PRC 1990 04 24
,...
'I
CHANHASSEN PARK AND RECREATION COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
APRIL 24, 1990
Chairman Mady called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m..
MEMBERS PRESENT: Wendy pemrick, Jan Lash, Dawne Erhart, James Andrews, Jim
Mady, Curt Robinson and Larry Schroers
STAFF PRESENT: Lori Sietsema, Park and Rec Coordinator, Todd Hoffman,
Recreation Supervisor and Jerry Ruegemer, Program Specialist
APPOINT ACTING CHAIR: Andrews moved, Mady seconded to appoint Larry
Schroers as Acting Chair for the meeting. All voted in favor and the
motion carried.
REVIEW HERMAN FIELD COST ESTIMATES AND FACILITY PRIORITIZATION.
P.\J.Q.+..j,.52.......PX.~.$~..D..t...=....
N..9..rr.'-~..
tl.9..QT..l?..:?.$.
Betty Lang
Bob & Marcia Schiferli
Dolores Ziegler
Kelly Ziegler
2631 Forest Avenue, Excelsior
325 George Street, Excelsior
6441 Oriole Avenue, Excelsior
6480 Oriole Avenue, Excelsior
Sietsema: I included some background material for your benefit just so you
can get kind of the feel of what the history of the park is. Basically
.~ over the past year the development of Herman Field has been requested to be
speeded up by the homeowners in the area who were interested in forming a
group called the Friends of Herman Field. That group met 2 weeks ago to
discuss prioritization of the facilities at the park and that
recommendation is included. Basically they recommended that the park, the
first phase of the park include park access, the playground area, open
field, trail development and 50% of the landscaping in phase 1.
Additionally they recommended that the 1990 Capital Improvement Program
budget be amended if it was necessary to, if the cost of these items
exceeded $3,500.00 which is in the current budget. They also recommended
that Phase 2 to include the boardwalk, picnic area, tennis court, lookout
tower, picnic shelter and landscaping and recommended that that be funded
in 1991. Staff feels the committee's recommendation is reasonable and in
order to begin development, we need to then move into acquisition of that
access. The easement between the road right-of-way and the actual park.
As those costs are unknown at this time because we'll have to have
appraisals done and work with the current landowner, I would recommend that
we wait to amend the budget until we know exactly what numbers we're
dealing with. But otherwise, to accept the recommendation of the
committee.
Schroers: Is there anyone in the audience tonight that is from the Friends
of Herman Field that wish to make any comment in regards to this? Would
you please come up and state your name and address for us please.
Betty Lang: My name is Betty Lang. I live at 2631 Forest Avenue. That
~ was part of the property that Lori was mentioning as far as access to the
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
April 24, 1990 - Page 2
"....
park. We had talked about some of the things at the meeting that we had
and one of the things that I think I failed to bring up at that time was
sometime back they had mentioned an entrance gate that would be closed like
whatever the closing would be for parks. 10:00 or 11:00 and I would still
like to see that so that it can be locked at night. And also I think we
discussed the possibility of having open fires down there. The more I
thought about it, the less I thought it was a good idea due to the fact
that our property adjoins that and there's no water, no hydrants or
anything down there. I guess that's it.
Schroers: Thank you. How do you feel about the entrance gate Lori?
That's something that could be taken into consideration?
"
Sietsema: That can certainly be done. The park maintenance staff has
built gates in the past and I don't see that that would be a big problem.
As far as the fire rings, the committee did discuss whether there should be
grills or fire rings. I can't recall that they really came up with a
conclusion. The staff would not recommend that we put in any kind of a
fire ring. At the most we'd consider grills and the policy has been to
provide grills in parks because oftentimes people will bring their grills,
grill in the park and then dump the coals on the ground and walk away and
throw their grill back in their car and then you have the potential for
either fire or kids walking over hot coals. So we have provided grills to
prevent that from happening. It's just basically something that this
commission should, however you feel about it.
Schroers: Maybe that would be something to consider in Phase 2 of the
development?
Sietsema: Yeah. We wouldn't have to include that in the first phase. I
don't know if anybody felt real strongly one way or another about the
grills but staff again would not recommend having the fire rings.
Mady: And if there's anymore discussion on fire rings, I would like to see
it go to the Public Safety Commission and maybe input from the Fire
Marshall too.
Schroers: Is there anyone else in the audience that would like to comment
on the Herman Field issue? If not, then I would open it to the commission
for any comments in regards to this issue.
Lash: I was a couple minutes late so I missed what, did you say anything
beyond what your recommendation was?
Sietsema: Not really.
Lash: Okay. I just had a couple of questions. One is, what do we have in
the budget for 1991? Anything?
Sietsema: We haven't done a budget for 1991.
,....
Lash: So that's something we can look at.
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
April 24, 1990 - Page 3
,....
Sietsema: That's a blank piece of paper at this point.
Robinson: Did we have something in there? We did a 3 year plan or
something.
Sietsema: Boy, I'd have to go back and look. I don't recall that there
was anything in the 5 year plan. I don't recall that there was.
Schroers: Jan, do you have something else?
Lash: The way I'm understanding this is what you're saying is Phase 1 is
going to cost more than the $35,000.00?
Sietsema: It's very likely that it would.
Lash: So you're recommending a budget adjustment?
Sietsema: What I'm recommending is that you approve phase 1 as the
committee has outlined it and direct staff to proceed with acquisition of
the access easement that we'll need and when we know what firm costs are,
I'll bring it back to you for a budget amendment at that time.
Schroers: Jim, do you have any thoughts?
.~ Mady: Yeah, I just wanted to the plan looks fine. The work of the Friends
of Herman Field committee along with staff should be commended. As to
amending the budget at this time, I guess I'd like to see staff go forward
to guesstimates. Get the cost done, nailed down and then come back with a
site. I have a real difficult time saying yes or no to a budget amendment
at this time. We have to, I think as a commission, have to discuss how we
consider budget amendments. Whether this one gets one or not or another
park gets a budget amendment, I have a tough time amending the budget once
it's been in place. I don't know if we have a procedure in place for that
but I would like to see staff get an appraisal done and get the
negotiations going with it because until that's done, absolutely nothing
else can go along.
Robinson: Lori, did the Friends of Herman Field approve of the latest plan
we had?
Sietsema: Yes.
Robinson: They liked that plan?
Sietsema: They were directed, I indicated to them that the meeting was
where they should bring up any last changes that they would like to see on
the plan and there were none that were talked about.
Robinson: Do we have any alternatives if it just becomes cost prohibitive
or whatever on coming off Forest Avenue at the proposed location? The
access road. Is there a second alternative if we just...
,.....
,....
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
April 24, 1990 - Page 4
Sietsema: Well if you recall, we looked at, we did a feasibility study on
four different accesses to tre park. One coming off of TH 41. Coming off
of Oriole. One coming off Forest and then the other one coming off of
Piper Ridge. Piper Ridge was not accessible through that area at all. The
TH 41 option was the most expensive and the Oriole Lane was the one where
the soils were poor and we would have to take down the large stand of
trees. So it was the decision of this Commission and also approved by City
Council to do the Forest Avenue access.
Robinson: So the other 3 alternatives are really not very good
alternatives?
Sietsema: No.
Robinson: I have no further comments.
Erhart: I would go along with staff's recommendation.
Schroers: Jim and Wendy are kind of new and I don't know if you had an
opportunity to be, I'm pretty sure that you didn't have an opportunity to
be involved in the Herman Field issue from the onset but if you have any
comments in that regard, we'd be happy to hear them.
Andrews: I guess my only comment would be toward later development and
~ that would be what, there appear to be trails through the woods. Would
those be lit at night at all or would that be an area that would be kept...
Schroers: No. I think that our original intention was that they're
basically a nature type trail in the spring, summer and fall season and
would possibly lend itself to cross country sking in the winter but
basically they would be a turf trail and not real developed.
Sietsema: The City Code states that public parks are closed at 10:00 or
dusk, whichever comes first in neighborhood parks~
Andrews: I'm thinking from a safety standpoint and there probably would
not be a concern then.
Sietsema: The park would not be open at night so there wouldn't be a real
need to have them.
Pemrick: I too agree with staff's recommendation on this and I can
appreciate Mrs. Lang's comments about wanting it locked. If it's on her
property line I think that's only right that we would honor that.
~
Schroers: Okay, good. I also feel that the recommendation is acceptable.
From personal experience, I'd like to make two comments in regard to
boardwalks. Boardwalks, number one generally cut through prime wildlife
areas and number two are an expensive, very expensive item in terms of
maintenance. There's all kinds of problems with them. I don't know what
the water level is or exactly where the boardwalk is proposed but if it's a
proposing type of one, the floating type of materials they have seems to
enhance the appetite of the muskrats and they get in there and eat that
JIll'"
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
April 24, 1990 - Page 5
sort of thing all up. The weeds tend to grow up through it and under it
and rot it out and it's really a difficult thing to maintain so I think
that's something that you may want to take a look at. But other than
that, I think that it's fine and I guess I'd be ready to entertain a motion
if someone has one.
Mady: I'll make a motion that we direct staff to proceed with the
appraisal and negotiations on the park access as soon as possible.
Robinson: I'll second it.
Mady moved, -Robinson seconded that the Park and Recreation Commission
authorize staff to have an appraisal done on the property needed for park
access and to enter into negotiations with the property owners for
acquisition. All voted in favor and the motion carried.
REVIEW REQUEST TO AMEND COMPREHENSIVE TRAIL PLAN.
Sietsema: I had a couple of calls on this item. People who were
interested in being in the audience and I told them that it probably would
not be on the agenda until after 8:00 so if you would want to hold off on
this just because I know there was some interest.
Schroers: I wouldn't have a problem with that. Does anyone object? Okay.
~ Then we'll put that to the back of our packet and move to item 6.
SITE PLAN REVIEW, REDMOND PRODUCTS, INC.
Sietsema: This site plan proposal is located, the location of the site is
just north of the Lake Susan Hills West subdivision. It will be located on
the north side of what will be Lake Drive. Just south of the Business
Park. It is 51.6 acres that's proposed to be developed into a 388,380
square foot office/warehouse facility. As you may know, Redmond Products
is currently located just off of TH 5 over by. the Press and ABC Lumber.
They're proposing to develop a bigger facility and move. The Comprehensive
Plan does not call for parks in this area as Lake Susan Park serves the
industrial area. Additionally the City has parks in Lake Susan Hills West
directly across the street from this site. The most northerly park site
of Lake Susan Hills West lies directly across the street. Lake Drive East
will include a sidewalk along the south side of the road and the trail plan
calls for a concrete sidewalk along the east side of Audubon Road north of
Lake Drive East. So the recommendation as there is no, this ins't a park
deficient area, the recommendation for staff is to require the payment of
park dedication fees in lieu of parkland dedication and to require a 20
foot wide trail easement along Audubon Road and the construction of a 5
foot wide concrete sidewalk within the easement and to allow a $3,500.00
toward the trail fee for sidewalk construction.
Mady: So the credit is specifically for Audubon Road?
Sietsema: Audubon only because the sidewalk along Lake Drive will be...
~
Mady: In the HRA deal.
~
Pa,k and Rec Commission Meeting
Ap,il 24, 1990 - Page 6
Sch,oe,s: How did you a"ive at the figu,e of $3,500.00?
Sietsema: We had estimates of what a ,unning foot of sidewalk would cost
and I can't ,emembe, what the length of that st,etch was. It wasn't much
but that's, you calculate it out that many feet by that many dolla,s is
,oughly $3,500.00. Now if this piece is const,ucted along Audubon Road
with the upg,ading of Audubon, which ve,y well may happen, then staff would
,equest that you allow me to take the libe,ty to change the di,ection of
this commission to not give them that c,edit.
Sch,oe,s: Okay. Do you feel that maybe because the people f,om Redmond
would mo,e than likely be using the su"ounding pa,ks du,ing business hou,s
that they wouldn't adve,sely impact the pa,ks in ,egards to the ,esidents
in the a,ea?
Sietsema: They will definitely impact the a,ea. Howeve" there are pa,ks
within, they'll have an impact on the existing parks which are located
close to this facility so it's not, Lake Susan Pa,k isn't even open yet so
I wouldn't think that it would have, I think the pa,ks that a,e the,e will
accommodate this facility.
Sch,oe,s: Okay, that's what I was looking fo,.
~ Sietsema: T,ying to spit that out.
Schroers: I guess we'll open it up for comission comments. Does anyone
have anything of interest?
And,ews: Is the land directly to the south that says planned unit, would
that be apartment type units that a,e planned to go in that vacant land at
that point?
Sietsema: Right ac,oss.
And,ews: That'd be di,ectly to the south of the p,oposed site.
sietsema: The,e's a piece of pa,kland that's in this a,ea ,ight ac,oss the
st,eet and the ,est of this area is zoned high density.
Andrews: I can't see the detail here but is Redmond going to sc,een thei,
building so they don't have this huge conc,ete monolith in f,ont of, ,ight
directly across the street from the park. I can't see that on the plan.
I know that's not the issue we',e talking about but.
Sietsema: I don't have a landscape plan. They gene,ally do and the
Planning Commission is the one that add,esses that.
And,ews: I unde,stand that. I mean I realize we don't have the authority
to make that change.
,....
Mady: Let me cla,ify that. We did on RosemouAt. That issue came up here
and the recommendation was discussed here so it's a good point.
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
April 24, 1990 - Page 7
,....
Andrews: I see it on the plan that their parking lot and building are just
right up against the property line there that to me it looks like there
would be an uninterrupted sight line just to the building and I guess I
feel that...
Sietsema: Generally they do berm and are required to put in landscaping.
Schroers: Any other concerns?
Lash: I have one and I think I have a pretty good idea of where this site
is. I drive Audubon almost everyday to work. This little cut out area
that's up in the upper left hand corner.
Mady: Prince.
Lash: No.
Sietsema: That's an existing farm.
,....
Lash: That's a farm right? Okay. I guess I have a problem with the
recommendation to put that little chunk of sidewalk along there. I really
don't see that it serves any purpose. I see the one already on the west
side of the road everyday along McGlynn and I look at that as it was
probably a complete waste of money and I would certainly not support
putting any more, especially on the other side, and have a black chunk of
sidewalk that starts nowhere and ends nowhere. Personally I don't see the
point of having it in an industrial area. I would just as soon forget that
and take the money and use it for other trails that we put a higher
priority on.
Sietsema: There is a trail along Audubon that will be built south of this
site with his Lake Susan Hills West and this provides the next connection
toward Lake Ann Park because that is the way the people that live in Lake
Susan Hills West will get pedestrian access to Lake Ann.
Lash: So they'll be going down the east side of the road until they get to
the railroad tracks and then they'll have to cross Audubon and get onto the
one that goes along McGlynn?
Sietsema: No. What they will do.
Lash: I have the trail plan. Are you saying ultimately your plan is to
have it on both sides of the road?
""
Sietsema: No. The piece that's built from McGlynn is to get the people
that work at McGlynn to be able to either get over to the trail system or
up to Lake Ann Park. The one on the east side is to serve the residential
area. It's shown that the residents down in this area will hop on the
trail on the east side of Audubon Road, go up to Park Road and because that
will be probably a quieter road and up to Lake Ann to the intersection
which will be at one time lit and there will be a crosswalk to get into
Lake Ann Park. This will be the new entrance to Lake Ann Park there. So
"....
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
April 24, 1990 - Page 8
this is one chunk, one leg in that whole stretch. Eventually this is a
major link to the downtown to get down to the Chaska school district if
someone wanted to get whether they live along in that area. If it's more
developed or whatever, it is our connection down to the school area.
Lash: Okay. Also go along with my recommendation and with my suggestion
that we take the easement but at this time take the money.
Schroers: Anyone else?
Mady: I guess I'm looking for, I'd like to see us construct, as a person
who works in an industrial area in Eden.Prairie, every nice day, the day
the sun's out. Not a rainy day, there are people who walk along the roads.
In my area there are no trails. Eden Prairie missed that one area for
some reason, but there are a lot of people who walk that area everyday,
including some joggers. I'm not sure where they change clothes but
apparently they have some type of wellness program in their buildings. So
if you have construction, and Redmond Products has been a very aggressive
employer in the past. I haven't seen any change in that. I would guess
they provide for their numerous employees with some type of recreational
facilities including walkrooms so I would assume that we're going to be
seeing a lot of walkers and joggers during the lunch hour and before and
after work in that area. So construction at the time of total construction
makes the most sense. It's the cheapest time to do it and if we're worried
~ about maintenance to the sidewalk. I know the sidewalk in front of my
parent's house in Minneapolis was replaced 5 years ago so that would make
that sidewalk 55 years old prior to it being needing to be repaired so I
guess whether we do it now or do it 5 years down the road makes more sense
to do it right now when it's cheaper than to wait 5 years when it's going
to cost quite a bit more to do it. And you're not really gaining anything
in time.
Robinson: But we are just talking about this little piece right now?
Sietsema: Right. Lake Susan Hills West will be developing the piece that
their property abuts along Audubon Road and then if we have, the thinking
is that if we have everybody along the east side construct their portion of
it, eventually we'll have the whole segment done that will lead from a
subdivision through an industrial area up to a park or going south down to
the school campus. And past the park into the downtown area.
Schroers: Is there any further comment? Can I have a motion?
Mady: I'll make a motion to go with staff's recommendation. To accept
park fees in lieu of any park dedication and to require a 20 foot wide
easement and construction of a 5 foot concrete sidewalk along Audubon Road
with a credit of $3,500.00 being given to Redmond Products unless at some
point in time Audubon Road is being upgraded and the developer or Redmond
Products is not at that time, or the sidewalk can be constructed with other
funds.
,-...
Robinson: I'll second it.
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
April 24, 1990 - Page 9
,....
Mady moved, Robinson seconded that the Park and Recreation Commission
recommend to require the payment of park dedication fees in lieu of
parkland dedication, to require a 20 foot wide trail easement along Audubon
Road and the construction of a 5 foot wide concrete sidewalk within the
easement and to allow a $3,500.00 credit toward the trail fee for the
sidewalk construction along Audubon unless the sidewalk is constructed with
other funds at the time of upgrading of Audubon Road. All voted in favor
except Jan Lash and Dawne Erhart who opposed and the motion carried with a
vote of 5 to 2. .
Pemrick: I have a comment. I'm kind of concerned with Redmond. We had
talked at one point about seeing if they would put softball fields in. Has
that been mentioned now that they're building this new facility? Some of
the larger corporations...
APPROVE PLAYGROUND EQUIPMENT PLANS FOR LAKE SUSAN PARK AND CHANHASSEN HILLS
PARK.
sietsema: I've p,ovided fo, you, information the quote f,om Ea,l F.
Anderson who we've gotten ou, equipment from in the past. And also the
plans fo, the two sites showing phase 1 and Phase 2. If you have any
changes that you'd like to see in those plans, we should make those now.
Othe,wise I can go ahead with you, app,oval and o,de, it now. It would be
,.... within 6 to 8 weeks.
Lash: This is a ,eally minor thing. I ,eally like this. I like these a
lot and this is a real t,ivial little thing he,e but these little wheels,
you know these stee,ing wheel things. I don't know how much those cost.
They p,obably do not cost very much but in my experience watching kids in
the playg,ound, it seems like it's something that's ve,y seldom eve, used.
sietsema: On which plan is it included?
Lash: I think it's on both of them actually. It's D on Phase 1 of Lake
Susan and Chan Hills Pa,k it's D also in Phase 1.
Sietsema: It's p,obably the cheapest thing that we could stick in that
spot.
Lash: I know but...
Sietsema: Because I indicated to him befo,e that we we,en't wild about
those but he had the space and it was either just put up a board there or
put that and that was probably the cheapest.
,.....
Lash: Okay. And then I noticed on one of them, that there was a fireman
pole. Yeah, that's on Lake Susan. I was wondering if it would be possible
just to get one in on the Chanhassen Hills Park one too. If that would put
us way ove, budget. Those are really good sort of a confidence builder for
kids that are starting out being kind of chicken on this equipment and they
look at them for a long time and they maybe decide they might try it if
somebody helps them. Then the first thing you know, they're going on their
,....
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
April 24, 1990 - Page 10
own and it makes them feel like they've really accomplished something so I
really like those. And then my other question is, E on phase 2 of chan
Hills Park, what's an exerglide?
Sietsema: An exerglide, it's a new kind of a swing and actually two people
can fit on it or a parent and a child and instead of pumping the swing to
get going with your legs, it moves. It's a metal piece that you hang onto
the hand...
(There was a tape change at this point.)
Lash: Okay. I'd like to see that if it can be done.
Mady: I had only one comment to make. For Phase 2 next year, could we
direct staff to order Phase 2 like in February next year so it will be
here.
sietsema: If you budget for it I can.
Mady: Well we hopefully will. That way it will be here April 1.
Sietsema: That's what I did with the Lake Ann equipment.
Lash: When is that coming by the way?
"'"
sietsema: It might be here. If it's not here, it should be here any
mi nute.
Robinson: Do you need a motion on that playground equipment?
Sietsema: Yep.
Schroers: Are there any other comments first of all? Okay, then I would
be looking for a motion to include Jan's additions.
Andrews: So moved.
Lash: Okay, I'll make it since I was the one that made that. What he
said.
Schroers: Is there a second?
pemrick: Second.
Lash moved, Pemrick seconded to authorize staff to order the playground
equipment for Chanhassen Hills Park and Lake Susan Park with the addition
of a firepole at the Chanhassen Hills Park. All voted in favor and the
motion carried.
,.....,
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
April 24, 1990 - Page 11
"..
VERBAL UPDATE ON LAKE ANN PARK CORE PIER.
Hoffman: We're concerned about attempting to get the pier installed before
the Fish department started in the first part of June and when they
initially said we were granted a pier they said it would be here by late
summer. That date has been moved up so installation of the pier will take
place on Tuesday, May 15th. Lori and I met with the folks in the
Department of Natural Resources the other morning at Lake Ann looking over
the site there. They will pick up the pier that morning at Stillwater
State Prison. Bring it out to the boat access at Lake Ann. Our park
maintenance personnel will be there with a front end loader to unload the
pieces right at the boat access and they'll float them over to the site and
pin them together and have it installed in one day.
Schroers: Where is the site?
Hoffman: Just to the east of the boat access where that dock.
Mady: Where the dock is now?
;f#"'"
Hoffman: It's in that general area. We're going to take some water depths
and find out the best place to put it as far as the drop off location and
those types of issues. Then this year it will be anchored off and it will
be somewhat of a temporary, 12 to 14 foot piece of dock since the water
will be so low, that will be installed there and then the handicapped
access trail will be asphalt to the parking spots and the lower parking lot
will be designated as handicapped. And we're going to have a grand opening
celebration sometime in the first part of June.
Schroers: That sounds great. What's going to happen with the existing
dock?
Hoffman: That existing done, Dale, he'll probably move it down to the
other end of Lake Ann beach to that popular fishing area unless
otherwise.. .
Schroers: There is one dock there.
Hoffman: Yeah.
Schroers: And there will be two docks there?
Hoffman: Yeah.
Mady: You're talking about the west end of the beach?
Hoffman: West end of the beach, correct.
Schroers: Okay. Anything else on the CORE pier?
VERBAL UPDATE ON CHANHASSEN CLEAN-UP DAY, MAY 5TH.
~ Lash: I got one of these today from school so they were sent home.
,...
.1tJ"
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
April 24, 1990 - Page 12
Ruegemer: These are the flyers that went out to the schools last Friday so
they should be getting distributed in the next couple days. We just tried
to keep it real simple and to the point and with a brief description of the
clean-up day designated for May 5th. McDonald's was generous enough to
donate 1,000 bags and those can be picked up at any time. It's while
supplies last.
Lash: Where?
Ruegemer: At McDonald's.
Andrews: Chanhassen.
Ruegemer: Chanhassen McDonald's.
Schroers: You just go in and ask for a clean up bag?
Ruegemer: Right. If you have like a big group, they'd like you to call
ahead so they can get them ready for you. So if like the Cub Scouts are
going to go in and get some, so they wanted them to call ahead so they can
get like a pack of them to them or just so it's easier coming in and out.
So they can just get them.
.~ Schroers: Are these like larger sized garbage bags?
Ruegemer: They're garbage bags, yeah. So that was nice.
Erhart: Did you give them credit in the local papers? McDonald's for
doing this?
Ruegemer: Right. Yeah, that's what I'm going to get to. I've been working
with Connie Meyer of the Villager and we designed an ad. We just finalized
that today for this coming Thursday. It's going to be a full page ad. It's
going to be, we worked together on working on the clip art so it's going to
be basically like this and there's going to be writing inside of it. A
brief description. It's going to be coming out this coming Thursday and
it's going to be in the back side. A full page ad on the back side of the
paper. It's going to be green so it's going to stand out a little bit more
from the original.
Sietsema: And the good news is it doesn't come out of the park and rec
budget.
~
Ruegemer: So we worked on that and there is mention of McDonald's in the
paper. Also, there's basically more of the same information. We're just
going to try to keep exposing it and try to get repetition so people are
familiar with the clean up day. Last Tuesday we had an informational
meeting here. I sent out probably, I don't know how many letters.
Probably 50 or 75 letters to the homeowner's associations and local
scouting groups. Local businesses and interested citizens and two people
showed up.
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
April 24, 1990 - Page 13
JIll"'"
Mady: That's better than other meetings we've had in the city. So we're
. just going to try to advertise for the papers and through schools. Try to
get people involved that way.
Hoffman: Hopefully with all the Earth Day...this will just kind of take
off from that. We had a call from one of the local Girl Scout organizers
that they had picked up 10 bags already along Kerber Blvd and asking Lori
to dispose of it. I think we should see some activity and hopefully it
will be just kind of pick up off of all of the Earth Day information...
Robinson: Are we sure to get the parks in the downtown?
Ruegemer: We have groups kind of slated for that with the Cub Scouts and
the Girl Scouts. And different citizens have expressed interest but I'd
like to plug those people into the parks like out at Lake Ann and up at
City Center. To get the parks clean also along with the main street.
Schroers: That's a good idea. Where is the drop off point for the refuse
then?
Ruegemer: We are encouraging people to include it in their regular weekly
trash cycle so whatever they pick up, we'd like to have them put it in with
their own garbage.
~ Schroers: Okay, so we don't actually have a designated drop off point?
Ruegemer: We don't have a designated, we're trying to keep it simple as
possible so people would pick up their own yard as well as their
neighborhood and surrounding areas.
Hoffman: Other cities that have had that type of clean-up and designated
drop off area are just inundated with not only litter or trash from the
streets but everything from A to Z.
Schroers: Yeah, I was going to ask if I could throw my neighbor's pumper
away.
Hoffman: So it gets to be a risky proposition.
Ruegemer: with the low turnout at the meeting, it doesn't seem like
there's a lot of outcoming public interest so that's why we're not going to
have the social mixer on Saturday with the hot dogs and pop in fear of low
turnout.
Hoffman: Your worse fear. Four people show up to eat 300 hot dogs.
Ruegemer: So that's going to be scratched. Just keep it self motivated on
Satuday to make people aware and have them clean up their own area.
Hoffman: Maybe next year.
".....
Ruegemer: Right. Just kind of grow from there. And there also will be
probably the same ad coming out the following Thursday. It would be May
JIll".
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
April 24, 1990 - Page 14
3rd I believe. Coming out in the Villager just to.
Hoffman: But smaller.
Ruegemer: Smaller, to inform people that the day is coming up that
Saturday. So we're just trying to keep people informed through different
informational channels.
Robinson: What about down at South Lotus Park? Somebody dumped two big
old Christmas trees down there. If I put them out by the garbage barrels,
will the City pick them up when they pick up the garbage?
Sietsema: Yeah.
Ruegemer: So if anybody needs any flyers, stop by. I'll give you some.
We'll copy some off for you to distribute.
Schroers: Thanks a lot Jerry.
Mady: Side comment. It appears, hopefully it's not because of this but
there seems to be a lot more glass a,ound the city. Broken glass in the
streets and that. Hopefully it's not because we have such a readily
available supply of recycleables out there that kids can hit going on their
way to school but there does seem to be more glass out there now.
I""-
Schroers: Okay, if there's no further discussion on the clean-up day, we
will back up to item 5 on the agenda.
REVIEW REQUEST TO AMEND COMPREHENSIVE TRAIL PLAN.
Sietsema: We received a letter at our last meeting from Dawne Erhart
requesting that a portion of the trail plan be revised and deleted from the
trail plan. I'll show you where it is on the map. This is the overall
trail plan. The segment that we',e talking about tonight is this piece
from here to here. This segment is shown as a part of the nature trail
system that's along the Bluff C,eek area and it provides a link between the
hard surface trail along TH 101 to the nature trail system. This section
is right in here actually has changed and has gone straight up to the hard
surface over here. So there's been some changes already just due to
development and the soil conditions and what not. Staff feels that the
comprehensive trail plan is a planning tool for us and it shows the
connections that we have and try to make between, within the trail system.
The hard surfaces and natural trail system and how they connect to each
other. And rather than at this time start taking out bits and pieces of it
and seeing what we have left, I would suggest that we leave it as it is and
try to find an alternate route or make a conscience decision not to
proceed. We don't have the easement at this point in time. The time that
we would acquire that would be if the landowner were to further subdivide
in the future and acquire it at that time. So we can either make a
conscience decision not to p~oceed with acquisition of that easement at
this time of development or look for an alternate route. That's basically
~ in a nutshell what I feel that the options can be for us to do.
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
April 24, 1990 - Page 15
,.....
Schroers: Is there anyone that currently uses that trail now for walking,
horse riding, cross country skiing, anything?
Sietsema: I think the local people down there do but it's not a public
trail.
Erhart: As far as we're concerned, anybody that wants to walk on it,
whether they be in the neighborhood or they belong in another neighborhood,
are more than welcome to walk on it. Before we open it up to discussion
though Larry, I'd like to give the audience that has come in and then the
new members some background on this.
Schroers: Be my guest.
Erhart: Okay. Thank you. First of all, my husband and I voluntarily drew
the nature trails out and drew the nature trails on our property and said
that this is something we would like to see. It was our understanding at
that time that an easement would not be required until at which time we
came in and wanted to subdivide for development. Yet 2 years ago we
applied for a mortgage and we found staff making the recommendation that
they wanted to take the easement at that time and this is a very much of a
misfortune and it was something that I feel was a real abuse as far as the
City's responsibility and we found ourselves before the Park and Rec
telling them why they should not take the easement at this time. I just
,.... feel that in the future, if I ever want to bui ld a new home on my property,
I will be asking for another lot split at which time history may repeat
itself again. I am not opposed to nature trails but I have found it to be
a nuisance to have it on the map and at the time that there would be a
subdivision for development or we would subdivide I should say for
development, we can talk about it at that time. If the City feels that
that's still a good place for it, we're willing to negotiate. I have not
changed my feelings on major trails. I would not have gone to the trouble
nor would my husband have gone to the trouble to draw them out if we did
not feel that it was something but that's what's kind of the irony is here.
We wouldn't even discuss this segment tonight or be discussing this segment
if we hadn't gone to the City and asked them to put it on in the first
place. And second of all, I don't feel that this piece of trail should be
looked at by itself. It's just a segment of the overall revisions that I
think this Commission needs to look at as far as the comprehensive trail
plan. We've had two failed attempts to fund trails and .I think we need to
sit down and discuss this and come up with something that we can bring back
to the people of this community that they can fund. I think that's the
bigger picture here. I think my piece of property there should be
discussed as with the overall revision of what I see the comprehensive
trail plan.
Schroers: Okay, is there any response from the audience in regards to the
comprehensive trail plan revision?
""
Tim Collins: I think I agree. I think we have to look at the overall
comprehensive plan in detail so I think maybe we should schedule a time or
set up maybe a conference in lieu of this to see what we can do for
something that the City can fund. That's where I'm coming from so this one
"...
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
April 24, 1990 - Page 16
revlslon to the trail, I don't think we'll be able to address that right
now as well.
Lash: Did you have a specific area that you were concerned with or
something? That when you saw this on the agenda caught your eye and you
wanted to hear what was going on?
Tim Collins: I have a real interest in the entire trail system.
sietsema: For the record this is Tim Collins and he lives down in
Chanhassen Hills. He wrote a letter to the Commission last year expressing
the need for trails along major collectors and the natural areas along the
park that's along Chanhassen Hills and basically his desire to see the
trail plan move forward. He's been interested all along in seeing that
happen. I think if I can put words in your mouth, that he's here tonight
to see if he can instigate more discussion on how funding can happen so
that trails can be built along those major collectors like TH 101 and the
area around the south as well as the north.
Tim Collins: People in our entire development were under the impression
that the trails were funded. I mean we really thought they were going
along and then of course they got voted down in the referendum so the
people in my development, they're eager to go and start putting together
plans or helping with fund raising. I can get a lot of people in a couple
~ of days or few weeks to put some things together.
Lash: I guess I have a couple of questions about this just because I'm one
of the newer members and wasn't involved when this was all put together. I
guess one of my questions is, when was this plan actually put together and
who put it together and who approved it?
sietsema: It was developed in 1987. The instigation, what prompted us to
do the trail plan was the survey that was completed, the parks needs
surveys and trails were consistently mentioned in the survey. If I
remember correctly, it was 4 out of the top 5 things that people felt were
needed in the City were trails. Whether they be nature trails, walking
trails, biking trails, whatever so we put together the Park and Recreation
Commission put together the trail plan and it was approved by City Council
in 1987. In early '88 it went to referendum and failed. The funding for
the whole overall plan failed. The plan still is an approved plan. This
is our planning tool is this comprehensive trail plan that shows what our
overall goal is someday although it's ambitious. But we knew when we put
it together that it would take a long time to accomplish this. Anywhere
from 1 to 20 years likely. So that's basically the history. The plan has
been approved by City Council in 1987 and funding is what we're trying to
accomplish.
Tim Collins: Wasn't that referendum though voted down by just a few votes?
Sietsema: 5.
,.....
Lash: But it was twice wasn't it? Did it go to the voters in 1987 and
then in 1988 too?
,....
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
April 24, 1990 - Page 17
Sietsema: Twice in 1988. It was in February of 1988 and November of 1988.
Robinson: So it takes a Council action then to change?
Sietsema: That's right. It's part of our comprehensive plan. Our overall
comprehensive plan that guides us in, when we look at where there are park
deficient areas and there are park needs and when it's in regards to trail,
we look at this document.
Robinson: So it's really more than a guide. It's pretty well cast in
concrete.
Sietsema: Well no because it's just like, things change. Things shift from
where it may be exactly shown on here. It may shift to the south or to the
north or when it gets right down to development, we have soil reports and
feasibility studies and that kind of thing. We have to change it from off
street to on street. The one on Minnewashta, it's not likely that we're
going to be able to get that off street. Disconnected from the paved
surface of where the cars are all the way along there simply because of the
topography and what not. So this shows us what our goals are and what we
would like to accomplish in the best case scenario. But we often deviate
from what our comprehensive plan or what our plans show. Our planning
tools. But if we don't have the thing to start out with, we're throwing
,.... darts in the dark.
Robinson: Do minor deviations need Council approval also? I mean this is
obviously not a minor one. I don't mean to imply that.
Sietsema: Yeah. Well, you do look at the whole plan and you look at each
section because usually, similar to what we talked about with Redmond,
that's just a small section and in and of itself, it doesn't go anywhere
and doesn't end anywhere. It's just a linear piece of concrete but when
you connect it to Lake Susan Hills and the industrial park and then the
development that comes below Lyman Blvd. and you put a trail along Lyman
Blvd. and then down along CR 17, eventually you're at the school and you've
got something that connects a whole bunch of neighborhoods to the downtown
Chanhassen and to the park system and to other neighborhoods. So you have
the big picture but you have to address each little segment because there
are different landowners. There's different situations. There's different
topography. There's different barriers. There's a lot of different things
so you may have to deviate from what it is that you still want to make that
connection.
Lash: When you made this, did you specify which areas were to be, I know
the red is this hard surface and the bluer dots are natural trails. Did
you specifically have in mind which ones were to be concrete and which ones
were to be asphalt or how did you...
11""'.
Sietsema: Basically the policy in the trail plan is that if it's in a
residential area it would be concrete. If it goes by the front of homes and
also in our downtown and industrial park area. Lake Drive East is all
concrete. Downtown will be all concrete. But along the major collectors
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
April 24, 1990 - Page 18
JI11"
where it's a more rural section, it's the 8 foot bituminous.
Lash: I guess I'd also be interested in then when things are changing, as
an example the trail in front here. The trail that was voted down and the
one on CUrrY Farms that was voted down, are those things then being removed
from the plan Or are those just remaining on the plan even after Council
has voted them down?
Sietsema: They still remain on the plan. The comprehensive plan. It's
just basically what they decided is not to proceed with construction of
those trails at this time. They still remain on the plan.
Lash: I guess I kind of have a Problem with that. I don't know why
something like that should remain on the plan when it's already been
rejected by Probably the majority of the people who live there and also by
the City Council. I mean it's like eventually somewhere along the line
it's going to be fOrced on someone even if they don't want it.
"
Mady: That's a pretty tough, I've got to jump in. I'm sOrrY but if you
want to talk about Frontier Trail, I live on Frontier Trail and I was here
that night. I don't think you were. The statement to take it off because
the Council voted it down, there were a lot of issues in there that don't
reflect what the people were told that night. This is a planning tool.
Just because it's on here doesn't mean it's going to be constructed in the
next 20 years but it still reflects good sound planning. And in Dawne's
case, it doesn't necessarily mean that it has to go on her property. It
just r-eflects the fact that we want to get from Point A to Point Band
here's a logical way of doing it at this point in time. It's just like
on TH 212. FOr 25 years they said TH 212's going to cut through somewhere
in the southern part of Chanhassen. Just because you don't know fOr sure
it's going to be in this quarter mile or that quarter mile doesn't mean you
show a meandering line. It's a planning tool and that's what it's there
for so that when the opportunity's present themself, you bring them up and
everybody knows they're going to be brought up. It's not something that
just kind of hatches out of the wild blue. So that's why they should
always remain on here as a planning tool.
Lash: I agree that it's good to have plans but then you get all hung up
with everY single thing that comes up. Because it's on the comprehensive
plan it's always the recommendation regardless of how people feel about it
because it's on the comprehensive plan. It's always the recommendation and
I feel like people have a tendency to be somewhat intimidated into going
along with that even if it's maybe not what they think is best because it's
on the comprehensive plan.
'"
Sietsema: But Jan that's why there are commissions and the Council has the
final. They haven't approved that that's the way it's going to be built no
matter what. That's why we still review it here and we still review it at
City Council level and they make the final decision. But if we don't have
things where if we don't identify where we want oUr parks and where we need
parks and where we want our trails to be on a plan, it makes it much more
difficult for us to achieve that when we actually get a site plan in front
of us. Staff would be remiss if a subdivision came in here and did not
,...
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
April 24, 1990 - Page 19
recommend following our comprehensive plan. This commission may decide
that this isn't the right time to do it or the Council may decide this
isn't the right time to do it but staff bases most, I mean we base most of
our decisions and recommendations based on the plans, the general plans,
comprehensive plans. The policies and the ordinances that have been set up
by the City Council.
Lash: Well I understand you make your recommendations based on the
comprehensive plan. That makes sense to me and that's your job. What maybe
doesn't make sense to me is that, how do we know that this is a plan that
is workable or doable or that people want? To me if it failed twice, maybe
it's the plan that people don't want. Maybe they want a modified plan and
maybe we need to look at that and that in the end would possibly save us a
lot of money. It would maybe take things off that people don't want and
put and then we'd have money to put them in places where we do want or that
are higher priorities.
Andrews: Can I make a comment? I think if we proceeded that way you're
basically destroying the entire comprehensive plan. If you're going to
look at every individual parcel as individually, we won't have a plan.
Lash: No, I'm saying maybe what we need to do is revise the plan.
Sietsema: I had it on the agenda the last time we talked about it.
,....
Andrews: It is such a huge project that I think it's something that, it's
probably more modified than created anew but the other thing, what the
comprehensive plan, it's a 20 year plan or a 30 year plan. I doubt if any
of us will be here in 30 years or even 15 years to see the plan go through.
I think to start talking about removing sections or adding sections of a
comprehensive plan, all these individual sections of the trails and so
forth will be. ..on the map as premanent as drawn. I think that's what
you've already said. So there will be an opportunity to look at individual
portions of the trail to see if they deserve development and consideration
at the time that that property comes up for development OY change of
ownership.
Erhart: But Jim, what happens then if we go to a referendum and the people
vote to fund it? Then what we have on the comprehensive plan is what we're
going to get.
Andrews: I disagree with that. I think that every individual parcel that
the City would have to obtain would have to be looked at individually
because we have to deal with individual owners.
Erhart: I'm going to jump in here too. I talked to some of the old
Council members to try to get some history on the comprehensive trail plan
and how it all came into be and who approved it. One of the Councilmen
told me that when it came in for approval, they said that it was fine with
them.if the people chose to fund it but because the people voted it down,
he felt, as well as I know 3 of the new Council members feel, that it needs
~ to be gone over and revised.
",....
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
April 24, 1990 - Page 20
Sietsema: And that can certainly happen and that's been on the agenda.
Erhart: Right but it helps to know the property procedure to change things
and that's why myself did not jump on this sooner. Because I did not know
the proper procedure to amend it and I know I asked for that twice now.
Maybe everybody else knows. I have finally found out by making phone calls
and talking to you Lori but like I said, it's hard to make changes if you
don't know the prope,ty procedure.
Lash: I guess another thing that I want to say is, looking at the plan, I
can't say specifically that I have problems here or there or anywhere
without looking at it in detail but when we get recommendations for
subdivisions coming in, those are sidewalks and trails and stuff that are
going on that are not on that plan.
Sietsema: Right. The trail plan is a document. It's a portion of the
chapter of the comprehensive plan. This just shows you where we know we
want connections now but it doesn't even have Saddlebrook in there which
has sidewalks going all the way through it but because I can't guess whe,e
those, who's going to sell property and how. The document also states that
the general policy is that sidewalks will be included along all th,u
streets and there's some policy statements in there and that's what I base
those recommendations on.
~ Lash: Okay, and was that a policy that was initiated by the Park and Rec
and then it went on and it was app,oved by City Council?
Sietsema: Yes.
Lash: Okay, I think that's another thing that needs to be ,e-evaluated.
Sietsema: The Park and Recreation Commission can ,evise, we're going
through the whole Comprehensive Plan updating and that's why I've included
on the last few meetings. It wasn't last meeting, the meeting before and a
couple meetings before that, we talked about revising and I think that it's
the general consensus of this group that this plan needs to be ,evised or
at least shown in phases so if we want to do some funding, we have
something that's more workable. I haven't gotten a lot of direction from
you. The way you change things is to take action when it's on the agenda
and no formal action has been taken. You directed me to go find out what
the road improvements are going to be and I showed you that the last time
we talked about it but now what? I didn't get direction from you that we
want you to come back to us with a plan that shows only TH 101, TH
5, Powers, Lyman, Pioneer, Minnewashta Pa,kway and come back with cost
estimates from that. I need the direction from you.
Erha,t: Okay. Well I think I can do that tonight or speak for myself
anyway and I think each of the commission members could have an opportunity
here. Can we do that then?
Sietsema: You can do whatever you want.
"...,
,....
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
April 24, 1990 - Page 21
Schroers: Let's try to get this back under control a little bit. We've
just kind of let it got into an open discussion here and I think th~t's
okay. We need to communicate a little bit but maybe if we could get things
a little bit more under control then we could proceed and get something
accomplished or something done.
Erhart: Okay, then you call it Larry. What do you want to do?
Schroers: Okay, well what I would like to do is to start with Wendy and
get each commissioner's feelings in regards to the revision of the
comprehensive trail plan.
Pemrick: Well I've heard that this is updated or it needs to be updated
and reading through this letter of Dawne's from last week. I think it was
very generous of them to donate so much of their property for this trail
and I can understand where she's coming from now. Some of this needs to be
looked at again. I can understand changes and thoughts occurring and I
think we should honor that. We can't look a gift horse In the mouth here.
So much property has been set aside by them and if there's a way to work
the trail a different way in that area, I think it should be looked at and
now's the time to get it off if that's what she wants. I think then we
don't have to sit and stumble over it every time and go through this every
time this trail plan comes up. Give us something new to start from and
approve that way. Those are my feelings.
1"",
Schores: Okay, Jim.
Andrews: I guess my biggest concern is the entire concept of the trail
system is so large of a project I think it's very, we're trying to discuss
a small detail at the same time we're trying to discuss the whole project.
I think that we do need a comprehensive plan in order to have some vision
of what the finished project is but I do feel that let's go back to the
drawing board on the whole thing. From what I've seen of a government at
any level, basically that means that nothing's going to get accomplished at
all if all you do is keep going back and redrawing and redrawing. As far
as the specific recommendation, I guess my feeling is that I'm not sure,
I'm not really sure which way I would recommend at this point but I feel
that we do need a linkage, an east/west linkage. If there's an alternative
route that could be used at the time of development, I'm sure that that
would be looked at. I think the plan, at least the way I understand it, as
a concept or a recommendation of what we would like to see but is not
necessarily what would happen at the time that the trails were constructed
and the way I also understand it is if there were a referendum to be passed
by the citizens to build these trails, they're not necessarily going to go
as drawn. There's going to be much discussion and many hearings as to
where trails would actually end up so I guess I feel that until an
alternative could be offered to the connection, but I feel it should be
either not passed or tabled until a later date.
Schroers: Okay, Dawne did you have anything further?
~ Erhart: Yes. If this is the time that we are going to call attention to
changes that each of think that needs to be made, I'd like to do that right
"
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
April 24, 1990 - Page 22
now. I think the trails on the major corridors should have first priority.
I think everybody here has agreed to that. As far as the sidewalks go, I
feel all of them should be taken off at this time. I feel that we have a
Council that has some problems with this or at least we should take them
off and maybe have a work session with Council but it seems to me in one of
our meetings when the new Council came on, we sat down and talked to them
about it and we have a Council now that is not supportive of that but they
do support the major corridors so I'd like to go ahead and keep those on
but take a real good hard look at the sidewalks. And I think the one on
Curry Farms should come off. The people were in here. We never made a
motion on that. It went to City Council and they agreed with it. That's
all I have at this point.
,....
Robinson: Boy, I don't know where to start. It sounds like we're back
challenging the whole trail plan again and maybe we should do that. Only
not with just the Park and Rec Commission. If Tim is it? If you can get
some people together maybe and maybe 10 other neighborhoods. There's 10
groups like you say you have interest in it, that could really help us in
address it. It is like, it's overwhelming the magnitude of the project
that you really don't know where to start with it. So I hate to propose
starting allover here but if we're questioning it, maybe that's what we
should do and we can't do it here tonight I don't think at this meeting.
As far as Dawne's specific request, that's a shame if they have dedicated
that property or given that for trail use and then it became part of the
comprehensive plan and they get challenged now every time they go to do
anything with that property. I don't think that's right but I wouldn't
make a decision on that until we get an alternate route to it. So I'm
wondering if we should start allover. Or not start allover but looking
at just looking at it again for possible revisions or challenge some of the
things that are on it.
"...
Mady: I think I'm going to take Curt's ideas one step further. It must be
about 2 months ago now I asked or made a request in commission
presentations to look at doing another park need survey. There has been
some changes in the city as to understanding of what a trail system is.
What the costs are. What their implications are to your own particular
neighborhood and that to the whole city. I think Dawne's correct, there
are 3 City Council members now who aren't necessarily pro trail but I don't
know if that's the way the city is or not anymore. What we found out in
the two failed referendums, which both failed by very small margins. Where
people didn't want to spend any of their money right now to build a trail.
I know a number of people I talked to voted against both issues who each
time said, yes I want the whole trail system but I don't want to spend any
money. So it's still, then comes the job of this commission and the hope
that City Council to figure out how in the world we do that. That's why we
do it through the development process and we do get bits and pieces done.
They ultimately will make a whole connection but if you don't do the bits
and pieces now, it's kind of like building a brick wall. If you don't lay
the first two bricks, you'll never get the top course in. You can't look
at the whole plan and say that this little segment is insignificant so
let's not do it. You've got to look at the whole plan and say if I don't
build that first segment, I can't build the next 3. So if we don't
continue on, maybe the plan doesn't need to be in at all. We have to find
,....
,.....
,...
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
April 24, 1990 - Page 23
that out. We have to I think, until we do a very comprehensive survey like
the last one was, we won't know what we need to do. It doesn't need to be
leading. The last survey didn't ask leading questions. It was free form
and we still found out that I believe it was 77% of the people wanted to
see a fairly complete trail system through so now people have a very good
understanding of what that means. At least a number of the people in the
community do. Maybe we'll get different response and maybe we'll get a
higher response or a lower response. I don't know if any of us can make
that judgment at this point in time. As to the specifics of Dawne's
situation, we need an east/west link in there somewhere. If it's not on
Dawne's property, it needs to be someplace so I think it's a shame if we
don't get it there but I just want, I guess my concern is that in that
large tract of land in there that there needs to be an east/west segment
since there's going to be a park, major park directly across TH 101 there.
So we need to show it somewhere. That's all.
Lash: I agree with Curt's comments.and Wendy's I guess that it's a shame
that someone is generous enough to do this but then when they want to do
any little thing on their property, they're made to go through the hoops
and who knows how many people that could apply to in this situation.
They're not planning on subdividing for a development. All they want to do
is add a garage and they're taking out a mortgage or something you know and
I don't think that's fair and I don't know how that can be changed but I
think that this, since the comprehensive plan is being revised this year,
this is our opportunity and I don't wa~t to pass that up at this time. It's
the time for us to revise it and to make it something that's going to be
workable and that the people would support if it ever had to go to a
referendum and I don't know that that would have to be done. If we're to
keep a trail plan, I guess I would choose to see it go in phases and I
think we did talk a few meetings ago about where our priorities were and
just to kind of clarify my position on, when you're talking about bits and
pieces and I kind of like to think that I'm capable of looking at the big
picture of things and I've had people tell me that they think that I can.
Where my problem comes in on this is that I already have in my mind where
my priorities are because we've talked about that and I think we were all
pretty much in agreement but we don't have the money to do it. So where I
have the problem is putting in a little piece here on something that is not
one of our priorities. I would rather get the money so that we could put
it on a road that is our priority and then in 20 years, if that road is a
priority, fine. Then we'll fund it and do it on that road instead of
having a block of it here and a block of it there and a block of it over
there on roads that are not our priorities at this time. Maybe down the
road, maybe it would save us money. Maybe that road will be ripped out.
Maybe, who knows what's going to happen in 20 or 30 years. The whole thing
could be ripped out before anyone ever walks on it from one neighborhood to
a park you know. How do we know it's going to happen? My priority is to
get it on the major corridors and I see putting all these little bits and
pieces in as a stumbling block for me to accomplish that goal because we
don't have the money to do it as long as we keep spending it on all of
these other little bits and pieces. So that's why I know you all have a
pretty good feeling for how I feel about those and that really is my
thinking. I feel like we're just defeating our goal of what our priorities
are. And Jim has said that he's talked to people who wanted the whole
,....
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
April 24, 1990 - Page 24
plan. They like the whole plan but they didn't want to have to spend money
for it. I talked to a lot of people who didn't like the plan. They
thought it was too massive and it was overkill and they would have
supported a revised one that would have been maybe half the money but they
thought it was too much money and just too much allover everywhere. So
that was the feeling that I had gotten over the plan when it was defeated
twice and we'll never know whether it was people didn't want to spend the
money or people didn't like the plan. But personally I would never, ever
vote to support putting this plan back to a referendum again after it's
been voted down twice. I'd be embarrassed to put it back to the voters
again.
Mady: I think you're missing a point here. The trail referendum, each of
the last two times, the two times rather, never was to fund this whole
thing. It never has been.
Lash: Well what was it to fund? How much of it? That was the impression
people had.
Mady: The first time around it was, maybe it was both times, it was a
three phase idea and we had 800,000 Phase 1.
Erhart: Jim, do you recall what was in the first phase or could you
talk...
,....
Mady: I can't remember off hand but it's always been a phased plan. No
one has ever said we're going to build a whole thing. Geez, we're talking
3 years ago but I think we're talking like 3 million dollars for the whole
thing back then. We were up front with that every meeting. Every piece of
literature all the way through and yet we still can't seem to get the point
across of what this was and what it was supposed to be doing.
Lash: Maybe if the plan had showed exactly what the $800,000.00 was going
to do.
Schroers: Well it did. We had estimates that said that the average mile
of trail was going to cost us $28,000.00 and that it could go as high as
$40,000.00 in areas where the topography didn't lend itself very well to
having a trail there and other flatter areas might have been less but the
average trail cost, if I'm not mistaken, was about $28,000.00 a mile. And
things were broken down and it was pretty organized at the time but it's
difficult to remember back but do you have more?
Lash: No, I think that's about it.
tI""
Schroers: Okay. You know we're getting a little bit beyond the subject
here. I mean we're getting into the whole comprehensive plan and it's all
related and I think it's something that we definitely need to address but
we are unprepared to address that entire issue tonight. I just have a
couple comments some of which haven't been mentioned. The survey that we
conducted in regarding to the trail plan. On that survey the people
surveyed overwhelmingly wanted a trail plan. The survey showed that no
question. Everybody wanted it. It was my opinion that the people that
"
I""'"
"""'"
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
April 24, 1990 - Page 25
were in favor of the trail just felt well, who wouldn't want a trail plan.
There's no problem. This is going to pass. I don't have to go and vote
and people didn't show up. It was real close on both of the times but the
factor there was the number of votes. The total number of votes. There was
very few people that turned out to vote and I think where we were lacking
was getting the information out to the city. Communicating with all the
people. That's the tough part and really getting people to get involved
with the issues and show up and give us their true feelings and that's
something that we need to address whatever we do in the future in regards
to a trail plan or community center or what it is, we have to find out and
have an avenue to pursue to open up the communication to the residents so
they're aware of all the facts and they feel like they want to get out and
become involved. I think that that was really the failure of the
referendums in the past. That's just my personal feelings. In regards to
Dawne's personal situation here. I agree that it was most generous of
Dawne and her husband to donate this property.
Sietsema: Wait a minute. There's no property that's been donated or
purchased.
Schroers: To designate this section as a part of the trail.
Sietsema: Just for the record I needed to clarify that.
Schroers: Excuse me for that. What concerns me is that whether or not
we're going to be setting a precedence by making a revision like this. Are
other landowners going to come up and say well you've changed your plans in
the past and I've decided that I wouldn't like a trail on my property
either. Then if you deny a request, someone can ,also come back and say
well okay, you've granted a request to your commissioner but you won't do
it for me. That really shows the City in a bad light. I don't like to see
that. I'm not sure exactly what to do about it. I don't personally like
to see anything designated as a natural area being taken off a plan for
fear of losing it altogether at some point in the future. I think the
natural areas that we have are few and precious and my feeling on the
matter is that, as long as it's really not having a major affect on
anything right now, I would just as soon see it left in place until a
better alternative is found and that we would direct our attention to doing
just that. Finding a better alternative. So I don't really know if, in
lieu of what I heard tonight, if we can even ask for a motion or
recommendation on this. If we can just table this item until...
Andrews: I'd like to make a comment. From what Lori talked about, it
sounds like the whole issue's been kind of perpetually tabled and I think
that I've heard just about everybody say we've got to prioritize them.
Break this down into workable chunks and make some sort of, take some step
forward rather than just constantly deferring to the future that we may do
something. And I'm not referring to this specific proposal but I think to
prioritize and break it into smaller phases. I mean you talked about how
the referendum was communicated as being a Phase 1, 2, and 3. I can
guarantee you that in my neighborhood that probably 99 out of 100 people
were under the impression that this was an all or nothing proposal. And I
think even myself, I mean I have as a commissioner, I have no idea. I mean
,....
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
April 24, 1990 - Page 26
I really don't understand the plan. It's just too big to understand as an
entire plan. I think we really almost have to work with maybe a phase 1
map, a phase 2 map and a phase 3 map so I can see with a map what's what.
I'm also beginning to agree that perhaps spending money on 100 feet of
sidewalk here and there over the big scheme of things, maybe that money
would be better saved for the projects that are going to be the top
priorities. I can sense the frustration already building in myself that
action has to be taken, not just deferral.
Lash: Can I ask Dawne a question and then we can maybe go on. I don't
know if we can do a thing with hers or not. Dawne, I'm trying to remember
and I have kind of foggy recollection that at one of the meetings when you
were talking about this that you said that there was, did you say there was
a work road or a gravel road or something that was somewhere down there
that people were using? Is that on your property? Is this the area that
we're talking about? It is the area that you're talking about?
Erhart: No, this is the trail that we're talking about. And I think
everybody sitting here is saying they're going to lose it. Yet at the time
somebody comes in to subdivide for a development. In other neighborhoods
we have requested a trail and we will continue to do that as people. And
the other question I have is, if water and sewer goes in out there, which
right now as long as I own the property, I won't subdivide until that comes
in and I may not see that in my lifetime but all of a sudden that's going
~ to change the whole trail system. And the trail where it sits right now,
there are no natural amenities there. On my property on the other side
would be a beautiful place for a trail system along hills and wetlands and
nesting areas for birds and that. But you know, a person's almost afraid
to show anything on the map because like I said, it becomes a nuisance.
Every time I want to do something outside of subdividing for development, I
have to come and come before the Park and Rec explain why you shouldn't
take it at this time. That is what has started this whole thing with me.
I have not, and I want to go on record again, saying I have not changed my
mind about nature trails. I wouldn't have gone to the trouble and neither
would Tim have to draw this all out if we didn't think it was something
this community needed. But I agree with Larry, and everybody else that we
maybe need to work on this. Would it be out of place to talk to Council
about sending out a survey like Jim had brought up or even get together
with Council for a workshop? Maybe go for a public hearing and get some
input from the people so we know where we're going with this?
Schroers: I certainly wouldn't think that having a combination meeting
with the Council is something that we can request. It's been done before
and they wouldn't deny it. It seems to me that we would need to have a
little work session before that and organize ourselves a little better on
this issue. To be perfectly honest, after all this discussion, I'm not
absolutely clear on this and I don't know if we should put this item up for
a vote this evening or if we shouldn't.
""
sietsema: Maybe I can suggest that we take 3 giant steps back and I'll
bring the whole trail plan with all of the verbage and everything back to
the Commission and we can review it. That's it.
,...
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
April 24, 1990 - Page 27
Mady: Do you have this?
Sietsema: Yes. And we can review it all, start over and there are phases
in there and see where we are from there. Schedule an hour block at our
next meeting or whatever and talk about reviewing the trail plan.
Lash: Maybe if each commissioner comes prepared with a list of their top
10 priorities or whatever.
Sietsema: What I'd like to do is I'll make copies of that and get it out
to you this week so you have a couple of weeks to review it so we're a
little ahead.
Schroers: I think in fairness to Dawne and ourself, we need a little time
to look at this. Okay. In that case.
Lash: Do you want a motion to table this?
Schroers: Yeah. I'll ask for a motion to table this until we have further
information and time to sit down and sort that information out.
Sietsema: In the meantime I also, I want to address another area. I have
a number of people, residents that continually call me and want to know,
tell me when you're going to be talking about the trail plan. We're
".... interested. l.Je want to give our input. Tim is one of them. He's calling
me on a regular basis and saying what's happening. Are we any closer to
funding? Are we going to go to referendum? Are we going to you know, what
can we do? How can we help? We want people to know that we want this.
Would you want me to invite those people into this work session? It is a
public meeting and it will be in the newspaper but I can notify them.
Schroers: I don't think in a work session.
Mady: Well if they've asked to be included in the discussions.
Lash: I think if it's published in the paper and it's on the agenda,
people who are interested I would think would be looking.
Mady: If they've talked to you.. .Herman Field, this should be the same
type of deal.
Schroers: Do you think so? I guess my feeling is that the commission
isn't real organized on this issue right now and that we would be better
prepared to deal with the public in general if we spent an hour or two on
our own to get ourself organized a little better first.
Councilman Johnson: The Sunshine Law may require that people asked to be
informed of discussions of the trail issue have to be informed if you're
going to discuss the trail issue. It just might be in the State Sunshine
Law. There are certain things that if they requested to be informed of it,
and you go ahead and discuss that item without informing them of it.
."
"""
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
April 24, 1990 - Page 28
Schroers: This may not be a discussion. This may be a commission
workshop.
Lash: More of a notification than publishing the agenda in the paper?
Councilman Johnson: Yeah. If they've requested to be on that kind of a
list. I don't know, maybe these people have made that formal of a request.
There are certain people who.. .bus commission who requested to be informed
about everything that the bus commission ever does. You can also make it
specific to a subject. I don't know how many of these people have made
that request.. .work session and in the future have a more public meeting
where you're going to invite public input and you inform them of both...
Sietsema: I'll notify them of the work session but that it's not a public
hearing.
Lash: Maybe put that in the letter. Say it's not a public hea~ing. It's a
work session.
Mady: Well it should be free form. ..Even in our regular meetings there
doesn't need to be that much structure. The Council meetings need to be
structured. This should be free form as much as possible, and it usually
is. If we sound like we're just, don't know where we are from time to
time, that's still fine.
.1"'"
Lash: Because we are.
Mady: Some of the best ideas and things come out of total chaos. They
really do because you get things coming from allover the place and then
all of a sudden they seem to jell. If a meeting seems to be going nowhere,
well maybe sometimes that's where it needs to go.
Schroers: Well I guess that's my point exactly is that this item tonight
took pretty much that very venue and we ended up accomplishing practically
zip on it.
Sietsema: Well I don't know. I don't agree.
Erhart: No, I think we've opened the doors.
Andrews: I'd like to make a comment about the survey. I think that's a
waste of time mainly because I think everybody's going to be for it until
it comes time to put up the money.
Lash: Right. It's like saying would you like a Mercedes. Would you like
a million dollar house? Hey, yeah. I'd love a million dollar house but I
can't pay for it.
Mady: If that were the case, then why in the survey did we get so totally
different results? when we had stuff at 20% and stuff at 80%.
,....,
Andrews: A survey is not spending the money. When you have a referendum,
that taxpayer, that voter is spending the money. A survey is a wish list.
".....
Park and Rec Commission. Meeting
April 24, 1990 - Page 29
It's like and what do you want from Santa this year. Well I'd like a new
car. Then you do to the store to buy the car and see it's too much money.
You don't want the car anymore. I think if we're going to make any
progress, I think we have to obviously communicate this in small phases and
take it one step at a time because that's the only way we're going to get
funding on it from the voters. They're not going to fund a grandiose plan
because, you know if we can't understand it, how can the voters know what
it is. I really don't, I mean I see the plan. I understand the concept of
the plan but for me to understand what it costs and all the time it takes
to dedicate the property and stuff, it's a huge undertaking. If we're
going to move forward, we have to do it in pieces where we can say well
this is what we're going to accomplish this year or this 6 months. We're
going to take this quarter mile section and we're going to put a path on it
and if we get that much done, that's progress. A survey, by the time we
get a survey back and decide what to do with it, it will be this time next
year.
Lash: I agree with Jim's comments. I'm not trying to say anything
negative but I feel like the last time we had the survey, 77% of the people
said yeah, they wanted trails so you guys went ahead and you did all the
work and you drew the plan and you went to Council and you did the
referendum and then it failed because 77% of the people didn't want to pay
for it after they said they wanted to have it. So I guess I Just feel like
the survey's, while they can provide you with some information, I Just
~ don't know for sure when it comes down to it if people are going to come
across with the money and then you've wasted an awful lot of time.
Andrews: I don't think the results would be any different. I think people
would still say they're vastly in favor of a trail system.
sietsema: Then what I need tonight is a motion, one, if you want to table
the item. The request to revise the comprehensive plan until the
comprehensive plan can be studied further. The other would be, then to
direct staff to set up a work session at the next meeting with the tra~l
plan.
Andrews: I think that's right on.
Erhart: I do too Lori.
Schroers: Okay, then.
Sietsema: Dawne moved?
Lash: And I'11 second.
Erhart moved. Lash seconded to direct staff to set up a work session for
the Park and Recreation Commission at the next meeting to review the trail
plan. All voted in favor and the motion carried.
"...,
Schroers: That's it for the agenda. Do we have any commissioner
presentations?
",....
Pa,k and Rec Commission Meeting
April 24, 1990 - Page 30
Mady: I've got a question for Todd. Todd, have you been in discussions
with the DNR as to any fish stocking... We did Lotus Lake approximately 3
years ago with walleyes. They were going to supposedly do it on like a 3
to 5 year basis and I haven't heard anything since then.
Hoffman: No, there hasn't been any discussions lately. I know in talking
with them on the population on Lake Ann, they've neve, stocked Lake Ann and
they don't see that they will stock it in the future. If you have any
specific requests, I can certainly talk to the appropriate person at the
Fisheries and get some further information on any particular lake in
Chanhassen.
Mady: Well I know after they did Lotus after the boat access was in, there
supposedly was going to be an ongoing program with Lotus. Could you just
give them one quick phone call and see if there's any plans because I'm
sure they have a specific plan.
Lash: Is that kind of the same for Ann too? I know I brought this up to
you one time before but we think the fishing stinks down there. Are they
going to do anything about that?
Hoffman: They've never stocked Lake Ann that I know of.
Lash: Well now we've got a boat access. We're putting in a fishing pier.
~ We're doing all these neat things to fish and there's no fish. Don't you
think we should maybe...
Hoffman: Not everybody would hold that general consensus.
Lash: Well, if you want to spend the whole day out there, you might get a
bite but. It's not like it used to be, I can tell you that.
Hoffman:1 They monitor all lakes.
sietsema: That have access on it.
Hoffman: If you would like, there's information on tests. They do test
nets every 3 to 5 years on what the population of what all species of fish
are in that lake and then you can find out if they are there.
Lash: How do they know that?
Hoffman: They test net it. Gill net it. Box net it and you can find out
that the fish are there.
Mady: Before I bought my house I called the DNR to get a fish count on the
lake across from me.
Schroers: Okay, are there any more commission presentations, concerns?
".....
Andrews: Todd, did you get my comment about North Lotus? About the
wind.. .
,....,
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
April 24, 1990 - Page 31
Hoffman: About the tennis nets and wind screens?
Robinson: And the wind screens here at the elementary school? We were
going to do something with those.
Hoffman: Yeah, we had this discussion with Dale this spring and they're
just not holding up. We're just trying to battle with trying to piece them
together.
sietsema: I think the big thing is, we'd like to do some plantings and
some screening that will protect those courts but until we know what's
going to happen with the whole park up there, we're hesitant to spend any
money.
Andrews: As far as North Lotus goes, you might as well take them down.
The wind breaks those clips. The first good wind they were down. You
might as well just take them down and save the money.
Mady: Put the netter on the other...
Andrews: It doesn't marter.
Robinson: But is that what we decided to do? We talked about this 2 weeks
ago. Is that what we decided to do up here at the school? I don't know
~ half the wind screens are on up there I think.
Hoffman: Yeah, they're pretty much removed the torn ripped segments and
tried to keep the north/northwest portion of it retained.
Andrews: The North Lotus ones are in good condition. They're just falling
down. You can take them down and put them on the other spot or something.
Robinson: What are we going to do? Nothing or replace them or...
Sietsema: We were going to look into alternatives I think is what we came
down to because there really isn't a better model of tennis nets. We can
go to half, put in hald nets up.
Andrews: Half screens you mean?
Sietsema: That have a little bit less resistence.
Andrews: Well it's not the netting itself that breaks. It's the little
plastic clips which there are about 800 of them on the tennis courts right
now. The screens themselves are in perfect condition. But what may happen
is if you put a wire attachment, then they may be stronger than the screen
and the screen will rip so I really feel that you have a battle you can't
win there. I'd just take them down and say the heck with it because I
think you're just going to either rip nets or break clips constantly.
,....,
Robinson: Can we put this on an agenda in a couple weeks or so just to get
it on the table and let's do something specific?
.,..
,.....
,.....
Pa,k and Rec Commission Meeting
Ap,il 24, 1990 - Page 32
Sch,oe,s: Okay, the next action would be to move to adjou,n.
Robinson: So moved.
Lash: I think Lo,i had a couple of things.
Sietsema: I had a couple of LlPdates of what the City Council did last
night. We had the CORE fishing pie, on the agenda and they accepted it and
autho,ized execution of the ag,eement. The pa,k shelte" elect,ical up to
the pa,k shelte, was app,oved and I'll be going and getting bids fo, that
p,oject and the fireworks...
Robinson moved, Lash seconded to adjourn the meeting. All voted in favor
and the motion carried. The meeting was adjourned.
Submitted by Lori Sietsema
Park and Rec Coordinator
Prepared by Nann Opheim
,