Loading...
PRC 1990 04 10 lflii"'" """ !I"'" .', CHANHASSEN PARK AND RECREATION COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING APRIL 10, 1990 (The recording quality on the tape of this meeting was not very good so SQme comments could not be heard.) Chairman Mady called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m.. MEMBERS PRESENT: Jim Mady, Larry Schroers, Jim Andrews, Dawne Erhart, Jan Lash, Wendy Pemrick and Curt Robinson STAFF PRESENT: Lori Sietsema, Park and Rec Coordinator; Todd Hoffman, Recreation Supervisor and Jerry Ruegemer, Program Specialist APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Robinson moved, Schroers seconded to approve the Minutes of the Park and Recreation Commission dated March 27, 1990 as presented. All voted in favor except Jan Lash who abstained and the motion carried. SITE PLAN REVIEW FOR CARRICO ADDITION. P.ld,9..l"J,9...",,,PI,,~,~,~,D,t.,,,:,_ ~.?,m_~, tl9S:!L~_~,~" James Bergeson Donald E. Gould Mar k Williams Mark & Kathy Sanda Jerry & Becky Jensen Eric Rivkin Dave & Mary DeZeller Bob & Linda Gunderson Tom Droegemueller Todd Coumbe Jeff Wi 11 iams Mary Cordell Tom Struthers Dave T. Sabler Al Ramsey Renae Perkins Mike & Gwen Filippi 1661 Wood Duck Lane 1730 Wood Duck Lane 1655 Lake Lucy Road 1685 Steller Court 1741 Wood Duck Lane 1695 Steller Court 1731 Wood Duck Lane 1690 Wood Duck Lane 1740 Pheasant Circle 1791 Ringneck Drive 1760 Wood Duck Lane 1730 Lake Lucy Lane 1741 Wood Duck Circle 1708 Pheasant Circle 6420 White Dove Drive 1721 Wood Duck Lane 1731 Wood Duck Circle Sietsema: This item has come before the Park and Recreation Commission in the past a couple of times. We reviewed the site plan a year or so or more ago and at that time we decided that we were interested in purchasing the entire property for park purposes. We did an appraisal on the property and the property owner did an appraisal and the Park and Recreation Commission and the Council decided not to pursue acquisition of the entire parcel at this time. They have since brought the proposal back in so we're looking at this as a site plan. What they're proposing is that there "be a 4 1/2 acre park parcel outlot that would be used for park purposes. In reviewing this with the engineering department, they have determined that they're going to need a large portion of that 4 1/2 acres for stormwater retention Park and Rec Commission Meeting April 10, 1990 - Page 2 ""... and drainage purposes. Basically the site will be graded to contain the pond in a certain area and it will overflow at times when we have extremely heavy rains, a 100 year storm or more and then it will be wet for a few hours, perhaps a day and then would drain out and be useable again. So the property has some recreational value as long as we don't put facilities on there that can't get wet... You might not want to have your sand court volleyball court right next to the pond but there is definitely some recreational potential uses. The site has the sand court volleyball court, half court basketball, totlot equipment, open space, although there would not be room sufficient enough to put in a ballfield on this site. So staff is recommending that since the property is compromised with the wet area, that we were recommending that we acquire property, give him 50% credit toward their dedication fees. Work with the engineering department to keep it as dryas possible to contain that pond holding water, that holding area as much as possible so we can use the rest of it for recreational purposes. Also, to continue our search for more adequate park needs. Mady: What I'd like to do is we have a number of new commissioners. This item has come in front of us previously... I'd ask you to please come up to the microphone and state your name and address for the record and then give us your thoughts on what... Tom Droegemueller, 1740 Pheasant Circle: We've got about 85 homesites in this development of Pheasant Hills and there are probably 200 kids there and we need a ballfield really bad. I kind of disagree that the site isn't ~. big enough to develop a ballfield but I haven't see the plan and I don't know what basis you're making that charge. Is it because of the wetland there? Sietsema: Right. We're talking about if they're proposing to dedicate this 4 1/2 acre site here, the ponding area which goes right in the center, most of it will be contained in here but the rest of it, it's pretty questionable. You can probably get maybe a small one but not anything too large. Tom Droegemueller: That's the biggest need that they could have an area large enough... Is that what we're left with? Is that wetland? That's the only area that can be designated for park use on that property? Sietsema: No it's not. It's part of the property that, we need to determine whether, what the parkland that we get. How much. This standard by using density of 1 acre per 75 people. This subdivision has I think 16 acres, 16 lots and if you have 3 people per lot that's about 50 people so it's not creating, this subdivision is not creating the needs of more than an acre of parkland. Tom Droegemueller: What about the fact that the whole Pheasant Hills area doesn't have any parkland at all? Sietsema: Right. See this developer, he only has to provide what he's creating the need for. II""""'- Tom Droegemueller: What's the City's view of meeting the needs of the Park and Rec Commission Meeting April 10, 1990 - Page 3 JIiIM'" people over in that area, the Pheasant Hills area? Sietsema: I think they're very aware of what your needs are. The situation is that we're really compromised with what's left in the area for park purposes. Tom Droegemueller: . . . .what's left? Sietsema: We're compromised in that there isn't an awful lot of big parcels left for the City to acquire. Unfortunately there wasn't parkland dedicated in your subdivision...and so we're in search of a piece of property. Tom Droegemueller: I think one of our concerns is that we don't want some area designated that's across a major thoroughfare where the kids have to cross a 45 or 50 mph road to get to park property. This is attractive land here it looks like so the opportunity to put a park in near without causing problems but that's about all I've got to say. Mady: I just want to point out, it might help a little bit tonight. The Park Commission has set aside $100,000.00 in our capital budget, our reserve fund for park acquisition for the Pheasant Hills area. We're looking for land. We want to acquire land. I'm not sure how much land that's going to buy but we are aware of the need. ~. Al Ramsey, 6420 White Dove Drive: A couple years ago or a year ago weren't we promised a totlot on the small lots that were supposed to be a gift acquired from Tom Klingelhutz? Sietsema: Tom has not deeded those over to the City. Ai Ramsey: Because of back taxes? Sietsema: I understand that's one of his reasons. I'm not sure about that but he has not deeded those over to the City and we can't go in and put totlot equipment... Ai Ramsey: I understand that but I think at the time, we had a meeting here. I can't remember exactly when it was. It just seems like we're just sort of keep getting pushed off and pushed off. At that time I had a 4 year old son. Now he's this tall. He doesn't want swings no more. The totlot's a joke. I mean the neighborhood, by the time a totlot is put on this property, nobody in our neighborhood that I know of is going to be able to use it. You're going to have maybe a few 5 or 6 year old kids over there and by that time my kids will be old enough to be bullies at that time which is the case with everybody's kids. They're going to be pushing the little kids off. It's worthless to do. It's a waste of money in my opinion. I don't see Carl here tonight. I guess somebody told me he wanted $330,000.00 for his property. Sietsema: That's what his appraisal came in at. ~ Ai Ramsey: That's the appraisal or that's what he asked for it? Park and Rec Commission Meeting April 10, 1990 - Page 4 y ".... Sietsema: That's what he's asking for it. Al Ramsey: Sietsema: Before or after the improvements? As it is right now. Mady: Bare land. Sietsema: Bare land. Lash: They were taking into consideration that they assumed they would be getting sewer and water. Sietsema: That was his asking price. Al Ramsey: Has it been voted, is it MUSA or whoever, to extend that to include that property in there? Sietsema: No. I believe they're going to be addressing the Met Council this summer on that. Al Ramsey: What guidelines do they go by as far as if the property is acceptable for sewer and water? I was told that in the next 10 years they're not going to extend that. Now that's rumor. It's people knocking on the doors saying vote for me. Telling them what they want to hear. I ~. was told that that property was not going to be able to be in the sewer dist r ict. Sietsema: That's what I believe Met Council has indicated to the City. However they are petitioning, the landowners and I don't know if it's been endorsed by the City. I don't know that that's even been decided... Al Ramsey: I think it's a shame to be endorsed by the City. If the city has a staff of approval on it to extend it, I think the City should be slapped on the back of their hand. They've admitted they made a mistake with Tom Klingelhutz and his development in not providing parkland. Now you're going to make the same mistake again. I think it's a shame that you make that same mistake twice. I think you should learn by your mistakes and get a decent park in there. And this will be my fourth house in the Chanhassen area that I've built for myself. The third one in pheasant Hill. I paid $1,500.00 for park dedication fees and my kids play in the cul-de-sac. It makes me very angry to see my kids grow up with scraped knees because of asphalt. If they want to scrape their knees on the ballfield or whatever, fine but if they're having to play out in the middle of the street, I don't think it's right. With the taxes we pay and the park dedication fees of 84 residents in Pheasant Hills have paid. Linda Gunderson: My name's Linda Gunderson. We just moved in to this development and I'm kind of concerned about the wetlands in here. I really want them developed right. The wetlands are a natural way to prevent flooding and if they're not built up right, it's going to be a flood zone in there and I think we should really be looking. ."... Park and Rec Commission Meeting April 10, 1990 - Page 5 ,tII'" " \ Mark Sanda, 1685 Steller Court: I live just south of the Pheasant Hills development and I have to agree with the other gentleman. The one thing you can say about that area is that there's no parkland. If you talk about setting aside $100,000.00 to obtain some parkland, where is it going to be? The only place it could be is on the west side of the Galpin Blvd. and you're going to be having children, dozens of children from the Pheasant Hills development attempting to cross a road that has a 40 mph speed zone and that's going to create some problems. I know the area fairly well. I can't imagine any other spot that would be acceptable for parkland so I just feel that the City should take another look at this because this seems to be the opportunity to satisfy the Pheasant Hills people as well as some of the rest of us that live south of that area to have a nice parkland. Thanks. Mike Filippi: My name is Mike Filippi and I just moved into 1731 Wood Duck Circle in pheasant Hills and like everybody else paid their park fees. When I moved in there I was under the understanding, I was told by Klingelhutz that that was an outlot. The area I'm talking about is where Carrico Lane is scheduled to end onto Wood Duck Lane. I was told that was an outlot. That was where some parkland was going to be or that it would never be developed so I bought the property right across the street from that and put my house up. Right now the way I see it, if that street goes through and this proposal for the park goes through the way it is proposed here, my children are playing in the backyard very likely, if anybody misses that stop sign during the wintertime while they're sliding down the >~ little hill I've got back there. Slides through that stop sign, could get killed. I could have cars coming right in the back side of my house and that upsets me to say the least. The other thing as far as the wetlands. Our concern, it's my understanding that a Class B wetland is very difficult to develop. You're going to need, if I'm not mistaken, permits from either the Corps of Engineers or the DNR. I don't know that those have been applied for. If there has been any indication that those would be received. Passing on this prior to knowing whether or not they're going to get permits to build in there would.. .be irresponsible. This is the first time I've ever.. .so bear with me. Is there been an EAW done? Environmental Assessment Worksheet done on this site? Sietsema: I'm not really sure. A lot of your questions and comments are more applicable at the Planning Commission meeting. We don't address where the streets go and that kind of thing. We're strictly here to talk about the park. Mike Filippi: It was in the staff report so I just assumed it'd be discussed as long as it was in there. It talked about the thru street that was going to go through there. I guess the real question I've got is that I just heard that Klingelhutz didn't dedicate any land for the parks and was supposed to. It's my understanding that if he did it would be dry land and why wouldn't you swap out dry land for wetland and would it not be more expensive to maintain a park on wetland where it's constantly resettling and sinking and needing to be redone and redeveloped and reworked and in the long term cost more money than to look at dryer land? ,tII'" Sietsema: I'm not sure what your question is. The soils in this area, and Park and Rec Commission Meeting April 10, 1990 - Page 6 "....., in a lot of the area, they cannot build into the wetland area. We can't alter any different than what our ordinance indicates that we can either. So we have to pretty much, we can alter it to define it better but there are certain stipulations that we have to abide by also. The property is not that suitable for building than it would be suitable for some recreational facilities. Mike Filippi: The way this map is drawn, it would be rather misleading to assume this is a proposed park. Could this be possibly redrawn to show us exactly what amount of this area is really going to be used as park or could be used as park? Are they just going to end up as unuseable land? This makes it look like we've got 4 1/4 acres worth of park. It's a pretty misleading drawing. Sietsema: But quite a bit of it is wet .for quite a while after a rain. Mike Filippi: 80%? 90%? I mean 5%? What's really going to be useable? Sietsema: I don't exactly at this point in time until the grading plan is done. Mike Filippi: Do you think without that being done the plans recommended that we go ahead and accept this proposal? Sietsema: As far as what, based on what has been decided by the Council in ~ the past, this is a compromise situation at best and I feel that this would be, it would be better to accept this than to have him put more houses in here and have nothing. Mike Filippi: I would say don't let the houses go in. sietsema: They made a decision that that's one of the things that could potentially happen. Mike Filippi: It's not a done deal? Sietsema: No. This hasn't been approved by the City Council. Mike Filippi: So you still can change it? Sietsema: You can still talk to the Planning Commission and you can still talk to the City Council. The only decision that's been made so far is that the whole entire piece of property is not going to be pursued at this time for parkland. So given that, if it's not going to be parkland, what can we get. Mike Filippi: Can we pursue some of the dry ground? I mean we only need 4 1/2 acres. Sietsema: Well there is some dry ground on there but what we're also under the gun on is that this development does not create the need for very much parkland because it's a small development so we can't just go in and say .~ you have to give us half of your useable property because we need it for Park and Rec Commission Meeting April 10, 1990 - Page 7 ,... " \ parkland without. We can't make those demands on them without compensation. Mike Filippi: If they put a thru street into our neighborhood, that pretty much connects us as far as I'm concerned. That makes us one big neighborhood. I don't care how you want to divide it up by name. As soon as you put a thru street into Wood Duck Circle and that becomes the short cut between Excelsior and that neighborhood or the other parts of our neighborhood back out to Lake Lucy Lane, that's all one big neighborhood. I don't think you can separate this little section saying it doesn't call for enough because they're going to connect it to the rest of the neighborhood and make one big area. I think you've got to take the entire thing into consideration. ,..... Mady: One thing Mike when you separate two right there is Carl Carrico is developing 16 lots. That's all he's developing so the requirements that the City can put on him are only the responsibility of those 16 lots. Under our standard that our City uses, 16 lots can generate the need for parkland to accommodate approximately 50 people. Under the standard we use, that would equate out to roughly 2/3 of an acre. So if we gave him credit, 100% park credit, we would only get back from him roughly 2/3 of an acre of land. That's all we can demand of that particular developer. Now the area as a whole, you're correct. As to the whole neighborhood does need a heck of a lot of land... To get that, we have to. ..and at this point in time it appears that the City is going to allow Carl Carrico to go in front of the Met Council to have sewer and water brought into his property. If that's the case, that property the whole piece is worth over $300,000.00. Now if it remains non-sewered property, it's worth considerably less than that. Until that determination is made as to whether or not it's sewer is brought up here or not sewered property, the City doesn't really have a good basis... I think tonight it's helpful that the residents to know that you want a lot of parkland. Maybe the rest of the commissioners and the City Council reads our Minutes, they'll see that the need still is there. It's a large need and we may look into it again. I can speak for myself but I can't speak for the rest of us. We will be addressing this once we get input from all the residents. Once we make our comments tonight, you can still interject after that. Resident: What about using the $100,000.00 to...and make enough of an area where you could provide... Mady: If the property does become sewered, then we have a good opportunity. Mark Williams, 1655 Lake Lucy Lane: I've been looking at this lot for quite a while and had many conversations with Lori. There's a couple things to consider and just a couple of questions first of all. What is the Park and Rec Commissions, what are their duties going to be or what are their responsibilities in terms of what they're going to come back and recommend to the City Council? As r understand this is going to be a super complicated process in terms of them actually being able to get approval to ,... subdivide this into 16 lots and that's by no means any.kind of trivial Park and Rec Commission Meeting April 10, 1990 - Page 8 .,..., deal. At this point in time, what would you guys hope to tell the City Council in terms of, are you going to make a recommendation possibly that this is the last chance for land? That they may want to consider trying to buy that whole parcel again? I'm just trying to get a feeling for what you guys may hope to accomplish by listening to us. Maybe that's a question you can answer later. One of the things that I think has been lacking in this all along is maybe a little creativity in terms of coming up with some more land. There are a couple of other parcels of land. There's a house right at the corner of Lake Lucy Lane and Lake Lucy Road that I believe has some property around it. I've heard rumors that that property may be for sale. Those people may be interested in leaving. In addition, in the northwest corner there's another house and I've heard rumors that that guy may as well be going to subdivide and do some additional development there if the MUSA boundary came through. It appears to me that there's maybe some additional property there that can be considered. I think there might be a possibility which a little creativity, throwing in some additional money, there be a way to come up with it. The person land bigger than the 4.2 acres and come up with enough land to do all the things people want. A ballfield and basketball court and volleyball court but it just seems that times that people take no for an answer a little bit too quick and I think the word that you should get is that people in these neighborhoods don't want to take no for an answer any more. We see our last chance slipping away and I think you'll hear a lot from a lot of people that this is probably just a start of it. The City Council and stuff will probably hear a little bit too so my word is that we're extremely serious about this. I JI!""" don't want to be sitting here talking about this 2 years from now and coming to find out that the nearest land is now a mile and a half away from here so: thanks. . Don Gould, 1730 Wood Duck Circle: I don't have any kids at home anymore. I really think that's good property for a park. I'm really close to a road going through there. I moved in and I was told by Tom that that would be a deadend situation. There'd be no, well a deadend sign went up recently. We had more traffic than I wanted. I was trying to get away from that. That's why I built my house back in, Wood Duck Circle is kind of neat but I just wanted to say that I think that's a great place for a park, not for houses and we don't need more traffic going through there. Todd Coumbe, 1791 Ringneck Dyive: I've lived out there for about 3 1/2 years and people are trying to figure out roughly what... I would guess the largest circle.. .boundaries is that it's under water most of the time. It's dry right now but 3 years from now that was basically all wet so we're talking a couple corner. Even if you're talking about. ..you've got it spread out allover the place. The second part...is very useable and I don't understand.. .50% break on the lot as far as no park. When we all paid our full share and don't have any park yet at all. I'd like somebody to address what the rationale is... Bob Gunderson: My name is Bob Gunderson. I live at 1690 Wood Duck Lane. Just moved in a couple weeks ago. I guess like this gentleman over here, we were also told by Mr. Klingelhutz that, under the assumption that this was an outlot area. That this was going to be dedicated as parkland and we ~ thought that was kind of a great little plus for us because we thought the Park and Rec Commission Meeting April 10, 1990 - Page 9 """ ,.... community was very kind of country style. Kind of quiet. It offered our kids an outlet to play in because there is no nearby park. The only nearby park there is is in Centex. Now because Tom Klingelhutz or whoever developed, had that, I feel as though the residents of Pheasant Hills are paying some kind of penance because there wasn't any parkland dedicated and now we have to settle for 4.2 acres which is going to be under water for most of the springtime. I drove by there 30 days ago and after the melt, it was almost half covered. I'd be really surprised, especially these... the very south part anyway, that those would incur some kind of water in their basements. The other question, when you take a look at this, because there is no planned parking. You park on the streets and Lake Lucy Lane is a very busy road and shutter the thought that a ball would be hit out in the road and some kid chased it and had to meet a car head-on. I was also under the impression that Carrico Lane was going to be an entrance for a parking lot for the park. That this whole area was going to be dedicated as parkland. I guess I'm a little concerned here that this area has grown. I understand that there's at least 92 kids, this is from an informal survey, but at least 92 kids who's average age is probably between 8 and 7 years old. A totlot does not meet the requirements of these kids. They need basketball courts. They need baseball diamonds. They need a hockey rink. I mean our neighborhood, I think a majority of the sports that the kids play is hockey and I've seen the little pond out there on, what is it Ringneck and Wood Duck? They do their hockey practice there but when that's not frozen, they do it in the middle of the road. Why can't there be a park? That's all I've got to say. Mary Cordell, 1730 Lake Lucy Lane: I've been coming here for almost 2 years talking about parkland for our neighborhood. In fact I had written a letter to the park board before we moved in knowing that it was a park deficient area and kind of asking what was going to be done. I think I'm speaking for several people, I'm a little bit frustrated because the process is so slow. When we moved in my kids were 3 and 5. Now they're 5 and 7 and I think they'll be grown up before we get some recreation facilities in the area. I guess my view regarding the Carrico property, I'd prefer that that all be parkland obviously. If that's not feasible because of the price which was kind of decided before, at least can't we have a strong negotiating position saying yes. The City will approve these lots going in. We will approve you going before the Board and trying to get your MUSA permit or whatever but in exchange for that we want some useable parkland of sufficient size. It seems like we should be able to have some sort of, I don't know, negotiating factor there with Carrico as far as whether or not the City does approve his application for MUSA line or not. I guess in conclusion I just feel like we have a desperate need for a park in that area and this is one of the last parcels that would be within safe walking distance because we're bounded by CR 17 and Galpin Lake Road and Lake Lucy Road is going to become busier so this is one of our last parcels that could. be used for parkland for our children. Bob Gunderson: I just have a quick question. What size is needed for the land to take care of for what we're asking for? A hockey rink. A baseball field. Tennis court. If we're going to negotiate on area, I'd like to start up here okay...but I just want a decent park. JIll" Park and Rec Commission Meeting April 10, 1990 - Page 10 "" Sietsema: If he had a perfectly piece of flat property, we could get a ballfield, tennis court, hockey rink, playground equipment, half court basketball and volleyball in, comfortably in about 8 acres. 8 to 10 acres. If it's flat and you don't have to deal with topography and wet areas. Tom Struthers: My name is Tom Struthers. I live at 1741 Wood Duck Circle and Carry and I just moved in December...Chanhassen. I just want to echo that when we made the decision to move here to Chanhassen we did take into account and we were told many times..what you've heard here tonight about the proposed park and the area there that had been set aside for hopefully a roadway into the park. So we're still hoping that that can come to pass. I grew up in a community here in Minneapolis and I was able to walk or ride my bike to organized ballgames. Hockey practice. Things like that. I enjoyed that access to things that I was of the age and was able to get into all sorts of sports and activities and the reason was because my community did dedicate and commit itself to the planning of parks and things like that. It's a community that is very much closer to downtown Minneapolis and so forth and I'm hoping that Chanhassen being out and building for the future, they'll do the same thing. Where our area, we're more or less locked in. If we prefer to travel by foot or by pedal by TH 7, TH 5, CR 17 and CR 117 which are relatively high speed roads and at times they are very narrow and hard to get around. With that concern, we do not have kids yet but hopefully in the future, there will be plenty of park and recreation activities very close to Pheasant Hills. The area that the proposed street will go through will connect with what is now a dead end in Wood Duck Lane. Wood Duck Lane and the other streets behind it are ~ very windy, very relatively low speed roads. Not meant for high traffic. I guess my last point would be that in looking at the proposed park here and I've had many opportunities to drive by it this spring. Even though you've had a very dry spring, the ducks were able to make use of most of this area and there's really very little that I could see that could be used for anything else in terms of recreation. Thank you. Jim Bergeson, 1661 Wood Duck Lane: I'm curious about the access to the proposed patk. If the park was developed as planned, we've got about 80 plus houses up in Pheasant Hills which are on the upper portion of the plan here and 13 homes that have very good access to the park. It seems very, very awkward to me for anybody in Pheasant Hills where there's 80 homes, to get to the park. It appears you have to go down Carrico Lane and go to Lake Lucy Lane to get access to it. I'm curious if there was again an idea or a plan to try to acquire some additional property so that there would be better access for the pheasant Hills people. Sietsema: It could be very easily be accommodated I think to put like a trail easement between lots. That's not a favorable thing to do. Otherwise you'd have to put in trails along the street... Jim Bergeson: To repeat some of the sentiments of an earlier person up here and that is that as a negotiating tool at this point, I would hope that the Parks and Recreation and Planning group would look at this whole corridor and look at investing some money to expand the size of the park. Make it more useable so there is enough property to have a decent park and do it right the first time through. """' Park and Rec Commission Meeting April 10, 1990 - Page 11 "..... Eric Rivkin, 6095 Steller Court: From what I've been hearing, I'm quite disappointed in the Park Board's not acquiring this whole parcel for park. My observation is that the, and I have developed land in Minnetonka myself and I know what the situation is like. I've been on both sides of the fence here. I think the system of acquiring quality parkland doesn't work. Area developers take advantage of a weak law to set aside the worse possible unbuildable, undesireable acreage in a parcel and call this open parkland. One.. .quality parks would pay high tax dollars and pay park fees and I don't feel it's being put to good use. I feel like I'm a dog being fed the scraps by this kind of proposal here. I also am well read about protection of wetlands. I think it's a very dangerous assumption to think that this development was going to not harm this wetland. It is going to harm this wetland. It is going to harm the entire watershed. It's going to harm Lake Lucy because the nutrients from this development are going to add to the nutrient loading to this -lake.. .engineering department or the Watershed District yet about this proposal. We have had our lake measured by an independent hydrologists in Lake Lucy. This is part of the Lake Lucy Watershed I believe, is that correct? Sietsema: I believe so. Eric Rivkin: You believe so? Okay. And he said in his report which we've been putting together and going to submit it to the Watershed District and the City. Tom Workman has a copy of that right now. It says in there that if the area around Lake Lucy watershed fully developed, we would lose up to ~ 25% of the watershed's ability to replenish itself. With all the rooftops and driveways, the water doesn't sink into the ground anymore and replenish all our wells that we spent good money to get. But also it feeds our lake. The ground water is responsible for feeding and keeping Lake Lucy up to it's present levels. It is not primarily a run-off fed lake. It is a seepage lake. This is verified through even just in pure observation. Our lake is only been down 1 foot. It's measured at 955 elevation this winter and it's high water mark is 956. That's only 1 foot difference. On every other lake in the region has been down 3 or 4 feet. That is evidence also that our lake has been fed by ground water and not simply by run-off which we haven't had during this 42-44 month drought. For that reason alone, an environmental reason, this development should not go in. Every developer wants to make a buck. Wants to get nothing more really than to see from border to border in every town that's on the verge of development, a sea of rooftops and that has to stop. I think it seems to me to be a real problem. I know that your lack of funds, $100,000.00 isn't much to buy much of anything these days for a park. I suggest to you t.hat you look at other sources to buy parkland. The legislative commission on Minnesota Resources for one. The Nature Conservancy is another. They provide funds worldwide to set aside wild lands. You could take up a collection. I think we could have fund raisers. You've got the support of the entire community. I think everybody wouldn't mind to pitch in. I think the Klingelhutz' would, in order to get rid of their guilt for misleading all these people, including myself, would love to donate a little bit of money to avoid the legal fees possibly of being misled. And I think that you have, and I'd like to address the residents too, that we have the power to stop this development from going in. You can stop it at the Met Council ~ level. You can write organized, get a petition and write letters to the Park and Rec Commission Meeting April 10, 1990 - Page 12 J!II"'" '\ Metropolitan Council and to the attention of this Carrico development. Make sure it gets in ahead of when this gentleman, Carrico presents his case and you can stop it there. They hardly see any visitors. When they see visitors, they're amazed and they will listen to you. If your intentions are good, they'll listen. If it doesn't work there, you could stop it at the City Council level. I think the park board has a responsibility in my estimation of responsibilities to take the wishes of the majority of the people who are here at this meeting or whether you get a petition or a surveyor whatever, and take that to the Council. Take that to the Metropolitan Council and the City Council. Write down a letter on behalf of the residents. You can do that and stop it because you represent us and if us says no to this, then you should say no too. I don't think you are bound by a weak law saying well Carrico only has to give 5 measly acres. This is not a park. This is junk. This a swamp. It's mosquito ridden. I've been there all the time. It is not a park okay? Not by anybody's stretch of the imagination. I don't want to even get into the argument of how you can even try to put a totlot or anything on there. It's not habitible as a park. I think it's a good location for a park. You've got all kinds of good arguments here. You've got an ecological reason. You have social reasons. Whatever it takes. You've got a good estimate on the land. LCMR grants, they typically give you 50% funding. Take $75,000.00 out of your pockets or the coffers of the park fee, park coffers. The rest in fund raising. The LCMR. Whatever you can get and I'll bet you get this park quickly. It doesn't have to wait long. I think that we have the power to communicate. You have the power to communicate. We have the power ~ to communicate those powers that can control what this development sketch puts in and it can be resolved quickly because it's proceeding. If we just sit in our homes wishing it not to be done, it will get done. Thank you. Mady: Is there anyone else who'd like to speak? Resident: I have a question. ..Met Council. Sietsema: I believe that they need to have an approved plan to take to petition the Met Council for a MUSA line extension so that's why they're going through this process. Once it was decided that the City was not going to acquire the entire piece of property, then making applicable proposal, if they get site plan approved, then they can petition the Met Council and that would be later this summer. That's the plan that I've heard. Mady: Okay, I'll open it up to commission discussion. I'll start with Larry since he was one... ,..... Schroers: First off I'd like to say that I'm really pleased that everyone turned out and did voice their opinions, especially in regard to the need and the desire for more parkland in the city of Chanhassen. I agree with you wholeheartedly. I think that unfortunately we have a couple of problems here where... One of the things are that Park and Rec doesn't really have control over what the developers tell people that are buying their property. So they mislead you. They come back to Park and Rec. We really don't have any authority to do anything about that. That's after the fact. It's really unfortunate that parkland wasn't set aside for Park and Rec Commission Meeting April 10, 1990 - Page 13 """" Pheasant Hills in the beginning. I don't know why it wasn't or who was responsible for it but it's after the fact. What we're really dealing with right now is the fact that there is very little land in the area available for suitable park use and that it's very expensive and we have limited funds. My recommendation or my thoughts are that I don't want to see any parkland or open space that we can acquire for park slip away from us. I would like to pursue those issues, possibilities of acquiring the entire area of the park or as much of the adjacent building sites to this park to make it useable. I guess I'm also in favor of researching possibilities of other methods of funding. I appreciate the input that you've given here tonight and I guess I feel that I would like to accept this parcel and try to acquire additional building sites to make a park that's useable for a park. Lash: I too would like the same. If we're going to be coming in and one gentleman said, asked the question what we hope to accomplish tonight and I guess what I would hope to accomplish or our purpose for doing this and seeing such a large turnout supports my thought that my goal is to get feedback from you since you're the ones who are most involved and you're the most familiar with the site. I certainly don't live there and I don't have all the inside information that you people do so I certainly appreciate all the information that you can provide for us. It makes our decisions easier and I can tell you, just from listening to your comments, I changed my initial reaction to this proposal. I had originally thought well, it's probably the best we could hope to get. I was not in favor of ",..., accepting a 50% credit. I thought it should be prorated on the amount of property that would be useable. If 20% was useable, he should get a 20% credit. From hearing all their comments and knowing that we do have a small amount of money, $100,000.00, I guess I would like to see staff get involved in some negotiations to see if we can expand it by trying to purchase a couple, at least one of the lots if not two and 6 and 7 would be nice but then after looking at it again, I'm thinking number 3, which is kind of a pie shaped lot, would make a much easier access point for people coming from Pheasant Hills... But it says Addition at the top. Is that also Pheasant Hills? Sietsema: That's Pheasant Hills. That's straight north of there. Lash: Right. Okay. So if we had that pie shaped piece put in the middle it would be useable plus the property just south of that looks like it would be useable. It would at least double our useable space that it takes. And if his asking price before was $330,000.00 for the whole thing, I would guess that we could get a chunk for $100,000.00. A decent sized useable chunk. And if he's not willing to negotiate with that, I guess I would be willing to say, I don't think he's been especially cooperative in the past.. .hand out special favors now. I would say that I would be inclined to just reject this whole proposal unless he's willing to negotiate to make this a more useable site for us. Andrews: I'll pass. "..... Robinson: I've been on the Commission a number of years and I don't know how many times, a large number of times that we discussed the need for park Park and Rec Commission Meeting April 10, 1990 - Page 14 .,.... in the Pheasant Hills area. I also rejected Mr. Carrico's $330,000.00 for these 13 acres just 2 months ago. I think you've got to do something. I'm frankly getting sick of you people coming in here so we've got to do something. We've got to do something. We're getting down to where there is little or no property left in that area for a park and it is definitely park deficient area. I'm not sure what that adds. If it's to acquire it as part of the Carrico piece in addition to his proposed piece here, I'm not sure. Lori, could we in the future in situations like this start the meeting an half hour early and go out and look at the area like we've done sometimes? Sietsema: Sure. Robinson: I should do that on my own and I usually forget or when I have, I can't find it anyway. I think that would be real helpful if we could have gone out there tonight and see how much of that 4.2 acres is actually useable for a park. I don't have any answers on this. I think we've got to do something and the way it's proposed here I don't think is acceptable but I'm not sure what we do. Pemrick: I guess I can commen tonight. I'm in full agreement with the... on preserving our wetlands. I think that's very important. Wetlands can playa real big part as far as letting... It's very educational for children to have wetlands to go and learn about the environment and habitat and... Secondly, I agree that we should maybe look at trying to acquire ~. some of the lots... and again that was... I did some rough calculating and there is $300,000.00...so that would be my recommendation. Expanding on what's been offered. And I don't know enough about the Pheasant Hills development... Any idea what the prices are for those lots? A resident in the audience was making a comment that could not be heard on the tape. Mady: Can I make one comment first. One, the Pheasant Hills subdivision came through the City in the early 80's. There's not a person up here who saw that. The Park Commission in the early 80's was very nature oriented. The city as a whole was. At that point in time they were looking to aquire, that's when the City developed it's wetland ordinance which at that time was the most restrictive wetland ordinance in the whole metropolitan area. And so they went, that's what they took was they wanted nature areas. Unfortunately we're bound by them and now we're suffering for it. Hopefully with any new subdivision...just to make that comment. (Jim Andrews comments could not be heard on tape.) Mady: How was that.. .dollars for the land arr ived at?. Sietsema: That was his appraisal. Mady: That was with... ,.... Sietsema: Yes. We came in under $100,000.00. What happened is we came in with an appyaisal of around $60,000.00 and his was $330,000.00 and there Park and Rec Commission Meeting April 10, 1990 - Page 15 ,..... was another one that came in at about $68,000.00 or $70,000.00 and what, we brought the appraisals back to the Park and Recreation Commission and to the City Council realizing that it's the luck of the draw as to... Bob Gunderson: One of the things I keep hearing is about these other lots that exist. These lots don't exist. They are proposed lots. Right now the ground is, Carrico can build one house on this entire parcel. One house and that's not going to change until your MUSA boundary changes and that's one of the key factors that you can't forget so we shouldn't be talking about buying Lot 2,3 and 4 and... Right now this is one parcel of land and he's got a massive battle in front of him to get this into the MUSA boundary especially... Sietsema: The misconception is that the Park and Recreation Commission can approve or disapprove this plan. Resident: You guys can go in there and listen to us and say, this is unacceptable. From your perspective... Our perspective is... ""'" Sietsema: The Park and Recreation Commission looks at this site plan as though this plan were to be approved, is this the park property, is this acceptable. Is this what we, the best we can get out of it and then we send that recommendation onto City Council and in the meantime, before it gets to City Council, it goes to the Planning commission and they look at the streets and the water and the sewer and the drainage and all the other things and they make a recommendation as to whether it should be approved or disapproved and that recommendation goes on to City Council. We only look at this in regards to the park. If this plan were to happen, I would. . . Resident: Can the Council upon your recommendation to try let's say and acquire the park through condemnation, can the Council cover you if it's goes over your budget? Mady: They'd have to. Resident: Well say it's in the best interest to buy it to get this park. Sietsema: Whatever the decision, if it went into condemnation proceedings, we would be pretty much forced to pay whatever the amount was decided by the condemnation commission. Resident: And it's a lot cheaper now than it's going to be 5 to 10 years from now when the MUSA line goes in and it's all of a sudden worth a half million dollars and you could never possibly acquire it. So this is the time right now to get this land. It's cheap. $60,000.00-$70,000.00, $100,000.00 is cheap I think for a parcel of 16 acres like this. ,.... Lash: $100,000.00 would be cheap but he's not willing to sell it for $100,000.00 is the problem. We wanted to do that if it was $100,000.00 and we made the decision in January that we didn't have the funding and we were not willing or able at that point to pay $330,000.00 for 11 acres. We just bought 35 acres for $200,000.00. Park and Rec Commission Meeting April 10, 1990 - Page 16 ".... Resident: Doesn't condemnation go one way or the other or is there any middle ground? Lash: There would be a compromise. We figured even at half of that, a 50% compromise, it was going to be over $150,000.00. Resident: Well? Mayor Chmiel: We work the same way as you do at home. We've got a budget and we've allocated dollars for these different things. Consequently the Park and Recreation Commission does have $100,000.00 in the budget. Whole dollars for allocation which has already been established...trucks and vehicles and whatever else we have going. We work the same way that everybody does with their own budget. The budget's going to have to be looked and more allocations made but it can't be done in this year. It would have to be next year. It's getting too late for this year. I think the thing that we have to do is to review this and look at it as.. .and go from that point. Eric Rivkin: What happens if you try to go for outside sources like LCMR grants? I mean those aren't guaranteed money... You've used that kind of money to purchase parks in the past. Sietsema: Yes. Typically the LAWCON grant or the LCMR grants are used to fund community parks. Lake Ann Park and Lake Susan Park. We've taken ~ proposals of neighborhood parks to the LAWCON and haven't been competitive for it. , It's not to say that we couldn't try to do it now. The LCMR grant funding is a Legislative Commission on Minnesota Resources funding, the deadline was the end of February so we've got to wait until next year to apply for the grant for next year but we can certainly include the proposal and I think that deadline is in June or July for LAWCON grant. Resident: Couldn't you, I keep on trying to imply, when this MUS A line goes in. We're always a step ahead of this guy so we could have the funds already there sO...go through condemnation and you can say you've got this money and you can buy this thing. No matter what. Even if it's $300,000.00. Mady: . ..the grant funding is pretty well dried up for basically dry land. Recreational facilities. The City's benefitted a lot from them. We've used them a couple times. In the past few years, in the cases I've seen, there just isn't a lot of funding available especially for dry land recreation facilities. Eric Rivkin: Well you've got an environmental issue here. You've got wetland protection. We've got data now that you could use for the Lake Lucy watershed. We've got Minnesota Resources. We're in a program perhaps from the DNR. The LCMR, that's 60-70 million dollars. That's cigarette tax and State lottery. You can go on the basis of not only a community park but for environmental reasons, then you would meet their requirements. That's another source. .~ Sietsema: We would definitely be applying, it doesn't cost us anything to Park and Rec Commission Meeting April 10, 1990 - Page 17 ,.... apply for grants. Either one of those. What has happened is that LCMR would look at this say it's a park proposal. It belongs in the LAWCON grant office and they would refer us to them and submit an application for a grant from them and see what our chances are. It could be competitive. I don't know what their criteria is. In the past it's usually if it's connected to water, it's got more of a chance. Like a lake. Considering it's a wetland area, I can't even guess because I don't know what those criterias are. I don't know what they're funding this year. Andrews: A couple of brief comments. I agree this is not a suitable park site...the neighborhood continue their job. I also encourage you as you already said here yourself that I think the key to this development would be to make sure the MUS A line is not extended...and puts us in a stronger bargaining position. Also, I think park property does enhance property values of the houses that already exist and I think that should be considered... Even if we were to acquire this property, I have one concern and that would be that it would require extensive grading to make a useable ballfield. I'm not sure that that would be... so this parcel may not provide the uses that you're looking for. It's difficult topography to work with and I think... "..., Erhart: I also changed my mind since this group showed up tonight. I was willing to go along with the proposal... Therefore I would ask staff also to look into other funding...and to enter into negotiations with Mr. Carrico.. . ,..... Mady: I guess it doesn't really matter what we feel, it doesn't help. We're bound by law, State law. The law as it appeared in front of the State Supreme Court as to whether we can acquire...and in this particular case we're talking about...about just 12 acres of land. The standards and the ordinances of this city, what we can require Carl Carrico is how we have to base our decision on the park. It is a problem. I'd like to be able to buy the whole thing for about $65,000.00. That's what I think it's worth. I think it's a fair price and it's give us a pretty piece of land. That will allow us to have a little bit more to develop it. ...buy as much land as we can, that's not going to get you a park that's useable. You've still got a piece of ground that has considerable topography that's going to need a lot of grading to get it nice and flat and useable. That costs a lot of dollars. The Park Commission, when we set aside $100,000.00 in our budget reserve, that money came from park dedication fees 100%. The City collects property taxes. Not one dime of property taxes goes for park development. We do use some park city taxes for cutting grass and doing some maintenance but we don't buy playground equipment. We don't put in ballfields. We don't buy land with any city tax dollars and so we're looking at a development that is, Pheasant Hills put in somewhere in the neighborhood of $34,000.00 in park dedication fees. That's a nice piece of money and probably in 1980 buying somewhere around there could have bought us a pretty good chunk of land. Unfortunately that didn't occur and now we're stuck... I think there's some opportunities here. We can't require Carl Carrico to do anything. I mean a whole lot. We can't force him or say we won't do this or we won't do that more and above what we can legally require him to do. I'm not happy about the MUSA line being extended in his property. I don't know if the Park Commission has a whole lot that can be Park and Rac Commission Meeting April 10, 1990 - Page 18 ~ done about that. We can make a recommendation. Some of the areas you're discussing, we really don't get involved with there. Parking, they discuss that at Planning Commission which I supposed would be next week or the week after. We need land in Pheasant Hills badly. I say let's just get the whole thing but I think the only way we're going to do that is if the MUSA line is not extended. That's the only way we can look at it. As to not approving the development at this level, I think we have to be bound by ordinances and our standards and looking at Carl Carrico has what he has and that's what the City works with. Probably mistakes were made because of Tom Klingelhutz and apparently he's still promising things to people that aren't being had. I would think in my mind what staff has recommended according to our ordinances and law, is reasonable. I would like to see us however maybe push the City Council in the direction of not allowing the MUSA line to be extended. We have to look to what benefit does the City gain by having the MUSA line extended if it changes earlier. I haven't hear anyone here say, give a good reason why the MUSA line should be extended for Carl Carrico. We have a problem in the area and by granting the MUS A line extension just increases the problem. So the recommendation is almost kind of a split recommendation. If you look at it as what we are required to look at by our ordinances, staff recommendation is what should be recommended. And as a proposal, I guess that makes sense. However, my feeling is that we should ask the City Council to not allow the increase in the MUSA line area. I don't see a reason for it. Any discussion? Mike Filippi: I guess I've heard a lot of talk tonight about what this ~ wetland, and how much is actually going to be useable. I don't know that you're in a position where you have to say yeah, there's enough useable wetland here to quality as the amount of park that you have to dedicate. I don't think the recommendation...50% credit even if you do decide. If enough of it's wetland that's actually useable, then 50% credit on that possibly 5% or 10% of the amount of land that's useable, that's... Mady: Can I clarify for the public how we figure this out? Mike Filippi: We'd love it. Mady: He's going to generate roughly 50 people. This development will generate 50 people. Our standard is 1 acre of parkland for 75 people so we're talking about 2/3 of an acre. If he pays his park fees, we've got roughly $7,200.00 in park fees so you bring that back to a cost per acre... $20,000.00 an acre would buy you a third of an acre. What we were looking at...but if we give them 50% credit, let's say we want to take 2/3 of an acre over $3,500.00-$3,600.00...this past year for a community park in southern Chanhassen went for $6,500.00 an acre. That's a farily reasonable price. As a matter of fact, it's probably low. For Chanhassen for raw undeveloped land. So the dollars that we're getting for the land that we get, it is a reasonable number. Whether or not it does what we need it to do, to put...is another question. So we have to look at what we need for the whole area aside from what we can demand Carl Carrico. Mike Filippi: I understand what you're saying there but can I ask this, how many people on this Council have been to that piece of property? Can I ~ just see a show of hands on the Council. 3 of you. Park and Rec Commission Meeting April 10, 1990 - Page 19 ",... Mady: We toured it last year. Mike Filippi: And do you feel that you're going to get 2/3 of an acre off that? In actual useable year round... Mady: Yeah. There's two...it's going to get us what we need. At that point there's a land, unless you want to fill it all in, we can't do that. We wouldn't be following our own ordinance to do that. Resident: ...MUSA line, the decision...of land... There's a piece of land that I...they want $3,000.00 t~ $4,000.00. Now you said you could buy that for $65,000.00. I don't think that's...ll acres and most of it's wetland. But anyway... Mady: Is that on the south side? Resident: South side. They want $54,000.00 for it. sietsema: That's part of Lake Lucy Highlands. Resident: It's been on the market... (There was a lot of talk back and forth between the Commission and the audience that wasn't audible on the tape.) ,.... Resident: ...I'd like to hear an answer on how you guys are going to get around this one? Mady: There's no easy answer. We're simply limited by dollars really. How the city has gotten around the dollar problem all along has been to wait until a large enough chunk of land has come in that we can get a park. This is not a new problem. We've got, the North Lotus Lake Park went in a few weeks ago. Those residents were up in front of the City for, when my predecessor, the chairman of the Park Commission, was up here for 8 years and he lived in that neighborhood. He pushed for that park for 8 years to get one there. We can't make any promises and I certainly don't want 8 years to get this. We've got roughly 4 new people from when this started up here. The previous commission didn't have any great ideas outside of trying to condemn the land. We found out that it was a crap shoot between $65,000.00 and $330,000.00 and there was no money for anything over $100,000.00. We didn't have a decision to make. All we could say was it's too bad. Now we have Carl Carrico coming in front of us again. I'd like to be able to buy the parcel. Maybe half of the parcel but we're still, I don't know where it's going to get us. I really don't. We'll give your comments to Council and maybe they'll have some ideas. There's a lot more people that will be looking at it than just us. Resident: ...Chanhassen as a whole... Resident: $100,000.00, how are you going to stop him? Mady: You've got to realize that that land is owned by someone and they're ~ got rights too. We don't have an easy answer because we don't have any Park and Rec Commission Meeting April 10, 1990 - Page 20 ,....., dollars. It's really a, as Don said, we move through a budget and I don't know of. anyone in this town that feels the taxes are too low...to buy land. Resident: buildi ng. that?. . I agree... My main question is how this thing is stopped from We don't want it developed... Where are the dollars coming for Mayor Chmiel: Those are basically fall within the snow contingency funds they have for street maintenance. The question that we just asked just recently, and I've not gotten an answer yet. Hopefully I should have, there should be some additional dollars somewhere. Resident: I think you guys should get rid of any type of the. ..for lack of a better word...and say no to the whole thing and put a ball diamond in. Mady: We've got to look at it, seriously, we have our turn to look at it. Roger Knutson, the City Attorney basically said that the law as it's been, and it went all the way to State Supreme Court so we've got good case law to base it on. He basically said that we don't have a whole lot that we can do...outside of what the dollars will be, we don't know what's going to happen. (There was some more talking from the audience.) "..... Mady: Keep in mind, 3 years ago now we had a park referendum.in the City of Chanhassen. $300,000.00 for a community park in the City of Chanhassen in an area that was badly needed. They had no parkland. That passed by I think it was 6 votes so to say you have a whole lot of support, it isn't more in the community than we've seen today, now. I could request another survey of the community to see if that's changed but we don't know that it's changed. The creative funding sources, we ask for it all the time. Eric Rivkin: I'm talking about the people...and that's what the LCMR likes to see. They like to see what will they support. First before you even apply for the application, if you can get people to sign a petition saying, for pledges, saying we'll put in so much money... They won't give you 100% of the money. Some of it's got to come from the local people. Whatever that is. It doesn't have to be the City. It can be from individual property owners. If that's what it takes, maybe we can find support just locally. . . Lash: Lori, let me ask you a question. We have the right to reject this parcel as park property saying it's inadequate and ask for another proposal? We cannot reject the proposal? Sietsema: What I was going to recommend is that it sounds like everyone in the room is pretty much agreeing that there's park needs and this doesn't look like something we'd like to accept so I would recommend then is to recommend to the Planning Commission and the City Council that this proposal be denied due to the environmental nature of the park piece and it's affects on Lake Lucy and that's sound justification for doing that. That would be one recommendation. The second would be that if the site ~ plan were to go forward as it is, that you would direct staff to look into Park and Rec Commission Meeting April 10, 1990 - Page 21 JfI""" acqulrlng additional park pieces from development using the funds that we have already budgeted for this area. Whether it is to get a couple more of the lots or to talk to Mr. Hughes and see if he's interested in selling so that would be two recommendations that it sounds to me are supporting what I'm hearing here. That would go onto Planning Commission so they know very strongly up front that no, the Park and Rec doesn't want to see... That the MUSA line shouldn't change for the reasons Eric stated or any other additional ones. Because I think they're looking for approval...and we're all in agreement. Lash: So what are we going to do? Mady: Make a motion. Lash: To which one? Mady: I also wanted to ask..'. the second part of the recommendation the sidewalk dedication. Requiring that the sidewalk dedication...I'd like to see the commission request that if this thing goes all the way through and is approved...and he actually does build this thing, that upon depending on the kind of street he's putting in, that that sidewalk's put in the very same day. The day they're pouring concrete to put those gutters in, they pour the concrete for the sidewalks. That will save us a lot of problems later on. Can we have a motion? """" Sietsema: I heard Curt say that he would like to deny the proposal for the site...specifically the wetland value... Robinson: That's exactly what I said. Lash: Okay, and I'll second it. Robinson moved, Lash seconded that the Park and Recreation Commission recommend denial of the proposed Site Plan for the Carrico Addition due to the environmental nature of the site, i.e. wetland value on the Lake Lucy watershed. All voted in favor and the motion carried. Mady: Now the second one? Sietsema: Basically that the recommendation would be that the proposed park plan is not adequate and direct staff to work with the Carrico's and neighboring land owners to acquire additional property... A resident made a statement that was not audible on the tape. Sietsema: We have to react to the site plan as it relates to the park issues. It will come back to the Park and Recreation Commission. Basically they're saying this isn't good enough. Bring us something better. So it will come back. ,.... (There was talk back and forth between the audience and Lori sietsema at this point.) Park and Rec Commission Meeting April 10, 1990 - Page 22 "'"' Sietsema: A lot of it depends on the budget and how much we negotiate. You know if Mr. Hughes is willing to sell, then that makes that whole piece a different park. Resident... Sietsema: Hughes' is the piece just, this square. Resident: Is that wetland? Sietsema: No, this is wet down here. I would have to look at it. I can't tell you what I'm going to do because I have to look at it. Lash: When this comes back to us Lori... Andrews: Is there a homeowners association... Resident: Andrews: I guess I'd encourage you...park interest group of some nature to look at consolidating funding and actually help us coordinate...cooperative funding. I know it's a nice idea but it's very difficult to make that happen. The sooner that action is taken... ~ Resident: Mady: Our Minutes are verbatim. Do we have a motion? Sietsema: I've got that Jan tabled this item to direct staff to negotiate for more additional property using current budgeted funds out of the park acquisition fund and Dawne seconded. Lash moved, Erhart seconded that the Park and Recreation Commission direct staff to negotiate for more additional property using current budgeted funds out of the park acquisition fund. All voted in favor and the motion carried. AUTHORIZE EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS FOR THE LAKE ANN PARK LEGION SHELTER. Sietsema: As some of you may recall, the rest of you who don't, in 1986 the Legion came to the City and asked if they could build a park shelter up by the ballfields at Lake Ann Park. They asked the City to forward the funds for the construction of that, construction of trails and that they would repay those funds with their charitable gambling proceeds. So the City did that. We put into an account $15,000.00 and they purchased their materials and their equipment and. ..built eventually. There is $8,000.00 remaining in that fund and we have 3 options for what we can do with the $8,000.00. Return it to the Park Acquisition and Development fund from which it came or we could improve the shelter to include water or put a shelter to include electricity. As well as what will be done with the park shelter that's a community park shelter that's planned to be built down by ~ the lake. Staff is recommending that we go to putting in the electricity Park and Rec Commission Meeting April 10, 1990 - Page 23 ,.... from the gate house and put it down by that backstop over Field #1 or Field #2 and get electricity up to the park shelter and then include water throughout the park when we build the picnic shelter. Lash: I have a question. What will be the use of the electricity? Sietsema: So they don't use a generator or borrow anything out of the concession stand. There's no electricity right now so if you want to plug in a coffee pot. Lash: I know like the Lion's and... That's not very often is it? Sietsema: I think we'd get a lot more use out of the facility and it'd be great for tournaments. The other thing is that we don't have any electricity at each of the backstops so if we ever, we have pitching machines that are available to the players and we have no way of connecting those. Andrews: I have another question. Would the services probably be adequate, is there lighting on those fields currently? Sietsema: There's lighting on Field #1... Andrews: On Field #2, would that have adequate service for lights? JIll"" Mady: . ..a long time. Andrews: ...So the point about the concession stand... Lash: My other question Lori was, say we were to put sort of a smaller type...basically provide that with a drinking fountain or maybe even a couple of toilets. Would that be something we could do for $8,000.00 and not get into water.. .and even just drinking fountain. Andrews: I think also the process... (The commissioners were talking very softly at this point and could not be heard on the tape.) Hoffman: There are specifications for electricity to the shelter and all three of the fields. It may come in somewhat lower than $8,OOO.OO...get requests each year from the organizations that use that facility...and facilities not there. Can we run an overground service from the back of the gate house up there?.. Sietsema: It makes the facility.. .than it currently is. Schroers: I'm in favor of getting electricity to the facility. This has been going on for a long time. This is another one of those deals that has been dragged on for a long, long time. The facility was intended from the beginning that it would have electrical. It's all stubbed in for electrical and all that and I would like to see us get some of these things ~ taken care of. That's an ongoing complaint from the residents that how Park and Rec Commission Meeting April 10, 1990 - Page 24 ,..... long it takes us to actually get something done. I'm definitely in favor. I think that that makes the facility much more useable and it's an issue that won't have to come up again. Mady: I guess I have to agree with Larry. We seldom seem to be able to finish a project...and hope for the best and hope that somehow or another we find another source of funds for something. We're always money short. Wait too long and the...filled up. I do have one question for staff. That's the $8,000.00. Is the Legion reimbursing the City? Does that include this $8,000.00? Sietsema: No. Mady: Okay, so this is just money that they didn't spend so... Sietsema: Yeah. Schroers: We have already allocated the money for this correct? Sietsema: For the park shelter. Mady: Shelter improvements, yeah. Schroers: So we basically we have budgeted for it already? ~ Sietsema: We budgeted it for electricity. Hoffman: ...other activities that take place there. Summer playground... It could be used for installation of electricity... Lash: I'd still prefer to have water but if we can't do it for that amount of money. Mady: Well we'll be getting water in this summer with the other shelter anyways. Robinson: I'll make a motion. Lash: Second. Robinson: That we approve the shelter to include electricity and also provide electricial service to Fields #1 and #2. And if there's any money left over out of that $8,000.00, that it be returned to park acquisition and development. Lash: Now I'll second it. Robinson moved, Lash seconded that the Park and Recreation Commission recommend authorizing expenditure of $8,000.00 in the Legion Shelter account to provide electrical service to Fields 1 and 2 and the Legion Shelter and to return any remaining funds to the Park Acquisition and Development Fund. All voted in favor and the motion carried. ,... Park and Rec Commission Meeting April 10, 1990 - Page 25 JIIfI". APPROVE METHOD OF DESIGNATING CANOE RACKS. Sietsema: As indicated in the memo, the Park and Recreation Commission has approved a park plan for Carver Beach, the linear park along Lotus Trail which at the time that that was approved we also directed staff to install canoe racks at that site. The canoe racks were built over the winter by the Park Maintenance staff and are ready to be placed. The only thing was that on the park plan it didn't indicate the exact location of the canoe racks. ...we had talked about putting a canoe rack out at Lake Ann and South Lotus Lake or another park site. Lake Susan, whatever so we have 3. 2 for the Carver Beach site and one for another lake site and we need your direction tonight as to where to place the 3 and also the procedure by which to rent them. Andrews: On the Carver Beach site.. .there's a small...that's flat that provides a place to store canoes. However, there's no parking there which is a problem. I guess...residents to use these? Sietsema: It would be open city wide. Andrews: .. .parking on the north section of Carver Beach... "...., Sietsema: In response to that, I would just like to mention that the location of, the southern location of the canoe rack, there is parking available and I would think that we would put those up for people that don't live close by. There's a lot of homes along this park that have canoes that would like to store them and I would probably designate those for.. . Schroers: So how would you recommen splitting it up? Putting one on each end? Sietsema: Right. On the map you can see that I, at the old boat access site there would be one and at the mini beach, or the beach. Where the parking you just stubbed in on the southern end, the other one down there and then so the people that have to drive to the park can get the spots by the parking spaces and the people that walk to the park get the spots on the end. Schroers: We had addressed an issue of removing a no parking sign or two and having a short area on that road where parallel parking could go for 2 or 3 cars. Whatever happened to that? Sietsema: There was discussion as to that was a possibility for the future but staff wasn't directed to pursue it...take that to the Public Safety Commission as well if we do want to pursue that because the narrowness of the road and any problems you might have with that. (One of the commissioners asked a question that could not be heard on the tape. ) ,.... Park and Rec Commission Meeting April 10, 1990 - Page 26 .""'" Sietsema: I don't think that there is. I think that's another question. Lash: How about like right in this whole... Sietsema: Park property, the road doesn't go through there. There's a road easement. ..actually meets the lake. It's Just park. Mady: One individual still has a dock out. ..and Roger indicated that he wasn't...and people were parking there anyway. ..1 kind of agree with the sentiment that staff that...and leave the public parking on the east end of where the big public beach is. Robinson: Is it a given that we put two racks on Carver Beach? Sietsema: That's what was directed. Schroers: And put the third rack, I guess I would hope for Lake Lucy but, I mean not Lake Lucy. Lake Susan and then there's no problem with parking. Lash: I want to do that too but do you think that that lake, I'm not familiar with that lake. I've never been on it myself. Is that lake busy? Sietsema: It hasn't been. It's a small lake. It's not much bigger than Lake Ann. ""'" Lash: Is there a limit to how many people you want...? Mady: I have no problem with that... You're planning on having the City Attorney draw up some sort of what they'll pay... Andrews: Are they having a season specified on there. ..removed by x date? Sietsema: That would be part of the rental agreement. Lash: I don't have a problem with the selection process but one thing I guess I would like to maybe see considered is, if you were chosen to have a spot and then you reapplied the next year and there were more applicants than spots, that your name would be kind of fall down on the list therefore giving everybody more opportunity. Erhart: I don't want to do that. Andrews: I think you throw it in the pot and everybody has an equal opportunity. Mady: It should be because otherwise once you're there, you're in forever. Lash: Yeah, I don't like that idea at all. Schroers: ...in the paper notifying people through the Villager that this opportunity is going to be available. .~ Mady: Since the Council doesn't do their recycling drawing anymore... Park and Rec Commission Meeting April 10, 1990 - Page 27 ,.... Andrews: Is this for canoes only or are we talking sailboards or kayaks? Schroers: Do you need a motion Lori? Mady: Yeah. Andrews: I move that we put one rack at the main location at Carver Beach, one in the north section and one at Lake Susan Park and the selection as suggestion... Mady: Second. Andrews moved, Mady seconded to locate one canoe rack at the main location at Carver Beach, another canoe rack in the north section of Carver Beach and a third canoe rack at Lake Susan Park. Selections for canoe slips would be through a lottery system with a fee of $20.00 per season. All voted in favor and the motion carried. APPROVE JULY 4TH CONTRACTS; BANNER FIREWORKS DISPLAY COMPANY. ,.... Hoffman: Item number 5, review the bids for the 4th of July fireworks display. Two companies submitted bids and the third company did not submit a bid... The best fireworks which they gave us a real comparable price on it. It appears at first glance that Arrowhead Fireworks had a little more... Over the past years have not received really a recommendation... The same company do it. In talking with Arrowhead they were hesitant to give out the name...they work with...and he said for the money they spent they'd li ke. . . Mady: What size of show was there... Were they comparable sizes to us? Were they smaller? Hoffman: They were larger. Just over $10,000.00 and they thought they received somewhat less of a show than a lot of you have... Mady: I'll make a motion to recommend Banner for this year. They've given us excellent shows in the last few years and I don't see any reason to think about going to anybody else. Andrews: Second. Mady moved, Andrews seconded that the Park and Recreation Commission recommend approval of Banner Firewords Display Company's bid in the amount of $5,190.00 for the 1990 4th of July fireworks display. All voted in favor and the motion carried. Lash: I thought you were going to do something about the band... Hoffman: The note on the band. Since we had the intention of bringing it ~ back to this meeting, since my initial call, I called him like 4 times .,..... iI""" Park and Rec Commission Meeting April 10, 1990 - Page 28 and... The impression I'm getting is that he thinks we're being hard nosed ...and I'm not sure where we'll end up with it...at some point we should... CHANHASSEN CLEAN-UP DAY. Hoffman: This report Council level. There for the next Tuesday. meeting. we've seen a lot of interest from the commission and seems to be great interest and we've set up a meeting Jerry Ruegemer is going to be heading up that Jerry Ruegemer: This is a worthwhile project. It's being portrayed as city employees are very important in the community in continuing to support. ..and I sincerely believe that this is a good effort that we can put forth to better ourselves. First if I could go through the ideas that I have put together and you can object or approve, whatever the case may be. If you have any suggestions, please if you'd let me know and we could brainstorm or we could make this a real positive clean-up throughout the City. We can start with number one. It's just give recognition to volunteers. Possibly there might be a check in point where we could have a sign-up sheet where we could get an accurate number and possibly with names and addresses we could get something out giving recoginition to the people that did volunteer. That's one way of recognizing or possibly public thank yous throughout the newspapers being a better channel to pursue. As number two, we could promote this to be a contest of some kind. Prizes awarded to people who do bring in the most volunteers or the most litter or garbage in terms of volume. That could be a possibility. I think a very nice touch would be to have something set up possibly in the City Hall or City Center Park that we could set up possibly if you donated pop or hot dogs from local businesses could show appreciation to volunteers and have kind of a social mixer. Kind of show the City support...to award that for their effort. Possibly we might be able to work with the local merchants and retailers with the volunteer effort that we could possibly reward them, if they would be generous enough to donate, I just put like an example for McDonalds maybe with the volunteers that do help with the clean-up, possibly they could receive a token for a free ice cream cone. That's just an example. We could kind of go off from there. If you have an ideas, let me know and possibly pursue that. Another possible idea which would be allow some type of reward for registration fees or park and rec programs. Another way to see if that would work and that would be to just put a list down. Maybe put down either you vote to possibly, I don't know how feasible that is. Possibly if you get more attendance with the new volunteers for the program. I've been talking about this idea...and the City Council. Just tossing out ideas. It'd be a good idea to start at the top. They work here. To get the idea that we're growing at the top so the community can see that well if the Mayor's out here, if it's good enough for him, it's good enough for me possibly to promote the idea from the top and work your way down through the ranks. Would be a possible idea. I think it would be a good idea to pursue. Councilwoman Dimler: What day are we talking about here? ~. Jerry Ruegemer: It'd be May 5th. """" """" ,.... Park and Rec Commission Meeting April 10, 1990 - Page 29 Councilwoman Dimler: Oh, I'm not available that day. Ruegemer: One possible way to have the designate certain areas in Chanhassen as pick-up points for the garbage. Possibly you could have local sanitary companies or possibly use city trucks to bring the garbage to a certain focal point or drop off area throughout the community to have City Council people or Park and Rec Commission people to be directors or or certain leadership in this area. It's possible you could divide up the city of Chanhassen in the radius that would, equal out the neighborhoods and we could possibly have drop off points for that. Robinson: Jerry you're talking about the clean-up of the whole city? This isn't just park clean-up, is that right? Ruegemer: City wide. And we could like the Mayor, we could get the City Council members and Park and Rec Commission members involved. That would show a lot of support throughout the community. I think that would be a real good idea and also to get the city employees involved with it. The more people that are involved with this, the better it's going to be. More information is going to be set forth throughout the community. Also another possible idea would be city employees having, wherever they go out in a car or walk around to different various areas throughout Chanhassen, carry flyers with them promoting the idea of the clean-up day and just word of mouth. Just passing out. People talking to people and getting people involved. Getting people used to the idea. The more people that know... would be a possible promotion idea. Also, be involved with the schools. We could, throughout the school, before the actual clean-up day we could send flyers to the schools similar to like the Easter Egg Hunt where we divide it up into schools and we have the children bring the flyers home. We could do this a certain amount of times before the actual clean-up day and we could promote that way through the schools. Also I think talk to the teachers and we could promote it that way if they would show the kids that it is an important idea to keep the city clean and have pride in your community. That we could promote it that way. That would just allow say 10 or 15 minutes a week, every 2 days to promote the idea and get the children used to the idea. Parents listen to their kids most of the time and if they could get used to the idea, it would be beneficial for the clean-up. Also, for information we could put posters around the various businesses. In and around City Hall' and around the Chanhassen community to promote the idea. Also the obvious advertising through the newspapers. We could place certain promotional ads in the Sailor, Villager, Herald just promoting the idea that we could get into the paper at least 2 or 3 different places and people would just stumble upon it and get used to the idea that way. Also, we have sent letters out to the homeowners associations and possibly they could break down, get subgroups between the homeowners associations and possibly head groups that way to promote the idea within their own neighborhood. Lash: Did you say yoU have sent out letters? Ruegemer: Another possible area or idea that came up, if we were not to have certain destination points or drop off points would be to put the garbage in their own garbage cans and dispose of them on their weekly Park and Rec Commission Meeting April 10, 1990 - Page 30 IfI""" cycle. garbage money. people. That might be a possible idea to see how feasible that is since charges by the can and if people are willing to pay that extra This is a possible idea we can pursue farther. Get out and talk to Andrews: Do you have your garbage hauler... Lash: I just got my bill the other day. It's 1 can, 2 cans, 3 cans. Sietsema: So if you put it out with your own garbage, you might have to get an agreement... Pemrick: One thing you might want to consider, and Jan and I are closest to this thing, but placing information or posters around town. That's kind of a neat art project to get the kids involved in at the schools. Kind of the last 20 minutes of the day, let's color up some posters to put around town and kids get into it... Lash: Yeah, I kind of thought too, just to go a little further with this school idea. You could try talking with Kathleen Massee and see if possibly the school would be willing to do kind of a pick-up thing Friday to sort of get them into the whole idea of the thing by just having kids out and pick up around the school and maybe City Center Park. You know there could be a contest for each classroom or grade level or whatever... but that might get them in the mood for... .,.... Ruegemer: That's a good idea. Then just a closing thought...the idea is good and it's going to go as far as we take it. We have to get the whole city involved, including for the most part the City officials and I think that's really important. The idea of going, get everybody involved and it really shows community spirit. Like a fire, it spreads and we have a good idea. Let's take it as far as we can go with it. Robinson: Are we considering old tires? Would we do that? Did you think about getting into some of that? They don't have a chance to, the City of Minneapolis did that a year ago, 2 years ago. Schroers: I think if it's going to be a successful promotion and we're going to get a lot of input, we are going to end up with a lot of garbage and we're going to have make a deal with a commercial hauler to pick-up and take whatever we come up with. I think that may take some kind of a negotiating because there are extra charges for things like tires and batteries and that sort of thing but I think that's the avenue to pursue. Jerry came up with an awful lot of good ideas. I'm a little surprised. A whole bunch of ideas. I think that there's a couple of them that I don't think, in my opinion, wouldn't appeal to me. I think a certificate of appreciation for pick-up litter wouldn't mean too much to me. Prizes for people who get the most volunteers. Prizes and that sort of thing. I'm not sure how much, I guess I would be motivated for a prize. I would be more motivated in the pride of cleaning up your community and feeling good rather than getting a...prize. I don't think that's what we want to promote. Discounts on local businesses and stuff, I think that's kind of ~ Park and Rec Commission Meeting April 10, 1990 - Page 31 IfI""" the same thing. But other than that, I think all your ideas were really good. Lash: I agree with some of those Larry too. I circled ones that I liked the best and maybe we can kind of combine a couple of these and sort of make it, if we could kind of con people into thinking that this was going to be fun. If we got Mayor Chmiel and the Council people and kind of have a kick off thing in the morning and maybe we could get McDonalds to throw in coffee or something and we could get McGlynn's to throw in donuts. Wendy Pemrick made a comment that could not be heard. Schroers: Where are we with that? Has the date been firmly established? Have we been working to that end already? Hoffman: Somewhat firmly established in that... Lash: If you have a major kick-off in the morning and kind of do a thing like that and get everybody all pumped up and get back and pick up and then have dumpsters up by City Center and then have like free hot dogs and pop when they dump their garbage... IfI""" Schroers: Would it make it easier if we just went down through this list and had a yes/no vote on a number of the items and that way we could eliminate the things that everybody doesn't want and then we could focus on what's left and try to make that work? ,....., Mady: I wonder, we go~ 2 weeks, 3 weeks to get this done. I'm somewhat concerned that we get this thing too big. Because then you're not going to have enough people to get it all done and get it all organized so I think we're best off in the first year to downgrade it as much as possible. Maybe making, just doing some awareness this very first year. Holding coloring contests in school. It's potentially a good idea, I know my daughter came home with this big poster she's supposed to color for earth day or earth week...so I know that's taking place. Maybe that's a good idea there. I don't think the City's got a lot of money for ads in the paper. You might be able to get a story out of it and do some things but awareness in the first year is the most important phase. Making people aware of it this year. If we can get a couple of groups together and go out and clean specific areas of the downtown area. Park areas. Get a Boy Scout or Girl Scout troop to go out and do that. I'm sure you can get that accomplished. Make as much of the city aware as possible. Do it in our own yards. Maybe get people some information. I know my family's been recycling all along with the City and putting the sign out every couple weeks and letting everybody know.. .but they don't know what to do with their sticks and their leaves right now. It's like, you put them in a big bag and put it on the curb and you go, well tomorrow is it still going to be here. It may not be. You just don't really know so I think no one really knows what's going on anymore with the trash. We're not quite sure what we're supposed to do. I saw a bunch of my neighbors put out plastic bottles thinking they'd be recycled and they came by and they put the bottles in the bin. So there are places that those can go. There's some drop off points. One in Eden Prairie. One over in Minnetonka that I'm Park and Rec Commission Meeting April 10, 1990 - Page 32 "'" aware of but our current pick-up doesn't do that. So I think we need to do a teaching process this first year. It doesn't mean...for the City. ..that we're trying to organize the City to do the whole thing this year but I think there's some good points and some good ideas for next year so we can start on it now. Plan ahead. Ruegemer: ...success this year. Sietsema: I don't know that you need to really approve or disapprove of that whole list. If there's something on there you don't want to be pursued or ideas that should be added. They're going to probably, the thing's going to start jelling when we realize how many volunteers we have at the meeting he's got set up for the people that have called so far. So I don't know if we really need formal action on it. Hoffman: read about their yard street and It's something, it's awareness. How much is a person going to it in the newspaper and take their own initiative to pick-up or... It is an awareness. We're all guilty of walking down the walking past a pop can...and picking up your neighborhood park. Ruegemer: If you have any ideas, give me a call. Thank you. Mady: Does staff have anything else for tonight? Sietsema: No. ;111" Mady: I have a couple things I wanted to ask in the Administrative Section. On the fishing pier, it's nice to see that being approved. On the second page of the sample agreement and installation, it talks about the City needs to construct a concrete footing. Do we have that budgeted. Is it... Okay. The second item was under K on the third page of it. It says the City shall take necessary steps no later than October 1...ice. Now we now know that our city insurance policy does not cover things that are left out in the water so maybe we should be aware that...DNR and find out who's responsibilities... This is a very nice dock and we should be... Hoffman: All the fishing piers currently in the state do stay in during the winter. In such a case that the ice did damage one of the docks extensively... Mady: The last thing I had on the adminstrative packet had to do with the u.S. Open tickets. Am I understanding that each one of us has the option of getting up to 6 tickets or is there just 6 tickets for the City? Or can I get 6 tickets. Robinson: And can I get 6 tickets? Hoffman: You want 6 at $175.00 a piece? Mady: Yes. ,...... Hoffman: Then you should contact the u.S. Open office. This is just a personal call to myself to get information on tickets for the u.S. Open. Park and Rec Commission Meeting April 10, 1990 - Page 33 ~ Mady: So it wasn't an actual invitation to just the City? So anybody could have done this? Hoffman: Sure. They have not advertised these tickets to the general public. They will do so on June 15th and once that day gets here.. .so if you would like to contact them now, it'd be the appropriate time to call. Mady: So this is basically on an individual basis? Okay. A couple other questions. You were going to be looking at play structures this time around? sietsema: Mady: Okay, then you guys...so I'm assuming you don't want any help. Hoffman: It's amazing. Before we even solicited for volunteers, we had the Honor Society at the High School. 25 volunteers. Any of the old pros, certainly we could use knowledge and guidance can certainly show up. Mady: Is there a motion to adjourn? Erhart: I've got one item. Schroers: And I've got an item. ",... Erhart: A letter that I'm passing down...put on a future agenda. Along with that I would also like to ask staff to put sidewalks... Schroers: I would like to identify this particular parcel of property right here as being considered for possible park property for the Pheasant Hills area. Sietsema: On the piece across the street from Kerber? Schroers: Yeah. I don't know if that's the way you describe it or not but it's where Lake Lucy Road Y's off. Maybe it is the corner parcel there. And we need to look at and see how big it is... I go past there frequently and I'm judging that it's at least a couple acres and the topography there is such that it can be worked with. It's not a real wet area. I think that is probably the most available and most useable area in the neighborhood of Pheasant Hills. And if they were correct in the selling price of $52,000.00, I think we should take a real serious look at that and see if we can't make that work and try to achieve. Andrews: That's across the road. Schroers: Well it's right where the road Y's. Pemrick: Do they have to cross the street? ~ Schroers: They have to cross the street but coming right down out of that development, it depends on, if they're coming out of the development and just follow the street, they wouldn't have to cross it. If they stayed on Park and Rec Commission Meeting April 10, 1990 - Page 34 ,.... the right side of the street, they'd be right there. The main flow of traffic, the fast traffic and the heavy traffic follows this curve down and around it. It does not go up into that area so it really would be a pTetty ideal location and there may even be an additional parcel back in here that's undeveloped that could be added to it. I seem to remember a low or a wet area back in there and I don't know. You'd have to ask Bill where it is but if the information they gave us tonight is correct and this parcel is available for sale for that amount of money, we need to find out how big it is and whether or not it could accommodate probably not all but at least some of their needs. Take a real serious look at it in the very near future. Erhart: what can you get on that 2 1/2 acres? We couldn't get their ball diamond that they're talking about? Not even small. Sietsema: Yeah, you could get a ball diamond. Lash: I remember in our packet before when we were looking at this whole Carrico thing and there was a picture of a for sale sign and it was... Is that the same? Because that was 2 1/2 acres. At that time I mentioned that and you guys kind of sounded like it wouldn't be suitable. That it was too wet or something. Sietsema: I remember that picture you're talking about... I think what I probably would have responded.. .per acre. 2 1/2 acres so it's... ,.... Schroers: I'm willing to go out there with anybody and look at it and look at what surrounds it also just to see if there's something that we can do with it. With all the concern that there was here tonight... Lash: Can we do it before our next meeting? I ripped this out of my magazine that came, the Park and Rec magazine and I'm sure it's probably too late to do anything yet this year Todd but maybe it's something we can kick around for next year where they have May 9th is National Youth Fun Fitness Day. Do you know what I mean? Hoffman: I noticed that as well. Lash: Is that something we can think about? Hoffman: If you want. Schroers moved, Erhart seconded to adjourn the meeting. All voted in favor and the motion carried. The meeting was adjourned at 10=00 p.m.. Submitted by Lori Sietsema Park and Rec Coordinator Prepared by Nann Opheim ~