have they requested anything else or are they
happy?
Hoffman: Not that I know of. We certainly did not replace it with
anything, hard court surface. They have a ballfield, sand volleyball and
piece of play equipment and the trail so it becomes some additional open
space.
Schroers: Well I guess I like that idea. I mean if we have a good reason
to believe, I mean if we are fairly sure that it's g6ing to fail the test,
we could certainly use that $2,500.00 better.
Lash: Has that been fully landscaped? I would rather see the money go
towards some nice trees and s6me landscaping along the trail or at the
entrance. I haven't been down there and looked at it for a while but it
was pretty bleak the last time I saw it.
.....,I
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
February 25, 1992 - Page 15
,....
Hoffman: There were some trees which went in with the initial development
but inch, inch and a quarter caliper.
Schroers: Let's scratch the soils test then. Do you feel that you need to
notify the residents of that? Of Curry Farms.
Hoffman: That would be my, we can certainly make a change to a master plan
without notification. It's at your discretion whether you would want to do
that or not.
Schroers: The situation that I want to avoid is having people show up at
our meeting and say we were promised this. Why weren't we told? Why
didn't somebody explain to us what was going on? We're sitting here with
our new tennis rackets ready to go.
Hoffman: I would propose that we send a letter to .the residents stating
the reasons why the master plan has been amended. If you have concerns, to
call. If there was sufficient concern, to hold a public hearing.
- Schroers: Sounds appropriate.
Lash: Can we designate that money to go more towards some landscaping
efforts instead?
Schroers: Yeah, leave the money in Curry Farms.
~Hoffman: I did receive comment this winter on a skating. The closest
~kating to there was either down to City Center Park or over to Carver
Beach playground so.
Lash: Carver Beach playground isn't that far.
Hoffman: No, it's not. It's just not right in my back yard. And it's a
part of, you'll notice the estimates for installing electricity up to these
sites with a light for family skating and the installation of the warming
house was included. I would anticipate that I will bring back to the
Commission a study on distribution of our open skating areas. Do we want
to move ahead with the plan to run electricity into those sites? Holding
of the neighborhood meetings to discuss that sometime in the June/July
timeframe this year so we get another chance to take a look at the skating
rink issue.
Lash: Would this site lend itself well to skating?
Hoffman: No, because of the hill which is there to...water truck from
getting onto the park site. There is a pond there which is partially in
the rear lots. Lot lines go to the middle of the pond and it comes into
the park. We received requests to maintain parks, it would be my
recommendation that we take a stance, even in Pheasant Hill where we've
been maintaining that, to simply not provide any maintenance to holding
pond areas. I don't know if you're all privy to the story where the bobcat
went through Pheasant Hill Park. Through the Pheasant Hill neighborhood
skating pond. Not our bobcat. The City received, has gone up there and
""'flooded the area from driving the truck up to the pond and taking the hose
Park and RecCommission Meeting
February 25, 1992 - Page 16
down and flooding it, the rink, and that has taken place ~or the previous 2
years to this year. After the neighborhood has gone ahead and cleaned out
the area and installed their lights and that type of thing. So they got
used to that. Then this year with the heavy snow they said boy, none of
the residents, none of the neighbors want to go down there and shovel that
heavy snow off so they called us. Said can you bring a truck or a bobcat
out to take a look at that? Received numerous requests over about a week
and a half. It was a Tuesday we went out there and drilled some holes.
There was about 12 to 14 inches of ice. Both Dale Gregory and I said,
heck, that's enough ice to hold a bobcat or a truck. Dale said I'll be out
here Thursday or Friday. Wednesday was the mid-week holiday, Martin Luther
King Day I believe. On Wednesday a contractor got antsy. Got some calls
from residents and took his bobcat out there and fell through that 12
inches of ice. Cracked through and took him 7 hours to haul his bobcat out
of there, $8,000.00 worth of damage. So you have riever, I thought that was
safe for sure but he got up close to the edge and the ice was able to
compress enough into the mud, because the mud wasn't solid frozen with the
mild winter we had. It cracked up behind him and when he backed up he fell
through. So we should.take the position, my recommendation that we do not,
to cease maintaining, assisting to maintain ponds, storm water retention
areas, that type of thing. We receive those requests on an annual basis as
well. Just all these side notes taking up too much time. But they're
interesting stories.
Schroers: Okay. Good story. Greenwood Shores Park. I guess I'd like to
plug in about $25,000.00 for a parking lot.
Lash: What a jokester.
Andrews: We should have signs out on TH 5 directing people to the park
too.
Lash: r want to know what the problem is with the volleyball. It's the
only thing we've ever asked for.
schroers: It's a trade off for the parking.
Lash: I guess. I mean we play volleyball down there so there's obviously
room for it.
Hoffman: Below the hill would you propose or above the hill?
Lash: Well, I think they've set it up in both places. Just beyond the
gravel thing they've set it up and then farther down they've set it up so,
and just use the white markings.
Hoffman: It
take up that
to erosion.
It's a small
would fit. It's such a small area to begin with that if we
much area with sand, does it distract from, it's susceptable
And then we open up that area. It could be put in there.
area.
Lash: I agree it's a small area and personally I don't really care if it's
there or not.
......"
.....",
-'
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
February 25, 1992 - Page 17
.~
Andrews: I think if you put a volleyball court in, in my opinion it's hard
to justify that you shouldn't have parking nearby because I think it's
blatantly unfair to say well we can have a volleyball court anyway but
you're not welcome to use it.
Lash: You're welcome to use it.
Andrews: But just don't drive your car. It's like.
Schroers: We don't even want to get into this.
Andrews: It's not right.
Schrqers: This issue right now. My concern would be that we .have already
lost or are losing a couple nice trees down there. As far as I know there
was a couple marked. I believe I saw marks on a couple of trees down there
and I looked at the trees and I said, oh no. Why do these trees have to
go? And the deal is, if you put in a sand volleyball court, you have to
dig down about a foot and I'd be concerned about doing any root damage.
Hoffman: There's that large oak tree right on the edge of the hill. The
other thing is that that bituminous trail that ends down there, at some
point I believe that should be connected up with the road simply for
accessibility from going from hard surface to hard surface. From the road
to the trail. That would make sense.
I""""
Lash: Excuse but just when you said that it got me thinking, I heard a
comment from a neighbor there who said it is so ripped up, the whole hill
is so ripped up from.
Hoffman: The sewer.
Lash: Yeah, and how in the world is that going to be repaired this spring.
I'm afraid any grass seed or anything that's put down is just going to be
washed right down the hill.
Hoffman: Well we're thinking as the same thing that we'll do over in Lake
Ann to make crosses between the ballfields. It will be worst at Lake Ann.
Is to go ahead and p~t down temporary gravel on a certain secti6n and then
grass the remainder of it. Let the grass establish itself for a year. The
following year or two later, take out the gravel and put down topsoil and
reseed that area. Simply because it has been ripped up. The ADA does
address as well accessibility for parking, no parking. Hard surface trail
connections. That type of thing so it's all part of that.
Lash: Well it ends up with people walking and riding their bikes down to
the trail, that there's a strip with no, you know getting ripped up to the
point where there's no grass growing.
Schroers: Especially right at the very, where the
edge of the park. There's a puddle there usually.
rained recently, it's muddy there.
I"'"
trail comes in at the
Even if it hasn't
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
February 25, 1992 - Page 18
Hoffman: If the commission's in favor of that, that's a project that's
small enough that if we end up with additional time, asphalt or gravel,
that project could be done in house on probably a single day or two.
...""
Schroers: It wouldn't bother me if it was done. Unless you think then
that the neighbors would not want the paved path going up through.
Lash: I don't think it would make any difference to anybody. If you're
riding your bike down there, and I do that quite often. The hill is so
steep that you're going about 80 mph by the time you hit the flat land
anyway and if you're going down over all those bumps and the tree roots and
everything else, that can be kind of a sca,ey ride.
Hoffman: Okay. Anything else in Greenwood?
Lash: You've got picnic tables and grills. Are you talking about adding
more picnic tables?
Hoffman: Yeah. The Commission had talked about that in.
Lash: I mean the ones that are there are fine. As long as we keep them
chained down.
Schroers: Do you feel that there's a need for more'?
Lash: I think is there 2 or 3 there now? I don't know. 3 seems adequate
unless there's ever large groups. A lot of people down there at once. It
wouldn't hurt I guess.
.....,/
Schroers: I guess it seems to me that maybe once or twice I've ever seen
people on more than one table at a time. . I don't know if it pays to spend
$1,300.00 on two tables that are just going to sit there and not be used.
Hoffman: We can take a look at it in 1993.
Lash: We may not have any left in 1993.
Schroers: Herman Field. First phase play area with border wood and pea
gravel for 1992, $13,000.00. Superdeck boardwalk, $6,000.00. I still, I
have a problem with that personally. Picnic tables and play area bench.
$1,500~00 for a total of $20,500.00 in 1992. I think that it's good. It's
been a longtime coming and it will be nice to see something get done
there. I think that we are going to regret the superdeck. That's my
opinion.
Hoffman: Because?
Schroers: You can consult Lowry Nature Center at Carver Park about a deck
through the wetlands. It's a really a ~igh maintenance item. .Hard to work
on and once it's in, hard to get it back out again.
Hoffman: That's essentially the reason for the high price tag here. If we
were to build our own, when was that replaced out at Carver? Just this
last fall? ~
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
February 25, 1992 - Page 19
I"'"
Schroers: Yes.
Hoffman: I saw it in the Seasons Magazine for total expenditures but those
are a wood structure. This is the superdeck, plastic. Black plastic with
either the green brown, white top and once you put it in, it's in. It
essentially never will have to be maintained or removed. It does not have
to removed during the winter. There's water present there. It's fairly
indestructable.
Schroers: Is that a solid or does it have slots in it like the wooden ones
that are built that have spaces inbetween?
Hoffman: No slots. It's solid. Have you swam and sat up on the raft at
Lake Ann?
Schroers: Yeah.
Hoffman: Same, exact same material. In fact exactly same manufacturer,
different color material obviously. You want it to blend. It's not the
white. There are certainly boardwalk nightmares out there. Baldour Park
of Carver County Parks is worst. That thing is like a Walt Disney ride to
take a walk out on that thing.
Schroers:
one of the
r-- guys on it
campers.
the park.
I missed that project by about 2 days at Carver Park and it was
luckiest things to ever happen to me all year. I know the other
were this deep in muck for 3 weeks and they weren't happy
Anyway, I hope that this will work out and be a nice feature to
Lash: I guess I'd look at 1996 and see how high the total on the back is
and I would opt to maybe push the play area expansion up a little.
Andrews: I had a comment about would this be a site we'd want to look at
for a hockey rink. Because there's not much up on that end of town for
people to use as an ice rink and if that's the case, do we want to look at
some money for electrical being brought in? Like maybe the tennis court
project.
Lash: That'd be expensive.
Andrews: Well there's no ice surface that I'm aware of anywhere near
there.
Lash: Yeah, there's Minnewashta.
Hoffman: Minnewashta Heights has the family rink. Cathcart Park has the
hockey facilities.
Andrews: Across the street and down a little ways?
Schroers: Well it's probably a couple of miles but our original intent in
looking at Herman Field, we had also discussed some diversity in our parks
~and we kind of talked about hiking in there since it is kind of pretty good
size and that the hiking trails could be used by residents for cross
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
February 25, 1992 - Page 20
country skiing in the winter and that that would maybe kind of take the
place of skating.
.....,JIll
Lash: I think there was also the general consensus at the time that this
was to be more of a natural, passive park although I see we're putting in a
tennis court.
Hoffman: Yeah, that was my surprise too th~t the resident survey came back
with a request for tennis courts. other than Pheasant Hill Park, those are
the two most recent neighborhood parks and they're also going to be the two
in my opinion, some of the two of the nicest neighborhood parks in the city
simply because of the adverse topography which was there and natural
features. That type of thing. The only other thing to consider, from
staff's point of view, would be the letter back from Carver County park
board stating that they would be in favor of making that trail connection
to Carver County Park sy~tem. However they are not in the position to
finance that. Being a bridge crossing, it would be on their property in
the Minnewashta Regional Park. If we would like to see that occur, we
would need to go ahead and provide funding for that.
Lash: About how much would that be roughly?
Hoffman: Rough estimate, depending on the magnitude of the bridging is
really the.
Andrews: What you're saying is they're asking us to pay for a structure on
their property? ~
Hoffman: Correct.
schroers: Which I think we won't do because if we get into that,
especially with the new disabled persons program, that would have to be a
considerable bridge...if somebody would come and do that for us on our
property but it's not likely to happen.
Lash: Maybe victoria wi~l do it. Be neighborly. Little turn around here.
Hoffman: That we have to be presented with it because the connection is a
natural. To be a resident of that area and to have the opportunity to walk
down into that neighborhood park and walk into Minnewashta Park would be
great but if you don't make the connection, what you walk up to is a 5 foot
high chainlink fence.
Schroers: I'm not opposed to having someone assess the situation and bring
back a cost and see what it would ~ntail. We'd certainly be willing to
look at that. But without that information for us tQ say well, yeah, let's
budget a couple thousand dollars and see where we'd get with that, I'd
rather not do that until we have an idea what it's going to take.
Hoffman: We'll investigate it and address it in 1993.
Andrews: The other question I had about Herman was that we talked about, I
don't remember where we ended up on providing lighting on that trail. In
-""
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
February 25, 1992 - Page 21
"
the woods it's kind of dark. We talked about that at one time a long time
ago.
Hoffman: No lighting has been installed ~n the park. In the parking lot.
Lash: I think we'd have major uproar from the neighbors.
Andrews: I'm not stating I'm for or against it. I just remember we had
talked about it.
Schroers: There was concern from the neighbors about security on their
property but I think it was more in the form of fencing rather than
lighting.
Andrews: Okay.
Lash: It will be interesting to see how this goes.
Schroers: You know everyone's apprehensive until they got a nice park in
their neighborhood and then they like it. Anything else on Herman Field?
Okay, Lake Ann. 1992. We've got everything. That should wrap up the
program on Lake Ann. Should be just ducky f9r 4 years right?
Hoffman: Pretty much what it does.
Jl"""'Schroers: Alright. I like it.
Lash: What's the picnic shelter park parkview, $50,000.00?
Hoffman: That's a picnic shelter which was discussed on parkview
preservation picnic area. A slab shelter with a cover on it. The
ballfield restrooms, concession is beyond 1996.
Lash: Is parkview up by the ballfield or up above, up by like where the
horseshoes?
Hoffman: Yep. Where the horseshoes are.
Schroers: Why are we planning now for it?
Hoffman: For the chase program? Same thing you use with Henne~in Parks.
Schroers: The which program?
Hoffman: Water patrol, water safety. A chase boat. Well there's a
lifeguard and really a staff boat. We're renting canoes, playaks and that
type of thing and they get in a high wind and end up on the other side of
the lake tipped over, we need somebody to head on over there.
Lash: So it's just for emergencies?
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
February 25, 1992 - Page 22
Schroers: Well you're getting a good deal if you can get a motor for
$750.00.
...."
Hoffman: Got a quote.
Schroers: Okay. I guess that's all in place. Okay, we'll move on then
to, Lake Ann is continued then. Is that what this general is?
Hoffman: Correct.
Schroers: Okay. Let's go to Lake Susan then if no one has anything
further on Lake Ann.
Lash: What's the bituminous trail loop?
Hoffman: At Lake Ann?
Lash: Yeah.
Hoffman: The trail loop was brushed out not this winter but the following,
late last spring. The wooded portion.
Lash: Oh.
Hoffman: We'll take a look at that and reassess that as that goes. We'll
install it first in aggregate and see how that works and then go ahead and
put down bituminous... The only segment of the park which was unused, the ......JIll
path that was used by running a trail through there. We'll just add
another compenent to Lake Ann Park which is presently not there.
Lash: Natural would be nice.
Schroers: I don't recall that we had to do this archery range in phases.
Hoffman: Replacement targets.
Andrews: I want to get back to Lake Ann a second. On that stairway down
from up on the hill down to the beach. This is only a comment. rdon't
know what we can do about it but 4th of July, that sucker's a killer coming
up there, especially if there's somebody who's managed to get in the car
quickly and turn on their headlights that are right in your face and you
can't see a thing coming off the stairway. I don't know if we're going to
get any electrical anywhere near there where we can have some sort of
lighting. Something. r know it's in poor condition too. It's all eroded
out and you have the people walking on the side that have eroded it and
then you've got the...stairway so.
Hoffman: Electrical will, the closest it will be is the shelter.
Andrews: That's about how far away would that be from the top of the hill
there.
Hoffman: 1,000 feet~
,..."
Pa,k and Rec Commission Meeting
Feb,ua,y 25, 1992 - Page 23
JII'"
Lash: Is the,e, I can't ,emembe, f,om the old plan now but the,e's a way
to get f,om the bottom pa,t of the picnic shelte, to the top pa,t of the
picnic shelte,. Could that just be continued all the way up so that would
be a new way to get f,om the beach level up to the pa,kview?
Sch,oe,s: Well, it will be.
Hoffman: Yeah.
Lash:
...have to be lighted couldn't it?
Hoffman: The,e's a walkout on the uppe, level and onto the lowe, level
the,e a,e steps that come up alongside the,e.
Sch,oe,s: Lighting is kind of a t,icky deal along walkways and that type
of place. You have about two options. You have like the balla,d type that
just kind of lines and it ,eally doesn't illuminate anything. It just
defines the walking space. And then you have the ove,head on a pole and
they both have thei, sho,t comings. Ve,y, ve,y expensive. The ones that
line the sidewalk will find a way to get run ove, or busted up for sure.
And the overhead are ,eally hard to change the light bulbs and that so,t of
thing. And the cost is incredible. That lighting is just crazy.
And,ews: I ,ecognize if you're 1,000 feet away from elect,icity you've got
a cost problem. I guess I'm thinking here, at least fo, the 4th of July
Jll"'that, as long as I'm thinking of the lighting and how the last 2 yea,s I've
been there I've seen people take some pretty bad falls on that step. That
maybe at the ve,y least we could ask ou, public safety officers maybe to
stand along there with their flashlights.. .because I know personally I took
a heck of a heade, on one of those missing a step.
Hoffman:' We can address that.
And,ews: It would save somebody an inju,y and wouldn't be very costly to
do that.
Sch,oers: Possibly maintenance could look at imp,oving those steps a
little bit.
And,ews: They're bad but it's not that the steps are so bad, it's just
that you cannot see and they',e not a ,egula, inte,vals so you can't time
it.
Hoffman: They?re hard to walk up in the daytime. We have a lot to dis~uss
so we'll take a look at this so if we just want it as La"y said, just give
a b,ief overview and get th,ough it.
Sch,oe,s: Oka~, Lake Susan. Looks good. We',e going to be doing some
good improvements there fo, 1992 and also a majo, lighting in 1993 and I
think that will be something to look fo,wa,d to. Meadow Green.
Lash: What about the backstops? A,e they still good?
I""'"
Hoffman: They',e in good shape that I know of...
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
February 25, 1992 - Page 24
Schroers: I think the bleacher will be up, a nice addition down there too. ......"
Lash: Fred, you live right over there. Is there anything you can think of
that that park's lacking?
Berg: No. Nice area.
Schroers: Okay, then let's go to Minnewashta Heights. Is there any type
of a shelter or skate changing area included along with the skating rink?
Hoffman: With that $6,000.00? It's not been included to date. The
$6,000.00 in 1993 is intended to bring the electricity in and implement the
portable warming,house system. Then those portable warming houses would
need to be budgeted as part of the annual recreation program budget.
Schroers: And they're about $3,000.00 a season?
Hoffman: No, considerably less than that. what did I bring back..
Lash: They're more like $600.00 or something.
Hoffman: Yeah.
Schroers: Those are the types that are like a trailer house?
Hoffman: Correct.
Lash: In looking at this, it seems like I remember reading a park, kind of
a survey thing that you guys had done as far as useage and that there was
reports from Dale and this was a couple of years ago. I don't know if it's
changed now but he'd go out there to flood it or plow it and it had not
been used or maybe had been used once in several weeks previous. Is that
getting more useage now than it was?
...."""
/Hoffman: That's changed. Yeah, I began at that point to send out some
signals to the neighborhood that there's a potential that we would consider
discontinuing that ice rink and calls started to come in and I drive TH 7
quite often and this winter I noticed skating going on there.
Lash: Okay, is that lady that came in here about the play equipment had
said that there had gotten to be more kids out there so I just was hesitant
to spend $6,000.00 running electric out there to put in a warming house if
it wasn't being used.
Hoffman: In fact a side note on that one is that there is a street light
in that park and we may be able to run it right off of that street light,
depending on the load capacity which that wire can maintain.
schroers: Okay, so in this $6,000.00 then is included the rental.
Hoffman: Would be included in the 145 Recreational Annual budget. General
operating budget.
Schroers: oh okay. So we don't even have to budget for that then?
...,.,
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
February 25, 1992 - Page 25
,......
Hoffman: No.
Schroers: Okay. Then if there's not anything further on Minnewashta
Heights, look at North Lotus Lake.
Andrews: My park.
Schroers: Jim. My only comment would be on the tennis courts. Probably
needing a touch up probably fairly soon actually.
Hoffma n: 1993.
Lash: How about 1994? We're on $66,000.00 in 1994.
Andrews: I think it's a matter of the sooner the better. They were in
good shape last year but they're starting to crack. The one thing I really
noticed is all the fencing and all the standards are all breaking out of
the asphalt. Not that they really do much. anyway but that's something that
would be...looked at. But as far as resurfacing, I think you could
probably go oh I would think probably 1993 or 1994 would be okay. But it
should be done by then I would think.
Hoffman: I'll make a note of that and have somebody out and take a look at
both North Lotus and Meadow Green which were built, constructed the same
year.
,....,
Andrews: As far as the skating rink goes, I'll make a comment there. That
rink gets a tremendous amount of use. If there's anything there that could
-be done to provide more ice surface. There was more than one occasion
where the hockey players and the figure skaters couldn't find enough ice to
share without some conflict.
Hoffman: This application at the hockey rink with the lights and boards
installed, we would need to move the open skate area down onto the
ballfield area. I understand it's all tiered out there.
Lash: That's a nice tran~ition though to go in 1993 to the lights and then
a couple years later build a hockey rink. That would give us a good feel
for the useage.
Andrews: It's sure been busy this year.
Hoffman: The comments that I've heard is that the play area was wholly
inadequate from that neighborhood. It's small, initial phase.
Andrews: I don't think there's many you can do that w6uld be perfect. I
mean there's kids of all ages now. It's not just young kids so the swing
sets were a big help. But I think the main thing with that park that it
provides what the kids really like is the open space, the ballfield and the
soccer area and stuff. That's the use that gets the most of. There are a
lot of people that go up for the playground. Parking's a real problem,
especially now with the summer soccer leagues going in there. You have 2
,....,or 3 teams on the field at one time. There's cars allover the place and
that's going to become a problem. Eventually it will come to the
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
February 25, 1992 - Page 26
commission or to the City Council. Whether there's going to be some ~
demands made. Last year was the first year they were parking, they filled
up the upper lot plus Fox Hollow plusPle8sant View were all full of cars.
Hoffman: The biggest parking ,lot besides Meadow Green in any neighborhood
park.
Andrews: It's a big park facility. Like I said, you get a ball team plus
two soccer teams out there practicing, it's pretty crowded. One other
comment would be the grass conditions you might want to take a look at in
the spring. Maybe it's some scheduling or some treatments, maybe you could
make it a little stronger. It was in pretty bad shape last fall. It might
be a situation we may want to try to restrict some useage early in the
season to give you a chance to fill in so you don't kill it.
Schroers: Is that it?
Andrews: That's it. Don't need any more money. Just take care of it.
Schroers: Looks to me like we're not going to spend any time on Pheasant
Hill. We're spending $20,000.00 for the engineering and the grading and
that sort of thing so it kind of looks like it's going to take care of 1992
and nothing planned for 1993 and 1994 is too far off to consider.
Lash: If we can't get a tennis court in at Curry Farms, I guess I would
think that Pheasant Hills is going to be the next logical place for one
that the people in Curry Farms could use. I know that's a lot of money but -'
somewhere in there it's got to get.
Hoffman: Put in.
Lash: Yes. Maybe not too far beyond 1996.
Schroers: Okay, Power Hill. Weren't we discussing something regarding a
sliding hill in Power Hill?
Hoffman: Yes.
Schroers: And where are we at with that?
Hoffman: That would be part of the initial improvement in 1993. Depending
on what expense that initial development goes to. That $10,000.00 may not
cover the cost. It all depends on the amount of grading and seed we
purchase. That type of, thing. This park has received a lot of attention
in the past 2 to 3 weeks in the form of inquiries. Flamingo Drive is going
through. They're selling lots along Flamingo Drive which borders that
entire seg~ent of Power Hill Park...what facilities will be constr~cted
there. The people from North Dakota asked if there will be trees.
Lash: You say no. You'll feel right at home.
Hoffman: Yeah, it will be pretty flat for a while. It used to be a
cornfield.
...,.,
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
February 25, 1992 - Page 27
J!I""'"
Schroers: Okay, so then basically where we're at with the sliding hill
depends on how we do with our 1993 grading, seeding?
Hoffman:
begins to
handle on
1993.
Yeah. As the road goes in there and the boundary of the park
get defined, in this coming year I'll be able to get a better
that and we'll go ahead and stick a defined figure in there for
Lash: Do we want to put some money in there for trees?
Hoffman: Certainly.
Andrews: That would make sense in 1994 I would think. It's a light year.
Schroers: How much do we need for trees?
Andrews: I think you need at least $1,000.00 if it looks like anything.
Hoffman: $1,000.00 won't get you far, yeah. $5,000.00 will get you a
reasonable planting program. Planting programs in parks, Bandimere Park,
you could spend $15,000.00-$20,000.00 on landscaping.
Schroers: Can we split the difference and just look at like maybe
$2,500.00?
,.,.....,Hoffman: Yes.
Lash: You know when we see these master plans come in for these things,
they always look so nice you know because they have all these trees and
shrubs and all these things allover and you think, oh that's really going
to be nice. I just don't ever see that that ever happens. Do we ever get
the shrubbery? I know we plunk a few trees in but do we ever end up with
really the whole landscaping package?
Hoffman: It's beginning to happen more often now. We've followed that
concept in Sunset Ridge Park. At least trying to follow the plans.
Pheasant Hill Park as well. ChanhassenHills to a certain degree. They're
put in there as an architectural feature drawing. If we do believe they're
too misleading, we should address that at the time that we approve the
master plan. Say either shown to a reasonable degree or take them out all
together.
Lash: I guess I'm naive but when I have always seen all the stuff, until
you just said that, I just assumed that that all got put in when it was
developed. I didn't know that it was sort of for fill.
Hoffman: It's something which we may want to take a look at but a planting
plan or a landscaping plan for the parks is somethIng which has just kind
of occurred naturally through a tree farm or purchasing some trees here and
there over the years. Trees are getting to be more and more a hot topic.
Lash: We're the Tree Board.
,....
Hoffman: You bet.
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
February 25, 1992 - Page 28
Lash: We should be the shrub board too.
....""
Schroers: Okay moving along to Prairie Knoll. Nothing is happening there
until 1994 so we probably don't need to spend any time on that one.
Andrews: Time out. I know we're heavy on the budget in 1996 and light in
1995. Would it make sense to, from a budget standpoint to move the play
area for 1996 into 1995 to kind of smooth things out and maybe make those
people happier one year sooner?
Hoffman: Yeah. An item you need to'take through your mind is the location
of that playground in reference to the community park. Do you feel it's a
priority that it should be moved up to 1995 or should it be put beyond
1996?
Lash: Maybe go beyond 1996.
Hoffman: 'Yeah, it's right in that cul-de-sac where these people can walk
onto the trail system...
Lash: And originally wasn't this just intended to be more or less just
some open space?
Hoffman: Open space, prairie with a piece of playground area and a
trail...
Andrews: I know that we talked about that. It had prairie grasses on it I
believe, that we had talked about wanting to preserve it so maybe we'd like
to just delete the play area altogether and look at restoration of the, as
much as possible, to a natural prairie area.
-'
Lash: See how the demand goes. If there's call.
Andrews: Right. Never mind.
Hoffman: Is that a motion to scratch it then and look at it later on?
Andrews: I think so.
Lash: Get a tally sheet of requests...
Andrews: prairie Knoll, I think just the notation about the prairie
restoration as part of a site preparation. Just maybe make a note about
that.
Hoffman: Okay. There's different success ratios on pralrle restoration
but we'll take a look at that and see if it's feasible or not. Talk to
some of those Hennepin Parks folks.
Schroers: We've got some nice prairies at both Hyland and...but a major
lot of work to get them going. But once they're going they're really nice
areas. Okay, Rice Marsh. We spent some mOhey in Rice Marsh in 1991 didn't
we and 1990? Don't we have some new play equipment in there?
...."I
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
February 25, 1992 - Page 29
I"""
Hoffman: 1991 was the half court ba$ketball court and then purchased the
swing unit last fall which will be put in as part of this expansion for
1992. That has been put to the forefront so that hopefully it will be
installed prior to athletic association programs starting when their
parents meander down to that park, they'll see their play equipment in real
early.
Schroers: We did spend a pretty good amount of time discussing Rice Marsh
and I was very surprised when I went down there one night and I couldn't
believe how busy it was.
Pemrick: It's always busy.
Hoffman: Park has also increased in acreage. It's closer to about 65
acres from 30. These numbers will, they've all been recalcuated. They all
vary to some degree. These were estimates that have just been passed along
and gone back into the actual County file... But Rice Marsh now includes
the entire area which was part of Hidden Valley as well. \
Schroers: It goes almost up to TH 101?
Hoffman: Yeah. Other than Outlot A in Lake Ann, it's the third largest
park in the city.
Schroers: Okay. Let's go to South Lotus Lake.
JI"""
Hoffman: Brief description of why I put unsurmountable curbing. The
project this year included a portion of the curbing for water control.
Traffic control in that confined area. It looks incomplete. There's
unsurmountable, there's a high curbing in certain areas but the rest of it,
there's a lot of...or you can just simply drive. This is a very high
traffic area. From a maintenance, engineering standpoint, installing the
remainder of the driveway access area with unsurmountable curbing would
really clean that site up. Attempt to address the funding of that through
some street budgets.
Schroers: Let's do that?
Hoffman: I'll include it in there but I'll update you on finding some
alternative funding sources.
Lash: What about tennis?
Hoffman: Good news on tennis courts. There's a lot happening, taking
longer to discuss than anticipated. In fact I gave Curt a call. One day I
was in another meeting and Todd Gerhardt came in and said, come on in. I
think we have a tennis court for you. As part of the road improvement
project, the TH 101 by-pass, since that road improvement is in a tax
increment financing district, as part of that improvements, recreation
improvements can be funded through that. So in the process of pricing out
a double tennis court on that site. In fact I have two alternatives for
layout with a double tennis court, handicap accessible, drinking fountain
~and lights as part of this roadway project and we get by scott free.
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
February 25, 1992 - Page 30
Lash: Wow. So when is it going to happen?
....."
Hoffman: Potentially this fall or spring of 1993. Curt was just a
buzzing.
Lash: All the years here. All the work here and he got nothing. As soon
as he leaves, boom.
Schroers: Okay, good.
Pemrick: Are we going to call it Curt Robinson Tennis Court.
Hoffman: Memorial.
Schroers: Okay. We're getting there Todd. Sunset Ridge. What do we '
have? We've pretty much got it covered. We've got trees and tennis court
and basketball. Looks good to me.
Lash: Is there a ballfield there already?
Hoffman: Yep.
Schroers: And then other improvements. These apply to.
Hoffman: That was just to balance off the figure so it all added up for
you in the back for 1992. Come out to 145.
Andrews: Is that a typical annual contribution in terms of the tree farm?
$200.00.
"""'"
Hoffman: It's minor because it's so fu;l.
Lash: It used to be a lot more than that didn't it?
Hoffman: Yeah. It's when some transfers were taking place and tree farms
was full of some smaller plantings and this is to replace 6 or 8 or 10
trees which were moved out of there this year...
schroers: Okay, how realistic are these figures in terms of actual dollars
that we have to use?
Hoffman: Thi~ total of $145,000.00? Again, it's an estimate. We were
$30,000.00 short. I would anticipate with our expenditure timeframe this
year, we 6an get a much closer handle on that. Many of these expenditures
will not be going out the door until potentially July-August. If we want
to hold back at that point, we can amend this. In discussions with the
. City Manager, he makes caution in that area simply because it is published.
It is a public document. If we make amendments to it and then people who
are expecting an improvement in 1992 did not see it happen, they're going
to be knocking on OUT door. It's a...
(There was a tape change at this point in the meeting.)
-""
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
February 25, 1992 - Page 31
JII""'"
Schroers: Okay good. Then are we all satisfied with our final amendment
to the 5 year capital improvement?
Andrews: I move that we accept the 5 year capital improvement program as
amended.
Schroers: Is there a second?
Lash: Second.
Andrews moved, Lash seconded that the Park and Recreation Commission
recommend approval of the Final Amendments, Chanhassen Park and Recreation
Department, Five Year Capital Improvement Program, Neighborhood and
Community Parks, as amended. All voted in favor and the motion carried.
CHANHASSENTRAIL PLAN IMPLEMENTATION. PHASE ONE (1990-1995). PHASE TWO
(1995-2000). AND PHASE THREE (2000-2010).
Hoffman: Chairman Schroers and Park Commissioners. This is an item which
can span 3 minutes or 3 hours this evening. It's a discretion as to what
extent you would like to carry this conversation this evening. It's quite
timely from my perspective. Today and tomorrow and I am attending the
Minnesota State Bicycle Conference which this year has really expanded it's
horizons. One it's dealing with legislation enacted by Jim Oberstar in the
"....... . . . Surface Transportation Def iC,iency Act. Some consider able fundi ng
sources will be available at the Federal and State level. ... about who's
going to be handling those funds and grant application process and
acceptable projects. That type of thing has not been laid out yet but it's
exciting. They've mandated that a certain percentage of roadway funds must
be applied to bicycle, walking, alternative modes of transportation. So
it's pretty much landmark legislation. Another interesting side note is
that there is a rails to trails conservancy which I was not aware of. It's
a conservancy group which is located in Washington D.C.. They're advocates
for rails to trails conversion and they will have.many good ideas for us to
build upon for our projects in southern Chanhassen.
Schroers: With that why don't we ask you to be our representative at the
conference and bring us back some information that we can apply to our
trail plan and address it at that point in time.
Hoffman: We certainly can do that. It's an item which hearing at this
commission, many communities not only have a Park and Recreation
Commission. They also have a Trail Commission. Trails are taking up a
third or ~ourth, half of the time of many park commissions, especially
communities which have basically developed their park system and they're
looking at alternative modes of transportation. Downsizing the importance
of the automobile and that kind of thing. Documents which are enclosed in
here show you that there is some progress even though at times it seems
bleak. There has been some progress made but it's imperative that the Park
Commission stance on trails and sidewalks within the community, make it's
position known to the City Council. As noted in here it would be a good
~investment of your time to investigate a sidewalk/trail ordinance as it
deals with subdivision. Currently if you're a home buyer in Chanhassen and
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
February 25, 1992 - Page 32
you drive from one neighborhood to the next, sidewalks do not make any .....,.,I
sense simply because they've been addressed on a subdivision to subdivision
application issue. So one will have it or one not. It depends on the
decisions that were made at that time of approval of that subdivision. So
we can spend as much or as little time on this issue as you wish. This is
map which assists me as I look at trail connections in Chanhassen. Again
as stated in the report, we're getting those segments out there where we
can start to make some sense through connections. As TH 5 improvement
project~..city's trail system. This portion...intersection of Powers Blvd.
and...take you out to Lake Ann...This segment was included as a part of the
Audubon Road improvement project...
Schroers: I guess I'm really surprised that the Planning Commission
doesn't have a policy regarding sidewalks in the neighborhood. Personally
I would just as soon see some consistency there. I don't like seeing or
using a sidewalk when it just plain ends and all of a sudden you're in a
street or a roadway. We've had people come up here that were very much in
favor of sidewalks. We've also had peopl~ come in here who were adamantly
opposed to them and to try to please everybody, I don't think is the answer
but I'm not sure if that's what we should be doing. I wo~ld think that
that would be part of the Planning Commission to set up an ordinance
regarding sidewalks in corridors in a residential area.
Andrews: We can make a motion that we are in favor of such an ordinance.
I think that's what you're asking us to do isn't it?
Hoffman: Or drafting an ordinance yourself.
......,
Andrews: I don't know if I'm qualified to do that but.
Lash: And you think that the Planning Commission...
Andrews: No, they aren't either but I think we ought to make our wishes
known to Council. That's where it should be drafted and coordinated with
the planning Commission.
Schroers: We've tried to do that. We wanted to be consistent with our
trails and we wanted them all bituminous and we wanted them all off road
and we had that etched in stone and got torn up and thrown up and blown up.
Lash: Somewhere along the line I think there was some confusion or over
zealousness or something and misinterpretations. It got to be a pretty
loaded issue there for a while and I think things have calmed down enough
that we could probably relook at this issue and come up with what we think
is a fair and reasonable plan and I think i fwe give thought to_ having it
be reasonable and something that isn't going to be perceived as overkill or
something that we are t~ying to force on people who don't want it or
something like that,I think we just need to have a consensus here within
our group so that we can state to City Council that this is the direction
we'd like to go and we think this is a reasonable direction. And I think
Council has made fairly clear over the last couple of years the direction
that they're interested in heading and I think they've sent that message to
us. And if we think that's a reasonable direction, then I think all we
need to do is come up with a response to that and say this is what we're .-;
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
February 25, 1992 - Page 33
Schroers: I agree with that. The problem is that it's an interconnecting
situation. We started off saying that we want to be consistent and we want
all our trails off street. Well, that didn't fly and unless I'm, you can
correct me if I'm mistaken but I think the way it is right now is that
wherever possible we are off street but in the other area we are inclined
to go with what is in the development or in the area. Some places it's
sidewalks and some places it's asphalt and in other places it's painted on
the street.
Andrews: I think we've got two different issues here. One is what do we
do with existing developments if we have sidewalks or trails versus what do
we recommend for brand new developments and I think it's always easy to
impose a law that requires sidewalks to a new development because people
when they move in and they're already there, have already chosen to have
them. I think that's the first step to take. I agree, if you came into
where I live and said we're going to put a sidewalk down your front yard,
,..... that'd leave me about 15 feet of front yard and I would be aged nst that in
spite of the fact that I would see a benefit to get those kids off the
, street. But I personally do feel that there ought to be a sidewalk
ordinance required for all new developments. I think it enhances property
value and it will make the life of future park commissions much easier if
we do that.
Schroers: We thought too and we had a lady come up here and she told us in
no uncertain terms that she moved out here from the city to get away from
all the pavement and she did not want a sidewalk going through her yard and
she would much rather see her children play in the street than to have a
sidewalk go through her yard.
Andrews: You're going to have people pressing opinions on every side of
every issue and to say that we don't want a sidewalk ordinance because we
don't'have a consensus or unanimous consensus in favor, that's not going to
happen. I do think that if you look at Eden Prairie, I think Eden Prairie
is excellent example of a city with a good trail and sidewalk ordinance. At
least it appears to be and I think I see nothing but...sidewalk ordinance
for future development.
Lash: The problem, I completely disagree with you because I am one who
moved out here to get away from sidewalks. I grew up in the city and I
would have absolutely no interest at all in having sidewalks in front of my
house. But I think we need to look at the difference from Chanhassen and
Minneapolis where they have a sidewalk in front of every house. The
,.... di fference in Chahhassen is that, other than if you look at downtown.
Downtown basically you have city blocks with streets all around and the
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
February 25, 1992 - Page 34
rest of the city is developed into neighborhood areas that are off of
basically a main road or a busier road. What I see the difference in, in
Minneapolis you've got lots of cars going up and down every street allover
everywhere. There's not Just little pockets of residential areas like
there is in Chanhassen. Almost every neighborhood that you go into,
there's a road to get into it and then there's a lot of little cul-de-sacs
and a lot of little windy roads going all around and to use all of our
trail funding to put sidewalks all the way around on all those little
roads, leaves us no money to put them in any other areas.
-"
Andrews: That's not what I said.
Lash: No I know but that's what happens to the money. That is what has
happened to the money in the past. If we require sidewalks in the new
developments, that's our trail fund money. That money goes to...
Andrews: Doesn't have to be. Doesn't have to be.
,Lash: Well but that's the way it's happened in the past.
Andrews: That's the way our current system is set up. There's nothing to
say that a sidewalk becomes part of the development process and it has
nothing to do with trails or park dedication fee. This is part of the
developer's cost to develop prop~rty.
Lash: And then he would pay trail fees on top of that?
Andrews: You bet.
.....,
Lash: Okay. So if they did that, that would be a completely different
thing. I mean still again, personally I don't see the need for it but as
long as it's not going in my front yard and it's not costing me any money
and it's not taking away from putting in the trails on the other roads,
then I don't really care.
Andrews: I agree with you completely. I wouldn't somebody coming through
my street and put in a sidewalk in my yard today.
5chroers: Okay, but we can't sit here and say that we don't want it in our
yard but we're going to require it in everybody's elses.
Andrews: Yes you can. Yes you can.
5chroers: You can but it doesn't fly.
Andrews: I completely disagree because if I had come into my neighborhood
with a sidewalk already there, I would have been happy to have it.
5chroers: That's a point well stated but we cannot sit here and publicly
say that we wouldn't want it in our yard but we're going to require someone
else. I think that that's bad politics.
Andrews: I don't think that's inconsistent at all. Because if a person
buys a newly developed piece of property with a sidewalk on it, is making a
.....,
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
February 25, 1992 - Page 35
,....
choice to have the sidewalk. I wasn't given the choice to not have it or
have it. When I bought my property there was no sidewalk there and that's
the way I bought it. I'm happy with that. If I had a sidewalk there, I
would have been happy with that too.
Schroers: No, I understand that and that's a point well taken. But I
think that it wouldn't be to our advantage to sit here and publicly state
that we don't want sidewalks in our yard and yet support and ordinance to
that effect. I think that the sidewalk should be separate from trails and
that the sidewalk should be an issue for the Planning Commission. If we
want to vote an endorsement to support a sidewalk ordinance and pass that
along to the Planning Commission, that would be fine but I think that's two
separate things there. And we're going to address the main trails, the
trail system for the city and let the Planning Commission and the
developers address the sidewalk issue.
Lash: Unfortunately the trail system that's laid out on the plan now
includes any of the sidewalks that are in so when you look at this overall
trail plan, it's on street trails, it's off street traila, it's sidewalks,
it's anything that's smooth is on this plan. And when I look at it, I get
confused knowing which is which and I think that somewhere along the line
it's got to be a different system for this so that when I look at this I
can tell that the one through Saddlebrook is a sidewalk. The one on Lake
Lucy Road is an on street painted line. The one that's somewhere else is
a, well nature trails are separate but anyway, I think there's got to be a
system so that when you look at that we can see what we're talking about.
~I look at Phase 2 and I see that there's a little black line going right
down my new street. Right in front of my new house and I want to know
right away, is that supposed to be an off street trail? I already asked
that. I know the answer is no, but if I didn't know that from having asked
that last year, just because I know the confusion and this thing came out
in a publication and I looked at that and I went whoa. They're going to
put a trail right down the front of my yard, I'd be upset. Now I'm under
the impression, because the answer I got before is that it's just going to
be a marking or a sign saying you can get through from Kerber over to the
main beach by taking this route. And I'm not opposed to that but looking
at the plan, you can't tell that that's what that is.
Andrews: I want to make a couple comments. I guess I feel like from a
sidewalk issue as far as developments go, I guess I could see that in my
opinion I think there ought to be something for collector streets.
Something for, I don't know how to legally define but I guess I'd say a
cul-de-sac of under 150-200 feet doesn't require a sidewalk to provide safe
pedestrian traffic. But I still would feel had I moved into our current
neighborhood with a sidewalk down Fox Hollow already there, that would have
been definitely better and safer than what's there today. Now to say that
I would not appreciate somebody coming in after the fact and ripping up my
front yard to put a sidewalk in, I don't think is inconsistent. Because if
the sidewalk had been there when I first bought my house, I think I would
have preferred it that way. .
Lash: If they made an ordinance for sidewalks, it would have to be
,....something that as soon as the street went in, before any houses went in,
the sidewalk would have to be there so anybody coming to look at the lot
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
February 25, 1992 - Page 36
would see that there's sidewalks... But has happened in the past is that
. they haven't gone in at the same time and people buy the lots and they're
not informed and first thing they know, then somebody wants to come back
and put sidewalk in and they don't want it.
....."
Andrews: When they want to know what the stakes in their front yard are
for.
Lash: Right and this is where the miscommunication...caused so many
problems.
Andrews: And I agree.
Pemrick: And that's where each neighborhood has to be dealt with in a
separate manner because some definitely do not lend themselves to having
sidewalks. Some definitely would but I think you can't in one fell swoop
say everything from now on is going to get sidewalks in front of them.
Lash: I think it depends on the size of the development. It depends on
the length of the street and how much traffic is going to be on there.
I mean some of it would just be a completely total waste of money. And if
it's not our money...
Andrews: I think larger developments sho~ld have sidewalks. I think it
should be part of our city plan to have, to look at that as part of our
future growth in the city. I think it's inevitable that that's going to
become something that we very much want to have. I just think it's wiser
to look at that upfront instead of after the f<;ict. I mean we're dealing .""""
with the problem right now with lack of trails and so forth right now.
Having to go back and put in trails at very expensive methods because it
was not part of the original construction. And we're saying well, we're
going to continue that policy. I don't think makes sense.
Lash: I just see that there's a big difference between a sidewalk and a
trail .
Hoffman: You're 60rrect.
Pemrick: Yeah, and they should be separate. Definitely.
Hoffman: The Commission has made some, they've taken that position and
that's exactly the position this bicycle conference takes as well. Trails
and sidewalks are separate. They' need to be addressed separately. A trail
is an 8 foot bituminous trail. A sidewalk is a 6 or 5 foot concrete
sidewalk. Many, many communities include sidewalks as part of their trail
plan simply to try bolster what their trail plan looks like but there's too
many curb cuts. There's too many interferences ~ith traffic, driveways,
that type of thing. You cannot perform the same uses on an 8 foot
bituminous trail that you can on a sidewalk but sidewalks serve a variety
of uses as well." They need to be treated separately. ...have sidewalk
ordinances which typically, as Jim mentioned, deal with thru streets only.
It's a standard which a community needs to struggle with. This Commission
does not wish to take a stand on, it's a difficult issue. It certainly is.
Pl~nning Commission, at least through conversations with Paul Krauss, the
....".,
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
February 25, 1992 - Page 37
"...
Director of Planning, between the two of us he says go ahead and do it if
you want to take a shot at it, fine.
Schroers: Why?
Hoffman: Why?
Schroers: Why doesn't the Planning Commission provide us with their
information that they have or their ideas regarding what they envision for
trails or sidewalks and let us look at it and see if we think that it will
work for our trail system and give us, let us have some input that way. I
mean I don't know why we should be stuck with having to make the decision
for sidewalks and sidewalk ordinances in a residential area. I think that
we've got enough to do with trails and parks without having to try to plan,
to be the Planning Commission as well as the Park Commission. We do want
to have trail connections through there too but it just seems to me like
we'd be a little bit out of line trying to force that issue. It seems to
me that' it would be more of a Planni ng Department type. of thi ng.
Lash: I guess I'd like to see the two issues split. Have us deal with the
recreational trail part of it and we would have to work somewhat in hand
with the Planning Commission I think on that. And then as far as the
sidewalk thing, I think that needs to be addressed jointly between the
Planning Commission and Public Safety. I think Public Safety, the reason
for a sidewalk would be public safety and if Public Safety reviewed it and
thought yes, this street is a safety hazard for children to get to school
~or to get to a park, or whatever their feeling is, then they would make a
recommendation to the Planning Commission that yes, this street should have
a sidewalk. And then it would go to the Planning Commission and City
Council.
Berg: I agree. I think it's much better to be proactive when you have the
chance instead of reactive. I'd like to see the two issues separated and
do something with it still. That is in our germain and I think for us to
sieze the initiative is much better than to sit back and react to what
other people are telling us they think is a good idea.
Andrews: One comment that Larry said, that I think I made clear that we
don't consider sidewalks to be part, a substitute for the trail system. I
don't know if that's the direction the Planning Commission is looking for
from us but I didn~t, I wasn't trying to imply that at all. I don't think
I did.
Schroers: I think that you point is well taken and I agree that we have a
sidewalk running along Carver Beach Road as part of the trail. When you
look at it, it doesn't look like a trail but the amount of use that it's
getting and the number of children that it's keeping off that busy street,
in my opinion is better than not having a sidewalk or a trail there. The
point that I was trying to make, I'm not against sidewalks or trail. The
only thing that I was saying is that I don't think we should sit here and
state publicly that we wouldn't want one in our yard but that we should
think about requiring it of the rest of the people because then we're kind
of setting a double standard. We just shouldn't make that statement. If
~we wanted to pursue a trail, or a sidewalk ordinance, fine. We should
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
February 25, 1992 - Page 38
pursue a sidewalk ordinance but then we shouldn't say that we want other
people to have one but we don't want us to have one. That was the point
that I was making there. That we don't set a double standard.
....."
Lash: There's two sides, there's pros and cons to every issue and I used
to carpool with a gal who lives by Lake Susan and has a sidewalk in her
front yard. They knew it was there and they moved from Minneapolis and,
maybe she didn't know it was going in. But anyway, they don't like it. She
wishes it wasn't there. But it's there so they live with it but she said
we don't shovel it and we're not going to shovel it. We don't use it and
we don't like it and we're not going to shovel it. Well what good is it 6
to 8 months of the year when people\are going to take a stand like that and
not even have it cleared? It's there for the summer.
schroers: And are they on like a collector?
Lash~ Well what's the first road?
Hoffman: Lake Susan Hills Drive.
Lash: Yeah, it's 6n the west side of CR 17.
Hoffman: It's all decisions which, philosophical decisions. What is a
sidewalk? Is it recreation? Leisure? Safety? Is it planning? Should
there be an ordinance requiring clearing of that sidewalk? In many towns
if you don't clear your sidewalk, you got a ticket in your front door 2
days later. These are all issues which we need to wrestle with. If the
Commission would like to send a message off to the Planning Commission that ~
they think the Planning Commission should address sidewalks and Park and
Rec will take trails, I can certainly do that through the Planning Director
and see what kind of response we get back.
Pemrick: I'd be for that.
Lash: I'd like to see Planning work with Public Safety on the sidewalk
thing.
Schroers: I can envision in an area, if the streets are made wide enough,
you can have a line painted and the on street trail and that's fine for
kids that are of the age where they're responsible or Adults jogging or
bike riding but little kids on tricycles, there's a trade off. Some trails
are better in certain areas than others depending on the amount of traffic
and the ages of people in the aTea that are going to be using it. I firmly
believe that that sidewalk along Carver Beach Road either already has or
will save a serious accident or a death because the cars just used to
screech on a paily basis and now that almost doesn't happen because kids
stay on the iidewalks.
Lash: Do the people who live along there keep that cleared in the winter?
Schroers: No. It's not ~eally used.
Hoffman: !t won't unless there is an ordinance.
....,,;
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
February 25, 1992 - Page 39
,-...
Lash: And see that was another thing that was miscommunicated to a lot of
people when this was going on. People would come in and they were tqld by
the Commission, they'd say who's responsibility is it to keep it cleared
and the Commission told them that that's the city's responsibility. Well
okay. Then everybody was happy and then it turned out that really it isn't
the city's responsibility. It's written in the ordinance that it's the
property owner's responsibility so a lot of people were misinformed. That
was a while back that that happened but now you've got people who came in
before they bought their homes feeling like the city was going to come and
clear it for them every time it snowed and all of a sudden they found out
that's not happening and they're stuck with it so.
Schroers: It's just not being maintained or used in the winter when
there's snow on it. It's not being used and as soon as it clears off, the
kids are back on it with their bikes.
Lash: In this thing it's got listed, I don't know what page it's on but
there was listed some guidelines I think that, here it is. That we were
supposed to be going by the...public safety...and then property owner's
desire and acceptance. It's the very second one. So I think there was a
lot of thought put into this...
(There was a tape change at this point in the discussion.)
schroers: ...really costly. I mean there was no way that we could sit
here and reasonably try to discuss a project of that magnitude which could
~never be funded by any way that we knew.
Hoffman: Other than the road projects.
Schroers: Other than the road projects, right. But for us as a commission
or in the park budget to try to fund off street trails out of our budget,
there's no way that that could ever happen. That's why it was included in
the referendum which unfortunately failed by such a narrow margin. That
would have really helped us out but I think that that's something that we
have to look at again once we get a plan and decide something like you were
stating earlier Jan is reasonable and workable and logical. It will be
easier to sell and we'll probably have to look at another referendum for
funding.
Lash: And I think looking at our, at the Phase 1, 2 and 3, this must be a
revised from the way it was for the referendum.
Hoffman: Yes.
Lash: Because this looks reasonable. I mean if we had to go to a
referendum and say to people, this is the trail system that we would like
to have implemented by the year 2000 and we need a million dollars or
whatever it is to do it, I think people could look at this and say, wow. A
million dollars isn't going to get very much but at least it's going to
hook up TH 5 to CR 17 and at least it's going to hook up Minnewashta to
TH 5 and some of those kind of things and they would maybe be more inclined
then to see a map that's just got lines allover everywhere in front of
I"""" everythi ng and then they get...
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
February 25, 1992 - Page 40
Schroers: Along with the $5 million figure.
...."
Lash: Right. So this is backed off quite a bit I think from the original
thing and it looks a lot more reasonable.
Schroers: We still have the survey and stuff to look at tonight and
actually, we're getting some good discussion here but in terms of really
solid accomplishment, we're not.
Hoffman: My only closing remarks would simply be that trails touch a lot
of people. That's why they're a difficult issue. However, if we choose
not to take a definite stand or decisive stand, they'll continue to slide
by and slip by. However, it's a simple fact that walking is the number one
recreational activity in this country, bicycling is number two and it's
been shown over and over in all the surveys, not only in our community but
other communities as well. It's also been proven or shown, demonstrated
many, many times that those same folks as Jim says and other people have
mentioned, that are defiant against these trails, whether they be in
railroad corridors or along street, will turn the corner once they're in
and not be your enemy anymore. They become allies and again I can't state
that exclusively but that does occur many, many times. We're simply not
going to fill the Council chambers with people that are all for trail and
go and say let's build it. It's always going to be a controversial issue.
Lash: Everybody wants them. They just don't want it in front of their
house, which gets to be a problem.
Schroers: So we are taking no action on this this evening but we asking ~
you to find out what the Planning Commission program is regarding sidewalks
and trails and provide that information for us to look at.
Andrews: Can I make a comment? I think one thing we're making a mistake
on is that we're always trying to look for a consensus instead of a
majority. I think sometimes that it's beneficial if we can't agree, to
make a proposal. You know I don't mind being defeated if, I can live with
that so you're not offending me if it's 4 against 1. I can live with that
but I guess I think I can sense some frustration from Todd here that it's
okaY to make a resolution saying that we are for this or against that but
make that resolution. We don't have to all agree. It doesn't bother me.
Lash: I guess I would like, are you looking for a motion Todd first of all
of a, direction that we want to take or what's the whble purpose here?
Hoffman: This issue was fairly open ended and if it ended in a motion or
recommendation.
Andrews: I guess your recommendation sounded like you were looking for
some firm direction here. Maybe you don't need it today. I don't know but
I guess I'm concerned like you are, that if we don't take some firm stand,
either for sidewalks or against them, that we haven't accomplished'
anything. We just basically spent half an hour or so talking about the
pros and cons and then 3 weeks from now we can spend another half an hour
talking about the same pros and cons allover again.
-'"
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
February 25, 1992 ~ Page 41
,....
Lash: Well I'd be willing to make a motion.
Schroers: Okay but first of all let's clarify here what we are talking
about. It's the Chanhassen Trail Plan Implementation. Now that happens in
some places to include sidewalks but it is not exclusively sidewalks so the
issue that we're dealing with here and the recommendation that we are going
to make is in regards to the trail plan implementation. Not specifically
the sidewalks. We're talking about the trail.
Pemrick: Well I think we wanted to include that we want sidewalks to go to
Planning Commission somehow.
Andrews: Well make a motion. I don't think first of all, I thiQk the
Commission should be open to any motion. Not be specifically directed
here. And then so we can take some small steps. We don't have to take a
huge step here. We can take a small step. I would be happy if we could.
Schroers: Well I don't have a problem with that if someone has a motion,
let's hear it.
Lash: I would like to m6ve that the Park and Recreation Commission make
the recommendation to City Council that we will be attempting to provide
the trail system as planned in the Phase 1, 2 and 3 through whatever
efforts it will take on our part through the year 2010. Having these be
recreational trails. Considered recreational trails and that the issue of
sidewalks be something that would be addressed by the Planning Commission
""'with recommendation from the Public Safety Commission.
Andrews: Okay, I'll second that.
Lash moved, Andrews seconded that the Park and Recreation Commission
recommend to the City Council adopting the Chanhassen Trail Plan
Implementation, phase 1, 2 and 3 through the year 2010 for recreational
trails and that the issue of sidewalks be addressed by the Planning
Commission with recommendation from the Public Safety Commission. All
voted in favor and the motion carried.
Andrews: All we're looking for now is we're looking for some direction
back the~ and then we can revisit this and we've committed ourselves no~ to
moving on.
Lash: With the recreational trails and we have turned sidewalks over
to Public Safety and Planning.
Andrews: Okay. Does that help?
Hoffman: Sure does. Simply taking the report from this Commission to the
City Council and you're never going to get their awareness without taking
some news and information up to them. Without awareness we're not going to
get very far with any issue.
Lash: When I look at these maps, just to clarify to make sure I'm thinking
,....right. Any of these future things on here are off street? Are planned to
be off street, bituminous installations? I don't see any of them ri~ht
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
February 25, 1992 - Page 42
now, I mean we don't know where the future developments are going in so
none of these are sidewalks that are shown except for existing ones like
through Saddlebrook and Lake Susan.
....",
Hoffman: Correct.
Lash: And part of me, just to clarify it. I would just as soon have the
sidewalks that are in taken off of this so that we know that these are your
basic trail. The sidewalk thing could go on a different map as far as I'm
concerned but people if they're walking on a bituminous and they see a
sidewalk going by, they're going to know there's a sidewalk there. They're
not going to look at a map and go, oh let's see I could take this sidewalk
and go allover everywhere. I would just as soon have the map just show
the off street, recreational trails. E0en ihough there are some
connections. I know there's some connections and there's some reason for
it but maybe they can be shown in a different way, if not taken off.
Hoffman: Okay. Sure can be.
Andrews: I feel better now. I think sometimes we try too hard to all
agree and you don't need to do that to make progress.
Hoffman: . ..a Planning Commission meeting and I don't know if I walked in
on a bad issue but it was even worst than this. Don't worry.
Pemrick: I heard they go until midnight a lot of those meetings.
Lash: We're going to get there pretty soon...
......."
Andrews: I guess just as a suggestion for future agenda Ltems, reading
back further here about horse trails. The different types of uses. Boy I
can see us getting into some long discussions on those.
Schroers: We have been in long discussions on those in the past. Anyway,
since we have moved on this item then let's move up...
CITY OF CHANHASSEN PARK AND RECREATION NEEDS SURVEY.
Hoffman: Chairman Schroers and Commission members. This is my assessment
of what this could potentially look like. It's admittedly wordy. We did
want to accomplish some explanation back to residents, citizens about what
has taken place. What is current activity. That is included. It does
need some editing. There was a question added undey programming to ask
residents where they are currently receiving their programming, where they
are fulfilling their programming needs at. There ended up being 6
questions. 5 questions. It~s very short. Technically I would hesitate
even calling this a comprehensive survey. It's kind of a, we just want to
know your quick impression of a couple of the different issues. I just
talked to the Director in Prior Lake. They are looking at a comprehensive
survey strictly on trails based on a 1989 comprehensive park and recreation
survey. That trail survey is3 pages long. Their comprehensive survey was
5 or 6 pages long and he's sending a copy of that up. So this is a
different approach from what we've taken in the past and a different
approach from what most communities do so prior to digging in, I think you
.....;
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
February 25, 1992 - Page 43
,...,
need to reconfirm your stance on what you want to accomplish with this and
then just get sliced to the meat of the issue and we'll redefine this thing
and bring it back again.
Lash: Before we get started I just want to tell you one thing Todd, for
future reference because we missed this opportunity by like 3 days. You
know Barb Klick. She's in the Public Safety. She's in a marketing class
at St. Thomas and as an assignment she has to work in a group and they have
to find someone to do a survey for and she said it's between $5,000.00 and
$10,000.00 worth of work that they do for this business or whatever it is
for like $500.00. Basically your printing costs and things and so it's
students who know, who are working and they know how to do all of this and
they do everything for you for a very small fee. I talked to, we had our
meeting our Tuesday and I talked to her Friday night and the day before she
had just set one up with Davanni's Pizza or something like that. She said
if she had just known we were doing this, it would have been a perfect
project for her. She would have been real motivated to do it. It would
have been something.
Hoffman: It would have been great. What University is this through?
Lash: St. Thomas. It's right over here in Chaska.
Pemrick: Can she get out of that one?
Lash: No. She had just set it up so but just for future reference. When
""'we ever are going to start something like this, it'd be worth a call to
see.
Hoffman: dkay.
Berg: I guess I have a little trouble with the stated goal or what I
interpretted the stated goal of the survey to be and what the survey does
matching up. On the first page down on the last large paragraph. Provide
beneficial input back to the community enabling intelligent and justified
decisions to be made in the planning for your park, recreational and
leisure needs. 'I'm not sure it does that if you eliminate all questions
about tax increases. Are we really getting any information about what we'd
like to see done in the future without any tax increase? Or with or
without? If I were looking at this for the first time, I'm seeing a lot of
things tied in with bond issues with tax increases. I'm not sure you're
really getting a flavor for what I'd like to see in my parks.
Lash: Most of the things would require a bond issue.
Berg: Yeah.
Lash: I mean that's the kicker that we have is everything we want to do,
we don't have enough money for and we don't know if we should go ahead and
pursue a referendum for something that maybe people don't want to start
with.
Berg: I guess I'd like to see that more clearly stated then. That point.
""'unless I'm not seeing it somewhere.
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
February 25, 1992 - Page 44
Hoffman: That's been, Jan speaks in the same vein as you do. If you ~
received your Park and Recreation Magazine. Did you get that yet? Do you
get it on a separate schedule. Take a look in there in the improving,
there's an article on a bond issue in Colorado. $25 million I believe that
they passed and simply one of the questions is how much are you willing to
spend per month to improve your park and recreational facilities. Straight
forward. $1.00? $2.00? $2.50? They took the answer, averaged it. Added
that up to what they could get for a bond issue and said here's what your
answers can get in improvements and they took it out for a vote. It
passed.
Andrews: That's an interesting way to ask a question.
Hoffman: Are you willing to spend $2.00 a month to improve park
facilities? $1.00? $1.50? $5.00? That could be your whole question.
Lash: And then see how much money we have.
Schroers: One of the things that we came up with in our special meeting
Fred was that we decided to kind of focus this questionnaire on things that
we would be unable to handle normally through our park and recreation
budget. Things that we were likely to have to go to some type of outside
funding for and that kind of got us away from our neighborhood parks and
more into the community parks and the trail system and so that's kind of
why or how we arrived at what we have here so far.
Berg: So if I look at this then, with that supposition, I'm going to
assume you're talking about Bandimere and trails.
...""
Schroers: Pretty much is what it came to yeah.
Berg: I guess what I'm thinking is, it would be better if we didn't have
to make that assumption. I think if you stated that clearly, you'd have a
more effective survey.
Lash: So something like your Park and Rec Commission is feeling that the'
two main issues facing us in the future are the youth complex at Bandimere
and future trails, would you support this.
Berg: And the things that we're planning or talking about doing can't be
accomplished without and then how do you feel about, and then go on into
your survey.
Andrews: I think that would be helpful.
Berg: The other thing, I don't know how, this is related to my profession
except that I'm a lot more effective and things are a lot more effectively
transferred to other people if they're a lot simpler. My first reaction to
this was, and I made a notation, there's an awful lot of reading here. A
tendency for a lot of people is to see this and say well there's only 5
questions but that's a lot ,of reading. I'm not going to do it. If som~how
that could be, what's here could be condensed into a considerably fewer
sentences, I think you're going to have a better response.
...-I
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
February 25, 1992 - Page 45
Lash: Well, as an example in question 3. The first 3 lines could be x'd
out. You start with, the City acquired 32 acre parcel and basically we
don't have the money to develop it and would you support a tax increase to
develop this into a youth complex? Yes or no.
Hoffman: You bet. I can edit this with no problems. Let's just carryon
and decide if there's other areas which need to be addressed or.
Lash: Question 2 you must have added after we met. Was that something
that you feel strongly that you need to know or Jerry needs to know or
where did that ,come from?
Hoffman: It would be helpful. I'm not sure which question, even question
1 is going to tell us. It's going to tell us if they're satisfied. We're
not going to be able to change our operation knowledgeably even if we get a
question. If we get 90% say they're only moderately satisfied, we're going
to have to do another survey to find out why.
~Pemrick: What does that mean?
Hoffman: Yeah, what does that mean.
Lash: That was why when we talked about that, I kind of wanted right under
that, not a separate question. Just why with a couple of lines and if they
wanted to elaborate on it, because they have a real ax to grind, then you'd
know specifically what it was. Maybe it was just that they got put on hold
when they first called or something.
schroers: I don't know that we need to ask that question. I don't know
that that's what we're trying to find out. We're trying to find out if
they would be interested in supporting the trail system and the youth
sports complex which our current budget is not going to allow for us to
develop.
Hoffman: The reason it's in there is simply because we're going through
the exercise. If there's a couple other things you can find out as long as'
you're doing it. In discussing this with the City Manager, he wanted to
tag on all sorts of stuff about the city.
Schroers: Even if we were going to ask that question we could cut down to
3. We could say, dissatisfied, satisfied or.
Lash: You're great.
J1i""'. schroers: Yeah.
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
February 25, 1992 - Page 46
Lash: Wouldn't change a thing.
....",
Hoffman: So what I'm hearing is we still just want to make this thing
essentially 4 questions.
Lash: Well one of the goals was to have it be one ~age wasn't it?
Andrews: That's not possible.
Lash: You think that's impossible?
Andrews: Yeah. You can't do this in one page.
Lash: If it was one both sides. One sheet of paper but.
Andrews: Well you'd have to get a magnifying glass to read it I would
think. I think most of what's here is needed to make an intelligent
answer. You have to provide some background information.
Schroers: Okay, what Todd is asking is if we want to consider items on
this survey besides Bandimere and the trails. Is there anything else
anyone feels that we should be addressing in this survey besides that?
Pemrick: I thin~ those two items should be address but then at the end say
additional comments and then we'll get feedback.
Andrews: That's on the back.
Lash: Although I kind of like the number 5 where they can prioritize
future. That would be just getting more feedback. Maybe we're not on
track at all. Maybe we think that there's a need for these two things but
they think there's a need for something else. I don't know what but maybe
there's a lot of people out there who feel that installation of ballfield
lights is the main thing that we need to get done in town.
--'
Hoffman: Is there anything else underneath that segment?
Andrews: I just had one comment on question 4 and one on question 5. I
think question 4 should provide a response that they're satisfied with the
system the way it stands because right now the only choice they have is to
say they're either against parks and trail.s or in favor of 'paying more
taxes but they can't say well the status quo is just fine with me. I like
parks and trails but I don't want to contribute any more money.
Pemrick: That's a good point.
Andrews: Then question 5, instead of saying I do not favor raising taxes,
perhaps a better way to put that would be to eliminate the last sentence
about taxes and just say, I'm willing. What amount I'm willing to
contribute to accomplish these improvements and that way we can find out
what level of funding might be out there.
Schroers: I like that too because that word taxes just is a bad word. If
we could eliminate that word and just use funding instead or just say how
...,;
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
February 25, 1992 - Page 47
,....
much would you be willing to designate towards parks and trails or
something, but using the word tax puts a bad taste in everyone's mouth I
think.
Berg: Yeah even if you said I would favor 0, 2, 4, 6, 8, fill in whatever
numbers you want, a month towards park improvements and let them circle
one.
Hoffman: You'll find if you read that article in Park and Recreation
Magazine that they did a lot of things like that. Instead of saying land
acquisition, to fund land acquisition which they thought was a negative
connotation to some people, they said to fund land preservation. Everybody
said hey, good deal. Wording and misrepresentation of questions and that
type of thing will be refined and will be discussed so we're not trying to
attempt to misrepresent our position or to lead people astray. This is not
a referendum issue so it doesn't need to go to the legal extent but we will
certainly.
Lash: Question 4 I would like us just to use the word trails and not
sidewal ks . Because if this did, go to a referendum, I don't thi nk it would
be to be putting sidewalks in anywhere.
Schroers: I think I'm satisfied with, I would be satisfied with conducting
this survey in regards to trails and Bandimere Youth Sports Complex. I
think trying to cover too big of an area at one time is going to be counter
productive. I think that's what we have done in the past and we didn't get
,.... that far wi th it.
Andrews: Part of what we wanted to accomplish too in our last meeting was
to start to create awareness of the size of these two projects. If we keep
it short, then if we were to come back in the paper or whatever with the
results of the survey, they might still remember the questions that they
got asked and it would make more sense.
Schroers: I think that we need, it needs to be very clear that what we
have in mind for Bandimere is a youth sports complex so that the people
that are concerned, because I have heard here that people said well, why do
we think that we need this and we have had the CAA in here I don't know how
many times telling us about the lack of facilities for the youth programs
so that's where we're getting that information from is that a youth complex
is needed. Trails are a hot item in almost all municipalities and state,
federal and all sorts of other park systems as well so I think that there
is enough interest in these two items to concentrate on them.
Berg: My only other cosmetic comment then would be with the additional
comments, maybe you want to add something specific to Bandimere and trails.
Otherwise you're going to open up the flood gates. You want to keep it
specific to those two.
Schroers: That's only my opinion. I mean if somebody else has some.
Lash: Well we kind of went round about that last time and started out
,...., thinking we were supposed to find out what everybody wanted and then when
we talked this to death last time, we got to the point where we're going to
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
February 25, 1992 - Page 48
narrow it down to just Bandimere and trails. Then we backed off in the end
and said well, then maybe we need to find out if they thin.k that there's
something that's a higher priority than what we think. I just don't feel
like I'm all knowing and can l"ead everybody's mind and tell. Maybe I think
there's a need for Bandimere but maybe we're the only ones in town that
think that and everybody else thinks we need ball lights over at Lake Ann.
..J
Berg: Maybe you want to word your additional comments then to encourage
them to include things other than.
Lash: Yeah. What would you like to see? What do you think is the number
one priority or list anything that you think is a high priority for you.
That's a hard thing for me to do though. If somebody doesn't kind of guide
me through it. All of a sudden I'm faced with that and then that requires
a lot of thought. Then pretty soon I just throw it away. So we need to
have, maybe give them some suggestions at least to get their wheels going.
Andrews: You're saying as question 5 you'd like to see an other in the
write in?
Lash: Or are you just saying to put other?
Berg: I was talking specifically about the comments here at the end.
...don't make it all inclusive, they're not going to think of anything off
of that list.
Lash: I know it. It's kind of a double edged sword. You don't know.
Hoffman: The Commission. also totally ruled out community center and
people, I still get asked that.
......",
Schroers: We can leave that under other and see how much, how many people
\>Jrite that in.
Lash: Yeah, I don't have a problem with putting it on because I guess I'd
be interested in how many people are interested. It just gives us more
direction. The more things that we can think of that would be issues and
still trying to keep it somewhat short and simple.
Schroers: I think that we are also sending out a signal to these people,
to the residents and when we include too much, we're giving them the
impression that we are trying to get a youth sports complex, a trail system
and a community center and they're going to say, that's going to cost us a
fortune. No. No. No. That's what happened before. If we're not very
careful...
Berg: You've been real top heavy in Bandimere and trails. If you have a
general list at the end of other concerns that you might like to see the
Park and Rec Commission address and you bury community center in there
somewhere, I'm not going to get the impression that you're trying to pull
an end run here and talk about the community center.
Lash: I think it would be an obvious, I think it would seem like a, I
think people would wonder why in the world it's not on there. People who
.....I
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
February 25, 1992 - Page 49
~'reallY supported it in the past. And I look at this, I guess if I got this
from someone and I looked at this I would think, gee they really care about
what I want. They really want to know what I want. Instead of them
telling me what I want and what they think we need, they're asking me what
I want and I would feel good about that and I would feel that I could be
honest and say absolutely not. I don't want a youth complex. Or
ballfields are number one for me or whatever and I think if we give the
impression that we honestly care about their opinion and we're trying to do
what they want and to provide what they want instead of forcing something
on them that we think they need, I think they'll be responsive to it. If
we don't make it look slanted or one sided or anything else, just give all
the facts and ask them what they want and what they're willing to support
and pay for.
Hoffman: Larry, can I just ask a couple of comments of the Commission?
Just so we can satisfy the other half of our department, Larry I know
you've been going just for Bandimere and trails but if we take out question
2 but retain question 1 so we can at least give people an opportunity to
comment on the other half of the department which is recreation programs.
As long as we're sending this thing out.
Schroers: - Sure.
Hoffman: It's Jerry and the department in trying to focus our attention in
that area as well. What is your thoughts on demographics? On the
introduction. Is it important for people to tell where their community
~is? How big it is? Who it is? We had talked about that in that we didn't
have to ask them. We knew what it is and in fact we wanted to communicate
that out to the community. In fact that can be.
Andrews: I remember we talked about that being important and now that I
read it, I realize how totally uninterested I am in that.
Lash: Well most people know already that the city is growing. It's grown.
Berg: And they're going to get hit again and again and again. If you have
a school board referendums and whatever, they're going to be seeing these
numbers again and again and again.
Hoffman: School board's going to be there next February-March most likely.
Andrews: Minnetonka just approved.
Lash: What about November?
Hoffman: I don't think so, no. They were looking at February or March,
this time next year. So you might want to get this on in November.
Schroers: We could maybe eliminate Todd the opening paragraph there that
gives the stats and just go with as a growing community the Park and
Recreation Commissipn. Just eliminate the stats.
Andrews: We're rapidly growing. Something stronger.
".....
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
February 25, 1992 - Page 50
Berg: But then deal something, put something in there that this survey is
going to really be dealing with Bandimere and.
~
Hoffman: Yep, because it is misleading to tell them that we're going to
address the entire system when we're only asking two questions. I would
propose bringing this back in a final version as you're going to see it.
I'll ask you in the next report to critique it stringently. In fact go
ahead and delete sentences and use your 'own corrections so when you come
back next time, we can put a survey out in the street.
Andrews: Thanks Todd. I know you put a lot into that so.
SOUTH LOTUS LAKE GATE ATTENDANT PROGRAM.
Hoffman: I think this item can be fairly rapid fire. Just brief the
issues which are there. Given some history to the park commission, if
you've read through that or if you didn't know the history, you probably
heard rumors of it. At this point I believe it would be premature.
Premature to go ahead and deduct, disassemble or do away with the gate
attendant program at south Lotus Lake. It's a politically embedded issue.
It would raise considerable debate. The cost of operating the gate house
at this time has been reduced to a very minimal level. That's not to say
that we couldn't reduce the cost and administrative even more bY
eliminating it but we have not only the past issues which were raised with
busyness. and parking on the streets and environmental issues but now we've
got Eurasian Water Milfoil. People on that lake have tagged into the "Gate
Attendant" system as being a deterrent to bringing weeds into Lotus Lake.
That would be brought up as well if the gate attendant program dissolved. ....",
My recommendation to the Commission would be to evaluate the center on
another year and to leave the program as it exists in place today.
Schroers: That makes sense to me.
Lash: I think it's got kind of screwy hours. Noon to 6:00, 7 days a week.
How much useage does it get during the ~eek from noon to 6:00?
Hoffman: Jerry was on vacation. I took those off of some time cards I
found.
Ruegemer: That may have been later in the summer.
Hoffman: 4:00 to 7:00 during the weekdays.,
Lash: Yeah, that sounds more. Actually what I kind of had thought was
what if we went to 6:00 to 6:00 just on the weekends and just skip the
weekdays? Do you think people would be upset about that?
Hoffman: Weekdays get heavy use after the work day and staffing it from
4:00 to 7:00 is very important. During that 10:00 to 7:00 on weekends is
important as well.
Schroers: The way the recommendation is worded is will gate attendants be
scheduled based upon.
...."
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
February 25, 1992 - Page 51
,....
Lash: So you're not talking about having it be noon to 6:00 7 days a week?
Hoffman: Correct.
Lash: Okay.
Hoffman: We'll evaluate when we should be there and go ahead and put them
into place.
Schroers: Okay. So unless someone has a concern, I would ask for a
recommendation or a motion on the recommendation and the recommendation is
that South Lotus Lake Gate Attendant program be kept intact as it presently
exists with gate attendants being scheduled based upon need.
Andrews: So moved.
Schroers: Second?
Pemrick: Aye.
Andrews moved, Pemrick seconded that South Lotus Lake Gate Attendant
program be kept intact as it presently exists with gate attendants being
scheduled based upon need. All voted in favor and the motion carried.
COMMISSION MEMBER PRESENTATIONS. None.
""'ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS:
A. APPROVE 1992 FOURTH OF JULY FIREWORKS CONTRACT.
Ruegemer: Thank you Larry. Typically in the past in working to get a
fireworks display for the 4th of July we've always put this up for an open
bid procedure. In the past 3-4 years the end result has typically always
been the same. The same company getting the bid. Banner Fireworks. In
the past they have done a decent job as far as complying with all safety
standards and they have really given an excellent show that's really been
talked about in our area as far as the neighboring communities: As far as
Chaska's and Eden Prairie's. There's a lot of people that really look
forward to our show every 4th of July. So that's why we've just entered
into a private contract this year with Banner Fireworks instead of going
through the whole procedure again and kind of skipping a few steps and just
getting the end result. The fireworks display will be on Saturday the 4th
of July at Lake Ann Park and there will be fired from the same area. And
to accompl ish what ~"'e need to accomplish, there will be addi tionalsafety
standards taken a look at by the Fire Marshall just to insure that we do
not have any problems as far as setbacks and that will be addressed before
the final contract is approved, signed and returned. The fireworks display
will be $6,000.00 and it will include a million dollar public liability and
prope~ty damage insurance policy and that was bid right into the $6,000.00
price tag so we will not. Last year we had to add additional insurance
after the bid had been approved and it cost additional money. This year
that was put right into the $6,000.00 figure.
~Berg: What was the cost last year?
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
February 25, 1992 - Page 52
Ruegemer: Roughly $5,600.00.
-'
Berg: And then how much for the insurance?
Ruegemer: It came in about $5,200.00 and it was about $500.00 or $600.00
for additional insurance.
Lash: So Banner doesn't know that you're not sending it out for bid
anymore do they?
Ruegemer: No. We just sent a letter stating the fact that we just want to
enter into a private contract with Banner.
Lash: So they know you're not sending it out to any other?
Ruegemer: This year. They're the only ones we sent a letter out to.
Lash: You should probably keep that under your hat and let them think
they're sti 11 'biddi ng agai nst other people.
,
Hoffman: You can compare this list to the past-list. They're not under
cutting our show.
Lash: No, the~'ve always done a good job. It's just when you're doing
that kind of stuff, you don't want to let somebody know that they've got an
exclusive on it or pretty soon they're going to start jacking their price
up.
..."I
I
Ruegemer: Well that's something that we did get strict guidelines to as
far as when we send out the letter. A strict price saying with what we
expected as far as a dollar amount and insurance amount and what we could
get in the price list was comparable to last year's show.
Hoffman: If they do that we'd dump them Jan.
Lash: Yeah. I just don't want to get jerked around.
Ruegemer: So it's staff's recommendation that the Park and'RecreatiQn
Commission accept the fireworks display bid of $6,000.00 from Banner'
Fireworks and we will take a look at adding the additional wordage in
coverage for the insurance before we approve the final.
Lash: So moved.
Berg: Second.
Lash moved, Berg seconded that the Park and Recreation Commission recommend
to accept the fireworks display bid of $6.000.00 from Banner Fireworks
Display Company. All voted in favor and the motion carried.
B. APPROVE 1992 FOURTH OF JULY BAND CONTRACT.
Ruegemer: This year in looking ahead to the community picnic for the band,
we did take a look at additional bands as far as listening to demo tapes
~
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
February 25, 1992 - Page 53
,....,
and looking to maybe mix it up a little bit as far as getting out of our,
having the same repeat band. But for the dollar amounts and the show that
we do receive from the Hi-Topps, there really wasn't any comparison to any
other bands that we had listened to. I think the Hi-Topps really put on an
energetic show and really get the crowd involved. I heard that from quite
a few, a number of community residents that they really do look forward to
every year to have the Hi-Topps here. Now with St. Hubert's involved with
it now we'll have to see but for this year I think we will be best suited
to get the Hi-Topps back and perform.
Andrews: When is St. Hubert's doing their engagement with Hi-Topps?
Ruegemer: It's already done.
Hoffman: It's done.
Ruegemer: So it should be scheduled far enough apart where people
shollldn't...so we should be okay that way. They're scheduled to perform
Friday, July 3rd. That will be the community night and basically it would
be the same timeframe from 8:00 until midnight with the same amount of sets
and that would be the case. There will be the back up dates and the second
play date will be included on the contract...
pemrick: One heck of a party. A lot of people driving back and forth.
Oh no, you can dance and watch the fireworks. It's close enough.
Lash: From the dance over to the fireworks or what would you do?
,
Schroers: You said they were both on the 5th but the fireworks was on the
-4th.
Lash: But if it rained on the 4th. If it rains Friday and Saturday. Not
that it would ever do that but if it did, everything is scheduled, the rain
date has everything for the 5th.
Pemrick: I don't think there's a problem. They can go together. You can
be dancing and watching fireworks. Maybe people with kids don't even want
to be at the dance and just want to watch fireworks and get home to bed.
Lash: Yeah, would it be possible to move the band to Lake Ann?
Hoffman: Sure.
Lash: Have it all in the same spot.
".....Hoffman: We just might do that. But we've been fortunate, it hasn't
rained yet.
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
February 25, 1992 - Page 54
Andrews: Last year they were inside though.
....."
Hoffman: Yeah, we had that off and on shower deal.
Schroers: One other question. Jerry, what about that guitar player that
played before the fireworks?
Ruegemer: Oh before the fireworks? Jeff Brooks.
Schroers:
fireworks?
Is that his name? Is he going to play again before the
I mean people kind of liked that.
Ruegemer: Yeah, we had talked about that down in the lakeview area and
also adding another person up in the parkview area possibly because there
is a lot of people that do sit up there as well.
Hoffman:
. .
There's more people on top than down below.
Ruegemer: Yeah, so maybe just give them a little entertainment value also
up in that area because there are a lot of people that do sit up there. I
think it'd be very nice to have somebody maybe different music styles.
Schroers: Yeah, Eric Clapton or someone.
Ruegemer: Sure. Get a little variety up there.
Lash: Polka band.
....._,/
Andrews: Prince.
Schroers: Okay, so do you need a motion then on B for the band contract?
Ruegemer: Yeqh. Just to approve the Topps and $1,300.00.
Schroers: Okay, I'll move to approve. Is there a second?
Pemrick: I'll second.
Schroers moved, Pemrick seconded that the Park and Rec~eation Commission
recommend to approve the band contract for the Hi-Topps for the 4th of July
Celebration in the amount of $1,300.00. All voted in favor and the motion
carried.
Lash: You'te going to have the kiddie parade and everything right?
Ruegemer: oh yeah, definitely.
C. EVALUATION OF TEEN NIGHT OUT PROGRAM.
Ruegemer: This whole concept of the teen night out started last, probably
early last summer as far as getting together with...Community Education.
We were looking at trying to offer more. That was one of our goals in 1991
is to off~r more programs for that age group. We just started to brain
storm a little bit and we did kind of formulate like a commission or a....."
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
February 25, 1992 - Page 55
JI'"
group that did get together and then we were going to offer these types of
programs and try to get something going. Something constructive going so
we did invite the Chaska Park and Rec also to get involved with this
project. And as we turned out, we just decided at first we thought maybe
we could do it once a month and then once we got going with our first one
we thought that it might be a little excessive. It might be a little
repetitive if we kept doing it every month. So what we had decided now was
just to do it 3 to 4 times a year starting off in the fall because there
are a lot of other activities going on at that time as far as other teen
night out dances offered by the middle school itself and ski trips and that
type of deal so there is a lot of other activities that we weren't aware of
at first that are available. So what we're go~ng to be doing is to just to
continue to offer those 3 to 4 teen nights out a year starting in October
and ~oughly cover the late fall and winter months just to give them
something to do when the winter duldrums set in. The activities that we
did offer for the teen nights out did include the swimming, volleyball,
basketball, giving them something to get their energies out so maybe their
parents would get a little rest too so those are all held at the Chaska
Middle School and they were from the 6:30 to 9:30 timeframe. That seemed
to work out very well as far as kids getting there after supper and then we
didn't keep them too late there so it seemed to work out for the best. The
admission fee, we weren't really sure what type of response that we were
going to get at first so we did set the admission fee at $3.00 just to help
recover some of the costs if we did have a low turnout. As it did turn
out, we did have quite a favorable response at the first one. We were
~pleasantlY surprised and we did get some pretty nice prizes for the first
one to try and attract some kids in coming out as far as grouping together
and trying to get the business community involved a little bit. As far as
getting pizza coupons and different t-shirts and cassettes and we did give
away a boom box for the grand prize and all those costs were recovered from
admission and concessions. That was the first one. We did have a pretty
good turnout for that. The second one was, way back in late August I got a
letter from KDWB Party Music and as far as what they were trying to do was
promote the Pepsi license to chill and what Pepsi did was start a program,
this license to chill program where they went out to different schools and
communities and did offer like a teen night out program and they would pick
up the cost for all this including DJ's and prizes and different things
like that so we were fortunate enough to have that our second time. The
December 6th teen night out so we did have all our costs paid for by Pepsi
and KDWB and they did give away really nice t-shirts and keychains and
frisbees. We did have a celebrity DJ come out. One from KDWB, this Eric
Jordan and that was very, very popular with the kids so that was very
successful as well.
Berg: I would going to add to that, I was going to chastise you for your
sentence about the teens enjoy the presence of a celebrity, especially the
girls. So I asked my daughter who was theie, is that accurate Rachel and
she said oh, I'm afraid so.
Ruegemer: He was very popular with the young ladies. In fact they have
jock shots and what they did is, well jock shots is just the picture of the
DJ and the time slot they're available and as a promotional deal they
Jl"'printed up flyers for that and have all the information on it including the
picture and they did include those in their lockers on the inside so they
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
February 25, 1992 - Page 56
can take a look at him. every day. But that was the second one. We did ......"
have a very good response to that also. The third teen night out we just
wanted to go Qut kind of with a good bang so we did hire this Hollywood
Henderson which was an additional cost to us but it was very, the response
was very good. It was a lot of kids coming in to that too. He also
brought additional t-shirts and keychains and other prizes to give away~
On the average we did have, we had to take a look at all the chaperones
too. We had typically about 12 to 15 chaperones at each teen night out
just to kind of cover all our bases. Just to maybe put the other parents
at ease to have their kids.. We wanted to promote a safe atmosphere so
parents would feel comfortable dropping their kids off and know that they
will be looked after. There's not going to be a mad chaos every time they
drop them off so we did cover different exercise. Make sure that as people
left they were gone for the night. We didn't allow this revolving door. to
have people in and out all the time. We just didn't want to have to deal
with that. People going out and drinking or whatever they wanted to do.
We didn't have any trouble with people drinking and so we were very
fortunate with that. We tried to keep our eye on that also. But that did
really work out with having that number of chaperones. We did seem to
cover all the areas. It worked out very well. All the through chap~rones
you have an average roughly around 330 teens for teen night out which is
well above what we had estimated at first when we had our first one in
October and that did represent about 26% of the middle school population.
We are going to continue this again for next year. We did wrap up our
session with the teen night out for this year. We'll not be doing ariy more
but we'll resume those again in October of 1992. I just have a number for
you~here. It's one of the, to maybe share what we had went through as far
as concessions for all the different teen nights out. As far as the amount ~
of cases of pop, candy bars and hot dogs we did sell and that was the total
of what we did go through. And also the gross revenue and our expenditures
for each teen night out.
Schroers:" Looks really good Jerry.
Lash: I just have a question. Why do you have the gross revenue and then
the expenditure so you have your plus thing and .then why did you divide it
by 3?
Ruegemer: Because there's 3 groups invo10ed. The Chaska Park and Rec,
Community Education and our.
Lash: Well I just had wonderful feedback from my daughter about these. She
just thought these were the greatest. My only thing is I wish there was
still another coming up because it's only February.
Berg: One more would be nice.
Lash: Yeah, one more would be nice. And to make sure that it's
coordinated somehow around the parties at school because it seemed like
some of them got kind of lumped together where there was a teen night and
then the very next week it was a school party or something so if you get
the schedule from the school.
-'
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
February 25, 1992 - Page 57
,.....
Ruegemer: That was all part of our learning process also and...did
approach us, the principle at the Middle School and is taking over
everything as far as the after school parties and our parties and all that
and it just seems to be a little bit more than we can handle at this point.
Lash: Did you have a problem at all with high school kids trying to get
. ?
,1 n.
Ruegemer: Towards the end we did. The first couple we didn't at all and
we just had maybe one or two try to get in.
Lash: How do you know?
Ruegemer: We have different teachers there. Gay Mattson is very
knowledgeable in that and we usually have her at the front door. I was
always at the front door. Sometimes it's hard to tell between some of the
kids but we try to keep a good handle on it. We didn't have any problems.
The reason we're not going any farther as far as why we're ending now in,
after the last one, is there's so many other school activities going on
now. At first we did project going all the way until May but there weren't
any, when it got into March there's all the State tournaments. All the
different, wrapping up all the band concerts and all that. We couldn't get
a Friday night from now until May. We couldn't get any in April. We
couldn't get any in March so that's why we didn't do it and we thought well
sure, we're going to do one last one in May but the kids were getting, our
,.....thought was, once we get closer to the end of school, there's always the
possibility that it might be a little bit more rowdy and we didn't want
that to tarnish what we have done up to this point. Because this last
January they were starting to get a little bit more obnoxious than they
were in the two previous and we thought once they get closer towards the
end of school they might really raise some cane so.
Lash: So if it's tournaments, can you not have it because there's
tournaments or you figured it'd be a conflict?
Ruegemer: Oh we could. Conflict.
Lash: Because there's a lot of kids that don't go to those things.
Ruegemer: Sure. But there's also the adult basketball. Like in February-
March.
Lash: Somebody else using the facility?
Ruegemer: Yes.
Schroeis: Well that looks like a good successful program Jerry. It's
obvious that a lot of work and well thought out planning went into it and
it's really nice to see all that effort payoff. Thanks a lot for that.
If there's nothing further on the teen night out, we can move to the
Adminstrative section.
,...,
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
February 25, 1992 ~ Page 58
ADMINISTRATIVE SECTION.
.....-I
Hoffman: Just one side note. It's always a concern of ours that we put
all this effort i.nto going down to Chaska and we haven't done the same at
Minnetonka. Just keep your thought process open in that we continue to
direct our efforts one direction. We haven't had any negative feedback
from it simply because these people in the Minnetonka School District are
happy with the services they're receiving out of Minnetonka Community
Services, Hopkins-Minnetonka Park and Recreation. If they ever say hey,
you're spending staff time and our tax money planning a teen night out at
Chaska Elementary, 3 of them and 2 ski trips and you didn't d~ anything up
in Minnetonka. Why not? We just need to be aware of that.
Andrews: I gues~ I had sort of that question in my mind.
Lash: Well it's something that, well it wouldn't.be that much fun I
suppose if they don't know enough kids but it's certainly something that
would open to Minnetonka students if they wanted to go wouldn't it?
Hoffman: If we want to make that available, we need to advertise that and
make that combination and it is, it would be difficult.
Pemrick: Yeah, that gets real tough.
Hoffman: So it's something that we need to continue to address.
Lash moved, Pemrickseconded to adjourn the meeting. All voted in favor ~
and the motion carried.
Submitted by Todd Hoffman
Park and Rec Coordinator
Prepared by Nann Opheim
.....-I