PRC 1991 01 22
,...,
CHANHASSEN PARK AND RECREATION COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
JANUARY 22, 1991
The meeting was called to order at 7:40 p.m..
MEMBERS PRESENT: Jim Andrews, Wendy pemrick, Dave Koubsky, Larry Schroers,
and Jan Lash
MEMBERS ABSENT: Dawne Erhart and Curt Robinson
STAFF PRESENT: Todd Hoffman, Park and Recreation Coordinator; and Jerry
Ruegemer, Recreation Supervisor
WELCOME NEW COMMISSION MEMBER. DAVE KOUBSKY.
Hoffman: The first order of business is to welcome our newest Commissioner
Dave Koubsky. If you all haven't met him, welcome Dave.
Koubsky: Thank you.
Hoffman: You probably all remember interviewing David and since that time,
since the Council appointed him, we got together one morning for just over
an hour and went over the basic format. Please feel free to jump right in
there and help Dave along at any time to give him a few pointers on how our
meetings operate so he feels right at home. He's got a blank name tag but
it's on it's way so it's all official.
,.....,.
ELECTION OF OFFICERS. CHAIRPERSON AND VICE-CHAIRPERSON.
Hoffman: Just go ahead and feel free to open up discussion and...if
anybody wants to nominate themselves or nominate somebody else, I guess
it's all yours.
Andrews: I'll just say I have an interest.
Hoffman: Jim has an interest. Curt's not here. Dawne's not here.
Anybody else?
Schro~rs: Have you heard from either Curt or Dawne? Do you know if they
plan to attend tonight?
Hoffman: I heard from Dawne will not be attending. Curt I did not hear
from.
Lash: Do you have any idea if they have any interest? Did you ask them?
Hoffman: I didn't ask them but I would think that if they had an interest,
Dawne especially when she called, would have left that message or Curt
would have called and expressed his interest.
Lash: Well I'd be willing too if no one is interested but Jim's interested
so I won't.
~ Andrews: I'll flip you for it.
Hoffman: We need a Vice Chair as well. Chair and Vice Chair.
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
January 22, 1991 - Page 2
....."
Pemrick: Well do you have any druthers? Would you prefer one or the
other?
Lash: It really doesn't matter to me and I've always thought that Larry's
done a nice job when he's chaired too.
Hoffman: Okay, somebody make a motion because I don't.
Schroers: I'm going to say that I guess I was just willing to go along
with the program. I would volunteer if there wasn't other interest but if
there is, that is fine with me as well. I don't mind acting as Vice Chair
in someone's absence.
Pemrick: And I don't mind doing that either. How about you Jim?
Andrews: We can't all be Vice Chairs either I don't suppose.
Lash: Do we want to do, go ahead and vote Chair first and then do a Vice
Chair?
Hoffman: One or both. As a platform or separate.
Lash: Well I'd move to nominate Larry for Chair.
Hoffman: Is there a second?
Pemrick: Would you like to be Chair?
"""""
Schroers: Yeah.
Pemrick: I'll second it.
Schroers: If everyone goes along with that, I will do it.
Pemrick: Yeah, I'll second that.
Lash moved, Pemrick seconded to nominate Larry Schroers as Chairman of the
Park and Recreation Commission for 1991. All voted in favor and the motion
carried unanimously.
Hoffman: Okay. Larry is Chair. Is there a motion on the floor for Vice
Chair?
Schroers: I will move to nominate Jim as Vice Chair.
Pemrick: I'll second that.
Schroers moved, pemrick seconded to nominate Jim Andrews as Vice Chairman
of the Park and Recreation Commission for 1991. All voted in favor and the
motion carried unanimously.
Hoffman: At this point we should take the liberty to discuss any merit to
the rotating chair. You know the opinion of some of the Council members.
We have had that rotating chair in the past 1 or 2 years. If you would
...",
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
~. January 22, 1991 - Page 3
like to discuss continuing that or discontinuing that, I think we should do
that at this time.
Andrews: I'd like to suggest that we drop that. I guess I'd like to see a
format that becomes familiar and maybe I guess my personal opinion, I'd
like to see a little bit more structure to agenda items being acted upon
and if not acted upon, being set up so they are brought before us and kept
in front of us on a regular basis. I think that could be better suited
with a consistent chair.
Pemrick: I agree. I thought we kind of decided on that didn't we?
Lash: I think there were still some mixed feelings.
Schroers: Yeah. We had discussed it. I guess that I've got two points on
it. I think it's good experience for those who want to do it, to have an
opportunity to do it and from that aspect it was real positive but the
negative portion is that the City Council was not comfortable with it for
the most part. In the past we have had some rough edges with certain
commission members and certain Council members and that is non-conducive to
achieving our goals. I think in view of the fact that the Council was not
happy with it, it would be easy to make that concession.
"'"
Lash: I do think it was somewhat confusing to the public. I guess I'm
just more comfortable with having a spokesperson. If Larry's going to be
the Chair, he would be the one who would be quoted or asked questions about
things and I think having a rotating chair it just gets confusing for the
public as well as us and Council and everone so I think it just looks more
professional. A person that looks like someone is willing to take charge
and be responsible for it.
Pemrick: I agree.
Lash: I would move then that we discontinue the rotating chair?
Andrews: I'll second that.
Lash moved, Andrews seconded to discontinue the rotating chair for Park and
Recreation Commission meetings. All voted in favor and the motion carried
unanimously.
CALENDAR OF 1991 MEETING DATES.
Hoffman: Item 3 is your meeting schedule calendar. I went ahead and
marked that out so you can keep that or plot it out on your own calendar at
home. There's just a few dates that we flip flop around. We're typically
on the fourth Tuesday but when we come up against a Holiday or something
where there's a three day weekend, we just slightly alter one week.
Basically we've followed the Council's pattern to that degree where they
have changed it, we will as well.
",.....
Andrews: I was looking at November 26th. Would it be possible we could
consider moving to the 19th instead. I know some people I know that
Thanksgiving preparation can get relatively intensive even that far in
advance.
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
January 22, 1991 - Page 4
...."
Hoffman: I wouldn't have a problem with that. Thanksgiving falls on what,
the 28th?
Andrews: Yeah.
Hoffman: Okay. We'll make that modification as well get that modification
into the City records si~e this schedule has been distributed to the
Council and other commissions.
Andrews: And we had also talked about if necessary we would adopt the
twice a month if the building activity and so forth requires.
Hoffman: If necessary, even in the months of February and March when we
get fairly intensive activity going on. Preparation for spring
construction season, if we need to call a second Tuesday, we'll do so. Most
likely we will know far enough in advance where we could make that
~odification at the meeting previous than this meeting... You can take it
from here Larry.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES :.
Lash moved, Andrews seconded to approve the Minutes .of the Park and
Recreation Commission meeting dated December 11, 1990 with the following
changes on page 3 by Jan Lash: Changing the word Kteam ball- to -tee balIK,
and a statement by Jan Lash, changing the word KGrandaleK to KBrandondaleK.
All voted in favor and the motion carried.
.."",
APPROVAL OF THE 1991 MINNESOTA P~R~ AND RECREATION ASSOCIATION AGENCY
MEMBERSHIP.
Hoffman: Really this item is brought to you more just for your
information. It wouldn't necessarily have to be but it has been in the
past. As an agency, the City does retain it's membership in the MRPA,
Minnesota Recreation and Parks Association for this Board as a recommending
or advisory authority. As you can see from the MRPA's brochure pamphlet,
there are a number of different categories under there. Professional,
retired, Board recommending advisory, that type of thing. Minnesota
Recreation and Parks Association is our State professional affiliation.
They throw some weight or have some weight in the political arena as far as
funding and those types of things and our grant programs which we
participate in. ...the membership you receive publications from them and
also have the opportunity to go to the annual conference. It is
recommended that we accept, or go ahead and join as an association... for
the Minnesota Parks Association again in 1991.
Schroers: Are you looking for a motion on this?
Hoffman: Yes.
Schroers: I would move to once again be a member. Is there a second?
Andrews: I'll second that.
Pemrick: I'll second that.
...."
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
.~ January 22, 1991 - Page 5
Schroers moved, Andrews seconded to renew the Commission's MRPA membership
for 1991. All voted in favor and the motion carried.
VISITOR PRESENTATION:
PRESERVING OPEN SPACE FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF A GOLF COURSE. JOAN AHRENS.
CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSIONER.
Hoffman: Joan isn't here.
Schroers: Should we just move to item 7 and come back to it when Joan
comes?
Lash: Is this Joan?
Ahrens: Yes. Ready for me?
".
Hoffman: Basically what Joan is interested in is, she had talked to Paul
Krauss the Planning Director for the City about the possibility of
preserving open space. We're in the development stage, the City is where
land developers are coming in and trying to pick up available pieces of
land at a pretty astounding rate and at this point in our development it's
a good time to take a look at any of those future and long range land use
plans. That's one reason you review the comprehensive plan. You have a
chance to take a look at that. In talking with Paul, Paul was...kind of
start some dialogue if this would be a reality or a feasible concept that
we could go ahead and maintain or preserve some open space through the
development...golf course. So Joan if you want to go ahead and talk to the
Commission about your thoughts.
~
Joan Ahrens: I'm Joan Ahrens and I'm on the Planning Commission. I'm here
on behalf of the Planning Commission tonight and I guess I would just like
to clarify that it wasn't exactly a, this didn't come out of a conversation
between Paul Krauss and me. It came out of our last Planning Commission
meeting. I guess the reason that we'd been talking about a golf course is
because, as you know over the last year we've been doing the Comprehensive
Plan. Talking to a lot of residents and we've had a lot of public
hearings. First and foremost on everybody's mind is preservation of open
space in Chanhassen. It's the reason most people moved here and they want
to not only see open space preserved but they want to have access to it.
So the idea of a golf course came up at our last meeting. I relunctantly
agreed to be the one to present it to you because I wasn't sure how good of
an idea it was but doing a little research I have found that I think it
would be a great idea for the city and I was talking to Tom outside, he
thinks a great idea too so it's nice to know we have more support here.
What I did, and I guess in general I'm here to talk about golf courses.
Specifically what I'm here for is to ask you to amend your section of the
Comprehensive Plan to include a study area or study areas for golf course
development. We don't have anything like that and we certainly have a lot
of space right now. We could look into it. Now is the time to do it.
I know it would be a very large project for the City and I think that there
probably would be some concern that we don't have the population base to
get a big project off the ground. And I'm talking about a municipal
course, not a private course. My idea was to develop one, to acquire land
and develop it from square one. Tom was talking about the possibility of
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
January 22, 1991 - Page 6
...""
acquiring the existing course. But anyway a lot of people I think would
say that maybe we don't have the population base out here yet but by the
time you get a large population base, of course you don't have any open
space left which is what happened to the City of Minnetonka. They've been
trying to get a golf course going there and they don't have any land left.
They have one bit of land in Purgatory Creek but it's a nature preserve and
people don't want to turn a nature preserve into a golf course. I don't
know why but anyway. I have some little outline here I've prepared for
you. This is based on some conversations I've had in the last couple of
weeks. This isn't a formal presentation on all of the aspects of
development of a golf course. This is, I'm throwing ideas out to you and
I hope to have some dialogue here with you on this. I was relunctant at
first because I wasn't sure this was going to be a good idea to pursue. I
have talked to a number of cities who have municipal courses and every
single one of them said they thought it was a great idea for their city.
They've all been very profitable from the first day of operation. You'll
see on here that the Edinburgh Golf Course is going to see revenues of
$150,000.00 this year from a golf course alone. They figure that their
golf course has generated over a hundred million dollars in economic
development for the City which is outstanding. One of the reasons, they
have probably the biggest and most expensive development here but they
planned it that way because that's what brings in money. They also, I
think the beauty of their course and some of the other municipal courses
was that it's not just a golf course. It's an open area for all the
residents throughout the year. They use the golf in the wintertime for, or
a number of cities do, for crosscountry skiing and sledding and whatever
outdoor activities the city wants to use it for. They use club houses for -'
community centers and meeting places and for rental areas and restaurants
so it really is a development that's used by the city. I've listed on the
bottom some financing options and these are very sketchy ideas and they
aren't, each idea isn't exclusive. They can be combined to come up with a
good financing plan and the only reason I list these is because the first
thing that comes to everybody's mind is how do we pay for something like
this? A big development like this and there are options. In Brooklyn Park
they, a developer came in and purchased all the land necessary for the golf
course and then they wan~ed to build, part of Brooklyn Center, part of
their problem is they had an image problem up there. The people who lived
up there were mostly working class. As they got better jobs and made more
money, they wanted to stay in Brooklyn Park but there was no upper bracket
housing for them so they thought of the idea of a golf course and building
upper bracket housing around the golf course. This has been a big success
for them up there. At any rate, okay. The land was purchased by the
developer and then the developer gave the City, which doesn't happen very
often, but gave the City all of the land for the golf course. It was a tax
write off for the developer and they figured that was the only way they
could get their residential development going out there. It's the largest
plat ever recorded in Hennepin County which tells you how big a project
this is and how big a project it continues to be out there. But that was
just one idea of how they did it but every city has their own story and
I have a lot more information if any of you want to talk about it at some
other time but, do you have any questions? Any ideas?
Koubsky: Joan, does the Planning Commission have any area in mind off hand?
Joan Ahrens: No. This was an idea that was brought up at the last
....."
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
~, January 22, 1991 - Page 7
Commission meeting. We know that there is a lot of open space left in
Chanhassen. We didn't pinpoint any study areas at all.
Andrews: I have some questions and comments I guess. I've always been a
proponent on the Board here of open space so I'll start with that statement
and then I'll kind of work down from there. I guess I question the
feasibility of a golf course knowing what the economic climate of the day
is and also the competitive situation with Edenvale, Bluff Creek, Island
View, Deer Run and I know there's other courses nearby. I know Edenvale
has really struggled as a course to be economically viable and I guess
I look at this and we talk about, we want to preserve open space but yet
the comment about Edinburgh was look at all the development it caused. To
me that's sort of a paradox. I would think that perhaps a better idea
might be to designate an open space as open space and let it be nature and
not a commercially developed project. I also question how our business
owners like the owner of Bluff Creek would respond to being in competition
with the City. My experience with some of the things I'm involved in,
which would include some like the Hyland Hills Ski Area, that it's very
difficult for private business to compete with a publically funded
operation. They usually, the public operation typically will have the best
equipment and the lowest prices and that can drive a private venture out of
business and I look at that and wonder is that really a fair thing to do to
somebody that's struggled to have a business in Chanhassen.
"....,
Ahrens: Do you want me to respond to that?
Andrews: Sure, go ahead.
Ahrens: Your first concern that this is a bad business climate to start
talking about development of a golf course. You're right. Our economy is
in terrible shape but it takes 5 to 7 years to get an idea like this off
the ground and hopefully we'll be in better shape in the future when this
comes to fruition, a golf course. Secondly, there's never been, I think
that the City does have to be sensitive to the needs of private businesses
but there's never been a shortage of golf courses in this area. The
western suburbs of the Twin Cities has the highest number of golfers
anywhere in the metropolitan area. Edenvale was in trouble and they
probably still are. They've been trying to sell their course to the City
of Eden Prairie. The City of Eden Prairie wants the course but Edenvale's
asking 7.2 million dollars for it, and it's not worth it. So there are
some private courses that may be in trouble but I don't think that, and I
think that the numbers would be real easy to get our hands on. I don't
think that a municipal course would threaten private courses by any stretch
of the imagination and I think that your concern that it would bring more
development also to the City of Chanhassen. We're going to have
development one way or another. It's how we're going to plan for the kind
of development we want. I think the idea of having open space just for the
sake of open space is great but I think if the city can make money off of
that I think, and still have it be open space and have it desireable and
attractive and everything else, I think that the City should think about
that.
~. Schroers: Anyone else have any particular thoughts?
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
January 22, 1991 - Page 8
..."",
Lash: When I think of open space, I don't picture a tailored, landscaped
golf course. When I'm thinking of open space out in Chanhassen, I'm
thinking of the woody areas and the marshy areas and the lakes and all of
that but I certainly wouldn't want to say that I wouldn't want to get more
information on this. I think we should certainly explore it. If we get
more information and it looks like it's something that would be viable
sometime in the future, the least we can do is.
Andrews: I have a couple more questions too on that. Is what you're
saying that one of the ways that we would be able to obtain land is through
a golf course, and from what I can tell, at least from our park board the
way it stands right now, maybe the only way we could obtain a large tract
of land and at least preserve it in something other than buildings or
houses. I guess I would look at that as yes, as a better alternative than
blacktop and buildings but I guess I still would look at either a
combination of totally undeveloped land and a golf course or, my personal
preference would be wild land I mean which is probably the most valuable
asset that we will have. But it may be economically impossible to preserve
that as a city without some way creating some sort of revenue so I
understand both sides of the issue here. I guess idealistically, I would
like to see a large tract of land that we could just leave as is. Leave it
wild. Maybe have a few trails on it but be lucky enough so that 20 years
from now there could be a 200 acre piece of land surrounded by city that is
just wild forest or whatever.
Pemrick: Well I'm in favor of a golf course. I think it's a great idea to
have. I've always been in favor of any lifelong sports or activities. .."
Tennis is a major one and golf is a major one. Golf is just exploding and
there are enough public golfers, public course golfers. I think it would
be well attended you know. Private courses are pretty exclusive to the
majority of everybody and I'd like to see further study done. I think
there's a future for a golf course in Chanhassen. Has there been any
approach by any private sectors like a Deer Run type thing coming into
Chanhassen?
Ahrens: Not that I'm aware of but I haven't talked to any private
developers who are interested in developing another private course because
the private courses are really in competition with each other and there are
a lot of private courses around.
Pemrick: Don't they have both though? I mean a private course also allows
the public to play, it's just that you get first.
Ahrens: Some of them do. Right, some of them do.
Pemrick: Not like Hazeltine.
Ahrens: No. Some of them do allow the public to play also but municipal
courses generally, some of the courses pulled in something like 70% of the
people who play golf there are local residents and they offer lower prices
to residents to offer a service to them. So there's more of an incentive
for people to stay in the community and spend their money.
......,
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
~, January 22, 1991 - Page 9
Koubsky: They can also have local memberships. Being a public course, you
can also be a member of the course which will give you a discount or some
option.
Pemrick: Most of them seem to fill up rapidly when they do offer
memberships.
Ahrens: Well I heard an interesting statistic and I don't know if this is
just from a golfer or what but they said that every 4 days there's enough
people starting golf in the United States to support a new golf course.
schroers: Well evidentally there's a lot of people that think it's a good
idea because there are brand new golf courses going up allover all the
time. I think that it would be nice for Chanhassen to have a municipal
course and it would be nice to be city owned and operated and open for the
public but I think that whether it's city or private, golfing is still a
business and whether or not you do well with it depends on what type of
facilities you have and how well you manage them. Just because it's going
to be a municipal course doesn't mean it's going to be a major success.
~
Ahrens: Oh absolutely. It depends on how it's maintained. Dwan. I don't
know how many of you are familiar with that course. It's in Bloomington
and it's a short course. It's not, I think they have 9 holes...35 acres
that are developed by a golf course so it's a small course and they
projected their revenues based on 27,000 rounds a year and they thought
that they could make it on that. They have from the beginniing had a
minimum of 50,000 rounds a year out there and that's the way it is. Most
of them have a minimum of 50,000 rounds a year. It seems like when a golf
course springs up, people go to it. You know they are amazingly successful
and cities are making good money off of them, but they do have to be run
exactly like a business. You're right. Some cities have developed golf
courses and run the golf courses and then sold the club houses to private
developers so there are private people running club houses. It depends on
what the City wants, what kind of business they want to be in.
Lash: So Todd, would you be able to pull th~s information together for us
or who would be, who would need to do this?
Hoffman: That would be worked out amongst staff at what staff level that
the job would be taken on. It would also then, to start any type of a
serious consideration or study we'd need approval and funding at the
Council level as well.
Ahrens: We have the opportunity to Brooklyn Park, they offered to even
come out here and talk to us. They also have, they paid for a feasibility
study several thousand dollars of a feasibility study done for their golf
course and they offered to hand that over to us which was very generous I
thought. It would be interesting to document...
Schroers: Well I think that your request is very reasonable. That we take
a look at it. At the comprehensive plan and consider areas that would be
suitable for a golf course. I can say however that we have been looking
~ for large tracts of land within the city of Chanhassen to be used as parks,
both active and passive parks and there is still some open land but a lot
of it is not very affordable or attainable it seems like so it may be a
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
January 22, 1991 - Page 10
...".,
little bit harder to come up with an area that large without private
development or without private interests to help them.
Hoffman: As you know, the Deer Run golf course is basically a trend which
is taking place in other parts of the country and initially in hearing
those folks speak, the developers speak about how they came about depicting
that location, they were just looking at a location anywhere west of Eden
Prairie. Chanhassen, Victoria, anywhere out here and that piece of land
became available so per chance we missed an opportunity there but the trend
in the housing around the golf course and a private developer developing
the golf course and then another developing group developing the house
seems to be one trend which is fairly popular in golf course development in
this day and age. And Larry, to fall back again on your speaking of
dollars spent. Just in raw land value, if we tack on a $15,000.00-
$20,000.00 per acre raw land value to start at 100 or 150 acres, we're into
the 1.5 plus million dollar range just to acquire the land so it is a
substantial amount of money and that's why it is a 5 to 7 year process to
even get something like this off the ground because it is such a large
project.
Andrews: I have a question of how this works with the comprehensive plan.
If we were to, would we be designating a part of Chanhassen to say this is
our open space/golf course area and then if present owners had that
property and tried to sell it, they could only sell it for use as a golf
course like we were looking at with the trails situation?
Hoffman: Basically if it came to the point where a study area or an area ..,
would be designated as open space for a golf course, you don't have
exclusive rights to that but you have the wherewithal then to if that land
becomes up for purchase, that it is labeled as in the comprehensive plan
and you have first shot at it to purchase it or condemn it.
Ahrens: It's a tough situation though once you start identifying specific
parcels as golf course and the owners say wow, my land could become the
next golf course and the price goes up considerably. I don't know how
you're going to.
Lash: That was my next question was, does that turn around and bite us
back in the market by people jacking the price up? Is that a real typical?
Hoffman: It's a real mouse/cat game, sure.
Ahrens: But that's the way it is with all development out here. You know
everybody you talk to who owns land out here says that their values have
gone way up just since we've been talking about the comprehensive plan and
expanding the MUS A line.
Lash: But if people think that government is interested in it.
Ahrens: Yeah, it goes way up.
Lash: ...bottomless wallet.
Ahrens: I think that truthfully it could be said that it's an idea for not
just a public course but maybe a private/public venture or something like .."""
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
~ January 22, 1991 - Page 11
that. Probably is what the City would be looking at anyway.
Schroers: I'm wondering if there would be a possibility of wording this a
little bit different and instead of saying looking at specific study areas
for development of golf course, would be just kind of looking city wide as
to where it would lend itself and not actually identify a specific area
that we would be looking at.
Ahrens: I don't know if within your section of the comprehensive plan if
you have to do that. Identify some certain areas for certain activities.
Hoffman: If you choose to do that, it lends some credibility and to keep
things going in the same direction as go on 5-6 years down the line, to say
you have that area designated. At this point in these initial discussions,
you know talking about designating a certain area in the comprehensive plan
is premature basically. We're at a level where we're just trying to start
some dialogue in the subject and obviously you need, you don't just need
commission or councilor city support. It needs to be a community support
type function or it's just not going to be viable.
Andrews: I wasn't suggesting we were going to designate it tonight but I
just want to understand what the implications were of the idea.
~
Lash: What kind of a feel do you have Todd for the idea and have you had
input from people that are interested in something like that?
Hoffman: Previous to speaking with Paul and the events that took place at
that meeting and in conversation with Joan, I have had some background in
it in the cities of Mankato and North Mankato. They were battling to be
the first city to, they both acquired the land and then the first city to
develop their golf course and North Mankato finally beat out Mankato and is
going ahead with a development. The City of Mankato has been in the
process for over 10 years now and they've owned the land throughout that
entire time so the process to get it going can be a lengthy one for a
municipal golf course.
Lash: Do you have a feel for, you said you thought that it might be
thought that our population now wouldn't, what kind of a population number
do you think would?
Ahrens: I don't have any numbers of mine. I don't believe that's a valid
argument anyway. I'm just thinking in our last election we had our
community center on a referendum lost because people didn't feel we had
enough population to support a community center and I think these are very
different ideas. The important thing is getting the correct information to
people and how golf courses pay for themselves and community centers don't.
It's just something the city buys and pays for and it sits there. An
expensive asset for the city. They're two very different ideas. But
I imagine that argument will come up.
Koubsky: I guess I'd just like to express my interest in, I think it's a
pretty good idea. I think it's one that should be considered and worked
~ out. At least thought about and not tabled.
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
January 22, 1991 - Page 12
...."
Schroers: Todd, is it going to take a motion to amend the Comprehensive
Plan?
Ahrens: Tom wants to make a comment.
Tom Workman: I know this isn't a public hearing. Do we have a new
Chairman yet? I was out. Okay, Mr. Chairman and Commissioners.
I introduced myself to Dave before I had to tell him I was Tom Workman or
anything else, I forgot to introduce my own self. 7233 Pontiac Circle for
those for the record. I started thinking about a golf course idea when
what was going to be the Workman/Chanhassen Municipal is now the Eckankar
property over there and I think you need about 140-150 to do a golf course
properly or something and there's 174 there. We could make a great big
totlot out of the rest of it or something. So I started thinking about you
know I mean rather wildly obviously about that but last spring in thinking
about how our city appears to people, the recurring comment to me from
friends, family and enemies alike was every spring and summer that darn
Bluff Creek. What kind of a reputation Bluff Creek throws off and then of
course is the impression that it gives the City of Chanhassen. The course
is laid out pooYly. They don't rake traps. They don't water very well.
They don't do things properly. The course is jammed. Don't get me wrong.
The course is jammed and the guy is making money but golfers like myself,
friends, family and enemies alike, avoid it if we can because it's not that
good of a course. But what I did was with Scott Harr spent last summer and
fall trying to find out what we could do about that club house that was
half built because it stands there, I don't know if you're familiar with
it, but it's this big brick clubhouse. I think about 4 Minnesota Vikings ...."
in the late 80's, late 70's, early 80's got in and gave their money to
somebody in the venture and then he ran off with the money and now we've
got this thing half built and everything else. It's been standing there so
he makes a lot of money selling beer and Twinkies out of a tin shed and
people golf there. There's no doubt about it. I think if we. had 3 golf
courses in this town it would fly because of the demand. Joan's comments
were correct. It's really becoming more popular but Scott and I, through
contacting the owner, there's no code violations on that golf course or
with the club house. You can't tear the club house down. Can't do
anything. Well it continues to be king of a sore spot with me that this
thing is kind of, this impression that people are getting. The only thing
they get, oh Chanhassen, Bluff Creek. Oh yeah. And so I've always thought
about how could the City turn that into a municipal golf course. Obviously
condemnation. That kind of thing is kind of frightening, etc.. Well at
the League of Cities Conference in Houston this year, there's some
representatives from a firm, well the PGA is there and the LPGA's there at
all these places because cities are doing big municipal golf business. But
I made a contact with a fellow from what they call First Golf. But to back
up. when I saw Joan's comments in the agenda tonight, I thought somebody
else is on a tract that I may be on and we should get together. But First
Golf is basically a financing outfit and I've got an awful lot of
information here that I'll give to Todd and I should have had maybe for you'
guys tonight. They basically finance these deals. If it's an existing
golf course, we'll help you finance it. You pay for it through the
receipts. Through people golfing. That's the difference between having a
large open space that has no turnstile on it. It's very expensive and it's
not going to be paid for unless it's a bond referendum or something. It
becomes a large open space that's paid for. If you don't make a profit, ...."
~.
,...,
/"/11I....
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
January 22, 1991 - Page 13
big deal. The profit is the open space. I've always said the City
shouldn't be in the business of making a profit off of it's citizens, etc.
but municipal golf course is a way to preserve the open space and have it
paid for by people all around. Not just in the City, and certainly not
through taxes which we all know doesn't work out real well. And this is
just one financing idea and Joan came up with some more and I think 7 to 10
year idea is kind of, it's too long for me to think that far out and I
certainly wouldn't hope that something like that would have to happen. I
don't know. I've heard rumor and there certainly is some platting going on
around the Bluff Creek area and they could at any time turn that into 2 1/2
acre or 10 acre lots and I don't know if you've stood on that bluff up
there but you can see everything from up there down in the valley and it is
some really pretty land out there that would be perfect for preserving. Do
we preserve it just for golfers? I don't know. Burnsville, the City of
Burnsville is c~rrently going through something of a battle on this so we
might want to check with them or watch what they're doing. I know that
there's the proponents of, we just want this open space for trails and
hiking. We don't want it for golfing because apparently the hiking people
don't like the golfing people or something. They are two different people
I think. But that certainly can be looked at. The hiking people would
just have to hike when it's dark. I don't know. Like I emphasized before,
people want to play golf here. They don't want to go somewhere else but
they will and they do and for the 30 or 40 times a summer that I play golf,
I'll play Bluff Creek once and yet it's still packed. I can be selective
apparently and other people don't care to be. That's about all I had to
say. I didn't mean to bore you on and on here but I'll get this
information to Todd. I had a conversation with a gentleman. He called me
up from Denver and they want to sell golf courses and sent these packages
up. Obviously there's money in it for them too and I don't know nearly
enough about any of it but I do know that there's a million and one options
and ways to go about something like this and I think we're at a good point
to do it so I'm glad the Planning Commission thought to bring this up. I
was going to bring this up at the City's, the Mayor was going to get us
together and do some planning ourselves. Some goal setting but I thought
it'd be a good time to do it now. And lastly, I did bring up to Todd, how
could the City get some botchy ball courts in the City. Rather cheap and
inexpensive. You'd think an Eagle Scout could probably handle it if given
the instructions so there you go.
Schroers: Is there any other commission members have any further response
on that?
Lash: I feel about the information already provided about the different
options and financing, I guess just looking at this thing, I feel like I'm
stuck between a rock and a hard place because I don't think we'd ever go
for a referendum on this with the climate that we've had referendums lately
but yet it seems like it's sort of sneaky way around it to do it without
letting people know or letting them have input into how they see the money
being spent. But there are different options of having it, of getting the
money from someone else and paying them back from the revenues or those
kinds of things, I'd be comfortable with that. I don't know enough about
all these different bonds and these different options that you explained
but I wouldn't feel comfortable with anything that I thought was something
that we were doing without voter approval. Yet I don't think we'd ever get
voter approval so I guess I would, if we're looking for a motion I'd be
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
January 22, 1991 - Page 14
-""
ready to make a motion that we, do you want to look for an amendment to the
Plan now or do you want to come up with a way of wording it yourself or
what do you think we should do?
Hoffman: Yeah, I don't believe at this time we need to go to an amendment
of the Comprehensive Plan. We have 10 years to amend that piece of work
and we can certainly start the discussion and move forward with staff
discussion and discussion with the Manager and the Council and the Planning
Commission members and the input from other people out there prior to
starting those types of actions.
Schroers: That's exactly what I was thinking. If you could start the
research on it into some of the funding and to see how actually realistic
it was, there would always be time to amend the Comprehensive Plan and to
look for areas so I think if the funding is available, that will make it an
awful lot easier to find a suitable area. I think it's very interesting.
I certainly wouldn't be opposed to seeing a golf course come in the city
and be anxious to see how this develops.
Hoffman: Okay. Again, no motion is necessary.
schroers: Okay. Then if there's nothing further on that, then I'd like to
move along to item 7 on the agenda.
HERMAN FIELD PARK ACCESS AND INITIAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN.
Public Present:
..."",
Name
Address
Tom Schoenecker
Betty Lang
2820 Sandpiper Trail
2631 Forest Avenue
Hoffman: Herman Field Park access and initial development plan. I believe
we have both of you here for that item? Yep. And we also have, many of
you can see Scott here in the audience. You all know him but I'd also like
to introduce Bruce Chamberlain. New person with the firm of Van Doren,
Hazard and Stallings so he'll be working with, he works with Scott and
works with Mark Koegler so we have those people now as well and Dick Wing
as well is in the audience from the Council. This item as the report
states, has been talked about and re-talked about over the past 8 to 10
years and then the past 3 years, some intensive study work has been done to
begin the process of developing the 11 acre Herman Field Park which was
initially donated to the City along with $30,000.00 to develop that. Last
March I believe it was when the Minutes are in here. Last April was the
last time the Commission discussed this item. At that time we were still
wrestling with the issue of access through an easement. The Commission
left it that evening with staff to go ahead and investigate the need to
purchase or acquire easements. Just during the initial stages of that
process when we were taking a look at that. a road vacation request, as
noted in the report, resurfaced and through that opportunity of vacating
that portion of Forest Avenue, we were able to acquire that easement as a
trade-off so we did not have to go ahead and purchase that easement. That
was just a windfall action of that Forest Avenue/Oriole Lane vacation
request that came through so as stated in the report there, the two ~
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
~, January 22, 1991 - Page 15
conditions of approval for that vacation were the 40 foot easement for the
gravel trail or gravel road access to Herman Field Park and then as well to
maintain the easement off of Oriole coming down into the northeast corner
of Herman Field Park to maintain a viable way to get a trail into that
park. That approval of the vacation was, and with those conditions was
then granted in November of 1990 by the City Council. Previously we have
talked about the park plan or the master park plan in the year '88
I believe in the forefront. The master park plan with the design of the
park. What facilities did the Commission and the residents in that area,
would they like to see in the park through neighborhood involvement. Having
those residents down to these meetings and with commission support, a
master park plan was developed. That was revised again in I believe it was
1990 and so we have all the components in hand to go ahead and start
initial development. We did go ahead and budget $50,000.00 for this first
phase of development. That was approved by the City Council so along with,
we have the dollars available. We have the means of gaining access finally
to Herman Field Park and we have in hand a master park plan. The
direction I'm looking for tonight is we did send the notification out to
the residents to have them down to answer any last questions they had prior
to going out and taking a look at acquiring bids or specifications and
plans for this project and then eventually taking those to the City Council
for their approval and going out for bid within the next 2 months.
Comments from the commission.
III"""
Lash: How much of this do you think we can get for $50,000.00?
Hoffman: The most recent estimate we had was $31,000.00 to have the access
road put in. That's about a year old so it will be in the neighborhood of,
guessi ng $35,000.00 plus t.o have the access road put in and then we're left
with $10,000.00-$12,000.00 for park development.
Schroers: The development of phase 1 consisted of very little besides
mowing what would be a couple of trail areas for nature walking and we were
going to put in some, an active use, open space with some picnic tables and
how much grading were we going to be doing? Were we going to do any
grading on Phase 1?
Hoffman: As long as the contractor is there doing the road project, it
would be favorable to go ahead and do the grading portion to whatever
extent is necessary in that active area of the park to level that area out
so it can be seeded and mature into turf prior to being used as a ballfield
or an open space area.
Schroers:
$12,000.00
We're not going to get too far with grading on $10,000.00 or
are we?
Hoffman: No. The $50,000.00 is increased $20,000.00 from the $30,000.00
which was originally donated but again this will be a multi year project.
We'll have to come back with some more dollars in 1992 to potentially put
in the totlot or finish other things inside the park so again we're in the
initial cost estimates but the $50,000.00 is not going to create
everybody's vision of what they want to see that park be in this first
r- year.
Lash: So we could get the access road and maybe an open play area?
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
January 22, 1991 - Page 16
"""""
Hoffman: Yes.
Lash: We can put a couple of picnic tables in there. Maybe a grill.
Garbage can.
Hoffman: Ye~h. ,Obviously as we've seen in other parks, once you go in and
you start construction that first year, it's not a real beautiful place to
go ahead and take a look at anyways. It's a bare dirt field and so we need
to get in there and do the seeding and grooming. The vision is on this
park to, about 20% or thereof is going to be groomed or maintained. Mowed
so there is an active area, a pleasant area to go and visit and picnic and
take your children in and that type of thing. Then as well there will be
the mowed trails through the natural area taking into concern the location
adjacent to wetlands and those types of things so it will be, in the next
coming years we'll have to set aside some additional dollars if it's
available to acquire those other facilities.
Schroers: Ooes staff have any feeling as to whether all of the excess that
there is from the entrance road be used on grading or did we want to get a
portion of the park useable as far as. not an active area but just something
that can be used for a passive use?
Hoffman: The trails. Getting the trail component in, cleared, grubbed out
would be a high priority and if that could be at all fit into Phase 1, that
would be a good component to include in that. Other than that you know the
cost estimates at this time are so vague that I can't forecast what other
things we could go ahead and put in there. But again. as long as the ~.
contractor is there doing the grading right up to that area, until we have
a grading plan and some estimates on how much dirt we're going to have to
actually move, I can't give you an estimate. A dollar figure but as long
as they're there, it's much easier for them to complete that project at
that time. Bringing in a contractor or we can possibly take a look at, if
we can't feasibly get that done on the money we have this year, that next
spring we could do it with our own crew or even later on this fall by
renting equipment and then having the City maintenance personnel do that
grading work themselves.
Koubsky: oid the residents express a similar way that they'd like to see
it moved forward with the extra money?
Hoffman: Obviously they've expressed, they'd like to see it developed and
turn into the park that it's going to be eventually. However the access
road is the first thing we need to do. After that they've expressed
interest in the play area and in the trails so they can have a destination
for a walking area as well.
Lash: I know there was a concern...Lang regarding some kind of a gate
system. Is that something that we'll be able to?
Hoffman: Taking a look at the system, I have talked to another resident
today on the phone on that same issue and the situation being, we have
gates at some other parks within the City. Lake Ann Park for one which is,
it's not closed and opened every day because we do not have a personnel
component on hand that can do that. We do not have our own police force.
You know we contract with the Carver County people who, if you ask them to ~
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
"..... January 22, 1991 - Page 17
do it will do that when they're available. So even though the gate is
there, we do not have the personnel to open it and close it at 10:00 p.m.
and 6:00 a.m. every morning so my recommendation would be to leave the gate
out of the initial phase and if it becomes a situation where we do need to
solve some type of entry problem to the park, to go ahead and add it. A
gate system. Our park maintenance people can build those but then we also
have to wrestle with the situation of who's going to open and close it.
Schroers: Also a gate doesn't do a whole lot of good without a fence and
fencing is very expensive and what gates and fence do is keep the
non-troublesome type of people out but the people that are going to go in
the area to cause a problem really aren't going to be deterred by a gate or
a fence. If they want to get in, they'll get in. Is there any other
comment or questions on the commission before we open it up to the
audience? Okay then, at this time...
i"'"
Tom Schoenecker: My name is Tom Schoenecker and I live at 2820 Sandpiper
Trail which is a block away from Herman Field. I was on this Commission
for about 5 years about 5 years ago when all of this started to take place
and about 4 years ago the land across the street from our house and
adjacent to Herman Field, land that was always owned by Randy Herman was
developed. The people in the neighborhood at that time thought that was
part of the park plan... At the time I was on the Commission and we did
get this commission to ask the City Council to make the developer provide
an easement to that property through the park for our neighborhood. I do
know that that easement was written into the contract for development of
the property. However, I don't see anything in the neighborhood that looks
like an easement. The houses are so close together, I don't know how there
could be an easement for park access through there but I believe it is in
there and I would ask this commission to investigate that and develop that
easement from our neighborhood into that park. The people in the
Minnewashta Manor area would have to go about maybe 5 or 6 blocks to walk
into the park if they had to go around where just an easement through the
new development would just be a matter of walking...
Schroers: Are you asking for a pedestrian easement?
Tom Schoenecker: Just a pedestrian easement, yes.
Lash: Is that off a cul-de-sac?
Tom Schoenecker: It's off a cul-de-sac. The new cul-de-sac going up.
(The quality of the recording was very poor at this point in the meeting
and. was not picking up the discussion very well.)
Schroers: We've gone and looked at that and talked to residents in the
area and their general feeling was something that didn't necessarily have
to be formally developed by people in that area because they just wanted to
access the park...
"...
Tom Schoenecker: The thing that I'm concerned with basically is the
indication of where that easement is. Right now who knows where it is and
we should have some way of indicating to the people in the neighborhood
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
January 22, 1991 - Page 18
...."
that is an easement. That it is an easement and that we do have access
that way.
Pemrick: There wouldn't be any way without...
Hoffman: Correct. In addressing the, not developing it per se but just
allowing people to use that area, the hill there would have to have some
development. If you wanted to make use of that easement and you took a
connection off of one of the trail loops on the west side of the park and
extended that to the base of the hill, you then would have to literally
build steps to bring the back yard of this person and if you've gone that
far, you almost may as well continue that trailway so it is designated.
The easement is there between the two homes which are right at the end of
the cul-de-sac. I believe about 2 years back that a portion of the
commission did go out and visit the Piper Ridge development to take a look
at that area. To speak to the neighbors and obviously the two adjoining
neighbors 'would not like to voice their opinion against that development
...easement. It's a. ..small area inbetween those two homes so it would be
fairly tight through there.
Andrews: Have we had that surveyed...
Hoffman: Yeah. It's platted.
Lash:
.,. .and it would be very close to a home.
Schroers: The houses are close together and if the easement is in the ..,
middle between the two houses, it would affect both of the property
owners...public access to the park there and I think that they would offer
a lot of resistance.
Hoffman: It is one of the questions which is on the survey which the
Friends of Herman Field went ahead and took of the neighborhood and you'll
see both responded in both ways on that. That many of the people would
like to see it and others didn't care either way.
Andrews: I've got a comment her~. We're talking about two property owners
that are...the question is, I think the easement was put there for the use
of a neighborhood, I think that the comment about if it was designated
I think the people, if it's going to be used, would feel comfortable using
it and not be concerned about being challenged by a property owner that
they're not on their property. And also as time goes by and ownership
changes the property, some of these battles on what the easement...or what
used to be an easement becomes a bigger and bigger issue. I think if the
easement is there and it is City property. even if we don't develop it, I
think it should at least be staked so if a person decides to walk down that
hill, they are comfortable knowing that they're not on somebody's private
property and nor would the private property owner feel like they're having
their property trespassed on.
Tom Schoenecker: That would be my concern is that as the neighborhood, or
as a neighbor there, I walk that area quite a bit. I walk around right
now. Well I would like to walk through but I don't know where it is and
I'd be afraid of going on somebody's private property and being kicked off
..."""
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
~ January 22, 1991 - Page 19
so if there was an area that was designated someway of staking or something
just so I could go through.
Lash: If we have, if and when we have...
Tom Schoenecker: Would it be possible just to send a letter and one of
these site plan to the neighbors there and designate where that easement is
so we would know where it was? Would it be possible to get something like
that?
Hoffman: It certainly is but I would be somewhat tentative just inviting
the neighborhood to use an easement because it just is there. Just because
it exists. I would be more comfortable with inviting the neig~borhood to
use the access that park if it was maintained or developed or marked in
some manner. If we want to promote the use of it, then we should go ahead
and take the responsibility for marking it and making it known to not only
the neighborhood but all the public that would use that park as that is a
viable means of gaining access from that cul-de-sac to the park.
Schroers: I think it would be reasonable to include pedestrian access...
development.
,....
Andrews: I think you're missing the point here. We're not talking about
developing a trail. I didn't write your name down but if a citizen would
like to use an easement which already exists, they have a right to do so
I understand it. What we're asking for is just for now is where that
easement is. To say that we don't want somebody to use an easement that's
there, then I guess would imply that the easement should be vacated.
Schroers: No.
Andrews: Development is a separate issue.
Schroers: ...City Engineer just place the stakes for marking purposes.
I know they came through where I live and cut some trees and other things
to mark where some manholes were...and that was on the end of the easement.
Lash: I can't understand why, from looking at it, why anybody would want
to move it. I mean you'd walk to the end of the people's yard and sort of
fall into a bunch of woods. It's a really steep hill from what I saw and I
didn't go through their yard but from looking at the map and stuff before,
you'd have to be a goat to.
Tom Schoenecker: Some of us are.
Andrews: I guess my personal feeling is that the least we should do is put
a metal stake that's visible at each end of the easement line and that can
be adequate. We don't have to talk about developing of an easement nor any
unnecessary connections but I think at least...those neighbors should be
aware of where this easement is located so that there is no conflict or
difficulty between neighbors. And if we don't want the neighboThood to use
the easement, if that's what our...ought not to be used, then I think what
we should do is look at the vacation of this easement and deeding it to the
property owners. I think you've got to go one way or the other and be fair
I"""""
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
January 22, 1991 - Page 20
.....",
to everybody. Not just the people that, who their property is directly
adjacent to the easement.
Hoffman:
...Jim that we battle in a number of situations...
Andrews: I know it's not easy but I guess I look at it, you know if it
were my property and I purchased it and I was adjacent to the easement, I
guess I would say that it's my responsibility as a purchaser to be aware of
what easement's I'm located next to and to come to the Council and say,
it's not fair because there's an easement on my property is not an excuse.
The easement was put there for the greater good and not necessarily for the
convenience of the one person who happens to live next to it. I think we
have to be fair to all concerned. I think w~ should at the very least, put
something to identify where this easement is so that we eliminate the
difficulty. Development could be dealt with at a later time. We don't
have to make it easy for people to use it but those that wish to use it
should be aware of who's property they're on.
Schroers:
...just put in a request to the...to mark that eaesment?
Hoffman: It would be something that I'm not, the City has not done before
but I can certainly investigate that possibility. What type of marker
would be placed there. What type of permanent marker would be placed
there. I do not know whether it'd be the City placing an extended metal
post is running into a liability issue as well but extending and installing
a flush mounted type of marker of some sort is certainly viable.
....."
Schroers:
...find a way to alert the residents where the marker is?
Hoffman: Again, it's an issue where the easements are put there for a
purpose for access to that park but traditionally it's been two different
issues. The easement is there but then the discussion comes with a second
round of discussions come...when it is developed similar to a situation
over in Saddlebrook to Butte Court. That's a situation where you talked
about the adjoining residents out of courtesy but then you also talk to a
neighborhood that because the adjoining residents, because they have a
right as well to use that public easement so it is a, it's a situation
where you don't want to make enemies on anyone side.
Betty Lang: How many residents have you talked to...?
Tom Schoenecker: oh there's probably, I think there's probably about 60 or
70 homes up in that area. In Minnewashta Manor I believe there's about 35
and these are the people that I'm concerned about and were concerned at the
time. I believe as citizens we have a right to know where that easement is
and that's all we're asking for is to know where it is.
Hoffman: But again to express my concern Jim, if you understand I have a
concern that we should be marking this easement and publicizing it if it
does not lead officially as an entrance to the park. Just having it lead
to the border of the park and then you find your way into the park from
there on is in my opinion not the manner in which to approach that.
Lash:
...from a liability?
...".
"""""
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
January 22, 1991 - Page 21
Hoffman: Liability and it's an area of the park which is sensitive. It's
a steep grade. It's very treed in that area. Certainly you know as a
nature walk area, to a person that enjoys that type of walk, he can
traverse that but for the normal person to be aware that that is an access
for us to say that that is an access to the park and then they walk through
that backyard and come to the top of that hill and wonder what is taking
place.
Schroers: I was just going ask if there was a problem entering from the
Forest Avenue, from the dead end down there?
Tom Schoenecker: No, there really isn't a problem entering that way but in
going walking, it's nice if you can go in one area and then walk around and
come out the other way and go back home. Basically you get kind of a
circle route and that's kind of what we're looking for.
Andrews: ...1 guess, I don't think this is a park issue we're talking
about here in the first place. I think this is a city clerk or city office
project here. You're not talking about park land the way I understand it.
It's City land. I would think the information of where the property is is
something. that is public information available at the City office. At the
very least, I mean if we can't, decide what we want tonight, I think at the
very least you should do is request from the City Office for a detailed
plat showing where that easement is. I don't know who would have that, who
~ would designate if we're going to send out notices to the property owners
within the 5 houses...we need to do that but I think the city offices
should be approached to get the information initially.
Hoffman: ...Tom I could certainly send you that but then mailing it out to
the residents for whatever reason would raise some issues which we
currently don't have answers for.
Andrews: I think at least we should send something to the two property
owners who are adjacent to that easement just for their own information
that there was an inquiry about where the easement was located. For your
own information here's a copy of the plat showing where it is. I think at
this point maybe that's all the farther we have to go.
Tom Schoenecker: Thank you very much.
Schroers: Anyone else have comments on Herman Field?
Betty Lang: My name is Betty Lang and I live at 2631 Forest Avenue.
I have one comment and I have one question. First of all about the gate.
I understand your thinking that it's not going to stop anyone on foot but
what I'm concerned about are the cars once that's graded back there and
there's a parking area because just at the dead end we had a lot of beer
parties and teenagers that were congregating and that was the reason I
wanted the gate. Second point it says in the letter that I received is to
complete the access road, Forest Avenue will be extended a short distance
from where it currently stops. Does that mean you're going to blacktop?
And if you are, are we going to be assessed?
"
Hoffman: You will not be assessed. The portion of the extended Forest
Avenue will be blacktopped but it will not be an improved road. It will be
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
January 22, 1991 - Page 22
..."""
an aggregate base with a...blacktop surface but no assessments will be
charged to the adjoining neighbors.
Betty Lang: How about the gravel road to the parking lot area? Now how
about down the road if you decide to blacktop that? Are we going to be
assessed for anything that runs along our property?
Hoffman: No. Not whatsoever. The gravel road which is going in to access
the park and the parking lot is being put in there. Initially it's gravel
for cost saving measures. Two to three years down the line from an
aesthetic standpoint as well as from a maintenance standpoint, when our
public works crews are out doing street patching and that type of thing in
the spring, we'll schedule that in as a work function to have that
blacktopped but none of that work, that would be in the interior of the
park and that would be paid for out of the park development and acquisition
fund.
Betty Lang: So we don't have to worry about that?
Schroers: I think that you're concerned Betty about the teenage parties
that are back there. One reason that they're back there is because it's
not developed and it's not an area that's watched or supervised. The more
that it gets developed, the more often patrol cars come into the area, the
less of that sort of problem is going to exist.
Andrews: I have one more question. Is there a light plan for the parking ~
area there?
Hoffman: No there is not. The extension of utilities which include
electrical is not included.
Lash: It is going to be kind of a... I can see where it could potentially
be a problem and I'd like to make sure that Mrs. Lang feels perfectly free
to call and...we'll know if it's a problem and then We can address it.
Hoffman: Parks in general have that stigma attached to them. They are a
public place where teenagers feel fairly comfortable going to and if they
have access to them at times, they will make use of them and we just have
to take the appropriate measures to try to curb that.
schroers: Is there anyone el$e that we want to hear from on Herman Field?
Hoffman: Nobody here needs to speak. What I'm looking for tonight is
approval to move forward with the project. Taking this to the City Council
for their approval and then go ahead and have the specifications and plan
developed and then move on with the process to have that road construction
process bid and get the construction started. It will probably be in June
of this year.
Lash: I'll move...
Pemrick: I'll second it.
......"
~ Park and Rec Commission Meeting
January 22, 1991 - Page 23
.,-...
Lash moved, Pemrick seconded that the Park and Recreation Commission
recommend that the City Council approve the necessary arrangements for
construction of the access road to Herman Field Park to be constructed in
the spring/summer of 1991_ All voted in favor and the motion carried
unanimously_
DISCUSSION. CITY CENTER PARK MASTER PLAN_
Hoffman: We have one visitor. Kitty Sitter is here. She is the President
of the Chanhassen APT and the School District has some input into this
project as well since the City Center Park, the land comprises both school
and city property. So basically the agreements over the past on the
development of that park have been verbal. The funding sources that are
available from both the City and the School District have jointly funded
projects so we'd like to have the input of both the school officials.
Kathleen Macy may be here tonight as well. She is the current Principal at
Chanhassen Elementary School. As part of the 1991 Capital Improvement
budget we did designate $68,000.00 in improvements for the City Center
Park. Really the only thing earmarked or tagged as part of that $68,000.00
was approximately $40,000.00 for the improvement or replacement and or
replacement of the playground equipment which is on the southwest corner of
the school. The remaining money is designated as general improvements or
reconfiguration of the park items which are of keen interest to the users
of that park in which I've heard expressed over the past 3 years are
improvement of the tennis courts which have deteriorated rapidly and are in
pretty deplorable conditions as well as the upgrade of the hockey rinks
which are currently there and then basically upgrading of the facility in
itself. The splitting up of the remaining $28,000.00 minus the $2,000.00,
the amount we spent to construct this park master plan is what the
commission should make some sort of decision on. We have to move in a
direction on where you would like to see that money invested within the
park itself. As part of the most recent community center proposal, you
know from the site changes or design layouts, we're taking a look at to
increase the useability factor. The useable space which that park has so
that included moving existing ballfields. Realigning lines and that type
of thing but it also involves some grading and filling up on the north end
of the park where Kerber takes that bend right in there in that low area.
Then eventually the possible future acquisition of land adjacent to the
park in the north side so those are all things which the Commission should
think about as we develop ideas for a master park plan which eventually
will be used to proceed with future development within that park.
Schroers: There's somebody outside trying to get in.
Hoffman: I was wondering why you guys got these big smiles on your face.
Lash: I have a question....I assume you have kind of a rough idea of what
that would cost...
Hoffman: I wasn't involved in looking at it for the community center
aspect which appears to be approximately 3 acres. It's in an area where it
~ would be most likely built into single family or multi-family residential.
It's a high dollar piece of land. To take a stab at starting at the low
end at 150.
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
January 22, 1991 - Page 24
...."
Andrews: At least that.
Hoffman: So it's an idea that shouldn't be ruled out. It would definitely
be a plus to City Center Park and to that major campus area of City Hall,
the Fire Department, the School and that open space to have that additional
land. The person who currently owns it has owned it and developed the
multi-family housing there. As part of the dialogue which took place when
the community center was taking a look at that issue, was taking a look at
purchasing that land, he really would like to retain enough area shown on
your map there to build one more unit but then he would be willing to sell
us the other portion. So it's something to target in the master plan
pursuing that. You know we'll just continue to feedback on land values and
what the situation is with that current owner and if at any time it looks
favorable to try to move in there and possibly acquire that piece...we
would certainly bring that information back to you.
Lash:
...I'm not trying to be negative. I think it's a good idea but.
Hoffman: It's just like, it falls into the ranking system. The Commission
never thought they could come up with the money for the pheasant Hills
acquisition but it became such a driving force to buy a piece of land up
there that we kept knocking away at it and eventually a piece was
purchased.
Lash: But we...
...."
Hoffman: If this became a priority and we wanted to budget some money in
1992 for it, we could budget that but at this point I don't see that as a
high priority. It would just be certainly nice.
Andrews: Wish list.
Hoffman: There you go.
Andrews: Would you be willing to quickly go over again the items that
we're looking at for the actual improvement? You talked about hockey rink,
improvement of grade on the northwest corner. Was that part of what we're
looking at right now?
Hoffman: No. That was part of that area down in the corner. The low spot
where the trails connect there to the west of the tennis court. That would
have needed some grading and filling if the community center proposal would
have passed and then it would have changed the entire configuration of this
park. Currently other improvements, the ballfield would include smaller
dollar items such as replacing the backstop. Improvement of the infield.
Those types of things. Another small item which should be included in 1991
is the reshingling of the warming house. Taking a look ~t the initial
estimate, about $20,000.00 to resurface and reinstall the posts on the
tennis courts. Right there those types of projects would eat up that
dollar sum. The play equipment is targeted at $40,000.00. That sounds
like a lot of money for play equipment but you have the experience to know
that it's going to buy a nice structure but by no means is it going to be
overwhelming for the number of kids who will use it. The hockey rinks were
built initially by our maintenance staff and they continue to upgrade them ,.,.
and try to keep them in as useable condition as possible but as things
~, Park and Rec Commission Meeting
January 22, 1991 - Page 25
continue to get older, they need repair and eventually replacement as well.
Schroers: There was some talk about changing the format of the hockey
situation to make it a little bit more conducive to snow removal and
proper maintenance. Would that be included in there?
Hoffman: I believe what drove that discussion was the access problem.
Maintenance really, currently they dump the snow every side which plugs up
any you know pedestrian trails around the outside of the rink where it's
tight so you have to cross rink number one. Go through a game or a
practice or whatever is taking place to get your players over on rink
number two. The general issue there was how can we realign these rinks so
you can access each rink separately. The tough question there becomes one
of that the light poles are in and are permanent and they would have to be
a major redesign and replacement of light poles there in order to realign
the rinks so they would face more down to the warming house. The other
possibility could come up with some design work to have a separate access
altogether for the second rink and that should be taken a look at as part
of the master park plan.
Andrews: We've got $28,000.00 to spend then and about 168 things that we
have to do. $40,000.00 for the playground and $20,000.00 for the tennis
courts?
",.....
Hoffman: Yeah. The tennis court, again it was not targeted specifically
but it's, in my opinion, it is the highest, second highest priority for
this location. The use that they receive and as well as the comments and
the feedback that we receive back from the users would say that that would
be the best investment right at this time.
Lash: ...we also talked about...under the master plan of...where the
ballfields are so we will be looking at that?
Hoffman: Yep. In discussions with Mark over the phone, taking a look at
possibly where the track could be located in reference to those two
ballfields and where we can fit some additional soccer fields in and how
that design layout would work would be incorporated. That stemmed off of
the...major earth moving projects which would take place. I don't think
we're in a situation to take on some large grading operations to improve
City Center Park. We've already put in over a third of our budget in there
this year and it's getting a substantial investment but we don't have the
additional dollars to go ahead and do any grading. But as much redesign
work as we can get for the ballfields at a reasonable cost will be taken
into consideration as well. In a master plan you should identify and bring
back concept plans that potentially this is how you could reconfigure it in
years down the line to get better use out of your land.
Andrews: I guess I'm wondering what it is that you're asking for here.
Perhaps you're asking for specific direction of how to spend $8,000.00 or
just for a go ahead to come back with a plan of how various alternatives
that we could then look at at that time?
J11I'"
Hoffman: Yes. I'm looking for your approval to go ahead and what you feel
are the major, the priorities in your opinion and then we move forward.
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
January 22, 1991 - Page 26
......,,;
Andrews: I was' just trying to figure out exactly what it is we need to do
next here.
Koubsky: I guess I think one of the main priorities is, besides a tennis
court and playground is the hockey rink area there. Chanhassen has really
only two hockey rinks as I know it and for the kids to have to cross one
rink to get to another is real restricting.
Andrews: Disruptive.
Koubsky: Yeah. Especially at game time. I can imagine how the scheduler
feels. I don't know what.the best option is here. If it's a path to go' to
the middle for access points to the rink and then they'd have to figure out
how to remove the snow differently. I haven't spent a lot of time up there
yet. I think it's something I will do but I guess that would be an
interest of mine to do that hockey rink area.
Lash: Did you say Todd how much you think it would cost to reroof the
warming house?
Hoffman: $1,000.00.
Andrews: Now the warming house sits right between the two hockey rinks?
Lash: No. It's over by the City Center field.
..""",I
Hoffman: The dark building there.
Andrews: Okay.
Lash: Well, that would certainly be money well spent to prevent future
problems if we ignore that. How much do you think it will take to do
something? What can be done to the hockey rinks for $5,000.00-$6,000.00-
$7,000.00?
Hoffman: Again we initially looked at the berming which takes place on the
north side of the rink. It prevents a real accessible path alternate. The
people that use the rinks are so intuned to just skating out onto the open
rink and zipping down a little ice ramp there and right across to the
second ice rink or hockey rink that it would be hard to change. To remedy
it, to remedy the problem in it's entirety you should shut off that side
access and then create an access on the north end inbetween the two rinks
where they then could get into that point. You'd also have to take the
maintenance access points over there as well which is not real desireable
because currently it works well for the maintenance folks.
Lash: There's nothing that can be temporary that could be in place when
it's being used but be removed to access it to?
Hoffman: To maintain it?
Schroers: Is that something that staff could look at with maintenance and
see what alternatives there could be?
..""",I
Hoffman: Yeah.
,.... Park and Rec Commission Meeting
January 22, 1991 - Page 27
Schroers: We could research that a little further and see if we could come
up with something that might work at a reasonable dollar amount.
Hoffman: We certainly can. Those doorways or those entryways to the
hockey rinks are, you know the boards are available where they just drop
them in the slot and they can close it off. It's just a time factor that
they're never there so to have maintenance remove them and put them back in
every morning would just be an addition to their time but it solves a major
problem in accessability and interruption of games, then you know there's
those trade-offs which you measure.
Lash: Are there games every day? Every night?
Hoffman: No. Basically, at the current time, we don't have any games
taking place there. It's just practices.
Lash: On Saturday?
Ruegemer: It's roughly probably 2 hours, 4 days a week. 2 hours a night.
Possibly 3 on some nights but it's nothing real major.
Lash: I was just wondering, if it wasn't scheduled, then it wouldn't be
necessary to put the portion back in. Maintenance wouldn't have to do
that.
"......
Hoffman: Yeah, if you recall it was a request from one of the persons in
the Hockey Association that initially you generated that in discussion to
alter or change the layout of the hockey rinks.
Andrews: Is the grade of the land such that an area could be flooded to
the north of the rinks where people could skate around to the other rink?
Hoffman: Not at the time. Berms are there.
Lash: Well, why don't we leave it up to you guys to come...
Andrews: Punt.
Lash: Well, they're the ones who have to do it every day. I certainly
don't know wh~t they have to do to remove the snow... They would be the
best ones to come up with some good alternatives.
Hoffman: Okay.
Schroers: I think that they would appreciate that also. Speaking from a
maintenance point of view, it's kind of nice if somebody will let you come
up with an idea that might work. Give you the freedom to at least express
an opinion. It's kind of nice.
Andrews: I have some more questions on the ballfields. Are there 3 fields
that are shown here, are these heavy use for the leagues that we run all
summer long?
JIll""'"
Hoffman: They're heavy use for the Chanhassen Athletic Association T-ball,
Ragball, Pee Wee leagues from May until July 4th.
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
January 22, 1991 - Page 28
.....".,
Andrews: Are the monies we're looking at here, are these monies that would
be in addition to our regular maintenance fees of keeping the fields, you
know the grass green and in useable shape or are we looking at things that
need to be done to keep these in the inventory?
Hoffman: No.
Lash: Are we looking at losing a season?
Hoffman: No.
Lash: So you're not talking about ripping the whole thing out and
reseeding?
Hoffman: That's correct.
Schroers: Does the lady from the school have anything that they would like
to add? I had difficulty hearing that time.
Kitty Sitter: Do you have a timeframe? Do you know when you might start
this sort of project?
Schroers: I don't actually. I would hope that we would start as soon as
the frost was out in the spring and we could get the equipment in to work.
Hoffman: With the size of the project being that we need to bid, require ...""I
proposals for a $40,000.00 play structure and we need to...what type of
components should go in there and once those types of...is know, then going
out to actual suppliers and... We need to speed that process up and get it
right on line so in the month of June or the month of May is what sits in
your mind all the time...
Kitty Sitter: It just makes it a little easier when you have an idea so we
can keep the kids away from that place...blacktop that area as well so that
would be another site... Remove the one on the parking lot on the north
side...
Lash: Do you have a preference Kathleen?
Kathleen Macy: We know we want some on the south side as well as the north
side. The south side is where our older kids play and there's nothing out
there. We want a basketball hoops, at least a half court. If we could
have one, maybe two where you take on the whole length and then four square
areas because kids use them all the time. During school and it's something
that they can use that's good play for them. I don't know how far over we
go but that would depend... Do I have a preference?..but I don't want a
basketball on the north side because that's where it was before and the
kids weren't the problem. It was the cars and the vehicles that came...
They backed into the hoop and it got bent... We're willing to do almost
anything to...make it better for the kids that are there every day and then
in the summertime use is great too.
Lash: Really what I meant was as far as the actual work as far as
installing the playground equipment and all of that. Would it be...
...",
~ Park and Rec Commission Meeting
January 22, 1991 - Page 29
Kathleen Macy: ...after the kids are out would just make it safer because
you're going to work during the daytime...so we have to put them out to the
other end. It makes it easier for us if you start with the planning and
then the day school is out, start digging up the field and taking out...
That's the easiest but we can work around it Jan. This is such an
advantage to the kids that...
Hoffman: In the current time schedule, I don't foresee that we, it would
be a far shot to be anywhere a month ahead of that schedule so I'd advise
to go ahead and wait until school is out and then start the work.
Lash: I just don't want it to drag out until school starts again.
Hoffman: No.
Kathleen Macy: How do you see the south area construction fitting in to
what you're...
Hoffman: They're two separate projects totally. The stipulation which are
attached to the north playground project is the funding program and the
Development Block Grant money for the 1991 fiscal year which I believe
becomes available in June so we don't even know...funding source until
June. Obviously some of the planning can start prior to that. When we
receive that confirmation that the funding is there, we can go ahead but I
would see that following somewhat behind the other projects that could
start.
,.....
Kathleen Macy said something which wasn't picked up on the tape.
Hoffman: No, I would certainly like to complete both of those prior to the
start of school so we can have some sort of grand opening.
Kathleen Macy: Both playgrounds?
Hoffman: Both playgrounds, correct.
Lash: I had one question...basketball and she asked something about
the...and she was wondering, that was a pretty busy spot during some of the
T-ball and Ragball people parking there and she's wondering where...
Hoffman: I had a meeting with the City Manager today. We spoke about that
and the signs come about part way down, No Parking signs and I'm not
totally familiar with the situation. If it's been no parking always or
just during school. Do you know Kathleen? And the parking lots are full
you know during that time period. It's a two month time period. I'm not
sure if the road, Coulter Drive in front of the City Hall is absolutely
full during that time. The situation being, if your peak periods for
parking, you have overruns but they can't be so substantial that it's such
a headache to find a parking spot and then the rest of the time the parking
is sufficient so we don't want to go ahead and pin point an area to
blacktop inside the park if we don't have to. The most appropriate area
~ would be just inside the back parking lot. To take another swipe at that.
That would take out the one ballfield which is there and we'd have to move
it to some other area which we currently don't have. It's so convenient to
park on Kerber, that's why they do it. I'm not sure if the school parking
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
January 22, 1991 - Page 30
..",
lots are full or filling up during that time.
Lash: The south one does...but why would the no parking signs go up there?
Hoffman: Oh, for the school crossing zone?
Lash: Oh!
Hoffman: To go from the school path across to the apartments and then
eventually to the other units which go over there.
Lash: So is it possible to establish the no parking only during school?
Hoffman: There are strict State guidelines which go with those school
crossings. I'll have to speak with the engineering department on what
those guidelines are.
Schroers: Let's...proposal to go ahead with the tennis court.
Hoffman: Sure. Just need your approval to go ahead and start the
investigation for completing that project.
Schroers: Okay, and do you want this in a motion form?
Hoffman: Uh-huh.
Andrews:
C, D, E?
Do you need this to be just a motion of priority?
Is that what we're looking for here?
You know A, S,
...",
Hoffman: It sure can be, yeah. An overall motion of approval. You can
give me the complete go ahead or you can set some guidelines in there.
Schroers: What are you looking for that you don't have up to this point?
We've got the tennis courts and the hockey rink and shingling the roof for
the skating rink.
Hoffman: That's going to spend the money.
Lash: More than spend the money.
Hoffman: Yep.
Schroers: Okay, is someone interested in entertaining a motion to that
effect?
Andrews: I move that we allocate and prioritize with the tennis courts
being first, the improvement of hockey rink and roofing of the warming
house being second. And that the playground and other equipment being
proceeded with as originally planned before.
Lash: Should we put the shingling?
Andrews: I talked about that.
...""
~ Park and Rec Commission Meeting
January 22, 1991 - Page 31
Lash: Yeah but should that be separate from the hockey? The shingling and
then whatever is left over goes to the hockey?
Andrews: I would consider that a friendly amendment.
Schroers: Okay, is there a second?
Lash: Second.
Andrews moved, Lash seconded to recommend that the following improvements
for the City Center.Park receive priority in the order listed: preparation
of master park plan, installation of play equipment, repair of tennis
courts, shingling of warming house and work on the hockey rinks. All voted
in favor and the motion carried unanimously_
Lash: When do you feel that you'll be coming back?
Hoffman: Next meeting.
Andrews: Todd I wanted to mention, I mentioned to Wendy that last year we
had quite a delay between the time of ordering equipment to receiving it.
I hope we can do better this year. We ordered it, I think it was in March
and didn't get it until mid-summer and hopefully we won't have that...
,....
Lash: That is the standard delivery time though, 6 to 8 weeks.
Hoffman: It depends on when your order goes
March, April gets to be their busiest time.
around is standard on playground equipment.
pushed forward.
in. Obviously February,
About a month and a half turn
So we do need to get that
SOUTH LOTUS LAKE BOAT ACCESS - SITE AND DRAINAGE STUDY_
Hoffman: Along with the report, you did have the attached study itself
that was prepared by Van Doren-Hazard-Stallings. This study was initiated
originally sometime last spring by the engineering department dealing with
the drainage issues that were occurring down at South Lotus Lake Park. How
to correct those problems. The park never initially developed into the
facility that it should be. The grass never grew properly. The storm of
'87 or '88, whatever it was, came in and wiped out the retaining structure
at the bottom of the park itself there and then the drought years never let
the vegetation establish so the engineering department took a look at this.
Started working with Scott Harri from Van Doren-Hazard-Stallings in getting
a plan initiated. At that time it was anticipated that the funding
sources, the outside funding sources available there to do the soil
correction, service grant and then the environmental trust fund would be
sufficient dollars to complete this project. But taking a look at the
extent of the measures which were necessary to correct the problems which
were taking place there with the additional runoff coming from the adjacent
developments and those types of things, and the drainage structure, the
flow rate not being correct, the dollar amount started to build and as the
~ study indicated, their total was $40,587.00 is projected to correct the
problems which currently exist and then to get that park looking into the
state that we all wish it would be. As stated, this park was not addressed
as part of the 1991 budgeting. We did not talk about an additional
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
January 22, 1991 - Page 32
...."
$20,000.00 being spent at South Lotus Lake Park for this project. I was
aware of the project prior to the budget discussions but again at that time
the project was fully in the hands of the engineering department and I was
not kept abreast of the funding situation with the transfer of my position
and then as well the leaving of Gary Warren. Scott then called me one day
and said, you know we need to move forward and talk about how this project
is going to progress. We met with the City Manager and discussed the
funding options so it is my recommendation that we go ahead and approve the
alteration of our 1991 budget to include a maximum $20,000.00 for this
project. The initial budget figure of $40,587.00 only necessitates that we
spend $11,409.00 initially but would be such a project if there's any add
on's or additions as we get into the project, it could be necessary to
spend additional dollars so we just need to have those available for that
type of project. Scott is here and can address any specific questions you
have on the study itself or how it has progressed over the past 6 or 7
months.
Schroers: Well, it just so happens that I recently attended a Clean Water
seminar and there was a ponding section and it was maintained that most of
the ponding that goes on in municipalities, it's basically just a hole dug
out for water retention. It's the feeling of the people who were putting
on the seminar that the configuration of the pondings were changed somewhat
to represent more of a funnel shape, the actual hole for the water. If it
was deeper in the center but then coming up and expanding out a little bit
more and be more gradual so as to promote more water vegetation. Plant
life which would help to purify the water and also it tends to make the ~
area more aesthetic and develop a small area for wildlife around the
ponding and it's also kind of a safety factor in that cattails on marshy
areas are kind of a deterrent for children and also that they shallowness
around the edges which promotes the plant life and the growth is also safer
from the aspect of a kid falling in to a deeper, steeper area that he
wouldn't be able to climb out of. Are any of those considerations in your
current plan to redo it?
Scott Harri: I guess I can concur whole heartedly I guess with your
perception and the information you received regarding what might be the
best way to design these types of storage facilities that both, I guess
clarify the water to a certain degree and also provide for a buffering of
the rate of flow and so we don't impact downstream properties. Most of the
time in urban settings, just the physical constraints of the property and
the space involved, you know people design these ponds with I guess the
maximum...you can put on things just due to the constraints of land and the
developable property. In regards to specifically your question, the lower
pond provides I guess for the best opportunity to achieve the cattail
growth. The slower and flatter sloping areas and what exists right now as
part of our proposal is the north half of the pond from where the inlet
comes in from the upper pond and the storm sewer system toward the lake, we
propose on providing a boulder type wall along there to improve the
aesthetics and to reduce the amount of maintenance required of weed cutting
and things. And as far as the bottom, we're not really changing any of the
flatter areas. The area to the south or toward the hill, that area right
now has a lot of cattails growing in it. We propose really not on dredging
or taking any of that sediment material that's built up there. It's got
some good nutrient and it does remove effectively.a certain portion of the ,."."
nutrient loading that does come down with your smaller rainstorm washings
~ ParK and Rec Commission Meeting
January 22, 1991 - Page 33
so it is kind of providing for both but it doesn't provide it entirely
around the perimeter of the pond itself. So we're going to get some water
quality improvement and they perhaps pointed out at the seminar that the
most harmful storm water event is when you have the light drizzle. The
first little flushes of stuff that cleans the street and gets in the storm
sewer. That's where the most heavy nutrient from fertilizers and other
things, road salts and stuff get in there. It's not your real gully
washers that tend to cause water quality problems. Okay. Because even the
smallest rainstorm collects the sediment and brings it down to your pond,
and those happen quite frequently so it's the frequency of these events and
having these shallower or flatter slopes makes a lot of sense. And this
information is evolving just every year. There's more studies done on
urban ponds. Should they be deeper? Wider? How much time you want the
water to sit in there so you can settle out the sediments so it's something
that's not a science. It's kind of imperically developed over time but I
would agree wholeheartedly and I guess half of the pond is going to serve
the purposes that at least we're finding out in the seminar you went to.
~
Andrews: I just had a general comment about the ramp. I use it a lot
myself. I'm a sailor and I go over there probably average almost once a
weeK and have a good idea of the kind of traffic you get. In the diagram,
in the parking area near where it says Area #4, that's the area where
people when they come out off the ramp with their boat, they usually tend
to pull off to the side, tie their boats down, put covers down and so
forth. I think you need to expand an area and also curb it to keep people
off the grass there. That particular grassy area gets completed destroyed
and I think you have to make sure that people know first of all where they
are limited to with their vehicles and secondly, to make sure they are
provided enough space so that one person can pull off and secure his boat
to take up the road while another person would tend to back in there so
maybe you've already allowed some additional room in there from previous
but it is tight.
Scott Harri: I'll just put a little thing on the overhead here. I think
you bring up a very good point. Our specific proposal would be in this,
we're talking about this queuing area where people tend to tie up once they
pullout and right now people are driving on top of this grass island area
and it's becoming pretty thread bare if you will from lack of any better
term. Not a lot of vegetation there and what we're proposing is to curb
this area in front of this island and put a berm in here. A planting berm
along with putting some of the salvaged rip rap from this berm area down in
this island area here.
Andrews: There are actually people going like this, pulling off to the
right. , What people tend to normally do is pull off over here.
Scott Harri: Right here?
Andrews: Yep. Going off in the grass there and it doesn't survive very
well.
~ Sch,oers: Why are they doing that Jim? Just so other people can get
around them?
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
January 22, 1991 - Page 34
..."",
Andrews: Yeah. I think a person's natural instinct is to pull to the
right to get out of the way and let somebody else pull in.
Schroers:- Versus going up the hill and putting their stuff together up on
top?
Andrews: Well some boats, you know outboard motor boats or inboard/outdoor
boats or heavier sailboats, it's dangerous to even take them up that little
hill until they're secure on the trailor. You can lose a boat off of a
trailer even up a trip that small so, and most people tend to probably do
90% of their tie down right there on the ramp and they do tend to pull off
to the right and I think we have to provide either enough room for them to
do it adequately or to make sure they know they shouldn't do it there and
provide another space for them to do so.
Scott Harri: There's about room for 2 cars and trailers to pull off on the
right hand side. About. You know you get somebody real long that doesn't
pull up far enough, then it creates some problems but in general terms
there's almost space for 2 cars to tie down which is just enough for that
one person's tie down...somebody else is pulling out. And I've been there
when it's been real busy and it's a zoo down there. You know people are
trying to launch while people are coming out at the same time. But you're
right.
Schroers: Is there a boat launch that isn't a zoo when it's busy?
..",."
Koubsky: What's the south area on Number 4 used for? Is that just green?
Scott Harri: Yeah. Right now it was intended as a secondary collection
for storm water runoff and it was hoped at one time to provide for some
additional ponding and storage in that area and it really didn't work out
feasible from how fast the water kind of comes down that hill. It's more
of a nuisance and a maintenance hassle down there. Maintenance, when we
met with them in conjunction with developing our recommendations, was in
favor of paving that area down there. Just blacktopping it right across
and we felt that maybe a middle ground of using the salvaged rip rap from
the berm...
(There was a tape change at this point in the 'discussion.)
Lash: So we wouldn't have any recourse back to the developer who's
essentially caused a fair share of the problems isn't it?
Scott Harri: Well yeah. I think it might be that you can only look
forward but I think it would behoove us to look at the development contract
that came about in it's final form to see if there was some provision in
there for some cost sharings or for some rehabitation. The fact that
there's problems, the biggest challenge was...by the fact that just as a
natural course of the design and development of that upper pond where the
parking lot was, that we were able to store most all of the additional
runoff that came through the Bloomberg development by just the physical
size of that existing pond and putting in a smaller say outlet pipe from
that pond. So the impact to the City was in the destruction caused during
some of these heavier rain storms in '87 and '88, '89, '90 type of thing ~
and the erosion and that kind of stuff. Now with this improvement, there's
~ Park and Rec Commission Meeting
January 22, 1991 - Page 35
a minimum cost to go ahead and make these improvements and their impact now
is being mitigated. So on the one hand they added a lot to the...
Lash: But if they had to pay the $20,000.00 instead of us, that would be
even better?
Scott Harri: That would be better, yes. Exactly.
Schroers: It would be quite difficult to put language into a contract like
that and get a reasonable contractor to bid on it if he had to assume the
cost of something that he couldn't control like a major rain storm causing
the erosion. I mean if you're going to throw that back on the contractor,
you probably wouldn't get people submitting bids on something like that.
Hoffman: The arrangement to initially acquire the land for South Lotus
Lake Park did include a swap with that developer. Swapping the piece from
north of North Lotus Lake Park, which we owned, for the piece for the boat
access as well so there was some cooperation on the part of the developer
to meet the City's needs and request so there's that aspect to look at as
well.
~
Lash: The other thing I'd be interested in is, you have an estimated time
line that begins saying if everything went just great and I guess I'd be
somewhat interested in us taking the direction of trying to set some kind
of realistic time lines of completion because I tend to get frustrated
when I see projects dragging on. I now some things are out of people's
control. If it doesn't rain and seed doesn't take and all that kind of
stuff but I had some frustration with the completion at Lake Ann. It
seemed like it took a long time and there were a lot of delays.
Hoffman: You're speaking specifically on the contract for the construction
job itself, the time line? Okay.
Lash: Just so we have a little more accountability. We know there is an
end and just to kind of keep everybody on track. And then I looked at the
landscaping plan and I think it looks fine but I'm not a landscaper and I
guess I'm a little gun shy about putting in lots of trees and shurbs so I
just want to make sure it's not over kill and done tastefully.
Andrews: As far as the landscaping goes, right down on the lake frontage
near the boat ramp we've put a couple of picnic tables down and when people
are pulling their boats up on the sand. You know when they're not taking
them out of the water but when they're coming in for a break or whatever,
there's not enough room down there for that really. What I use is a
sailboard down there and there's only room for like two guys to pull a
sailboard up on the sand and then there's the bush and the trees are right
there. I guess I'd say that maybe we ought to look at less landscaping
right on the water rather than more. Especially toward, to the northwest
side of the ramp there. It's heavily brushed and not very useable and
that's where the picnic table was at least.
~
Hoffman: Scott's comment is that the area to the west has been kind of
extended over time. Brushed it out a little bit so we can move the dock
down and gain a little bit more space over time but keeping the shurbs out
of that area and not planting a tree right onto that waterfront area is
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
January 22, 1991 - Page 36
....."
. very adviseable. It's just such a tight location and there's a lot of
activity there.
Schroers: In terms of landscaping and shurbs and planting and islands and
parking lots, isn't some of that even Code? I know that in the City of
Plymouth, if you're going to build a parking lot, you have to have so much
islands per so many square foot of parking and there has to be some kind of
planting in it.
.
Scott Harri: The size of the islands and percentage of green space within
the parking area is, at the time the upper parking lot was developed met
the City ordinance and was only through the budgetary constraints that a
full landscaping package that you're seeing in your packet right now was
originally proposed but was cut back to a minimum to satisfy the bare
minimums at the time the project was initially constructed. What this
proposal does is it restores back to what this commission originally
approved back in 1985.
Schroers: Is there anything in here that anyone sees that they're not
happy with?
Andrews: One more thing. I know it's getting late tonight but on the
upper parking lot it shows the Norway Maples and the two islands in the
parking area there. I would suggest those be removed. There's so much
pressure up there for trailer parking space now, I guess if those were over
hanging and created any impediment to parking, you're just reducing ...."
available space to park and it typically is full by noon on Saturday as it
is. So if a person were to be concerned about a tree over hanging even 2
or 3 feet, that would probably eliminate one spot.
~ Scott Harri:
Sap and all that stuff.
Andrews: Yeah, sap too on cars or boats.
'.~uLL IIaryic A quick landscaping observation. On the lower bottom you've
got 6 Seedless Green Ash that evidentally the City has in their nursery. I
don't know if the City has any pine trees. I was just wondering. There's
two houses up on top to the south there that have to look down on this and
I notice they have decks and what not. Is there one reason other than the
cost that pine trees weren't considered because eventually that would block
this whole boat access off from their view off their decks. I don't know
if they ever had any input on the aesthetics of this park or not.
Hoffman: Sure. Yeah they have in the past. Those were put in there as a
cost saving measure. They are available. The pine trees which we have in
our nursery are about this tall and so that's the reasoning for it. If we
would plop it a 4 or 6 foot spruce tree, we'd be looking at additional
couple thousand dollars at least in there.
Schroers: There's been a lot of concerns and a lot of questions and I
think that that's really good but it also sounds like most of them have
been answered sufficiently and it appears to me that a good amount of
effort and good planning has gone into this and I don't see a reason not to
approve this. Is anyone willing to make a motion? ..,.
~
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
January 22, 1991 - Page 37
Lash: Do we want to, I'm assuming that some of Jim's concerns were put
down and they'll be added?
Hoffman: Yep. Added or subtracted from the final plan.
Andrews: I would imagine that if that steep slope on the upper lot had to
be changed, that would be extremely expensive. If that were to be thought
necessary, I guess I would like to see this come back to us. Other than
that I think most of the other items are fairly minor in nature.
Hoffman: If we can take a look at that and if that could be incorporated
with part of the 1 to 2 year grading project on the lower level which is
going to be to decrease that slope, if this potential problem could be
solved in that same vein.
Andrews: Maybe it needs nothing at all. I'm not an expert but if it would
need to be changed, then it would be probably add a considerable amount to
this project. I would be willing to move that we amend our budget for the
project as it's suggested with the minor modifications but I guess I would
feel that if the additional cost of a retaining wall system is needed on
the upper parking lot, I think I would prefer to have that come back for
further budgetary consideration.
Lash: That would almost have to wouldn't it? It'd be a whole different.
,....
Hoffman: Project.
Schroers: Okay Jim, is that your motion then?
Andrews: Yes.
Schroers: Okay. Can I ask for a second on that?
Pemrick: I'll second it.
Andrews moved, Pemrick seconded to recommend approval of the South Lotus
Lake Boat Access Site and Drainage study with the noted changes and to
amend the 1991 Capital Improvement Program to include expenditures up to
$20,000.00 as the Park and Recreation Department's share of the project.
All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously.
LAKE ANN PARK COMMUNITY PARK SHELTER.
,....
Hoffman: Again another Capital Improvement item which has been floating
around for a number of years and has been discussed and plans have been
taken a look at and those types of things. It is a project which was
discussed as part of the CIP. City Council approved it and now we must
move forward with the plans and the design work which needs to be completed
prior to the construction sometime in the summer of 1991. The attachments
you have available to you are the initial sketch plans which were done as
part of discussion approximately 3 years ago. 2 years ago. 2 to 3 years
ago and then as well a site location map which showed a proposed picnic
shelter location inbetween the lower parking lot to turn around and then
down to the beach area. Minutes from the March 27, 1990 Park and
Recreation Commission meeting are also attached. That is the last time the
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
January 22, 1991 - Page 38
...",
Commission addressed this issue with some concerns over the rental
operations and storage and what specific facilities would be included as
part of this project were discussed. Those types of discussions should
continue tonight. What I'm looking for is some specific recommendations on
what type of facilities, what the exact make-up of the picnic shelter
should include. The running water, restrooms, bathrooms, concession area.
Those types of things. Then we'll take that information back and Mark or
Van Doren-Hazard will bring back an updated version of this plan and then
we'll go through that and take a look and see if that meets the needs and
the wants of the commission and then go further ahead with the approval at
the Council level and then on to the construction process.
Andrews: I think what you're asking for is, there's about half a night's
worth of work here.
Schroers: You know a lot of this we have addressed before. Jim, you were
here for one meeting I recall. I remember the discussion about the boat
rental and so forth. Wendy, were you?
Pemr ick: Yes.
Lash: I was not here that night.
Schroers: I think that we have laid a lot of the ground work for this and
I don't know how much we need to change it. You just want to get more
specific Todd? ~
Hoffman: Basically we do have some, as these projects tend to carryon, I
just want to reinstill in my confidence of what it is exactly we want. If
you haven't changed your mind. That type of thing. Just to freshen up
everybody's opinion and attitude on the project so when we go forth with it
we have accurate, up to date information. So yes, tonight was a lengthy
agenda. This is an item which is, it's a major capital improvement and we
certainly want to do it, addressing all our concerns but'we've gone over it
in the past. We've talked about the lifeguard station. The rental
equipment. The potential for storage. But then no, we can't have storage
into this building because of the cost factor. We could store the rental
boats up at the maintenance building. Obviously we want it to be
aesthetically pleasing. What type of mAterials potentially do you want to
take a look at? If we run into cost restrictions, should we take out the
fireplace or do you think that's a real major item and those types of
concerns.
Schroers: Instead of jumping back and forth and going allover the place,
why don't we start with like the upper floor of the building and do this in
some organized form so we can get through it and hit all the areas and do
it in a reasonably efficient manner so we're not here for the rest of the
evening but we still get our bases covered.
Lash: As far as the fireplace goes, which would be on the upper floor.
thought we had talked about an outdoor fireplace and we had already
earmarked funding from the Lion's or someone for that didn't we?
I
Hoffman: I'd have to review discussion previous to this on the picnic
shelter but I recall that, yes.
....",
~ Park and Rec Commission Meeting
January 22, 1991 - Page 39
Lash: I believe there was $20,000.00 coming from the Lion's? Well we
decided to put a plaque on it and everything. Is it bringing back
memories? I do remember that so I wouldn't feel comfortable unless you're
talking about a fireplace inside and outside. It was a decision to use
that money for.
Hoffman: From the Chaska Lion's gambling fund. Okay.
Lash: It was on a letter saying I think we were going to do that so I
wouldn't feel real comfortable just all of a sudden.
Hoffman: Changing it?
Lash: Yes. Scrapping that whole idea.
Hoffman: I'll go ahead and review that. Take a look back in the Minutes
to find out exactly what that all entailed.
"'"
Lash: Well from reading the discussion last year, it sounds like it was
pretty thoroughly covered and I wasn't here but I guess I would say the
idea was to make this somewhat simple originally and with only $110,000.00
it's not going to end up being very fancy. I can't imagine that it would
be for that amount of money so if we have a concrete floor that can be
hosed off by the maintenance guys when it needs it and if we can afford to
screen it in. I don't even know if we can afford to do that but if it were
built in such a fashion that we could eventually screen it in or eventually
glass it in if we ever wanted to do that, I guess that would be something
to look at. And as far as construction, I think we've tried to stick with
a real natural looking things in that park. A lot of the playground
equipment has been timber style things and something that we would want to
stick with that...
Andrews: I see here the necessity to drill a well. Does that imply if we
don't do a well we have no water at the site?
Hoffman: Correct.
Andrews: Okay. I don't see how we could have any concession area without
water.
Schroers: You're not going to have a very well maintained facility without
water either because in this type of a thing, it's an open atmosphere and
everything gets spilled on the floor. Beans, watermelon, whatever and if
you don't have some water to clean it up, it gets looking pretty bad in a
short time.
Lash: What about the idea Larry in your opinion, you work with this stuff
all the time but could we put some type of just a floor drain system in it
so you could hose it and it would go down that instead of running off all
over or what would be the best?
~. Schroers: I think that's certainly feasible. It's just depends on how
sophisticated we're going to get with the plumbing in the building. If
we're going to have shower rooms and all that sort of stuff, then a floor
drain I think would be fine. Otherwise you'd have just a border and just.
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
January 22, 1991 - Page 40
--'
Lash: Like a gutter?
Schroers: Like a gutter and just flush it right out or into a corner and
clean it up and put it in a can with a liner.
Andrews: I have another question that pertains directly to this. There is
no available sewer hook-up on this property?
Hoffman: No.
Lash: So we can't have toilets?
Andrews: We can toilets but what I'm driving at here is drainfield
capacity. If you're going to have drains that you're going to hose into
plus showers plus bathrooms and so forth, we're looking at a lot of
drainfield.
Lash: There wasn't ever showers was there?
Hoffman: No.
Andrews: Okay. No showers. Pardon me. But I think that would almost
eliminate the ability to have a floor drain as a method of cleaning. That
would generate a tremendous amount of water volume for the drainfield to
handle.
....",
Hoffman: That's correct. The drainfield or the treatment of that type of
system, the sewage system here is still being investigated. The location
is low enough and adjacent to the lake that a drainfield cannot be located
in the area between the shelter and the lake. It just won't meet setbacks.
If a drainfield concept was used, we would have to install a pumping system
to pump that back up the hill and then back down into the drainfield. The
other situation being that there are ways to have the water effluent run
off the top and then be piped into an existing sewage system around the
lake at the Greenwood Shores where it can connect up into that area so you
still have a septic system type of system which is pumped periodically but
the water effluent runs off the top and heads out so there's a variety.
Schroers: It goes into like a catch basin or something and then runs into
the existing system?
Hoffman: Depending on what grades you have and what elevations your
existing systems are at, if you can have it run. Otherwise you need to
install a pump system but the pipe for the water is something of this
nature so it's smaller so the installation could be feasible that way.
Then you would not have to pump the sewage system as frequently. Otherwise
you'd just install -a very large tank which fills up with both solid and
liquid waste and then you pump it periodically just as an enclosed system.
Andrews: Sounds like we're spending money quickly when we talk about
systems like that.
Lash: Just see if I understood this. You say one of the options would be
running pipe all the way over to the other side of the lake and hook up to ....",
the sewer?
.JIII"'"
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
January 22, 1991 - Page 41
Hoffman: The closest sewer line and what that would entail, you know not
the solid waste but just the liquid that runs off the top of a septic
system. You know everything sinks to the bottom and the effluent runs to
the top and then to pump that portion of it over to the closest existing
septic system or sewer.
Lash: That would have to be really expensive wouldn't it?
Hoffman: You know the size of the pipe just to drain off the water is not
a real huge, it's a smaller pipe so the dredging in of that is not a huge
project.
Schroers: Well I think we're getting a little out of our area here anyway.
I think this is the sort of thing that the engineers are going to have to
decide what is going to be the best way to handle this. But basically how
many people are we trying to accommodate here Todd? Have we given any
thought to that?
Hoffman: At the last meeting I believe we spoke of, threw out figures of
40 to 60 in the upper picnic area.
Lash: Were you talking about electricity up there?
J1I'"
Hoffman: Correct.
Lash: In the discussion before there was a point I believe where Larry or
maybe Lori, I can't remember. Somebody had said that you are the one who
formally dealt with the request for different facilities and asked if you
wanted to address it now or later and you said later. This is it. What
are the kinds of things that are requested the most? That's what we need
to know.
Hoffman: We talked about the group picnics. The number of, we've
designated two areas at Lake Ann. parkview, which is up at the top of the
hill near this location and then also Lakeside which is near the location
down in front of it. They're being used on a weekend to weekend, they're
booked solid for they're for groups up to 250 people so obviously we can
only serve a small group of people so to address it it's going to be a
popular location for group picnics, family gatherings, weddings, that type
of thing and it will be extensively used so we need to try to develop it to
such a degree that it can be feasibily used. You need to have water,
electricity, those type of things. Beyond that you don't have to get
really elaborate with carpet and paneling but you need to have the basic
functions available there and it's going to be booked consistently.
Schroers: So you want to design it with hard use in mind? Do you see the
way the facility down at Lake Susan has been treated and every day I see
the way our facilities are treated and we want to build it to withstand the
most rugged abuse you can imagine. We don't want to put nice tables. We
don't want to put carpeting. We don't want anything that can easily be
destroyed because you can bet that it will be.
JIll"'"
Lash: I guess the most maintenance free as far as, you know if there's
graffitti or if there's a lot of that kind of stuff that goes on.
Something that you'd be able to either' get that off or paint layers.
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
January 22, 1991 - Page 42
-...."tf
Schroers: I think that you're going to find that there's going to b~
larger groups also wanting to rent it out. If we build that for 60, I know
somebody's going to call you and say, well we've got 75. Can't we squeeze
in there? And I don't know what the Codes are and stuff here but I mean we
run into that all the time. I realize that building is bigger to
accommodate larger groups. The more square footage you've got, the more
cost involved and we wouldn't get anywhere for $110,000.00 but anticipating
that this is going to be used extensively would be a conservative
anticipation. These things are really going.
pemrick: Could it be designed to be built on down the road? 5 years from
now add on?
Schroers: The modular system?
Lash: Or at least even in it's location. If that's looked at so it's not.
Pemrick: So it's conducive to it.
Schroers: In Europe they build whole modular parks that they can change
the theme of the park from year to year so they can generate interest in
the same area and people don't get bored with the same amenities in the
same area all the time. But here that's not the trend. When we see that
something, that this facility here is being over used and that there's more
need, we just build another one somewhere else on the site.
-...."tf
Andrews: I'll be brief here because it's getting just so late. I'm just
going to try to hit right down the line like is being requested. I think
we need water. I think we ought to have the effluent should be stored and
piped off in the liquid fashion like Todd's saying. I think it's the
cheapest. We had talked about the need of perhaps a small storage/first
aid closest or room or whatever. I think that should be included. I think
it could be taken off the concession area or something like that but we
wouldn't need much room but it could be done. I see nothing on the plan
for any kind of maintenance or utility storage closet where you could keep
a broom or a squeegee or a hose or whatever you need there. I think that
would be helpful.
Schroers: I think that's a necessity.
Andrews: The other question I would have is in the upper level, I would
think that on rainy days people are going to be very, very tempted to bring
their barbeques or their charcoal cookers, whatever inside trying to cook
and I don't know what we've thought about as far as fire protection. If
we're going to be sprinklered or if we're just going to have signs that say
you'll be imprisoned if we catch you doing it or what but people by nature
will try to do that and I guess I'm concerned that the construction should
be fire resistant on that upper level in particular. Other than that I
just want to go home it's so late.
Lash: Well if there was a fireplace up there, if it was made in the
fashion that it was sort of a grill type so if they wanted to do that, they
could use that and it would be...
""",
~ Park and Rec Commission Meeting
January 22, 1991 - Page 43
Andrews: We talked about materials. Natural looks nice but costs the
most. I know it's basically somewhat not eye appealing but it can be done
with painting and perhaps texturing. Sometimes tip up concrete can be very
cheap. It's very, very resistant to weather, vandalism. That might be a
consideration plus there's local companies that provide it that we could
perhaps get a little more bang for our buck with tip up versus frame and
wood.
Koubsky: Tip up? You mean like pre-cast?
Andrews: Pre-cast tip up concrete, yeah.
Lash: I'd like to see a telephone in there too.
Schroers: There's something else to be considered also.
going to be with the upper level when it's not reserved?
open to the general public? Are you going to let people
out of there all the time?
What's the policy
Is it going to be
just wander in and
Hoffman: It's originally designed for that type of function, yes.
Lash: So how do people know if it is reserved? Will there be signs up?
",......
Hoffman: Yeah, there will have to be some sort of implementation of a
system.
Andrews: See if it's going to be open to the daily use, that just to me
reinforces the idea of fire resistant construction.
Schroers: ...to maintain that every single day. Somebody's going to have
to be there to clean it up if you have it that way. If it can't be locked
and for reservations only, it's going to be a daily maintenance problem.
Andrews: Another thing about tip up concrete would be that it could
support a concrete deck easily versus if you had frame or wood again. The
loads of that, you know the concrete deck on the upper level for
maintenance would be I think much more expensive and difficult to
construct. You could always trim that with some brick veneers or something
to give it more of a natural look but we're only looking at what, a 1,200
square foot building. This isn't that big. I think we had visions I think
here of some sort of monsterous building here. We're talking of something
that's quite small.
Lash: I'd be interested in some drinking fountains in there also as long
as we have water.
Schroers: And the downstairs is never going to be reserved? That's always
the lower level is always just open to the public?
Hoffman: Concession rental. Restrooms. Maintenance. The storage building
will be incorporated in there and then also a lifeguard storage area.
'"
Lash: Would it be able on the upper level, just getting back to the idea
of future possible expansion. Would it be able to be cut into the hill
someway that the lower level would be level with the top of the hill so if
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
January 22, 1991 - Page 44
...".,
we just wanted to extend it out to the top of the hill, we'd just add more
picnic; A roof over a picnic area there, if we could do that?
Hoffman: The currently designed level is a walkout on the upper level and
a walkout on the lower level. Other thoughts being that eventually on the
large picnic area or parkview picnic area, that concrete slab, large picnic
shelter just post and roof construction. Picnic shelter would be
constructed on top of the hill to accommodate groups of 200-300 people.
That type of thing so adding additional facilities to Lake Ann for group
picnics so it will be addressed as well in the future.
Koubsky: Are you going to have toilets in this thing? The space allocated
for the toilets versus changing area. I'm not sure which is more important
but when you have 200-300 people and you've got a beach, these are going to
be the only flush toilets in the park...but all 3 toilets for the women's
bathroom, I don't know if that's.
Hoffman: Just like the Target Center. We'll fit as many in as we can with
the constraints in budget.
Lash: Well you don't really if the changing area, I think that's a really
good point Dave. I looked at that but I didn't bring it up because I
thought most people when they go have already changed before you get there.
Most people I don't think are going to want to change once they're there.
I would rather just see more toilets put in and if you need to change
there, you could always change in one of the toilet stalls. ~
Schroers: That's a good point. We have a very active beach with 4
changing rooms and they are the least used or any of our facilities. You
could probably cut those changing areas in half.
Hoffman: Okay.
Schroers: Or cut it in half and have the storage space in the closets
because that's something that we're in shortage of everywhere and every
building that we have. The stuff that you tend to accumulate, lifeguard
equipment and all this other stuff, you can't have too much storage. It's
hard to sell storage space because everybody says it's not useable. You
can't but it's sure nice to have.
Hoffman: Great. That's a lot of good input. Between myself and Bruce
we'll relay that back and get some of the design changes and an updated
sketch plans back to the commission.
Schroers: Can we move on to item 11 now? Is there anything else you
wanted to cover on this one Todd?
Hoffman: On the community shelter, no. We're relying on, I really wanted
to just get updated because I was relying on some old information so with
this new input we can go ahead and initiate the design stage and then right
, onto construction. Big summer we're going to have here.
Schroers: Sounds good. I bet Jerry's ready to just jump right in.
""""
"...,
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
January 22, 1991 - Page 45
APPROVAL OF THE 1991 FOURTH OF JULY CELEBRATION BAND CONTRACT - HI TOPS.
Ruegemer: You bet I am. Starting to prioritize the events for the 4th of
July. I have been in contact with the booking agent for the Hi Tops and
they have expressed interest in playing again for the annual 4th of July
celebration. I stated in the memo, they are quite a bit cheaper in price
than other bands of that size and popularity. Basically it just stated,
you know the dates. The rain out dates. Compensation. The set. The
length of the set. I'd just like to get your feedback. Is there any
questions regarding?
Andrews: My only comment was, they were great last year and I think we
just approve this and go with it.
Schroers: Everything about it is good Jerry. You've got it.
Andrews: Need a motion for that?
Lash: I move we accept the contract for the Hi Tops for the 4th of July
da nce .
Andrews: I second.
"......
Lash moved, Andrews seconded to approve the performance contract with the
Hi-Tops as written in the amount of $1,400.00 for the 1991 4th of July
Celebration. All voted in favor and the motion carried.
SITE PLAN REVIEW. VALVOLINE INSTANT OIL.
Schroers: Do you want to do wait for Todd or do you want to do this Jerry?
Ruegemer: I think we'll have to wait for Todd on this one.
Hoffman: Very straight forward basic site plan review. It is located,
take a look at the map there. Just to the east of the car wash and up to
the northeast of Brown's Amoco. The new station there. 79th Street is.a
cul-de-sac. A dead end street so the designation of a sidewalk along that
street was not included in this. Thus we can still obtain our trail
dedication fees in lieu of sidewalk construction. As well it's commercial
property. We're not looking at acquiring or taking a piece of this land
for park property but it does lie within the fringe useage district of
South Lotus Lake, City Center Park and Rice Marsh Lake so it is the
recommendation of staff to accept park and trail dedication fees in lieu of
land dedication or trail or sidewalk construction.
Schroers: So moved. Is there a second?
Andrews: Second.
Schroers moved, Andrews seconded to accept trail and park dedication fees
in lieu of land dedication and trail construction for the Valvoline Instant
~ Oil site. All voted in favor and the motion carried.
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
January 22, 1991 - Page 46
'"""'"
COMMISSION PRESENTATIONS:
Lash: I'll be very brief. It's not a presentation. I'd just like to
comment. I said this earlier before most of you were here to Todd and
Jerry but I thought this was the most exciting, positive packet I've seen
in 2 years. I think we're starting on a great foot. A great note. We're
getting a lot of old projects done that have been hanging over our heads. I
like to see that. I really think we're going forward and I feel great
about it and I'm going to just thank Todd and Jerry. I think they're doing
a great job.
Schroers: I will second that.
pemrick: Do you need a motion for that?
ADMINISTRATIVE SECTION:
Schroers: Any concerns or anything from the Administrative Section?
Hoffman: There is one point of interest in the Administrative Section that
needs some input and that is the first cover letter there. The memo from
myself to the commission as it relates to a joint meeting possibly with the
Public Safety Commission. Scott Harr has expressed interest in meeting to
deal with some of these issues. My direct response back to them that a
majority of them did deal with the enforcement side of snowmobiling. Of
those types of things but as well, obviously snowmobiling falls into the ~
realm of recreation so at times they would like your input on what your
feelings are on snowmobiling within the city.
Lash: Do the same regulations, do they apply to 3 and 4 wheelers and
mini-bikes or are those all different?
Hoffman: Separate.
Lash: It's all separate? Because I think that's something that needs to
be addressed too. If there's damage being done to park property by those
types of vehicles and I think there is. If we decide to meet with them,'I
would like that to be addressed.
Schroers: I guess I would be in favor of having a joint meeting and like
Jan says, go ahead with some of these issues that have been haunting us for
a while and just make some progress.
Hoffman: Again, the Jet Ski issue as mentioned there is another one. Most
of these are seasonal in use and this season was good for snowmobiling so
we had some complaints coming in on snowmobiling. Noise levels. Damage to
property. Driving along the roadway and that type of thing. And then all
of a sudden the season's over with so the complaints go away. The problems
go away to the following year so to effectively attack these situations,
you want to address them prior to the season and keep the ongoing work
going and regulations to at least provide the accessibility for this type
of recreation but then as well to guide it's use.
Andrews: I need to ask a question. Didn't the City, well the City has now ~
been putting out sort of an informative news or pamphlet doing with park
,.. Park and Rec Commission Meeting
January 22, 1991 - Page 47
and rec issues as well as many other city issues. How many times a year
are we trying to do that?
Hoffman: Quarterly and just a side note on that. The format currently
existing is almost strictly park and recreation related. In our next issue
we will switch to a city newsletter format where the park and recreation
will be an insert and then the remainder will be general city news.
Andrews: Okay, would it possible to put something in there larger than the
microscopic print that goes in the local paper that would deal with the
ordinances that are on the books regarding snowmobiles in a seasonal
appropriate format? I'm not aware of the rules until I read these and I'm
sure most of our citizens have no idea what the rules are.
Pemrick: And Jet Skis, didn't they just come out with some new guidelines
last year?
Hoffman: Correct.
Lash: Maybe it could even be written somewhat in layman terms.
Andrews: Well you've got to be careful of that but my comment of b~ing a
board sailer on Lotus Lake is it's craziness down there with, sometimes you
feel like you're a target on that lake.
,ifili'.
Koubsky: I think it's important not only reiterating the rules but tell
the public what the problems are because like when I was reading this with
snowmobiles I said, well my first question was, what are the current
problems?
Andrews: Why do we need these rules?
Koubsky: Right.
Lash: People can get defensive about those things too because they moved
here 20 years ago to snowmobile and all of a sudden...cracking down on what
they can do.
Andrews: I think there is a local snowmobile club if I read correctly.
I'm sure they may want to put something in the pamphlet about their
activites and how to become involved too so it doesn't have to be all a
hammer over somebody's head. It can also be a carrot thrown in with it.
Hoffman: We take that, we include that information.
Lash: Will they also be included?
Hoffman: Snowmobile Club? Not in that joint meeting, no. We did meet
with those folks on an informal setting. The memo you see there back to
Dave and Leroy and myself and Steve Walter and Jim Castleberry.
,~. Lash: So you'll be able to relay.
Hoffman: Their feelings.
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
January 22, 1991 - Page 48
-'
Lash: I'd like to just bring up that I'd like"to thank Todd for following
up on this. I don't think this is something he was directed to do but he
just picked up on it from the meeting and followed through on it and I just
I appreciate that happening.
Schroers: Is this something that we're going to need a whole separate
entire meeting that's going to take some time or did you want to include it
like a before a normally scheduled meeting for either the Public Safety or
for us and put a time limit on it so we just hit it and get down to
business or do we want to talk about this all night?
Hoffman: I would foresee that it's probably going to take a couple hours
and it should be scheduled on a separate night.
Andrews: Pick a neutral night.
Schroers: Okay, why don't you proceed on that.
Hoffman: And then get out an agenda or something of that nature to you so
you know what's being discussed so if you have questions on it, you can
contact either myself or Scott.
Andrews: You may have already done this in the past but if you could
provide the Board members with a roster of names, addresses and phone
numbers to contact each other because I know Larry and I are probably going
to occasionally have to get a hold of each other and that would be ~
appreciated.
Schroers: Yep, our rosters are definitely outdated now aren't they?
Hoffman: Yeah. They're just being updated and we'll present them to you.
As well the 1991 budget and any of those types of materials that are of
interest to you once those are published. We'll get them back out to you.
Schroers: Okay, I'm looking for a motion to adjourn.
Lash: Don't we need a motion on a special meeting?
Hoffman: Yeah, you can formalize that in a motion.
Lash: I make a motion that Todd proceed with scheduling a joint meeting
between Park and Rec and 'Public Safety.
Andrews: Second.
Lash moved, Andrews seconded to direct staff to schedule a joint meeting
between Park and Recreation Commission and the Public Safety Commission.
All voted in favor and the motion carried.
Andrews moved, Koubsky seconded to adjourn the meeting. All voted in favor
and the motion carried. The meeting was adjourned at 10=50 p.m..
Submitted by Todd Hoffman
Park and Recreation Coordinator
Prepared by Nann Opheim
...",