PRC 1991 09 24
"....
CHANHASSEN PARK AND RECREATION COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
SEPTEMBER 24, 1991
Chairman Schroers called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m..
MEMBERS PRESENT: Jim Andrews, Wendy Pemrick, Dawne Erhart, Larry Schroers
Dave Koubsky and Jan Lash
MEMBERS ABSENT: Curt Robinson
STAFF PRESENT: Todd Hoffman, Park and Rec Coordinator and Jerry Rugemer,
Recreation Supervisor
APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Lash moved, Erhart seconded to approve the Minutes 0
the Park and Recreation Commission Minutes dated August 27, 1991 as amende,
on page 1 by Jan Lash changing the phrase "who it DQ~ in litigation" to
"who is .1Jg"~.. in litigation". All votedi n favor and the motion carr ied.
HENNEPIN COUNTY REGIONAL RAILROAD AUTHORITY RAIL CORRIDOR. HOPKINS TO
CHANHASSEN. INTERIM USE.
Public Present:
Name
Address
,....
Verne Severson
Diane Gilbertson
Matt Thill
675 Lakota Lane
1190 Bluff Creek Drive
9610 Meadowlark Lane
Hoffman: Tonight to begin my comments I'd like to say that the majority 0
the input, the Commissioners, the Council and then as well staff has
received to date has surrounded the issue of allowing horses or horse use
on the trails. The availability of this proposed to horse owners is a
valid concern. One which will be addressed in an appropriate time in the
planning process for this recreational opportunity. However, prior to tha
issue even being resolved I think we can certainly touch on it this
evening. The larger issue of whether or not we can sufficiently upgrade
and maintain this trail at this time for the use by the general public. I
believe is the larger issue which we'll take a look at this evening. With
that I'd like to distribute the letters which I have received. I know you
may have received copies of the same from people in the city of Chanhassen
expressing their concerns and desires in relation to this trail. Some of
these folks in the audience were here last night at the Council meeting on
unrelated issues so I applaud them for their involvement in this item as
well. The first thing I'd like to do this evening is take a look at a 12
minute video tape of the corridor itself...had dubbed in some narration on
here so you can orientate yourself from the tape and what we're actually
viewing. You can go ahead and turn on your TV's up there.
(At this point in the meeting a video presentation on the railroad corrido
was presented.)
Hoffman: Just to show the distances which we covered there. The origin of
Pioneer Trail is here. The entry point in this location is dOWR ~ther
~ into the city of Eden Prairie on Lake Riley Road. The entrance would be
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
September 24, 1991 - Page 2
--'
you'd need to travel down to TH 101 to the underpass where you can exit at
that point. Continuing on, that segment is 1.4 miles. Continuing around
the next .57 miles between TH 101 and Bluff Creek at grade crossing and
then this section from Bluff Creek to the Chanhassen border and to the 212
underpass which is here. The 212 underpass is just under a mile. When yo
drive from this point to here you need to turn around on the tracks and go
back. There's no exit point at that location. Another thing to think
about is eventually at what point it would be...going ahead with this
project. If you're going to lay this portion of the trail in the aggregat
surface with the paving machine, you need to drive the paving machine
from Bluff Creek the 1.05 miles to this location and then back each truck
individually backing up the full 1 mile distance to get to that point.
Unload one truck which ,would go what, about 40 feet and then drive that
truck back out...so establishing this trail in it's present orientation is
a difficult task.
Schroers: The Lake Riley itself and where that gravel road that comes out
of Eden Prairie Park there is just to the northeast of the bridge on
pioneer Trail?
Hoffman: Just to the northeast, correct. That's where you looked down an
saw the horse off to the left of the house. Again the Park and Recreation
Commission initially reviewed this item on April 23rd. Prior to addressin
the planning and operational procedures which would be necessary to
transform the railroad grade into a useable trail, a correction to the
recommended budget amount would be necessary. As documented in the Minute
of April 23rd, the correct estimate for the purchase of the typical
material which is being used, 3/8 minus limestone aggregate is $15,000.00. ~
In speaking with different suppliers, the 3/4 minus which 100% of the
material falls through a 3/4 inch sieve but 5% to 10% of it is that large.
However this is the material that the City of Shorewood uses and they don'
receive back as good a reviews about the trail surface. However, if you
went with that it would be an approximate cost savings of $3,500.00. This
being the case, it's embarrassing for me to have recommended a budget
figure of $6,000.00 when we went through our budget. That was caused by a
error in calculating the aggregate quantity a second time when I went ahea
and did the budget proposal. However, if it's the wish of the Commission
to go ahead with the project and look for that additional money, that
portion could be very easily made up in the budget allocation prior to
taking the budget to the City Council on October 14th. However again the
larger issues of the budget amendment...prior to amending the proposed
budget it would be my recommendation to take a look at those different
issues which have been brought to your attention this evening. Again in
conducting the site visit of the corridor a number of discoveries were
made, including the presence of dramatic views which some of which you can
see on video but certainly the video does not do justice. . Existing
dangerous conditions, the road overpasses, the lack of an existing
trailhead which can be used for vehicle parking and trail access and then
again just the shear immensity of the project. Further it was clearly
apparent that the alternative to developing an equestrian/snowmobile trail
or one or both of those uses in the ditch line of the railroad right-of-wa
in our section just is not feasible as you saw. Again it is my conclusion
at this time that the City is clearly not in a position simply to surface
the trail and leave it at that. There are to be clearing of immense
~
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
~ September 24, 1991 - Page 3
quantities of brush and small trees prior to work beginning on the trail
surface. And again the safety railings would need to be constructed
absolutely at TH 101. A barricade could be constructed at 212 stopping th
trail before it crosses the trussle because once you cross the trussle you
don't go but to 50 yards and the tracks end. Further the corridor lacks
defined access points other than the at grade crossing at Bluff Creek
Drive. Then there's no publically held land anywhere in the area for us t
develop a trail access where a person from some other portion of the city
could drive to that location. Access the trail. Walk 2 miles out. 2
miles back and then leave the trail again. So as you can see, I have mixe
emotions on the alternatives which are available to us at this time. The
first would be to sufficiently increase the proposed budget. Plan on
completing the improvements in 1992. However if this is not met with favo
from the Commission, the project must be delayed. The opportunity to
construct a trail of this link bisecting probably the most beautiful area
of Chanhassen along the bluffs there is unmatched within the city. Howeve
the expense of construction of the safety railings and the investment of
labor and materials and machinery would be significant. Again additional
costs would be accumulated in trucking the aggregate to the site. They
would bring in about a 20 ton loads in semis to the site. The cost is
shown there I think just over $4,000.00 if we had to send tandem axle dump
trucks to their pit and take 7 tons at a time. We would be doing that for
weeks to get all the material on site so what would be proposed is they
would create a stockpile near the location and then we would take it from
there. Load it into the dump trucks and create the surface. Then again
~ the lack of a trail head raises significant doubts about the accessibility
to the proposed trail to the general public~ It's my recommendation that
if the Park and Recreation Commission wishes to move forward with the plan
to complete this project in 1992, that staff be directed to prepare a
detailed analysis of the financial investments necessary to complete such
and then allow for a budget amendment. It would be a fairly drastic budge
amendment depending on what portions of the improvements we would take a
look at completing. Then further investigate the potential trail head
locations that would potentially be available to us. At one point a perso
did approach me for the sale of the lot just north of the TH 101 underpass
on the west side. That lot could potentially at some point in the future
be acquired. Again the sight lines in that area and the access is not the
most conducive to a trail head location. Then again the grade on this sit
is, that's the reason there's not a house there right now is because the
grading would be extensive.
Schroers: Was there a price attached to that lot?
Hoffman: Not at that time, no.
Schroers: Do you have any input from the cities of either Eden Prairie or
Chaska...developing the trail and what their timeframe would be?
"
Hoffman: The City of Eden Prairie is taking a look at it in the 1992
budget process. I'm not sure if they'll move ahead with that if the City
of Chanhassen does not. The City of Chaska doesn't have any portion of th
right-of-way which has been purchased by the Hennepin County Regional Rail
Authority in the city at this time so they don't have an option.
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
September 24, 1991 - Page 4
...""
Schroers: Do we have any information on whether or not, and if so when,
the trail would extend into the city of Chanhassen? I mean city of Chaska
Hoffman: None whatsoever.
Schroers: I'm a believer that a trail should go somewhere. It should
connect points of interest and if it were to start in Hopkins and develope
all the way out to Chaska, you know that actually is an avenue of
transportation. You can get to different municipalities. I question the
validity of taking that kind of money into a trail that deadends in the
middle of, you know just out by a major highway and not in any city really
at all.
Hoffman: A representative of Chaska was at the meeting with the Regional
Rail Authority and would certainly be interested in pursuing that in the
future. Currently between Eden Prairie and Chaska it's kind of a waiting
game to see who's going to do what and what action is going to be taken.
Schroers: Okay. Well before we get into two lenthy of a discussion here,
why don't we open it up for comments from the visiting residents this
evening and see what kind of information and input we get and we'll talk
about it and what we can accomplish. Is there anyone that would like to
give us some information?
Matt Thill: My name is Matt Thill. I live at 9610 Meadowlark. I'd like
to encourage the Park and Rec Commission to go ahead with this. It looks
like a really neat opportunity that could really be literally a chance of
lifetime. I think your staff brought up some really good concerns that
maybe we didn't see at first like the railings and the grades and that kin
of thing. So what I'd like to encourage us is that we go ahead and look
into how much some of those would actually cost. Which ones would actuall
need to be done. Some of the concerns that are brought up. There are
national groups. One that I know of is called Rails to Trails. Maybe tha
would be a good resource. They may know how to access resources of larger
government bodies. I think a positive of this route would be the safe
alternate for bikes. Bicycles as opposed to some of the highways that are
in South Chanhassen. They're really heavily traveled. High speed and in
general no paved shoulder. I guess just to sum up, I really think it's a
great opportunity and I'd like to at least see what we are up against with
some of the trail heads and those kinds of things. So thank you.
.....t1I
Schroers: Thank you.
Verne Severson: I'm Verne Severson. I live at 675 Lakota Lane. My wife
Susan has been writing some of these letters. She couldn't make it tonigh
so she sent me here. I think, well as Matt said, some of the concerns tha
were brought up were very valid and we'd be concerned about the safety of
the trail as well and access but I really encourage you to still pursue it
aggressively and try to find a way to get this in because that is a very
beautiful area of Chanhassen. We live there and we'd like to share it wit
the rest of the city and other people. Of course we'd like to use the
trail as well. It was also mentioned that the primary interest has been
expressed that it should be used for horses. Well, I think the people tha
I've talked to, my wife included, has said if you can't get it set up for
.J
,...
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
September 24, 1991 - Page 5
horses now, we shouldn't stop anyway. We should go ahead and cover it so
people can walk on it or ride bikes on it. Maybe that isn't as big an
expense as going all out and getting everything ready so we'd like to
encourage you to at least get started on it. And the other point. I gues
all of us on the south end of Chanhassen feel left out because we feel tha
the northern part of Chanhassen gets the nice parks and trails and this
time we think it's our turn so we'd really like to have you aggressively
consider this. Thanks.
Diane Gilbertson: Hi. I'm Diane Gilbertson and I live at 1190 Bluff Cree
Drive. You all have my letters and I guess I would really appreciate the
opportunity or your opportunity to continue looking for a trail system for
multi purposes. I have horses but I also, it is beautiful down there and
think at some point if Eden Prairie and Carver, it would get us to the
river bottoms on the other side of Chanhassen. They're gorgeous and enjoy
them.
Schroers: Thanks very much. We appreciate your input in this and the tim
that you've taken and your concern of the matter. I'd just like to make a
general statement. I think that our mission here is to try to provide
every l-easonable recreational opportunity for the residents of Chanhassen
and our neighbors as well and I think that everyone would be delighted to
see this trail go in and to be used to it's fullest potential. However as
Todd has very thoroughly pointed out, there are a number of issues that ar
going to have to be dealt with and they're not necessarily easy issues.
,... From a monetary point of view, funding and budgeting is really tight. The
State cutbacks have affected the municipal operations as well as the State
in general. Some of the physical barriers as far as having a place where
it's even feasible to try and acquire a good access site are limited along
this trail. So it's going to be kind of a difficult thing to pursue but I
would think that we are certainly in favor of having a trail. It's just
whether or not it's practical and feasible. So with that we can start wit
thoughts and opinions from Commission members and do I have a volunteer fo
who'd like to start.
Andrews: I'll start. I just want to be sure I understand. We're not in
position of use it or lose it as far as this right-of-way opportunity goes
The way I understand it.
Hoffman: That's right. It is, as I stated, a golden opportunity but it
will probably exist for 20-30 years.
Andrews: I feel that we should at least look into the cost of doing the
proper job. I feel it's important before we make a decision pro or con
that we understand what the alternatives are and what the cost to doing a
proper job are. And I think just to be informative and thorough, that
should include a proper horse trail as well. Personally I feel that a
multi use trail serves a broader section of the public but I do also see
that the beauty and the value of the river bottom and that drainage area
and that would make probably one of the most ideal horse riding areas that
could be found in the Twin Cities and perhaps that could be looked upon as
something that would be a unique recreational opportunity that we in
Chanhassen could at least consider. But I'd like to know what it could
,... cost us and then I think we could make a better informed decision. I woul
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
September 24, 1991 - Page 6
......",
agree with the recommendation that you made Todd and that would be that we
do a more thorough job and we review this again.
Schroers: Okay. Wendy, do you have any?
Pemrick: Yeah. As far as the overpass on TH 101 being redone. I assume
they're planning on widening that. Is there any time frame that's been
given as far as when that would be done?
Hoffman: Again, I just caught wind of it today. I tried to reach the
Carver County Engineer and did not get back. They may be looking at
removing that and taking that down to an at grade type of crossing. Why
replace it with a bridge if you're not running a railroad cars over the to
of it anymore. Obviously it's a dangerous one lane intersection which the
certainly have an interest in removing. So I'll find out that information
as well. It certainly would be premature for us to build a railing
structure on top of that if they're going to build that down next summer.
Pemrick: I was just wondering if that would be something that they'd be
responsible for taking care of if and when they did the rebuilding on that
If we had our trail in place. It's probably all out of the same pot.
Hoffman: Yeah. The road project would be a County project. County Road
101 so at that time if we could piggyback along with their project to serv
some of our needs, we certainly would.
Pemrick: Well I would like to see this pursued. Whole heartedly. I thin
it's just a fantastic opportunity for us but I also feel we need to get ~
some more firm costs. I would have to say if there would be a way to do i
where we could have a separate horse trail apart from pedestrian, I would
· be more in favor of that than combining everything on one trail. But I
think we should go ahead and really try to get this in place for the
citizens of Chanhassen.
Schroers: Thanks Wendy. Dawne.
Erhart: I think pretty much everybody has expressed the concerns that I
would have. I would also like some answers to the cost before I could mak
a conscience decision either way on it. I also agree that if at all
feasible, I would like to see the pedestrian and the horse trails separate
if we could. But first of all we've got to find out what the cost is.
Schroers: Okay, thanks. Dave.
Koubsky: Just one comment. If they are planning to widen TH 101 and take
that bridge down, it will probably be a lot easier not to have the
overpass. We might even be able to negotiate some sort of trail access at
that point. That person's property may become more to our liking if there
is grading involved with sloping the trails down. So if Carver or if the
County does have any long term plans or engineering designs, maybe somebod
can look into it Todd. I guess in reading Eden Paririe's letter, it seems
to be a wait and see game. They're waiting to see what we're doing and I
hate to be in a position to table things now and wait and see what Eden
Prairie's doing. Like other members have said, if we can at least look
""""""
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
~ september 24, 1991 - Page 7
into the cost of things and show that we're trying to move forward on this
thing without making a real dollar commitment here before we know what the
end result's going to be. I guess that's all. That would be my
recommendation at this time. Keep going and maybe in that turn Eden
Prairie will and Chaska will jump in too.
Lash: I guess it sounded to me like a big part of the cost overrun or
whatever you want to call it would be from having it continue from Bluff
Creek to 212. Am I understanding that correct?
Hoffman: It's a mile of the 3 miles so about a third of the cost.
Lash: But that's where you'd have the trouble getting the rock in?
Hoffman: Yeah. It would take more time.
Lash: I guess I'd be interested in looking at breaking it down possibly.
I agree with Larry's earlier comment. While it doesn't seem like it makes
a lot of sense to dead end something but if that would be a major stumblin
block for us with that last section I guess I'd be interested in seeing th
cost broken down and doing it in sections and stopping at Bluff Creek and
at a later time finishing the end. Maybe by that time we'd have a better
idea of what Chaska's position on it. I would not be in favor of, I don't
think this year...budget amendment just because I think we work hard on th
budget...over one project. But I too would be very interested in the cost
~ Break downs for this and I also don't feel that...trail would be compatibl
for all the different use ages that we're looking at... plus I'd like to
thank Todd for the video. That was really helpful...
Andrews: I had a question. How wide is that right-of-way?
Hoffman: It varies. Typically from about 60 to 100 feet.
Schroers: From the center of the tracks?
Hoffman: Total width.
Andrews: Would that give us room to put in a road with nose in parking at
certain points there? Could we do that?
Hoffman: Possibly if the Rail Authority would allow us to do that. But
again that would take some, we'd have to find the right spot where the
grade would allow us to do that.
Lash: Larry, the trail that you talked about that goes through Shorewood
and all that. You know I look at this as a similar type project where
people are going to be coming from a long ways away and biking or jogging
and I don't know at this point in time how much importance I place on
actually having a parking access for people to drive to to get out. I 100
at it as more of an Eden Prairie or even farther east as having a place to
go. Of course when it dead ends somewhere, what do they do then?
,...
Schroers: Yeah. Well the existing trail that actually goes from
Minnetonka Mills all the way out to Carver Park is wonderful. The only ba
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
September 24, 1991 - Page 8
-"
sections are the portions through Shorewood where they use the larger 3/4
minus Class V material. That material is poor for a trail surface. It's
not good for bicycling. It's not particularly good for walking or hiking.
I wouldn't imagine it would be very good for horses and then the other
little part through the city of Excelsior is not completed for some reason
but you can use alternative streets. But there are many places along that
route where you can access. You can park in the parking lots of the
Minnetonka City Hall. Carver Park has several parking spots for their bik
trails and you can access this trail system by connecting spurs from Carve
Parks. You can also park in the business district of the City of Victoria
You can park in the business district in the city of Excelsior and there
are many places that you can access this trail from and that's 'important.
access it on my bicycle. I just ride from my house and ride down and ride
on the trail and then go and it's very important. In this particular
location there are no opportunities like that. I mean possibly there woul
be someplace to park in Eden Prairie up around CR 4. That's close to the
Eden Prairie VFW. If they wouldn't mind, you could probably park in the
Eden Prairie VFW and access the trail from there or east of there I would
think there would be opportunities, either streets or parking lots that yo
could possibly park in but when you get west of Eden Prairie, there's
nothing. I mean all there is are the roads that cross TH 101 going down
that hill through those sharp corners is a horribly dangerous place to hav
an access. Even if it's a developed access with adequate parking, there's
traffic coming onto and off of TH 101 in a hazardous, you would have to sa
that that was a hazardous area. So that wouldn't be good. There may be a
better option at Bluff Creek. I don't know. I think the point that Jim
brought up regarding the right-of-way is important. I would see that as
probably the most encouraging possibility of gaining access. If we have t ....,;
go out and purchase a lot, anybody that lives down there and is familiar
and knows that is a very nice area and I would have to guess a fairly
expensive area for purchasing private property. If a lot say went for
$40,000.00, if we had to purchase a $40,000.00 lot for an access point,
that would greatly restrain the success of this project. I think at this
point we really don't have any solution but to accept staff's
recommendation which I think is very fair and appropriate at this time. W
have to do more research into the areas of accessibility and cost analysis
for developing and consider the safety issues as well. There's too much
that we don't know about this. We would be ill advised at this point to
say yes, let's budget money for surface material and go ahead and put down
the surface. We would be premature on doing that. So I too am in favor 0
going along with staff's recommendation and I would like to actively and
enthusiastically proceed with an attempt to get this trail into place but
we do need to get these cost estimates and other items of concern more
narrowed down.
Andrews: I'll give you a motion if you want. I think we're unanimous.
Schroers: We are. Please go ahead.
Andrews: I move we direct staff to provide us with further detail of cost
in developing a multi-use trail as well as an appropriate horse trail and
separate those costs for us to act upon at a later date.
Pemrick: I'll second that.
"""*'
,...
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
September 24, 1991 - Page 9
Schroers: Okay, is there any further discussion? Does anyone feel that
there should be more added to the motion?
Andrews moved, Pemrick seconded that the Park and Recreation Commission
direct staff to prepare a cost analysis of the financial investment
necessary in developing a multi-use trail as well as an appropriate horse
trail along the Hennepin County Regional Railroad Authority Rail Corridor,
and separate those costs, to be reviewed by the Commission at a future
date. All voted in favor and the motion carried.
Schroers: Hopefully we'll be able to find the means to get this trail in
place at some point in the future but I wouldn't expect to see it complete,
within the next year or two. But I'd like to thank everyone for taking th
time to come here tonight and to write the letters. Community support is
ultimately very important in a project like this, especially when it gets
to the City Council level. They want to know that the dollars that we are
spending are going to be appreciated and that people will be using, make
good use of the money and effort that's put into something like this. So
please continue to support this and we'll do everything we can do. Thanks
a lot.
SITE PLAN REVIEW, CHANHASSEN BUSINESS CENTER PUD.
Schroers: The people involved with this development were unable to attend
the meeting tonight. However staff would like to address this issue and
,.... give us some information even though the development people are not
present.
Hoffman: Thank you Chairman Schroers. Again this was the same proposal
which was brought up last month and was pulled at the request of the
applicant. Kent Carlson is the person who contacted RLK, their associates
that are working with them at 5:00 this evening and had somebody stop down
here to let us know that they'd like to have the item pulled from the
agenda. My response was that I believe we should still go ahead and revie
the item. If the Commission feels that it is unfair to render a decision
to the City Council because of their lack of attendance, that is a
perrogative. However we are falling behind in the time line. It went to
City Council this evening for their concept approval so City Council is
backing this concept. It was addressed last evening that the applicant
would be addressing the Park and Recreation Commission the following
evening, which is tonight. They are not doing that and obviously as you
read through here you see that there is some conflicting interest as far a
what the applicant feels they should receive in park dedication credit and
what City ordinance calls out for. So if we can just briefly take a look
at this issue. Get some of your feelings on it. Then I'll leave it up to
the Commission whether or not they would like to give the applicant the
opportunity to come next month to present their position or if they would
like to take a recommendation to the City Council at this time. Two main
issues are the trail. Originally the trail was slated to be a looped
configuration around the entire site. There came a concern from the
applicant with that orientation. Due to the future possibility that therE
may be somebody that wants rail access from the Chicago, Milwaukee, and St
Paul Pacific Railroad. It's a valid concern. It's a small likelihood the
~ that would occur but if it would, having that trail there would certainly
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
September 24, 1991 - Page 10
-'
limit the opportunities and it would cause some safety problems. As an
alternative to that, take a look at aligning the trail in this
configuration. It makes it somewhat smaller but it still does make a heck
of a lot of sense since this connection point right here is the future Lak
Drive East. Excuse me, Lake Drive West which connects with Lake Drive
East. This is the road Redmond was going to develop the property to the
north. It's also the property which skirts the Sunset Ridge Park and will
connect up just over on Powers Blvd. just to the west of Lake Susan Park.
So continuing that trail along the entirety would take a trail from this
cul-de-sac all the way back along the frontage road and through that
development, the future development to the east. Back down past behind th
Legion and back by McDonald's. All the way in front of DataServ and out t
the border of Chanhassen. So it would be a continuation of that trail.
Then as well this connection point here is directly across from Heron Driv
and the Lake Susan Hills West neighborhood. Those folks could access the
trail by crossing Audubon Road. Walk down along this 100 foot buffer zone
which is being incorporated into this development. Due to the single
family residential which would be constructed to the south. Loop around
and come out. Eventually then we would take a look at connecting
pedest)-ian trail in the Bluff Creek corridor into this segment as well. I
don't believe the applicant has a problem with this. Situation came up
with how do we want to fund it. Do we want to allow them to construct it?
Would we like to construct it? Currently the best recommendation coming
from a conference with the City Manager is that the roadway, the sewer, th
water will all be incorporated into a tax increment financing package. Jus
tack on the construction of the trail with that development contract. Hav
a tax increment financing district to pay for the construction of the
trail. Trail fees remain a valid charge and we can still deposit those .....",
into our park acquisition and development fund. The other issue of course
is the issue of park dedication credit. Outlot A as shown here, you have
some to po information and other information on your other maps. The
triangle area is the large ~tand of trees. It is the only stand of trees
that sets itself apart on this site. That is dramatically not even any
developer I don't believe in their right mind would pull that set of trees
to gain an additional lot. The creek also comes through that location.
But this configuration, it would be difficult to develop. What Ryan
Construction and RLK Associates is proposing that the City give them park
dedication credit for providing Outlot A to the City. However, as stated
in my report, City ordinance does not allow for that. Outlot A is clearly
being dedicated to the City as part of the PUD amendment for this
subdivision and if you give that a credit, the benefit of allowing them to
zone PUD for the dedication of Outlot A. You also give them the credit fo
park fees in dedicating Outlot A. We've just shot ourselves in th~ foot
for no reason. I'm not s~re what their argument back to the City is going
to be on that. It's in conversations with Mr. Carlson, he's been very up
front...I'm not sure what their motive is for not being here tonight.
However, I certainly feel that they are sincere in their interest to
develop this site in the best possible manner. Again the main point to th
park dedication which, if you calculated it out is fairly sizeable sum"
$175,000.00. Something of that nature. That's certainly money that you'r
not going to just throw out the window. Is the fact that Chanhassen City
Code states that land conveyed or dedicated to the city or the cash fees i
lieu of the dedication shall be in addition to and not in lieu of open
space requirements for planned unit developments, PUD's. And then as
...."
,.....
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
September 24, 1991 - Page 11
stated in the attachment, what you have from the Planning Commission
meeting, Planned Unit Developments are to encourage the following. Number
1 states it exactly. Preservation of the desireable site characteristics
and open space for protection of the sensitive environmental feastures
including steep slopes, mature trees, creeks, wetlands, lakes and scenic
views. The findings in this proposed development, the applicant intends t
save the existing stand of mature trees along Bluff Creek located in Outlo
A. Comprehensive Plan land use map identifies the park corridor as open
space. In order to meet the PUD, that's what they're dedicating to the
City. Ag~in if we wish to hear the applicant out, we can table this until
October 24th I believe would be our next meeting. It's getting, the
development process is getting along in it's stages. The further we put
this off, again the further it would get behind. It's not that that actio
won't be taken to the Council prior to their final decision but each time
they go to another government body and has to get some support for it, it
bolsters their position. Then if all of a sudden they say, look it. Your
Park and Recreation Commission has created a stumbling block for us here.
They want us to pay full park fees. We don't think that's a valid point.
Everybody else is being real cooperative. They're posing a problem for us
I don't want that to occur either.
Schroers: Okay. Are there any commission members have any particular
points of view regarding this?
Andrews: Yes. I share Todd's concern that I think the developer is tryin
,.... to steamroll this right through us. When they applied for the PUD they ha
full knowledge of City Code and the costs of what this project entailed.
For them to imply that we ought to give them a break because of the PUD I
think is unrealistic. I also look at the funding there and we cannot
afford to pass that up. We must not do that. And the third reason being,
if we let it go this time, every future industrial or commercial PUD, you
can kiss OU1- park fees good-bye. We won't get them anymore and we can't
afford to do that either. Especially with the MUSA line being expanded an
all the future commercial development here. We're going to need that mone
to fund our expansion. So I feel we should at least make a recommendation
to Council on what we've got so far and if it means that we still reserve
future hearing for the developer to come before us but I'm concerned that
if we don't do something, that we could get pushed into a corner. Like
Todd said, it'd be looked upon as the only thing that's holding up the
project and I don't want that to happen.
Schroers: I think we're receiving the signal reasonably loud and clear
here and rather than going through each individual commissioner on this, I
would just ask is there anyone that has a point of view or an interest in
this that hasn't already been discussed?
,....
Koubsky: I guess the only thing I'd like to say is it looks like we'll
probably do a motion tonight. I would like to leave it open that Ryan
Construction or the developers could come back and address us on our motio
and we would be in a position or we would be willing to hear them. I'd
hate to make a decision. Close the door on them where that could be used
against us in the future also. So I'm all in favor of making a motion as
long as we keep the dooT open.
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
September 24, 1991 - Page 12
....."
Schroers: Okay. I think that is reasonable. I also think that there
would be no advantage for us or anyone to hold this up for the next
meeting. To bring this up. I think if there is going to be a contest to
our recommendation, it's going to happen at the Council level anyway. We
may as well let it happen there so I am very much in favor of just going
with staff's recommendation and if they have a problem with it, to take it
up at the Council level.
Erhart: I'll second that.
Andrews: Was that a motion?
Schroers: I guess that was a motion.
Erhart: I'm moving the meeting right along.
Schroers: Good. That's fine. Is there anything else that anyone would
like to add to that?
Andrews: Could you read that motion back or summarize it? I'm not clear
what was said there exactly.
Schroers: Basically what we said was that we are accepting staff's
recommendation for the full park fees and trail fees and that the develope
can come back and address us in the future if he'd like but at this point
we'd just like to pass staff's recommendation on to Council. Is that the
way you have it Todd?
....."
Hoffman: Yes.
Lash: I have one question on the trail... It looks like there's an empty
spot on Audubon. Is there something existing there or is there a reason
for that...?
Hoffman: The trail picks up on the other side of the road in that section
The only reason we brought that small loop... The trail currently exists
on the east side of Audubon Road. From Heron Drive at this point north,
where it crosses the bridge, all the way down to the public works building
and then it goes to the west side. It goes in front of McGlynn's all the
way up to TH 5. This portion was brought up here to match that trail
coming out of here and so those people could drop down and come around. A
this point then, pedestrians would cross Audubon and either continue on
Lake Drive West or go south or north on Audubon.
Lash: I guess I'm looking at it as if I was a noon walker. which I kind 0
am once in a while. That I would rather not want to have to cross the
street. . .
Hoffman: If you were an employee and you wanted to walk the loop, you hav
the opportunity to walk the loop. Good point. If the Commission wishes t
include that then, the recommendation would be recommended to go ahead and
include that segment of the trail as well. Actually include the dedicatio
of that easement and then include the construction of that additional
segment in the TIF package.
..."",
Pa,k and Rec Commission Meeting
~ Septembe, 24, 1991 - Page 13
Sch,oe,s: I think that makes good sense to connect that.
And,ews: We've got a second and motion. Is this a f,iendly amendment
then? Okay.
Sch,oe,s: As fa, as I'm conce,ned it can.
And,ews: Do you know about how many feet we',e talking about the,e Todd,
,oughly?
Hoffman: 400 feet? Is the,e a scale on the,e? It's 300 feet. 250.
And,ews: I'd like to speak ,ega,ding the amendment to the motion. I feel
like we',e holding the develope, to the lette, of the City Code he,e on th
· PUD, ,ightly so. I do look at asking the develope, if they',e going to be
,esponsible fo, that additional 300 feet. I don't think that's quite fai,
We'd have a t,ail di,ectly ac,oss the st,eet that complies and is
available. We',e now imposing additional cost above and beyond what he's
,equi,ed to do. The,e should be compensation fo, that.
Sch,oe,s: Well we could conside, using a po,tion of the t,ail and pa,k
dedication fee that we get f,om this development to complete that section.
Lash: Do you feel Todd that that's asking above and beyond the PUD?
,.... Hoffman: Again, the PUD allows the develope, to tighten up those lots. I
gi ves him a lot of flex ibil i ty. I n return fo, that they need to do a
little bit of additional landscaping. They need to dedicate Outlot A. The
Meed to be ve,y conscience in their storm water management and those types
of things. What we',e asking Ryan Const,uction Company fo, is simply a 20
foot wide easement plus the trail dedication fees. Then the City would go
ahead and const,uct that t,ail segment along with the ,oad p,oject and the
other internal imp,ovements as pa,t of the tax inc,ement financing
imp,ovement package. So to connect that segment the,e I don't believe
would be of any g,eat hinderance to Ryan Construction.
And,ews: It's not going to impact them at all then if it's part of the ta
inc,ement.
Hoffman: Right.
Andrews: In that case.
Schroers: All it is is getting the easement from them and why wouldn't
they?
Hoffman: Potentially if they had. a question. If they thought it would
affect Lot 10 and Lot 11 adve,sely, having the t,ail in f,ont of there but
they've got some fairly substantial setbacks the,e for buildings and I
wouldn't see that that's going to be a p,oblem.
Sch,oers: Maybe it would be an enhancement ,athe, than a dete,rent.
r-
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
September 24, 1991 - Page 14
...",.,
Andrews: I would be in favor of it as long as it doesn't create a cost to
Ryan. If it does, then I think we've got to be equally fair to them as we
expect them to be of us.
Schroers: I think if they feel that that's unfair, then we have left that
door open and they can come back to us.
Andrews: Okay.
Lash: I guess my other point was, I just personally don't like to see dea
ended sidewalks...
Schroers: Okay, so. Do we have this? Do you want to read this back to u
Todd? We already have a motion and we have a second. Is everyone ready t
vote on it? Are we clear on it?
Andrews: I'm sorry. I just want to do this the right way.
Schroers: That's okay.
Then let's just continue.
Schroers moved. Erhart seconded that the Park and Recreation Commission
recommend to accept full park and trail dedication fees for the Chanhassen
Business Park PUD. To require a 20 foot wide trail easement within the 10
foot buffer zone on the south edge of the development; along the north sid
of the proposed cul-de-sac; on the west and north side of Lot 8. and on th
west side of Audubon Road from the cul-de-sac to the 100 foot buffer zone.
The construction of this trail/sidewalk will be included in the Tax
Increment Financing Package. All voted in favor and the motion carried.
Note: The applicant, Ryan Construction Company requested that this item b
pulled from the August 27, 1991 Park and Recreation Commission meeting and
at 7:00 p.m. on the evening of September 24, 1991 Park and Recreation
Commission meeting again asked that it be pulled. The Park and Recreation
Commission chose to act on this item on September 24, 1991 asking that the
applicant be allowed to discuss this item at their October 22, 1991 Park
and Recreation Commission meeting if they so chose.
-"
Hoffman: I will supply the Minutes of this discussion to the developer, t
Mr. Kent Carlson. I'll presume that he had a valid reason for not being
here this evening...come and speak before the Commission. He was at the
Council meeting last night and he didn't say anything at that time so it
must have been something that came up right at the last moment. Just an
interesting note. The weather station, if you noticed on Lot 12 is
basically the anchor tenant, if you will. That's going to be a unique lot
simply because it is a small building with a lot of weather tower. They'l
be releasing, they're moving that from the airport so it will be the site.
Pemrick: Is that going through for sure?
Hoffman: It should be going through, yes. They release the large weather
balloons from that site everyday. So Chanhassen should have accurate
weather forecasts."
......,'
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
September 24, 1991 - Page 15
,...
Lash: Oh, do you have an estimate as to trail fees that we would be
pulling from this?
Hoffman: $833.00 an acre. I haven't calculated that out. That would be
only for the lot acreage. So just strictly for each individual lot as they
would come in for development.
Lash: Dave has here roughly like $60,000.00?
Hoffman: Something like that. And again, we need to look to this type of
development for par k ac:quisi tio,n and development fees. Agai n we need to
remind them that their taxes are not going towards that purpose. We don't
get our piece of the pie at that time. We get it up front and we need to
protect that interest. A similar case scenario is the southern piece just
below this, the Rod Grams property. That's being developed single family.
They've been in with some initial conversation with staff. They too would
like to dedicate that lowland as their park dedication credit. They too
were sent away with the opinion that that lot be accepted and you should
come up with an alternative.
Schroers: Good. Very good. Let's move on to item 4.
1991 REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL.
,....,
Hoffman: As part of a special City Council meeting held a couple of
Mondays ago, September 16th, the City Manager asked that I prepare a
comprehensive status report for all our parks and park improvement
projects. You have a copy of that report for your review. As that report
detailed the activities which resulted from the work of the Commission.
I chose to highlight the commission and it's member's in a follow-up report
to the City Council which is also attached...
Lash moved, Pemrick seconded to approve the submittal of the 1991 Park and
Recreation Commission report to the City Council. All voted in favor and
the motion carried.
(There was a tape change that occurred at this point in the meeting.)
UPDATE PARK AND RECREATION 5-YEAR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM.
Hoffman: ...having the 5 year capital improvement program. We're starting
to establish that. Looking at the development of an additional or a
community survey. Those pull a lot of weight. If you ask the community in
a survey if they're happy with recreational facilities and they say yes,
there's no point looking to a referrendum type issue. If they say
hey, we're crowded. Where I moved from had a lot better opportunities for
my children to participate, then we know we'd better get in gear and get
some activity rolling.
Andrews: Have you been reading the local papers? There's been several
rather interesting letters regarding trails in particular. There was one
that was rather condemning of the City saying that we've been irresponsible
in not providing any trails. I thought it was interesting because it made
"""""" it sound like we've never looked into it. We've never tried. It's our
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
September 24, 1991 - Page 16
.."""
responsibilty to do so and it's frustrating for me to read that knowing how
desparately I think we/all want to do it but knowing that the funding's
just not there. I think if you were to poll people, what were some of the
things you'd want to see. I think trails along the major thoroughfares,
TH 101 and TH 5 and some of the other busy streets are going to be the
highest priority but at the same time those are the most expensive projects
we could get involved in.
Schroers: You're right. I think there's a definition problem of trail.
When we have a trail going in with a development like what is proposed
along, let's see, industrial development and the business climate,
basically what We end up with there looks more like a sidewalk than a trail
and people, don't relate that as being trailways. When they think of a
trail, that's someplace out in the country that gets you from Point A to
Point B so they're not aware of all the little hook-ups that we are able to
make. Sometimes in a referendum or public hearing processes, this
information is brought out and it's a good opportunity to get the community
a little better informed on what is actually happening.
Lash: In the survey process, what I see that happens is that people are
asked would you like to see trails or would you like to see more
neighborhood parks or would you like to see more ballfields at Lake Ann or
whatever. And people would say yes, yes, yes, yes. But then when it comes
down to having to pay for it, well all of a sudden they're not so
interested in having it. So sometimes I think we're...that's'the way that
they're presented with it. Would you like to see that? Would you like to
see it and it would cost you $100.00 a year or you know. You have to have
the money involved for people to make an intelligent decision on those
types of things. If we're going to base our decision on a survey, then
maybe they need to be informed that there's going to be a pricetag involved
with most of those. .
...."
Andrews: Taking that a step further, if we were to ask people to rank
what's most important and then go back with on a second survey and say
okay, knowing that if you had to pay an extra $100.00 you could get this
much. If you had to pay an extra $75.00 you could get this much. If you
had to pay an extra $50.00 you could get this much. How much are you
willing to support? That might be real useful to do that.
Pemrick: If the survey were to be presented, who would be developing the
questions or coming up with it?
Hoffman: It can either be taken on by staff and the Commission or as in
the last case it was contracted out to a student doing $ome work as part of
his, I believe it was graduate studies.
Pemrick: We could have input though as far as the final survey?
Hoffman: Correct. We would take a look at that process. Do we want to do
it in-house or do you want to have a firm come in and give us direction on
that and have them develop it.
Lash: Is there a possibility as we're budgeting, if we were to look at
Bandimere Park, for us to budget x amount of money each year. Not that it
...."
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
~ September 24, 1991 - Page 17
would be spent but that it would just be like we would do our own savings.
Say I wanted to...the whole 5 years and decided I was going to save
$1,000.00 a year. Can we do something like that with our budget? Or do we
actually have to use the money?
Hoffman: No. We can set it aside in the budget reserves.
Schroers: Correct me if I'm wrong but in regards to this 5 year capital
improvement program, I see this as a guide or kind of a wish list as you
will. This is not something that we are bound to. This is just a way to
organize what we would like to accomplish within the next 5 years but we
certainly are not bound to completing it because things are going to come
up. Things are going to change and so we can think of this as a guide or
work aid but I don't think that we have to consider anything that we do as
etched in stone.
Andrews: I want some realism of funding. I think Jan's point about like a
sinking fund for Bandimere. 5 years from now if Chanhassen continues to
develop the way it is now, we're going to need to develop that park. IF
it's a half a million dollars today, it will probably be about $800,000.00-
$900,000.00 5 years from now to make that kind of development. I think
it's important that we establish some realism as to what that future cost
is. I think also back to this poll or surveyor whatever, I feel would be
viable. I think maybe we could go maybe until next year before we do it
because I don't think we're in a position to really act upon much of
~ anything we survey at this point. I think a survey can be used for two
purposes. One is it creates information for us but it also gives us the
opportunity to create awareness back to the public as to what other people
are thinking as well as it gives us a chance to create our own awareness
back to the community of what are the projects we're working on and
considering. Helps them prioritize things so they aren't having these
vague wish lists going through their minds and saying well we've got trails
we can do. We've got parks we can do. We've got this we can do. Helps to
make choices.
Lash: I know from being here that there's a need to acquire property out
by Lake Minnewashta but if I was an ?verage citizen and a referendum came
to me or someone said to me would you be willing to pay a certain amount so
we can acquire more property for a park out by Lake Minnewashta. I'd say
wait a minute, you've got 30 some acres. ..passed a referendum a few years
ago and it's just sitting there. I just feel like we ne~d to prioritize
how we want to do some things. I know that's the point of this but when
it's a big project like that and it seems so overwhelming that we'll never
be able to do it unless we have a referendum, we'll never be able to do it
unless we have a referendum. Unless we prioritize it and say maybe what we
need to do is start bank rolling it. Let everybody know it's a priority
and moving in the direction to do something and we'll probably never be
able to get enough to do it entirely out of our little budgets each year
but maybe it would soften the blow when it does hit. And again, it's not
carved in stone but at least we're saving some towards some of these big
projects.
~
Andrews: People are a lot more receptive of the idea if you've already set
aside 200 and you're looking for 500 more just to do it. That sounds a lot
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
September 24, 1991 - Page 18
...",tI'
better than saying we've set aside nothing. We need $500,000.00. It
sounds a lot more positive.
Erhart: We're doing the rough grading right now out there too? 8andimere
Park?
Hoffman: 8andimere Park, no.
Erhart: It's got big machinery out there.
Pemrick: That's for the compost they're going to get.
Erhart: Oh, okay. I was all excited because I was saying oh 1992 plus.
$10,000.00 for rough grading. We're already there. We're doing it. Okay.
Schroers: Well these are all good points that we are coming up with. Is
there anything that anyone would like to do beyond asking staff to develop
a priority list that we can work off an item or two on each meeting until
we get through this thing?
Hoffman: I'll as well take Commissioner Andrews comments on, you have the
facility list which was a~cumulated this spring. Let me just go ahead and
list those in here in a menu fashion so you have under 8andimere.
Schroers: Well you know; with each item that we bring up at each meeting,
a little pre-history and what we would like to see in the future or what
we've done in the past will help us decide what we want to do in the
future. So if that's included, that would be great.
..."",
Lash: And you know if you've gotten calls from people or requests for
certain things, rou know.
Hoffman: Many of the par.ks are at a poi nt where they've been fully
developed and we're actually back remodeling or refurbishing those. I
quickly brought that point up at the special Council meeting held on the
16th in that Chanhassen is unique in it's situation that we do not fund any
dollars from the general fund for park development or park redevelopment.
As it would be the case in Carver 8each playground where we're going in anc
refurbishing equipment using new monies which are generated from new
development in the city. At some point that opportunity to do that is
going to run out.. All the cities and other park and recreation department
people that I've talked with, they go ahead and allocate, whether it be a
fourth of their budget, a third of their budget or 90% of their budget,
dependi ng on where that particular city is in development, out of 'their
general fund for park acquisition and development. That may very well be
the case where we're going to need to make that type of recommendation back
to our City Council at some point in the future. The City is in a position
of a fairly heavy debt load at this time. However, we're in an excellent
position to free ourselves of that in the very near future. Unlike some
other communities that have in essence sold themselves very short in the
long range financial availability for their city, Chanhassen is going to be
much better off in the near future. So we're going to need to take a look
at some alternate sources of funding as well. When the end of the
development boom hits, our budget's going to bottom out and we're not goinG
....."
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
~ September 24, 1991 - Page 19
to have a job to carry out anymore. Again I go back to Jan's type of
comments. If we can soften that blow by beginning to take a little bit
from the general tax base for these type of redevelopment projects which
are taking place in old town, we may wan~ to take a look at that.
Schroers: Very good. Is the request that we're making of staff, are they
reasonable? Is that something that is within your work load capabilities?
We've asked you to do quite a lot. Do you think that that's reasonable?
Hoffman: Sure. I'll go ahead ~nd break it up in neighborhood. Then in
community. In trails and potentially then in long range goal planning as
well so we can touch on some other things. Bring back to you, if you're in
the mood to go ahead and go through it. Some information on our budget
situation currently. What our fund reserve is. Currently we go ahead and
only budget for the general budget. What we're assuming that we're going
to take in revenue in the following year which is ~he safe way to 90~ If
we want to end up with any money left over in capital improvement budget,
we certainly want to take that step. However we did go ahead and approve
the Lake Ann Park shelter out of the capital improvement budget which was
up and beyond a special project which was approved by the Commission and is
to be starting construction here October 21st. So there are times when we
take a look at taking a bigger chunk out of that fund reserve in doing some
special projects but it has come down from approximately the $600,000.00
range. We'll probably be down to about the $400,000.00 range by the end of
,... the spring of the year so. It fluctuates but we certainly want to keep it
up there in the high range because we generate some nice income in taking
the interest off'of there. In fact many communities, some of the older
communities, Fridley, Columbia Heights, those types of areas, they strictly
operate their park acquisition, or it's not acquisition anymore but their
park development off of interest generation. $60,000.00-$90,000.00 to
$100,000.00 in interest off of their fund reserve each year. So there's a
variety of unique ways of continuing to fund Park and Recreation
Departments and continue to keep on top of those. So that's clear Larry.
Schroers: Okay. That's clear and we don't require any further action on
this at this time. So we are free to move on to item 6.
(There was a tape change at this point in the meeting.)
ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS:
1991 GATE ATTENDANT PROGRAM REPORT.
Ruegemer: ...$150.00 which can be figured into the total from the revenue
collected from the 1991 passes at Lake Ann. And just below that then is
the 1990 totals in regards to the 1991 with this same type of layout.
Below that then is just the total hours of each gate attendant that was
hired this summer for the Lake Ann and South Lotus Boat Access. Then in
regards to total hours, wage and total earnings for the 1991 summer. Just
below it then is just for Your references. The 1990 totals with hours and
total wages earned.
~
Lash: Excuse me, what's the cost of the printing of passes?
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
September 24, 1991 - Page 20
.....",..
Rugemer: The printing of passes with the seasonal and the resident passes
is roughly around the $800.00 mark. But keep in mind for the seasonal
passes, there were enough ordered that they can be used for next summer.
This report is just used to gather information from year to year. It's more
of a creative tool or information tool just to look back and try to build
on to the next year and also to use as reference in past years. As far as
any types of ~ctivities that happen out at Lake Ann and activity at the
Lake Ann gate house and boat access. Are there any comments or questions?
Schroers: Good job.
Hoffman: Chairman Schroers if I may just have a short minute to comment.
Again the Lake Ann entry fee has been an issue that we've rehashed how many
times. I continue to get the questions from, I spoke with a seniors group
in Excelsior and the first question was, he stood up and why do you charge
to get into Lake Ann Park. My.daughter went over there to gO to a picnic
and you nailed her for 2 bucks to get into the park. I continue to hear
comments like that and when you take a look at the revenue which is
generated versus the expenses, it appears to be that approximately
$12,000.00 is generated to the good but if we take into aspect advertising
for employees, administration costs of hiring those employees, getting them
on the payroll, administering them on a daily basis for 3 1/2 months and
all the other overhead costs which go along with that program, that gets
reduced even further so is $5,000.00-$6,000.00 clear profit worth the
controversy and the issue which are raised every year about the fees at
Lake Ann Park? I continue to question the~ in my own mind and I urge the
Commission to think about it as well.
.....,
OKTOBERFEST~
Ruegemer: We'll move on then to the Oktoberfest. The Oktoberfest section
of the next agenda item. As Oktoberfest is coming up here this coming
weekend, the 28th on this coming Saturday. It will take place from 4:00 to
11:00. The festivities will be set up down in the iower parking lot here
of City Hall and on Coulter Drive. The Rotary tent will be set up along
Coulter Drive. Their types of games are the family .games. The Snowmobile
Club and also is the weather permits, there will be a Jacob's Ladder set up
by the Soccer Association down in that area. There will be, Coulter Drive
will be barricaded off on either side of the stre~t. Preparation
for Oktoberfest continues on a daily basis too ultimately. Get all the
details ironed 6ut .before th~ weekend. Advertisement. This flyer was
inserted in last ~eek's Villager that did go out to all the Villager
circulation throughout Chanhassen. It equaled out to be roughly 4,500
flyers for that. The rest or extras were printed up and the extras were
distributed a~ound town as far as posting up in key areas and also being
distributed throughout local businesses to hand out to their patrons. Alsc
advertising has been sought at the Chanhassen Bank. They will put that up
on their flashing sign. The banner did go up around town. Also just word
of mouth. Also in advertisement, a story will be in this week's Villager
also as kind of a follow-up from the insert from last week.
Hoffman: He promised us a front page.
...."
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
~ September 24, 1991 - Page 21
Ruegemer: Just to continue on, the report does go through the various
types of groups and activities that will take place at the event. The type
of music. The food that will be available. Different groups that will be
presenting information on,the senior interest and the arts fair that's
going to be coming up. There will be a booth set up fOT that to pass out
information to the Chanhassen residents about such a special event. Again
Rotary Bingo will be taking place throughout the night. The Snowmobile
Club will also demonstrate and will have new snowmobiles available for the
,residents to look at and also a groomer. All the permission for the lot
across the south side of City Hall has been granted so it would be okay
then, assuming the City accepts all liability associated with Oktoberfest.
That has been cleared so we will set up portions of the snowmobile,
demonstrations and also.the hot air balloon over the vacant lot just
directly south of the Chanhassen City Hall.
Schroers: Quick question. Who owns that?
Hoffman: The bank's property company. Mithune is his name. So the person
who owns the bank owns this property.
Ruegemer: In all, just a general concept map and other activities have
been taking place just to make sure that Oktoberfest goes off without a
hitch. Is there any questions or comments from the Commission?
Hoffman: Remind them we didn't even ask them to work.
,....
Ruegemer: You're getting by with that. We're getting soft on them.
Koubsky: Jerry and Todd, I guess I was looking at some numbers on the gate
attendance program and just kind of what you had said Todd about maybe
making a $5,000.00 profit. When you look at these numbers and the daily
passes roughly equals about the hourly wages on the gate attendants so what
people it seems like we're doing is basically paying those people to come
into the park. If you make $5,000.00 profit, that leaves about another
$5,000.00 which is your time which is made up here by seasonal and
non-resident passes so those are the people who can drive by. They've
basically paying your extra salary to administer these people which leaves
us to the $5,000.00 profit which is the 70 softball teams. Now could we
still I guess, what I'm thinking is to look into the potential to just
charge the softball teams the $75.00 a team to use the field. Eliminate
the passes and you've got your $5,000.00 profit without any administrative
fees or burden to you other than registering the softball teams. And drop
the fees.
Hoffman: Softball teams are certainly not going to go along with that.
Koubsky: They're not going to like that?
Ruegemer: That's a big definite. If you just associate ot kind of single
out a certain group that's picking up the tab versus, they're going to say
why should we pay for coming in for a seasonal pass when nobody else is
getting charged?
.~ Hoffman: Why shouldn't we charge the swimmers?
Park and Rec Commission Mee~ing
September 24, 1991 - Page 22
..."",
Erhart: So it's everybody or not at all?
Rugemer: Yeah.
Schroers: Well we have beat this issue up a few times.
Andrews: I want to add more to it too. If we are getting the part time
inspection done on the boats and we're covering the cost of having those
gate attendants do that, there's a benefit there that's.
Lash: The other benefit that hasn't been kicked around is just the fact
that there's someone there.
Andrews: It will cut down on the vandalism.
Lash: Well it makes people feel more like maybe they need to make an
effort to follow the rules.
Schroers: It's kind of a security benefit for the park. If the park is
just open and there's no attendant and there's no fees, that just kind of
se nds out a mes'sage t ha t anybody ca n come in her e a nd do pr act i ca 11 y
anything that they want. You really need to establish the impression to
people that come to use the park that the park is looked at or controlled
and the ordinances attempt to be enforced and that sort of thing. A lot of
that message is passed on by having an attendant on duty at the park. Also
someone who knows how to get emergency services in a hurry if they're
needed. The attendants are a ~alid part of the operation I think.
...",
Hoffman: The com~ission can kick it around. We'll address it again when
we take a look at 1992 fees.
Erhart: They're designed to make money though?
Schroers: No. No. We brought that up before. We realize that it isn't a
money making plan really but each tIme it basically came back to we made
very few changes. The fees have remained the same and it has come down to
the idea that we should have a fee and we should have an attendant so we
can kick it around again. We would certainly appreciate a recommendation
from staff. Suggestions. Ideas in how to improve on the situation if
there was a way.
Hoffman: It is as well from the last decisions which were made, it's
become unequitable that we allow many people to enter on a free basis
because they're involved with a youth athletic sport so if they drive in
and say they're with the baseball game and they go, if they're there to
play adult softball or go to the beach, they pay so.
Lash: Has that cut down on some of the whining?
Hoffman: Drastically from the out of town teams. The youth teams that
came in and then were charged in the city of Chanhassen to play when the
children from Chanhassen went to Shorewood or Chaska they didn't have to
pay to get in their parks.
......"
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
.~ September 24, 1991 - Page 23
""......
'"
Lash: So that was the main purpose for doing that. Just because we had
gotten so many complaints, or you had.
Hoffman: And that has ceased.
Lash: Okay, good,.
Schroers: Do we want to continue on then to the central park master plan.
CENTRAL PARK MASTER PLAN.
Hoffman: Item 7(c), the central park master plan has some definite
ramifications in the area of the Park Commission simply because it directly
impacts City Center Park which is one of the most widely used recreational
facilities in the city at this time. The HRA is currently investigating
the possibility of establishing the central park in Chanhassen. As you can
see, this park would encompass City Hall. Taking Coulter Drive as it
currently exists in front of City Hall and moving it. Purchasing the
property to the south. The building, the Chiropractor Professional
building and then developing that central park plan. The major, the
driving force for that type of action is when you take a look at the other
communities and how they present themselves in their center of their city
or their town square or that type of thing, City Hall would basically
become another building amongst all the others in the city if these two
lots were developed with a professional building a couple of stories high
or whatever. Out in front of City Hall would be tucked back and there
would be no benefit to the community as a focal point for both the
community and the business. The downtown area. However in the event that
the HRA moves forward with this, we'll be losing the one ballfield directly
behind us here in the parking lot. That being the case, we would jointly
look at central park project with the redevelopment of City Center Park to
the extent that we can grapple some of the redevelopment money for that
activity since they're the culprits who have caused us problems in City
Center Park and'we would need to redevelop and buy additional land to the
north. We would certainly attempt to convince them in that fashion.
Because what would basically, this entails is taking Coulter Drive and
moving it to the north. That splits up the nice quiet nature of City
Center Park as it currently exists. You would need to have some parking on
the north side of that road so when parents and children exited their
vehicles to,go to a ballgame, they don't have to run across the new Coulter
Drive up here behind City Hall so there's some questions which need to be
addressed. Looking at a larger plan or the same one that precluded, this
is the general concept to expand this past the Post Office. Up through the
City Hall. To the north of City Hall. This would be the area which is
currently the ballfield which exists out there today. The skating area
would be reconfigured. The hockey rinks would most likely be affected in
some way. It is still felt that they can fit in their present location.
This area would then be used for the special events which we currently
hold. The Oktoberfest, 4th of July. This Chanhassen Art Festival which...
going on now for next August to hold an arts and crafts fair of
approximately 200 exhibiters in the city. It would take place mainly at
this locale. The bandshell would facilitate Music in the Park. Those
types of, activities so there's many different things that can take place in
that open space. So again there are no specific recommendations. I'll
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
September 24, 1991 - Page 24
....""
certainly take your comments back to staff members who work with the HRA or
if you want to send a bonafide recommendation whole heartedly approving
their efforts in this regard, you can certainly do that as well.
Lash: Would we get into the warming house...
Hoffman: That warming house is the biggest dump in the city. I remind
Todd Gerhardt and Don Ashworth of that every time we bring this issue up.
I've got to take them on a little visit over there. If you currently go in
there, there's mold growing from the walls to the floor to the soccer balls
which are stored in there so it's a bad place. We would be taking all the
residents right by that building with that new road up there. It's another
one of those big projects which is out there. How nice it would be to
develop that into a warming house with a vending counter which could be
accessed from the inside during the winter. Which could be accessed from
the outside for the CAA activities in the summer which would include
bathrooms which you can access from the inside during the winter. From the
outside during the winter. Which would include storage for the athletic
association and which would include storage for the park and recreation
equipment. And then build the building to match the City Hall
architecture.
Andrews: Sounds like a quarter million right there.
Hoffman: Yeah.
Schroers: Let's talk.
....,;'
Lash: So will they vote for it?
Hoffman: That's the other situation. That's a, City Center Park
currently, any night of the week you're up here during the first month and
a half of school, the first month and a half, two months after school, ft's
the hottest spot in town for youth activity and parents to get together anc
take advantage of their leisure time. We don't want to in any way take
that away from them.
Lash: We can't afford to give up a ballfield.
Absolutely can't.
Hoffman: No.
Schroers: I agree with that. I mean what we have to give up, we have to
gain somewhere. This concept is nice. It looks good and I think the idea
is good but we don't want to lose existing facilities.
Lash: Well we just can't.
it Todd?
I mean it's already booked to the max, isn't
Hoffman: Yes. It would either need to, we would need to redesign the
present property which is there following the plan which was developed and
approved by the Commission whIch then squeezes things in a little bit
tigh~er but it makes better use of the property. But ideatly, looking to
the acquisition of that last piece of land up there for the, to include 'in
....,;
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
~ September 24, 1991 - Page 25
this whole center type of activity, publically held property for the use
and enjoyment of the residents would be the best avenue to take.
Lash: So when you're talking a joint project, are you talking us
contributing to the funding of it? Or would they be wili'ing to take the
whole.
Hoffman: We would certainly need to be a partner in the redevelopment of
City Center Park. What portion lawfully and under an agreement with the
HRA that they can take on, they would certainly be willing to do that.
Schroers: I think' at that point we have to look at the functionability as
well as the aesthetics. The way things are laid out here, they seem like
they're all pretty cramped and I'm wondering if there is enough open space
available for these things. Events like the Art Fair and the Oktoberfest
. and that sort of thing. I mean if we're going to go to the trouble to make
it this nice, we certainly want it to be at least as functional as it is
nice.
Andrews: The other comment I'd like to make is, this plan would imply that
if City Hall were ever to be expanded it would again expand to the north
which would again chew into the park spaces that we have here. If you're
going to invest all this money into a boulevard development, that would not
be the likely place of any future expansion. I think they should consider
that too.
,....
Lash: That was my thought too.
Hoffman: The future expansion of City Hall is noted on here. It doesn't
show... It's a mirror image currently of this portion where we're sitting
and then this portion ha~n't developed and the front half of this area.
Future expansion to complete the mirror image is this back half shown on
the plan with the basement underneath or the lower level corresponding so
that would be the expanded area of City Hall. ..plans for the future. But
this is the parking lot which is now a ballfield.
Andrews: Never mind.
Koubsky: I guess I really like the idea. I think it's great. Whether the
design's right or not, I guess I haven't looked into it that much but just
by looking at it, it's pretty exciting to me. I think the ballfields, more
kids in the area you know, that's a consideration that will have to be
taken into account. We do have more parks you know. We're developing more
and more where activities are expanding. We don't want to I don't think
jeopardize any youth activity to create a parking lot. I like the idea of
a centralized city park. This plan at least in concept looks pretty fun to
me. Especially the realignment and improvement of the hockey rinks.
Schroers: Yeah, the concept looks nice.
Lash: What happened to, yeah there was an idea kicked around a while ago
when Pauly's would be gone and that would be a, did that just go down?
'"'
Hoffman: Not large enough.
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
September 24, 1991 - Page 26
...,.",
Erhart: I like the idea of a central park too but I don't want to lose any
youth activities to a'parking lot. But maybe we can work with the HRA.
Hoffman: The other point which I had brought up is, we've had a very good
relationship with the school district on developing and using that
property. However, it should be remembered that city property does end at
just on the other side of the warming house. So we need the full
cooperation of School District #112 in this type of activity as well.
Schroers: There really is no sp~cific common area for the city right now.
Place that people can go to while they're shopping or somebody's getting a
hair cut somewhere or something rather than waiting in the lobby or
something. If they want to come to a place like this,. we really have very
little to offer. I think something like this really offers a comfort zone
to people who are using this city.
Hoffman: And as was pointed out at the Chamber meeting~ Chamber luncheon.
today' is that it may not seem that it's in the center of the city today but
it will be in the very near future. The grocery store is locked in. It
wi 11 be here.
Erhart: For sure now?
Hoffman: For sure.
Schroers: And is the location like straight south?
Hoffman: Yep. Straight south.
....."
Schroers: It's right next to the hotel?
Hoffman: Yep. Just across the street from the hotel. There will be a ne~
bank which will go in the corner and then beyond that will be the parking
area and the new mall with Festival Foods a~ the anchor tenant. Merlin's
Hardware moving over there. MGM Liquor moving over there and Bernie's
moving from downtown over to that location. And with the continuing
develop~ent of West 78th to the west, City Hall will be surrounded by
retail and professional in the very near future.
Schroers: If this concept or something like this is approved and we go
with it, the City has to require an ice cream or yougaft shop somewhere
within walki~g distance.
Hoffman: So noted.
Andrews: Municipal yougart shop.
Schroers: Municipal sponsored. That'd be great.. Okay can we move on?
Hoffman: I believe the HRA would be glad to hear your comments in the
formalized fashion if somebody wishes t6 make that type of motion that can
be passed on to them. If you approve of such. Disprove.
-'
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
~ September 24, 1991 - Page 27
Lash: something like we would be happy to cooperate i.n a joint project for
this area along the City Center Park redevelopment. ..?
Hoffman: I think they're basically the developer of this city park. Our
portion of it would be the cooperation and the redesign of City Center
Park. But the point of not, if we lose the ballfield, that we need to gain
that back in some shape, manner or form is a valid one and that's the type
of information that's going to say ah-ha. They just can't walk allover us
here.
Lash: How do we have to put it then?
Schroers: What we want to do is make a motion to the effect that the Park
and Rec Commission is very much in favor and would like to support the
concept of the city central park. We'd be willing to donsider a Joint
effort in an attempt to attain a facility of this nature. I don't think
that we want to say specifically that we want to lock into this plan. I
think we just want to give them the message that we support the idea. We
like the idea and are willing to work'with them in order to attempt to
accomplish.
Andrews: Friendly amendment. I think we should put in there we do, would
like to be compensated for any lost park resources that are involved in
this project. If that means replacing or.
~ Schroers: I don't know at this point if they would look at that as a shot
in the arm.
Lash: I would not be happy to support it if it is not a joint project.
City Center then will be redesigned so we don't lose facilities. If we
lose that ballfield, I'd be not happy to cooperate with them on this
because I don't think we can afford to lose the ballfield.
Schroers: No, I don't think we can either but I don't think that we're
getting that specific at this point are we?
Koubsky: Can we just express a concern about losing the ballfields?
Andrews: Yeah, let's do that.
(There was a tape change at this point.)
Schroers moved, Andrews seconded that the Park and Recreation Commission
pass along to the Rousing and Redevelopment Authority it's unanimous
approval of the Central Park Master Plan with the note that it is vital
that any ballfields or playing areas displaced by the plan be relocated.
All voted in favor and the motion carried.
LAKE ANN PICNIC/RECREATION SHELTER.
Hoffman: 7(d) is the report. This report would be attached to the
documentation being the plans and specs for both the shelter project and
the utilities project. We have broken those down into two separate
projects. It would be in the city's best benefit to do so. Two very
,....
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
September 24, 1991 - Page 28
....."
different projects working towards the one end. The plans and specs .were
approved last evening by the City Council. The project is currently !out
for bid so it's moving right forward. The schedule 'is attached on the back
to begin construction on October 21st On both the utilities and the
shelter. You will s.ee that if you're interested and want to head out to
the park the first part of November, you'll'see the large trench, valley
which will be dug right down the middle of the ballfields to accept the
'watermain and the electricity which is coming from the 6enter of the park.
That will be filled in and left in an unfinished manner for the remainder
of the winter and then restored in the sPl-ing. They'll get the majority of
the block structure up and the building and get it closed in and then I
would presume they're going to start with their stonework and finish it
up. They do have a clause in the specifications. A damage clause
specifying $200.00 fine back to the contractor if this is not completed
by June 1st of 1992. So I believe they will take that with some
seriousness.
Andrews: $200.00?
Hoffman: A day.
Andrews: A day?
Hoffman: Correct.
Schroers: I have a question. Right down the middle of the ballfield is a
trench? ~
Hoffman: Right down the middle of the.
Schroers: Inbetween the ballfields? Not through the middle of the playing
area?
Hoffman: , Sounds bad, that's right. I rescind that comment. Right up
through the berm.
Erhart: I thought it was right through the ballfield too.
Andrews: Are we going to be puttin~ in rough in's for the water or Sewer
where we could put in facilities near the ballfields or is that just going
to be buried and left?
Hoffman: It's incorporated into the project and again, now is the right
time to do those types of things. It's raised the cost of the initial
estimate somewhat. That will be addressed by the Council. That includes a
watey- fountain at Field #1 and 'a watey- fountain up at the concession
building. If the City brought water right down the middle of the pay-k and
did not leave a drinking fountain in those two locations, again we would
not be very popular. Would be looked upon as foolish. Then the water
continues down and will stub in a yay-d hydy-ant up to the pay-kview picnic
area so those people can make use of water in that area. We presume at
. some point in the futuy-e we'y-e going to take a look ~t a concy-ete slab
covered type shelter. Picnic shelter in that location. Bouncing back to
the ballfield, that concession building will serve our needs for some time
-"
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
~. September 24, 1991 - Page 29
in the future but I would presume that the City would take a look at a mOr"E
complete shelter building in there including restrooms to serve the
ballfield area. That will very easily be accommodated at that time. The
water's there. Electricity's there. The sewer just needs to be a gravity
line to run from that location down to the lift station which would be
located at the turn around and then pumped over to Greenwood Shores. The
lift station there. So this, I mean this is like, you're servicing an
entire subdivision. It just happens to be a p~rk. Now we're free to take
a look at additional improvements in the future.
Schroers: Okay. That takes care of the Administrative Presentations. ThE
last item is the Administrative Section. Anything there that anyone wants
to focus on? If not, call for a motion to adjourn.
Andrews moved, Lash seconded to adjourn the meeting. All voted in favor
and the motion carried. The meeting was adjourned.
Submitted by Todd Hoffman
Park and Rec Coordinator
Prepared by Nann Opheim
~
~