Loading...
PRC 1992 07 28 ~~HANHASSEN PARKlAND RECREATION COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING JULY 28, 1992 Chairman Schroers called the meeting to order 7:34 p.m.. MEMBERS PRESENT: Fred Berg, Jim Andrews, Randy Erickson, Wendy Pemrick, Larry Schroers, Dave Koubsky and Jan Lash STAFF PRESENT: Todd Hoffman, Park and Rec Coordinator; Jerry Ruegemer, Recreation Supervisor; and Dale Gregory, Park Maintenance Supervisor APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Hoffman: A couple corrections Chairman Schroers. Under Public Present, Kay an~ Susan Boudrie, 6042 Murray Hill Road are incorrectly listed under the neighborhood meeting for Carver Beach Park. They should be under Mosquito Control. And then starting on page 54, there are 12 comments which are listed as resident which are the comments of Mr. Ross Green. Schroers: Okay. Are there any others? If not, can I have a motion to approve. Lash moved, Berg seconded to approve the Minutes of ~he Park and Recreation Commission meeting dated June 23, 1992 as amended by Todd Hoffman. All ~voted in favor and the motion carried. MOSQUITO CONTROL IN LAKE ANN PARK AND LAKE SUSAN PARK. Public Present: Name Address Dave Johnson 170 Beaverbrook Road Lincoln Park, NJ 07035 MMCD, 2380 Wycliff Street, St. Paul 55114 2380 Wycliff Street, St. Paul 55114 2380 Wycliff Street, St. Paul 55114 2380 Wycliff Street, St. Paul 55114 2380 Wycliff Street, St. Paul 55114 6042 Murray Hill Road, Excelsior-Chanhassen 8600 Great plains Blvd. 2029-16th Terrace N.W., New Brighton 17575 Valley Drive, Jordan 56071 17575 Valley Drive, Jordan 56071 123 !nterlachen Road, Hopkins 55343 1695 Steller Court 9010 Co. Rd. 140, Cologne John DeProspo Bill Caesar Ross Green David Neitzel Susan Palchick Susan Boudrie Al Klingelhutz David Dolbert Ernie Wermerskirchen Renee Wagner Bob Bennett Eric Rivkin Harold Trende Schroers: Before we dive into this issue, we have decided that because we ~spent a great deal of time on these issues last time, we're going to limit ?resentations this evening to 5 minutes to the Mosquito Control. Also to Mr. Rivkin and to any other interested parties who are not affiliated with either, so Mr. Green are you going to be speaking for the Mosquito Control Park and Rec Commission Meeting July 28, 1992 - Page 2 .---' this evening? Okay, thanks very much. Okay, with that then Todd, would you like to bring us up to speed on this? Hoffman: Thank you Chairman Schroers and Commission mempers. This item was reviewed by the Commission on June 23rd. Your last meeting. Official action taken that evenin~ was to table discussion until July 28, 1992, tonight's meeting. On the 23rd the Commission heard from a variety of representatives of the Metropolitan Mosquito Control District. An even larger number are here this evening I believe. Eric Rivkin, a resident of Chanhassen. Harold Trende, Carver County Commissioner. Al Klingelhutz, Carver County Commissioner and other members of the audience. Information disseminated that evening was very extensive, touching on many issues surrounding mosquito control and the activities of the MMCD. It is important for the Commission tounaerstand and remember that they are not being asked to judge all activities of the MMCD. The only conclusion that needs to be reached is whether mosquito control activities should be carried out in our city parks. Mosquito control has indicated by designation on a city base map that currently Lake Ann Park and Lake Susan Parks are the only two locations within the city of Chanhassen which are being treated. As such, discussion is centered in those two locations. However I believe that it would behoove us that any recommendations made would be applicable to all park sites within the city. I assume the park commissioners have read the attachments of their choice. I attempted to list all by title so you could pick through there and read the ones which interested you the most. I would like to touch on the occurrence which we had take place at Lake Ann. It's obviously gone over in detail in your ~ packet and that is the failure of the MMCD to notify the city of spraying which they did the week of July 13, 1992 at Lake Ann Park. I was certainly under the impression, as I believe you were, that if they were going to spray adulticides, the chemical Punt within Lake Ann, that they would notify us. Due to some misunderstanding internally on their part, that notification was not given. Our recommendation this eveni~g, in order to assist you in making a recommendation on this issue, I've provided a variety of choices based on subject concerning the mosquito control issues. In regard to larval control briquettes, I feel we could make two options. Either eliminate their ~sewithin the city parks or allow their use to control providing notification of the treatment areas and times are provided. In regards to adult mosquito control chemicals referred to as cold fogging, I've provided three options for the Commission to consider and either recommend or change or create a recommendation of their own. Option number 1 is eliminate their use. Option number 2 would be to eliminate their use for a probationary period. I would suggest the remainder of this season and then the calendar, summer year 1993. Then re-evaluating through citizen comments and those types of things, what the effect of the elimination of that cold fogging program was. Or Option number 3, to allow their use to continue providing notification of the treatment areas and times are provided. In regards to the landing and take off and the loading of the helicopter which they use or the mixing. of high volumes of control chemicals at Lake Ann or any other city parks, it is recommended that this practice be prohibited. Schroers: Very good. Thanks a lot Todd. At this time we'll then open up the floor to presentations. I don't know who would like to start. Ross, ~ if you'd like to go first or Eric. Mr. Green, go right ahead please. Park and Rec Commission Meeting ,.... Jul y 28, 1992 - Page 3 Ross Green: My comments will be brief tonight. Mr. Chairman, members of the Commission, Mr. Hoffman and staff and ladies and gentlemen, I'd like to address basically 4 issues here in the brief time that I have. The first has to do with what Mr. Hoffman mentioned already and that's not notifying you as to regard of a treatment at Lake Ann Park. That happened on ~uly 13th. The purpose of this treatment was to reduce the number of aedes triseratius mosquitoes and that was based on the LaCrosse Encephalitis prevention program that we have in place. These are specific treatments are not common place and there was confusion on the part of the supervis6r as to who would call Mr. Hoffman's office. Because of the involvement with the LaCrosse Encephalitis program, and myself with the issues of Chanhassen, there was an internal oversight basically is what it was and the call was not made. And I would, if you would please accept our sincere apology for that. I can assure you that will never happen again but it was an oversight and a confusion thing. If this had been a regular treatment of Lake Ann Park, when the nuisance mosquitoes were there, there would not have been a question but there was and we're sorry that it happened. A couple of other comments. Since 1983 MMCD has been controlling pest and disease carrying mosquitoes in Eastern Carver County. There are significantly fewer mosquitoes emerging from these breeding sites to bite people in Carver County, including more specifically Chanhassen than there were previous to 1983. A second issue here would seem to be that MMCQ, is MMCD presenting a threat to the environment? Scientific studies say no. The control materials used by the MMCD have gone through extensive testing ~and are registered through the Environmental Protection Agency. Since 1988 MMCD has funded independent research looking for adverse aquatic environmental impacts. Research to date has indicated that the dosage rates used are below that which would have an adverse impact on vertebrates and non targeted invertegrates organisms in the region. Another issue would be is MMCD presenting a threat to public health? The larval control materials that are considered to be non-toxic to plants, people and pets. In 1984 the MMCD requested the Minnesota Department of Health to evaluate the potential hazards of human exposure to chemicals used by MMCD to control adult mosquitoes. The report indicated that Pyrethroids, and an example was resmethrine, are generally considered one of the safest known pesticides and that exposure to these materials as they are typically used in pest control, would not result in significant potential for the occurrence of human health effects. And there's an expanded risk assessment of these materials that's being completed right now. It's internal at the present time so I can't give them to you at this particular time but when that is done, and I mean very soon, we anticipate a similar type of finding and you'll have that available to you at that point. It's just not completed at this point. Another issue that may be addressed here is, how the MMCD tax dollars are bei ng spent. I thi nk it's worth for you noting that MMCD levy on an $80,000.00 house is less than $4.00. 93% of MMCD's budget goes into the field for the control of mosquitoes, biting gnats, lyme tick surveillence, program development, quality control, and environmental studies. I would also like to introduce a gentleman, or two gentlemen that are with us this evening, that can answer questions regarding the health aspects of the adult control materials, Punt and ~Scourge. Permethrine and Resmethrine. It's Dr. John DeProspo and Dr. Dave Johnson. Dr. DeProspo is the toxicologist that was referred to by Mr. Rivkin in his dissertation last week and I'm sure can address any of the issues that Mr. Rivkin brought up and any questions that you have from a Park and Rec Commission Meeting July 28, 1992 - Page 4 ...",. technical nature because there were many inaccurancies and misleading information that was there and we're not going to be able to get into all those in terms of a presentation so, with that in mind, he is available for comment and for answering questions regarding that aspect. Thank you very much. Eric Rivkin: Thank you. I planned a long time ago to take only 5 minutes. One. truth we can all agree on is that anything that is designed to kill biological organisms is by definition not environmentally friendly. And I don't want ,what happened to me and my son, confirmed by a doctor, to happen to anyone else before it is too late. I read the Minutes from the last meeting and it seemed to me that there were questions left unanswered about the safety and effectiveness of both the larvacides and the ~dulticides to the environment' and human health. I'm not an expert so I've compiled comments from experts in mosquito control from recent literature that I received since the last meeting on this one sheet which should answer your questions. Would you like them now? Okay. The conclusion from reading these scientists comments, and I wanted to tell you who these scientists are. These references are from the proceedings and scientific studies presented at the conference called Mosquito Control Pesticides, Ecological Impacts and~anagement Alternatives which was held in Gainsville, Florida in 1991. Florida spends $60 million a year ori mosquito control for the whole state, including significant amounts for economic and ecological impact research. As the conclusions are, from reading these scientist comments, is that neither larvacides or adulticides are to be considered environmentally safe because of adverse impacts on ecosytems. They are ~ strongly on the trend of getting away from chemical controls and going towards natural controls and prevention techniques through source reduction. They also emphasize strongly that pesticides of any kind have no place in natural areas', such as our par ks, and re'cognize hazards to humans from mosquito pesticides. Especially the spraying of the adulticides. Since nuisance mosquitoes will be in abundance in certain areas of our parks, and I emphasize nuisance mosquitoes, and they are in the most abundance and those people will low mosquito tolerance will always be bothered no matter what level of mosquitoes there are, it seems wise not to add to the chemical soup in our air and water with mosquito chemicals. And as far as alternative mosquito control is concerned, we can Join many other municipalities in our own Twin City metro area and communities around the country, in substituting the chemical controls for natural controls . such as martins, swallows, bats and dragonflies and prevention techniques mentioned in the expert's comments before yqu. If engineering and planning departments in our city can prevent the creation of prolific breeding sites by requiring developers to design water management properly and encourage revegetation and enforce surface water quality and mangement techniques to provide healthy habitats for mosquito predators like snakes and frogs and birds to feed on larvae and adults. If mosquitoes are a nuisance, problem in these parks, with your permission, I will offer to coordinate any effort with wildlife experts, local Scout troops, citizens and bird clubs to build these habitats as they have done in the other cities, and properly place them in the parks at a future time. And this would not cost the City anything. I have many volunteers already willing to do this. Any encephalitis mosquito threat could be wiped out 100%. Not 99%, but 100% very cost effectively through the strategy, control strategy that is ...",. recommended by the MMCD which is not adulticiding but is through Park and Rec Commission Meeting ~July 28, 1992 - Page 5 eliminating of the breeding sites. Larry, Dave Neitzel of the Mosquito Control District found literally thousands of containers, beer cans, litter throughout the woods and if ~e simply go and pick them up, we'll eliminate the breeding sites. He could not find any tree holes or any natural depressions or areas that could hold, breed the triseriastus mosquito, which is the only mosquito vecter. It's very rare, that could possib~y carry this threat. The only places we could get citizen volunteer group and Scouts to pick up these containers and educate everyone through the city's newsletter, not to litter the park and why. This could be done in the springtime before leaf out, once a year and the major sweep of course would be in the initial time and then once a year thereafter would be just very minor maintenance. I would like to comment on Ross Green's, I didn't plan on this but please forgive me if I'm going over my time here but when Mr. Green mentioned this Department of Health study. I also want to lift some quotes out of that study. And by the way, that is not a scientific at all. It's simply an evaluation by some local doctors and was done in 1984, well before any of the, all these studies that I quoted you and the scientific references in the previous sheet and this sheet. In 1984 the number of health related complaints has risen significantly to the point where Minneapolis has banned mosquito chemical controls from it's parks. Since this report, many studies have been done that confirm adverse reactions are real and those are cited. I'll quote you. This report. "Several contacts reported antidotal reports of adverse responses in humans exposed to synthetic pyrethroids, both Punt and Scourge. Responses ~included prickling and itching of the skin, i.e. face, tongue, lips, nasal passages, eyes and hands and numbness of the face and hands." Here's another quote. "Allergists stated that the people .allergic to ragweed could exhibit cross sensitization to pyrethrines." And the last one. "Allergists stated that when people with an existing disease such as asthsma or other respiratory disease, heart disease, were exposed to inhaled pollutant e.g. insecticide spray, that could manifest an exasperation of the disease." And it also appears in the literature that reactions could also be triggered by inert ingredients which are kept secret by the manufacturers. Thank you very much. Schroers: Okay, are there any other interested parties that wish to make a presentation regarding mosquito control? Mr. Klingelhutz. Al Klingelhutz: I'm Al Klingelhutz. Most of you know I'm a Carver County Commissioner but I'm not going to speak as a Commissioner tonight. I'm going to speak as a citizen of Chanhassen. Under your fellow citizens here in this town. I was to the 4th of July celebration and I was amazed there was very few mosquitoes. I understand that the area was sprayed prior to the 4th of July celebration and I know a lot of people and a lot of them came up to me and said, hey this is great. We aren't swatting mosquitoes all night. We're enjoying ourselves. These are some of the benefits of mosquito control. Carver County, before my time as a County Commissioner, somehow got the eastern half of Carver County to be taxed for mosquito control and not the western half. I didn't find out the details on this but as long as we're in the taxing district, if we use methods and the'work ~that the Mosquito Control District does, you and I are still going to pay that $4.00 on an $80,000.00 house. If we use it or not. This is another thing that should be taken into consideration. I love to garden, you can see by the color of my skin I'm out in the sun quite a little. And I see Park and Rec Commission Meeting July 28, 1992 - Page 6 -*' that some of you are. I can remember, and I haven't aged, I remember when there was no mosquito control in this area of Carver County. And' at times like this when we've had rains and more rains and continuous moisture in the morning, the mosquitoes would almost pick you up and carry you away. I was out in my garden this morning, sure I got bit 3 or 4 times but I didn't think that was bad. When I can recall before this took place, I'd probably have 200 bites in the time I was out in my garden. Citizens, we've had one case or two cases of someone who went to the doctor who was exposed to this spray. Have we had any other complaints from any other citizen in Chanhassen that used that park on that same day or was up to the July 4th festival? It seems rather odd to me that the most ardent person against this spraying, him and his son are the only ~eople that have shown any allergy or reaction to.the spray. I just hope, and I sure hope that you continue spraying Lake Suan Park. That's just across the lake from me and I'd sure hate to have them mosquitoes that are bred over there come over to my place and start biting me. Going back to the encephalitis mosquito, it's been a long, hard pull. We've still got them. There's still cans being dumped out every day. You can pick them up once a year and 3 months later you go back in the same area. You probably find another tire that somebody rolled off in the ditch, half full of water. Good breeding area. It would take more than once a year surveillance to control the encephalitis mosquito. It takes constant vigilance and who's going to climb up a tree 40 feet in the air and look in a ~not hole to see if there's water in it or not? That's another breeding plac~. We've had a couple cases in Chanhassen. I think Mosquito Control District did a tremendous job and I've got a letter here from the Mosquito Control, I ~ believe it was back in 1988 that I received this letter. We're having a problem here. In 1984 a young girl in Chanhassen became sick with LaCrosse encephalitis. Since that time most breeding sites in the area have been eliminated but it takes constant watching to Get this done. And for the life of me, I don't know. It's been going on for so long and we've had one report from one family that was effected by an allergy to the spray. We talk about the wetlands in Chanhassen. We're increasing our wetlands 10 fold by what's going on. And sure, we might get more frogs and snakes and swallows and thi ngs, but we're also goi ng to generate. a hell of a lot more mosquito breeding areas too. Thank you. Schroers: Thank you. Is there anyone else who would like to address the Commission? Harold Trende: Just one quick statement, Mr. Chairman, members of the Board. I guess I find it kind of ironic. The years I've been on the Board, Mosquito Control Board, most request for various spraying at functions come through myself and go to the Mosquito Control Board. I don't believe in the 6 years that I've been a representative on that Board, that any city has asked for mosquito control. They received the mosquito control the day of the f~nctions and without fail, the following year and years thereafter they asked for it and receive it again. It kind of tells me that there must be some satisfaction with the service that is being provided. I guess I find it very difficult to believe that these same people that are requesting this control would not have environmental thoughts or worries either. It seems to tell me that by their asking for repeat treatment year after year, and these are, some of these cities are ~ in our towns in Carver County which are not in the mosquito control Park and Rec Commission Meeting ..........July 28, 1992 - Page 7 district. Which lie on the western half of the county. They realize the benefits of the treatment-s without any ill effects and I hope that you people, and I know you will, give serious consideration to the amount, the extensive amount of work, or evaluations and things that the Mosquito Control District has done. As I mentioned last time, I'm one member on a Board of 18 County Commissioners on this Board. We all have environmental concerns. I'm sure that if anyone of us thought there was a danger to the environment, we would not be supportive of the program either. Thank you. Schroers: Thank you. Anyone else? Out of fairness, Eric I can't start this because we're going to go on all night. We'll be going back and forth. Eric Rivkin: I want to correct a fact... Hoffman: It may be that Mr. Rivkin would want to correct that the evening of the 4th of July, unless I do not know any differently, there was no mosquito control that was sprayed for that event. Eric Rivkin: That's not what I want to correct. The July 4th..~right about that but according to the MMCD, they did not spray until July 13th... Ross Green: That's correct, it was not sprayed but the...that you're ~referring to the larval control program... Schroers: The fact of the matter is, there wasn't a whole lot of mosquitoes aggravating on the 4th of July. Ross Green: That's correct. There's no question about that. Eric Rivkin: There's no larval control within the area of Lake Ann... Schroers: Okay. Well, we're going to have to move on with this issue. Not being scientists and having extensive and complicated presentations from both sides of the fence here, we have a fairly difficult decision to make. First of all I'm going to open, or make available to members of the Commission, take this opportunity to ask questions of anyone in attendance here this evening. Andrews: I've got some questions for Mr. Green. You may want to take the mic to have this on the record. I just need some clarification and a better understanding of what exactly you do. One of my questions has to do with, as I'm reading through the material, it talks about fogging and spraying. Are those two different types of application? Ross Green: The word spraying is many times misused. We find many people talking about spraying. I think of liquids when I hear spray and the cold fogging is one way of spraying. The backpack treatments that we put on with permethrine is another type of spraying but I've also heard our application of briquettes and the dry materials, the biological materials ..........we use, also referred to as spraying so it's a misused term. When you hear cold fogging, that is a spray from a truck mounted unit and it sprays resmethrine and that's done during the evening time. That can be considered a spray. Park and Rec Commission Meeting July 28, 1992 - Page 8 ......" Andrews: Okay, and those are considered adulticides, is that correct? Ross Green: Those are adult mosquito control materials, that's correct. Andrews: Okay. My question with concern, do those chemicals, do they have a, I guess the word I use is like shelf life. 00 they accumulate? 00 they dissipate to no measureable residue? Do they accumulate with repeated spraying? Ross Green: Yeah. Andrews: SQ there is a measureableresidue? Ross Green: The best way to address that, and that's why Dr. Johnson or Dr. DeProspo is here to address those kinds of technical questions regarding the materials, can best answer what you have in mind. I think if you would. He can address any of that.' Dr. DeProspo: Good evening. Thank you for the opportunity to be here tonight. When we're talking about resmethrine' in particular, there a~e certain things that you have to ,keep in mind. I don't know what your background is buf in chemistry, every element has a...it's the only material in the pyrethroid family that has been allowed to be used in and around food. Food handling establishments. Restaurants. Things of that nature. According to the Delaney clause, that was put out as a part of the Food and Drug Act~ it indicates that you're not allowed to use any material ~ that causes tumors or confirm cancer in animals or in humans. Therefore" obviously resmethrine is not a carcinogen. I've read some material where' it's made references that it is. It is not. Otherwise it would never have been able to get the food additive clause that was granted by EPA. In testing the materials, as far as the safety goes of this material, each and every active ingredient is tested. It's mandated by the Environmental Protection Agency and it goes through a very complete testing program whereby we test for what's considered acute toxicity. These are short term exposures. Accidental type exposures. An example would be if somebody was fogging and somebody happened to be exposed, that's an acute exposure. We test for what they- call subchronic exposure. These are expOsure. Repeated exposures for a length of time that would be less than a lifetime.' Okay, typically in animals that we tested, it's 90 days. To give you some kind of a comparative basis, the lifetime of a rat is 2 'years. So essentially it's a good portion of the animal's life that we're testing. Again, the third constituant of safety testing that's mandated by the EPA is for long term toxicity and a carcenogenicity. This is done over the lifetime of the animal. This is the classic rat and mouse type tests. You hear of things like saccarin and things of that nature and basically those materials were tested at such a level that you can actually induce carcenogenicity based on giving, overloading the animal's ability to metabolize the material and essentially this is a documented effect and you can induce some tumor formation and especially in the liver. Resmetherine has gone through these studies. They have not shown any adverse reactions in any of those areas. One of the main reasons for it is because it dissipates so quickly. Okay. We've run reproduction studies where we've looked at, we've fed the animals over their reproductive life and we've gone thy-pugh several generations to -" see if it's passed on through generations. There is no effect in that Park and Rec Commission Meeting ~JulY 28, 1992 - Page 9 respect. We looked at birth defects. We test various species during the period of organic genesus. When the organs and systems of the body are being formed in the fetus. It does not cause any adverse reactions there either. Environmentally. We have to test birds, okay and essentially what we look at is we look at an upland game species which is usually a quail and a waterfowl which is a mallard duck. What we have to do is the same type of an ordeal. We have to go and give them, we have to see what the effects would be from an acute exposure, and that's given orally. We give subacute exposure which is basically a dietary application and then we also look at the reproduction habits of both species to see if there's any effects in that. There are no effects whatsoever in both species in all of those areas. Fish. Resmethrine is, as I say, is a hard compound to work with because it doesn't hang around long enough. There are certain studies that have to be done in fish which we test over 96 haurs. 4 days. And essentially what it is, is we take a material. Stick it in a tank. Put fish in there and we do that a graded levels and this is the equivalent to, I'm sure you've heard of the .LD 50 study. And what we look at is, we look at the concentration and water that will kill 50% of the population that's exposed to it and basically all that is is just a reference type of a number to compare materials. In the case of resmethrine, we have the hardest time just trying to maintain the concentration for 4 days. Essentially these tests were made for materials that hang around longer than 4 days. That don't break down so quickly. We have a problem ~maintaining the concentration where we're constantly adding material into . the water, trying to maintain the concentration. We monitor it analytically to make sure that we are testing what we're saying we're testing. These are all mandated by the Environmental Protection Agency. We also look at the reproduction of fish as well. We also look at it in vertebrates.. Generally daphe magnimus is the species of choice. So we look also at the food chain constituents as well. Again, there's no real adverse effect when you look at it from the point of a real life exposure. Unfortunately, one of the things that we've been fighting with the Environmental Protection Agency is the fact that because they are these can studies, and unfortunately a lot of times governmental agencies have box checking exercises and they don't allow for different types of situations. We have to do the 4 day te~t. Because of that, it's caused toxicity. In real life you'll never be able to pollute anything with resmethrine. In fact, the half life in water is 31 minutes so it's even shorter in water than it is in the air, Currently the State of New York, the Department of Environmental Conservation, is testing the aquatic toxicity of resmethrine. They want to use Scourge. They've been using it expensively for the last 4 years. It's all they've been using in the State of New York. They like the material because of the low toxicity to humans and mammals and also to the aviant species but it's had this cloud that's hung over it about fish toxicity. They're testing it at real life, in real life situations. In other words, they would test it for 6 hour exposure. If you take a tank of this stuff and it spilled in the lake or river or whatever, it's going to disipate. It's going to dillute. So you're not going to have a constant 66ncentration as you would in the artificial laboratory tests. Under those conditions, resmethrine is relatively non-toxic. Some years back the ~Metropolitan Mosquito District tested Scourge at 10 times the recommended . label rate on trout. They took a trout pond with roughly about 1,000 trout and they tested it 10,000 times the recommended rate and also at the recommended rate without any mortality at all. So again, in real life you Park and Rec Commission Meeting July 28, 1992 - Page 10 .-, have to take these things into perspective. Put them into perspective. The material just does not hang around long enough to do anything. Schroers: Thank you very much for that information. We need to give. the other Commissioners opportunity to ask their questions and move along on this item. Lash: If you can briefly answer one question. If this disipates and, I may be looking at this too, in my simple ~ind because I'm not a chemist. I'm not a biologist. But if this disipates in 4 hours, then is it still effective after the 4 hours when it's supposed to be used? Dr. DeProspo: No. No. Lash: You guys spray and then... Dr. DeProspo: The idea, well okay. You have to understand the concept of adulticiding. With adulticiding, if it doesn't hit the mosquito while it's in the air, it's useless. So actually it's the droplets that hit the mosquitoes while they're in the air that kill the mosquito. Once it hits the ground, it's ineffective. Lash: Okay. In my view, it seems that most the mosquitoes are out at night so how beneficial is this for us to be spraying at 10:00 in the morning when most of the mosquitoes don't come out until 10:00 at night? -" Ross Green: We're not... Lash: Well, you're no~ there at 10:00 at night. You are? Ross Green: Yes. Eric Rivkin: You're not spraying resmethrine in the parks. You're spraying permethrine and you're talking about... Dr. DeProspo: Yeah, but that's a different type of an application. I'll be more than happy to talk about permethrinetoo. Lash: Okay, but the thing that you were talking about with the 4 hour half life or whatever. Dr. DeProspo: Scourge, right" Lash: It is only beneficial for the 4 hour~ after you treat it and typically when do you do that? Or. DeProspo: Well actually it's only beneficial while it's airborn. Ross Green: It's a fogging operation that's d~signed. Mosquitoes...are up and flying after sundown and they're going to be up for a couple of hours or more, depending on the temperature and the cold fogging operation... make contact with the mosquitoes. If it doesn't, it falls onto the vegetation, it's not goi ng to.. .anythi ng else. -'" Park and Rec Commission Meeting """July 28, 1992 - Page 11 Lash: Okay, so when do you typically do this? Ross Green: This is done at sundown. Right at sundown and sometimes very early in the morning also. Most often at sundown and after sundown for a couple of hours with the treatment. Berg: Clarify for me, if I can just interrupt for a minute. Are you doing that now at Lake Ann and Lake Susan? Ross Green: No. Berg: And when was the last time that was done? Ross Green: Ernie Wermerskirchen and Renee Wagner are supervisor and foreman...in Scott County. Have you done resmethrine treatments? Renee Wagner: No, we haven't done any this year or last year, but yeah, we have done resmethrine treatments. Berg: So when was the last time? 1990? Renee Wagner: 1990. ~Schroers: Okay, so basically you are just using that for a specific time period when the mosquito populations are up and you feel that you can effectively eliminate a lot of adult mosquitoes in a short period of time and normally it's something that's requested and done in conjunction with a civic activity of some 'kind? Ross Green: Most often. Again, we're talking 7 county area where this is used in various parks and in heavy use park and rec areas. Most often it's like, for example in Chanhassen area would be for civic events. The night before the event, we would come in and do that. It's used in tandem with permethrine. It is the permethrine treatments are generally done 3 or 4 days in advahce if we got mosquitoes. Then over a period of 3 to 4 days it's anticipated that population, numbers of mosquitoes are decreased. And if they're still at an intolerable level the night before the event, then a cold fog operation would then ensue, if conditions were proper and mosquitoes were still there, We would then treat with the cold fog. So it's used in tandem with one another. Erickson: Are we using permethrine now then? What are we using at Lake Ann and Lake Susan now? Renee Wagner: Permethrine. Erickson: Can we hear about that then? Dr. DeProspo: Sure. Permethrineagain is another synthetic pyrethroid. It's been out for quite a while. Some of the uses other than for mosquito "......,abatement' is, the Army uses it to Impregnant in clothing. In uniforms .As a matter of fact it was used over in Desert Storm. It's for ticks and fleas and things of that nature. It's actually impregnated into the skin. We've got some products here, a product called Nix which is a material for Park and RecCommission Meeting July 28, 1992 - Page 12 -/ fleas and ticks on the human body. For hair. It's washed into the hair and into the body for lice and things of that nature. It's a permethrine material. Product that's available over the counter. Several of the bug sprays are also used as well in typical type formulations. Permethrine is basically in the same particular class as resmethrine as far as toxicologically. As I indicated to you before, there are times at elevated levels where you can induce tumors at a higher rate than normal. In particula~ this is what happened with permethrine. It's considered to be a Class C occigen. Which means that a Class A occigen is a confirmed human carcenogen. A Class B oc~igen is considered to be a suspect human or a confirmed animal occigen ~nd a Class C sort of is a catch all. You've got a study with permethrine. The history with permethrine is that there was seven different studies, long term studies of such. One of them came up with a higher incidence of liver tumors in female mice out of seven studies. Because'you do have a positive reaction, ~he EPA cannot ignore it so they have to put it into some kind of classification. As you can see, it's used for bodily functions uses. It's used for home and garden type materials. It's used impregnated in clothing and things of that nature. The only thing that it is not allowed to be used for is for anything having to do with food, which would be crop protection type uses. Lash: So the permethrine iS,what you've got right now? Dr. DeProspo: Yes. Lash: And this is sold over the counter? -' Dr. DeProspo: That's right. Lash: And this is what you use in Lake Ann and Lake Susan? Dr. DeProspo: Well, let's put it this way. Something similar to that. It's not quite. Schroers: correct? But it's mixed with different compounds and things, is that not And then as a result of that, may have a different labeling. Dr. DeProspo: Well the labeling is based on the toxicity of the material. Lash: Okay, so as far as the levels or your percentage of chemical, is this comparable to what you use or is your's stronger than this? Audience: That's lice shampoo is enough to treat 2,800 square feet of mosquito adulticide. Lash: Okay, ho~ about this? Audience: That's 1%. That's more. That's stronger. Lash: Okay. Just because I want this on the record, I'm going to read what the caution is on the back of this lab~l. Do not allow children or pets to contact treated surfaces until spray has dried. Do not allow spray to contact food, feed stuffs or water supplies. Thoroughly wash dishes and food handling utensils coniaminated with this product. Avoid contact with .....-I Park and Rec Commission Meeting ,.... July 28, 1992 - Page 13 face, eyes or skin. Avoid breathing vapors or spray mist. Dr. DeProspo: Right. These are all canned statements. There's a labeling guideline that's put out by EPA based on the toxicity of the material. There are canned statements that have to be put on there. There are four different toxicity categories and based on the toxicity category you have specific labeling that has to go on. Berg: Maybe my question was answered. Is the toxicity level in these greater or less than what you're using at Lake Ann or Lake Susan? Dr. DeProspo: They're probably less. Berg: Less than these? Dr. DeProspo: Yeah. It's safer I would say, based on the amount of active. Audience: When you're finished using them, the residues of these are greater. Schroers: Dave, did you have a comment? Koubsky: I guess I don't see the difference whether this stuff's stronger or less strong than what we use in the parks. I guess I wanted to go back ;"""'-to resmethrine. I was provided with two studies from MMCD that I found very helpful, and I appreciate them very much. They were scientifically based, which the Health Department Study I found wasn't. These were, just for the record, publications by the World Health Organization in Geneva. - They're dated 1989. I was a little troubled, and I'm not a toxicologist. I do have a limited chemistry background. I am involved with environmental engineering. I understand some of the concepts but some of your quotes, actually I was very comforted by these studies. Half life of resmethrine is 41 minutes. That's an anquisis solution which is a pure water, you know laboratory. These aren't applied in an anquisis solution. Dr. DeProspo: That should be in air. It's about 31 minutes in an anquisis solution. Koubsky: Okay. Typically there's about a 98% for the Board. 98% degregation in soil in 16 days. So what I interpret that is this stuff is sprayed. If it falls in the soil, it has in 16 days, 98% of it's gone. It has about 100% degregation on plants in about 5 days. So they can spray this on and it will work but it's effectiveness diminishes and it seems like it's basically washed off plants in 5 days which is why I think you have to keep reapplying. Now this stuff does accumulate in sediments. It doesn't accumulate in water very well. It doesn't like water. It's oil soluable. It's like oils floating on water. It does degrade in sunlight and wind. And it does; according to the EPA, or the World Health Organization, degrade rapidly. I don't think 16 minutes or 41 minutes is an accurate interpretation. As far as fish, it does indicate it is "extremely, resmethrine is highly toxic for fish. It has an LD which is a half dose kill ratio for carp at 44 parts per billion, which is extremely small. And for perch, it~s 2.36 parts per billion which is extremely small also. Park and Rec Commission Meeting July 28, 1992 - Page 14 ....", Dr~ DeProspo: Okay, but again, that's for a4 day exposure. Koubsky: Le~ me finish. Also, it has a study in here in which ponds were sprayed with resmethrine. It expected field rates for adult mosquito control which is a 10th of a kilogram fOT HA,hector or acre. Audience: About 2 1/2 acres. Koubsky: Okay. They had caged fish. Bluegills at'. 82% to 100% survival rate. Goldfish at a 73% to 100% survival rate. White sucker fish were very susceptible and had a 8% survival rate. So it does seem this stuff can ki 11 fish. I'm not real, and here again r was paging through as you were going through these facts because I know I had read these. Schroers: And also, they may be somewhat selective where one species or one variety of species is more susceptible to the toxicity levels than another might be. Koubsky: Yeah, it seems to. It does degrade quickly. It doesn't appear to be carcenogenic. It has a lot toxicity to mammals, birds and less when subjected to high doses fOT long periods of time. But it does accumulate in the environment. It does accumulate in sediments. It is toxic to anthropoids which are shell fish and fish, which would be runoff. If this stuff was sprayed ih the rain, and you had a mass runoff to the lake, it could cause some damage. It seems to be temporary but it isn't by any means harmless. But it is maybe less toxic than we may want to believe """'" also. There's a median. I think I just wanted to point. I may be misinterpretting some things here too but. Dr. DeProspo: Well again, like I said, I think you have to put it into perspective. Ar. you going to have, those studie~ were done where those specific species were exposed for a certain concentration over a 4 day period. Or 96 hour LC 50 studies. Koubsky,: I think this was just an application rate over a pond with caged fish. But I don't want to argue specifics of any study. Dr. DeProspo: Okay. Well, I can tell you that the majority of the data are, all of the data that I'm aware of, okay. I don't know what might have been done in Europe or in other parts of the world but I'can tell you w~atever was done in the United States are based on 96 hour LC 50 studies. Again like I said, that would never, you just couldn't'maintain a concentration that long for it to have that type of an effect. The other thing too that I'd like to just touch on very quickly is there's some question about the inert materials. That they're secret and that kind of a thing. The only secretive thing about these materials is that you know, being in business. If you have a particular formulation. whether it be ice cream or whatever. Or a pesticide, and I'm your competitor. I certainly wouldn't want, you certainly wouldn't want to let me know what you use in your recipe to make ice cream. Well, that's the same thing with us. We wouldn't want to tell our competitors what we use as inert ingredients. Only because there are certain materials that for instance can be a little bit safer for the eyes. It guards against eye irritation or things of that nature which changes the label signification. Okay. Like I said, there ...., Park and Rec Commission Meeting ~July 28, 1992 - Page 15 are specifi categories and toxicity that are driven by the results and that indicates what kind of a label that you have to put on there. What kind of , precautionary statements. So obviously if you have a material that's a little safer than the next guys, you would want to buy ours rather than his. So we wouldn't want to give away what that particular element might be. I mean you know, resmethrine is resmethrine. Many of the solvents are the same but if you have something, a mixture or formulation or whatever, it may be a little better than somebody else's. That's the ~nly reason that they're "secret". Lash: Who would be a competitor of your's? You're a government agency aren't you? Dr. DeProspo: No, we represent Rousso, the manufacturer. Lash: Oh, you make the chemical? Oh, okay. Schroers: Okay, I appreciate your inform~tion very much but we need to get back to answering just specific questions here. Koubsky: Just for my own point of information here. Are you in essence saying that what all these warnings that are on this can, the EPA is saying you've got to put these warnings on there even if, are you saying that they're not necessarily dangerous? "....... Dr. DeProspo: No. What I'm saying is that based on the toxicity of the material, EPA stipulated these specific warnings should be on the label. Koubsky: So I should be concerned about what it says on this label? Dr. DeProspo: Well I think you should be concerned no matter what kind of a chemical or what material you should use. For instance, they tell you to keep it out of the reach of children, things of that nature but the LD 50 of resmethrine is higher than table salt. So if you ate, compared to table salt which has an LD 50 of 3,000 milligrams per kilogram whereas resmethrine has one of 4,000 milligrams per kilogram, it still would carry the same precautionary statement 'because they're grouped in groupings. So they're, I mean that's the way it is. And because of that, it'would carry specific precautionary statements for that particular toxicity category. Dr. DeProspo: ...We're only allowed to classify chemicals, pesticides, according to various classifications. This pesticide, resmethrine, like he says, has a higher LD 50. It's safer to eat than table salt but it's still a pesticide. We still classify it as caution and those kinds of warnings... Andrews: I have some more questions if I might. These are questions related to the briquette treatments. I guess my line of questioning is kind of the same as what I nad before. My concerns are about accumulations of residues. Are we building up a residue or a change in the lakes, the ~onds, the streams or whatever that would tend to change or make it toxic )ver time? Park and Rec Commission Meeting July 28, 1992 - Page 16 ..."I Ross Green: I guess Dr. palchick would like to address that but the way we apply them, in terms of lakes, we're not applying them to lakes or streams. It's a different type. Andrews: Transient wetlands. Ross Green: Sure. I mean it does get very technical, even from a legal standpoint. We call them breeding sites where the mosquitoes develop. And one treatment to these areas, these briquettes are designed to dissolve in water over 150 days. Andrews: Just as a comment. I'd appreciate you trying to answer the intent of my question rather than the specific of my question. I felt in the first round of questions I was given, I think I was given an incomplete answer based on my lack of ability to ask the right question. Ross Green: I understand. We work with these materials and these operations every day and we do get more technical. I'm sorry. We'll try to address specifically what your question is. Dr. palcnick: After the last meeting when the question came up about some of the other materials, about bioaccumulation and what not, we contacted Keith Solomon who's a toxicologist on our scientific pure review panel and I asked him that question about the metheprine. His comment was, he was supposed to fax a letter to us which didn't arrive. That the metheprine breaks down to basically nutritive products and things that are ~ in the ~ater metabolizes ~s nutrients. So the breakdown is non-toxic. That's all the specifics I can give you because I'm not a toxicologist. Schroers: Okay, thank you. Are there any other questions from other. commission members? lash: I have a couple and they're pretty simple. If we were not sprayed prior to the 4th of July celebration, do you know when the last treatment was before the 4th of July? Hoffman: At lake Ann Park? Renee Wagner: Last year. Hoffman: Would have been at lake Ann Park. The 4th of July celebration was held at two locations. City Center Park on Friday evening and then Saturday at the Lake Ann Park~ Neither of those locations were sprayed. Lash: So it had been almost a full year since they had been sprayed? Hoffman: Correct. lash: When they did come through the week of the 13th, you did not receive notification correct? Was the area posted? This is the posting? Okay. It hasn't gotten to me yet. So they did do that. Then I have a couple other questions. One is for AI. AI, you said that even if we chose to op out of this program, we'd still have to pay the tax. ~ Park and Rec Commission Meeting ~July 28, 1992 - Page 17 Al Klingelhutz: Correct. Lash: I don't understand that. As a taxpayer now, I just don't get that. Al Klingelhutz: I don't understand how we got into this mosquito control business in the first place but I do know that the eastern part of Carver County is paying the tax and once you're in that district and if you didn't spray, you'd still, as far as I can understand, you'd still have the same tax as if you were spraying. Is that right? Lash: But then why would it make any difference to anybody if anybody opts out if they keep getting. If everybody in the whole 7 county area opted out of the program, they'd still have a $10 million budget? Al Klingelhutz: I don't know if... Lash: No, but would that happen? Al Klingelhutz: If everybody opted out, you'd probably find that the people would be demanding relief within the next year or so because of the amount of mosquitoes that would be bothering everybody... (There was a tape change at this point in the discussion.) ,,-... Lash: Well I feel li ke as a taxpayer, if this is a service that we decide we don't wish to receive anymore, that I would take it to certain politicians. I'm not sure who. I'd have to investigate it to demand that we not have to pay for it anymore. I guess I just feel like that's ridiculous to have to pay for a service... It just doesn~t even make sense to me. Can you answer that question? Harold Trende: About a half a dozen, 7-8 years ago this area, half of Carver County was included in the district by a legislative action. And so half of Carver County is assessed for the Mosquito Control oistrict. The other half is not in the district. Carver County contributes less than 1% in the budget of the Mosquito Control District. ...if there is such a word, is Hennepin County. They pay for spraying in Western Carver County. They've been spraying areas of Wright County also the south counties because of the fact that the mosquitoes will drift 25 to 30 mph on winds. As far as any area in Carver County, we'll use that as an example. To be relieved of the taxing authority that's in place, would also take legislative action. It took legislative action to get us there. It would take legislative action to get it out of there. I guess, I think what Al was referring to. If the park areas in the Chanhassen di~trict are sprayed or if they are not sprayed, as far as the bill is concerned it's going to be the same. I hope that answered.' Lash: Okay, and if we were like Western Carver County and somehow got legislative action to be removed from it, we'd still get treated but Hennepin County would pay for it? If they're going Western Carver County. "Harold Trende: They're doing Western Carver County now. Of course you've got to realize that Western Caiver County has practically no population compared to the eastern part of Carver County. The... Park and Rec Commission Meeting July 28, 1992 - Page 18 ....",;' Lash: Okay, I think we should have Hennepin County pay for it then. Schroers: Good idea. Lash: And I have one other one. Let me see. Maybe that was the last one, okay. Erickson: One quick question. Probably Mr. Green. I think you said last time that the eradication of the nuisance mosquito was not your goal but control was. Is that a fair statement to make? Ross Green: Yes. Erickson: What do you and the MMCD consider to be control? it mean what percent of the mosquitoes would you like to be able to control? And what percent do you control? Ross Green: Well let me give you a for instance. Because of the treatment that was made just recently to Lake Ann Park on the 13th. I'll just give you an indication no~. That purpose, as I mentioned earlier, had to do with reducing the Aedes triseriastusmosquito population which is a vector of LaCrosse encephalitis and Dave Neitzel can address any questions regarding that, but we did do that treatment and there were, we found on a couple different occasions, on 6/25 and on 7/9 we found 4 and 2 mosquitoes respectively but in those mosquito collections, we also found other mosquitoes, nuisance mosquitoes along with the Aedes triseriatus and there ~ were like 71 and 624 _also found in that and after treatment, we found 0 Aedes triseriatus and 4 of the other species. So there was effective control that happened. We aretryin~ to minimize the impact of mosquitoes on the population here. And in pre-treat and post treat counts that are taken, we can sho~ the reduction to a level that many times in many places are down to a tolerable level. I re~d something, this is again something I picked up in the paper from Winnepeg but one of the Directors up there mentioned that it was not uncommon last year to find 185 mosquitoes biting a person in one minute. And I'm not saying that that same situation would be here in the Twin Cities area but Minnesota and the Midwest are one of the capitals of the world for mosquito populations. And if you want a trivia question in terms of United States were most the mosquitoes are produced, southern Alaska is the answer. And there are many mosquitoes so it may be the difference between enjoying what you have now and not being able to get out your backdoor. But there is data, and we have that available as to the reduction of those mosquito population numbers. Erickson: Maybe it's just an...question. Can you reduce it to some sort of percentage for me? Numbers of mosquitoes out there on the worst situation. Numbers that you're controlling. Ross Green: I can give you a number in a couple of different programs in terms of percent control. In our programs they range anywhere from 75% to 90% or more control for the lar0al control programs and also when many times in the breeding sites that we have, we get up to 100% control in the sites that we have. So in terms of that num~er, yes. We do have data to indicate significant, significant numbers of mosquitoes reduced. To put that in your own backyard. What that means and what your immune system's '....,,1 Park and Rec Commission Meeting ~ July 28, 1992 - Page 19 all about. If you're a kid for example or someone new to the area, you're going to react differently to mosquito bites and whether your bothered by them or not is an individual question also. But the data is there to support the reduction of mosquito populations. And many times those are down to tolerable levels.. That people can enjoy themselves for events and to enjoy themselves around the park areas and we've had much feedback in terms of that positive effect. Erickson: Is it fairly consistent that we haven't had a permethrine treatment for 11 months? Is that fairly consistent that we still wouldn't be seeing hoards of mosquitoes? Ross Green: It does depend on the mosquito populations, there's no question about that. When we have large numbers of mosquitoes that are being produced outside of the district and also in areas where there are mosquito development where we by-pass areas because of only treating the most prolific breeding areis. The program is long range in that it's directed towards larval control. We want to control, it's aimed at controlling the mosquito before it leaves the water $0 that those mosquitoes are not going to fly in and bite people and that's the direction we're headed with larval control. With these environmentally sensitive materials to do that job. Schroers: Okay, thank you. It's very obvious that we have two very ~opinionated sides to this issue. I tried, to the best of my ability, since last meeting to find some unbiased information regarding the activities, not so much the activities of the Mosquito Control but information regarding the specific chemicals that are used. I went to a.n agency called the Emergency Response Commission. They said thank you for calling but we don't really have the answers that you need. We'll try to find out for you. They did call me back and the results from that was, I did get a phone response from Mr. Green because the Emergency Response Commission contacted him to try to get the information. I also contacted the University of Minnesota, Division of Environmental Health, the State Department of Health, the Minnesota Department of Agriculture, University Department of Agriculture, and I basically had the same two questions for all of these. Has a risk management study been conducted regarding the methods and the types of chemicals being used by the Mosquito Control? And what exactly are the long term risks to the overall environment and to the public health. I could get no answers. They just kept referring me from one agency to the next agency and no one seemed to have the information that I was asking for. Some of it has been touched on this evening. Mr. Gr~en brought to our attention that a risk management study is currently being conducted but that information is not available at this time. Ross Green: It's been completed but it's in internal review right now and shortly that will become. Schroers: And who conducted that study? ~Ross Green: State Health Department. Schroers: Oh. It's funny that they wouldn't know about that when I called but I'm sure that there's a lot of different people in the Health Park and Rec Commission Meeting July 28, 1992 - Page 20 ....".. Department and maybe I didn't talk to the right one. Audience: Part of that information... schroers: Okay. And the other question, wh~t exactly are the long term risks to the overall ,environment and to public health? All the information that we've been listening to and have been able to find out amongst ourselves is that the risk is ielatively low. But the bottom line is that no one has been able to tell me that these chemicals are absolutely not harmful to anyone now or at anytime in the future. And I guess in this position, taking the best interest of the residents of the city of Chanhassen and other people that are going to use these parks, if I don't know for sure and am positively convinced myself that these procedures and the products being used are totally, absolutely safe~ how can I justify saying that we should use them. I mean I don't feel that we are in that position and this is a difficult thing to do. Dr. DeProspo: Maybe I can help you out a little bit. Okay. This is what I was trying to get to before and didn't get a chance because I wanted to work up to this so that I could give you the full background on how this is worked. Schroers: Can you be brief with it please? Dr. DeProspo: Yes I will. What we've done is we've worked out some risk analysis for both permethrine andresmethrine. The government sets what ~ they call an allowable daily intake, which is now called the reference dose and essentially what that is is it's a dose that's allowed to be taken internally over a lifetime which will not give you any undue adverse effects. Okay. Based on those numbers. These are published numbers. These are numbers that have been in the Federal Register. Okay. Using these numbers, we put together some risk assessments based on the treatments that MMCD does. For permethrine. The allowable daily intake is .05 milligrams per kilogram per day~ which means that essentially a 70 kilogram person, okay. It~s'about 150 pounds. Would be able to absorb, and that's the key thing. Absorb 3 1/2 milligrams of, permethrine a day. Which is less than the amount on the head o'f a match. However, this is 3 1/2 grams of material. I just wanted to show you this. This is the amount. of resmethrine that's spread over an acre. Okay, so it's a very small amount of material. Based on these assumptions, the thermal absorption you'd be able to essentially roll around on 20 square feet every day for the rest of your life, bare naked and that, whatever was put on the ground in that 20 square feet, would be absorbed up into your skin. That's given the fact that that,'s all absorbed. If you were to eat the material. Okay. You could eat essentially the foliage that was sprayed about 3 1/2 square feet of foliage for the rest of your life every day for the rest of your life without causing any undue effects. As far as inhalation goes, we didn't work that out because essentially it's not an inhalation problem. The droplet sizes that are used are non-respirable. They're too large in order to get down into the lower lungs where absorption occurs. For resmethrine, the allowable daily intake for resmethrine is 30 micrograms per kilogram per day. Again, for a 70 kilogiam peison, 150 pounds, essentially they could be exposed to a fog as we use for 23 hours a day, ....", every day for the rest of their life, assuming they'll live through 70 Park and Rec Commission Meeting ~Jul y 28, 1992 - Page 21 years. Let's see. Thermally for resmethrine. From based on studies that we've done with rabbits. If somebody were to be exposed for 21 days, repeated exposure for 21 days, essentially they could roll around on 40 acres of treated foliage, presuming that that was absorbed into the body every day for 3 weeks without any undue harm. Orally. Schroers: And presuming that you're a rabbit. I mean how does that translate to humans? Dr. DeProspo: That is translating to humans. Because it's based on a weight/weight basis. So if you have a 5 kilogram rabbit, on an average basis, it's a ratio. So it depends on how much weight. It's the same amount of material based on a weigh basis. Schroers: I understand what you're saying. Dr. DeProspol Okay. Orally, essentially you would be able to eat 52.5 square feet of foliage that was treated with resmethrine every day for the rest of your life. That's a pretty big salad. So this is the point that I'm trying to get to you and putting it in these types of terms. Schroers: Basically, being brief, your whole point is that, in your opinion, it is very safe. ,...... . )r. DeProspo: Yes. I mean these are numbers. I'd be more than happy to talk over with you. These are based on scientific facts. These are studies that are down at the EPA that have been approved by the EPA. The numbers have been published by the EPA. The studies have been published by the EPA. Eric Rivkin: Dr. DeProspo, why does the label say that it's highly toxic to birds and fish? Dr. DrProspo: Because that's a canned statement that was used a while back before it was, before you had to put in environmental data. The other thing is that, as I said before, one of the things that we are fighting is the fish ~oxicity. We don't believe it's toxic to fish. We've got data that's it coming out of the New York Department of Environmental Conservation that supports our story that it is not in fact that toxic to fish. Eric Rivkin: Peter...Zoology at the University of Florida in 1991 did a study and he concluded Scourge, which is resmethrine, is extremely toxic to non-target...firefly larvae. Are you aware of that study? Dr. DrProspo: No, I'm not. Eric Rivkin~ Well it's true and it's right in here. Schroers: Okay, what's happening here is exactly what we were hoping ~ouldn't happen. We are taking up our entire meeting with this issue and lt this point in time, I guess the only thing that I would, are there any other questions from the Commissioners? If there isn't, the additional information that r would like to provide is that both the City of Park and Rec Commission Meeting July 28, 1992 - Page 22 ....", Minneapolis and Hennepin Parks have opted not to use the adulticide spray in their parks. They feel that, I contacted people in those areas and they feel that any chemical organism that attacks and kills something in the environment is not necessarily environmentally friendly. I mean.it is toxic enough to kill a particular species and I don't know that we have all the answers for what's going to happen 10-20 years down the road. I guess that unless there is objections from anyone on the Commission, I WQuld be willing to attempt a motion on this. Koubsky: I think I'd like to make a statement if I could. I did review all this data and I appreciate people submitting the information. I want to reassure you that I did review all of it and read most of it and I did find it very enlightening, specifically the World Health Organization information. That, I don't think any of the other commissioners had. That's besides the point bu~ I did read it. I did have a fairly long dissertation here but I'm not going to go through it and I'm going to go to my punch line, if that's okay. Again,I would like to thank you for the information and I do commend the MMCD for using chemicals or compounds that do appear not to have an extremely adverse effect to the environment. I know chemicals have changed throughout the time and you've done studies. Other people have done studies. You've listened and you've changed. I don't again know your history but it seems to be, from what I read, that the material that you use, based on these guidances, at. least on the short term, do not have adverse effects on the environment, used at application rates as prescribed. I guess I'm going to just get into a little dissertation here. It's just going to last a minute. I am concerned about .....; the health and safety of the residents of Chanhassen. I'm also concerned about protecting the environment of Chanhassen and feel it's our responsibility to come up with solutions to weigh out human health threats and environmental threats. My personal feeling is not to go with either of the options listed by Todd but that we do restrict the use of mosquito control and adulticides in the city parks. It almost seems to be a question about why we're discussing it since we haven't used them in parks for a year anyway. We may be talking about the wrong topic and I'm assuming larvae ides will be our next topic. But I would however recommend that we request the MMCD to monitor the city parks for all types of mosquitoes, including the Aedes triseriatus which is responsible for transmitting LaCrosse encephalitis disease~ I don't know if this is possible but I think a guideline could be established that would provide an . acceptable level of this mosquito in our parks. And if the levels were exceeded, some type of appropriate treatment should be initiated. I'd hope that the MMCD would assist the City in establishing these guidelines and that we would have them in place prior to requesting the MMCD to stop treatment, and this again would be for a public health concern. In in the interim I think we would request the MMCD to coordinate with the city, and I am a little disturbed that we did an application without our knowledge, but I understand that happens. And I accept your apology. You coordinate with the city and inform us of their intent whenever they want to. use adulticides in the city parks and give their rationale for doing so. Possibly mosquito counts which you are aware of. And again to post signage if applications have been made, which you've done. Again, it's not my intent to chastise or allienate the MMCD but to work with them to protect our environment and the citizens of Chanhassen. Again, I commend your ~ cooperation with me in providi ng me information and I also commend you for' Park and Rec Commission Meeting ,...., Jul y 28, 1992 - Page 23 providing the information that I needed and will look into further. That's my statement. Schroers: Okay, thanks. Mr. Green, one thing. How does Mosquito Control feel about biological control of mosquitoes versus the chemical control? Are you active in those areas? Do you feel that removing the breeding areas. they can be removed on a regular basis? Plugging up tree holes and doing whatever is possible to encourage biological predators on mosquitoes to come into the area. 00 you think that that is a valid alternative? Or maybe not an alternative but something that can be used in conjunction with and is Mosquito Control interested in pursuing that area? Ross Green: You're talking about two different things. Susan, would you like to address the biological aspect because we have a different type of mosquito here that doesn't...from the larval control standpoint. And Dave can address the artificial container or site modification part. Dr. Palchick: Proof of the adult control alternatives, the article that you just got was in a Mosquito Coritrol publication and it talks about the bat houses and everything else and gives an evaluation of...things for adult mosquito control. It doesn't give any of them of a very favorable review. ~Ross Green: There's also an article in the National Wildlife about the purple martin situation. I don't think there's any doubt that you're dealing with...treating mosquitoes but there's a palethra of creatures out there to eat and the insect world is a very dynamic one with many, many representatives and numbers within that...is very questionable as you can see and for the record. Dave Neitzel: Regarding the remov~l of artificial containers, that's something that we do encourage and.I'd like to see more of that happen at Lake Ann. It's quite conceiveable that if the efforts are kept up to keep these containers out, the need for the adult mosquito treatment would be reduced or eliminated. At least as far as Aedes triseriatus mosquitoes go. Schroers: But is that something that you're program does? Do your people actually pick up and remove these containers? Dave Neitzel: Yes. I inspected the park myself and removed over 250 beer bottles, beverage cans, there was an old rubber boot that was full of mosquito larvae. If it collects water, those mosquitoes will be in it. Schroers: Okay, thank you. Thank you very much. You've answered the question. Lash: I have one quick question too in regards to the meeting on the 23rd. We discussed where the helicopters landing now and I think we were told it was McKnight Park in Chaska. Is that correct? This isn't really any of our business but since I work in that area and I'm an employee of the ~School District, I'm interested if you received permission from someone to . use that as a site to load? Park and Rec Commission Meeting July 28, 1992 - Page 24 --' Dr. Pelchick: Yeah, the public works. The person in charge of public wor ks . . . Ross Green: Can I just mention one thing that you mentioned and that's the mixing of materials on the landing sites. There's no mixing that goes on in these areas at all. What they are is bags of material that are poured into hoppers is what they are. They're not mixed at all. It's simply a loading place and it's generally in a park area because there's room to land and to take off and there's no one.around when that happens. So that's again from a cultural standpoint, an area to land... Schroers: Okay, thank you very much. Dr. Pelchick: I found his name. It's Tom Redmond and also we don't load it during school. This has been after school's out. Schroers: Thank you very much for all your information. It's time for us to make a motion on this and I'm ready to do so. Andrews: I'm ready to take a shot at it. I'll make this as brief as I can. I don't like swatting mosquitoes any more than anybody else. However, I sort of have this vision of, if I was driving down a road and I. saw two parks next to each other that were identical in all respects except one park had mosquito control efforts obvious and ongoing versus a park without that, my perception is, I would choose the park that to me conveys more of a natural setting which is without active control. My motion is ...." that we ban adulticides in the park except for control of disease, which would include LaCrosse encephalitis and the only time adulticides would be used in the park would be at specific request of the City. Like for special events or large gatherings that we have, we could make an advance notice and request for. That's my motion. Schroers: Is there a second to that motion? Koubsky: I guess with that I'd also ask the MMCD to help the City establish sollie guidelines for what are acceptable levels of disease bearing mosquitoes. Lash: Is this open to review at a later period of time? Andrews: Any motion is open_to revocation or change. I mean that's. Lash: No, but as part of your motion is that it were to be reviewed say in the fall of '93 and we would. Andrews: I guess I would assume this would be reviewed annually because I think we're going to get some feedback pro or con. Lash:' Can I make a friendly amendment that it be reviewed by this Board? .. Andrews: Sure. I have no problem with that. Lash: In the fall of '93. ....,,/II ~park and Rey Commission Meeting July 28, 1992 - Page 25 Andrews: Just to clarify Dave on disease control. I said that would not be limited. Koubsky: Right. Andrews: Okay. Lash: Do you also wish to have City Council review this in respect to more of the City than just the parks? Andrews: I think that's beyond what we're here for. Schroers: In order to make this clear, can we restate this. Reorganize it and ask for a second and move on it. Then if it fails. Andrews: Okay, I'll restate it as best I can. t move that we ban adulticides in city parks except as they...ban. And when was it, 1993. And that if we were to consider the use of adulticides, it would be at the specific request of the City and for no other reason in the meantime, before 1993. Schroers: Is there a second to that motion? ~Lash: Second. Andrews moved, Lash seconded to ban adulticides in city parks except for control of dis~ase, which would include LaCrosse encephalitis. The only time adulticides would be used in the parks would be at the specific request-of the City, and to review it in the Fall of 1993. Andrews and Lash voted in favor. Pemrick, Schroers and Erickson voted in opposition. Koubsky and Berg abstained. The motion failed. Schroers: Okay, can I make an attempt? Okay, I would like to move in regards to the larval control briquettes. To allow their continued use providing notification of treatment areas and times are provided. In regard to the adulticides, I would eliminate their use completely. In regards to the landing, take off and loading of MMCD helicopter or, we now understand that there is not mixing involved but also the accumulation of high volumes of unneeded chemicals within the confines of the city parks, not take place. And also, that staff and city actively pursue other measures of controlling the mosquitoe~ such as volunteer groups who are willing to remove breeding site containers, possibly plugging tree cavities if we find that, and whatever else we can do from a community standpoint to try and help controlling the mosquitoes and hopefully some point in the future less chemical may have to be used. And that's my motion. Is there a second? Lash: I have to ask for clarification, because it was so long. I got lost in the middle. What was the second part in regards to the adult mosquito control? ,.... Schroers: The adult mosquito control was to eliminate the use of adulticides. Period. Park and Rec Commission Meeting !July 28, 1992 - Page 26 -' Lash: Is this' open to review? schroers: No. I would just like to vote on it. This is my motion. I'd like to ask for a second. Lash: No, I mean in 1993? Schroers: Oh, in 1993 yes. It can come back before the commission again. Okay, is there a second? Erickson~ Second. Schroers: Okay, all in favor. Koubsky: Point of order Mr. Chairman. Can we discuss the motion before we vote? Schroers: Yes. Koubsky: Help my in my own mind. How are your motions different? Schroers: Th~ fact that with Jim's motion you could still use the adulticide if we requested it or special activities. Is that right? If it's requested. But who can request it? I mean does it have to be requested by Park and Rec? Does it have to be requested by City Counci!'? And I'm trying to be consistent in followin'g suit with other major park ...."" programs who have totally, completely disallowed the use of the adulticides. Koubsky: And you're talking with, I assume you've done some conversations with Hennepin Parks for example. What was their rationale for banning the use? I'm assuming they had the same people give them the same information. What caused them to vote the way they did? 00 you know? ,Schroers: I am not authorized to speak on 'behalf of Hennepin Parks so I don't feel that I can do that at this point in time. I think there are other things that come into play when an activity is going on in a highly used area, people get inquisitive. They say, what is going on. They start asking a lot of questions. They get very uncomfortable and it could tend ' to deter business would be one thing. That is my opinion. That's not Hennepin Parks speaking. The City of Minneapolis chose not to use adulticides. They didn't get into specifics. I just asked them if they are using them. They said no. They felt that they were more of a threat, both as a health hazard and to the environment than the larvae ides were and they chose not to go with the adulticides. Berg: Did we allow the friendly amendment to have this reviewed in Fall of 1993? Schroers: Yes. Lash: And in your motion now, I've forgotten. For the larva. The briquettes. What did you say? --" Park and Rec Commission Meeting ,.... Jul y 28, 1992 - Page 27 Schroers: That is for, to allow their continued use providing notification of treatment areas and times are provided. That they would notify the city. Let us know that they're going to be there and that they're going to be treating an area. Any other discussion in regards to the motion? Schroers moved, Erickson seconded to approve the following regarding mosquito control in City of Chanhassen Parks: 1. In regards to larval control briquettes, allow their use to continue providing notification of the treatment areas and times are provided; 2. In regards to Adult Mosquito Control Chemicals (Cold Fogging), to eliminate their use and to re-evaluate the program in the fall of 1993; 3. In regards to the landing, take off,and loading of the MMCD helicopter in city parks, that this practice be prohibited. 4. That staff and city actively pursue other measures of controlling mosquitoes such as volunteer groups who are willing to remove breeding site containers, possibly plugging tree cavities if we find that, and whatever else we can do from a community standpoint to try and help controlling the mosquitoes and hopefully some point in the future less chemical may have to be used. ~AII voted in favor except Koubsky who opposed and Andrews abstained. The motion carried. schroers: your time. It still passes and it goes to Council. Thank you very much for All your information. We appreciate it. Lash: Larry, I would like City Council, I'd like to ask Todd on this issue, since this was such a tough issue for us and took up two meetings, to provide them with maybe more information than they typically get as far as just our Minutes. Maybe there needs to be a back-up memo. Just explaining to them what we've gone through. How hard this was for us and that we did have one nay vote and one abstaining vote and then the clarification of those votes so that they know that there was some dissent within our Commission and that it wasn't a unanimous vote. Sometimes those things kind of slide right through and they don't know all the facts. So with that I guess I'd ask. Andrews: I'd like to state my reason for abstaining then, just as long as we're on the subject. I was hoping we could make a series of motions and work in smaller pieces rather than one all encompassing motion and my reason for abstaining was, although I support virtually the whole motion, I would have also have wanted to see a band of larvacides as well. So that's why I abstained. Koubsky: Well I guess my reason for a nay vote is I did agree with the continued use of the larvacides, which is the first part. As far as the banning adulticides, I thought it was a little premature. I would have """"been in favor of restricting them, assur.ing that the MMCD continue monitoring the parks for disease bearing mosquitoes and if elevated levels of those types of mosquitoes were detected, that at the request of the Park and Rec Commission Meeting July 28, 1992 - Page 28 ..."I City, they be allowed to apply adulticides for treatment of those types of mosquitoes. Schroers: For the record? Koubsky: For the record. That's it. Schroers: Okay, thank you very much. With that we'll move on to item 3. LAND DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL REVIEW FOR THE OAKS COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT. Public Present: Name Address Joe Perttu Tim Anderson Michelle Erickson Karen Gramow Shelly Geske Cindy Schallock Mike & Mary Henke K.D. & R.C. Bohara Greg Hromatka 790 Santa Vera Drive 7550 Canyon Curve 7441 Canyon Curve 7490 Canyon Curve 7530 Canyon Curve 7501 Canyon Curve 7560 Canyon Curve 7510 Canyon Curve 7580 Canyon Curve """"'" Hoffman: Chairman Schroers and Park Commissioners. I would like to thank all our residents that stayed through that long dissertation on mosquito control. I'm going to ask you, is there anyone that didn't sign in? I ask that they sign in. I would also recommend that if there is anybody due to scheduling, since the meeting did go so late, that needed to leave and wanted to make a comment prior to staff's report on this item, that we would entertain those comments. I'm not sure if there's anybody in that position. Seeing none. One correction to the report which is before you and that is on the proposal, first paragraph. That was corrected later on in the body of your report. This concept is a concept approval of planned unit development for 15 units ra~ging from, 15 buildings ranging from 8 tb 16 units each and those are the rental units. Not three 16 unit buildings as stated there~ And also nine 8 unit buildings which will be owner occu~ied for a total of 240 units on this site with a clubhouse/office. The entire site comprises 25.29 acres of property zoned R-12, high density residential district. The project's name is Oak Ponds/Oak Hill. The applicant is Lotus Realty, Chanhassen, Minnesota. The architect on the project is Arvid EllnessArchitects of Minneapolis, Minnesota. The vicinity is pretty widely known. It's just west of City Hall here. The map is somewhat unclear. City Hall...this location. Looking out west -across Kerber Boulevard and to the back side of the west side of the apartments which are currently there" is where this proposal is being made. Present zoning of the site, being the 25.29 acres is high density residential. Adjacent zoning is where we'r. seeing some of-the debate arising out of this concept bebause to the north the zoning there is single family residential. The south is a general business district and will ....." eventually be developed into strip mall, commercial, restaurant, that type Park and Rec Commission Meeting "..., Jul y 28, 1992 - Page 29 , of development. To the east or back towards City Hall it's zoned R-12, high density residential, again with the existing apartments being there. And then to the west, again it touches high density residential district: Comprehensive plan and the comprehensive trail plan are discussed in the body of your report, which I will go through. Background for the Commission members which did not go through proposal. Theoriginal proposal for this property and then as well for the members of the audience. Oak Ponds/Oak Hill/Lotus Realty has submitted application for the concept review of a planned unit development involving those 240 multi- family units. The project again consists of 15 buildings which will be renter occupied and 9 buildings which will be owner occupied. The owner occupied buildings are to the south. The rental units are to the north. The plan calls for a central clubhouse including a swimming pool and a small playground area. This property was the site of a multi-family housing proposal in 1989, approximately 3 years ago. At that time the project was reviewed on a number of occasions by the Park Commission. At that time the project, and then they addressed dedication of 5 acres of neighborhood park as part of that. That proposal, that recommendation including those 5 dedicated acres just died because of a lack of movement on the project. They pulled it off of the planning stage. The proposal developed raises several issues that need to be addressed by the Park Commission. They include our park dedication requirements, trail requirements, and park dedication credits for privately supplied recreational facilities which they are proposing. The, first decision ,,-... i nvol ves par k dedication and requi ring land dedication versus the acceptance of cash in lieu of land dedication requirements. Again, the key has always been in addressing the issue of land versus cash dedication, that the availability of existing park facilities meet anticipated needs. The Chanhassen comprehensive plan identified ,neighborhood parks that have a normal service area of 1/4 to 1 mile. In the vicinity of this proposed development, Chanhassen has five existing parks within 2/3 mile of the site. They include Lake Ann Park to the west, City Center Park to the east, Chanhassen Park to the northeast, Meadow Green Park to the north and Lake Susan Park directly south. From the perspective ~f the location, these parks can easily accommodate the neighborhood park needs of the proposed project. All these sites will be accessible to Oak Ponds/Oak Hill residents via the existing end plan trail system. Therefore, it is unncessary to consider the acquisition of additional parkland to serve the plan development. In regards to park fees, Chanhassen's current park dedication requirement is $440.00 per unit for multi-family. Therefore this project consisting of 240 units would generate a total park fee of $105,600.00. The second issue pertains to trails. The city's comprehensive trail plan shows an off street trail along Powers Boulevard to the west of this site. When the previous project was reviewed in '89, this trail was to be accommodated within a new 20 foot easement along Powers Boulevard. Trail construction in this area will be difficult due to the width of the existing right-of-way and the adjacent topography which drops sharply to the east. Despite this fact, this segment is an important link in the Chanhassen's overall trail system. Construction of that trail will require close coordination with Carver County as it is a county road. The developer will be responsible for estimating the cost of this trail ~segment and for it's construction. Upon submitting their cost estimate, the city will review that and we will make a recommendation to the City Council to reduce trail fee dedications accordingly. 'The proposed plan Park and Rec Commission Meeting July 28, 1992 - Page 30 ~ also calls for a 6 foot wide bituminous trail running from Powers Boulevard on the west to Kerber Boulevard on the east. The trail is located along the north side of the existing stand of oak trees. It would be at the base of the hill there. The construction of this trail section is not being advocated. Although it would be a beautiful addition to the city's trail system, the trail dedication requirements of this PUD will likely only provide the necessary funding for the more important Powers Boulevard trail segment.' The plan also calls for sidewalks along the neW dedicated streets that pass through the central portion of the project. An additional sidewalk connection is sh6wn linking the rental units on the north side of the street to the proposed sidewalk. Oak Ponds/Oak Hill has a trail dedication requirement of $35,280.00 based on th. current fee of $147.00 per unit. Since the Powers Boulevard trail is an important part of the overall trail system~ the City should require the developer to construct this trail segment in exchange for the corresponding reduction in trail fees. There's a question of park dedication credit. Should the city give any credit for that private development of a swimming pool and a small play yard? Park dedication credit involves the issuance of full or partial credit for the construction of private recreational facilities in this particular case. To the degree that it's applicable, park dedication fees could be reduced by an amount representative of the expenditures that would otherwise need to have been made by the City to provide recreational facilities. Oak Ponds/Oak Hill includes a swimming pool and playground area. Are these facilities worthy ,of park credits? In the case of the swimming pool, ii is an attractive ~menity for the project's residents. It is not however 'a normal amenity of a neighborhood par k. Chanhassen ....."I residents currently can use Lake Ann for their swimming activities. Therefore, the inclusion of a private swimming pool does not have direct impact on the city's supplied recreational facilities and is therefore not a candidate for park credit. The playground is proposed on this site because of the density, 240 units. Anywhere from 400 to 600 to 700 residents of that area. A playground is appropriate and we commend the applicant for at least trying to approach meeting the needs that will be generated there. Since the playground is located in open space that is required as part of the PUD, the planned unit development, as part of that application the developer receives some leniencies as part of the development for leaving the oak stand. When you come in for a PUD,they have to bend over backwards to do some things for the city. Not clear cutting those trees, not disturbing that open space just to the north of the site but they cannot so call double 'dip. They cannot receive credit for that open space as part of the PUD and then receive credit again as part of park or trail dedication requirements. A credit for supplying the actual equipment also has no merit. Play equipment is commonly supplied on a private basis to accommodate the daily needs of children, single family homes and multi-family developments commonly have a swingset or play structure in their own backyard. Is Oak Ponds/Oak Hill any diff~rent? Again, the developer should be commended for including that, however it is not a candidate for park 'credit. Based on these findings, it is my recommendation that the City accept full dedication, park dedication amount of $105,600.00 in lieu of land dedication. Again that would be collected at the time of building permit application. Presumably they will phase this development and would pay that in a phased approach as well. Two, the developer of Oak Ponds/Oak Hill supply a 20 foot easement along Powers ....,; Boulevard and construct that 8 foot wide bituminous trail. The trail Park and Rec Commission Meeting """'July 28, 1992 - Page 31 dedication requirement fees will then be reduced appropriately to offset that expenditure. And three, to reiterate the inclusion of the private swimming pool and playground, do not diminish the need foY community supplied recreational fa~ilities and therefore no park credit will be given for the provisions of these items. Schroers: Very good, thank you Todd. We will now take comments from the residents of the area. Before we do that, I'd like to ask that if a number of you are here in a group in support of;the same issue, if you would pick one representative to come up and make your statement rather than every individual having to get up and say the same thing. It would help move the process along a lot better and eliminate some unneeded paperwork. So with that if anyone wants, would wish to address us on this issue, we would be happy to take your comments now. Please for the record, state your name and address. Tim Anderson: Mi, my name is Tim Anderson. I reside at 7550 Canyon Curve, which is on the middle or west pond in the Saddlebrook development. My concern is the trail that is not being advocated by the city staff. I'd like that on record that it, I do not want to see it'be built because first of all, we built, that trail is not part of any regional trail development that is on your trail maps. And building there, I built there knowing that there wasn't going to be a trail there. I'm now fining that a trail, there I"""'" is a possibility that a trail may be built there sometime in the future', so my concern is that that trail, even though it's not advocated by the city staff at this time, I'd like some guarantees that it will not be built in the future after some time. You know after this project's been approved. Schroers: Okay, I don't know if there's anyway that that can be guaranteed. Koubsky: The trail wouldn't be on any actual parkland. It would be on their land. Tim Anderson: What type of process would the developer go through if for some reason they wanted to build it in the future? Hoffman: If they chose to make a presentation to the city that they would want to construct that trail, at their own cost and on their own, it would have to review that with the City's Planning Commission, the Park and Recreation Commission and the City Council to have that approved. Tim Anderson: build on that? point? What would happen if the City in the future would want to Would they have an opportunity to build a trail after some Hoffman: Not unless the city recommended that we take an easement for future trail construction. Upon reviewing this application and not taking the opportunity, we would not have that opportunity in the future without an easement. "...., Tim Anderson: I'd like to have it on record too that there is adequate east/west access between Kerber and Powers Boulevard either via the newly constructed road as part of this development, which will have two sidewalks Park and Rec Commission Meeting July 28, 1992 - Page 32 ......; on either side of the road. north of this development. And also the sidewalk on Saddlebrook Curve Thank you. Schroers: Thank you. Is there-anyone else that would like to speak on this item? Mike Henke: My name is Mike Henke. I live at 7560 Canyon Curve which is approximately right ,inbetween those two ponds. I guess I don.t un~erstand, is the bitminous path private or will that be a city owned path? , Schroers: If we acted on it, it would be a city owned pat~. Mike Henke: If they put'it in then it's their's and it would be a private path? Hoffman: Typically, you're speaking of the trail along Powers? Mike Henke: No, the one that goes. Schroers: Through the development along the bottom. Hoffman: If that was developed by the City, the City would require an easement and then it would be the City's trail. Mike Henke: At this time...by the developer to be put in? Hoffman: It was proposed by the developer but again, it would be my opinion that they're not going to come back to the city and propose since we are not advocating it. That they would like to build it. .....,., Mike Henke: Thank you very much. Schroers: Can we assume that the developer offered to build that trail because, for that reason he may have, it may have been cheaper than for the other portion of the trail that we're asking for and that he was looking for some economic advantage for proposing to install that trail? Hoffman: No, I don't believe that to be true. I believe the reason they proposed it is simply because it's a bituminous pathway is different, it's a different experience than a sidewalk along a,road. And for residents of the area and residents of that development, it would be a pleasant walk to be able to leave their residential unit, walk along the sidewalk and walk down behind these ponds on that bituminous trail. I believe that was the reasoning for their proposing the trail. Schroers: Okay, another question. Is the conservation easement, thai we had in that area, does that impact on that proposed trail at all? And in fact, is that easement still in effect? Hoffman: The conservation easement? As it deals with the hillside and the oaks. Again, that would be a planning issue. I can't address that directly. Which trail are you questioning would have an impact on that? The one on Powe,rs? .....,i Park and Rec Commission Meeting ~July 28, 1992 - Page 33 Schroers: No. Hoffman: The other one? Schroers: Yeah. Hoffman: A trailway is often a permissible use. Schroers: Within a conservation easement? Hofman: Within a conservation easement, correct. Schroers: Okay, thank you. Is there anyone else? Yes sir. Bob Bohara: The report says that the 5 parks in there provide enough. What's the current useage of the parks and projected with the kind of growth that Chanhassen is getting? By the way I'm Bob Bohara. I live at 7510 Canyon Curve. It says it's sufficient? Hoffman: The parks which are located within 2/3 of a mile are a variety of park sites. They encompass community park sites, Lake Susan and Lake Ann which provide the highest density of park type uses of any park within the city. Then there is Meadow Green Park which is a typical neighborhood park providing a ballfield and play equipment. Chanhassen Pond Park which ~provides a somewhat different experience with a natural setting and a turf trail encompassing the pond which is there. And then City Center Park which is again a community park. Very active. Utilized by the majority of the youth programs within the city so as far as, from a useage standpoint, I would say these 5 parks see a very high percentage of the use which we experience in our park system. I'm not sure if, your question wasn't real direct so. Bob Bohara: The question was, you're going to add 500 to 700 people and you say that the parks can adequately handle that. Hoffman: Correct. Bob Bohara: Currently, there's some kind of carrying capacity to a park system before you start, either damaging the experience for people or damaging the environment or whatever. How close to that are we currently and what will adding 700 people do to that? For those five parks. Hoffman: For those five parks, Ido not believe the addition of this unit is going to overpopulate, downgrade the experience of utilizing those parks. The city standard for parkland, which is high among metropolitan communities, because of the concern in Chanhassen for preserving open space and recreational features, is 1 acre per 75 residents. We currently have more land in our park system than necessary for our present population. I couldn't forecast when we're going to outgrow our current acreage of parks and when the city would have to acquire more parkland. Obviously as the city grows, this commission and the City Council addresses each development ~proposal and will be acquiring land, additional parkland as our population grows. So to directly answer the question, there would be no adverse impacts on the five parks which are mentioned because of this development. Park and Rec Commission Meeting July 28, 1992 - Page 34 --' Lash: The only one I would have a little concern over I guess would be maybe City Center because I envision this to be a place where there'd be a lot of children and I think we're starting to see that City Center is getting at capacity for structured activities isn't it? For ball teams. Hoffman: Correct. Lash: Which then we've got Bandimere on line hopefully to be developed so that would take care of it but. Bob Bohara: Do you ,measure... Hoffman: No, we do not have any data which would say. Bob Bohara: No, this is a ballpark. You haven't done a study or anything...five parks and it's adequate? Hoffman: Correct. Lash: We have done for Lake Ann, City Center and Lake Susan the amount of useage for structured baseball activities and soccer. Things like that so there is information on that. (There was a tape change at this point in the discussion.) Lash: ...we can tell you how much the ballfields are used everyday by the amount of time all the ballfields are used for structured activities but the unstructured things, I don't think we have any. ...." Andrews: The comment I wanted to make was that the per capita, or the persons per acre standards are studied and established by State and City organizations and civic engineering groups so that we're not just picking a number out of the sky as to what we think is an adequate number of people ,or adequate number of acres per person that we need for Chanhassen and we're far exceeding what is actually recommended for growing cities. Bob Bohara,:That's overall...you have basically a concentrated are of people and a park here. Whether it's for this area or... Andrews: My comment to that would be, that this particular development would be more centrally located to more parks than most areas in the entire city and that if you were, to say that this was an inadequately served area, then I guess I would state that that would mean that other parts of our city are even more dramatically under served. And there's no denying the fact that if you take an existing park system and add 700 more people to it, that in some way that must, by definition degrade the potential experience for the original sample population. However, I think it still provides a very good park system for all our citizens on an average basis and that's really the only way we can deal with it. We can~t build one acre of park next to every 75 people because we would have a park that would be useless for certain activities. And we have unfortunately limited funding too. -' \ Park and Rec Commission Meeting ,......Jul y 28, 1992 - Page 35 Berg: How extensive is the playground area Todd, do you know that the developer is putting in? Hoffman: I have no detailed information to date. Schroers: Can we save our discussion until after we take the audience presentation. Then we can hash all this out. Joe Perttu: I'll make this real brief. My name is Joe Perttu. I live at 790 Santa Vera Drive in Chanhassen here, which is right dire6tly across the street from the proposed development. And I'd Just like to make a few comments. I'd like to see a concentration o~ a more local park basis. There's a lot of small kids in the development as well as the surrounding homes and I'd like to see a concenttation where perhaps they could be required to have a small set aside park for kids. I don't see Lake Susan Park as being a real adequate option for people because it's a 3,500 feet from the development, yet they still have to cross number 5 to get there. I mean that's 3,500 feet by the way the crow flies. As well as Lake Ann Park. That might be an option for them as well but that's still down number 5 again. So I see most of these people walking over and using the Chanhassen elementary park which is basically used 9 months out of the year, 8 hours a day and I think it's probably over populated at that time and I don't think these people can really come over there and use that during those hours. So anyway, my comments being brief enough, I'd like to ."'"' see them be required to have a local par k there to serve all the 1 i ttle kids and stuff that would need it. Thank you. Schroers: Thank you. Anyone else? Okay. Do we have input from the Commissioners? Questions. Koubsky: Regarding the trail issue Todd, it's my understanding that we are not, we are proposing to set aside along north/south along Powers? Is that correct? Hoffman: Correct. We are proposing to require the developer to construct that 8 foot bituminous trail segment. Koubsky: Correct, and we're not willing to give any trail credits for the east/west trail along the wetland? Hoffman: Correct. Lash: Which we're not requiring. Hoffman: which we're not advocating. Lash: And in your recommendation it doesn't say anything about the sidewalk on the thru street. Hoffman: As the commission has discussed at great 'length, the Park and Recreation Department or Park Commission will no longer address sidewalks. ,...... That will be addressed as part of planni ng review. Sidewal ks wi 11 not be permitted as for trail fee credit. Park and Rec Commission Meeting July 28, 1992 - Page 36 ......." Erickson: Todd, has this plan been approved by the Planning Commission? Hoffman: This plan has gone through the first stage of review at the Planning Commission. Koubsky: Has it gone to the City Council? Hoffman: No, it has not. Lash: Did you say in here the size of the playground that they were proposing? Hoffman: No, Commissioner Berg questioned in that regard as well. You may be able to get an idea of th~ size by looking at the area which is proposed for the playground. I would assume that it would be a typical structure such as we put in a neighborhood park. $15,000.00 to $30,000.00... Berg: The development that's already there along Kerber. The little area they have there, that could no way be described as a playground area could it? Do'you know what I'm talking about? Hoffman: In the existing apartments? Berg: Yeah. The swing and whatever. Is that a playground area? Hoffman: Again, the developer of that project elected to put that equipment in. It's not considered a neighborhood component. It' wouldn't be considered that. It would meet some of the needs of this new development, no. """""" Berg: But what I'm asking is, if they're calling that a playground area, that's not going to have any effect at all on the park. I mean that's not going to help at all in terms of reducing numbers. Hoffman: On this proposal? Berg: If the one that they're proposing is similar to the one that's already there in the existing apartments, that's so small that it doesn't really count for anything. Hoffman: Correct. It would ~eet the immediate need of a 10 to 15 to 20 minute playtime. Inbetween normal activity when you would typically not be planning an excursion for a park for an hour or better of recreation. That's simply a filler so to say. Lash: So would this park site, and the equipment on it then be maintained by the developer? Hoffman: ' Correct. Schroers: This would not be at all a city park and therefore would not give the developer credit for any feeS. Seeing that this development is within the use of service area of 5 of our better parks in the city, this -,' isa golder opportunity to accept $105,600.00 in lieu of land dedication Park and Rec Commission Meeting ,..... July 28, 1992 - Page 37 that we can use to develop. Purchase play areas or whatever we decide to do in other parks that need upgrading and we don't have funding for. What the developer does with his swimming pool and his play area, that's a selling point on his part and he should not receive credit for that from us. Lash: I agree with that but we also, by not glvlng him credit then for it, how do we know that he's going to do it. Is there some guarantee that he's going to do it? Schroers: correct? Well they'll be bringing in the plat for our review, isn't that Didn't you say that this was a permit for plat review? Hoffman: then it's as part of developer. Correct. If they propose that they're going to build that and approved by the City Council and they don't come through with it, the development contract we would have recourse back against the Koubsky: I guess my thought too along Larry's line is, we do have the elementary school there. We did put in phase 1 to that totlot or play area. There are two additional phases that we would like to see go in and currently don't have the money to do. This may allow us some money to put in another phase or two. At least put that into a schedule where as the population grows, and there is more demand on the elementary park or City .,-., Center Par k, the play structure there also growi ng in response and can handle additional. Berg: I guess I'd like to see that but I'd also like to see Meadow Green added to that list. Schroers: Yeah, I mean this money will pretty much go into the general park fund and we can decide you know. As a matter of fact, later on the agenda when we get to, what is it on here? Hoffman: Capital Improvements? Schroers: Yeah, the capital improvements. I mean we can identify sources for those funds there and also park acquisition fund. Parkland acquisition fund. There's all kinds of uses for it so this is just an opportunity for us to, just a perfect scenario to get some much needed capital in the park and rec system. Erickson: I'm hearirig a real concern that the numbers are going to really explode and be a detriment to the existing 5 parks that we're talking about. I guess I'd like to see us keeping a close watch on that to see if the population in those parks is going up to the point where they need more equipment, etc.. Maybe we do have to look at that in terms of our improvement plan. . Koubsky: I would hate to start a precedence at this stage. """'" Schroers: Yeah, I wouldn't want to identify. Park and Rec Commission Meeting July 28, 1992 - Page 38 ...."" Koubsky: Or allow credits for any apartment or multi-family housing development to put up a swingset and then come to our Commission and ask for a credit for that becquse we've set a precedence. Schroers: 'I think we'd be premature at this point to identify what we want, to do with the funds from this development. 8erg: I'd say, let's just watch it. What's happening with the numbers and if they're changing, then we can act. Schroers: Good. Hoffman: Chairman Schroers, to address a question by Mr. 80hara. In regards to the 1 per 75. One acre per 75 residents, which is again a very liberal standard. The City of Chanhassen has chosen to set itself a high priority for park requirements. If we take a look at the 200 acres which makes up those 5 park locations, we split that in half. Say 100 acres of that is active park area. Those areas would service 7,500 residents under our current formula. So again, ~his could be one of the most park rich areas which you could identify in the city at the current time. As far as the applic'ant, I'm not sure if anybody's here. Mr. Brad Johnson voiced that there would probably not be anyone representing the applicant here this evening. In regards to park credit on their side of the issue, they did not question the application of park fees. Initially however, today they did call back and had some questions in that regard. I reconfirmed """"'" the City's position that no credit will be considered. Lash: Do you feel like your question or concern was addressed? I'm not exactly sure that I know what it was speCifically. Bob Bohara: You said that it serves 7,500 people but you have't been able to tell me how many people actually do use it. Is it 2,000?7,500 now? Koubsky: What's the population of Chanhassen? Hoffman: Current population is 12,000. Bob Bohara: You have a generous allowance for parkland. How are we doing? Schroers: There are times when there are scheduled programs and activities going on that the parks are busy. Then there are other times when there's barely a soul in them so I mean, it's just really depends. But if you wanted a day today, running number of attendance in the parks or how many people att~nd the park on a weekly basis or a monthl~ basis, all total, a grand total of people involved in structured programs and then just walk on's, I mean'we wouldn't have that information. . Koubsky: I guess though just from personal experience, I live south of TH 5 in the Lake Susan Hills area. I've got a 4 and a 6 year old. I go over to Lake Susan after school, or after dinner. I go up to the elementary school. Lake Ann. r utilize the area and there's really never, that I see, an overcrowding where my kids can't get on and either get on a ~ swing or do whatever they want. Even during T7ba1l, which my boys were involved with this year. One boy you know is actively playing at the Park and Rec Commission Meeting I""""'July 28, 1992 - Page 39 elementary school while the other one was playing T-ball. And there wasn't an overabundance of kids where they couldn't have fun. So I actively use all of these parks and I don't see an overcrowding. We don't have numbers and I think once we start to experience overcrowding, then people like yourself and myself will start coming to these meetings and saying, hey it's getting a little bit crowded. I'm not sure, well. We have to plan ahead of time but I haven't personally experienced an over crowding. Resident: I'm curious...parks. That is a park area but there are, there's no playground equipment in that particular area, right? Schroers: Right. Resident: So why not propose meeting that park area when you've leaving it alone? Leaving it sit as is? Or again is that because the city would not receive any tax on open land? Schroers: Well which area are you talking about? The entire development? Or the small park within the development? Resident: I think she's talking about the ponds and the oak trees and stuff. Why we wouldn't acquire that and turn it into a Chanhassen Pond type of development. ,..... Greg Hrometka: Well I heard before, my name is Greg Hrometka. 7580 and about, as a conservation easement. Maybe that's not within your domain but is it possible to have that specified and defined. Clarified and quantified sort of area. For a future. Hoffman: It-certainly is, and again a conservation easement is a planning zoning issue. Greg Hrometka: Yeah, I realize that. Lash: You're talking about the area along the ravine there? Resident: Yeah, exactly. Schroers: So what you would like to see that area similar to Pond Park where, what we call that is a passive or an inactive use park and basically it's left alone but there is a trail running through Pond Park that people can walk on but it's not like a play area. Resident: As long as you are an abled bodied person though, correct? Koubsky: Correct. Lash: Pretty much. .".-.. Schroers: Unfortunately. Shelly Geske: Canyon Curve. My name is Shelly Geske and we're curr~ntly building at 753 We're not even in our home as of yet but I, along with Park and Rec Commission Meeting July 28, 1992 - Page 40 .....", several other residents in our particular area, especially on Canyon Curve, when we bought this particular lot of land, we were told specifically by our realtors and specifically by the city that, actually I was under the assumption that the City of Chanhassen owned that particular area. Everything west of the hill. That the City actually owned it so what I'm saying is that I would like to just see that everything west, I'm sorry north of the hill would be just left alone and leave it in it's natural setting as is Chanhassen Pond Park or whatever it is down the road. I do realize that they do have a trail running through there but I guess in my own person opinion, I'd rather see a trail running through there and have people walking back 200 feet from my backyard than looking at 40 foot tall buildings. I mean I know that's not your area but especially those two buildings that are sitting adjacent to Kerber Boulevard that are farthest north. I mean they are very large buildings and they're sitting very much in the open. And I guess that's a real concern of mine. I'd just ~s soon that that's an alfalfa field right now. I'd just rather see that sit there empty and of course I understand the City would rather have the cash to develop the other parks but. Schroers: Well 1 don't think that that's an option at this point. The City does not own that land. The developer I believe owns it and as long as he falls within the criteria of the various codes and zoning regulations and that sort of thing, he can build his development and we can't really prevent that. It would be nice if the entire area was a park and there was no houses developed but unfortunately that's not reality. -" Andrews: Todd, just one comment. Since this is a PUD, your concern should be brought to the Planning Commission., That's your chance to maybe alter that site plan. Shelly Geske: Well, certainly we were at the Planning Commission in full force 2 weeks ago and our voice was certainly heard and as it will be again. Andrews: That's really the only place you could have an impact like you were trying to make on the development. , / Shelly Geske: Alright, thanks. Schroers: Thank you. Hoffman: In response to that overall type of question. The area where the oak trees and to the north is currently being planned to be left in it's present state. I could advocate, or I don't believe anyone at the city level would advocate pursuing acquisition of that. Taking it off the tax rolls and then not gaining the park fees. We're simply not gaining anything for the extreme loss which would be experienced. Schroers: Okay. If there are no further questions or comments on this issue, is someone ready to entertain a motion? Andrews: I could do it. My motion is following exactly along the recommendations of staff which is that the City accept full park dedication ~ in lieu of land dedication. We accept full fee and that we do require the Park and Rec Co~mission Meeting ,..... July 28, 1992 - Page 41 20 foot easement along Powers Boulevard and construct an 8 foot wide bituminous trail. Trail dedication fee should be reduced to offset the expenditure for trail construction, and that we do not offer any credit for the private development of any swimming pool or playground area within the development itself. Schroers: I will second that. Andrews moved, Schroers seconded that the Park and Recreation Commission recommend to approve the following for the Oak Pond/Oak Hills PUD Development: 1. The City accept full park dedication fees in the amount of $105,600.00 in lieu of land dedication. 2. The developer of oak Pond/Oak Hill supply a 20 foot easement along Powers Boulevard and construct an 8 foot wide bituminous trail. Trail dedication fees should be reduced to offset the expenditure for the trail construction. 3. The inclusion of the private swimming pool and playground area do not diminish the need for community supplied recreational facilities. Therefore, no park credit will be given for the provision of these items. .,..... All voted in favor and the motion carried. Schroers: with that, I'm going to be leaving and turning item 4 over to Mr. Andrews. DISTRIBUTION OF THE CITY OF CHANHASSEN PARK INVENTORY. REVISED APRIL. 1992. Hoffman: Item 4 is distribution of the City park inventory, revised April of 1992. Would you hold everything together so you have one document which includes all park plans. If there's not a park plan, then it includes an enlarged copy of the...map so you can get an idea of the configuration of the park. And then the manual includes all of the inventory sheets which are updated annually. In the report. , Andrews: That's strictly advisory then for us? No action needed. Hoffman: No action needed. I presume we'll be using that document in formulation of the CIP. Andrews: I appreciate this. This is a lot of help. Good resource. Koubsky: This was a great document Todd. Erickson: Todd, is this something that the public can pick up too? I mean if they came in to make a request. ,..... Hoffman: They could certainly look at one. We would have to tag on a cost if we started. Park and Rec Commission Meeting July 28, 1992 - Page 42 ....,., Erickson: Okay, if they wanted one printed up. Berg: This really helps in answering questions. Terrific. Erickson: Did you guys make these tables with your computer system? Hoffman: Certainly. We didn't but the office pool. SECOND QUARTER PARK AND TRAIL FEE REVENUE REPORT. ENDING JUNE 30. 1992. Hoffman: I've requested the park and trail fee revenues which are being accumulated by the city. Those figures are being brought down to the Park Commission for your Information in formulating the budget positions, etc.. Second quarter of the year, which is April, May and June is past leaving the City with collected fees of $95,644.94, both in park and trail fee revenues. This figure represents 65. almost 66% of our budgeted figure of $145,000.00. It puts us ahead of last year by 16% with 50% of our year expired. Again, that is solely due to the signing off on the permit for the Market Square development. The Americana Bank, which you see going up currently and then Mail Source out in the Business Lakes commercial site, industrial site. We were behind last year at this time by 10%, to give you a perspective. Last quarter we had $26,611.00 *0 we've made significant increases. In regard to expenditures, the department has been very conservative to date. Our expenditures under 410 total $8,748.00. \ We had a carry of equipment from last year which that we did not have to go out and pursue the purchase of equipment early in January-February of this -' year. That equipment is now, installation of that equipment has now been finished up. You saw the piece go into South Lotus. There was a piece at Rice Marsh. The Sunset Ridge play equipment is going in. The backstop will be going in at Curry Farms and at Sunset Ridge so we're getting to the point now where we'll be ordering our new equipment for 1992. Then there's a detailed budget breakdown, if you have any questions on that. The back page. Lash: I have a question on the carryover of equipment from last year. I guess I just don't understand how we did that. I mean if we had budgeted money, say we had budgeted for this year to spend $10,000.00 or something at Rice Marsh for new equipment. Well we just happened to have the equipment sitting around? Or we didn't order it or what are we doing? Hoffman: These pieces that were held over were included in the 1991 CIP. They were ordered in the spring of the year. Received in the spring of the year. Due to the workload which we experienced with the extensive wet season and the amount of grass to be mowed, we got started in capital improvements late in the year. Then we got hit with the City Center Park project which we had to install with city staff because of some of the bidding regulati~ns. That tied up 3 weeks there. The snow finally hit and we were out trying to seed Lake Susan Hill Park and. Lash: Well I understand that the work load could get backed up. I'm trying to figure out how we didn't spend the money that we had budgeted for this year for equipment that we were supposed to have bought this year. Did we not order equipment? ~ Park and Rec Commission Meeting ,.... Jul y 28, 1992 - Page 43 Hoffman: Oh, we have not order equipment yet because we have this, why order it and take the money out of our. Lash: Right, because we couldn't get it installed? Hoffman: And stockpiling it, correct. But now we're nearing that point. We'll be ordering the Herman Field piece of play equipment and other things. We'll be addressing that in the next two i~sues. Lash: Okay. I understand. I just didn't. I thought we weren't getting whatever it was we were supposed to be getting in '92. Hoffman: No. That would make people unhappy. Lash: Right. 1992 PARK ACQUISITION AND DEVELOPMENT CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM BUDGET AMENDMENT. ATHLETIC FIELD IRRIGATION - LAKE ANN PARK. Andrews: Alright, then this one item 6 which I think will explain what we've done so far. Hoffman: Item 6 is an important item obviously. It's asking for the ~ expenditure of approximately $60,000.00 out of our 1992 CIP, which has been -formulated to date. It's requesting a budget amendment as part of that CIP. We can get into that in detail. Before that I would like to run you through the series of events which has brought us to this point. If I instill you the severity of this problem that we're experiencing at Lake Ann, I can't impress upon you enough that that city staff, both Dale Gregory who I asked to be present here this evening and myself, have tried to coordinate solutions to.the current field condition problems at Lake Ann for a number of years. Two years. Over 2 years to be exact. Ever since this project was accepted and we simply have not gotten anywhere. We brought out the turf specialist which formulated the recommendations which you currently have before you. Fields 4, 5 and 6, which are the new softball fields and the soccer field, are not in reasonable condition to play athletic sports right now. We know that from a staff's perspective. We hear it on a constant basis from the people utilizing the park. It's our second full year of activities out there. They've improved somewhat over the last year and due to some overseeding efforts and that type of thing, we see intermittent times when the grass is better but it's just not taking as it should. For those of you who did not follow or were not part of the development, Lake Ann had started in '87-'88. Or excuse me, the development of the addition to Lake Ann. The ballfields. The referendum passed. City planned for development of those fields. In '89 the construction was partially complete. Fall seeding of the fields did occur that year during '89. That was a drought year throughout that summer, as you recall. Winter of '89 we had just about no snow. You could watch the dust bowl occur at Lake Ann. Not only did all the seed blow away, but we had dirt drifts along the fence lines that were noticeable to the eye from ~ TH 5. Spring of 1990 brought some rain and we had extensive erosion on the fields before of their lack of cover. Summer of 1990 the fields were regraded. Again, we had somewhat drought conditions experienced and suffficient germination did not occur~ Went back to the contractor again. Park and Rec Commission Meeting July 28, 1992 - pag~ 44 --' had them reseed the fields again. At that time we had to do a, the City had to entertain an agreement with the contractor that he would be paid for a portion of the seed to reseed them a third time. So the fields were regraded and then seeded in the fall of 1990. And then in the spring of 1991 we began play. To present all our comments received on the new fields have been negative. The comments received on the former Lake Ann Park ballfield area were certainly all positive. Anybody who visits the park will tell you that Fields 1, 2 and. 3 are some of the nicest ballfields in the metropolitan area. You carr't get better. However, 4, 5 and 6. ..you find in the metropolitan area. There are specific reasons for that. It has to do with the age of the existing fields. They're 22 years old. They were seeded with very different seed than what is being used on the new ballfields...ariother grass which are very drought resistant. They are very tolerant to foot traffic. They were the seeds which were used back then for athletic fields but in today's age with everybody liking nice, lush green, thick athletic fields, you come in with your bluegrasses and other seed mix. They're excellent grasses but they like ideal growing conditions which we do not have. We have heavy clay. And they like water on a routine basis. Then they will grow absolutely beautiful for you. Nice and plush, green, soft. Nice to play on. We're certainly not seeing that. We've just come through two of the best growing years that we've ever seen and we're still struggling. The essence of the problem out there is that we have soil ~onditions anywhere from about 2 t03 1/2 inches of heavy, black dirt, black soil and that lays on top of the compacted clay. It's a light colored clay which.you've all seen. That is heavily compacted. In fact the whole .strata of both the black dirt and the clay is heavily ......-I compacted. When the water enters the ground, it comes down through the black dirt. Hits that clay and spreads out. It's an impervious surface. It will not go down. The grass roots come down. Grow through that black soil and then spread out seeking that water. So we have a Dice rain, soaking rain. It soaks down. The water essentially sits 2 to 3 inches underneath the soil. It dries out very quickly. The grass grows for a very short period of time then it says, oh oh. I ran out of water. It has not put roots down. It cannot put roots down into that clay and get the zero growth after essentially a day. So this is not a healthy grass condition. It's not going to get better with time without intervention. It's not going to get better with overseeding. We've done that 3 times. We've incurred the cost to buy seed. We've incurred the cost to go ahead and put the manpowe~ out there to put that down and watch those efforts fail time and time again. When ~he turf specialists were .brought on the site, both df them immediately said, your solution here is irrigation. The first person was told well we're simply not considering irrigation, what can we do. He came up'with a package which he detailed there. Extensive aeration to the tune of 25 holes per square foot which essentially leaves more ground on top of the soil than is left in. The application of the wetting agent which is something I have no experience with but he said will allow the water to come down through the soil much better and the no burn fertilizer which he specified there. And then the most expensive material which was the turf...amendment, which he says over time will assist your fields. However, if you come into a drought condition again, all bets are off. Don't call me. It's not going to do you any good. So they came through with that at approximately $7,500.00 per year. We can continue to do that. No guarantees. John Hopko was referred to me. A very ....", experienced person in the turf management field. His credentials are very ~Park and Rec Commission Meeting July 28, 1992 - Page 45 high. Again, immediately upon coming onto the fields, stamping on the field, without even having to put in his soil sampler, simply saying you are going to get nowhere. I will make no recommendations if you do not consider irrigation. There is simply nothing you can do with these fields, more or less in the lack of irrigation. You can certainly consider huge soil amendments or corrections by bringing in trucks and trucks and truckloads of sand and other soil types. Dumpirig those on your fields. Bringing in the earth moving equipment again. Mixing that up so you get a consistent basis. Leveling back out again and reseeding but what does that cost? You're going to be in excess of $100,000.00 or better on a conservative estimate. It essentially comes down to the only guarantee we have is to apply water on a uniform basis and on a uniform schedule. Minus that, if we experience drought conditions, which we did a couple years ago, r would predict we would have to stop play on fields which are already currently inadequate. Erickson: The irrigation system, besides the fact that water makes grass grow green, does that also then allow you to properly aerate the soil? Hoffman: Yes. It would improve, I didn't go into detail into any of our aeration attempts, but Dale can speak on that. You were there doing it. Why don't you take the mic. ~Erickson: Well you bent up a bunch of times trying to aerate it the way it is right now? Hoffman: Oh absolutely. Erickson: I guess what I'm asking is, if you get irrigation in, that will soften the soil enough so that you can properly aerate? Gregory: ...we'll be able to keep it soft enough so we can irrigate or aerate...we spent more time on that than one time... r had another one brought in. I observed a similar machine. These are small machines. Riding machines but this one will only go down approximately 4 inches instead of the other one was going down 6 inches. I was able to aerify the soccer field...probably 10 to 15 holes per square foot instead of the 25 which we really need. As of this Monday morning, we have dried up enough out there, r can't even get back in the ground again. So r called them out and they're picking up the machine again and they... But right now we do have tracks in the. ground again. Erickson: With the irrigation and future aeration, that,will really bring the turf over several years? GregoTY: ...to aerify and move that soil around and breaking it up. Like with water, we should be able to let it aerify. Lash: Well I certainly heard plenty of negative comments of those three fields so r agree that something needs to be done but r have a couple of ~questions. To start with, from reading this my impression is that the contractor never provided the property soil conditions to start with. Is that correct or were they just destroyed through natural causes? Park and Rec Commission Meeting July 28, 1992 - Page 46 --' Hoffman: The soils that we in Chanhassen have to work with are certainly not ideal from the start. The contractor, the consulting engeineer, the City in not following up properly can probably all share in the blame for not getting a somewhat better condition. But soils in Chanhassen are just not conducive to athletic fields. Just from a standpoint. Lash: But I mean we knew that to start with. Everybody who lives here knows we have clay allover. So shouldn't in our agreement with the contractor, I'm assuming that there was something in there saying that these were going to be ballfields and they would have to meet certain standards and provide conditions that would be conducive to growing grass. Wouldn't we have done that? Shouldn't we? . Hoffman: Probably not. Gregory: As far as the...and everything else and I think where we've fallen short is, and I didn't realize it either until we talked with these turf specialists and that, is those ballfields... You can't move in with a earth mover, put clay in and then start putting black dirt and everything back over it. You've got to start from 6 to 8 inches down. Start mixing all these soils together. You've got to have a, there's one...all the way up because as soon as you start getting the layering effort, like Todd 'said, your moisture would go down so far and then it will stop and then all of a sudden the roots go down that far and then stop. And like I told Todd, when we really get down into looking at that price for any other ballfield, I think we should invest and have somebody come out that is a --' turf speciality and talk with them so we could write it into the specs. So we have the ballfields really set up the way they should be. Lash: So it wasn't done at Lake Ann? Gregory: No, it Wasn't... Lash: We didn't have clear specs for the contractor for what the ground needed to be consisting of? Hoffman: From the knowledge that I know in revi~wing it, after the fact. Becoming involved at a very late ~ate in that project, is that their typical specifications for ballfieldsaround in many communities but because of the special conditions we have out here, in the future we should certainly learn our lesson and pay more detail to those specifications in regards to ballfields. Lash: The point I'm trying to make is, do we have any recourse with the contractor for not providing the adequate surface that we needed? Hoffman: Absolutely not. They're guarantee timeframe is gone. Lash: So if we irrigate, the way I'm understanding this, the way you guys said with the layers and the water only goes down. So what difference is irrigating going to make? It will just be more regular water but won't it still just go through the dirt and get to the clay and spread out? ....", Park and Rec commission Meeting """July 28, 1992 - Page 47 Gregory: .. .rain now, it will come in... If you're irrigating, you'll be irrigating every evening and it'd just be going on a little bit of time. It will act as a sponge. Eventually you're going to keep getting water down there. Once we get the water there and we get the ground soften up, then we start our aerification and we start moving... But right now the water that does come down, it goes down 2 inches and that runs off and we get a couple of dry days and it's gone. All the moisture's gone already. Hoffman: Your thoughts are correct Commissioner Lash in that it's just more consistent. Lash: And that will help? It won't just be the sa~e problem but just more consistent. Hoffman: Correct. Lash: Certainly I'm not a lawn expert so I don't know but. Koubsky: I think though once you get some water out there, you could work with your iurf company and apply some things and lossen up the soil and retreat it. Something like Ringers offers a program that enhances soil and growth. I think Todd we need to go back and look at the spec and feel comfortable that we didn't specify specific soil corrections for the ballfields. I doubt they're in there but we did have a contractor we hired I""""to do that work at one time and I want to be comfortable if we go to another contract and have to review contractor bids, that regardless of whether the statute of limitations run out or not, if we specified some soil corrections for those ballfield and he didn't provide it, that may weigh our opinion on contractor selection in the future. We may not be able to get him there but. Gregory: I believe that what your contract actually says is that it requires a certain amount of inches of black dirt. And it doesn't have anything to, it doesn't say anything as far as the subsoil. Koubsky: And we know better now. Lash: Yeah, so the price that you have for the irrigation, is that for all 7 fields or is that just for, or all 6 fields. Well 7 counting the soccer. Hoffman: For all 6 fields and yes. In consultation with the person from Toro who comes out and inspects there jobs, he gave me a rough estimate on the number of heads which would be, irrigation heads which would be necessary for that project. To do all 7 fields and the slopes, spectator seating areas, in the neighborhood of $50,000.00 with overages and administrative fees, consulting services, etc., that would certainly approach $60,000.00. I've laid out the items in the 1992 CIP, which will most likely not be purchased. You can follow through on that. It is a large, it adds up to a large dollar amount. If you'd like, I could go through that item by item. Give some explanations why that has ended up to be the case. We are in a position where we can fund this impyovement at ,""""Lake Ann underneath our current budget ,which when you walk into a City Council meeting it's certainly much more favorable for approval than if we had e~pended our CIP and wanted $60,000.00 more dollars to do this project. Park and Rec Commission Meeting July 28, 1992 - Page 48 ....." In essence, the large dollar items include City Center Park where $11,200.00 will not be expended. After initially approving this budget and in conversation with the folks in the school district, they did not wish to enter into a joint powers agreement for fund half of that playground structure. Carrying on through there, obviously the Lake Ann Park building. It is not necessary to buy all the equipment, supplies, boats, refrigerators, etc. that come along with that project. That adds up to a very large dollar amount. The bituminous trail loop through the par k, if you poll a random sample or polled every user of Lake Ann, which is more important, that bituminous trail link in that woods or a nice field, I'm sure you can guess what the answer would be. The remainder of the money. Pheasant Hills Park. The budget there was very little, like $20,000..00. I'm real comfortable with $10,000.00 in performing the initial construction work out at Pheasant Hills, which includes engineering fees, preparing a grading plan, surveying and staking which will come with that pr~ject. And then the grading, surfacing, and site preparation which will be carried out in house and which means we spend money on rental of equipment and earth mover, cat. That type of thing. So those are the big buck items which are reduced and which trim our total allocated from $145,000.00 to about $80,000.00 which leaves us with approximately $65,000.00. Again, I would prefer bankrolling that, as many of you would but I simply, personally cannot tolerate another season of complaints and thoughts of liability on those fields and frankly the embarrassment which the city as a whole goes through for providing such an unfit facility. Lash: I'd like to go to my earlier question and ask you, I agree that the .~ 4 new fields are in terrible shape and you know, if this is what we need to do, I can go along with'that. But I guess I'd like to hear your view on why you think it's necessary to do the other three fields and the spectator areas also because we really haven't had problems with those have we? Hoffman: The three existing fields, when we went through the drought years, went dormant. Those seed types will go dormant and just turn out brown and then when the rain comes back they'll grow back. The new seed types which are out there will not go dormant. They struggle when they don't receive rain. They try to grow and they burn thems~lves out. So if we install irrigation on fields 4, 5, 6 and the soccer field, experience a drought year and then said, had to make a decision well you're ~oing to play on the flat slippery, dead grass fields and.you folks are going to play over here on the nice green field, I wouldn't advocate that simply from a policy perspective. And as long as you're doing the entire project, you've got a contractor in there, it's my viewpoint that we get the project done. In regard to spectator seating. Those areas are the most intensely used of the park. I mean on the ballfield it's 3 outfielders out there running around and the spectator areas, we certainly need to insure that those areas receive proper irrigation. If we're doing the other areas of the park, to keep them nice and maintain them as well. For the money you've invested so far, not to go that little extra step would be short sighted in my opinion. Lash: Not assum~ng these watering heads or things that go under the ground far enough that you don't have a,liability with ball players out there runni ng around. ......,I Park and Rec Commissiori Meeting ~July 28, 1992 - Page 49 Hoffman: Correct. I mean they're there. You hear complaints from soccer players that they're not going to, in my opinion they're not going to say now we've got a worst problem. It's the trade off is not even comparable. For your knowledge, the Toro heads or any ones which were comparable, are approximately $90.00 a piece so you start putting those in at the intey'vals we need...and if this project could get done for $60,000.00, which would be the current estimate, it would be a fairly reasonable project. If you look at 1,000 or better participants on a nightly basis, probably closer to 1,500 and you divide that into the number that the cost comes down to, perhaps $50.00 per participant and you put that over 15-20 years lifetime of a system like this and the cost becomes very reasonable. I am concerned again that we don't show favortism towards our athletic complexes in lieu of our neighborhood parks. I don't believe that to be the case. I think staff and the Commission has a general concern over the problems which you have experienced out there and potential liability because of it. It's essentially blacktop when it dries out. It is very hard. You c6uld experience concussions if you fall on the surface. Koubsky: Todd, water source. We did put the water through there. There's the shelter. Have we toenailed something up? Do we have a water source or are we going to have to go tap into the main? Hoffman: This project would tap into the main and probably have a single tap into that main and then have a pumping station, a pressure tank station 1"'"". located near that concession stand is my understanding on the initial conversations. Koubsky: Is that included in the 60? Hoffman: Correct. Koubsky: I feel it's something we need. Erickson: I feel real positive about both things. I've been out on those fields. They're horrendous and this sounds like, actually a relatively inexpensive way to take care of it. AndTews: Todd, do you need a park by park okay on this or can we just mak~ a general motion to approve the overall project and we can divy up where we take the money from later? Or what do we need to do here procedurally? Hoffman: Procedurally, it would be most beneficial if you would go ahead and, for purposes of setting the record straight, that you approve this amended budget schedule as presented, or amended as part of this budget amendment. The money's already been allocated. City Council will certainly have some questions in this regard. Andrews: Is there somebody that's willing to put a motion out here? Koubsky: I guess one thing as far as an amendment. We did take out, it's ,.... one thi ng to hit up on the parks and we'll obviously have to address this in the 1993 capital improvements but you did takeout the Boy Scout projects. Park and Rec Commission Meeting July 28, 1992 - Page 50 .....,I Hoffman: Just from the point of view that I'm not aware that we will be receiving a request for a project. Lash: You know just to tie in with that mosquito thing though, that was one of the thing~ I kind of wanted to insert in there was that maybe we need to make some efforts to provide these. Try the bat houses and the swallow' houses and that kind of stuff and I assume maybe we can get some Scouts to do some of that work. It would be nice maybe to have some funds in there in case we found somebody to do it. Andrews: Put it in your motion. Lash: Should we keep some in there? You've got more than what you need anyway, right? Hoffman: Correct. Lash: You've got $65,000.00 and the estimate is $60,000.00. Hoffman: Our recommendation would be simply to tag back in $1,000.00 into contingency and to use that for any miscellaneous projects which come up. Andrews: Can we have a motion? Erickson: Well I guess I can try to work my way through a motion here. I move that we accept, don't "be afraid to correct my wording here. This ~ change in the capital improvement budget to allow to have $65,000.00, or '$64,000.00 for the irrigation system over at Lake Ann Park with $1,000.00 for the contingency fund to possibly be used for the Boy Scouts or whatever. Andrews: Do you want to authorize the project too? You've said nothing about authorizing the project. Erickson: I authorize the installation of the irrigation syst~m over on the ballfields and soccer field at Lake Ann Park. Andrews: Is there a second? Pemrick: I'll second that. Koubsky: Are we authorizing or are we recommending to the City Council? Erickson: Recommending. Lash: In the amount not to exceed $60,OOO.00? Berg: 64. Lash: Well he's not in his recommendation not to exceed $60,000.00. Andrews: The recommendation is for $60,000.00...we've allocated $64,250.00 to be made available. We've only authorized $60,000.00 for that project. ~ That's the motion and it's been seconded. Park and Rec Commission Meeting .~. July 28, 1992 - Page 51 Erickson moved, Pemrick seconded that the Park and Recreation Commission recommend authorizing a 1992 Park Acquisition and Development Capital Improvement Program budget amendment to fund the installation of an irrigation system at Lake Ann Park for the seven ballfields and spectator areas in an amount not to exceed $60,000.00. All voted in favor and the motion carried. Koubsky: Just an off note. Have the turf specialist gone over to Lake Susan? Hoffman: Yep. We visited that field at the same time. The water was obviously good. The soil sample was unbelievable. When you put the sampler into the ground and you pulled it out, it popped. Just...because of the clay content. There's plenty of water there but we needed some corrections in our fertilizing program to green it up a little bit better. Whenever you hear that he says, you know you have problems. 1993 PARK ACQUISITION AND DEVELOPMENT CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM. Hoffman: Item 7 unfortunately is, if we do not get through the entire necessary proceedings this evening, may necessitate a special meeting simply because of the budget time line process. I've not been officially informed of when finance will want our final budget recommendations but ~ that will be forthcoming fairly shortly, that instruction. We deleted this - item from the June 23rd meeting agenda simply because of the length of the agenda. The establishment of our annual CIP is obviously a very important step. One of the most important pieces of work for the park commission on an annual b~sis. What we need to talk about in this regard is, we can skip over all the updated 5 year plan. You have all that in your packet but it, is essentially where our fund 410 is currently at. What does it health? What is it's prognosis for the future? As you can read there, it's health, it's in perfectly good health but it's not overly fat or excessive in dollars. Current cash on hand in the fund is approximately $250,000.00. That is down from a high of near $600,000.00 of 2 to 3 years ago. When the fund was at $600,000.00 or better, it was pulling down some fairly good interest as well. So we could tag that interest back into our anticipated revenues and things were made even rosier yet. Through all the parkland purchases and all the activity which we're just now coming out of. We're finishing up a lot of projects which were started 2to 3 years ago. We have brought that down to about 250. With the identified reserves which are necessary, being $150,000.00, that was bumped from $100,000.00 to $150,000.00 during last year's process for land purchased west of Lake Minnewsashta which is very important and then just a general reserve or a contingency if you will of $100,000.00. We're right at that dead zero. We can't count on our fund reserve to bail us out so we do in fact need to be conservative in our expenditures. And if you want bankroll anything, or if you want to set something aside for another budget reserve, we need to t~ke that into consideration asa part of our anticipating revenues for our next years. The forecasted revenue is howeve~ positive. In consultation with the City Manager, our discussions show that we will either stay constant or ~ improve in 1993 in regards to park and trail fees. Commercial/industrial will continue to be strong. Target may be on our doorstep. Along with that, all of this commercial development which is taking place in the downtown is just going to spur on the development of the remaining pieces Park and Rec Commission Meeting July 28, 1992 - Page 52 ---' in that commercial district. Once you get that grocery store in there, that's going to bring people to downtown. Other businesses are comin~ in to take a look at this property and saying, this is the time to build in Chanhassen. So we expect that activity to continue. Obviously you've just reviewed a multi-family structure which the City has not seen revenue from in the past. $100,000.00 from that would take you almost to y~ur forecasted revenues of $150,000.00. And again multi-family dwellings are going to continue very strong. So at the present time, we're taking a look at the $150,000.00 mark as a conservative figure but probably a very close one. This whole process, again is to, it's an open forum on the part of the Park and Recre~tion Commission. You use your knowledge, your general knowledge and the c~mments you've seen and the things you've talked about over th~ time you're\on the Board. The goal is not, our goal in evaluating and formulating this obviously is not to spend the money but to meet the needs of our residents. That's what we're after. It is again recommended that budget expenditures in the 410 CIP for 1993 not exceed $150,000.00. If we might well see revenues in excess of that, which we would then begin to bankroll our money again for future use. Andrews: I guess one comment I have is we just deferred $65,000.00 that planned to spend this year. t would think some of that has to be replaced now with future budgeting. Probably most of it. Lash: That's kind of tied in with my question. When you look at these park by park and you have 1992. Okay, if you look at page 5. Carver Beach Park. Play area refurbishment. $2,200.00. Did we actually do that or --' didn't we do that? If we didn't do it, it's something we should rollover and do in 1993. Hoffman: The Carver Beach play area refurbishment...So if you back go to item 6 and page to Carver Beach, the $2,200.00 remains. That is a very safety deficient structure. It's an old structure that needs replacement. Lash: I was just using that as an example. So each park we come to, we need to look at '92 and determine if it's something that we've done or haven't done. We can't assume because it's in '92 that it's been done. Hoffman: Absolutely correct. could have highlighted that. And if I would have made that connection, I I apologize for that oversight. Lash: Okay, I really strongly feel like if we had it in our budget for '92, that we should think seriously to making that a priority for '93 instead of postponing. Obviously something fOT '93 is going to have to go. Andrews: r do~'t know about .the rest of the Commission. I feel like I don't want to push, being at 11:00 on this particular item. We'll get as far as we' can and we'll come back at it. Just avoid mosquito discussion and hopefully get it done but. Koubsky: I guess my thoughts. We just moved $64,000.00. Do these charts reflect that movement? Hoffman: No, they do not. -' Park and RecCommission Meeting ~July 28, 1992 - Page 53 Lash: That was my question. Koubsky: That's what I thought you were saying. It might help me to review this and it might be a little more timely if we ask staff to get us some charts that reflect that movement so we don't have to page through two different items. We might not get very far anyway and if this requires another meeting, I guess based on the time, I'm ready for it. Lash: Maybe what we can do is go through the rest of our agenda items and see how much time we have and then go back and see if we want to get started on this or call a separate meeting. Bruce Gottsein: My name is Bruce Gottsein and I reside at Curry Farms. 1340 Stratten Court is where I live and it's right next to Curry Farms Park. And I've had conversations with Todd periodically and I've been following the park for probably, well I've been there 4 years or so. In just looking at, this is my first opportunity to look at your budget for this year and next year. A budget of $250.00 for a sign...and $500.00 next year for trees. I guess I'm asking the question, there was an overall plan back in '88 when I came up here and addressed you. They showed Curry Farms and showed tennis courts and basketball courts, ballfield and presently what we have in there is an infield and a graded outfield with no grass. We don't have a backstop for that softball. I understand that's going in this year yet. We've got a volleyball court and a small totlot area. I ""..... guess in tal ki ng with Todd, there appears tpbe a problem with the soil samples in that area to facilitate or possibly not be able to put in a basketball court. And I came here tonight to try to urge everybody to take a hard look at maybe doing something else other than tennis and basketball, if that's not possible. Curry Farms, I doh't know if you know it, is...with a number of young children. 150-175 or so just in that small area and when we were out listening to the other parks here earlier, we are just over crowded with kids in that small totlot. First question I got, I guess I can go down the list is, is the soil advantageous for tennis or basketball or looking at your 5 year projection that I had a minute ago, it looks like there isn't going to be any. Are we throwing that out? Is that a done deal? Are we going to take soil samples to see if that can be put in? of course I don't expect your 5 year budget, where are we at on that? Hoffman: For the Commission's information, we did have this identical conversation on the phone. My response to Mr. Gottsein is that I assuredly know that the soils currently will not hold an asphalt play structure such as a tennis court or basketball court. The question in my mind is, to what extent in soil corrections would we have to go to allow those facilities to be built. If the commission wishes to include the possib~lity for tennis or basketball, hard court surfaces there in the future, and would like to see soil samples conducted in the very near future, we can take that project into consideration and go ahead and coordin~te that activity. Again the only question is, how much extra money are we going to have to spend to allow those facilities to be built. We do know absolutely that the soils there currently will not support that. ,.... Lash: and I the 5 I think that we've talked about this issue before. I recall this think because of this conversation, that's why you don't see it on year budg~t. We had had the conversation before we did the budget Park and Rec.Commission Meeting July 28, 1992 - Page 54 ....,., and that's why it was taken off. Because we knew that the soils wouldn't accommodate it. Now is there something that you had in mind or that your neighbors had in mind? Bruce Gottsein: I guess I was under the impression that soil samples were going to be taken.to determine that. I didn't know we were already past that point. That they could not be put there until I saw the 5 year budget tonight. Have we taken soil samples and is that what the conclusion is? That it can't be put in. And has there been a study as to replacing the soils that are presently there in those two areas for the tennis and basketball court? Hoffman: No. Again, as I discussed with you on the phone, soil samples have not been taken. But it is a belief that we all hold that anybody who's worked in that park, has experienced the soil conditions there, that the soils presently will not hold it. We would be spending mon~y which would be obviously ill spent. Those structures are going to break up. The composition of the soil there is essentially black dirt on top of peat. The peat extends in a thickness which is currently unknown but when you drive heavy equipment on there, you best do it in a very dry period of time and you'll still see that equipment sirik and succumb to the poor soils which are there. If you drive down there when it's wet, that equipment will simply disappear. So there's not been a soil test to determine. My recommendation to the Commission that we not move forward with a basketball or tennis court there. That is based on my experience with soils in our different parks and my knowledge as to what that area was prior to it being ~ developed as a park. rAbout half of that park was a marshland prior to it being filled in and handed over to the City at that time as park. Bruce Gottsein: Are we looking at substituting something in place of the ballpark and tennis that was projected back 4 years ago? Erickson: What type of structures, if the soils bad, what else could we use? I think you mentioned there's quite a large number of tots. Would expanding the totlot, putting more ~f those kinds of things in, that can be done on that kind of soil without any problem? Hoffman: Sure. Bruce Gottsein: There is presently a totlot in there. There is a tennis court in there and there's the infield, gonna put a backstop up I understand this year and they're going to put in the grade and the tar for the trail. Is that not correct? That was projected for last year right? I don't know. Just canvasing the residents, there is an area in that park that's up high that's presently a parking lot that is suitable for maybe something like that too. Has there been any' consideration of changing the parking lot? Deleting the parking lot? Putting in an...basketball on one side? Because that is firm soil. That's not down in the park as such but it is part of the park. Hoffman: Again, as I discussed with Mr. Gottsein on the phone, that has been reviewed previously by the Park Commission. Request to install a basketball hoop j n that p'ar ki ng lot. The recommendation at that time to ....", the Commission was that were incompatible uses. A parking lot and a Park and Rec Commission Meeting I""'" Ju 1 y 28, 1992 - Page 55 basketball court, even the same surface and at that time the Commission agreed with staff's position. Bruce Gottsein: But I'm not proposing to take the parking lot. To use it in a dual purpose. I'm proposing to take half of it and segment it off or lengthen it a little bit and put a basketball and a parking lot as separate but on the same area that will support that. I'm asking. Lash: You know is basketball what you're looking for? Bruce Gottsein: I guess the hard look at it. If the original proposal 4 years ago cannot be accomplished because of the soil. If that's the case, then I'm asking, is there a look see at the park of putting in different things that can facilitate? I suggested ice rink~ I don't know where the city is on the posture on that. I'm not talking hockey rink. I'm not talking lights. I'm talking an ice rink. It may not be practical. I'm not the expert on it but I'm bringing up those items to everybody to please consider when you come for your budget in '93. Erickson: I think you came to the right meeting. Bruce Gottsein: Well we have, as you know, right across from Lake Lucy now there's another development going in there. And that's goign to add more residents and that's going to add more pressure on that small neighborhood park. So if we can put some more in there, it would help. Erickson: Has that development come before us yet? I'm not sure. Lash: Yeah. That might have been before you. Bruce Gottsein: Yeah, they're excavating right now. Is there going to be play structures in that? Lash: No. That was something that the residents of that area are supposed ~ to go over and use Curry Farms Park. Park and Rec Commission Meeting July 28, 1992 - Page 56 ......", Bruce Gottsein: Which is somewhat practical. It's not a very long distance even for a small kid. 'Lash: Do you have any other suggestions from your neighbors of things that they are looking for? Bruce Gottsein: Really muscle activities of the grade school age is what they're looking at. But I don't know, I really haven't, maybe it's a personal thi ng. I really have heartburn with the parki ng lot I",hen I go by there everyday and I don't see any cars in there. It just isn't utilized but yet 'we have a nice parking lot and we have a trail going down but it's going down to what? A small totlot and that's it. So I think we got the cart before the horse. I think we could have developed the park and then put the parking lot in. But we have it right there. But we're not , utilizing it. And it's a big, I mean how many cars are going to park at a 6 or 8 acre neighborhood park that has a baseball field ~ith no...and a totlot? How many cars are you going to get in there? You're not going to get them stacked up so I don't know, it's not really being utilized. Erickson: The parking part, I think we go through parking. ,We just went through a parking thing last meeting where there was no parking. People were parking in no parking signs and we just had to put parking in so I think getting us to back off on the parking might be hard. Bruce Gottsein: I can understand that and I'm not proposing to negate the whole parking lot. I'm just saying maybe you want to take half of it and convert it into one of these things you can't facilitate down below because of the soils. ....." Erickson: How about a swingset kind of thing? Bruce Gottsein: Well I don't know if you have it there but they have, there is a small swingset. I think it's your phase 1 and phase 2 you reference it. In there presently now. I guesS some outside structures of that or an add on. I drove by, and obviously it facilitates more people. I drove by Lake Susan and they had a nice add on to that. Anything that we can increase and add that on and especially maybe more of the physical activities. The monkey bars, the firemen's pole, stuff like that the kids can use their bodies and less maybe, well you do hav,e swings there. But I think kids, the ages are moving into that part more so than real toddlers. Lash: Just so you know kind of where we're coming from. When we try and look at this 5 year plan, we try and back up a little bit and look at, we try and spread the funds throughout the city as much as we can. So we try and back up and look at okay, who got what last year. And who got what the year before. And so that we don't continually year after year k~ep plunking large amounts of money in one park and not another park. So we've been kind of trying to spread it around and you guys had $10,000.00 worth in '91 and that's why in '92. Bruce Gottsein: That hasn't been put in yet by the way though. Lash: You didn't get it? ....", Park and Rec Commission Meeting '~Jul y 28, 1992 - Page 57 Bruce Gottsein: No, it's allocated but they haven't had it all put in yet. The ballfield hasn't been put in...backstop isn't there. And I can understand that and I'm not pushing that... Lash: So you know, when you look at this budget it looks bleak for you guys for 5 years and that's the reasoning behind it is that there's. Bruce Gottsein: I think you can get the best deal for your dollar in this case, in this park with what the residents have for kids agewise and not a heavy dollar item. I mean $60,000.00 for 3 ballfields, I think there's something there that could be for another 100-200 kids. Just an observation sitting back and listening. And I'm not talking the big bucks, especially in light of there's nothing else going to be able to go in there. Or to consider the dividing up the parking lot. Or some extension to that. I think you should take a hard look at it anyway. Andrews: Thank you. Bruce Gottsein: Thank you. Andrews: I would like to have staff take the change we just made to the CIP and bring this back. It's getting too late for me to do anything effective on this for my brain at least. I did make a note in my personal booklet of all the concerns that you just mentioned about Curry Farms so ,.... that those wi 11 be brought up by me for sure, if nobody else. So I'd 1 i ke to defer item 7, if we could do that. Erickson: Can that go to a new meeting, the next meeting or should it go to a special meeting? Hoffman: It should go to a special interim meeting. Erickson: A get together at the fire station kind of thing. Lash: In two weeks? Hoffman: Yeah, do we have the date? Andrews: The second Tuesday. Go back to our regular two a month set up. Second Tuesday. Hoffman: It would be August, is there a calendar up there? Andrews: It's the 10th? Pemrick: No, it'd be the 11th. 1992 4TH OF JULY CELEBRATION EVALUATIONS. Andrews: Okay, Jerry if you could give us a quick wrap up of item 8. ~ That'd be appreciated. Ruegemer: This report is basically straight forward. Maybe I might just leave it to the Commission, is there any questions anybody has regarding Park and Rec Commission Meeting July 28, 1992 - Page 58 -" the evaluation or the 4th of July itself? Erickson: I don't have any questions. I want to say that the parts that I observed were excellent. Well attended: Tables and chairs were set up really well. I didn't even get a hot dog. But no I mean, we came over on Friday night and I was very impressed with the turnout and people seemed to be havi ng a good time with the kids and I" thi nk you guys did a real bang up job. Hoffman: Is there any comment on the proposed schedule for next '93? Pemrick: You're doing a 3 dayer. Lash: You're having the adult softball tournament and the adult fishing contest on the same day?" Think that will be a conflict for some of them or no? Hoffman: Sure. Andrews: Alright, let's move on. Are there any Commissioner Presentations? COMMISSION PRESENTATIONS: Lash: I have one item that I would like to bring up. It's more a tree board item. It was something brought to my attention by a source that will ~ remain anonymous. And it's regarding, and I have a big 60ncern about this and I want to find out if this is factual and then I think we need to look into it. I heard that along Market Boulevard where the new trees are planted, that when this shopping center's completed that there's a landscape plan and that the trees that are currently there, and have been there for a couple of years and are now getting pretty well established, are not included in the new landscape plan and will have to be removed and cannot be spaded out and moved because they're over the utility lines. So it would have to just be cut down. Hoffman: I can address that. In some degree currently, there were trees which were removed as part of that construction project. I can't respond if they were all the trees which are on the west side of Market but as part of their construction and turn lanes and entryways and obviously there weren't roads laid out before so when they came in and put those in, they removed trees. They were backhoed out. Some of them were dug up by hand because they were planted, some of them right over the top of the utility lines so you obviously are not going to take a tree spade in there and remove it. Lash: Can we check into the. Hoffman: Remaining ones? Lash: Yeah, the remaining ones. To see what we can do about that. If it's just because they don't fit into somebody's plan, I think that's kind of dumb. And then also I guess I have some concerns over just some of the ~ things I've been reading myself regarding main street. The Target proposal ,..... Park and Rec Commission Meeting July 28, 1992 - Page 59 and the traffic flow and the widening of main street and there's a lot of trees on the boulevards and the center divide too that probably will be effected somewhat by that plan. And I think we've all just maybe begun to become attached to them. We're finally, our wounds are healing finally on that one. To start with, I'd hate to $ee them going and mess it up again. So see what we can do about those trees too. Andrews: I just have one and this is more of a future agenda item. I did attend that TH 5 planning meeting, whatever it was. whatever you want to call the commission that we're on. .It'sa committee of about 25 people so you can imagine how much progress this made and how probably frustrated I was. But I think one thing that's important for our own agenda items in the future is, that they're going' to be looking at specific recommendations as to how we want each of our trail intersections to look at each point they cross TH 5. And they're going to start working from east to the west so perhaps on a once a month or once every other month. Probably once a month basis, we need to start developing some concepts as to what do we want to see? what kind of look do we want? What kind of clearances and traffic do we envision and so forth so if you've got some ideas, things you've seen in other parts of city, maybe bring pictures or jot some notes down about what things yo~ liked about it or didn't like about it. We can start getting some guidance to that commission so we can get it the way we want it instead of the other way around. ,..... Koubsky: That's the actual crossing of TH 5? Andrews: Actual crossings. Wherever there's going to be a bridge or an underpass that might have something to do with the park system, they're going to be looking for some specific recommendations as to what we want. Hoffman: We will be bringing back formal issues for the commission to address as a part of that TH 5 Task Force study. Andrews: That's it. ADMINSTRATIVE SECTION AND PRESENTATIONS. Andrews: To me the highlights were the tree preservation board applications. Is that something we need to take action on or get moving? Hoffman: My thoughts in that area was, I would readvertise one more time. See if we get any other respondents. Query the City Council on how they'd like to progress and get that Board established and get a kick off meeting and plot some strategy. Lash: . I maybe might have talked somebody into applying. Koubsky: Todd, as far as applications, if we have an interest in becoming the members of the tree board, we would also have to apply? Or are we honorary members? ,.... Hoffman: Commission, Planning Commission, Park Commission and Council members will be appointed. So if you volunteer and if we don't get all 6 of you, we'll probably take 7. Hopefully 1 and at least 2 to the Park and Rec Commission Meeting July 28, 1992 - Page 60 ......" Commission. I would presume there'd be 1 or 2 from the Planning Commission and 1 or 2 from the City Council. So this Board will probably comprise of 50% split at large and 50% commission members. Maybe 10 or a dozen people. Meet twice monthly and talk about tree issues. Lash: Twice monthly? Hoffman: Excuse me, once. Lash: Every other month. I have two questions on the Administrative Section. First one is on the letter from Dr. Cooper about the geese. and I noticed that there wasn't any pick-ups on Lake Lucy and there has been in thw past. Was that purposely omitted? Hoffman: He may consider the Lake Lucy/Lake Ann'flock as contiguous. All one flock. Lash: Oh. So they were picked up. Hoffman: Lake Ann but they think the population goes back and forth. Lash: Does it? Hoffman: I haven't watched them fly over there. In their studies, they come out and study these flocks of geese and in their studies they have, ....", they say that's one flock which uses Lake Ann and Lake Lucy. The person who calls me on La~e Lucy has not called to congratulate us yet but he's not called back saying the geese are still there S6 I assume they're gone. Lash: And then on the one from Jerry to Don about the Jaycees. Hoffman: It should be from Todd to Don and Jerry. Lash: Oh yeah, that's it,. Okay. Whatever. I made a note just to myself and I don't remember what it means but I wrote teen center. So do they have something in here about that they were interested in? Hoffman: Interested in teens. Lash: Yeah. And that's something that we kind of kicked around or we have in the past. I thought well maybe that would be a good tie together. Maybe we could get them started on. Hoffman: I'll bring it up with Ken. He called to request a meeting tomorrow. Koubsky: We also have a letter in here from Mike Gorra who is dedicating or has 75 to 100 trees available. I saw there is some correspondence. We've gotten back with him? Hoffman: Correct. ...."., Koubsky: And expressed possible interest. ~ Park and Rec Commission Meeting July 28, 1992 - Page 61 Hoffman: Correct. The trees are a variety which are not ultra desireable. Locust and ash but we will certainly take as many as we can physically remove and put into our parks. Lash: Can I ask a quick question on that one too. Is it just that he's trying to thin out some areas or does he have some future plan for th~ area that he's removing these? Hoffman: I did not specifically ask what his reasonings were but I would think once we get on site, he'll open up. Tell me what his real reason is. Koubsky: So we'll possibly get those as the park this fall? The City has a spade? Lash: Do you have enough places to put them? Hoffman: We have a spade which we can use for some of the smaller ones. The bigger ones we can't use our spade but I'm currently formulating a map for placement of these trees and some other trees as well thinking into the future. The current oak trees at Lake Ann are beautiful and 80 some years old or better but there's no young ones. So put something for our future there and get them going. ,..... Andrews: Any other items? Hoffman: A couple of administrative items. Short notes. Dutch elm disease was spotted bY,Commissioner Andrews. It was confirmed. It's on private property. We've also had an additional report of Dutch elm on a private property out at Lake Susan so it's still around. Andrews: Did you look along TH 101 right along, right south of Town Line and north of Fox Hollow? There's some scrubby elms that are looking pretty bleak there too. Hoffman: I haven't noticed. They would probably be in the highway frontage? Andrews: Probably are. There's a whole bunch of them there. Hoffman: We're getting the second growth of elms are starting to take the hit again so it's gaining some coverage around the metro. Success of the survey has been outstanding. I don't know Dawne, what would be your estimate of receipts? Koubsky: Success or? Hoffman: Response has been very successful. Lemme: We've probably gotten 700 to 900. ~. Lash: Oh really? That's great. Hoffman: Dawn, and with some help from Jerry will be inputting that, all that data into a program designed by Don Ashworth, the City Manager to Park and Rec Commission Meeting July 28, 1992 - Page 62 ....." tabulate all that information which will then be brought to the Commission and published in the Villager. Initial, I'm sure you may be interested, it's a little late but initial response is that trails in reference to everything else will be here. Everything else will be here~ The. next item would probably be golf course. Bandimere is anybody guess. It doesn't look real positive for Bandimere. High tax comments are a dime a dozen. Let's see. Trails. Erickson: Anybody requesting bungee jumping facilities? Hoffman: No but the trail issues is heads and tails about anything else. Any comments? Lash: No, I had one other quick one I guess, now that I just looked through here on the Chaska, non-resident rec rules and I think that's just something we have to, especially now as an example of the comments tonight from the gentlemen over in Saddlebrook. Obviously he's concerned about all these new developments coming into town over taxing our facilities. I think it's something we need to all be aware of and be prepared because this is going to be coming. We may not be here anymore but. Hoffman: Thank you for your patience this evening. This has been a long one. Eric,kson moved, Berg seconded to adjourn the meeting. All voted in favor ~ and the motion carried. The meeting was adjourned. Submitted by Todd Hoffman Park and Recreation Coordinator Prepared by Nann Opheim ~ ....,; Park and Rec Commission Meeting If11""'"' Ju 1 y 28, 1992 - Page 62 tabulate all that information which will then be brought to the Commission and published in the Villager. Initial, I'm sure you may be interested, it's a little late but initial response is that trails in reference to everything else will be here. Everything else will be here. The next item would probably be golf course. Bandimere is anybody guess. It does~'t look real positive fot Bandimere. High tax comments are a dime a dozen~ Let's see. Trails. Erickson: Anybody requesting bungee jumping facilities? Hoffman: No but the trail issues is heads and tails about anything else. Any comments? Lash: No, I had one other quick one I guess, now that I just looked through here on the Chaska, non-resident rec rules and I think that's just something we have to, especially now as an example of the comments tonight from the gentlemen over in Saddlebrook. Obviously he's concerned about all these ne~." developments coming into town ove.r taxing our facilities. I think it's something we need to all be aware of and be prepared because this is going to be coming. We may not be here anymore but. Hoffman: Thank you for your patience this evening. This has been a long one. ~Erickson moved, Berg seconded to adjourn the meeting. All voted in favor and the motion carried. The meeting was adjourned. Submitted by Todd Hoffman Park and Recreation Coordinator Prepared by Nann Opheim If11""'"'