PRC 1989 03 21
;<
CHANHASSEN PARK AND RECREATION COMMISSION
~REGULAR MEETING
MARCH 21, 1989
Chairman Mady called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m..
MEMBERS PRESENT: Sue Boyt, Curt Robinson, Jim Mady, Larry Schroers, Dawne
Erhart and Ed Hasek
MEMBERS ABSENT: Carol Watson
STAFF PRESENT: Lori Sietsema, Park and Rec Coordinator; Todd Hoffman,
Recreation Supervisor; and Gary Warren, City Engineer
APPOINTMENT OF THE ACTING CHAIRPERSON.
Boyt moved, Mady seconded to appoint Larry Schroers as the Acting Chairman
for this Park and Recreation Commission meeting. All voted in favor and
the motion carried.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Robinson moved, Mady seconded to approve the Minutes
of the Park and Recreation Commission meeting dated February 28, 1989 as
amended by Sue Boyt on page 25 to change the last person talking from Jeff
Bros to Steve Berquist. All voted in favor and the motion carried.
,...,
REVIEW THE LAKE LUCY ROAD TRAIL/PARKING ISSUE.
Sietsema: At the last City Council meeting this item was discussed and
referred to the Park and Recreation Commission for review. In summary,
what we're looking to is to allow, there are residents that live along
Lake Lucy Road that would like to have parking allowed on Lake Lucy Road
and in a nutshell, there's people that use the on street trail that would
like the trail to remain. So our task here tonight is to try to reach a
compromise so both could be accommodated. In researching what our options
are, we've come up with currently this is what we have existing. We have
4 feet off street right-of-way, 6 feet bike lane, a 12 foot traffic lane
and 12 foot traffic lane, a 6 foot bike lane and then another 4 feet of
right-of-way that's not being used at this time. The first option that's
outlined in your report would be to allow parking on one side of the road,
on the south side of the road, an 8 foot parking lane, a 12 foot traffic
lane, a 12 foot traffic lane and then move the curb in and have an 8 foot
trail within the remaining right-of-way there. That option would take a
minor variance as it's a total of 33 feet of traffic and it's required to
have 34 feet so there would be a variance of 1 foot needed from MnDot to
do that option. The estimated cost on that option would be $75,000.00.
Schroers: Lori, is that trail still on street or is that an off street?
Sietsema: This would be an 8 foot bituminous trail on top of a curb
~separated from the street. It's separated from the street by a curb so it
Nould be right on top of the curb. The second option that we came up
with, now north is on the other side this time so this side is the south
side. Would allow an 8 foot parking lane, a 12 foot traffic lane, another
traffic lane and then 4 feet of boulevard and a 6 foot paved bike path
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
March 21, 1989 - Page 2
......",;
that would be separated from the street. This would offset the center of
the road by 2 feet so we have to move the center line as well. The
estimated cost on option 2 would be roughly $50,000.00. Both of these
options, Option 1 and Option 2, it was felt that we could work within the
remaining right-of-way to accommodate a trail without removing their
retaining wall. It would mean that we would have to narrow the trail down
at that spot but we wouldn't have to remove the oak tree or the maple tree
or the retaining wall that's along that street which has been a concern
all along. The third option would provide, would leave the bike lanes as
they are on street and the traffic lanes as they are and provide pull off
par~ing, off street parking pads. This option would have an estimated
cost of $2,600.00 per pad depending on how many would be needed.
Robinson: What's the total distance?
Sietsema: Length of Lake Lucy Road?
Robinson: Yes, or are we talking all of Lake Lucy Road or a portion of
it?
Sietsema: We'd be talking about the full length of Lake Lucy Road. Maybe
Gary, do you have the full length of Lake Lucy Road?
Warren: About 5,200 feet. About a mile.
....""
Schroers: I'm curious as to the size of these pads.
Sietsema: You've got 8 foot of off street parking with a bituminous curb.
There would be a stripe then and then the bike, the 6 foot bike lane here
and traffic and then the bike lane again here. This is north on this side
again. So that is the 3 options that staff came up with. Of course the
other two would be to leave the road exactly as it is would be another
option or the other option would be to remove the bike lane and allow
parking. We highlighted these 3 options because they accommodated both.
Staff felt that that was a compromise.
Robinson: It's not up to us to determine, one of the alternatives to us
is to do nothing at all? That's not an alternative to us and we can't
determine whether there should be off street parking at all. That's the
City Council's.
Sietsema: You do have the option to recommend that those bike lanes be
left as they are and do nothing. That is another option but it did not
acommodate both of the needs that appeared to be along that road and
that's why I highlighted these 3 options. Again, we could do nothing or
we could take out bike lanes altogether and not have a trail along Lake
Lucy Road. Those are the other 2 options. Given the amount of discussion
that took place at the City Council level, staff tried to come up with
options that were a compromise that would accommodate of those needs.
That's how we came up with these 3 options.
--'
Boyt: What about the option of when the water system goes in? Putting
the trail in on top of that. Is that one of those?
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
March 21, 1989 - Page 3
,......
Sietsema: That was option 2. Option 2 would put the off street trail, a
6 foot off street trail, this could be bike path or multi-purpose trail on
the north side, north is on this side, on top of the watermain. That
would allow parking on the south side. It's confusing because on this one
the south is on the other side.
Boyt: We might be able to get some funding from another source for this?
Sietsema: I might have Gary answer that. There might be some funds
available through the watermain project.
Warren: I haven't had the pleasure of meeting of everybody. I'm Gary
Warren, City Engineer. This is like jello. You push it one place and it
comes out another place. Even since these alternatives were done...
I know the residents here, Eric Rivkin in particular who he and I have had
discussions, there are several other alternatives that have really fine
tuned some of these that you're going to want to look at. Basically the
input I think from the Park and Rec Commission, the interest of the
Council, if I can speak for the Council, is to get some discussion going
as to the type of trail that's suitable for this area. Either leave it as
it is, if you like it that way, or consider some off street alternatives
becaues of the other issues that are related to it such as the need for on
~street parking which two of the residents in particular are requesting.
That's how we've kind of gotten into this. With the watermain
construction, the project's been awarded and the graters are poised I
should say right now and anxious to start the construction. There are
some construction practicalities that if something were to be done with
these alternatives, the numbers that Lori has quoted here from our report
are basically almost worse case scenarios if you're going to go in right
now without any other project going on to construction these improvements.
So, there are some good in cost savings that can happen at this time if
you proceed to move the trail off of Lake Lucy Road. There are
considerations as far as the State is concerned with being a State Aid
Road as to just trimming down the road section. That is also concern to
residents there. That State Aid standards are quoted very often and
interpretted very freely by even the individuals from the State you can
get two difference answers to the same question sometimes. But there is
some possibility of shrinking the road section down to a 28 foot wide road
section which is the minimum State road for this caliber of collecter and
then using that extra laneage and distributing it 10 foot parking lane, a
6 foot bike path. All the scenarios that seem to come up out of that are
varying widths for the trail, for the parking widths and such so that's,
when you see a lot of those options that's where it's all kind of coming
from. I guess from my perspective and for your benefit, whatever
alternatives or recommendations come forth from here and however the
Council chooses to handle it, if some alternatives are selected or options
as far as road width are concerned, they would have to be run through the
~State for State approval. There may be some reimbursement requested.
rhat's an issue that they would have to look at as far as if we shrunk the
road down and such. I didn't mean to get off on a tangent here but we do
have funds that we've dedicated for the Lake Lucy Road watermain project.
City Manager and I have only had a chance to talk briefly about it.
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
March 21, 1989 - Page 4
....,.,
There's been some fund closings and some fund transfers to cover some
deficit issues that were in the bonds that financed several of the
projects that we're looking to use those funds for this project. But his
acknowledgement to me is that we don't really feel comfortable that we
have monies left in that bond issue to fund the trail improvements. So I
think realistically speaking, if there are any modifications here that are
sought for the trail section, that that would be looked at pretty much in
face value. That construction dollars would have to funded through park
revenues for some other sources.
Hasek: A couple quick questions. The options that we've been shown.
Have they gone through the State yet? Have they seen them?
Warren: No.
Hasek: What is your opinion, knowing them as you do. I've been talking
to them a little bit too, but of these options, which do you feel that
they are willing to approve?
Warren: It's hard to say. I really think that there's some additional
options that have been generated since these that I think you would want
to, maybe let Mr. Rivkin, if he's going to speak to the group here, review
with you first.
Hasek: Have those been reviewed by the State?
...."",
Warren: None of these have been reviewed by the State except to talk with
them over the phone.
Hasek: To me it doesn't make sense for us to pick an option. I think our
charge is the trail and I think we ought to direct our comments to the
trail only. We've got a trail in place. We know we don't have any money
available to rebuild a new one. I'm not saying that it's even our job to
tell them that they can't have parking out there. If the City wants to do
it, that's a policy decision that the Council's going to have to make. If
they decide to do it here, then they're going to have to think about the
possibility of other people in other areas coming in and asking the same
question so it's not just this area that they have to consider when they
make the decision. I think we ought to focus on the trail. I think our
job is, basically we've got a trail in place out there and if they can
come up with an option that gives us a trail that is equally as safe or
safer but no less safe than the one that we've got out there, then there's
really no reason why we can't keep a trail on this alignment and
everything else is par. That we shouldn't go along with it. Personal
opinion.
Robinson: Has it been determined that there will be on street parking?
Sietsema:
the type
feelings
trail or
No. But I think that your comments are good. I think that's
of discussion that the Council wanted to hear as far as our
on the trail and if we wanted to spend money on an off street
how we wanted to do it.
...",
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
March 21, 1989 - Page 5
.JII'"
Robinson: But I agree with Ed that I don't think it's our, we should be
dealing with the trail systems. We can't determine whether or not there
should or should not be on street parking on Lake Lucy Road.
Boyt: That's not our area of expertise, determining which areas...
Hasek: I think that's going to come down to a discussion between,
basically between the engineering department, the City Council and the
State. My curiosity is if, I've got some interest in what happens out
there but my curiosity is if the State pulls funding, who pays for not
only the parking that goes out there but the reduction in the road and all
of that. We've got some very specific desires out there for these people
who want parking. Council's going to have a tough job. It's not going to
be just a matter of putting a few parking spaces out there because the
other people...have the same problem. They're going to have to decide
what's...appropriate for parking but that's not our job. Ours is the
trail. We've got a trail in place. I don't know how much farther we want
to go with this but I'd like to make a motion and then we can talk about
it.. .people have some things to say. I'd like to hear comments related to
the trail, not to the parking.
Mady: I guess I want to hear about the parking because right now the way
it stands, the two are... The choice they have if we don't go off street
"""1nd they allow the parking, is moving the trail.
Hasek: But that's fine. That's a policy decision that the Council's
going to have to make and then what they're going to have to do, if they
change policies, they're going to have to have public hearings and all
kinds of stuff. There are things in the Zoning Ordinances and the
Comprehensive Plan that specifically say that this is what we want to do
and if they want to change that, then it's a can of worms. It's not our
job. The Planning Commission and the Council can handle that. We
shouldn't need to do that.
Boyt: We are discussing whether or not it was appropriate on road...
That's Gary's job and someone elses job. We don't have the money to take
one trail off and put it someplace else. We have a priority list of
trails of the trail system. This is not on our priority list for this
year or next year. I don't think we start moving trails around until we
have the system in place first.
Mady: I agree 100%. I think what we need to do though is allow, there
are some, obviously there are some options that have been made that are...
We can hear those.
Hasek: No we don't. The Council can hear those. The point is, I can
come up with a design out there too but it doesn't mean anything because
the people that are going to have to make that decision aren't those
~eighbors, aren't us, it's going to have to be the Council and the State
)ecause it's a State funded road. If the State decides no, we don't want
any other options and it's no good, we're not going to vote for them and
the funding is going to be back in our hands and then the question is who
pays for it? Is it the neighbors who pay for it becuase they want some
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
March 21, 1989 - Page 6
...,
parking or is it the whole city?
Boyt: I guess that is one option that maybe that's one of their options
is they want to pay for an off street trail and that's an option that we
would look at. If the neighbors wanted to pay for an off street trail.
So if they have an option that won't cost us any money.
Hasek: I think if we hear comments from the public, I think that ought to
be directed at the trail and not at the parking. To me if the trail, as
long as the trail remains in the alignment, we've got something in place
that we have got in our Comprehensive Plan. It's approved. It's there
and if Council decides to take it out of there, then that's a policy
decision. We're going to have to look at the whole Comprehensive Plan
which means public hearings and all kinds of stuff.
Robinson: I agree with you but these people that have been here up to the
City Hall, this is their fourth time and if we send them away without
giving them a chance to speak tonight, I don't think would be fair. See
if they offer to pay for a trail, we might be surprised. I think we've
got to give them a chance.
Hasek: I'm just asking that the comments be directed at the trail and not
at the parking because the parking decision isn't ours. The design of
the road... I think it's our job, we've got a trail in place out there.
It's designed to a safe standard based upon other standards that have been
used in the past. There's no reason why we shouldn't approve an alignment
that is equal or better when it comes to...than what's out there. They
can move it off of the alignment if they want to into a ditch which would
be safer as far as I'm concerned. I personally don't think that anybody
is going to be able to tell anyone that putting parking outside of a bike
trail, to have cars cross that trail is going to be safer in anyway and
that's not what we're approving. What we're saying is we'd like it to be
as safe or safer than what's out there. I think that's our job. You can
do what you want but I would like to at least, for myself, I would like to
hear comments related to the trail and not to the parking because we can't
do anything about the parking. The Park board has no authority whatsoever
and we can't do anything about the road design. That's not our job.
Eric Rivkin: I will try to accommodate you about the trail but I think
you'll find that it's inseparable. My name is Eric Rivkin. I live at
6095 Stellar Court. I have some overheads that show different trail
positions and sizes that, as Gary said, they...beyond what has been shown
in letters and seen on the overheads here. I want you to see them so the
public can all see them so the engineering office can comment on it. I
have hard copies that I'll pass out to you of the overheads. This is just
to summarize our objectives here. First thing that's a priority is to
keep the city trail designation. One of the, I guess if we would take a
vote on it today, I don't know whether or not everybody would favor an off
road trail as opposed to something that's sitting on the street right now
but everybody's feelings about it are more than just emotional. I think
they're one of safety. That what we have is really a line on the road.
We don't really have a trail and I think that is probably a fair
assessment. Making the road narrower, we're not going to address that
......,
.......",
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
March 21, 1989 - Page 7
,.....
here tonight, in front of the Council of course and putting parking back
where it's needed. Encroachment is also an issue and as far as cost is
concerned, we of course want to take advantage of the restoration and.
include trail safety, aesthetics and parking features all at once. This
is ideal if it can be done. We're not going to decide it here but at
least we want to keep our objectives in focus. One of the first options
here is keeping the road the way it is. Curb to curb. Remove the center
lines of the road to accommodate a 10 foot parking stripe along the entire
roadway so you could get a 5 foot greenway or boulevard as Lori calls it
on the north side over the watermain and a 6 foot paved trail. I guess
we've kind of toned down the width of the trail to 6 feet rather than 8
feet. 5 seemed a little too narrow but it's up for debate and feel 6 foot
is adequate. That gives you enough room for having a snow removal or
place for both the trail and the street. When you look at what happens to
the retaining wall, things get a little different here. We've got the
watermain on the other side of the road at that point so that you don't
have to move the retaining wall once again. You narrow the trail down to
4 or 5 feet, depending on where you meausre, and the feeling is that that
may be a bit uncomfortable or even dangerous because you could run off the
road if you're trying to by-pass somebody. You've got a stone wall there.
You're going to be riding along and you're going to scrape your elbows.
You're at arms length away from sticking your arm out into a traffic lane
so that's why this isn't favorable. The costs here that you see here,
,.....this is probably the least expensive option to put a trail in because the
. ~oad is staying the way it is. We're not moving any curbs. I did get
some quotations on the phone from Midwest Asphalt. Based on the length of
the road and everything and the price that is covered with some quotations
of bids that we have gotten recently on asphalt, it might cost, a 5 foot
trail at $13,433.00. A 6 foot trail goes up about $1,600.00. The
sealcoating, restriping, replacement of the north side curb and
restoration, that's going to be done anyway so that's kind of a constant
through all of these different options. One of the things that it doesn't
do in accomplishing our objectives is that the road is too big and fast.
We don't get a chance to narrow the road. We don't have any snow storage
with the wall. You've got a dangerous trail with the wall and the off
center line might be a problem. Gary had mentioned that it's possible
that the State mayor may not approve putting the road off center because
of the problems now have shifted. If you do that substantially, I don't
know that a 5 foot extension or not but that has to be determined.
Another option here is the first option that narrows the road to the 20
foot minimum width. I was told by Chuck at MnDot that 20 feet is the
minimum size for a low density collector State Aid road. You've got to
have barrier curbs. I was told that 10 foot is the minimum for parking.
If you can get 8 'foot out of this, it's going to be better because you
have less encroachment over on whatever side the parking is on.
Hasek: Quick question. You said the low density, you're talking about
the traffic volume obviously?
~ric Rivkin: Yes.
Hasek: What kind of numbers was he talking about?
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
March 21, 1989 - Page 8
--'
Eric Rivkin: Okay, low density collector, from my understanding is
anywhere from a 200 to 3,000 ADT, average daily travel. Our road measures
about 700 and it was designed for 950 so it's extremely low.
Hasek: Yes, but it also, the ADT's were for a major collector. It starts
at 500 and goes up to like something too so you follow them both together?
Eric Rivkin: I got the impression from Chuck that this road qualifies as
a low density collector.
Hasek: Would it qualify for a low density collector also after it was
connected to TH 4l?
Warren: If maybe I could add in. The road, according to the assign
ADT...falls under the low density collector status. MnDot, this is Mr.
Weiselbaum that we're talking with here, when MnDot looks at a State Aid
road, they have a basic criteria that qualifies it as a State Aid road.
Then it really is looked at as a high density collector as a minimal. Now
this is where the variance process and all those other things corne into
play. They look at specific requests and try to be negotiable here but
their criteria for that low density collector is 200 to 3,000 ADT. A high
density collector starts at 1,000 and goes to 3,000 so they do have
overlaps. So the 915 ADT design is getting close to a high density
collector.
--'
Hasek: But it's still below?
Warren: It's still below that magic 1,000.
Hasek: That's interesting because Chuck is the same guy that I talked to
so now we're getting a different story from the same person.
Eric Rivkin: They gave you an equation that they use to figure the design
level ADT. They take the actual... By doing this, on this option, the
center line would be moved 4 feet and we could entertain the idea of a
parking bays. For relative costs comparisons, I just picked out of the
air that we might have typically 3 parking bays, 10 foot wide, 200 feet
long. That's very large. I'm being conservative about it. That doesn't
mean that what ~'m proposing is just something that's common throughout
different options. We do have a wider encroachment because we're adding
from the existing curb, we're adding 2 feet to the other side where the
curb for the 10 foot parking bay would end. On the north side you have a
comfortable green leg with a paved trail. Again, with the retaining wall,
we still have the same problem of leaving the curb in relatively the same
place of having it too narrow there. The cost of doing this kind of a
project though is a lot, $41,000.00. That's almost the $50,000.00 you had
brought up and it's pretty close to your option 2. The disadvantages
again are still you've got a dangerous trail in the wall and the trail has
no...at that point. That may be a debateable issue that the Council...
The third and last option that I'm going to present, as a modification of
option 6, only we're keeping the central line where it is. It doesn't
change... Both, because this curb is going to get restored anyway,
I didn't include the cost in any of the options to restore that but the
...."
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
March 21, 1989 - Page 9
",..,..
other curb also moves in and we would have to slide the road 4 feet to the
south to do this. One benefit is on the north side you have a wider green
strip and the wall, you have a comfortable passageway there with the green
strip that you can put into...comfort zone and emergency passes and that
type of thing. It would be about the same additional cost as option 6
because we're just basically shifting, we've got the curb in, again we're
replacing that but we're adding green area that's really shifting black
dirt from one side of the street to the other so it stays about the same.
From what I understood, we would keep the State Aid funds because these
options meet State standards. . If we went off of standards, that we would
be jeopardizing the refund. That was my understanding from Chuck. We
just simply reduce the road by a foot, we don't get back a foot's worth of
funding. We get back 100% if we were going to go with a variance or
something. They may accept the road design but it wouldn't be State
fundable anymore and therefore we'd have to give back the money. That was
my understanding. Okay so are there any questions?
Boyt: I have a real question about the cost. That we haven't been able
to put trails in for these dollar amounts at all. Have we Lori? The
costs for the trails that we're looking at Carver Beach Road are a lot
higher than this?
Sietsema: Right. We've got a lot more intrusions, obstacles that we have
~to go around in that area too.
Warren: You've got concrete on Carver Beach Road too.
Boyt: What's the dollar amount on Laredo? Do you remember? I can't
imagine that we can put trails in for $16,000.00. That might be just the
bituminous material but is it everything else included?
Eric Rivkin: No, it's just laying 4 inches...
Boyt: And that's where we run into lots and lots of dollars and we
don't have the dollars to do that.
Eric Rivkin: I'm familiar with blacktopping. I did a development
in Minnetonka. These figures are... If you have a 6 foot wide by 4 inch
compacted to 2 inch bituminous trail, right now I was quoted by Midwest at
a figure higher than this but I'm using a figure that's as recent bids to
the City of Chanhassen. $4.65 a square yard. The person I talked to
there is familiar with Lake Lucy Road. He knows the map. He knows the
road. I said okay, a watermain just went in. You've got the dirt.
You've got it compacted. you've got a clear shot 1 mile long. You've
got, no streets are in the way so this is pretty close to realistic. It's
in the ballpark. This is laying it down and pressing it in place.
Warren: I might add that we've requested that the Lake Lucy trunk
~watermain contractor...to take a look at the alternates to give us a cost
estimate also which we hope to have by the end of his week which won't
help you tonight but I think the dollars, it's very hard to make sure
you're comparing apples to apples. The dollars, I hope we have a little
better handle on it this week.
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
March 21, 1989 - Page 10
.....,.,
Hasek: Is that, you got subgrade in and everything? You've got ag lime
or whatever underneath it?
Eric Rivkin: The cost for putting in the parking bays, we would not be
required to dig up the blacktop to put in these green lanes. Dick Koppe,
consultant to the City, he's a consulting engineer, told me that he's done
this quite a few times in medians. When you've got to put in a median you
put asphalt or concrete curbing right on the asphalt, put the dirt in, put
the sod in and that's it. He says it works out pretty well. Sometimes
even better at water retention than taking up blacktop and resurfacing.
So he's the one that suggested to me to do this and he said also, when you
want to put in extra parking pads, you just simply scrape it up and
there's 8 foot blacktop already there. He says that will work out.
That's a plus. I was happy to hear that because it reduced the cost, the
cost of digging up the blacktop was around $16,000.00 and that was also
from Midwest. They would sawcut the road and take it up and recycle it.
Additional topsoil, reseeding and the topsoil itself is going for
$3,500.00 an acre right now. That's just over the phone. That's the
going rate. It wasn't included as part of the bid package or anything so
the totals here, you add 25% for city costs and you get $24,000.00.
That's wrong, I'm sorry. The total for the road modification, because
we're moving in the curb, replacing the curb was very expensive. $3.00 a
running foot is the going rate. $50,600.00 is the cost. So these are in
the ballpark. Getting back to the parking pads. We've already got 8 foot -'
blacktop already there so adding, we'd have to add 2 feet to make the 10
foot State required minimum for parking width. If we can get the 8 foot,
we don't have to put this, add in the...
Mady: I have a question, I want Eric to answer and Gary. If the Council
were to vote to remove the trail, I'm hearing that you need 10 feet to
have a parking pad. It's an 8 foot width now. Does that mean that this
now still requires a variance from the State?
Warren: I think it would be something that we would definitely have to
run through the State. If we pulled them off and let them go to a parking
lane, we would have to go to the State no matter whether we called it,
even if we said it was going to be a 10 foot lane, we would still have to
run it through the State to get the lane approved.
Mady: So it sounds like it's a variance no matter what we do?
Hasek: You need a variance for 2 reasons. One because it moves the...of
the road. The second thing is the perception as you drive down the road.
The reason you don't let you move it off center is because when those
lines are covered and you're out there driving the road when you don't
know what's going on, you assume that the center line is in the center of
the road. You move it off the center, I mean who's liable at that point?
That's the biggest concern they have is the perception of the center line.
Eric Rivkin: That's one thing that Chuck mentioned about the 28 foot
width. If the center is in the center and you've got curbs on either
side, it'd be right down the middle in that option. If we do move the
......",
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
March 21, 1989 - Page 11
""
center
not be
saying
in how
of the
line and just make a parking lane on the other side, it mayor may
an issue. However, I think Brian received a letter from the State
that it would be okay to move this line off center so I guess it's
they interpret and who you talk to. They kind of lose application
standards.
Hasek:
Well Chuck is the one who's in charge of that section.
Warren: Chuck is in charge of the State Aid section, that's correct. So
as far as what's allowable, it really comes from his office. Likewise any
financial considerations. I think what you're seeing is kind of calling
up the IRS to 5 different people to get the answer and you get 5 different
answers because there is some subjective reasoning I think being applied
to these standards which I guess needs to be that way. What the process
is that you basically formulate a proposal that you think meets what you
want to do and submit it to them and then you get a readout from them at
that time. Right now all they're doing is guessing.
Hasek: I know we've had the real experience of having to put together a
design for intersections for various things in the office and send it off
to MnDot and it gets approved until it gets to that end office and all of
a sudden they pull a policy out of the book. Even though it's been
approved through 5 or 6 different departments and department heads, you
~et to that last guy and he pulls a policy out to do it, he can shut the
~hole thing down. We've had projects that we thought were in line, ready
to go, financing and everything was all set and all of a sudden it gets to
the last man and boom, it's done.
Eric Rivkin: I was under the impression that if you make it clean to
standards, that you wouldn't need variances and have to go through that
lengthy and painful process. Just kind of like dealing with the IRS. You
just keep things really clean and you're not going to get called in for an
audit so to speak. ...by somebody in the front office saying, whoops.
That's why these were fine tuned. One keeping the roadway at the same
State standard and then one at another State standard with as many State
standard features as we possibly could. So I was basing it on ours and I
had a conversation with Gary...and with the residents. My expectations
tonight are that maybe it would be possible to come up with a
recommendation to have an off street trail of whatever design but of
course subject to the approval of the State. This is a recommendation
board. I understand it's not something that would make a decision so is
there some recommendation format?
Boyt: If we make that recommendation, we have to pay for that trail. It
comes out of the Park and Rec funds. You understand that right?
Eric Rivkin: Yes.
,.....Boyt:
We don't have the funds.
Hasek: By approving an off street trail, we're basically saying we don't
want the trail there. We can't do that. We can't do that. That's
against our job up here. We've got the trail in place by all of the
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
March 21, 1989 - Page 12
~
policies and objectives and goals and everything that we've got to direct
what we do. It's there. The only thing we can do is suggest that if
there's a safer way of doing it, that we would approve that but we
certainly can not take the trail off of there and not have the funds to
replace it. That's ludicrous.
Boyt: It's not fair to the rest of Chanhassen. I don't think it is for
us to recommend taking the trail off and replacing it, say 2 years when we
do have the funds when the rest of Chanhassen is waiting for their trails
and they have to wait and we do one trail a year. We don't have the funds
unless someone pushed for a trail referendum. I think that's the only way
that your road could get done before everyone else gets done.
Brian Tichy: My name is Brian Tichy. I live at 1471 Lake Lucy Road. On
March 6th a number of the residents of both Pheasant Hills and people that
live on Lake Lucy Road got together. We were discussing the issues. What
to do with the parking solution and the trail situation. We came up with
3 or 4 I guess proposals. Eric was at the meeting and a number of the
people were at that meeting. There were 4 proposals then that would be a
compromise from both parking and biking on Lake Lucy Road. We understood
the cost situations. Safety was discussed. We felt that on street bike
trails or routes, this is more of a lane on the road, a line on the road
where a bike is not a lane. Any type of bike trail on a road is not
necessarily the safest option. From a cost standpoint, we understand that
the money that is used to build a trail off street comes out of building ~
permits for new construction. Is that correct?
Hasek: Yes. There are several sources for it. That's one of them.
Sietsema: It would come out of the trail dedication fund which comes off
of building permits.
Brian Tichy: That's the vehicle we felt that would fund an off street
trail. For an option that we have come up with, or options that we've
come up with, I have a transparency here I can also show you to give you a
better idea. The op~ion A, some of these are similar to what Eric came up
with and Eric was a part of this committee. The road at this point is 36
feet wide. On Option A we came up with an 8 foot parking width which
again talking to State and MnOot and Chuck Weisenbaum?
Warren: Wichelbaum.
Brian Tichy: At that time he indicated an 8 foot parking width is
consistent with State policy. Is it 19 feet? 6 feet? I don't know. It
could be 8 feet. Your guess is as good as mine. There would be a
variance in option A to limit the travel lanes down to 11 feet from 12
feet in both directions and that would be necessary to get a variance from
the State. They provide a 6 foot multi-use bike lane on the north side.
Again, option B you can keep the 12 foot auto lanes and go to a 4 foot
multi-traffic bike lane. Whether it's horse back riding or walking. ~
Whatever. Option C and 0, going to what Eric had just spoke about, I
don't need to be repetitious here but those are similar to what Eric
expanded on earlier. The cities of Minnetonka and Hopkins at this time,
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
March 21, 1989 - Page 13
,.....
for a road of this type, a road similar to this would be Baker Road which
is a mile long connecting Minnetonka Blvd. and TH 7. It's 36 feet wide.
They provide parking on one side of the road. Two 12 foot auto lanes and
a 6 foot bike route that's designated as a bike route. There is no
parking on the 6 foot side of the road. The parking side of the road, let
me rephrase this, the bike traffic must flow with the traffic on the road.
So on the 6 foot side of the road where there's no parking, the car
traffic, the car and bike traffic follow on the same path in the same
direction. On the 8 foot side of the road, if there's a car parked, the
bike would avoid the car and then get back on the bike lane. That is what
the cities of Minnetonka and Hopkins do with a similiar situation.
Tonkawood Road is another example of a road that is a high density
collector road, both of them are, they both qualify for the amount of
traffic. Almost identical situations to Lake Lucy and they came back with
the bike route system through Hopkins... Some of the road in spots on
Tonkawood Road and Baker Road will go down to 3 feet depending on curves
in the road and the widths of the road. It depends on the type of road
that's housing the property lines in the area.
Schroers: On the 8 foot side of the road, does a bicycle have to go out
into the lane of traffic to go around the car and then go back in?
Brian Tichy: Yes. We felt this was a compromise situation for both
~arking and biking. We didn't feel that Lake Lucy Road, a number of us
~ave lived there a number of years and the parking situation previous to
this, very seldom do you see cars parked in the road unless there's a
special occasion. The amount of parking that will be on the road will not
be like a city street where there are cars lining the road...
Mady: ...the option of basically just leaving everything as stands,
trails on both sides. Bike trails on both sides of the road and handling
the parking need as we handle it every other place in the city that has no
parking in that if you have a special event, just handle it as a special
event and you either contact the Sheriff or contact the City or you do
like you do in some other communities where the residents who have those
needs from time to time are actually issued little cards that allow them
to do that. Is that not an option that we have at this point without
spending...?
Hasek: There's a ton of things that could be an option. I'll bet you
I've seen 16 different designs and nobody can comment if the State is
going to go with anyone of them. I don't understand why we keep looking
at designs. It doesn't make any sense. It's not our job. And I don't
mean to be cold. It's just, you know, we're not the body that can do
anything for you with your parking. All we can do is make suggestions on
the trail and I feel very strongly that the trail has to stay in this
alignment. Whether it's on the road or off the road, it makes no
difference to me. As long as it's as safe or safer than what's out there
~because if we don't do that, we are going against everything that is our
job to do and that is to protect the public health, safety and welfare.
You take a trail off of there and put it in an alignment that's less safe
for the public, I would almost bet that the City could be sued at that
point for making that decision. Only for something that's at least a
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
March 21, 1989 - Page 14
-'"
given safeness out there to something that's less safe. That's a
conscience decision to make something less safe. That's our job. As far
as I'm concerned, you guys can park 5~,~~~ cars out there everyday as far
as I'm concerned. That's not the problem with me. The problem with me is
that the trail stays in that alignment and we can't do anything to approve
that. It's not a matter of us picking an option out of the 16 or 3~ or 5~
options that come before us.
Brian Tichy: The situation that occurred with the people that live on the
road and were assessed for the construction of the road, was previous to
the reconstruction of the road, we had a crummy blacktop road that was in
need of repair.
Hasek: And it was an rural section too. Not an urban section.
Brian Tichy: That's right and parking was available. The horseback
riding and other functions of the road were available to all of us. We,
at the time the road was constructed, were not given notice by the Park
and Rec as to no parking being made a project on the road. We have
letters to the effect of that but nothing of a public hearing. Lori may
comment on that. I don't know if you were involved in that at time but
that's important to us. The people that live on the road and you're
paying for the construction of the road...
Hasek: But there were public hearings all along when this thing was -'
approved over the course of it. How long did it take to get it approved?
Warren: The feasibility study was done in 1985, early 1986. There were
public hearings as a part of that. The section that was shown as a part
of the public hearings did show part of it being a travel bike lane.
Brian Tichy: Those were options at the time. I'm sure before you were
involved here.
Warren: But I have the documents...
Brian Tichy:
who lived on
final option
us and we're
You'll be hard pressed to find someone that was a resident
the road who was informed of the bike lane, parking as a
until it had been decided. It's a frustrating experience for
trying to...
Hasek: Sure. I understand. I'd be pissed off too.
Brian Tichy: Well, it's gotten to that stage. Are there any other
questions of me?
Willard Johnson: I'm going to talk to you as a citizen. I'm Willard
Johnson. I live on 63rd Street. r have no way, one way or the other on
park trails but we got the road there. We've waited for many years. I've
driven it more than most of these people. I've only lived there for 33
years. Why don't you just...r don't understand. r don't feel you should
spend the taxpayers money to rebuild the road for just a few people that
live along there. First the City doesn't owe the people parking. Half
.....",
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
March 21, 1989 - Page 15
,.....
these people have got 5 acre lots so there's no reason they have to have
on street parking. Occasionally, Thanksgiving, parties, whatever but I
don't see nothing wrong with keeping the trails the way they are. You can
have his own parking in his own yard or you issue a ticket for them.
Spending $60,000.00 of mine and everybody elses is a waste of money.
Scott: My name is Scott (?). I live at 1206 Lake Lucy Road and that was
a great idea. I definitely stand behind that. Just issue permits for
them to park and stuff and as far as the jogging goes and stuff, I'm not
crazy about having a track in my front yard anyway. I live real close to
the road and I do have a concern.
Hasek: Which side? On the north side?
Scott: Yes. I'm the one with the little picket fence and I really don't
want no track in my front yard. If you can put it on the other side,
fine. I should have a right to say what I feel. I thought that cured the
whole problem with the parking and the jogging, you'll have to handle that
in your other ways. Have more meetings but I have to say for myself I'm
not interested in you moving in on me. Okay? Thank you.
Judy Schaefer: My name is Judy Schaefer. I live at 6501 Devonshire
~r i ve. As far as use of the tra i 1 goes, I use it regular ly. I have 4
~ons. They all use it. They ride bikes. They ride their skateboards on
it. We all use but not during the winter but during the summer, we're out
there every day and I want to make sure that they stay safe. I would hate
to see my kids riding skateboards on 4 feet. That just isn't safe.
Mary Cordell: My name is Mary Cordell and I have property along Lake Lucy
Road. First of all, I'd like to say something, an interpretation that I
had from the City Council meeting and that was, some of the Council
members were saying that any trail restoration, etc. would corne out of the
City's water money and that they would be paying for it. One council
member said, instead of spending $60,000.00 for a trail or whatever, I'd
just as soon put in the next water tower or something to that effect. So
it was ~y understanding, as a person at the Council meeting, that the
funds would corne out of the water money. The watermain project.
Boyt: I think Gary addressed that earlier. That's not the way it's going
to be handled anymore.
Warren: It was thought initially that that could be the case but the fund
closings that just occurred and the transfers that had to be made, right
now the best guesstimate is that we have enough to put the watermain in
and we don't have any surplus that we could allocate at this time.
Mary Cordell: Okay, but that was my understanding from the meeting.
Also, it seems that the restoration, when they're digging on the property
~hich is going to be on our property when they're on the north side,
~hey're digging and restoration has to be done. I think if you're looking
at putting in an off street trail, this is the time to do it because it's
already dug up. The costs have been maybe cut in half by already
accomplishing that portion of it so this might be, taking in the big
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
March 21, 1989 - page 16
...-"
picture, this might be the most cost effective time to put an off street
trail in. I have young children. One is 4 and one if 6 and I do not feel
that the current trails are safe at all. You have that traffic on there
right now. It's not very high but the speed of the cars is high. There
are some somewhat blind corners on the road and there are a lot of young
children in the area. Go up in Pheasant Hills which has now 80 to 90
homesites in Lake Lucy Highlands. There are a lot of young children there
and they are not able to safely use the trails so for me safety is an
issue too. From moving it on street to off street which I will favor. I
just think that being that the digging is going on and the watermain is
going in, that this would be an opportune time to put in an off street
trail and probably at a lesser cost.
Hasek: I called Minnetonka, that's where I grew up and I realize that
they have trails. I've been using that trail system, similar to what we
have in place out here for years. In fact most of their trails, in
talking with the planner and public safety administrater or director out
there, are of this type. They are moving to move them off of the
alignment in Minnetonka but not because they... I find it curious that we
haven't seen any alignments on the south side of the road yet. Is there a
reason why nobody's taken a look at that? We've had 16 designs and
there's not a single one for a trail on the south. Park's on the south
but not the trail.
Mary Cordell: I think because the watermain is going in on the north '""""'"
side.
Hasek: Everybody just kind of thought, but I've seen that the watermain
is on the south side on some of them too. Is it bouncy through the
alignment?
Warren: Only where the line-ups don't...There's a 300 foot section where
we're jacking under to get past that but because our trunk system, we're
connecting on Galpin and on Powers, the connections are available on the
north side. Plus the topography is a lot tougher on the south side.
Hasek: But that would just mean that the trail would be up and down as
opposed to flat. Has anybody looked at putting it on the south side?
Warren: I think one of the reasons, one of the main reasons why it's
being looked at at this time as an off street trail is because of the
economies that could be accomplished as a part of the restoration of the
watermain. That's the only reason. If you go to the south side, then
you're looking at completely starting from scratch on grading and
everything else. The costs would go up considerably.
Schroers: Just as a point of interest, it is policy of this Commission to
have off street trail wherever feasible and practical and it is economics
a lot of times that governs whether or not it is feasible. We are in
favor of off street trails where we can have them. Is there anyone else
that has anything to add?
'--'
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
March 21, 1989 - Page 17
I""""
Tom Steinkamp: Tom Steinkamp. I live at 1771 pheasant Circle. I was to
the Tichy's meeting and I'm seeing all 16 or 18 or whatever designs have
been developed and I guess I came here tonight hoping that somebody had
$60,000.00 in your back pocket to spend but I can see that's not going to
happen. I guess I've talked to a lot of the people in Pheasant Hills and
maybe if I can represent them, all of the people that I've talked to want
to keep the trail system. Want to keep it at least as good as it is. If
there's some way that you folks could fund a better trail, and I think you
folks would like to do that if you could fund it but I can see here that
you can't. I think the consensus of the neighbors in our development is
that we like the trail. We want the trail. If you can accommodate the
folks in the parking, if the city can accomodate the folks who need
parking, fine but not at the expense of the trail. We want the trail at
least as good as it is, if not better. Thank you.
Resident: ...earlier today. There were construction cars on both sides
in the trails today next door to the Tichy's. You had all you wanted to
do to get two cars through so I guess if they're talking width, here's a
for instance. You've barely got enough room for 2 cars to meet today on
the center line. I think you're talking about making off street parking
right along side...hit the road.
~Brian Tichy: That's a truck full of bricks by the way.
Resident: I know the difference between a truck and a car. It's on the
curb man. I checked... The trucks were out to the edge of the curb and
you couldn't get around them unless you run into the shoulder. It was
tight in the middle. I know a truck from a car. I've been in the
business long enough.
Al Harvey: My name's Al Harvey and I live at 1430 Lake Lucy Road. We
built in 1965. The 11 acres there. We enjoy the country like it is.
Trails are a nuisance. People run buy. They throw their pop cans or
papers. They bring their dogs through your yard. Most of them are on a
leash but once in a while our dog isn't and it chases their dog. It's
kind of, I don't want you coming any closer on the north. That's
basically what I'm saying. Our trees, we planted those trees when we
built in 1965. They're getting to be a nice size tree now. You come
closer to them and pretty soon the evergreens have to be cut. They've got
nothing. Until they get sewer in that area, I would like to see the road
left the way it is. Then go ahead and do your final trails. When you
give me sewer, I'll give you a trail because I need sewer. My front yard
is full of septic tank and drainfields. If you come any closer, I don't
know where I'll go. I'm waiting for construction to get through so I can
handle the situation then. So I would like to see no more added money put
in that area on trails, off street. Use what we've got. But I would like
to see the signs changed. Rather than a bike trail, put a bike route so
rather than just taking them down completely so they'd be used like the
~~oad was used prior. We had a blacktop road. We went to a gravel road.
Ne've got dust. We've had a lot of things there in 20 years but now we've
got a good road and acceptable trail but take down the signs so you can
use the road the way you want to use it. If you want to walk, you walk.
If you want to ride your bike, you ride your bike. If you want to park,
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
March 21, 1989 - Page 18
...."
you park. I think the signs are very misleading. Thank you.
Mark Williams: I'm Mark Williams. I live at 1655 Lake Lucy. First a
question for the council. When the trail was initially put in in
conjunction with the new Lake Lucy Road, was any funding from your
commission used for that trail system at that time?
Sietsema: No.
Mark Williams: The point being that no park board funds have been used
for trails in that area per se? It was basically done kind of as a piggy
back along with the State road. Is that correct?
Sietsema: Yes.
Hasek: The next question you should ask is, did we have a trail fee at
that time?
Sietsema: No.
Mark Williams: I don't know where various funds and necessities, things
that I've paid were included in my house have gone but I assume that some
of those have gone towards something that is funded this commission in
some small way. So in that respect, I think that our neighborhood has an
obligation or a right to use some of those funds and come up with a trail ~
that we consider to be safe for that neighborhood. I definitely feel that
this present trail configuration is not safe at all and at some point in
time, maybe next year or 5 years from now, we'll be saying we should have
done something. That trail is going to lead to some sort of accident and
I pray to God it's not my kids someday when he's old enough to ride his
bike on that road. I've noticed numerous times lately that that road is
being used as a thoroughfare and you find people going 50 mph on that
road. That is not a safe condition to have people going at those speeds
along curves 'like that with kids riding bikes. Whatever. It is not safe
and that is my primary consideration in this whole thing. Parking is a
minor concern. It can be handled by permits, whatever but safety is the
primary issue here and if we don't address this here, I think years from
now somebody can look back at this and say, I wish I would have done
something.
Boyt: There is a group called the Public Safety Commission and if you see
cars that are going too fast on a regular basis, you can go into the
Public Safety Commission and talk to them about it. They're the people
that would recommend a radar check on that road.
Mark Williams: I think that's something that everybody should consider.
Mady: To give you some information on spending some money in that area,
we've stated a number of times we do have very limited funds. In that
area, this Commission is looking to put a park real strongly. The
Pheasant Hills area, the land alone is probably going to cost us well over
$50,000.00. We're not real sure where that money's going to come from
right now which is too bad.
.-.If!
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
March 21, 1989 - Page 19
,-.
Boyt: But that's a separate fund from the trail fund.
Mady: Still, because we get maybe a certain amount of money from your
specific neighborhood, you're sharing in the, the trail system isn't just
a trail system for your particular neighborhood. It's a community wide
thing. People who live outside of your neighborhood will be on that
trail. They'll be passing through. They'll be going to the park in
Pheasant Hills. The park in Curry Farms which hopefully will be developed
in a couple of years. So it's actually a community thing. Trails is a
community item. It's not a neighborhood item. The whole community shares
in it. That's why this commission pushed twice for a trail referendum to
be passed so we would have the funds to do this. We recognize that the
Lake Lucy Road trail being on the street is not very safe. We know that.
We wouldn't have asked for that initially. None of us were here when that
got put on. It was a compromise at best then. It recognized some of the
concerns of the residents at that point in time and not to encroach
further into their property and I believe that's probably how that all
came about. If we had the opportunity to do it differently, we would have
done it differently. But we have a number of areas that we've been having
residents scream for trails for the past 3 years. So as we have funding
available, those are going. We've gotten the one up by school her~ just
approved this past 2 weeks and we've gotten a couple others that have been
~hown to be terribly unsafe. There's a trail now in existence and those
3re the ones that are being addressed. It may not be the best in the
world but it's a heck of a lot better than what we have in some cases
which is basically a 24 foot wide road and nothing.
Schroers: It wouldn't be ethical or fair to tear out an existing trail
and replace it with a new one in the same area before residents in other
parts of the city that don't have a trail have it.
Mark Williams: I thought you just stated that trails were a community
type thing as opposed to a neighborhood.
Boyt: That's what we're trying to meet the needs of the whole community.
Schroers: That's exactly what we're saying.
Mady: If we had more money we'd do it all.
Terry O'Brien: My name is Terry O'Brien and I live on 1420 Lake Lucy
Road. I've lived there 25 years. I think the city trails are a community
thing. I don't know where the community was when I paid my assessments
for that road. They were paying much on those trails. Now that it's
there, I had to pay for it, let's not make another one. That's probably
one of the best roads in the State. Now you want to tear it up and screw
it up. Let's leave it alone. ...We don't need more trails off on this
~side. Like I say, it's a community trail, some of these people are so
. ~oncerned, start pitching in a little bit of money. I'll pay more in
assessments this year and last year then I paid for my whole farm. I
think some of these people better think of that when they start saying
they want more trails and more of this and more of that. That's all I've
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
March 21, 1989 - Page 20
..."",
got to say.
Scott: Back to the safety thing of it all. If the joggers, and I'm
concerned too about that, down Powers Blvd. right? Down by the church
there. Remember they always had a speed trap there. Everybody does 35
mph there. Why can't they do the same on Lake Lucy and improve the
safety?
Hasek: Talk to your Public Safety Commission.
Sietsema: The Public Safety Commission meets the third Thursday of the
month.
Hasek: Just for your own information, the reason I started using
Lake Lucy Road when I moved in here 6 years ago since I got a ticket there
and it just drove me nuts. I guess I was going 33 in the 30 at that time
and they were tagging for 31. I found Lake Lucy Road and that's the last
time I drove the bridge out of Excelsior. I go Galpin Lake Road to Lake
Lucy so I've driven Lake Lucy Road for 6 years. I know how crummy it used
to be.
Schroers": Do we have anything else?
Joe Morin: My name is Joe Morin. I'm building a house at 1441 Lake Lucy
Road. In Eden prairie where I live there's a road called Linden Road and .-,.
it's a road about the same size as Lake Lucy Road and on either side of
the road they have what they call a bike route. It's posted on both
sides. There aren't any no parking signs and when people have
Thanksgiving or Christmas and stuff they park on the road there and it's
still not a problem. That might be the easiest solution to this problem.
Just post it as a bike route. There's a couple other points. I don't
think it's really safe for 3 or 4 year old kids to be skatboarding on that
road. I would like to see an off site trail someday but I can understand
the feelings of our neighbors to the north too so it's a tough problem. I
have a piece of advice for you though. You talk about things not being
fair. If you don't do it here, don't it there, but I think if you want a
trail system in this community, you're going to have to start forging some
wings to the chain and say hey, let's put it in whether it's fair or not.
Otherwise, you're not going to get anything done.
Schroers: Anything else? We do have some other things on the agenda
tonight so we're going to have to...
Eric Rivkin: I just wanted to briefly state, address the safety issue one
more time. It needs to be said. The Schroeders who own a lot on
Lake Lucy Road next to this gentleman here, put up a for sale sign and I
asked her why they were selling their house. She said, I fear for the
life of my kids on that road. Now we're losing people and a lot of people
feel the same way about the safety. I know it's a real emotional issue
and I would conjecture that the reason...for 14 years. I conjecture that
the reason that people don't...any accidents is because they are good and
sensible parents that don't send their little children on the roads like
that. The same is true here. People aren't going to send their kids out
....""
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
March 21, 1989 - Page 21
...",,/
on this road. They should be on this road. They should have a safe
passage between the park system. Between these links around the
neighborhood, the community as you want to refer to it now. It's a real
issue and it isn't going to go away. I hope you never have to regret it.
Boyt: That's the reason that a lot of us worked real hard to get a trail
referendum passed. We live in areas with .unsafe roads. We have children.
We would like our children to be able to walk to a park or to school
safely and right now they can't. The citizens of Chanhassen voted down
the trail referendum so we are trying to piecemeal, put together a trail
system bit by bit. We have some trails going in this year. We have plans
for trails next year. We're working on it. It's high priority to us. We
are the first group that ever asked for trails. Before we were here they
thought, let the kids walk on the road. This is the country. We've
always done it. Why shouldn't we always do it. It's not the safest way.
We know that.
Hasek: I think what we're left with, the referendum cost us, and I hate
to push this too much but the referendum cost us getting the trails built
without having to wait and do it piecemeal. If we would have had those
funds, we could have built trails off the road like we really wanted to
do. Now because of the limited funding, we're forced to take advantage of
other ways of getting those trails put in place and on street trails on
projects like this are very real inexpensive. Free to us. We don't have
to pay for them but we get our trail. We're caught between a rock and a ~
hard spot here. We're not going to give up on the referendum to put the
trails in but I think it's important enough ...to be able to swing those 8
people to our side.
Boyt: Do you know that's what it lost by? The trail referendum.
Hasek: I'd like to make a motion.
Schroers: Before we get into that, I would just like to thank everyone
for corning in here tonight and sharing your information with us. I guess
we've closed down the pUblic sector of it right now and just address any
concerns that the commission members might have and when we get to that
point, if we have a motion, we'll entertain it. Jim, do you have anything
you'd like to add?
Mady: I guess all I want to really state is, I think you'll find the
Commission as a whole to a person is wanting to put an off street trail in
there. Taking the striping off the road and allowing parking on both
sides of that road or one side of that road is not going to improve the
safety in any way, shape or form. There's no one here that I think could
say that and keep a straight face. What I want us to do, I hope, is keep
at least what we have. Not give up something. If the City takes a big .
step backwards and allows parking on that road at the expense of removing
the trail, I think we've all lost. Sitting through the council meetings
where this item has been discussed, it appears that the parking issue
really isn't a great need outside of an occasional party time type of
situation and so to lose what little bit of safety we have because of
that, to me is just outrageous. I just hope when this goes to Council,
-"
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
March 21, 1989 - Page 22
"
that they recognize that removing what little bit of safety we have, and
we all recognize it as not much, just simply doesn't make a lot of sense.
There are ways of handling the situation without, at this point in time at
least, costing a lot of money. Once the sewer goes through and that's
probably 10 years down the road, the way it sounds, that might be another
opportunity because obviously something's going to have to be torn up and
maybe then the City will have money. I hope we don't have to wait that
long. I sincerely do but until we can get a funds mechansim or source,
we've got situations that are a lot more unsafe in other parts of this
city...real thin now and we need to address those needs also. Those are
my comments.
Robinson: No real comments other than I would like to see it remain the
way it is. Leave the trails the way it is. I don't like spending any
additional dollars from the Park and Rec Commission's standpoint. I'd
like to leave the trail as is.
Boyt: I would always like to see off street trails for safety reasons
but I can't support taking this trail off because we don't have the funds
to build an off street trail. I think if the neighbors are still very
concerned about the trail safety, that they could look at the option of
assessment for having a trail built.
"....,schroers: If I said anything I'd basically just be repeating what's
already been said. I'm all in favor of off street trails. I'd like to
see them wherever we can get them but I don't feel that we can justify
spending the money to build an off street trail there. As a matter of
fact, we don't have the money to build an off street trail there now so I
would like to see the trail stay the same as it is right now. Any trail
is safer than no trail so unless through another way the trail can be made
better or safer, I guess I'd be in favor of keeping it the way it is. Do
you have a motion Ed?
Hasek: Yes. The recommendation from this board to Council with the
background understanding that we feel we have performed according to the
Comprehensive Plan and the duties that are given to us, we have a trail in
an alignment that's in the Comprehensive Plan. We have achieved getting
it in place at little or no expense to the community from the park board
funds. I would like to recommend that this board would agree to any
alignment for a trail along Lake Lucy Road which would be at least as safe
as, by design and based upon the public health, safety and welfare as the
one that's in place. That would be part A I suppose. Part B, that there's
no additional cost to the general community if the trail is realigned.
The third thing would be, that there would be no additional costs to the
funds of the park board for a trail to fit in this realignment.
Schroers: Is there a second to that motion?
~Hasek: Is there anything anyone would like to add?
Boyt: Is that a motion?
Hasek: That's a recommendation.
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
March 21, 1989 - Page 23
....",tI
Robinson: I'll second it.
Schroers: Any additions?
Hasek moved, Schroers seconded that the Park and Recreation Commission
recommend to agree to any alignment for a trail along Lake Lucy Road which
would be at least as safe as, by design and based upon the public health,
safety and welfare, as the one that's in place. That there's no
additional cost to the general community if the trail is realigned.
Finally, that there would be no additional costs to the funds of the park
board for a trail to fit in this realignment. All voted in favor and the
motion carried.
.....,
......,I
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
March 21, 1989 - Page 24
I""""""
'f
REVIEW SOUTHERN PARKLAND PARCELS.
Sietsema: As you may recall, at a previous meeting we had identified a
number of parcels in the southern part of Chanhassen that could
potentially serve as parkland. The referendum did pass. We have
$300,000.00 that can be allocated toward the purchase of parkland in the
southern part of Chanhassen. That was approve to spend on parkland in the
southern part of Chanhassen. We went out and we looked at the different
pieces and on your report you can see the ones that are highlighted. I've
asked Al Klingelhutz to attend the meeting tonight to give us an idea of
what land costs are currently in southern Chanhassen. Keep in mind that
our criteria for parkland in that area is that we wanted something upwards
of 75 acres that would accommodate active as well as passive uses. It
would be south of the TH 212 alignment and centrally located. I think
those are the highlights. With that, I'll ask Al if he wants to step up
to the podium and give us an idea of what kind of money we're looking at.
Boyt: Was it south of the TH 212 alignment or south of Lyman Blvd.? I
thought it was just south of Lyman.
Sietsema: I recall that it was TH 212.
Hasek: I think it was south of Lyman Blvd...
""""
30yt: Well we have an idea but one of the ideas was to have it close to
it. Adjacent to it.
Al Klingelhutz: I've looked at about 6 different parcels here and most of
them are...
Hasek: Let's not talk about the bad ones. Just give us the good ones.
Al Klingelhutz: It's going to be tough to find some land that's been
escalating in Chanhassen the past 3 years, even outside the MUSA line.
Just a few years ago we were selling at around $3,000.00 an acre. Today
the price, the cheapest I've found anyplace is $6,500.00 an acre which is
a big difference. These are asking prices and I think you can buy it for
pretty much less than that. I've talked with several of the different
land owners. I started with Earl Losicks which was the closest to Lyman
Blvd., just south of Chanhassen Hills. He said he wouldn't even think of
selling it until TH 212 alignment was complete and possibility built
because he thinks that if that ever gets sewer in there...valuable
property. Frank Fox, I talked to him, he has 140 acres. That would be
just south of the 62 acres that Earl Losick owns. It's in Section 23. I
don't know if you've got any plat books.
Hasek: We've just got a little...
~Al Klingelhutz: That would be parcel 3 on your maps.
Schroers: What was the first one.
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
March 21, 1989 - Page 25
....,,/
Al Klingelhutz: The first one was just north of parcel 3. Just north of
parcel 3 but it wasn't quite as wide. It's only 60 acres where Frank
Fox's is 140 acres. The line you see at the diagonal there...most of the
trees in there are maple and oak and some basswood and some ash.
Schroers: In your opinion, are they going to be in the right-of-way?
Al Klingelhutz: They will miss the right-of-way. They will be east of
the new proposed right-of-way. It shouldn't touch any of those trees.
Parcel 2, that's the Gil Laurent property. There's another thing that I
think you've probably heard about. That's continuing County Road 17 down
to pioneer Trail. That road would be just to the east of Parcel 2. That
black line where it's south of Lyman, east of Parcel 2. It would cut
through Parcel 3 too in that corner. Gil Laurent, he's grandfathered in
under the 2 1/2 acre lots. I talked to him quite lengthy on this and he
feels that once the TH 212 alignment is approved, he's going to go ahead
with his subdivision and sell them off as lots.
Hasek: Excuse me Al. How big is 2?
Al Klingelhutz: 2 is approximately 80 acres. I believe he sold a piece
off. South of pioneer Trail which currently existed of 11 acres so you
might say he's got 70 acres left north of pioneer Trail. Sever Peterson's
property which is 120 acres and he has grandfathered himself under the 2
1/2 acre. I tr ied to get a hold of Sever all week but I thi nk he's on ..",
vacation because nobody answers the phone there. What I'm trying to
convince him that he could probably sell off either one side or the other
of that road. I had talked to him once before and it sounded like he was
definitely going ahead with the 2 1/2 acre subdivision. You're got the 50
acres owned by Jim Delacy. That would be approximately north of TH 101,
abutting Lyman Blvd.. I talked to Jim on that and he's going to wait for
sewer and water he says before he develops that. I think has made a few
fortunes on buying land at a reasonable price and hanging onto it until he
can subdivide it. Right down here on TH 101, he bought that whole strip
on the Eden prairie side many years ago and then he sold it to developers
for pretty big buck per acre. He did the same thing down in Shady Oak.
That was his first venture. He sold the...developers and when he sold
that he bought those 3 farms and nows be bought a farm down by the track
which is Eden prairie and his son Jim is following his footsteps.
Hasek: Al, where's that parcel? You said it was abutting on the north
side of Lyman Blvd.. Where?
Al Klingelhutz: It's on the south side of Lyman Blvd.. North of number 1
there. ...Roger owns a piece in there and the Deerfoot Trail development
is down in that corner too.
Hasek: How big was that parcel?
~1 Klingelhutz: That's approximately 50 acres. It does have 2 houses on ..",
one 5 acre tract in the southwest corner that abuts onto TH 101 and it has
one house on the northeast corner on 5 acres that abuts Lyman Blvd..
Although that would be a unique piece to put in ballfields because it's
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
March 21, 1989 - Page 26
~
fairly flat and you wouldn't have a lot of land... I think it's going to
be awful tough to buy. Then we go to the Bandimere piece which is number
1 up here. There is a little park where you see that indentation already
there. The balance of the land is about 33 acres. It abuts TH 101, quite
a bit of it does abut on TH 101. There is a fairly flat field on the top
there and then near the road it drops off overlooking the pond along TH
101 there quite rapidly but it isn't too wide a strip. The old farmhouse
and barn and a few other buildings that are there which I would consider
as being worth saving. They're in really bad condition. That could
become available. When we first started talking, Lori and I started
talking about this piece, both Mr. and Mrs. Bandimere were alive. Here
about 6 weeks ago Mrs. Bandimere passed away. Here a couple weeks ago,
Art passed away so now this property is in probate. How long that's going
to take, I don't know. I did talk to, he has a brother and his wife who
have a half interest in that and I talked with his brother's son. He
thought that if we tried to push the probate through as fast as possible,
but it looks like it's going to cost about $6,500.00 an acre. That's the
price he quoted me.
Hasek: But they know we're looking.
Al Klingelhutz: No, I don't think that's true. It's just the fact that
land values have increased. You see what's happened in Chanhassen is you
,-..see all this development coming in. They know the MUSA is going to have
;0 be expanded in the not too distant future and they figure it
might.. .that MUSA line. When they get into that MUSA line, it will be
worth anywhere from $15,000.00 to $18,000.00 per acre. Even if they have
to hold it for 10 years, you can't have a lot better investment.
Schroers: If I understand correctly then, parcels 2, 3 and 4 are really
not available right now?
Al Klin~elhutz: The only way you could possibly get them I guess is you
said there was a public need and you'd probably have to go through
condemnation. I hate to do that to a landowner. There is one other
parcel. That's off of Bluff Creek Drive. It does abut onto pioneer
Trail, part of it on the northwest corner. It was on the market here
about 4 weeks ago, in fact I saw it in the multiple listing. I've been
trying to get ahold of it. It's an investment company with 12 different
owners. I've been trying to get a hold of them to see why it isn't in the
multiple listing book anymore but that was on the market for $5,500.00 an
acre.
Schroers: How many acres was that?
Al Klingelhutz: That was, Bluff Creek Investment has approximately 109
acres. Several acres of this is heavily wooded and with very...means. I
think if any of you are familiar with that area...
""""'iasek: Is that that hole?
Al Klingelhutz: Yes. But I would say there is probably 55 acres on there
that's tillable land and could be, it's quite hilly. All of it is quite
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
March 21, 1989 - Page 27
--'
hilly but I figure there's about 55 acres that doesn't have trees on it.
The rest of it is deep, deep, deep. I guess that's about all the
information I can give you. If you've got any other questions. I'd like
to be able to help you out. I'm sure that pricewise, 2 years ago
$3,000.00 to $3,500.00 an acre would have probably bought most of this
land. Today you're looking at $5,500.00 to $7,000.00 and some of it is
not available.
Hasek:
Bl vd . .
there.
This is
AI, I know that this is out of the area. It's north of Lyman
What about this piece right in here? That's all been farmed
You know what I'm talking about? The railroad tracks go through.
the back side of Hazeltine Industrial Park.
Al Klingelhutz: Audubon Road is where?
Sietsema: To the east.
Hasek: Yes, Audubon Road comes up and buts in here. I'm talking about
north of there. If you go straight across Lyman Blvd..
Hoffman: Lowland.
Hasek: No. This is high.
Al Klingelhutz: That's actually in Chanhassen. It's owned by Chaska ~
Investment Company... I think you're looking at a little higher for that
than some of the prices I've quoted. I thought you were going to point
out my farm.
Hasek: Where is it?
Al Klingelhutz: It's inside the MUSA line.
Hasek: Tony owns all the way over there?
Al Klingelhutz: He owns all of that. There is a portion there that's
owned by Rod Grahams between Audubon Road and where the...plant is there.
The balance of that is all owned by Bernardi Brothers.
Don Ashworth: There's a big outlot on the back of that, on Rod Grahams
house.
Al Klingelhutz: He's got a 40 acre lot on top of that hill up there.
Schroers: Well thank you very much for coming and sharing this
information with us.
Al Klingelhutz: I wish I could have come with better news for you
but I've done the best I could. I did spend quite a little time on the
telephone trying to pick all this stuff up.
...""
Schroers: We really do appreciate it.
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
March 21, 1989 - Page 28
,....
Al Klingelhutz: I really and truly believe that the size parcel you want,
how much parkland is there along Bandimere's site?
Sietsema: That's about 3 acres.
Al Klingelhutz: About 3 acres so you have a total of about 36 acres
there.
Hasek: 36 plus 5 out of the piece north of that when you develop...
Al Klingelhutz: I guess one recommendation I'd like to give the Park
Board, it pertains to Chanhassen Hills. That's got 45-50 homes down
there. Lots of children. I think there's about 8 or 10 acres of land in
there dedicated for park purposes. It seems that all of these
developments, they first build everything up with houses and then they put
in the park. Can there be something done that when the development has a
certain number of homes, that park can be partially used for a ballfield
or something like that? I know it's asking a lot of these people but
we've got these little kids coming over to our house and over the farm and
they haven't got anything to do. They haven't got anyplace to play except
in the street out in front. It does concern me a little bit.
Sietsema:
,....
Al Klingelhutz:
AI, are they developing around that park site yet?
Well, they're getting close to it.
Sietsema: Because the reason why we were waiting on that is we were going
to get the developer to do the rough grading for us.
Al Klingelhutz: I know that. I guess I was here when that was approved.
I'm beginning to wonder if we shouldn't be looking at something a little
bit sooner than developing it the last thing that happens. Another thing,
there is a trail along Lake Susan that you have city dedicated land along
the wetlands there. It probably wouldn't be a bad idea if you could
establish some sort of a trail through that land along say Lake Susan up
to the Lake Susan Park. Right now there's no indication of where these
people could even walk as far as...
Schroers: I think we do have that in our trail plan.
Sietsema: Yes.
Mady: What's Al saying is whether it could facilitate a lot of people to
use it to go through there with mower and cut the grass like we did around
the pond park so people can recognize that that actually is a trailway.
Al Klingelhutz: You might have to put a little bridge over, there's kind
of a creek that runs through there. Last year you wouldn't have any
~roblem.. .
Schroers: Okay, so I guess there's no action required at this time?
Sietsema: Well, I need your direction.
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
March 21, 1989 - Page 29
.....",
Hasek: Let's find a piece of property. Is the piece north of Lyman
Blvd., is the parcel north of Lyman Blvd., south of the Chicago-Milwaukee
St. Paul railroad and east of whatever this is.
Sietsema: County Road 117.
Hasek: This chunk in here. Is that completely out of the possibility?
I know that that's outside of the MUSA line.
Boyt: Isn't that where he said was owned by the...
Hasek: Yes, but Bernardi's. I guess what I'm asking, I wonder if we
could talk to the Bernardi's about it.
Al Klingelhutz: Bernardi's does not touch Lyman Blvd. there.
Hasek: This is the chunk I'm looking at AI. This chunk right here.
There's a farm on this corner. This is all farm back in here and it's all
high and there's, I don't know if there's a power line or something that
goes through at a cockeyed angle through here. This chunk here.
Al Klingelhutz: Yes, that's Bernardi's. That's owned by the
there and I think you'd have an awful hard time buying that.
dairy operation there. That's one person I didn't contact in
because I didn't think there was a chance.
Zeiglers
He's got a
that corner
......",
Hasek: What kind of direction are you looking for Lori? Send us looking
for more parcels or let's try to buy one of these or let's give up?
Sietsema: Do you want me to move ahead on one of these? Take a
recommendation to the City Council?
Boyt: Number one is in our ballpark.
Mady: It sounds like it's the only one in our ballpark.
Boyt: It's adjacent to an existing park. The one that is off of Bluff
Creek Road, it's real close so it would be like a linear park. It would
be long and narrow.
Al Klingelhutz: It's a pretty good sized field there. It's right across,
Hesse Farms adjoins it on the south and west across Bluff Creek Road.
Boyt: There used to be a farm out there.
Al Klingelhutz: There's a silo sitting there.
Hoffman: Number 1 is probably up in the air but being the situation that
bas occurred there but oftentime when that situation does arise, it maybe
up for sale just for the reason that nobody is willing to take the
responsibility for the property. That may work out fairly well. Then
again it may not. There may be somebody that would step in and want to
-'
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
March 21, 1989 - Page 30
,.....
take control of it.
Robinson: That sounds like the most likely piece that number 1 and it is
for sale now. It's too small but it's within our dollar limit.
Mady: It's too small to have both active and passive. A lot of active
and passive but at 30 acres, it's big enough to hold athletic, active
areas.
Sietsema: The 3 fields at Lake Ann are sitting on 20 acres.
Mady: So it's big enough to do something with and because there's
additional undeveloped land next to it, as that land gets close to
developing, we could acquire our 10% to be expand the park.
Hasek: There's a couple of options there. We can acquire the 10% or else
we can also target purchases for more land in there if we wanted to. So
even if it's the addition of 5 acres or something, it might be.
Boyt: The piece by Bluff Creek, it's a nice piece. Dawne is probably
familiar with it out there. There is a flat area on the corner.
Erhart: You're really getting away from the people. Number one is very
~entrally located. It would serve a lot of homes in that area.
Boyt: Lake Riley.
Erhart: Because I have talked to people in Lake Riley and that...
Boyt: I wonder if we should, Len Takkunen said that he would like to have
2,000 people in southern Chanhassen who would like to have input on this.
I wonder if we should look at these too. Get them involved in this.
Mady: The opportunity to hold a public hearing and advertise in that
area? Show them the parcels and recognize that we only have $300,000.00
and unless someone's willing to put in a referendum for the population, at
this point in time that's all we've got.
Hasek: So we'd be looking at 1 and what I've labeled as that which is
south of Bluff Creek then?
Boyt: I don't know if you advertise that.
Hasek: I think it's just discussion isn't it?
Sietsema: I would announce that we're going to have a public hearing to
discuss potential park sites in the southern part of Chanhassen that was
approved in the referendum and then we could just talk about which sites
,.....those are in the staff report and present that at the meeting.
Hasek: Okay. Can we ask Al to look at that or is it too remote?
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
March 21, 1989 - Page 31
-'
Al Klingelhutz: On the Bandimere piece, I talked to the son there the day
before, it was Monday I talked to him. He said he would let me know as
soon as the probate was available and could be sold. Now he can't really
do much until somebody gets power of attorney to handle this stuff. He
thought it would be about 6 weeks. Maybe we're being a little bit
premature. I think the discussion of it is good but the more you let the
word out, the higher price of land will be.
Mady: We also want to know about the piece...Bluff Creek.
Al Klingelhutz: I'll try and get some information on that one. I do know
one of the owners.
Sietsema: So perhaps we want to wait for Al to come back with more
information in this area and wait for the Bandimere property to be out of
probate or whatever.
Hasek: I would also like to, I don't know if Al is giving us his services
au gratis or how that's being handled but if he could keep his ears open.
I'd like him to keep his eyes open just in case something else comes up
out there if that's alright to ask him to do that.
Al Klingelhutz: Okay. I'll check with Sever Peterson once more too on
his piece. I don't know where he is right now.
....,.,
Sietsema: What's the final direction then that you wanted to give.
Mady: Direct staff to review other parcels discussed tonight along with
Mr. Klingelhutz and bring it back to the Commission with some thoughts as
soon as possible and the direction of possible review of...
Sietsema: So you want to set a public hearing date then after the April
meeting?
Hasek: Yes...
Al Klingelhutz: What I'd like to say, if anybody would want to go on a
tour with me to some of these properties.
Sietsema: That would be wonderful. We did look at a number of them but I
don't think it would hurt us to see them again.
Al Klingelhutz: It probably would give you an idea of which ones you
like.
Schroers: That is a generous offer and it's possible...
REVIEW REQUEST FOR CONCESSION STAND AT LAKE ANN PARK.
""""'"
Hoffman: This item was originally brought back at the February meeting.
It was then tabled because we had some interest from the Lion's group and
the group from Blue Bell Ice Cream wanted to upgrade their offer a little
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
March 21, 1989 - Page 32
.11"'"
more. More detailed. Since that time, as the update stated, the Lion's
Club has withdrawn their request. They don't feel they have the funds or
the people available yet this year to put something like this together;
Blue Bell Ice Cream also sent out a more detailed proposal which is
enclosed in your packet. Mr. Glen Barron has also spoke with both Lori
and myself about this proposal that they sent out. A few clarifications
on the entire item. Domo Products will not actually be the person
operating the wagon. They are selling one of their units to a private
party who will be operating that unit. Again, as I stated, Glen Barron of
Blue Bell Ice Cream did call us and he would like to correct Blue Bell's
position in that each Blue Bell truck is leased by independent
contractor's and they have little control over the actions of these
individual contractors so Blue Bell, the company itself would be the
person operating this vending wagon. It would be truck from Blue Bell Ice
Cream. It would not be an independent contractor. As I stated, we've had
problems occurring in the past. In that conversation with Glen Barron,
they have rescinded their proposal and so it is my recommendation to
accept Domo Product's proposal to provide vending services at Lake Ann for
the 1989 season.
Boyt: So moved.
Robinson: Second.
I"'"
Jchroers: Todd, do you have a list of products? Is this a complete list
of products that Domo Products will handle there?
Hoffman: I believe so and again, Mr. Gary Lindgren, representative of
Domo Products and the couple that would be purchasing and operating the
wagon are here this evening so you could ask any further detailed
questions that I can not answer to them. But I believe that list of soft
serve ice cream cones, hot dogs, popcorn, nachos and cheese, peanuts and
candy bars and 4 flavors of soft drinks would be complete.
Schroers: I am currently very involved with concession stands and
concession areas and one thing that I note in particular is that the very
small candy type items, individual pieces of gum and individual Tootsie
Rolls and things of that nature that kids really like are really a
maintenance headache. It litters up the whole area. It's time consuming
and costly to keep it picked up neat and clean and I'm wondering how much
of that sort of stuff you have.
Gary Lindgren: Generally, if you're getting into the candy part of it
which would be bars. Full sized bars that are generally kept in the
refrigerator like Snickers or something cold. Not the little stuff.
You're right. The candy bar type of stuff. Because of the weather, you
have to keep them in the refrigerator and it's better. That's what we had
in mind on the candy bars.
"'"
:chroers: Okay, and would you be selling, it says soft drinks. Is that
in paper cups or is that in cans or how do you sell them?
Gary Lindgren: No, that's be a dispenser 4 flavors in cups.
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
March 21, 1989 - Page 33
--""
Hasek: Paper cups or plastic cups?
Gary Lindgren: Paper cups.
Schroers: I like that better than cans that end up at the bottom of the
lake.
Gary Lindgren: Yes.
Mady: My concern in this item, I understand the need and it will get a
lot of use. It has to do with the trash and garbage it generates. I
guess reading through the comments here, I didn't really pick up on who
was responsible for trash pick up and disposal barrel and all that stuff.
Hoffman: In the agreement is listed under one of those items, number 4.
Concessionaire shall pick up refuse within a reasonable area surrounding
the concession wagon on a daily basis. So it would be the
concessionarie's responsibility to pick up at least the immediately area
surrounding the wagon. So again in theory, the products that people buy
are probably going to be that many mo~e products left at home so in theory
it's not going to create that much more litter but it will indeed
concentrate the litter to a certain area.
Schroers: I think what it really boils down to is going to be a
cooperative effort between the vendor and the City to do a good job of
keeping it policed. If you stay on top of it and you keep it looking
nice, people see that. They recognize that and they tend to like it that
way and want to keep it that way. But if they see things laying around,
what's one more? It's the kind of attitude that sort of develops...
--'
(A tape change occurred at this point.)
Gary Lindgren: One of the questions I think I can address as far as the
running the thing...traffic generated. It does make some noise. If you
can get the unit, you probably saw...for Octoberfest. We had a generator
out there, that you had out there for us and it seemed like, if you could
get it away from the unit a little bit and get it covered...and it wasn't
really all that bad. Of course there was a lot of noise going on anyway.
Hoffman: That particular generator is not the quietest on the market. It
is our sincere concern that that beach is a wonderful area to be in and a
generator in that quiet type of surrounding, we do not want to have a
generator operating there that is real noisy and that's my number one
concern.
Gary Lindgren: Well, they all make some nois~.
Sietsema: You can get them pretty quiet though.
Gary Lindgren: There are. I guess what I'm raising is, if we get it like
behind the unit up in the hill maybe and just put a little, just maybe -,.
even a little rough sawed cedar thing in front of it to block the sound a
little bit. That seemed to really help out here.
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
March 21, 1989 - Page 34
,.....
Mady: I think you can work with staff.
Gary Lindgren: It doesn't have to be anything elaborate but just
something that can help.
Schroers: Have you picked out a location where you would like to have it?
Gary Lindgren: I was down there before all the snow came and I don't know
if this is, I don't know how close you want to be to the actual beach but
when you come down the hill there in the parking lot there's a little
playground thing right on top there. You go beyond that and there's a
couple of trees, it's maybe between here and the wall that sets back in
there a little bit that would be a good spot. It's probably a spot where
people would be...
Schroers: That's closer to the beach than the playground?
Gary Lindgren: Yes. It's kind of behind the first lifeguard's stand.
Hasek: I think that's too close to the beach. I'd like to see it closer
I guess over towards the place where people drop off.
,..-.,Sietsema: I guess what I would suggest is that, I think staff has some
pretty strong feelings and probably would mirror what you're thinking. I
would like to see it on one end of the beach or the other and not right in
the middle of all the hub of the activity where people want to lay on
their blankets. I think that's something that can be worked out between
the concessionaire and staff. If you just want to direct staff to work
with them on that, and the same with the generator. I think that's going
to have to meet the approval of staff before we're going to be able to
give the final approval on it because I have some concerns that it's a
purring generator and not a roaring generator. Because that can be real
obnoxious too.
Hasek: There is no reason why the generator can't be sitting at a
substantial distance away from it?
Sietsema: No. We've had a concessionaire out there in the past and there
are ways to work around these things so I really feel confident that we
can come up with something that the Commission will be comfortable with.
Schroers: You already have the generators that exist for your unit right
now right?
Gary Lindgren: No. We order them. These are all custom made so we don't
do anything up front. Your 5,~~~ watt generators are probably the
quietest. Once you get above 5,~~~ watts, you start getting into some
noise. Depending on, now this is a 7 x l~ unit and I believe what's going
~nto the unit can run off of 5,~~~ watts. However, if you've got
everything going, you've got the lights on, it's a draw on it and 8,~~~
probably would be better but I think 5,~~~ would do it and I know there's
a couple out that are made. They are getting better.
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
March 21, 1989 - Page 35
...."",<
Schroers: I think they've come a long way in refining the generators in
recent years. They have generators now in the mobile homes that supply
light and power for when you're camping and they're running and when
you're inside, you can't even hear them.
Gary Lindgren: When you inside but when you're outside you can.
Schroers: You can but they're not loud and obnoxious like they used to
be. They're considerably better. I would agree that I think there could
be something that could be worked out as far as the generator.
Gary Lindgren: Whatever we get is going to be brand new so it wouldn't
be... Honda makes one that's getting pretty quiet. They're expensive.
They're a little more money but they're more quiet. We would certainly
try to get the best, the least amount of noise as possible. But I just
wanted to address the fact that we have to have a generator because
there's no power so there isn't going to be a problem down the road.
As far as that mimeo, I think possibly it could be expanded depending on
business. I think, this is going to be a first shot thing for these
people. They don't know how busy it's going to be. We could get into
sandwiches or whatever. I think we tried to cover the general, what
people probably wouldn't be bringing from home in this first phase. I
don't know how long and I realize it's a one year contract but you're not
going to have sewer and water there for maybe a couple other years too and
it could be expanded I guess is what I'm getting at.
....",
Schroers: What you'd like to see is a summer like last summer where it's
90 degrees and sunny every day.
Hasek: I guess I would just like to add to that motion, if you don't
mind, that we just direct staff to work with these people as a part of the
motion.
Boyt moved, Robinson seconded that the Park and Recreation Commission
accept Domo Product's proposal to provide vending services at Lake Ann for
the 1989 season and to direct staff to work with them in the placement of
the stand and the generator. All voted in favor and the motion carried.
SITE PLAN REVIEW - AMCON-EMPAK, INC.
Sietsema: This proposal is located at the northeast corner of CR 17 and
what will be Lake Drive. It will be across Lake Drive from Lake Susan
Park and just down the road west of where the proposed Rosemount is
proposed to be built. Basically what staff is recommending is that we
accept the park dedication fees in lieu of parkland and also to recommend
that the develop install a 8 foot wide bituminous trail along Powers Blvd.
to continue the alignment that will be started with the Lake Susan Hills
West development. Additionally, it is recommended that 100% trail ~
dedication fee credit be given for that trail construction. We will
require an easement and the construction of the trail. Any questions?
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
March 21, 1989 - Page 36
,....
Hasek moved, Schroers seconded that the Park and Recreation Commission
recommend to accept park dedication fees in lieu of parkland and that the
developer install a 8 foot wide bituminous trail along Powers Blvd. to
continue the alignment from the Lake Susan Hills West development. That
100% trail fee credit be given for the trail construction. All voted in
favor and the motion carried.
Al Klingelhutz: Can I ask a question on the last one? I live just
direclty across the road from, my property and a lot of people on the
south side. It's the only area that doesn't have a tree line buffering
the industrial development. I know you're not part of the Planning
Commission but it is abutting Lake Susan Park and I'm wondering if you
could ask if there could be a row of trees or something to buffer the
plant from the park and the people across.
Schroers: AI, isn't there a bank there from the railroad tracks?
Hoffman: This is on the south side.
Al Klingelhutz: The railroad tracks would be on the north side.
Boyt: We need a row of pines. I'm suggesting they be pine trees.
,....
Jasek: Is there vegetation between the park and...
Sietsema: No. It's a cornfield. It's really a good idea because the
park users are going to be looking right at that facility as well.
Schroers: Could staff send a memo to Planning Commission?
Sietsema: This recommendation does go to Planning after here.
Mady: Can I make a motion then that we recommend to the Planning
Commission to review our wishes to have, recognizing AI's comment, to have
a natural buffer installed between the building site, any parking areas of
the building site and the actual...
Boyt: Preferably conifers. We don't want leaves dropping.
Mady: Yes, preferably conifers since they provide a year round buffer ~nd
trees of substantial size. Not 2 foot.
Schroers: I'll second that.
Hasek: Did you want to put like a 12 inch caliper on that?
Mady: No.
~1ady moved, Schroers seconded that the Park and Recreation Commission
recommend to the Planning Commission and Ci ty Council to review the need
for a natural buffer being installed between Lake Susan Park and the
building site. All voted in favor and the motion carried.
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
March 21, 1989 - Page 37
-'
SITE PLAN REVIEW - LAKE SUSAN HILLS WEST, 3RD ADDITION.
Sietsema: This proposal is very straight forward. It doesn't deviate,
as far as I could tell, from what was in the original PUD agreement as far
as what was required in parks and trails. I attached the PUD development
agreement and as you can see in Section 4 and 5, there were park
requirements made at that time. So basically what my recommendation is to
just carry through what that original agreement was. To request park
dedication with Outlots A and B and require the grading of those Outlots
in accordance with grading plans provided by the City. This would also
require you to direct staff to prepare grading plans and start with
preparing a master plan for those park sites so that a grading plan can be
submitted when they're ready to go. Also, to require the installation of
5 foot wide sidewalks along the through streets within the development. 8
foot wide trails along the east side of Powers Blvd. and the east side of
Audubon Road and a 20 foot wide trail easement to be dedicated along the
west side of Powers Blvd.. That was to insure that we had the space to
put in another trail on the other side of the street is such was needed in
the future.
Mady: I like your recommendation with one exception. That is, taking in
Al's comments about Chanhassen Hills Park and that is, that we need to put
a time line into getting that grading done. Because they're going to be
moving a lot of dirt this summer, just have that be included with that.
It might require us to move a little quicker on our parkland but. -'
Boyt: Another thing that we need to look at sometime this summer.
Somehow tying in funds...so we can get that done right away.
Mady: ...we had one developer who indicated that he was surprised that we
waited and took them as the permits were filed instead of getting it all
up front from the developer...
Hasek: I'm surprised that that's not what we do.
Boyt: Should we change it right now?
Hasek: I thought we were. I thought we were taking down from the
developer.
Sietsema: It's stayed with the building permit.
Mady: Can we put that on next week's agenda?
Hasek: What should happen, when a piece of property comes in,
wants to go into Phase 1 but we're taking a big chunk of land.
should come right off the bat, when the property is subdivided,
when we should be getting our dedication. Right then.
he only
That
that's
Sietsema: We aren't right now.
--'
Mady: Let's next week we'll have a full discussion of it. I move that we
recommend to Council to accept staff's recommendation on this parcel with
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
March 21, 1989 - Page 38
,......
the exception that we request the developer to move quickly on the grading
of the parkland so that land is useable as the families are there. Those
kids have a place to...
Sietsema: If I could suggest that you request that the grading of the
park be done at the same time as the streets.
Hasek: Second.
Mady moved, Hasek seconded that the Park and Recreation Commission
recommend to request park dedication of Outlots A and B and require the
grading of those outlots in accordance with grading plans provided by the
City and to be graded at the same time as the streets. Also, to require
the installation of 5 foot wide sidewalk along the through street within
the development, 8 foot wide trails along the east side of Powers
Boulevard and east side of Audubon Road, and a 20 foot wide trail easement
be dedicated along the west side of Powers Boulevard as outlined in
Sections 4 and 5 of the Planned Unit Development Contract dated November
16, 1987. Additionally, it :is recarmended that the developer receive a 50% credit on
the Park Dedication Fees and 100% credit on trail dedication fees. All voted in favor
and the rrotion a carriedunanirrousl y.
APPROVAL OF JULY 4TH CONTRACTS.
,......
Aoffman: 9(a) has to do with the selection of the band for the street
dance. Again, a search for the appropriate type of band being family
entertainment. A lively band playing the appropriate type of music for a
reasonable price. The search ended up again with the Hi-Tops. They
continue to provide an excellent show. Last year, if any of those on the
Commission who were in attendance I think would agree with that. They
have evolved over the years. They've stayed the same but, their name has
stayed the same but they've changed faces and thus their show and their
act and their music changes correspondedly. So it's staff recommendation
to accept their contract in the amount of $1,200.00 for three 60 minute
sets for this year's 4th of July Street Dance which will occur on Saturday
evening, July 1st right up back here in the back parking lot at City
Center Park.
Schroers: July 1st?
Hoffman, Saturday July 1st.
Mady: A following question, are you planning on doing the Oktoberfest
again this year?
Hoffman: Yes.
Mady: Okay. I've heard discussion on having, the different...idea of
,-cktoberfest. As long as we have two items. Two different fields. We can
lave both bands. One on each one. I think we satisfied both groups of
the city. So I'll move we go with staff's recommend to enter into the
contract with the Hi-TOps this year again for three 60 minute sessions for
$1,200.00.
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
March 21, 1989 - Page 39
--"
Schroers: Second. Discussion, I think Lori should sing with the group.
She did a good job last year.
Boyt: Todd Gerhardt did well too. Dancing and invite Barb back.
Mady moved, Schroers seconded that the Park and Recreation Commission
recommend to accept the contract for the Hi-Tops to perform at the 1989
4th of July street dance in the amount of $1,2~~.~~. All voted in favor
and the motion carried.
Hoffman: Item 9(b) is an item on the July 4th fireworks display quotes.
We received quotes from 2 of the 3 companies that we inquire with.
Arrowhead Fireworks and then Banner Fireworks Display Company. vitale
Fireworks is bought out of the competition in that basically they just
can't compete with these more local companies. vitale is based out of
Pittsburgh I believe and last year they came in extremely high. This year
they just decided not to vote. They put on a different type of show.
High price and no blasts so they have not elected to put in a bid. The
two bids, just looking over here. Arrowhead Fireworks, I didn't see that
a price was included on this. It must be on a separate sheet. Their
total bid is closer to $4,9~~.~~. Banner Fireworks is at $5,~~~.~~. That
is basically the minimum for the type of show that we're putting on here -'
in Chanhassen. Both companies were asked to give us their best possible
show for that price. As noted in the comments there, the only noticeable
difference when you look at it is the number of shots that were quoted.
Banner quoted 352 aerial shots and Arrowhead quoted 54~. From the start
it looks like we should go with Arrowhead but if you look at it a little
more in depth and the grand finale of Arrowhead's display includes 2-l~8
shot finale boxes which are about this big around and each shot is about
smaller than your pinky and they retail for under $4~.~~ as I noted there
so they're padding their number of shots very ineffectively in this case.
So that is the only major difference there. So really there's no reason
to switch companies. Banner has produced a quality show here the past 5
times and they a real professional job for us. They show a lot of
interest. They come out to the site. Last year they came out to the site
3 or 4 times and it's staff recommendation to accept their bid in the
amount of $5,~~~.~~ for the July 4th fireworks show this year.
Robinson moved, Hasek seconded that the Park and Recreation Commission
recommend to accept the bid of Banner Fireworks Company in the amount of
$5,~~~.~~ for the 4th of July Celebration. All voted in favor and the
motion carried.
Mady: The question I have though Todd is what's the site?
Hoffman: Lake Ann. July 4th, the events
picnic with another type of entertainment.
families can come out, pitch their blanket,
the fireworks and just enjoy that day. All
will basically be a family type
A band, family picnics so that
listen to some music and watch
the other 4th of July events
-'
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
March 21, 1989 - Page 40
,....
will be taking place on the weekend, Saturday and Sunday.
Hasek: Are you going to put the band and the dancing in the parking lot
someplace?
Hoffman: Out at Lake Ann?
Hasek: Yes.
Hoffman: Lake Ann will not have a street dance. It will be up here.
1989 ICE SKATING PROGRAM REVIEW.
Hoffman: If you've all looked through there. It's just been a real
successful program. We have a good instructer. Just an excellent
instructer. We get a lot of good comments about her. Next year we're
going to try to upgrade the program a little more. Incorporate, as
I noted there, the United States Ice Skating Institute of America.
Implement their program. It was a self supporting program and just
continues to grow each year.
Sietsema: No action is needed.
,...,
Aoffman: Correct. Informational.
SOFTBALL UPDATE.
Hasek: Actually I think that saved us was DataServ came through with the
fields.
Hoffman: Yes, if we hadn't have had those, we would have been in a tough
bind.
Mady: The person to thank for that is Sue because she's the one that
mentioned to me that DataServ even had fields.
Hasek: I have a question for you Todd. Are we going to put money into
those fields?
Hoffman: Yes.
Hasek: We are. How much are we going to put into those fields?
Hoffman: Most of the money will be in labor hours. I have no estimate.
Hasek: Ballpark.
,..... Hetsema: We have no way of knowing. We don't know how much work they're
going to need and it's all soft dollars.
Schroers: It will be mostly striping the fields and charcoaling them.
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
March 21, 1989 - Page 41
......,;
Sietsema: Mowing.
Hasek: It's a little more than that. They're like cow pastures right
now. Can I ask, can we ask, I'd like to recommend that staff just really
keep a close eye on money expenditures for those fields. I'm glad that
we've got them available to us. There's no question about it. However, I
feel a little bit uncertain about spending money on private property.
Hoffman: We have done it in the past on the Legion field.
Sietsema: Also on the Minnetonka Intermediate School field. We spend
money on those and those aren't ours either.
Hoffman: We don't want it to get exorbinate.
Hasek: Exactly. We've got other things that we'd like to spend money on
and maybe the thing to do is to put the bucks someplace else. Maybe it
won't cost us much...but I feel there's going to be a little bit of labor
and cost intensive this year and at some point maybe DataServ...
Schroers: I talked to someone who plays on the
said one of the fields is very good. He's also
Lake Ann so he has something to compare it with
that they have is a very good field. The other
field at DataServ and they
a person that plays out at
and he said the one field
one needs some work.
"""""'"
Mady: Can I ask for a staff update at our next meeting as to what the
condition of the fields were at Lake Ann just prior to snow. How
successful were they with the leveling and the aeration and all that
stuff. What do they feel the fields are going to look like when the green
up starts hopefully within a month.
Hoffman: I've talked with Dale on that and the project was very
successful. They used some nice equipment courtesy of the Eden priarie
department and the fields greened up fairly nicely and by the time May 1
rolls around when leagues start again, Dale's feeling is that they should
be in real nice condition.
Mady: I guess one of the things of my concern was the condition of the
fields and I hope Dale is watching real carefully this year and if he
feels that any way, shape or form that we need to wait 2 weeks, that he
comes forward. If we have to throw 2 weeks off the schedule, that's
great. My concern right now is that those fields are in good shape to
start the season.
Hoffman: We'll keep a close eye on that.
Schroers: I have one other thing on the softball. When did you call the
meeting for the managers? When was that put out?
Hoffman: That letter? The meeting is tomorrow night.
....."
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
March 21, 1989 - Page 42
.,.....
Schroers: The meeting it tomorrow night but I was wondering when they
were notified about it. And when they were notified that if they
accepted, the meeting that you had with the managers to see if they wanted
to accept playing on DataServ fields. When did that take place?
Hoffman: March 7th and 8th those meetins took place. As stated on here,
we met with all four leagues, womens, mens over 35, open and co-rec.
Schroers: That may have been a short coming on my part that I didn't know
about that but did you notify us on that? Did we know about that?
Hoffman: The managers did but probably not Park and Rec commissioners.
Schroers: I mean the Commissioners. I didn't know about that and
were coming back to me and saying, I thought it was all settled.
what are you talking about. So in the future it would be nice if
know that you're going to have a meeting like that.
people
I said
we would
Hoffman: That's a short coming on my part. I was spinning in my heels
there for that month that that all took place. I'm sorry about that. It
got straighten out.
Mady:
,.....
rloffman:
You made no promises for future years however?
For future years?
The people, they're grandfathered in forever.
Mady: What if we decide we need those fields for something else?
Hoffman: As I stated there, it seemed like an awkward process but dealing
with that particular user group of our facilities, you've got to beat them
over the head before they're going to agree to change their ways and we in
fact needed to do that. The Babe Ruth league is coming along very
steadily. I think they're going to have 3 teams this year. Within a week
or a week and a half they should have their field request in so we can
start scheduling around their times so you will see the Babe Ruth people
out on Field No. 1 for the first time.
Schroers: This might be a real good time to make a special note that, I
think in general the commission feels that staff is doing an excellent
job.
Mady: In taking the heat?
Schroers: Not taking the heat but by coming up with reasonable, workable
solutions and always being on top of things and having information
available right there for us. We do really appreciate it and I think that
the Park and Rec staff is doing a terrific job for the city of Chanhassen.
Just one comment. Jim, the forever and ever is basically as long
voted that way. It's just like anything else.
ietsema: It's forever and ever until you change your minds.
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
March 21, 1989 - Page 43 I
-.-'
Hasek: If enough teams in town feel like they want to keep the league
together and the only way to do it is to sacrifice the people who play
outside in order to keep the league together, that's bound to happen.
This got us through this year. It may suffice for another year but if we
run short of fields, something will have to change. We did take a tad of
a, I don't know what the word is here. Slap in the face I think is really
what it was. We were told that there was a heck of a use out there that
for some reason disappeared in the last minute here and I don't know
exactly why that happened. We went on our best information and we did
what we could do.
Hoffman: The use, it didn't disappear. The only one user group that I
stated that would like to be there was the Little League people and Steve
Berquist stated at that meeting that oh, we don't need a field but he has
since carne back and said, well we certainly do need a field so I'm not
sure if he was just trying to duck out of the situation and not be...
Hasek: They have since corne back and requested a field?
Hoffman: At Lake Ann and free of charge I might add.
Schroers: I felt that in that given situation, it is for me personally,
that there was so much information and so much bombardment being handed
out our way, that it was hard for me to keep it all straight and have a
good response, a good rebuttal to it. Just from my own point of view, I .-'
felt that since we've talked about the issue previously and we had pretty
much decided what we wanted and what we would have expected, it would have
been a lot easier if I had written that down and had something in writing
that I could respond with rather than just trying to do it off the cuff.
Sietsema: Well we couldn't anticipate all the things they were going to
corne up with and Todd and I were both scribbling down notes like crazy.
If we would have responded to everything that they said, we would have
been here forever because some of the things they were saying were so
ridiculous and off the wall that I don't know where they were getting
their information or where they've been hanging out. We just simply
couldn't respond to everything they were saying.
Mady: In the defense of Jeff Bros and the CAA in particular, mainly his
point was he knew we recognized what their need was. He didn't feel he
had to justify to these people who don't live in Chanhassen what their
need was. He just wanted them to understand that the kids aren't kicking
them out of something that they deserve and the kids don't. That's all he
was saying is don't blame this on the kids. The kids aren't at fault
here. The kids have just as much need as they do.
Hasek: Except for the one father who felt that his kids didn't have any
more rights than he did or the people that lived outside the town...
QISCUSSION OF POLICY OF ROTATING CHAIR POSITION.
-"
Sietsema: The next item is the discussion on the rotating chair as we
discussed in our last meeting. There was some concern over the rotation
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
March 21, 1989 - Page 44
IfI1""".
of the chair person position. We asked Roger for an opinion which we've
included in there. Robert's Rules of Order require that a Chair and a
Vice Chair be appointed but it doesn't say for how long and the ordinance
of the City Code allows us to set up our policies and our ways of
procedure. He just suggested that if the City Council does not find this
acceptable, they should change the City Code. My question to you is, how
important is this to you? Do you want to push it?
Hasek: I'll tell you how important I think it is. First of all, I don't
think it's an issue that we have to severely press. I'd like to be able
to work with the Council. I think that there's a little bit of a conflict
between us right now and I certainly don't want that to continue. I'd
like to resolve it somehow so I'm willing to work with them. However, I
feel two conditions if we do change our policy. Two things need to
happen. Specifically need to happen. One, that it is the opinion of the
four-fifths majority of the City Council because that's what it would take
to change the ordinance. So if 4 out of 5 people should feel the same way
about changing the policy. The second thing is that we have some reasons
why they want it to be done. It can't be just I don't think it's the
wrong thing to do or I don't see the point in doing it. I'd like some
valid reasons why they're asking us to do this. If they can give us that,
then I think we should be more than willing to accommodate them and maybe
simply change our policy without having to go through a change in
...........ord inance.
Sietsema: We will be meeting jointly with the City Council next Monday
night prior to the City Council meeting at 6:30. Can I suggest that you
discuss it with them at that time?
Hasek: I tell you what. I would hate to hang up the meeting wi th that
issue. I want to talk about parks. I don't want to talk about our
policies here.
Schroers: I would agree with that.
Hasek:
that.
I think there's other things more important to talk about than
Really, I'd like to talk about parks. That's what we're there for.
Robinson: And it's only an hour, it isn't very much.
Hasek: That's right. If there's a policy related to the parks, then I
think that they need to be talked about and certainly this is one
opportunity...and I don't think we need to waste it on policy changes.
Sietsema: How would you like to proceed with this item then?
Hasek: I don't know how the others feel. Maybe we should talk about it a
little bit but I think just a recommendation to the Council to give us
some specific direction in response.
I""
~obinson: I agree with Ed. I would be for it but we don't want to make
it a big emotional... We would like to have a rotating chair. If they
don't like it, that's fine but let's get on to more important things.
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
March 21, 1989 - Page 45
.....",
Sietsema: So then what I will do is I will write a memo to Don stating
what you just aid. I will attach the Minutes and he can take it from
there with the City Council and he'll put it on their agenda.
Jay Johnson: I think to change this type of ordinance only takes a
three-fifths vote. Four-fifths is for the zoning ordinance if I remember
right and most everything else is only a majority.
Hasek: Okay, but still, I'd like to know that there are at least 4 or 5,
or at least 4 out of 5 of those people...
Jay Johnson: Right now I've only heard of one that's opposed to it.
Hasek: Then that would be the direction. If they have some valid reasons
for doing it, that will be fine. At least with me it would be fine.
Jay Johnson: There are 2 that are for it that I know. The other 2 I
don't know about.
Mady: My concern though, if they want to change it, I want to know why
they feel they should be able to dictate what our rights and rules are.
Hasek: They can change the ordinance to say that. They can set the
policies in the way that we run our meetings and that's all fine.
.....;
Sietsema: If you're all in agreement, that's what I'll do then.
Schroers: I would agree with that. I think that's fair.
Mady: It hasn't caused any problems yet. Let's just let it go.
Sietsema: I don't have any other items unless you do.
Hasek: I would like to find out what it would cost us to do a feasibility
study on a trail alignment for Minnewashta Parkway? We've talked about it
a little bit here. It's going to be a real tough problem to solve. It's
going to take some time and some planning and some real investigation to
even come up with a decent alignment in there. But I think it's going to
take some cost to do that and I guess I'd like to know if that's something
possible to get started on.
Sietsema: Sure.
Mady: I talked with Lori today and our meeting next Tuesday is somewhat
flexible at this point so let's put it on as commission discussion item
next Tuesday.
Sietsema: I might have a number for you for a feasibility.
~ady: I mean getting the whole commission involved in it. It's
definitely a high priority for all of us.
...."",
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
March 21, 1989 - Page 46
~
Hasek: That was one other thing I wanted to mention too. If we do have a
public hearing with these park sites, can we get some half section aerials
and half section maps? Maybe even a half section with the aerials on
them. Does Carver County do that?
Sietsema: We can do that.
Mady: There's one thing I want to make you guys aware of. We tabled
action on working with the school park. The community/city center park.
Community center action. Eckankar has now decided that they will not
provide us information as to what the cost of the. land will be for 10-20
acres of land near Lake Ann for a community center until after the land
use question is resolved. So last night the community center task force
tabled any further action until the end of April pending information from
Eckankar. So we're not doing anything and we won't be able to give you
information as to which site. We hopefully will be holding public
meetings the end of May. It was felt that we can't address a community
center topic and get any real meaningful discussion going on a community
center, specifically that's going to make some difference until this
Eckankar situation resolves itself because, if the City somehow finds a
way to buy that land, there's not going to be any money left over for
anything else for a lot of years so then everything else becomes... The
City doesn't have the money to buy that from my understanding right now.
""
3chroers: If you have room on the agenda for next week Lori and you would
like to address the totlot surfacing area and that sort of thing, I can be
prepared to make a presentation.
Sietsema: That would be wonderful.
Mady: There weren't any ideas in the packet, that's for sure.
Sietsema: That's what was so frustrating to me about that article was
that they do not use this, this, this and this and one of them was pearock
that we just put in all of ours and they didn't give you one good idea for
something to use instead.
Schroers: I have something and I hav a sample and it's in my possession
already so I'll bring it. I have nothing to gain from this. It's
something that's new. That I became aware of through the park system and
I thought maybe the City would like to look at it so I obtained an extra
sample and some literature and information so we can take a look.
Sietsema: Just as an update on the deal with Carol's resignation, I don't
know why she wasn't here tonight. She said she'd continue and she didn't
contact me but that wasn't the point. The City Council accepted her
resignation but they didn't take any action as far as appointing anybody
new so it will be back on their agenda this coming Monday. I'm forwarding
~our recommendation to them regarding just looking at the last two
:inalists.
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
March 21, 1989 - Page 47
.......",
Hasek moved, Mady seconded to adjourn the meeting. All voted in favor and
the motion carried. The meeting was adjourned.
Submitted by Lori Sietsema
Park and Rec Coordinator
Prepared by Nann Opheim
....",
...",.,