PRC 1989 01 24
3
PARK AND RECREATION COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
~ JANUARY 24, 1989
Chairman Mady called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m..
MEMBERS PRESENT: Jim Mady, Sue Boyt, Ed Hasek, Larry Schroers, Carol
Watson, and Curt Robinson
STAFF PRESENT: Lori Sietsema, Park and Rec Coordination and Todd Hoffman,
Recreation Supervisor
APPOINTMENT OF ACTING CHAIRPERSON.
Mady moved, Boyt seconded to appoint Curt Robinson as the Acting
Chairperson of the meeting for January 24, 1989. All voted jn favor and
the motion carried.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES.
Mady: I have a comment. On page 49 of the Minutes, we were talking about
the indoor ice arena and a tape break occurred and all of a sudden Lori's
saying, I don't know what thejr problem is and unless you knew what
happened in the meeting, you wouldn't have any idea what went on. At that
,..... point we should note that we had been talking about the Carrico property.
At tape breaks, we should probably almost add a little bit. Most of them
aren't too bad. They're usually right in the middle of a discussion but
this one we changed topics entirely and unless you knew what happened at
the meeting, no way are you going to pick up on this.
Boyt: I have a minor correction on page 6. Where it sars, outstanding
outstanding. It should be outstanding standing.
Robinson: Since we're talking about minor corrections, I have one on page
26 that I'm almost ashamed to bring up. At the bottom of the page it
says, take the hook off the antenna cable. What I actually said was, take
the hook off the attendant. What I meant to say is, take the attendant
off the hook.
Schroers: As long as we're into minor corrections, I have one on page 7.
Where it says, I would like to ask what their environmental and
conservation point of view, it should be, for the City of Chanhassen would
be rather than plan. It's the second paragraph on the bottom.
Hoffman: That'd be a fairly indepth, their plan Larry.
Schroers: That's exactly my point. Then I had another little one on,
this is page 21, about the fifth paragraph from the bottom. It should
say, I can make it instead of I can't.
I"'"
Mady moved, Boyt seconded to approve the Minutes of the Park and
Recreation Commission meeting dated January 10, 1989 as amended. All
voted in favor except Watson who abstained and the motion carried.
Park and Recreation Commission Meeting
January 24, 1989 - Page 2
....",.,
DISCUSSION OF TOTLOT PURCHASE AT CITY CENTER PARK - APPOINT PRESIDENT -
CAROL OLSON.
Sietsema: As you may recall, the 1989 Capital Improvement Program
includes $40,000.00 for totlot equipment for City Center Park. It has
come to our attention that the APT and the School are also working on
fundraising to purchase totlot equipment and playground equipment for the
City site. They heard about our money and we heard about theirs and we
thought, hey, let's get together. So this is basically just an
information discussion back and forth, kind of informal thing to find out
what we each have in mind. I think what the Commission has in mind may
vary as well so if you just want to open it up for discussion.
Robinson: Can we hear from Carol Olson? Is Carol here?
Carol Olson: Yes, I'm here.
Robinson: Could you tell us what you had in mind?
Carol Olson: Our major block of fund raising this year has been for the
playground. We're spending money on other things too so we're hoping that
after Fun Fair we might have about $10,000.00. That's not going to do
much but it will get a start. The obvious place where we feel we need to
\ do something is, what side of the building is that for the little kids? ....",
The north end. That is the oldest equipment over there and it's very
outdated. That's what we're trying to find out. Where are you putting
yours? Is it going to go in that same area? Is it going to go somewhere
else because if you were going to put $40,000.00 into that area, then we
won't work so hard towards playground equipment. We've got other things
we could spend the money on and just put something smaller in there.
We're committed to do playground equipment because we've told everybody
that's what we're doing so we've got to get something but maybe we don't
have to work towards a $20,000.00 or $30,000.00 unit if the City's putting
something in there.
Mady: Our discussions have pretty much revolved around the idea of
creating a play structure the size of, some of the very nice ones you see
in some of the major parks like Eden Prairie. We want something very
nice. The City Center Park is a focal point really for the real town of
Chanhassen. The kids need a nice structure. St. Hubert's has got a
fairly nice structure now in their play area. It's a little bit smaller
than what I think we were envisioning but we want something very nice.
Location wise, I don't think we've really specified. One of the things we
were looking at is having the park redesigned. Having it laid out so it
can be utilized better. Personally I recognize the fact that the
equipment on the north side of the school especially needs some work.
There are concerns about some of the equipment being safe and that, so
what we want to do is create a nice play structure up there. Something
that the kids can use a lot of imagination on and will accommodate a lot
of kids. Be a focal point. We want to bring their children up of all
ages so they have something they can all do. Exact location at this time,
I don't know. That site is being considered for our Community Center too
--'
Park and Recreation Commission Meeting
January 24, 1989 - Page 3
~
at this time so a plan will be corning up.
Robinson: Is some of that land city land and some of school district
property?
Sietsema: The City owns to just the other side of the warming house and
then the School District owns everything to the north of that.
Mady: The warming house south is the City. 2 to 3 acres of City property
to about 10 to 11 acres of school property.
Robinson: So anything we were going to do, we would not put on school
district property, like to the north of the school?
Mady: No, not necessarily because it's kind of a joint...
~
Sietsema: Because we maintain the whole park. The agreement that we've
had with the school district, as I understand it is that when school
session is out, the whole site is ours to schedule and during school
hours, it's the school. The whole site. So during school hours they corne
over and they go ice skating or they play ball on all three fields, even
the one that's on ours and after school, we schedule it for the T-Ball and
Ragball and that kind of thing and schedule tennis lessons. We share
jointly the cost of maintenance on the tennis courts and the facilities.
I don't know if we've shared the cost of anything on the playground
equipment. I think it's everything that's been behind the school
basically. The tennis courts and the ballfields, the running track and
the ice rinks.
Schroers: Do we have a time frame that we're working with here?
Carol Olson: We want to know, if we're going to do something, we want to
get something obviously that's a big structure there also because that's
where all the, it's kindergarten, first and second use that area at
recess. That's a lot of kids so you can't just put up a small unit but
we're going to have do something in a phasing. We can't raise $20,000.00
in one year. We just can't do it.
Boyt: Do you have the option of buying materials and having parents
assemble it?
Carol Olson: That idea has been kicked around. I don't know about
liability and I don't know how much, we've talked about it.
Bob Ostlund: That's been done at other school sites...a year ago.
Boyt: It was done at St. Hubert's. It was done in an elementary school
north of the Twin Cities. They had their own architect corne in.
~ Watson: Minnetonka School District does it, like out at Minnewashta. The
parents put up all the playground equipment out there and they simply had
someone from the school was there and checked everything and made sure
that they were in fact. Of course they had people who knew how to use
Park and Recreation Commission Meeting
January 24, 1989 - Page 4
-"
tools and were reasonably competent to begin with but that has cut the
cost way down.
Boyt: I think you can get at least four times the playground, in talking
to the parents at St. Hubert's, they were astounded that anyone would have
$10,000.00 to spend on playground equipment. I've been thinking of the
City Center Park, working on the southern end. The southern playground
that the older kids use. Partly because I think one of the most dangerous
pieces of equipment is there right now. The jungle gym.
Carol Olson: That's not the one that has the most problems. It's the
stuff on the other end. That seems to be the bigger problem.
Watson: You mean from the standpoint of injuries and kids getting hurt
and stuff? It's up on the north one where the littler kids are?
Carol Olson: Yes.
Watson: That stands to reason.
Carol Olson: We just thought, if you were going to spend $40,000.00, I
don't see that that whole area warrants $80,000.00 worth of playground
equipment. For us to go into a phasing thing, it would be real nice to be
able to work it so it could be located in an area where the school could
use it also. -'
Boyt: Does the school district have any plans to get rid of some of the
equipment that's had many injuries?
Carol Olson: It's something that we're looking at right now in terms of
what can we, if we take it down right now...
Boyt: I think that's something that I'd like to know. If we're going to
take out 4 pieces over here and 2 pieces here, what's going to be left...?
I think there's some that really need to go.
Carol Olson: You have that money in your budget. You're not sure where
but what's your timeframe? When are you looking at some kind of action on
it?
Boyt: It could happen this spring.
Robinson: We're going to prioritize. We've got a number of items and
we're going to prioritize them tonight. Sometime in 1989.
Mady: It's our goal to have that in place.
Schroers: Does the City already have someone that we use for this on a
budget thing and architect that would design it or would it go on bids?
Sietsema: Well, $40,000.00 would have to go out on bids because anything """'"
over $15,000.00 but typically we've worked with Earl F. Anderson with our
playground equipment. We've gotten real good service from them and
Park and Recreation Commission Meeting
January 24, 1989 - Page 5
,....
they've been willing to come out and help us design what we want and that
kind of thing. They're very reputable and their equipment holds up very
well.
Carol Watson: Is that from Mexican 'Forge?
Sietsema: Yes, I believe so. They are not necessarily the cheapest but
they go by, there's a handbook on playground equipment that has become the
Bible in liability cases. And if your structures are not built to the
specifications that are in this handbook that was set up as a guideline,
then you are more likely to lose your case if someone's hurt on that
equipment and they build all of their equipment by those specifications.
Schroers: Okay, and to obtain his services, does that have to go out on
bid or can we just hire that straight out as far as having him come and
look and see what we have?
Sietsema: He can come and look at what we have and make recommendations
and draw things up but the actual purchase is probably going to have to go
out on bids. We may want to hire someone that would be independent that
would help us decide what, with that amount of money, help us decide what
we want and then go from there.
,.... Schroers: To have them go out and take a look and see what's what, how
much money do you think we'd be talking about for that?
Sietsema: The guy at Earl F. Anderson would come out and do it for
nothing if he was pretty sure that he'd be awarded the job.
Schroers: Or if he had a good chance at it?
Sietsema: Yes. That's part of the services that he's provided in the
past.
Schroers: That seems like that would be a good way to get the ball
rolling. Contact them and have someone come out and look things over.
Give us some advice.
Sietsema: Location really is the key point here because if the community
center, if the City Center Park site is chosen for the community center in
the next couple years, that's not where we want to sink $40,000.00 of
equipment and then have to move it within the next year or two.
Boyt: But the north playground?
Sietsema: On the north side, that wouldn't be affected then.
Mady: Not necessarily. We are talking about asking, at the Task Force
,......, meetings, we talked about looking at the 4 or 5 acres that are directly
north of there. I know when I met at community meetings with the
community center, I will be asking the residents who attend those meetings
their thoughts on acquiring that 4 acres of land since we have fairly
Park and Recreation Commission Meeting
January 24, 1989 - Page 6
_Iif/Il
'--
accurate counts for that. It would just open up things for us a little
bit.
Sietsema: Do' you think that's where the playground equipment would be
going out?
Mady: It would maybe allow us to expand over because it's 100 feet wide
there I believe, at that spot. It just gives a little bit more room to
position the equipment there.
Watson: And maybe move away from that parking lot a little bit better
because it really is pretty close to the parking lot. When the kids are
out there and the parking situation has gotten to the point that that
school, where it's very difficult to find a parking space and there
doesn't necessarily have to be anything going on there of a significant
nature so that lot is being used a lot more. It didn't used to be used
that much. The kids were relatively safe over there because people
usually parked up in front or on this side, for some reason, but now that
lot is used alot and I think there's a much more significant hazard for
those kids.
Boyt: Do you know when the Community Center Task Force is going to make a
recommendation?
Mady: I would guess we're going to start holding public meetings, I'm -'
going to think late February, I'm hoping to start. We're meeting next
week to go over some things. I would hope we're going to start scheduling
some meetings and getting input. I would think if we do the meetings
properly and people attend, we should have some input to the Council I
would think by early April.
Boyt: That's getting pretty late to order any equipment.
Mady: Well, I think we can order equipment.
Boyt: But they have to know the site to decide what playground. That's
pretty important for the architect.
Sietsema: All he needs to know is if it's going to be a square spot, a
round spot, a rectangular spot and how big and what we're working around.
Boyt: So if it's a high priority for us, to get the playground equipment
in this year, we might not get two...
Mady: Two?
Boyt: North and South.
Mady: Oh, for the equipment. I would like to see the whole site designed
by the park... I think that's probably the most important thing we have -'
to look at things like the tennis court is running down. If you really
want that tennis court. The ground is full of cracks. The posts have
been risen through frost heave, they've come up out of the ground a little
Park and Recreation Commission Meeting
January 24, 1989 - Page 7
JIIII".
bit. It needs to be reworked and we're probably going to be looking at
having to redo that site in the next couple years so we need to have a
plan for the entire site that kind of makes sense. Because right now, the
way the fields are laid out...
Boyt: We don't have that in our budget for this year but we do have the
playground equipment in our budget for this year.
Mady: But we can find room in our budget as we have in the past to
design, a couple thousand dollars to design a park area.
Boyt: I think Lori was saying it's pretty expensive because they have to
survey the property.
Sietsema: They can probably do it for $1,500.00, come up with a design
because typically what it's cost us in the past. I think it's a good idea
that the sequence that things should go in is have a plan and then put
your things where they're supposed to go according to the plan but it's
difficult to put a plan if you don't know if there's going to be a big
huge building in the middle of it or not. Perhaps we're not going to be
able to work together with the APT and the school. We're going to have to
put ours on hold until we know what the community center is doing.
JIIII". Robinson: I really thing we should do that.
Sietsema: For $40,000.00, I think we should put it where we want it to
go. In the right spot and $40,000.00 worth of equipment is going to be a
big thing to work around if we put it in and then try to work around it
and put in a building and ballfields and what not.
Boyt: You guys need to get going.
Mady: Well we're meeting next week. It's somewhat of a different group.
We don't build a consensus quickly.
Robinson: I think we should put it on the agenda for an equal time frame
and we'll get specific about it to look at it again or review it. Put it
off in other words.
Sietsema: As soon as we have a clearer understanding of what the
community center is doing.
Robinson: Jim thought that could be in April so let's get it on the
agenda for April. If we know anything more then, fine. If we don't,
well, at least we look at it.
Watson: Is April going to be kind of late for you?
Carol Olson: We wanted to do something but it doesn't make sense for us
~. to do something just in order to spend money.
Watson: And we have the constraints of this potential building, etc.. At
any rate, we need a park plan or something should be done out there so
Park and Recreation Commission Meeting
January 24, 1989 - Page 8
.....".,
that when, even after the building's there and we do start to plan your
ballfields and all that stuff, that we do know where we're going.
Sietsema: We need to work with the school,to find out if they want to
rearrange the ballfields too and the tennis court and everything else too.
We're making some assumptions here.
Watson: What they need done because it's always going to be a joint
venture. So they get their equipment too.
Sietsema: Do you have some criteria as far as how far away from the
school you want it?
Carol Olson: We've really been listening to what you have to say too.
What the whole design is going to be. It's really crazy for us right now
to say we want it here if there might be a building there.
Bob Ostlund: I totally agree with what Jim said. A site plan to
coordinate on is what really is necessary right now so where the
playground equipment goes can fit with what the overall plan for the site
is. With or without the community center. I think that really is the
first step and then we'll have to take a look at it and try to think of
possibilities with APT or other interested parties on something once we
have that in place.
...".,.
Boyt: We'll need a joint venture to get the design because the school has
three grades on one playground and three on another.
Mady: I move to table to our first meeting in April and that if a
decision is made in the City prior to concerning the community center
site, move it to an earlier agenda.
Watson: Second.
Mady moved, Watson seconded to table action on the totlot equipment for
the City Center Park until the first meeting in April or if a decision
regarding the community center is made prior to this date, that it be
moved to an earlier agenda. All voted in favor and the motion carried.
REVIEW GRADING PLAN FOR LAKE ANN PARK, LAURIE MCROSTI.
Sietsema: Laurie's
with our discussion
when she gets here.
to go longer.
not here yet. I told her that it might take a while
so if we want to move on and then come back to this
I also told Richard. I anticipated this discussion
RECREATION SUPERVISOR'S UPDATE ON PROGRAMS.
....."
Hoffman: 8(a) discusses ballfield scheduling.
that have arisen in the past year specifically.
Some of the situations
If you've read through
Park and Recreation Commission Meeting
January 24, 1989 - Page 9
,.....
it, it discusses situations that are occurring down at Meadow Green Park
with the two ballfields that we have there. Gary Meister and the girls
softball program has kind of grown accustomed to using those fields. That
program is growing to the point where last year they had 4 t~ams. Now
this year he's anticipating 5 or 6 and he would like pretty much exclusive
use of that field, or those two fields that are there. I noted if we
granted that request, what some of the problems would be where we have
other requests to use some of those fields. Specifically field #2 or one
from Westside Baptist in as well. Last year Field #2 was pretty much left
empty throughout the week every night and many adult softball teams
scheduled practices down there as well. This year the battle has already
begun for field reservations. We don't have the written policy but I'd
just let anybody know who would like to reserve a field, just to make a
written request anytime after January 1 and these two are the first
requests in the door. I had one December 31st and one January 1st so they
were right on top of one another and with the additional growth going on
in the community, it's only going to be a problem that intensifies before
it subsides. When some additional ballfields are put in. The 3 at Lake
Ann Park will help out to a certain extent but again, I think by the time
those are built, they will be used to their maximum potential and we'll be
looking to the additional ball fields that will be coming into the south in
the southern park design for basically children type use sports. So what
I am asking of the Commission is a recommendation as if there is some
~criteria we should look at. Whether it be which group should get certain
preference on parks or if we should give certain parks to certain
activities. Say, Meadow Green Park and City Center specifically for youth
and Lake Ann Park specifically for adults. Lake Ann Park is another site
where many of the youth organizations, specifically Little League and the
Babe Ruth League, we'd like to see more youths there as well. As I've
noted on the next item, we're pretty much up to full capacity there with
our adult softball leagues.
Robinson: Todd, can the ballfields at South Lotus Lake Park that's
scheduled...for 1989, be used for league play? I realize not this year
bu t . . .
Hoffman: At South Lotus Lake? Yes, our policy is basically that
neighborhood ballfields can be used for the children's or the youth
activities. T-ball, pee wee, ragball, those type of things but it's just
not a compatible use for adult league play so we don't schedule any adult
leagues there. That's basically why we leave Lake Ann Park for the adult
leagues. But yes, to answer your question, once it is there, it will be
used for youth sports.
Robinson: So that will help alleviating your problem?
Hoffman: Yes.
Robinson:
,....,
Hoffman:
will not
probably
And the addition fields at Lake Ann.
And the additional field at North Lotus Lake will as well.
be in use this year. For intensive league play, I wouldn't
recommend it this year. It will probably get used by the
That
Park and Recreation Commission Meeting
January 24, 1989 - Page 10
.--,
neighborhood children in that area to a certain extent anyway but I don't
believe the grass is going to be fully matured where we should use it.
Boyt: How about a practice field?
Mady: Yes, I talked to one of the Little League coaches this year and had
mentioned again that we had, in our budget we would be putting in a mound
at North Lotus so they would have at least a practice facility field. I
told him it's not going to be big enough to hold your games on but at
least you're going to have a place where you can take some infield, hit
some balls around, take outfield. When the Legion field's busy, you at
least have a facility to use. A friend of mine complains quite regularly
about the lack of fields. Actually there's a couple of different guys
complain regularly about lack of fields so we need to accommodate as much
as we can but it's going to kick off a bit at existing ones is very
difficult also.
Boyt: Have we provided...
(A tape change occured during Sue Boyt's question.)
Hoffman: ...in the industrial league from Monday to Tuesday.
flopped those so the women's league who had 9 teams, they can
entire league on two fields. That would allow Field *3 to be
Little League on Tuesday nights as well so they did play some
at Lake Ann Park.
We've flip
play their
used for the>
games here --'
Robinson: Maybe we could get some ideas if you also updated us on (a) and
(b) because that definitely comes into play I believe on the other part
doesn't it?
Hoffman: Yes. If nothing else, on 8(a), if we want to remain as is and
just try to work out the most sensible solutions to field scheduling
conflicts, it just brings to your attention the rising need for additional
ballfield space that is occurring.
Boyt: Is Westside Baptist the church that's meeting in the industrial
park?
Mady: A question or I guess a comment which is mainly about Meadow Green
Park is that it truly is a neighborhood park so if we can at least keep
one field open, not even schedule practices but just have it there and if
a softball team shows up, they can use it or if the neighborhood kids, if
they're playing, they can use it or whoever gets there first has got it.
Unless we run into a situation where a couple teams are battling it out
for it and we start running into problems, then we'll have to do something
but we do have Carver Beach, it's just a small field. Maybe the girls
could use that one. It's not that far away.
Hoffman: Carver Beach is used by T-ball and ragball currently.
....."
Mady: In the summer after that.
Park and Recreation Commission Meeting
January 24, 1989 - Page 11
,.....
Hoffman: Girls softball goes a little farther into July, mid-July.
Mady: It's tough. Until we get our parks built, it's going to be tough.
Robinson: It is and I think we should, I know you're doing the best job
you can. I think we should almost, if it would make you feel better, make
that a written policy. You say there's an unwritten policy now which
allows returning groups or organizations, you've got your priorities set.
I think we should almost make that a written policy.
Boyt: I don't think so. Because of the children coming in. I think we
need to make room for the children and if it's an adult league where
people from outside of Chanhassen playing and although it sounds like
almost everyone is from Chanhassen and I think they should be bumped for
Chanhassen children.
Robinson: Chanhassen residents period. I think that's why I'd like to
talk about 8(b) because I think we could pin this down a little bit if we
go onto 8 (b) .
Boyt: We're leaving 8(a) yet.
Hoffman: 8(b), as I stated, does go hand and hand with the availability
.~ of ballfields. 8(b) discusses the adult softball player eligibility
requirements. We're up to 56 teams that participates on 5 nights a week,
Monday thru Friday in our adult softball leagues. In the past, probably
the farther you go back the more non-residents you have. The more non-
resident teams you have just to make a viable league so the people who are
actually here in town can participate in an enjoyable league. As the City
continues to grow, there's going to be more and more people within our
city boundary which would like to participate on a league. As time
progresses, we can probably start getting more strict on our requirements
for eligibility. The problem in bringing that into play is how the teams
now are patterned. They're set in their ways. Anytime you bring up any
type of change in eligibility for players, you're going to have some
discussion and some problems in dealing with those teams. So you just
want to really make yourself think through a clear decision and try to
come up with a good policy in which to do so. In which to limit non-
residents to our Chanhassen softball leagues.
Schroers: This is a little bit off the subject topic. I've had people
ask me if we have openings on our team. People from Chanhassen that would
like to get on a softball team and we certainly don't. Do any of the team
managers contact you and say that they could use a player or two or can we
refer people to you who are looking to get on a team?
Hoffman: In a few leagues they do. I try to advertise that individuals,
new people that are moving into town, if you would like to get on a team
~ and you don't have that contact, to give me a call and hopefully we can
make a match. More times than not, it's just through casual conversation
that I talk to a manager and ask them. Most of the team managers do not
volunteer that they have an opening on their team so at times it is
difficult to make those matches.
Park and Recreation Commission Meeting
January 24, 1989 - Page 12
...,.,
Mady: Larry and I both recognize, at least in the over 35 league, there
is probably 3 or 4 teams who consistently have problems getting a.full
team of 10 players. I think what we need to do is tell managers in the
early meeting that because of problems we have with schedule fields, just
the tightness we have, number one, we're going to have to eliminate the
outside teams that are coming in that have nobody living in Chanhassen.
I'm sorry, but we've got to let our kids play on our fields. Number two,
I would like to see us set some kind of a standard to the existing teams
who do have residents in Chanhassen, that 60%, 75%, something that live or
work in the City of Chanhassen because I know the team I play on from time
to time pick up people from outside the area just to fill the team. I
don't think that's right. I've told my coach that a number of times but I
think until the City sets up a policy on it, my team's going to continue
picking up a good ball player from wherever instead of committing to a
city that may have problem with their team because we want to keep their
position in the league.
Boyt: From what I've seen from your coach and I don't know if it's true
of other coaches...he calls the neighbors and says, will you play. They
never show up but he turns in a roster of names so he's got a team.
Mady: It happens. I know a number of the teams that have 17, 18, 20
players on the team. They consistently have trouble getting 9 players to
the field. We've got to do something.
...""
Boyt: I think that if more of our children's teams are full of Chanhassen
people, they should have priority. Chanhassen residents and people who
work in Chanhassen.
Schroers: I agree with that. I think that Chanhassen teams and existing
teams that have been in the league for a number of years should have
priority. When we get down to more of an individual thing, that really
opens up a can of worms. We have players that were born and raised, grew
up, went to school at Chanhassen. All their roots are in Chanhassen.
They basically say that they are from Chanhassen but they got married and
maybe now they live in Bloomington or Richfield or someplace like that.
Are you going to tell those people that they can't play?
Mady: Yes. We've got kids who can't play ball and they do live here and
that's the problem.
Schroers: I'm talking about adults, not kids.
Watson: But adults will drive the distance to play ball. Children don't
have those kinds of choices. Children play with their friends and they
want to be with their friends and they want to play close to home.
Boyt: It sounds like it's going to be a lot of hurt feelings in the adult
league but it sounds like we want to change the rules.
....",.,
Schroers: I think before we get to that, eliminating outside teams from
the league would make more sense.
Park and Recreation Commission Meeting
January 24, 1989 - Page 13
I""'"
Watson: How many outside teams do we have?
Mady: In the adult league, about 2?
Hoffman: Yes. Very small percentage and a portion of those outside teams
who have outside sponsors, also have people that live or work in
Chanhassen participating. I don't think there's probably a team in any of
our adult leagues that is strictly an outside team, meaning an organized
team from Eden prairie that plays over there and then comes to Chanhassen
and plays a night. There's no such team in any of our adult leagues.
There are some, so called, outside teams which may be made up of 60% to
75% of outside players. You have to make that distinction. It's either
the outside teams would nice to leave but it's better to go by player.
Just to give you some more information on that, I did attach that survey
and if you noted on there, 3(e) and 3(f) dealt specifically with what
other cities are doing for their eligibility.
Robinson: Where's the response to that? Is it on this matrix?
Hoffman: Yes, the response, I don't see it. Under observations, the
first page there, number 6 deals with it specifically. About 25% of
cities surveyed required all players to live or work in the sports
I""'" communi ty. Another 25 % reg i stered teams by pr ior i ty system which we did
last year and which takes quite a bit of time to do. It's hard to control
being the same thing that Sue noted. You can call your neighbors up. You
can fill your roster with your playing team and then call all your
neighbors and fill the other 10 places with Chanhassen names and it makes
your percentage look quite a bit better. So that works to a certain
extent. It requires a lot of time on my part going through and ranking,
counting the outside players of people who live or work and then coming up
with a percentage. 33% respondents allow anywhere from 2 to 7 outside
players per team. That seems, it's a popular method in some of our
neighboring communities. You allow up to 3 outside players to
participate. On a different part of the roster, this is where your 3
outside players can, you put their names down here. They're outside
players and either the player pays an outside fee to have the right to
play within our community or the team pays an extra $25.00 or $50.00 to
have those 1 to 3 outside players. So there are a variety of ways of
restricting it. Again, it does look like a good solution but if you look
at, as noted on there, if you look at the make-up of our leagues
currently, we do probably have 35% outside players which are playing so it
affects a lot of people. It affects not only those people but the teams
and their players and the other people playing on that team as well. So
it gets to be a very vocal opposition.
Robinson: I noticed a number of, again I'm referring to this thing where
it says, numbers of outsiders allowed. Percent of teams registered by
~percent of residents. A number of them have zero.
Hoffman: Meaning that no outside players are allowed, yes.
Park and Recreation Commission Meeting
January 24, 1989 - Page 14
..."I
Robinson: Right. Richfield, Blaine, Edina, Brooklyn Park, Shakopee,
Moundview.
Boyt: Eden Prairie.
Watson: So we wouldn't excactly be clearing new ground if we said that,
and if we are running up against the problem where we've got virtually
people signing up on the 1st of January for fear they're not going to get
a field and there's kids teams that won't be assembled for several months
yet and we don't know how many kids are going to come out for these
things.
Boyt: This year we have 8 sections of kindergarteners at Chanhassen
Elementary. That's a tremendous number of T-ball players I'd say. Some
of them are from Chaska but we're going to have a big increase in children
in our T-ball league.
Watson: And their leagues don't form January 1. It's going to be spring
and summer before we even know how many teams they have and that sort of
thing. It's going to be difficult to be able to schedule them in fields
because people are already writing on January 1 to say I want both the
fields at Meadow Green Park. We want them to play too but some people
can't schedule 7 months in advance.
Hoffman: The youth T-ball, ragball, pee wee, has the 3 fields at Ci ty ...."
Center Park. The field at Rice Marsh Park and Carver Beach Playground
Park so that's 4 fields. That's what they have and that's what they'll
need to make do with this year.
Boyt: Can we put a backstop at Lake Riley?
Mady: You mean Bandimere?
Boyt: Yes. Could we put a ball diamond...
Mady: Like Carver Beach has?
Hoffman: For just pick-up games, we could certainly do that but again,
summer soccer does some certain practices down there and we wouldn't want
to schedule that.
RObinson: It looks, according to the survey, that Chanhassen is pretty
liberal with the outsiders. Outsider fee for player. We charge zero.
Most of them charge from $8.00, $10.00, $20.00, $25.00 tops at Minnetonka.
Eligibility conduct deposit. Some are $20.00 up to $100.00. We charge
none. I think we need to tighten up for non-Chanhassen residents.
Mady: I guess my gut feeling when I look at this thing is I'd like to see
us...but I don't want to cut it off entirely either because I know what
kind of fear it's going to cause. I know the people who come to your ...."
softball meetings and I know how upset they get about very little things
very easily so if we could institute a policy where these 5 people, you
get 5 non-resident, non-workers on your team. That gives you 5 people who
Park and Recreation Commission Meeting
January 24, 1989 - Page 15
,....
are on the field. You're allowed a roster of 18-20 people so if you
wanted that.
Watson: I was going to say, what percentage would that be, about 25%
then?
Mady: Roughly. That gives enough people on the field. If you can't get
half your ball players out of Chanhassen, when we're tying up fields as it
is, I'm sorry, go play in Minneapolis because Minneapolis will let you
come from anywhere. If you pay the dollars, they'll put you on the field
someplace. This is just getting to that point.
Watson: I think you're being very generous.
Mady: 2 to 3 years from now when Lake Ann has 6 fields and hopefully
we'll have a park in southern Chanhassen with 4 fields, maybe we'll be
able to do something but right now, we're too tight. We need to let our
kids play someplace too. I play adult softball. I have been ever since
I've lived here.
Schroers: What that does, at 50-50 and I think that's reasonable, but
what's going to happen is that there's going to be a lot of long time
players getting displaced.
,.....,
Hasek: What is the policy right now?
Hoffman: The policy, it's stated on 8(b), right on the front. Basically
we use a percentage system. Any teams last year, we had 21 teams in the
open league, Men's open league who wanted to get in for 14 spots. In
order to pare that down, I believe 18 out of those 21 teams submitted a
roster. I had to go through that roster. Check those addresses. See if
they lived or worked there. Both their resident and their work address.
See if they lived or worked and prioritize all those 18 teams into a
percentage. 100% live or work. 80% live or work. Draw a line inbetween
14 and 15 and the bottom 4 drop out. That gets to be a very lengthy
process. It gets to be a process that doesn't work well because you can
have your 10 working players and fill the other 10 with your neighbors who
never show up at the ballfield and it's not a real good representation.
It's a system that a lot of communities use but it's not the best one I
don't believe. So what we're looking for Ed is, we're at a point where
are ballfields are getting full and we're trying to tighten up or if it is
a reasonable solution, tighten up who's playing adult ball.
Hasek: That's for the men's. What is it for the over 35?
Hoffman: It's the same.
Hasek: Let's say we go to 3 ball players per roster, that didn't happen?
~ Even though they voted on it, that didn't happen?
Hoffman: Voted on it at the meeting?
Park and Recreation Commission Meeting
January 24, 1989 - Page 16
.......",
Hasek: Yes. Wasn't there some discussion at the meeting that we had? I
know we voted on something 3 or 4 times there.
Hoffman: That was if you had to be 35 or older to play on the 35 and over
league or if you could be under.
Hasek: That's right. It's a 35 league and they were trying to decide
whether you had to be 35.
Schroers: Todd, do you have a recommendation? An avenue that you'd like
to pursue on this?
Hoffman: I hesitate to make a recommendation. I'm looking for a
recommendation from the Council.
Robinson:
for you?
If we put some restrictions on non-residents, is that workable
Would that cause you big problems in implementing that?
Hasek: That's what they're looking for. Somebody to make the rules so
they have something to back them because the problem is, you go into those
meetings and everybody's throwing stuff at you and if you leave it up to
them, they'll never decide. They'll sit there for hours arguing about
nothing so really it's up to the board and the recreation department to
set the rules to guide the thing. That's the way it has to be.
Sietsema: But you must be aware, if you do limit it to 3 outside players
or whatever it is, that we're going to be masses of phone calls. You're
going to start getting phone calls. The City Council will get phone
calls. The Mayor will get phone calls. The City Manager will get phone
calls. Softball is a very emotional game. I don't mean to make a big
deal out of nothing but I'll tell you, there are guys that lived in
Chanhassen 15 years ago that are now living on the other side of St. Paul
that still play here and if we were to say that they can't play, we're
going to have, that's the decrepence league. Who's that from?
--"
Watson: That's the good 01' boys of baseball...
Sietsema: That's just it. It's been really hard for us, especially for
the league that's been here the longest, the over 35 league, to change
from the good 01' boys beer league to a bonafide city league. It's been a
hard, hard thing for them to make that conversion. It's been hard for us
to help them make that conversion. Nobody wants to make anybody's life
miserable but we've got 3 ballfields and who are we going to allow? The
good 01' boys that have always played here forever no matter where lived
or the people who are waiting in line to get in?
Hasek: The simple fact is that the ballfields belong to the people that
live in this community. All of the people and if you've got a son that
wants to play. If you've got a daughter that wants to play. If you've
got a church league within the city that wants to play. Those are first
priority. That's the way the thing ought to be set up. We obviously do
not want to reject anybody. However, if that's what has to be done in
order to accommodate the people in the City, then that is what has to be
--"
Park and Recreation Commission Meeting
January 24, 1989 - Page 17
,....
done. I don't care if you've played in the City for 50 years and you live
20 feet the other side of the City of Chanhassen property, if you don't
live in the community and that's what the rules state, then that's what
the rule will have to be. I think that anytime you've got somebody that
doesn't live in the community and is somehow contributing to the
community, playing on a league when you've got someone here that wants to
play in any recreation and hasn't a chance because someone else has got a
spot that they can take, then it's inappropriate and it has to be
rectified.
Boyt: I think that's how we need to prioritize it too. We need to find
out how many diamonds Little League in Chanhassen needs. How many girls
softball needs. How many the little kids need. How many the church
leagues need. How many the adult leagues need who are from Chanhassen.
Let's start out with how many we need to meet the needs of the people that
live in Chanhassen.
Mady: We'll never make that.
Hasek: It might actually have to happen that some of the leagues, there
might be a group of people that want to bring in some more teams. They've
got people calling and they have room for more teams. There might be a
league that has teams already playing on it that just are not legal and it
~ might have to be that we have to cut those leagues in order to accommodate
the others. Yes, it's not an easy thing to have to do but if that's what
has to be done to accommodate the people within the City of Chanhassen,
then I think that's exactly what we have to do. I know our mens softball
team is going to probably suffer too but if that's the way it has to be,
that's the way it has to be.
Mady: I make the motion that the City of Chanhassen limit outside
softball players to a maximum of 5 players per team for this coming year.
See what affect it has on our field availability. We may have to do
better match our needs, the needs of our residents to our limited use to
our limited availability. Knowing full well that there will be probably
some major blood letting but I think it's time it has to be done.
Robinson: Is there a second to Jim's motion?
Boyt: Limit the number of outsiders to 5...
Mady: Actually on a team.
Boyt: Well, that's it. We have children playing who live in Minnetonka,
Eden prairie and Chaska who play in Chanhassen so if you want it to
pertain to just adults or to everyone that's. playing.
Mady: If we have a problem, we have a problem across the board, then we
~ need to limit all non-residents so that the residents have first priority.
Boyt: I think 5 is too big a number and that's why I will not second it.
Park and Recreation Commission Meeting
January 24, 1989 - Page 18
--'
Sietsema: If we go down through the children level of playing on your
limiting, then we have to notify CAA that they have to restructure their
whole registration. Their whole membership process because right now the
CAA is set up to serve the area, the kids in the area that Chanhassen
Elementary serves and that includes people from Victoria and Chaska as
well and Eden Prairie. And the people that go to St. Hubert's. I know
that's not, that's just another wrench in the works but that may have a
major affect of how Chanhassen Athletic Association is run.
Mady: Those people actually, they're part of the school. They're here so
I'll amend my motion to limit it to the adult league.
Robinson: Is there a second to Jim's motion now?
Hasek: I'll second if it's going to be for adults.
Boyt: Like I said, I think 5 is too big a number and I'd go for 3.
Robinson: I would agree with you Sue. I think we should probably phase
into this with a number like that. I too think 5 is too high. 3 would be
more appropriate in my mind.
Hasek: Could we suggest perhaps that this year it be 5 letting them know
that next year it's going to be 3?
Watson: I think if you give them a lot of advanced warning is really
going to improve their attitude towards it. They're just going to be mad
well in advance then.
""""'"
Hasek: What's the practical difference between 3 and 5 in numbers? We're
talking about how many teams? How many bodies?
Boyt: 56 teams.
Hasek: So we're talking about 112 people.
Robinson: Max.
Hasek: Between 3 and 5.
Mady: Knowing full well there's a lot of people playing both leagues.
The mens leagues. The open mens leagues.
Hasek: How would those be checked on there?
Boyt: On the roster you turn in, your Chanhassen roster and 3 people on
it can be your out of town roster.
Mady: I'll tell you how this all works. I've played a fair amount of
softball prior to moving to Chanhassen. I lived one summer both, well
I actually lived in Edina. I was a resident at my parent's house in
Minneapolis and a real good friend of mine lived in Bloomington and played
softball in those 3 leagues ~o that will happen here. At least it's
...."
Park and Recreation Commission Meeting
January 24, 1989 - Page 19
"".....
sending a message out to try to get it down. See if we can get some
control on this. Hopefully within a couple of years when we do have the
new parks in place, it will free it up. We also know the City's growing
in leaps and bounds and it's just really tough.
Hasek: So the two pieces of information that you really have to check,
could potentially be employment or a driver's license because a driver's
license is supposedly to be, has to have your legal address right? I
guess I would strongly encourage that if we're going to do this, that we
make every effort possible to really buckle down on it. If it's going to
be a rule, it's got to be cracked down on. If you're going to require
them as a resident to have a driver's license, then let's check those
things.
Boyt: Is that like a bond lease put on a team?
Hasek: A lot of communities will do that. An eligibility bond and if
you've got a player playing caught who is not eligible to play, you lose
your bond.
Robinson: Is that this eligibility conduct deposit?
Hoffman: Correct.
,....
Boyt: That sounds like something we might want to implement.
Watson: Just to keep it honest.
Schroers: I would like to know that if we limit it or whatever the
number, if it's 5 or 3, that it's going to accomplish what we want to do.
Is it going to make enough fields available that if we limit it to 5 or if
we limit it to 3, do we know that?
Hoffman: We don't know that for a fact but it's definitely going to help
the problem. It can't get any worse. If it doesn't help it to a degree,
frees up 3 fields or frees up 1 field, it makes us look like we're trying
to make an effort in that direction. You just go as close as Eden prairie
and a non-resident...softball teams can make a reservation to use one of
their fields so we are very lenient. To answer Ed's question more
directly, communities such as Eden prairie, St. Louis Park require a copy
of a driver's license and/or a pay stub if you work in that city right
along with your roster when you turn it in. We've heard cries of pain
from people thinking it was difficult in the past to get their league
roster in and this will just be- all that much more but you are right in
stating that if we are going to instate these restrictions, they should be
enforced.
Robinson: And we're not new in this then if Eden prairie is?
,....
Sietsema: No, you're not a trend setter that's for sure.
Hoffman: No. That's the reason I attached that survey, the softball
survey which is very helpful. It is the reason I attached both of these
Park and Recreation Commission Meeting
January 24, 1989 - Page ~0
.....""
on the same issue is because if we do make these changes, we are going to
have questions and we do want to have ourselves backed up. Doing so is
the problems we're having with the ballfield scheduling is really one.
reason why we should be making an effort.
Boyt: I think like Curt said, if it does not alleviate the problem enough
that we're getting towards zero next year...
Hasek: I think it's only fair that if we're really shooting for zero, if
that's what it's going to take down the road here, that it's only fair to
give them a warning that that potential exists.
Watson: This year it will be...
Hasek: No, just say for this year it will be 5 but there is the
possibility that next year it might be zero simply because of the number
of fields that we have. We've got fields coming on line but they're 2
years down the road and the demand is now. It's not 2 years from now.
How it's going to affect our league? Just looking at the 35 league, we've
got what, 3 teams that will be gone?
Hoffman: Potentially the team name could be wrong. A portion of the
players could be back under another name or on another team.
Hasek: Sure, but I'm saying if you look simply at the teams and the -'
rosters for the teams, there's 3 of them. Two of them from Chaska and I
from Excelsior right?
Hoffman: Yes, but I would say every team is going to be affected in
having to restrict some of their outside players. Knowing the over 35
league and it's personality, those people have been together for a long
time and you run into a team situation where you've got 15 or 20 guys
sitting around there trying to figure out which outside players they're
going to say good-bye to and which ones ar~ going to stay, you can imagine
they're not going to, they're going to try to get out of that situation
anyway they can.
Mady: It might be possible to go to a fee or something. A deposit they
...at the end of the year.
Robinson: I'll go for $100.00.
Boyt: $100.00 eligibility bond.
Robinson: Most of them are $100.00.
Mady: Yes, whatever the price is. See what the going rate is.
Robinson:
$100.00.
There's one at $20.00 and a couple at $50.00 but most are
Would you like to put that in your motion Jim or not?
..."
Mady: Yes, I think it's necessary.
Park and Recreation Commission Meeting
January 24, 1989 - Page 21
,.....
Schroers: That and the notification that things could change next year.
So if you want to restructure it, then I'll support your motion.
Hoffman: Before you do that Jim, you may also want to take a look at,
some communities charge the individual outside players for that right.
Some charge the team for allowing them to have those. Some just do not
charge for those outside players. That may be something, as long as we're
going through the changes, to look at it completely.
Hasek: I think if we can settle the eligibility problems, just at the
first crack at it here, we'll take a look at that issue. Todd, I would
request, we've got a meeting coming up with the over 35 league, when in
May?
Hoffman: Organizational meeting, end of March.
Hasek: We should get this information out, if we decide on it, as quickly
as possible.
Hoffman: This would be mailed to all leagues.
Mady: You want me to recite my motion?
,..... Hasek: I think she's got it don't you? The revisions?
Sietsema: Yes, pretty much. Jim moved to limit outside players to 5 in
the adult leagues for the year 1989 and monitor to see if it makes a
difference and to instigate a $100.00 eligibility bond and to notify the
players that it may be more restrictive in years to come.
Hasek: Okay, just a little comment about checking on, making sure that if
we're going to do this, that it gets checked and verified. Something,
driver's license or I think the work pay stubs is a good idea.
Sietsema: And to direct staff to verify eligibility.
Robinson: Do you still second that motion Ed?
Hasek: Yes.
Mady moved, Hasek seconded that the Park and Recreation Commission limit
the number of outside players to 5 in the adult league for the year 1989
and monitor the situation to see if it makes a difference. Instigate a
$100.00 eligibility bond for each team, direct staff to verify eligibility
and to notify the players that eligibility may become more restrictive in
the years to come. Mady, Hasek and Schroers voted in favor. Robinson,
Boyt and Watson voted in opposition. The motion failed with a tie vote of
3 to 3.
,.....
Robinson: Restructure it?
Park and Recreation Commission Meeting
January 24, 1989 - Page 22
--'
Hasek: Let's hear a motion from one on the other side then.
Boyt: Same motion but limit it to 3.
Watson: Second.
Boyt moved, Watson seconded that the Park and Recreation Commission limit
the number of outside players to 3 in the adult league for the year 1989
and monitor the situation to see if it makes a difference. InstIgate a
$199.99 eligibility bond for each team, direct staft to verify eligibility
and to notify the players that eligibility may become more restrictive in
the years to come. Mady, Hasek and Schroers voted in opposition.
Robinson, Boyt and Watson voted in favor. The motion failed with a tie
vote of 3 to 3.
Hasek:
to 4.
Okay, let's compromise.
Second?
Let's go to 4.
Same motion but let's go
Robinson: That dies for lack of second. Is there another motion?
Hasek: The problem that exists here is, if we don't do something we're
going to be stuck so we have to make a decision. We can't sit here all
night and playa game with this. Let's come up with a number that we can -'
agree with. If 5 is too many and 3 is too few, what's wrong with 4?
Mady: What we're trying to do, I know unless you attended that over 35
meeting, Todd and Lori are going to be, you're going to have, Don is going
to get more phone calls because of this probably than on any other issue
we'll ever look at in the next year.
Boyt: You know what? I have a 19 year
play Little League in Chanhassen at all
facilities so I don't care if there's a
that's upset about this. I don't care.
old son
because
man who
I want
who might not be able to
we do not provide a
lives in Eden prairie
my 19 year old children...
Mady: But he's going to be the one who calls.
Boyt: I don't care if they call me. I want our kids in Chanhassen to be
able to play ball in Chanhassen. Not to go to South Tonka. Not to go to
Chaska. To be able to play in their hometown.
Schroers: That's reasonable, I'll compromise.
Hasek: I make the same motion with 4. Is there a second?
Mady: Second.
Hasek moved, Mady seconded that the Park and Recreation Commission limit -'
the number of outside players to 4 in the adult league for the year 1989
and monitor the situation to see if it makes a difference. Instigate a
Park and Recreation Commission Meeting
January 24, 1989 - Page 23
"",.....
$100.00 eligibility bond for each team, direct staff to verify eligibility
and to notify the players that eligibility may become more restrictive in
the years to come. All voted in favor except Boyt and Watson who opposed
and the motion carried.
Hasek: Sue, I think next year we're going to zero. I see it coming.
Boyt: I don't think it should happen in one fell swoop.
Watson: I'm going to be real curious to see what significant difference
this makes in those teams so that we know if we went to zero, what we'd
really be opening up.
Hasek: I'll bet you it's going to make a difference. We've probably got
one of most legal teams in this league and it's going to make a difference
on our team.
Robinson: Could you let us know that?
Hoffman: I'll bring that back to you. I'll bring a listing of how many
teams are in each league at this time. It will make an affect. It will
make an affect in our womens league because our womens league is not up to
"",..... par as far as having a great deal of Chanhassen people in there. There
are a lot of people but there are a lot of people from outside as well
just to build the league so it will have an affect. Once our
organizational meetings are over and our leagues are underway, I'll bring
that back to a meeting.
Mady: We might need to go to a traveling league type concept. A number
of the smaller communities around have done with their over 35 league to
get them all legal so if you only get 2 teams out of Chanhassen, maybe
they can go traveling to Chaska and Excelsior and victoria.
Hoffman: We shouldn't have too much of a problem. Our co-rec league
which just started on Friday nights last year with 6 teams, that may be
dumped. It may not go this year because there will not be enough
residents that want to participate and if that is the case, then Friday
evenings will be open for some of these sports.
Schroers: I think the real answer here, and I hope that this encourages
us to be as expediant as we can with the development of Lake Ann and our
new facilities. Get the work on them and get them going so we can
accommodate.
Sietsema: It just happens to be the next item on the agenda.
REVIEW GRADING PLAN FOR LAKE ANN PARK, LAURIE MCROSTI.
,......
Sietsema: Laurie MeRosti is here from OSM to go over the grading plan.
Park and Recreation Commission Meeting
January 24, 1989 - page 24
......",
Laurie McRosti: Now you've decided who's playing, we can talk a little
bit about where you'll be able to play in a few years anyway. Just to
quickly go over the concept that was approved this summer for Lake Ann.
This side of this drawing shows what's existing out at Lake Ann. You've
got 3 ballfields out there right now. The lake facility and picnic areas
and that kind of thing. Parking lots and new boat access that was
installed. What's being planned then for the east side of Lake Ann, the
expansion, are again 3 ballfields. Two soccer fields. One that overlays
the third ballfield. These have all been designed as regulation softball
fields. The 300 foot baselines and they will be able to take all the
regulation leagues. We're looking at a future entry road. Once TH 5 is
improved, the existing entry to Lake Ann of course will be eliminated. We
had to allow them for a new entry road off of TH 5 or a frontage road
system that MnDot is proposing in this area. It's an entry road that
would come in here and take this system and then have parking lots, that's
an existing park lot, this new 50 space parking lot and another 74 space
parking that feeds off the road here. Then two new parking lots down in
this area as well. Also, in planning for an expansion of a picnic area on
top of the hill. That was then the concept that was approved this summer.
The way that is being actualized then, is through plans and specs that
have been prepared this fall and have been under review by the City
includes four diagrams. Four plan sheets. I'll just briefly show you
what those are. One is a location diagram that really you need to be up
close to be able to read. It's just one that lays out all the fields and
the parking lots and gets them on the ground for a contractor to install.
We also have a landscaping plan. A sheet of details as in the grading
plan that goes along with the specifications. I think the concept of 3
ballfields on the east side of the park being implemented in a similiar
way to what you already have is one that has worked out very well on the
ground. I think the nature of the landscape was probably pretty similiar
in the existing Lake Ann. What I tried to accomplish was, in effect
having the 3 ballfields kind of terraced into the landscape and that was
able to be accomplished. There is one here with the slope between it.
Ano~her one here with a lesser slope separating then the third ballfield.
The soccer fields laid in there I think real nicely. I've got all the
fields are draining at 1 1/2% so they will drain and yet they'll be nice
and flat to play on. Some things that are also, we've got the water
worked out quite nicely I think on the new fields as well. Water
basically is coming off in sheet drainage off of this parking lot and
heading down qcross these fields or else being picked up in this swale and
then on off the site out to the east and eventually into a drainage pond
that will be at the intersection out here and then eventually into Lake
Susan. There's minor drainage then that comes basically from this point
down this way and then back into the rest of the park. This plan has been
approved by the Watershed so we've got a Watershed permit. The only thing
they want to know is when work starts and that kind of thing. One
situation that's going on is that originally the plan was designed to be
just sheet drainage so we have sheet drainage off all the parking lots and
off the fields and water would just disipate. We don't have storm sewer
in this park and it's really not very available to even consider it and
that's why we went with storm drainage. However, we have looked at an
alternative of concrete curb and gutter in some areas of these parking
lots. It's indicated on here by a double line and basically it's on that
"""'"
"""""
Park and Recreation Commission Meeting
January 24, 1989 - Page 25
,.....
edge, around all of these little island. It's along the edges of this
parking lot and around that island as well. Around this island and then
again on the edges of these parking lots. That was mostly for control of
automobiles so that people won't be driving off onto the grass. However,
working with curb and gutter as well as sheet drainage is almost
contradictory but I think we've accomplished that pretty well with leaving
areas of the parking lots on curbs so we still will be able to have sheet
drainage flow off of that. I think we've got a plan that's going to work.
If concrete curb and gutter is an alternate bid on the contract and wasn't
something that was ever in the original cost estimates. We're not sure
exactly how the costs will corne in on the bid. I know if concrete curb
and gutter is selected, the Watershed does want to know about that and
review again just the drainage that is corning off of these parking lots
and making sure that we're not channelizing it. However, I feel confident
that the hydraulogists in our office that's looked at this and that we're
not doing that anyway even if we do select curb and gutter. We're not
channelizing water so we shouldn't have erosion problems. The shaded
areas along here are areas that we'd like to see sodded as opposed to
seeded. There's one, you can see them, they're on the steeper slope.
Primarily the steeper slopes and the drainage swales is where we'd like to
see sod installed as well as around two rows of sod around the infields
which is what we've got again on all three of the fields. This dashed
line then is erosion control which we've put in various places throughout
,..... the park to keep back any erosion or any of the silt that would occur
during construction. There's one area that something that got added and
that's a set of timber steps that would be corning from these fields up.
There's a pretty good slope that happened right here and we thought it
would just be more convenient and easier to get up this hill if we
provided some steps basically in this area. The contract reads that these
steps, they're drawn here but they would actually be sited with the fields
and coordinated with the contract so we get them in the right place but
they'll start to service the existing shelter and the play area that would
be up on top of this hill up here.
Schroers: That would probably be because of the shelter on top of the
hill that would be a high traffic area anyway?
Laurie McRosti: Right. That was what we were thinking is that just here
people would be using this hill a lot and hopefully we would cut down on
any of the wear and tear on that hill if we put in some stairs. Basically
we're limiting construction, I'm trying to control it as much as possible
and basically put the limits of construction at the edges of grading or at
the edges of the property on the east side. We're also considering then,
depending on how the costs come in on the bid, installing, we'd like to
see this project competely done by July 1st, is the way the specifications
read so that the roads and the paving has all been completed by your 4th
of July celebration. However, what we've got over here is a freshly
graded, seeded and planted park and we're suggesting or hoping that we
~ would be able to afford to install one of those plastic safety fences
practically the whole length of the park so that people won't be going
from existing Lake Ann over into the new park.
Park and Recreation Commission Meeting
January 24, 1989 - Page 26
--'
Mady: I have a question. On your sheet drainage, do you have any idea
how much water will actually corne across the top field, the northern most
field and corne all the way through?
Laurie McRosti: Actually I think most, or quite a bit of it is going to
come this way. You've got a swale that starts here so it's a low area.
It's subtle but I'm hoping that we'll get a majority of the water to not
run off onto this field.
Mady: Watershed might have a problem if you were to put up a more defined
swa1e up there to deflect it?
Laurie McRosti: No, I don't think so.
Mady: I guess my concern is that in the heavier rains that we're going to
make the fields inoperable for a couple of days. Chanhassen has so much
clay and it's really tough there anyway.
Hasek: What's happened is that Field #1 and #2, I think that's how
they're number, coming in on the old fields, the lower two on the left
collect an awful lot of water on the infield because the drainage tends to
fall against the sidelines of the ballfield and then flow out and it's
such a subtle flowage that it doesn't happen until you sit there for a, I
don't know, we spend a lot of time brushing it out of there and I hate to
see these drain the same way. If there's anyway that you could capture --'
that water before it got to the field, that would help. The other thing
is, I guess two comments. One, if there's anyway that we can increase the
drainage down and away from the field as quickly as possible, I'd like to
see that done. If, in your grading plan you would consider the
possibility that maybe at some point in the future we could irrigate these
fields, I think that would be important. We don't want to grade them and
then have to regrade them simply because we put water on them.
Laurie McRosti: I don't think that that's going to be a problem, if we're
irrigated.
Hasek: My last comment, I don't know, I can't see from here how much of a
burden you have on those islands but I think we might be able to decrease
some of the curb. I think the curb is necessary where cars nose in to a
grade but I think maybe on those islands, if we were to berm them high
enough. The concern has to be that the cars don't leave the parking area
and if it's high enough where a car's going to get hung up on it or if
it's planted, which I don't see on that one, that upper one, that might be
another discouragement that might be considered instead of curbing.
Curbing is nice but if it's not necessary, I'd like to see it done.
Laurie McRosti: I think we will have some extra material because I know
the soils reports, actually I've only gotten them over the telephone, I
haven't seen them, recommend that we take away the top soil, or 1 or 2
feet of topsoil underneath this parking lot because it isn't stable enougt
for a parking lot so we should have some extra material to start to berm. ,.,
These are the areas that you're talking about. The islands in the parking
lot separate driveways and that sort of thing.
Park and Recreation Commission Meeting
January 24, 1989 - Page 27
JIll"".
Hasek: The field, the top one up there, does that drain generally down
towards the infield?
Laurie McRosti: What I've done is, because all these two other fields
have, because of the way they were oriented and the way they lay on the
land, they do drain all out this way. This one basically does drain this
way but there are two swales here that should carry the water away from
the infield.
Hasek: Is that more appropriate for, I guess what I'm thinking about is,
our outfield is generally higher than the infield which is kind of nice
for the outfielders. To be able to see down for a change. I think you're
going to run into a problem. If you know what's happening out on the
existing fields now, I think that's kind of what's happening on Field #1
and #2. They've tried to take it from the infield and push it towards the
outsides rather than letter it all fall to the outfield and get out of the
infield. Standing water in the outfield is commonplace. To anyone in the
infield, it's a real pain in the ass and that's what you're trying to, I
think that's what's starting to happen on the top field there. If that
could be drawn down, and I don't know drainage enough to be able to
comment professionally on it but if it could be accommodated off of the
field without going through the infield or around the infield, it would be
JIll"". much more desirable.
Laurie McRosti: I think that's what this is. The water should come here,
this is a high point and then it should go this way, down into the lower
areas. We're fighting the hill this way so it's really, I'm sure there
are other ways. I worked for a long time trying to think of another way
to try to drain this. Since basically the whole thing is going uphill,
it's a difficult thing to accomplish, in this one field anyway but I'm
hoping that that's what this will do. Those swales on the outside of the
infield. They go down just a little bit, the water should collect there
and then move on out.
,....,
Hasek: What's the possibility of turning that field just slightly?
Rotating it.
Laurie McRosti: We're so tight here. I had shifted, this field was even
closer to the shelter than it was now and I think I actually moved it
already 30 feet this way. What we've got is a possibility of a future
road here but at any rate, we've got a boundary line right here. I've got
this parking lot is set just 50 feet from, I think it still ended up to be
50, from the property line so we could have some sort of landscaping. I
know there's some concern by, gosh the Watershed even mentioned it and
I know City Staff has talked about it, if there is a road here, with
people jumping across just already within that 50 feet and circumventing
the entry roads and using the parking lot. I got that a minimum of 50
feet between the parking lot and the field and it's just not, I think that
there's a lot happening out here at Lake Ann and it was, to get it all to
fit in within the parameters was, it definitely was a challenge.
Hasek: Is the road cast in concrete? That's a future road.
Park and Recreation Commission Meeting
January 24, 1989 - Page 28
....""",
Sietsema: It's dedicated.
Laurie McRosti: It's dedicated right-of-way so it's a property line. I
think there's as much chance that there would be houses backing up to the
park as there will a road, at this point anyway. There's going to be road
down here for sure and I would suspect that there will be access or a road
at some point to the park up in this area before there gets to be this
north/south route from here, or one that's further inland. I don't think
that anybody knows.
Hasek: Has there been any dedication of parkland out of that particular
piece of property? Is this part of that dedication?
Sietsema: No. This was an outright purchase. It wasn't a dedication.
Hasek: So that hasn't been platted yet next door?
Watson: Eckankar hasn't done anything.
Sietsema: They've got a plan in now. They're not planning to replat or
subdivide. They're not planning to subdivide so they wouldn't have a Park
and Recreation, a park dedication requirement because we have no authority
to go and require a dedication if they're not subdividing. And if what
they're proposing goes through, that road would not be there. ....""",.
Hasek: But what they're proposing...
Sietsema: What they're proposing is a church right in the middle of the
whole piece and they're not talking about coming to this boundary at all
but whether that goes through or not is still up in the air.
Hasek: But if the road is already there, we can still maintain that that
road will stay there?
Sietsema: Yes. It's dedicated right-of-way. It will be there regardless
of what, unless they want to reconfigure it or petition the City to
abandon it.
Hasek: So they're not subdividing their property and because it's not a
subdivision that we don't take dedication or parkland right?
Sietsema: Right. State Statutue only allows us to require park
dedication through the subdivision process.
Mady: They have in the past, somebody with Eckankar has indicated to the
City that they might be willing to let the City acquire for park purposes
or recreation purposes, some amount of land at what they feel their cost
is. We don't know it's effect.
Robinson: Do you have an estimate of the cost of this?
....."
Park and Recreation Commission Meeting
January 24, 1989 - Page 29
",.,...
Laurie McRosti: The original estimate was coming in around $190,000.00.
At this stage, I guess I don't know for sure what the refined cost is. I
know we've just been waiting now to hear about, this fence was something
that was brand new and has just recently been added so there are a couple
of things that haven't been included or haven't been able to have been
added to the cost estimate.
Robinson: What's our dollar limit?
Sietsema: $300,000.00.
Mady: That fence is an excellent idea. Just knowing what happens at the
park and I know how fragile that land's going to be until it's freshly
sodded. I think we're going to have to do a real teaching process through
the papers, talking to people. When we have our manager's meeting this
year with the teams, let them know what's happening out here and how much
damage they can do if they don't really abide by what we're trying to do
which is to keep people off that space for at least this year.
Schroers: Are you talking about our construction fence? Just an orange
plastic fencing as a barrier or something more substantial like a coated
chainlinked fence?
,..... Laurie McRosti: No, this fence would be temporary. A construction fence.
Hasek: They still make snow fences.
Laurie McRosti: Yes, but a snow fence...
Hasek:
bathroom
going to
bathroom
What you're doing is building nice green grass in what exists as a
out there right now. I don't know that a little plastic fence is
keep a ballplayer with 4 or 5 beers in him from going to the
out there.
Laurie McRosti: I don't know that a snow fence would do that either.
Schroers: They're a different thing. If they can rip a plastic fence or
they can kick the boards out of the snow fence. It's 6 and 1 or half of
the other.
Boyt: What exactly does the $300,000.00 go towards besides grading?
Sietsema: The grass, the seed, the backstops, the bases. We have to do
the project to playing condition.
Laurie McRosti: It pays for parking 10ts...I hate to throw out a number
without having this more final but I could say it's going to be
$230,000.00 to $250,000.00 and that includes the site grading. It
",.,... includes the excavation and backfilling again for these roads and parking
lots and bituminous put back on top of that. It includes the final
grading. The sod in these areas, and the sod alone I think, I can't
remember numbers. I better not talk about cost. Sod is expensive and
we're sodding actually a pretty big portion of the park. I think it came
Park and Recreation Commission Meeting
January 24, 1989 - Page 30
.....",
out to be about 6,000 square yards so that might be about $12,000.00 there
just for sod. Seeding, then the whole park gets seeded. We're looking at
fence, chainlink fence around, completely around these two fields and only
on the sideline for this field because of the overlay of the soccer field
that we have. So that gets included. Then of course the backstops behind
each field which there also then is a landscaping plan that is included in
this contract and the landscaping plan is designed, it's probably going to
run maybe about $18,000.00 to $20,000.00. It's going to be really
interesting I think to see how bids come in this year because I think that
in general construction work is down and I think that people are looking
for work. I think everybody's anticipating bids to be just a little bit
lower. We can always hope for that I guess. What we've got is a
landscaping plan that is suggesting the use of Sugar Maples and Green Ash,
some Spruce, some American Lindon and some Amber Maple and some American
Cranberry as the shrubs throughout the park. Originally we had been
looking at doing some planting of trees on the outfield of these parks to
pattern what you have other here. After talking with Dale Anderson the
other day, what we're going to do, probably not this next fall but maybe
even a full season later is to transplant these 6 inch, I believe they
were Lindon's.
Hasek: No, they're Ashes.
Laurie McRosti: Okay, they were either Lindon or Ash. These are so
close, they're 20 feet apart right now, so thin these out and actually put-,
them on the outfields of these fields here. So we're going to wait until
this gets established to the seed and sod. Until it's really quite a ways
along and then to move these fields over here and I think what that will
do is, the companionship would be the bone for a couple of years but then
you'll have some large trees. Besides the park will look like it's been
there.
Hasek: As long as they're moveable. I think we ought to consider the
possibility, now that we understand that they're moveable because we
talked about that 6 months ago. I think we ought to take them all out of
Field #2 and #3 right now and transplant them into some of the other
fields and maybe leave Field #1 alone for right now. Consider the
possibility in our next budget or recreating Fields #2 and #3 to make them
big enough to be State fields and then we will in fact have the largest
and nicest, one of the nicest complexes in this Metropolitan area with
which to have some tournaments and we could start paying for some of these
things through the quality of our ballfields. I think it's worth
considering. Before we move those trees, think about the possibility of
recreating #2 and #3.
Mady: I know a number of people who come into Lake Ann to play in
tournaments and feel, and they've been to a lot of softball fields, feel
Lake Ann is probably one of the nicest parks in the metropolitan area.
It's just small. That's the only problem we have and that will just make
it a nicer park. It's a jewell. It really is.
,.",.,
Hasek: It's something to think about I think. I know there"'s cost
involved with moving the fence and recreating the outfield and some of the
Park and Recreation Commission Meeting
January 24, 1989 - Page 31
",......
things involved there but for maybe just a little bit of cost, we might
have actually 6 useable fields out there for tournaments and that's enough
for one heck of a decent tournament. State tournament could be held here.
Boyt: Is there anyway we've got any bleacher type for the soccer fields?
The soccer field on the east, can we put some bleachers in there?
Laurie McRosti: You mean an actual structure?
Boyt: Yes, something. We need some amenities for the parents watching
their kids.
Laurie McRosti: One thing we've got are some slopes that are starting to
happen. To buy bleachers that you could just set out there, I don't know
if you want to be permanent but I think that's something that could be
separate.
Boyt: Do the slopes work there?
Laurie McRosti: Yes. Particularly this one does. I think you should be
able to sit away a little bit and maybe you can see this one better. This
one does actually. You could sit here and watch but when there's
softball, maybe it's not going to work. If they're playing at the same
time.
ifili"".
Mady: You're out a good 320 feet. Not too many of us that hit the ball
that far anymore.
Schroers: Are all 3 of those outfields?
Laurie McRosti: All 3 of them are 300 feet.
Robinson: Can we talk about the cost again for a minute and I realize
you're guessing but I'm concerned, if the $300,000.00 will give us a
complete set-up there.
Laurie McRosti: I think we should. I think there's some things that have
been included as alternate bids. The concrete curb and gutter for
instance. That might be something that will have to be dropped off.
However, I know that the grading will be able to be accomplished. The
seeding and the sodding. I think that the planting would be. I'm sure
that the fencing you'll be able to put up and I know for sure that the
parking lots and the roads will be able to be put in. We're looking at,
this safety fence, I haven't been able to get costs on that yet and I
don't know how much that's, you'll be putting in almost 2,000 feet of it.
All those things just add up.
Hasek: The construction of the infields and the bases and all of that is
"..... included?
Laurie McRosti: I should say the construction of the infield, A-I
infields will be there. This contract does not included the purchase of
bases.
l~~eA~UO~ 6U1PPOS eq~ pue
6u~pees eq~ uo eseeteA eq~ S~ ueddeq ~ou ~q6~w ~eq~ 6ulq~ ^tUO eq~ Ip~q
eq o~ 6ulpeAo eq~ leuop eq ~.UOM eq^eW ~eq~ 6ulq~ ^tUO eq~ ~na :~eSeH
.....",
oe~ueue~ulew AeAO e~e~ O~ seq ^~~~ eq~ ueq~
pue peqs~tqe~se S.~~ t~~Un ~~ sUle~ulew AO~~eA~UO~ eq~ ueq~ opAepUe~S
^~~eAd s.~eq~ ~nq ~st ^tnr eq~ q~lM eAe1Ae~ul Ptno~ s6u~q~ 10 spul~
esoq~ o~l opeA o~ eAeq ^eq~ Ipeqs~tqe~se ~ou s.~.~ 11 opeqsltqe~se ewo~eq
eAeq o~ spees Aep~suo~ o~ sn A01 q~ul eAenos slq~ u~ s~noAds 5t eq o~ ~oo
s.eAeq~ oq~u~ eAenos Aed spees et~~lt ^uew MOq Is~eds eq~ o~ul ue~~llM'
^tten~~e uo~~eu~wAe~ep ~eq~ se~ew OqM euoewos AO 1teS^W AO sAeeu16u3
^~l~ eq~ laq~13 o6U1MOAO aq o~ seq pos eq~ sueew ~eq~ os peqsltqe~se
se peulwAe~ep s'~ ~l tl~un peule~ulew sl pees pue pos eq~ : l~SOH~W elAne'l
lpetpueq
6uleq ~eq~ sl MOq AO uosees ^AP e ul ~eq~ 10 e~ueue~ulew eq~ Ipees
pue pos eq~ 10 ~Aed e ~eq~ S1 OAe~eM ouol~seno po06 e s.~eq~ :~eseH
opos eq~ 6ulAe~eM eAeq~ ~no eq tte tt.^eq~ pUV :uos~eM
o sex : uosulqoH
l~~ ~.us~ lee^ ^AP Aeq~oue eq o~ pesoddns s.~1 :~^Oa
osq~uow Z ul euop eq ptnoqs slq~ ~eq~
pe~ed~~l~ue ~.ueAeq 1 oew~~ q6noue ~oo eA.eM ~u~q~ I :l~SOH~W el1ne'l
o~se1 e~lno ~eq~ uo eAOW o~ ~06 eA.eM 16u~wnsse s.~eq~ :uosulqoH
-'
OSSOA~e 6ul~teM etdoed 6UlttOA~UO~ eq ttlM wetqoAd
^tuO eq~ opesn eq o~ etqe eq ptnoqs ~Ot 6u'~Aed eq~ :~~SOH~W ellne'l
l~eq~ ttV le~e1Ans pue S~Ot 6ul~Aed eq~ pue euop eq 6u~pees eq~ tt~M AO
6ulpelo eq~ ~sn~ ~eq~ sl I~st ^tnr ^q pe~etdwo~ Ples no^ ueqM :uosu~qoH
o~~el~uo~ s~q~ ul ~.ueAe selAosse~~e e~lt 10 pUl~ s6u~q~
o6u'~q~ 10 pU'~~ ~eq~ opa~ue1 eq ttlM SPte11 eq~ o~l esn o~ etqe eq
pue pe~~nA~suo~ s.~eq~ ~Aed e eAeq ttlM no^ ~eq~ ~ulq~ 1 :l~SOH~W elAne'l
oeult eq~ UMOp SAee^ Z eq ttlM esoq~ uo ^etd
^tten~~e aq~ asne~eq d1~ eq~ 10 ~no awo~ Ptno~ ~eq~ 6u~q~ewos ^te~lul1ap
s.~eq~ I~eq~ q~1M seAn611 eq~ ~AOM ~.ue~ eM 11 ~ulq~ 1 :ewes~elS
.~e6pnq eq~ o~ul se06 ~l eAeqM
MOU~ ~.uoP 1 pue eAeq~ 6ulq~ewos peeu o~ OUloD eA.no^ oS oewe6 eq~ ees
o~ tteq~001 ul e~lt eUlt pAe^ 05 eq~ ~e ~ls no^ Iptel1 eq~ 10 pue eq~ ~e
~ls ~.uoP no^ IAe~~os q~~eM no^ ueqM ~nq e~lu sl t11q eq~ MOU~ nox :~^oa
oeAeq
dn eAeq eM e~~1 pUl~ etqe~Aod eq~ ~noqe 6ul~1e~ eA.no^ 11 osex :ewes~elS
lte~uePl~ul peAePlsuo~ sAeq~ee1q eAV :~^Oa
--'
ZE e6ed - 6861 IVZ ^Aenuer
6ul~eew uOlsslwwo~ uOl~eeA~eH pue ~AEd
Park and Recreation Commission Meeting
January 24, 1989 - Page 33
.,.,...
Laurie McRosti: Right, or if the warranty for plant materials for a year,
for instance. Council hopefully will approve this, the contracts as plans
and specs on the 13th of February. I believe it was March 3rd where we
would open bids actually. We would advertise for bids 3 weeks in
February. The Thursday and Friday right after Council approves it, it
should go out for advertising so I would say by the end of March the City
would have negotiated a contract and that somebody would be ready to go on
it.
Hasek: If we're entering into another dry season, would it be reasonable
to ask for another year of guarantee of plant materials or is it your...
Laurie McRosti: Actually that's something that we just did. Plant
materials have been warrantied for one year. Then if they haven't made
it, they have to replace them and we're asking for a warranty on those
replacement trees for one more year. After that however, they have to
replace them if they don't make it for another year but they're warrantied
for up to a third year.
Schroers: Something that keeps corning up is that we would like to be able
to use Lake Ann for meeting or events other than softball, like the 4th of
July. With your plan, do you feel the entrance and the exit would
~accommodate that type of an event? Where we're going to have a lot of
people coming in and going out at the same time?
Laurie McRosti: I think that until something happens in the future, that
this access onto TH 5, is going to be congested if you have a huge event.
I think you even have that problem now.
Schroers: On your plan, does it remain as it exists right now or have you
done anything?
Laurie McRosti: Until TH 5 is improved, until MnDot improves TH 5, this
entrance stays the same and there really is nothing that we can do about
it. I think by 1992, TH 5 should be improved up to this point and it's
possible at that point we can start to consider looking to the change in
access here. There's also an allowance for a second access off of this
parking lot up here. That's something that's not going to happen though
until whatever Eckankar does over here is decided. So in the future, I
think there's an opportunity, if the City desires, to see 2 entrances and
exits into this park. There's been a lot of talk about a fee that's
charged right now and so one entrance in is desirable because you can
control it. There's also been talk maybe at sometime in the future of not
having a user fee for Lake Ann. That opens up other exits. Maybe there
are two gates.
Schroers: But the option on the second entrance is totally dependent on
,-., what Eckankar decides to do with it?
Laurie McRosti: Do you mean this one?
Schroers: Yes.
.s~Eel ( seM wnpue~e1e~ eq~ UT lpoql~e^e PlO~ eM ~eqM sl~eq~ ~na :lpeW
...SI~T e~01eq s~eel ( ~seel ~e sl~eq~ :~loa
.....",
.~eq~ op ue~ eM s~eel eIdno~
e uTq~TM 'UT eldoed esoq~ ~eo 'sse~o~d OUTuueld eq~ ~~e~s pue ~eel STq~
~eq~ e~ls ue~ eM se OUOl se os oUTq~ou o~ ~xeu ~01 euop oUTpe~o eq~ 10 ~01
e ~eo ue~ eM 'e^~eSeH s~eeuTou2 10 sd~o~ lw~V eq~ qono~q~ .~~ed q~nos eq~
lnq o~ leuow eq~ e^eq eM o~~ed q~nos e pe~~n~~suo~ e^eq 11leM 's~eel (
uTq~TM llln1edoq pue enoee, al~~T' ST auo ~aqwnN Oa^eq lpea~le eM :lpeW
lq~nol a~epowwo~~e o~ ~o an Dee, el~~T' SPlaT1 asoq~ 10 auo oUT~ew
~ou lq ~eoq aq~ OUTSSTw aq ~Iuplno~ eM a~Tl slaa1 11e~s pue uOlssTwwo~
eq~ 11 e~eq oUT~epuoM wlI '~qonoq~ puo~as e oUT^eq WII :s~eo~q~s
.azTlea~ nol pue laa1 nol ~eq~ oUTq~ewos
'~~e~~ oUTu~eM e ~01 ~nq sse~o uo ~uTed 10 a~eTd e o~ oUTlee~
~o ~01 e ~OU sle~eq~ 'euTl pa~uTed E sl~T ~I oouTPue~s slaq a~aq~
o~ ~aleId Ileq e ~o1 p~eq l~~a~d sl~T ~nq l~TITqTssod e sT ~uTed
sla~aq~
elT~~e~
aZTlea~
:~aseH
l~uTed ~aPTsuo~ ua^a o~ alqlssod ~l Sl
:~loa
oalqe~aplsuo~
euo aq ~qolw ~eq~ os eweo ~e~~os aq~ wo~~ ~~e~~ap ~o ~e~ap llT~essa~eu
PInoM PleT~ ~a~~os aq~ sso~~e eUTl e ~uTq~ ~IUOP I .~a^a~o~ OUTII0~
lleq aq~ pue a~aq~ oUTq~ou oUT^eq o~ pesoddo se ~aPTsuo~ o~ oUTq~ewos
seM ~I .auTl e seM ~T ssano I .un~ awoq e seM eUll ~eq~ puoleq pepuel
~T ~T ~o .spunoq ~o ~no uaq~ se~ aUll ~eq~ puolaq pallo~ q~lq~ lleq lue
~nq uo oUIOO eweo lleq e sla~eq~ pue ITe~~ ~eq~ UMOp 00 o~ pe~uEM ~a~lq--,
e ~l '~~ll~UO~ ~o ~lq el~~Tl e ~o~ '~Tq el~~Tl e ~T e~ew .~~e~~ OUTu~eM
eq~ o~ul ~T peT~ lldwTS eM pue ~~ed aq~ qono~q~ OUTOO seM ~eq~ ITE~~
E peq aM .ePTs~no aq~ puno~e ~~e~~ oUTu~eM e e~ll seM ~I o11e~~ eq~
peq ~eq~ euo ~ITnq eM ~~ed puels! ul ~no .punow uT ~no uOTssTwwo~ ~Aed
aq~ uo seM ! uaqM Ma~ e ~lTnq eM ~~e~ UT 'splaT~ uaas a^eq I sT 'uTeoe dn
~qono~q nol pelo WII pue '~eq~ Mes ! uaq~ peq I uOT~saoons auo aq~ :~aseH
la~ua~ PIel~~no ou q~TM PlaT~ e uo oUTleld ~noqe ~ulq~ o~ OUTOO s~eleld
eq~ a~e ~eqM pue PleT~lleq e uo e~ua~ PlaT~~no ue a^eq o~ oUToO ~ou e~leM
~eq~ lesn OUT~~Tl~uO~ e eq o~ OUIOO sl~eq~ ~eq~ lee~ uOTssTwwo~ aq~ saoa
.PlaT~ ~e~~os aq~ uo ~e^olel aq~ sT uT ~qono~q se~ Ueld ~s~T~ eq~ uaqM
aWT~ ~sel aq~ dn ~qono~q I q~Tq~ uTeoe 'uoT~sano auo ssano! :uew~~oH
o~ual~ed
aq o~ a^eq o~ oUToO a~e aldoad 'awos aq sleMle ~qoTw a~aq~ ~uTq~ I 's H~
ape~odn pue a~epdn seop ~oauw IT~un ~na oeAn~n~ aq~ uT ~UTod ssa~~e slq~
~oo e^laM ~eq~ a~nsse ue~ ~eq~ s~lo~ asoq~ q~TM OUT~~OM ~o sleM e~e e~eq~
~uTq~ I .a~aq peo~ e aas o~ ~ueM laq~ pue a~aq ~OO a^laM ~eq~ MOU~ laq~
pue Sueld oUIMal^a~ ~o 10~~uo~ uT sT l~T~ aq~ ~uTq~ ! pue ~Ulod ssa~~e euo
ueq~ a~ow aq o~ oUToO sla~aq~ pue l~~ado~d ~o a~aTd oTq e sT sTq~ o~sea
aq~ wo~~ OUTwo~ oUTq~awos q~T~ uOT~eln~~T~ leu~a~ul awos eqlew' ~o ~le~ ~o
~01 e uaaq sla~aq~ ~eq~ ~ou~ I .uaq~ ~qoT~ ~T ~oo a^laM '~11nq s~ao peo~
slq~ ~l ssano I o~uapuadap llle~o~ sl~T sleM awos UI :T~SOH~W aT~ne,
...""
v( aoed - 6861 'VZ lAenuer
oUl~eaw uOTssTwwo~ uOT~ea~~eH pue ~~ed
Park and Recreation Commission Meeting
January 24, 1989 - Page 35
"....,
Boyt: That's what Larry is saying. Is one enough?
Schroers: I think what we're doing is we're giving them Field #1 now
right?
Mady: I thought we were telling them, when we put this up, we're telling
them you're going to have two fields out there.
Hoffman: Yes. Basically the two smaller fields could be developed in-
house for potentially a Babe Ruth league and a Little League field and
that would still expand the adult leagues to 4 fields and we'd have 2
interim fields for the youth to play on.
Mady: They won't have dugouts right away but if they can't play without
dugouts for a couple years.
Hasek: Do those 2 fields qualify?
Hoffman: Yes.
Hasek: Are they too big?
IfI""",
Hoffman: You can restrict the fence. For our leagues that exist here now
aren't into the exact specifications of what a Little League field is.
They'll go ahead and play on a field that's got a fence farther than the
outfielders stand in but again, to get back to her issue on the soccer.
That field, a line would possibly work but again, then at the same time we
mentioned possibly having 6 nice fields which are used for a State
tournament. State tournament specifications say, an outfield fence at
this distance of this height. That's a minor area.
Mady: We can put a fence up. After we have our south park, we can put
the fence up here. For a few thousand dollars, we'd have it.
Hasek: You could conceiveably, if you really wanted to do that and have
something that you wanted to do, you could set slip posts in the ground
for poles and it could be a fence that could be rolled up and used only
for a special event where you have the requirement because the slip posts
in the ground would cost nothing and they could be covered up and dug out,
actually you can screw a cap on the things so they could be underneath the
soccer field and just sitting there waiting.
Laurie McRosti: It was my understanding, I couldn't go on about that, but
that this soccer field was something that was temporary until the south
park or until a more established, maybe temporary is kind of a lose term
for 3 to 5 years but it wouldn't be here forever.
,....
Mady: On the warning track used as a trail, it reminds me of something
which is having a separate trail actually from what exists as the Lake Ann
trail now on TH 5 down towards to the beach. We don't have a way of
getting kids on their bikes down to Lake Ann Park once they arrive on that
Park and Recreation Commission Meeting
January 24, 1989 - Page 36
....."
narrow road. Have we taken that into account here in any way, shape or
form?
Laurie McRosti: No. I think it would sti 11 be the same. The same access
point. I do know that maybe there's something that should be looked at in
the existing part of the park for the future, particularly when the trail
is upgraded and rebuilt once TH 5 is done, that that would be, that's a
good suggestion. That would be looked at as something more permanent.
Schroers: At the present time that trail does not have a lot of use.
Mady: A lot of people won't allow their kids to ride on the road to get
there.
Laurie McRosti: I think once it's upgraded, sometimes you can't even see
that trail up there so I can see why it's not used very much but I think
in the future it would be. At that time you might want to consider even
implementing much more of a trail system.
Robinson: Any further questions or comments?
Mady: I move to recommend the plans be approved as shown.
Schroers: I'll second it.
...""t
Mady moved, Schroers seconded that the Park and Recreation Commission
recommend to approve the grading plan for Lake Ann Park Expansion Project
as presented by staff. All voted in favor and the motion carried.
COMMISSION CANDIDATE INTERVIEW, RICHARD MINGO.
Robinson: I apologize for the wait Richard. We're about an hour behind I
believe.
Richard Mingo: I guess to speed up matters, I guess I want to throw out
one quick point is that we may not have to worry about question 2, 3, 4.
The reason I asked to come in early is I'm leaving tomorrow morning for
Arizona for two,months and I do this every winter so if that would be a
problem that two months out of the year would make me an unlikely
candidate, I want to tell you that right now. I'll just step out of here
and not waste your time here.
Mady: Lori, what's the City's standard on that? We do have a standard on
it.
Richard Mingo: I looked at that. There's some percentage.
Sietsema: You're required to attend 75% of the scheduled meetings which
would be 24 meetings.
-"
Mady: As long as you make all the two others.
Park and Recreation Commission Meeting
January 24, 1989 - Page 37
~
Richard Mingo: I just wanted to throw that our very quickly because that
could be a major falling point.
Sietsema: Would you like to proceed then? The first question has to do
with the commitment of time, and as we just discussed, there are 24
meetings. Two meetings a month that we have scheduled. There are other
times during the year, particularly in the summer when we may meet more
often to go out to visit different sites. To tour the park. To come in
early before meetings so that we can go out to different sites. I know
there were two different months in the past summer where we did have 3 to
4 meetings in one month. So the question is, do you feel you have the
time to make the time commitment that's involved?
Richard Mingo: Definitely. I'm retired so I'm a lot of times available
and at the present time I have no other sideline job other than as a
substitute teacher occasionally at the local high school.
Sietsema: The next question is, the Park and Recreation Commission would
like you to elaborate on what your impression of the current park and
recreation system is and what do you feel you can add? What kind of
expertise or knowledge do you have that can benefit the City in this area?
"" Richard Mingo: I think you've got a great start on parks. Being a former
baseball coach for 3~ years, I would like to see the baseball program
expand and I heard the lady here ask something about Little League
baseball. I guess you talked about having great parks. I always look at
the prime park anywhere in probably the nation sitting right over in
Braemar Park. They're set up with 4 fields with a beautiful stand built.
The pressbox could be improved but they've got that big beautiful baseball
park. They've got Little League. Babe Ruth and the one softball field
there all within that layout. Just a beautiful set-up so at sometime in
the future, and I don't know much about your south parkland but I would
hope to see Chanhassen seriously consider upgrading their baseball set-up
including sometime building a grandstand at one of those parks so they
would hold some baseball tournaments in this community. Also, I guess one
of my other things that I would like to see this community look forward to
because we're going to need it. We're growing very rapidly. I wish we
could get our own local golf course going. I think we've got one just
south of us that might be available at some time in the future or very
near future. We should begin grabbing it before it becomes too expensive.
As far as when you asked me the other thing about expertise?
Sietsema: Yes.
"....
Richard Mingo: I was a high school coach for 3~ years. I retired here 2
years ago from Bloomington Jefferson High School. I played amateur
baseball around the State until I was 39 years old. For a long time I
played here in Chanhassen up until the tale end of 1952 and the tale end
of 1954 after I got out of the service. Played here several years and
played in Waconia. Managed their team. I came back here and managed the
town baseball team. I was one of the three guys that built the baseball
field you see sitting over by the present Legion. In fact I helped moved
Park and Recreation Commission Meeting
January 24, 1989 - Page 38
.....-I
the original park which was at St. Hubert's school. We moved it down
where Brown's station is now. Then TH 5 came though and we had to move it
again across the road and build a smaller ballpark and being a left hand
hitter, you probably noticed I made a real short right field fence. I was
involved and there were only 3 of us that really built that ballpark.
That's why I hear $190,000.00 and I think, christ there were just 3 of us
with a farming tractor and a grader and we built that park by ourselves.
We didn't do that bad a job I didn't think except we didn't have much
money. I've worked with that. I currently run the Lion's High School All
Star baseball tournament. In fact, I helped to originate it that we put
on every year. Last year I was also the tournament director for the
Region 6 AA High School baseball tournament so I've been very active in
athletics. I played on a fast pitch softball in the Minneapolis Classic
League back in the early 50's. Before then, the sport kind of
disappeared. Everybody went to the old man's game and started playing
that slow pitch so I've been involved in that. I was one of the first
guys in the area to ever put on slow pitch tournaments. In fact, I've put
on a number of them here in Chanhassen. Several in Waconia back when
tournaments were kind of unheard of and raised some real good money for
our town baseball teams in both communities. I was familiar with that
particular sport too. I refereed high school basketball for quite a few
years and high school football as well as coaching those sports for a few
years.
Sietsema: What do you feel is the role of the Park and Recreation
Commission?
....."I
Richard Mingo: I guess there's a lot of ramifications to that. Obviously
one of the things is to develop an excellent recreational program for your
community to be used, primarily I think by community residents. I'm
interested in your softball quandry here and they may have that in all
communities but again, I think your city parks should be for local
residents primarily with some exceptions. Even in the old days, our old
amateur baseball leagues, we had 3 categories. One league you couldn't
have any outsiders. That was the old days with Class B. Class A ball you
could have 3 outsiders from 15 miles away or further and then AA you could
have unlimited number.
Sietsema: What are your feelings regarding conservation and environment
within the City of Chanhassen?
Richard Mingo: Having taught environmental studies at Bloomington
Jefferson High School and in Bloomington Lincoln, we were one of the only
schools in the State of Minnesota that taught a full year's course on the
subject. I think I'm fairly well versed in this subject and I guess in
real short order I could say I really believe truly in most environmental
facets. Whether you're talking about conservation of water, conservation
of soil, forestry conservation. Whatever phase of conservation you might
be concerned with.
Sietsema: And the last question is, we'd like you to please elaborate on ~
why you wish to serve on the Park and Recreation Commission.
Park and Recreation Commission Meeting
January 24, 1989 - Page 39
",....
Richard Mingo: I guess since I am retired, I've always been very much
interested in the recreational activities. Not only from the sporting
aspect but as far as wildlife issues and that type of thing is concerned.
I feel now being retired, especially since I'm no longer actively
coaching, that I've got time to devote to that type of thing. Having
lived in Chanhassen since 1957, why I'm very much interested in ~his
community.
Mady: I wanted to ask on number 5. Lori's question, I think what he was
getting on the conservation and environment, one of the things I wanted to
know about was your thoughts on active parkland versus passive parkland.
Active playfields versus just nature...
Richard Mingo: I think you have to hit a happy medium on this. I really
thing there should be some area set aside too in open. We've got rather
strict guidelines on a lot of us today as far as wetlands, etc. as to how
we use them. Anytime you're going to start a housing project, there's
concerns over that but I'm also very much interested in seeing that there
would be some passive land set aside. Because the community is starting
to grow very rapidly, I think it would be very wise that we start looking
at that and start setting some of these parcels of land aside now rather
than wait anymore. The developers get in and gobble them up and leave us
with nothing. I guess St. Louis Park would be one of the greatest
~ examples that we could find where their land was virtually devoured before
they had a chance to develop it. I know they've got some parks they
built, but they were really digging to find spots along railroad
right-of-way, etc. even to find any land for active parks. I hate to see
that type of thing happen. I have a feeling that we should be concerned
with both. I know we need more active. As I mentioned, I'd be very much
interested in seeing us develop a city golf course. But on the other
hand, I think we should also have some passive areas. We're very
fortunate of course in having the Arboretum out here which is a fantastic
place as far as being a passive environment.
Robinson: Any other questions? Thanks very much.
Sietsema: I would like to make one comment here. Originally I had
scheduled the Commission's criteria for the City Council meeting last
night and the other commission's had not had their criteria ready for that
meeting at that time so it was pulled off of the agenda. Councilman Boyt
put it back on because he knew that the Commission had worked hard on
putting the criteria together and thought that you should have Council's
comments on it. What was discussed last night is that it seems that the
Council feels that they should still be interviewing candidates and what
they would like us to do is narrow the process down to I think it was 2 or
3 people per position and make a recommendation. Instead of them
interviewing all 13 applicants, it would be 2 or 3 people per position.
So we would be recommending that they interview between 4 and 6 people.
That was basically the gist of their comments. That was all that I wrote
down. But they thought that the criteria was good as far as I could tell.
,....,
Schroers: Before we ask her back in, I don't know how the rest of you are
doing this or what you're using as a guideline to make an evaluation but I
Park and Recreation Commission Meeting
January 24, 1989 - Page 40
....".
just, on my own, use the 1 to 10 score. You go 1 to 10 on the questions,
total it and then come up with the score. I think that's a pretty fair
and reasonable. I don't know, do you want to elaborate on it? Do you
want to discuss anything further?
Mady: I don't think so. It's hard to make a discussion.
Schroers: As far as I knew, we didn't have anything established and we
need to have some sort of a system for evaluating.
Boyt: I don't think we should discuss until after we've interviewed
everyone.
Sietsema:
question
I don't think you should agree on what your rating for each
is.
Mady: I think each one of us is going to have to rank all the candidates
and then we'll combine them.
Schroers: That's what I'm talking about.
Mady: Build your own listing and we'll list them out and we'll rank them
1 to 13. The one with the fewest number of points is the lead candidate
and the one with the next fewest...
--"
Robinson: But will we discuss?
Mady: We will at the end. I think at the end we need to discuss the
merits of each one in case each one of us misses something. You can then
have the opportunity to rerank. Then once that's done, we'll put their
names up and we'll put our names down.
Boyt: I think we should talk about discussing after we interview
everyone. We need some time to discuss.
Hasek: After each candidate.
Boyt: No, after we hit all of them.
Sietsema: The schedule for interviews goes from 7:00 until 10:10 and then
you discuss after that.
Boyt: With pizza. Isn't that what we said?
Mady: Dominoes delivers.
Sietsema: That's right, I did say that. Now Richard just drops out so
that pushes it up.
Boyt: Is that 10 minutes for each person?
...."
.
Sietsema: Yes. Oh, there's 5 minutes inbetween. That's right.
Park and Recreatton Commission Meeting
January 24, 1989 - Page 41
,....
Mady: That's good you have some loose ttme because I mean, I asked a
question. Some clarification.
Watson: Of course you did.
Mady: We're interviewing here. We're supposed to ask.
Boyt: But not too many. We've got our questions.
Watson: We have some criteria here but very little ad libbing.,
Mady: I just asked for clarification on one question.
REVIEW PARK DEDICATION FEE SCHEDULE.
Sietsema: I assume you're all totally confused now on the park
dedication.
Robinson: Yes.
Mady: I have my feelings and thoughts. It's a 100 page packet on this
one.
,...
Sietsema: I just want to impress upon all of us, we know how much time
we've spent on this and I wanted to give the opportunity to review all the
phases that we've been through because we went through most of this
discussion last year. I know that I brought up the idea of changing our
standard last time from 1 per 75 to 1 per 50 but in researching that
further and working out the numbers, it appeared that it was quite a
taking. It was quite a high requirement when it came down to what the
land was. I called Roger just informally and asked him if he thought the
15% to 19% was reasonable. He said he definitely would begin to question.
We would definitely become less defendable unless we came up with some
really good reasons. When 10% is what has been upheld in the courts, 15%
to 19% is a little bit more difficult to defend to say the least. Don and
I sat down and we looked at this and what we realized is that the place
that we really have the problem is when we are not able to obtain the
property within the subdivision process. Similar to Pheasant Hills where
they came in with a subdivision and the property was rolling and we said
this one is not suttable for active park needs, we'll acquire something
else. Where in reality, the park dedication fee did not equal to what we
can actually go out and purchase property for. That's where we really
have the problem so what we came up with is basing the fee on the average
raw land value that we get from the County Assessor which is $10,500.00 an
acre. In cases where the land in the subdivision is more than that, we
can require in a typical urban development where the density is 2 to 4
lots per acre, we would require 11% of the price per acre for our park
dedication fee.
~
Hasek: Of the raw land?
Park and Recreation Commission Meeting
January 24, 1989 - Page 42
...."
Sietsema:
in. So if
dedication
to be.
Of the raw land value. Before the streets and the utilities go
they purchased the property for $15,~~~.~~ an acre, the park
fee then goes up to $589.~~ per unit is what it would break out
Robinson:
Will you always be able to determine the land value?
Sietsema: We can request that the developer provide us with that
information.
Mady: What if it's a farmer who's lived on the land for 15-3~ years. He
got it from his father in his will and he's now going to divide it
himself.
Watson: Like Mr. Steller's land for instance when he divided that up. He
had owned that land for ever and ever. The raw land value at that point
was what he could sell it for.
Boyt: We also had someone sold land to his friend so and so and he sold
it back to him.
Hasek: That's the trick. Right there's the trick that I was thinking of.
How you could buy and sell the land, if you base it on a percentage, where
we could take it in the shorts and that would be the situation. But it
seems to me, if we base it on the percentage, which is fine with me, but ~
if we had our own assessor assess the value of the land or if we hired an
assessor, if there was a discrepancy.
Sietsema: A land appraiser?
Hasek: Yes. Could we do a land appraisal and use that as opposed to what
we are being told the land sold for? Then we would have an appraisal, a
legal appraisal that we could take into court if the developer decided to
dispute it.
Robinson: But you're almost defeating the purpose then. Then you're
really getting into some administration.
Boyt: Maybe you could require an appraisal.
Hasek: But an appraisal, you can get an appraisal for a very decent cost.
Especially if we determine that they're paying what a third of what we
should be getting on a very large tract of land, tne appraisal would...
Sietsema: An appraisal would cost approximately the cost of one unit, one
park dedication fee. The appraisal we just had for the Carrico property
was $35~.~~.
Hasek: How big was that piece of property?
Sietsema: 16 acres.
......"
Park and Recreation Cormnission Meeting
January 24, 1989 - Page 43
",.....
Hasek: But it doesn't go, the appraisal doesn't necessarily follow the
size of the land. It's the difficulty in putting it together that
counts. It could be a 2~~ acre of land and only cost us $5~~.~~ to have
that done which would basically be one unit. But then we'd have something
legal to tie it to.
Watson: But how do we decide about this appraisal?
Boyt: We know approximately how much land goes for north of the MUSA
and. . .
Watson: But I mean, it's going to be kind of a judgment call. We'll
request an appraisal on some property and we won't get an appraisal on
other property?
Hasek: Sure. Why not?
Mady: I think we're being to an administrative nightmare here. I think
we all know that we're way too low. We know what property is going for.
We've had different developers coming here in the last 6 months.
Minnewashta, that guy said if he could buy any land around Lake
Minnewashta for $l5,~~~.~~ an acre, he was getting a steal. The Carrico
land we know was worth more than $15,~~~.~~ an acre if it's buildable. We
",..... know what Eckankar, 8 to l~ years ago, whenever they bought their
property. They paid on an average of almost $l5,~~~.~~ an acre.
Hasek: So what are you saying?
Mady: We know that $1~,5~~.~~ is garbage. That might be great for a bare
farmland outside the MUSA line but I don't think the County Assessor is
accurate for what's going up here in developable single family unit
property. I think it's so far out it's unbelieveable. I think it'. up to
us to set what we feel our standard is and that's what it is. If a
developer can show that it's not reasonable, then we modify it. We put
that in the ordinance. Give us that leeway. But we set the standards.
Hasek: That's backwards. That's exactly backwards.
Mady: But we set the standards.
Hasek: Let's set the standards, if that's the case, then let's set the
standard at $2,~~~.~~. You can't make them take us to court for it.
That's what you're asking them to do.
Mady: No, what I'm really saying is we know what's reasonable. We know
what the land is going for. We know it's $15,~~~.~~ an acre.
Hasek:
No, we're being told that it's $1~,5~~.~~ by the Assessor.
,.....
Mady:
We know that's not right.
Hasek:
wrong.
No. We don't know that. I don't know that. I think that that's
I'm not an appraiser. I don't know that that's wrong. What we
Park and Recreation Commission Meeting
January 24, 1989 - Page 44
--'"
should be doing is to try and corne up with a way that we can defend
ourselves. The only reason I'm saying that is because there are so many
communities out there that are extracting an extra pound of flesh from
developers simply because they know that the developer is not going to
take them to court. The City of Chanhassen I've seen do it as well. They
know that they can push the buttoms to get what they want just a little
bit more and I think from working both sides of the fence as I do in my
profession from the City standpoint and from the developer's standpoint, I
think that's an atrocity. I think if there's a way that we can tie it
down so that it's legal and justifiable, that's what we ought to be doing.
Boyt: And fair.
Hasek: And fair. It ought to be fair to the City. It ought to be fair
to the developer. And if we can do that somehow, that's the way it ought
to be done. The percentage is, I think the fairest way of doing that. If
we have to, if we think, as you're saying that a piece of property is
being misrepresented to us and our portion of that dedication is too low,
then it's, I think equally our responsibility and our legal obligation to
prove the developer wrong as much as it is for a developer to prove us
wrong. What we're saying by taking a percentage is, this is what we want.
It's in our ordinance.
Boyt: We have a base here of $1~,5~~.~~ so if someone comes in and says,
oh but I only paid $6,~~~.~~ an acre. We have a base to say, well, we're -'
going to contest that.
Hasek: We're not going to contest it because that's the base that we're
working with right here so we've saying no, I'm sorry, you might have
bought it for that but we're basing it on this. At that point, he has to
prove to us that he paid less for the land and it's worth less than what
our base says. But it also doesn't lock us into this being the minimum at
all, or the maximum. If we feel that somebody is buying a chunk of land
on Lake Minnewashta and is paying $3~,~~~.~~ an acre for it and he's
telling us he's only paying $l5,~~~.~~ or $2~,~~~.~~ for it, then we have
at least a vehicle with which we can go to our appraisal and say no, our
appraisal is what we're basing it on. If you want to bring in another
appraisal that will show that you paid less for this land or that this
land is worth less than what our appraiser it's for, then there's
something that can be contested but he's going to have to contest us at
that point. If it's in the ordinance that we're going to ask for an
appraisal if we feel that it's being misrepresented, that's our vehicle
and it's up to him to disprove us at that point. I think that's a fair
and legal way of handling it.
Boyt: Work with a straight percentage?
Hasek: Yes. It's something I hadn't throught about doing before but it's
really what we used from the beginning to figure out how we were going to
get to a number was a percent of land necessary to serve the people. The.-,
percent of the value of the land and then you always try to put a number
on it. This way we're not. We're putting a percentage on it and the
number can float.
Park and Recreation Commission Meeting
January 24, 1989 - Page 45
".,..,
Mady: Who determines the number?
don't know the value of the land.
I know $10,500.00 is wrong.
That's what I'm saying. 11% but we
We never do know the value of the land.
Boyt: We're not going to set the number. Isn't it going to change each
time?
Mady: But we never know that number. Who knows it?
"""
Hasek: That's what I'm saying. It doesn't have to Jim. One guy can come
in here and have a Bill of Sale on his property and he paid $8,000.00 or
$9,000.00 for it. Our judgment then is, well, okay, we've got a base
price of $10,500.00 and that's the rate that we're going to charge you at.
If he contests that, he will have to disprove our base number. It's up to
him at that point to prove us wrong. Alright, conversely, a guy comes in
and tells us that he's paying $10,500.00 for a piece of property and we
have reasonable doubt that that's an accurate number. We think that it's
much higher than that so we can kick in the ordinance. We can go in and
get an appraisal for the land. The appraisal comes back and says, that
land is worth $20,000.00 an acre. We're going to base our fees on
$20,000.00 an acre. He says you're way off base. I didn't pay that for
the land. Here's the bill and receipt and we're going to say, well, then
it's necessary for you either to take us to court to say that our
appraisal is wrong. We've got a legal appraisal. We've got somebody that
will stand behind it, or he can go out and get another appraisal that says
that no, this is way off. $12,000.00 is the most this guy paid. He might
say he paid $10,500.00. It's worth $12,000.00. Then it's up to us to
decide. Are we going to take the $12,000.00 or are we going to stand by
our appraisal?
Mady: Lori, who did the Carrico appraisal?
Sietsema: Bud Andrus.
Mady: The back part of his appraisal, I've seen a couple and they always
say the same, for $350.00 he's not going to go to court to defend his
appraisal because he didn't do everything that he had to. He said that.
Sietsema: No, he said that the $350.00 did not include his fees if he
were required to go to court to defend his appraisal. We would have to
pay his additional fees if he was required to go to court.
Hasek: He would go out of business if he did that.
Mady: I thought, I don't know, I've seen them where they simply won't,
this is what their gut feeling is but if you want a defensible position,
he's going to have to spend a lot more time.
~ Hasek: Yes, but then that will come. He's given the appraisal. The
basis of his appraisal has to be accurate or he doesn't work. That's the
law. It's no different than anybody else telling you that your engine is
going to blow up tomorrow knowing darn well what you need is a gasket in
Park and Recreation Commission Meeting
January 24, 1989 - Page 46
--"
it. You go in there and prove them wrong, this gas station closes down.
He's in exactly the same boat. He's putting his profession on the line
when he publishes that document. Now it may cost us more to ask him to go
to court to defend that thing because he's got to go out and he may have
to get some more information. God knows what's involved in that. That's
true.
Sietsema: His says, I have no personal interest or bias with respect to
his subject property. It is understood that I will not be required to
give testimony or appear in Court by reason of this estimate of value
unless prior arrangements are made. So what he's saying is that what he
did. . .
Mady: ...administratively, we get 3, 4, 5 developers in here a month.
Minimum. How are we going to set the fee?
Sietsema: It's $425.00 unless...
Mady: But we've shown, we all feel that that is way too low. We can't
buy the property for $425.00. You can't.
Sietsema: But not everybody is going to run around and do a little
switcharoo on their Bill of Sale.
Mady: What we're saying here is, how are we going to, it's always going -'
to be $425.00 an acre. How it's going to be more?
Sietsema: If the Bill of Sale is more than $10,500.00 an acre.
Mady: I guess I have a problem with $10,500.00. Most of the land that's
being developed here by local residents how have owned it forever.
Boyt: We can't come up with that number on our own though. We have to go
to a responsible source to get that number to start with I think.
Mady: So you're talking about 5 times a month we're going to have to have
a local appraisal done.
Hasek: No. Why would that be?
Mady: I have a real problem with this. We only have two staff people
here in the staff department. Now we're going to have to put an appraiser
on the staff. This City is growing.
Sietsema: I called other cities to find out how they determine theirs.
Most cities do go by the percentage of the raw land value. And I asked
them, how do you come up with an average raw land value and most of the
cities have a City Assesser on staff. It's determined by the City
Asseser what the average raw land value is. We don't have a City Assesser
so we have to fall back on the County or we can have, every year we could
hire somebody to appraise the value of all the land left in the city. ~
Park and Recreation Commission Meeting
January 24, 1989 - Page 47
,......
Robinson: Do they use a dollar amount or a percentage then? Most of the
other cities?
Sietsema: They say what the average raw land value is and then they take
a percentage of that number and it's a set figure. So in Eden prairie
this year it's $725.00.
Mady: And we're a lot closer to Eden prairie is in our MUSA line.
Robinson: So nobody has done what you're proposing in a percentage?
Sietsema: Not on a sliding scale. Not that I'm aware of.
Robinson: I wonder why that is.
Mady: It's an administrative nightmare.
Hasek: Is it an adminstrative nightmare or have they just simply decided
that it was a number that they could live with? You're talking about
people who's got some pretty high numbers out there. By what she's
telling us, the simple fact is, if you take 15% to 19% like some of the
cities are taking down and you go to court with it, you're going to lose.
What those cities are saying is, we're betting Mr. Developer that you're
~ not going to spend the money to take us to court so we're going to hold
you up right here one more time and we're going to take this extra fee and
we're betting that you're not going to take us to court on this. That's
really what they're saying and they're getting away with it.
Mady: I'm not saying that we do that. What I'm saying is that the
County Assesser is wrong. In my opinion he's wrong at $10,500.00.
Hasek: But, what is your more than my professional ability to say that
he's wrong other than a gut feeling?
Mady: We've got people who are buying land who are coming in and telling
us that $15,000.00 is a steal for raw land.
Hasek: So then if that guy buys land within the City and brings a receipt
into us for the land, then he's going to pay us what he actually paid for
by the system that we've got set up? What we're saying here is that this
is a minimum amount that they're going to take from you. The land costs
more than, we're going to take more than that.
Robinson: How old is the $10,500.00 number?
Hasek: Last year.
Sietsema: Last year we raised it.
~. Mady: Yeah, we raised it about $10.00. It goes back to like 1980. I
remember reading the Minutes. Mike said he can't remember it going up.
Sietsema: It was raised in 1982.
Park and Recreation Commission Meeting
January 24, 1989 - Page 48
~
Mady: Okay, land's gone up in 7 years. Developable land. Farm land
might not have. It went down and now it's coming back up but developable
land.
Hasek: Lori, correct me if I'm wrong but I think last summer had this
same hassle. Last year I think I talked to you on the telephone and you
had talked to the County Assesser and the County Assesser had said at that
point that that land was still at $10,500.00? That's what he said.
Sietsema: Yes. That's what he told me this year too.
Hasek: How often does the County Assesser do his job? Once every 6 years
or once a year? It's a yearly job for him. It's not something that he
does only once every 5 years. Right?
Sietsema: Right.
Watson: He has statistics to support that.
Hasek: Exactly. It's recent as of last year. It's a number that I don't
think that I'm comfortable with. There's no question about it. The only
think I'm arguing with you I think here about Jim, is how we arrive at a
fair way of taking the money away from, asking the developer to contributf
to our park and recreation budget in the form of land or money. If we car~
come up with a fair way of doing that, I think the way Lori's proposed
here is probably about the fairest way that I can think of.
Boyt: Could we get two different averages? One for within the MUSA line
and one for outside of the MUSA line and deal with those two separately?
Sietsema: I don't know off the top of my head.
Boyt: No, but I wonder if the County Assesser would give us the average
cost of property within the MUSA line so when we have a development that
comes in that's within the MUSA line, their property is averaged at this.
When they're outside the MUSA line it's averaged at that.
Mady: I think it's got to be a more defined than that. The prime propert
is being developed. The swampland is not being developed so when he's
averaging, he's averaging the whole ball of wax.
Sietsema: I asked him for the average raw land value of the rural area,
the urban area and the commercial area.
Mady: I think if we use our base as $10,500.00, I think we're crazy.
Hasek: I think the thing is, the land outside, obviously there's a heck
of a lot more land outside the MUSA line that would cost us less but
there's a heck of a lot more undeveloped land out there than there is
within the MUSA line. The question is, how do you arrive at that number?
You don't take the developed land, you take the undeveloped land.
.....",
Park and Recreation Commission Meeting
January 24, 1989 - Page 49
,.....
Boyt: I think we're trying to be fair about it in that our goal is to be
able to buy more land in that area. That's our goal. To buy more
parkland to meet the needs of the people moving into that area. To do
that, each area is different. We can't have an average of the three.
Industrial, rural and urban.
Hasek: The number that we've got right here now is going to be higher.
Jim's guesstimate is substantially higher than, then what you're saying is
simply we're going to base it on, you're going to have 3 numbers.
Boyt: Three numbers and that will be it. We're not going to look at each
one individually then.
Sietsema: Then your fee would be $250.00 for the rural development and
$550.00 for an urban development and $2,000.00 an acre for the commercial-
industrial.
Boyt: Something like that.
Mady: Whatever it works to.
Sietsema: Whatever it works to but that would be the basic fees.
~ Boyt: You have to pay a flat fee. Three separate fees.
Robinson: I like that better...
Watson: I think we'd relatively accurate too because there is a different
weight to the value of those various kinds of property.
Hasek: The City of Bloomington takes nothing from commercial-industrial
property. They have a 5% that they can take but they haven't done it.
They don't do it. They don't think it's fair that the commercial has to
contribute.
Boyt: But we're providing amenities for our commercial/industrial areas.
Sidewalks. Parks.
Hasek: I'm just saying, here we're going from one community that says 5%
is too much and we don't ask anything to what you're suggesting is .
$2,000.00 is a fair number. I think that's an unequitable amount to ask
too. I wonder if commercial, does commercial land...
Boyt: We're providing baseball diamonds for people who work.
Sietsema: I have to disagree with you there myself Ed because they choose
not to charge because they're interesting in attracting or whatever but we
want to charge what the State Statute is. If they choose to waive that
fee, that's their perogative but I don't think that we should compare our
~. number to their zero because they chose to waive it. What the State
Statute would allow, if we go by what she's saying, would be substantially
more than what we are. I'll tell you that Eden prairie and Plymouth are
charging well over $2,000.00 an acre for commercial/industrial.
Park and Recreation Commission Meeting
January 24, 1989 - Page 50
,....",
Hasek: It's commercial/industrial? How about multiple residential?
sietsema: They pay more for that too because the density is higher and
the feel the parks are used more because they don't have backyards. Their
own swingset.
Hasek: That was my position with multiple last time we talked about this.
Sietsema: The survey that was done is outdated because the bigger cities,
the bigger suburbs did raise theirs substantially. Eden prairie went from
a $500.00 something number to a $750.00 number and Plymouth went from a
$550.00 to a $650.00 so there was some substantial increases in the fees
in some cities. We have to take into consideration that we do charge a
trail fee in addition. That's considered part of the park dedication that
we break out so that isn't something that we should negate either. That's
something that should be taken in. For instance, Lakeville does charge
about $500.00 a unit and they have a $145.00 trail fee too so theirs gets
more equal to what Eden prairie and Plymouth are charging.
Hasek: Let me ask a question. Is the MUSA line on this?
Sietsema: Yes, the MUSA line is.
Hasek: Is this the MUSA line here basically?
-'
Mady: Pretty close.
Hasek: We don't have any commercial land outside of the MUSA line do we?
Sietsema: No.
Watson: Not at this point because we can't develop it anyway.
Sietsema: If you can't get water and sewer, it's hard to have a business.
Hasek: Is this within it here?
Sietsema: Yes.
Hasek: Lake Riley?
Sietsema: Yes.
Hasek: So then all we've got outside the MUSA line is really ag land?
Sietsema: Right.
Watson: Except for down along TH 212.
Schroers: And there is some kind of a proposal to the effect of changing
that area to ago ....",
Park and Recreation Commission Meeting
January 24, 1989 - Page 51
ifili"'"
Watson: We'd like to get rid of everybody. That junk that's down there
but it's all been there so long...
Hasek: I'm wondering, you've broken it down into three parts. Rural...
Mady: Do you have those...
Sietsema: Not off the top of my head. I'd have to ask them again. I
can't guess.
Mady: Because I know what we're seeing developed isn't developable land
now. It's the agricultural land down further. The residential land being
developed, with the farmland is where this is really crazy. I think our
residential land is a lot closer to what Eden prairie's is than what the
farmland is.
Hasek: Isn't there pressure, or hasn't there been pressure to develop
these two corners in Chanhassen? I personally worked on both of those
corners.
Watson: On TH 5 and TH 4l?
Hasek: Yes.
~
Watson: There's been a lot of pressure to develop there. Chaska is the
closest sewer obviously. Sewer is not that far away from there.
Mady: Ours is even closer but it's not legal.
Hasek: Would that give us any problems if we went with three designations
like that? Industrial, commercial?
Sietsema: I would have to check with Roger to make sure.
Hasek: I'm just trying to recollect the last time we talked about this.
Wasn't there some indication that in some of the industrial land just
south of the main street of Chanhassen here sold for like $15,000.00 an
acre when that went through? Somebody had mentioned that.
Sietsema: Rosemount?
Hasek: Yes.
Sietsema: That was commercial/industrial. That went for $24,000.00 an
acre.
Robinson: You made the statement in the packet on March 22nd when we
talked about this Lori, when you were talking about inside and outside the
MUSA line. You said rural areas are going for like $3,500.00 an acre.
,.....
Sietsema: That sounds right. I think that's what Scott had quoted me but
I'm hesitant to give you any figures when I don't know for sure.
Park and Recreation Commission Meeting
January 24, 1989 - Page 52
...",,;
Mady: Can we move to table this pending what the three numbers would be
and Roger's advice.
Watson: I'll so move.
Mady: I'll second it.
Sietsema: Before you second that, could you elaborate on what direction
you're giving staff.
Watson: To find out what those three figures would be. To find out from
Roger if such a proposal where we would have a different valuation for
within the MUSA line, outside rural and industrial/commercial property, if
that's a legally defensiveable mechanism to use.
Boyt: Is this also where we talk about trails and sending the information
to the Planning Commission?
Sietsema: Yes. I wish that would be separate discussion.
Watson moved, Mady seconded to table action on the Park Dedication Fee
schedule and direct staff to research and bring back the three figures for
urban, rural and commercial/industrial land. Also, to ask the City
Attorney if these numbers can legally be used. All voted in favor and th~
motion carried.
Sietsema: Last time we talked about the trail dedication fee and what it
was supposed to accomplish. If the trail dedication fee is supposed to
cover the cost to build sidewalks within a development, it does it on
large developments but not on the smaller developments. If it's supposed
to pay for sidewalks and contribute towards the overall trail system, it's
unreasonable to expect that to. happen. It's also unreasonable to expect
that the remainder of the developments that are going to be coming in to
pay for the overall trail system. So staff felt that perhaps this would
be the time to separate ourselves from sidewalks and move that back into
the planning, as it is in other cities. Make sidewalks a planning
request. Recommend to the Planning Commission and City Council that that
become a part of the subdivision process, or a requirement of the
subdivision process and that the one-third of whatever the park dedication
fee is remain as the trail dedication fee that would be put in the pot
toward the remainder of the community interconnecting trail system.
Again, if we just take out the connecting trails, it's still unreasonable
to expect the remainder of the developments to come in to totally pay for
that or to try and figure out what that's going to be when you don't know
how many units are left out there to be divided. So I think that the
amount equal to one-third of the park dedication fee is a reasonable
amount.
Boyt: Sounds good to me.
"""""
Mady: Yes, I have no problems with it.
Park and Recreation Commission Meeting
January 24, 1989 - Page 53
,....
Hasek: Do we need a motion on that?
Sietsema: If you want to send the sidewalks to the Planning.
Hasek: So moved.
Boyt: I'll second.
Hasek moved, Boyt seconded that the Park and Recreation Commission
recommend that sidewalks become part of the Planning Department's
responsibility. All voted in favor and the motion carried.
Sietsema: Just as a comment on that, on the tail end of that, what I
would like to do at your direction, is to revise the trail plan taking out
all the sidewalks and bring that back and have a look at what that looks
like. Take the trail plan and take out the sidewalks and see what that
looks like. Just for your own information. Just see how and get a feel
for what that is. Maybe that's something that we want to work on.
Mady: It'd be nice to have an open meeting someplace where we can talk
~ about the trail issue again.
Robinson: It's 10:20 and we have four items left.
Sietsema: Totlot can wait. priorities can wait. Did we forget anything
else? A discussion that came up last night was a request from a resident
along Lake Lucy Road. They want to be able to park along Lake Lucy Road
in the wintertime. I just want to alert you that this is an item that's
probably going to be coming back to Park and Recreation because the
Council indicated that maybe a possibility would be to remove the bike
trail along Lake Lucy Road.
Watson: Why do they want to park along Lake Lucy Road? You can't park
anywhere in the wintertime.
Sietsema: Well, that's just exactly the point. Even if there isn't a
trail there, you can't park there anyway. But his concern is that when it
snows he can't get up into his driveway and he needs to park on the street
until... At any rate, I wanted to let you know that that was upcoming.
The other thing I wanted to alert you to or to let you know is that
Eckankar did come in with a site plan. It's for a church right in the
middle of the 175 acres. They're not planning to subdivide in anyway.
Therefore, they would have no park requirement. According to Steve, when
their attorney brought it in, when they took" it to the consultants, they
said here's the ordinance. Follow it to the letter and they dotted their
its and crossed their tis and they've doubled checked and it looks like
it's going to be something that's going to be very difficult to deny.
,......
Watson: The only thing about it is, they assured us when they came in
last time that they do not have a church which is the fascinating part.
Park and Recreation Commission Meeting
January 24, 1989 - Page 54
~
Robinson: They've got a convenience store.
Watson: They have a publishing business and they had meeting facilities
and facilities for conferences. Eckankar has no church.
Sietsema: That is all up in New Hope. They built what they were
proposing, the campus thing up in New Hope and now they're saving this
piece for a church. It's quite an elaborate, they've got bucks.
Watson: No question.
Sietsema: And they've got the bucks to fight anybody who tries to be
discriminatory so I just thought I'd let you know that that was.
Boyt:
signs.
Let's change the color of the paint on the South Lotus Lake Park
That yellow.
Hoffman: Those are Herb Bloomberg's development signs.
Boyt: Yes, but they all say park. They say South Park or South Lotus
Park. Maybe you could ask him if we could paint it.
Hoffman: Update as well on what Council did on the park fees. They
approved them as is. There was some discussion from Councilman Workman OI~
why we were going the lower direction. Why don't we raise them? It seems
everything is being raised. They also directed us to work out some
arrangements for the people who do pay for a program, to participate in a
program, to work our an arrangement to allow those people free access to
the park.
Boyt: Any program or a City program? A program could be South Tonka
Little League.
Sietsema: Let me read you my notes on that so you have a clear
understanding. I just wrote down some of their concerns. Wants a way to
allow mothers to drop off their kids and little kids ball players, etc. to
get into the park without paying. I guess that's the only one I wrote
down.
Schroers: The only one we lowered was the daily parking fee right?
Sietsema: There was no clear direction from the Commission as to how we
were going to determine who got in free or not. One of the comments that
was made last night is that they'd just like, to ease the tension, they
would like to either include a sticker in the registration fee or give
them a sticker when they register and not charge them so they can get in
free or something so that it's clearly defined, very clear who can get
into the park and who can't and you don't have a 15 year old fighting off
raging parents.
-....JIiI'
Boyt: I think they could get their sticker when they pay their fee when
they register.
Park and Recreation Commission Meeting
January 24, 1989 - Page 55
1"""'"
Hoffman: But then again we get into the other, the out of town ball youth
leagues coming in.
Hasek: How about the family who has 3 or 4 kids involved and each time
they come down, they pick up a sticker for their kid and start passing
them around the neighborhood for the people who don't have them. Don't
worry, don't buy your sticker because I'm getting 3 of them and I only
need 1.
Sietsema: It doesn't matter. If you would build the sticker into the
fee, it's paid for.
Robinson: How did we leave that? Just that there would be some
exceptions to it?
Hoffman: Yes.
Sietsema: You guys didn't give us any clear direction so we asked the
Council if they wanted to give direction on that.
Hoffman: They didn't leave clear direction either.
~ Sietsema: They said ask Park and Rec to give you clear direction.
Robinson: Maybe we should discuss it.
Mady: I have a question on Jim Chaffee's report, did the resident from
Carver Beach go to the Public Safety Commission meeting or were they asked
to?
Sietsema: It was my understanding that they did not go to the Public
Safety Commission meeting but Jim will be at this meeting and so will the
City Engineer. One last thing for your information, I don't know if
anybody of you know Larry Brown. He's the assistant engineer. He's
submitted his resignation and he will be starting for a private firm that
I think is located downtown and I don't know the name so he will no longer
be employed by the City as of two weeks from whenever.
Schroers: I was contacted by a Boy Scout this evening who would like to
do our proposed archery range as an Eagle Scout project. I don't know if
any of us know where we're at with that. Basically, he said at Lake Ann
and I said well, I don't even know that it's going to be at Lake Ann. I
don't think we're that far yet.
Sietsema: What's his name?
Schroers: I don't even remember. I told him I would find out tonight and
~ I asked him to call me back so he's going to be calling me back.
Sietsema: He should contact me when he calls back because I have a list
of somethings that have come up that could be done.
Park and Recreation Commission Meeting
January 24, 1989 - Page 56
...."
Schroers: And not necessarily the archery range?
Sietsema: Well, the archery range is a possibility. We have to define
what it's going to be. If it's just a bunch of hay bales with a big
bullseye put in front of it, then I don't think that's going to qualify
for an Eagle Scout project. But if it's something more elaborate than
that.
Schroers: It can be a little more elaborate than that. We can do better.
Mady: Can the Administrative packet be put on the next agenda because
there's a lot of things that we didn't discuss? There are some things
that I want to find out about. A couple of things.
Sietsema: Like what?
Mady: Like the basketball court thing at North Lotus Lake.
Sietsema: That's on our next agenda.
Robinson: All of that's going to go on the next agenda.
Robinson moved, Boyt seconded to adjourn the meeting.
and the motion carried. The meeting was adjourned.
All voted in favor
.-....""
Submitted by Lori Sietsema
Park and Rec Coordinator
Prepared by Nann Opheim
......",