The URL can be used to link to this page

PRC 1989 04 11 PARK AND RECREATION COMMISSION .~EGULAR MEETING PRIL 11, 1989 Chairman Mady called the meeting to order. MEMBERS PRESENT: Jan Lash, Larry Schroers, Sue Boyt, Jim Mady, Ed Hasek, and Dawne Erhart MEMBERS ABSENT: Curt Robinson STAFF PRESENT: Lori Sietsema, Park and Rec Coordinator and Todd Hoffman, Recreation Supervisor The Park and Recreation Commission welcomed the new commissioner, Jan Lash. APPOINTMENT OF ACTING CHAIR. Hasek moved, Schroers seconded to appoint Sue Boyt as Acting Chair the meeting. All voted in favor and the motion carried. ~PPROVAL OF MINUTES: .tasek moved, Mady seconded to approve the second ha 1 f of the Mi nutes of the Park and Recreation Commission meeting dated March 21, 1989 as amended on page 27 to replace Don Ashworth with Don Chmiel. All voted in favor and the motion carried. Mady moved, Hasek seconded to approve the Minutes of the Park and Recreation Commission meeting dated March 28, 1989 as amended on page 32 by Sue Boyt to change "lime shelter" to "Lion's shelter"; and Dawne Erhart stated that on page 48 she voted in opposition to the motion so the vote should have been 4 to 2. All voted in favor of the Minutes as amended and the motion carried. Public Present: PUBLIC HEARING ON MASTER PARK PLAN FOR CARVER BEACH PARK ALONG LOTUS LAKE. Name Don Peterson R.J. Anderson Roger Byrne Steve Olson Mary Beth Tillman ~ichael & Marie Schroeder ave & Leneda Rahe Mike Wegler John & Lisa Lensegrav Address 6896 Navajo Drive 6870 Lotus Trajl 6724 Lotus Trail 6780 Lotus Trail 6940 Lotus Trail 6600 Lotus Trail 1021 Carver Beach Road 6630 Mohawk Drive 6880 Lotus Trail Park and Rec Commission Meeting April 11, 1989 - Page 2 ....." Chairwoman Boyt called the public hearing to order. Sietsema: I'd like to ask everyone to please sign the sheet in the back of the room so we can contact you of any future meetings because I'm sure that there will be. This item is placed on the agenda to brainstorm as to how we can improve Carver Beach Park. The linear park along Lotus Trail within the Carver Beach neighborhood. Staff doesn't have any ideas or any preconceived ideas or any kind of plans in this area. There has been the desire on the part of the commission to improve the park since the old boat access was removed and to put up some barriers to make sure that that old access stays closed and is not used. In previous meetings when we've had the audience in on other, or the people in the neighborhood in on other issues, they have indicated that there are some things that they'd like to see done to the park so we wanted to provide them with the opportunity to come in and tell us what those are formally. We will take those ideas back at the direction of the commission and put them down on paper and come back with a park plan showing those ideas and how those would work. So I'd just recommend that you open it up for public discussion. Boyt: Anyone who wants to talk to us about the park, come on up. Don Peterson: My name is Don Peterson. I live at 6896 Navajo Drive. I've ~een an active user of the park for 10 years. It's great that they're ~oing to do something with it. I'm a boater and it's a very nice lake to ,., boat on. The DNR is active in the lake. The enforcement was there quite a bit last summer which I appreciated. Right now I think the park is greatly under utilized. The 4th of July there was four boats down in the park for the whole weekend and I was one of them, and they're all neighborhood people so as far as like it says, discussing limited powerboats drastically. The new access has already done that. There's only 10 or 12 spots and people aren't going to wait. If they can't get on, they'll go to another lake. Waconia and stuff so the lake is pretty quiet all summer long. So anyway to try and shut off the neighborhood or more boats would be just like, you might as well make it a canoe lake, which I enjoy doing too but it's a big resource. I hope to see improvements be made but I hope it's not just for a certain element or to satisfy the people on the other side of the lake that have docks because it's kind of like our, Carver Beach uses that for kind of like our lakeshore fun too. Sietsema: If I could just make one comment. The map that I handed out was done by one of the residents and with his suggestions. I thought it would be nice for you to have a visual to look at the map and his suggestions are on there. He'll probably get up and talk about those too. Mike Wegler: My name is Mike Wegler. I live at 6630 Mohawk Drive. Down by the old boat launch area there. I've been a resident in Carver Beach, Chanhassen for 34 years. I've lived in Carver Beach all my life. I know :his area very well. We discussed last fall about the raft and staff and moving it out and that was our main issue about keeping it for kids and public and everybody to use. I just drew this up. Didn't have much time to do it but you can see there'~ a walking path on there and stuff. It ....." Park and Rec Commission Meeting April 11, 1989 - Page 3 .""..., needs to be cleaned up. We would like to get either the City or us to put a new raft in. It doesn't make any difference to use. That's where we're standing on it but we need to have a clean up to bring us down dumpsters and get something going. That whole area needs to be gone through and brushed out and we don't want to take any trees down or anything like that but we want it picked up and cleaned up and make a chip walking path or gravel. I personally don't think blacktop... Boyt: You put this together? Mike Wegler: Yes. Boyt: And is this a dock that you have drawn on here? Mike Wegler: Yes. They discussed a fishing for the kids and this is a very nice spot in here. If you've been down there, that's a... Boyt: Yes, a weedy area. Mike Wegler: Where we've been keeping it mowed and stuff and we thought put a few picnic tables in there. Put a fishing pier out for the kids. Let them use it a little bit. ~3sek: It says fishing/launch dock. Mike Wegler: It's where the old launch was. Hasek: Okay. So you're not advocating opening another launch? Mike Wegler: No. My mother drew this up and she had talked about it and stuff like that and she wrote that on there. We didn't have time. I didn't even have time to go back with her and go through it so there's a few things on there as far as the motors and stuff like that that's already decided on that lake. Schroers: Mike, since you live right there, do you think that the main use of the path would be to get the residents from the immediate neighborhood over to the main park area and back and forth? Just more or less a walking and maybe bicycles path? Mike Wegler: That's about exactly what it would be. Just a walk. I know my kids don't go over there as far as to swim and now with the new Fox Chase and stuff coming in, this end should basically be left the way it is, if not upgraded and make it useable because if you let it go back, it's just going to... Schroers: Would you see crushed aggregate or woodchip be adequate? ~ike Wegler: I don't see why not. I know the woodchips are kind of thing ith the pollution. I don't know if they really like that. Schroers: The thing with woodchips is they just don't last. Park and Rec Commission Meeting April 11, 1989 - Page 4 ......." Mike Wegler: I guess rock. I don't really know. I think if it was cleaned up and, I know when I was a little kid we had a little path we used to walk through there. Get poison ivy and itch weed and all that but we always made it through. It's been cleaned out a little bit by the Boy Scouts a few years ago. Just maintenance would help a lot. Hasek: Does that trail wash out when it rains at all? Are there spots where there's gullies through it? Are we going to have to handle drainage down there? Mike Wegler: Somewhat yes. That's the slope in there. That's another question. Maybe you don't want to mess with a too extensive path through there. Just brush it out and get it so the people can walk through there because people walk through there all the time. It's not heavy. Mosquitoes will carry you out. Anyway, anything else? I guess our main thing is that we get the raft back. That's what we want. As long as we can keep that swimming beach open. As far as fixing it up, we'd be more than willing to help anyway we can. Leneda Rahe: My name is Leneda Rahe and I live at 1021 Carver Beach Road. I was wondering about the swimming area. Were you thinking about improving anything down at the swimming area as far as ever putting more sand down there or eliminating the weeds which are growing up by the beach ~nd the plastic that has all washed ashore. It's pretty messy down there. As of last summer. Maybe something's been done between summer and now. -' Does anyone know about that? Hasek: What plastic? Leneda Rahe: Yes, plastic that was laying down there. Does anyone know about that? Mady: Yes, we just put all new sand down there. The plastic was to keep the growth from corning up through. Leneda Rahe: Yes I know and it all washed ashore. Roger Byrne: My name is Roger Byrne. I live at 6724 Lotus Trail. If you're going to do anything down there, you've got to start by getting that cleaned up. If you don't clean it up, anything you do is going to be worthless. That's the main thing I think. That's the place to start anyway. After that, it has a lot of potential there and I think you guys know that and figure out something. Anything you do I'm sure will be muchly appreciated by the people in the neighborhood. It's a neighborhood park and the neighborhood uses it. Anything that goes in there I'm sure will be used. You won't be wasting your money. The neighborhood will use it. If you put a canoe rack and fishing pier or just fix the beaches up, anything. I'm sure the neighbors will use it because they use it now in the shape it's in and I'm sure you'd get a lot more uses. You're not 1asting your money at all with anything you do down there. The people will appreciate it and they'll use it. Another thing, after we do clean it up, you've got to have someway of keeping it clean which means putting some trash cans down there. You've got to have some regular maintenance ..."", Park and Rec Commission Meeting April 11, 1989 - Page 5 "..... of getting that trash out of there. Everybody throws the trash now because there's nothing to put it in. As long as you have the receptacles to put stuff in, if it's going to be a park, just make it look like a park and keep it like a park and I'm sure people will appreciate it. Hasek: I have a question. You live right across the street from that little beach, right? Roger Byrne: Yes. Hasek: Is a lot of the traffic that goes up and down Lotus Lake Trail, local traffic or are there a lot of outsiders that drive up and down there? The reason I ask that question is because there's an awful lot of garbage that's just over the hill off of that road and I'm wondering if it's the neighbors that have thrown it in there or people from outside? Roger Byrne: There's a lot of stuff that I know didn't come from neighbors because there's a lot of old bicycle frames. There's an old motorcycle stripped out that's down there now and just big time trash. Kids run up and down there, pop cans fly and stuff like that. I think some of the neighbors do throw stuff in there too. A lot of people dump their leaves over the edge but it doesn't look like a park so nobody treats it like a park. If you clean it up once and make it look like a ~ark, people will treat it like it should be treated. So that's where we .ave to start. That's a big project to clean that whole place up. There's dead trees in there. A lot of downed trees. A lot of weeds and crap that shouldn't be in there if you want to make it look like a park. It will get used all the way along from one end to the other with people fishing along there all summer the way it is. Hasek: Just from a maintenance question I guess. As a direct neighbor over there, if you were to see one of your neighbors throwing trash on there, would you be tempted to say something, and I'm talking about leaf litter and stuff like that. I'm wondering if somebody started up and kept it up once we got it greened up. That's a thing that we wouldn't be typically cleaning up in there. Roger Byrne: I think once we clean it up, I think everybody will take more pride in it and I don't think the neighbors would dump stuff. Everybody dumps -stuff because they figure it looks like a dump already so you dump stuff in a dump. If it looks like a park, that ain't where you dump stuff you know. I think that's the problem. It looks like a dump so everybody dumps stuff. I'd say something. If it was all cleaned up and real nice over there and I see somebody dumping their junk over there, I'd say something and make them get it out of there. But right now, it's pretty tough to say anything to anybody because it looks like that's where it's supposed to go. ~ady: Roger, last year when we talked with you down there, there's that ndividual, a couple of guys were down there fishing. We talked about allowing parking on one side of the road so people could fish there. Is that still? Park and Rec Commission Meeting April 11, 1989 - Page 6 """'" Roger Byrne: Well, me and Mike was talking about that. The road's pretty narrow. I don't know if parking on the road per se, all up and down the road would be very good. But there are some spots along in there where a couple small trees could be cut down, there's a million trees in there, and the road would be widened out. Mike works for the City. Half hour with a grader down there and he could make, there are some spots where you could park a couple cars here. Maybe up half a block, another couple. I'm sure along that, from one end of that park to the other end there's probably spaces where you could widened it out enough and say parking here. Parking there. No parking on the street per se but you'd probably get 15 cars in there. ~ap1~ I don't know if we need that many. Roger Byrne: Yes, I know but if you really wanted to. And then down by towards the boat launch, there's space out there where you can make a couple. I don't know, you could try down the road on one side. I don't know if it would work too good. The road's pretty narrow and it washes out when it rains and gets big gullies on the side which makes it narrower yet. Until they fix that road and maintain it, it's tough. But we're willing to get it paved but we don't want it to. Nobody wants to pay the City tab. They want us to pay for the whole thing so now we don't want to pave it and there you are. It should have been done a long time ago when ~he sewer went in but I can't afford. I've got to pay like $6,000.00 to ~7,000.00. That was 5 years ago. It's probably double that again by now. ~ Mady: I just wanted to find out what your feeling was. Roger Byrne: I'm just speaking for myself on the parking. I know alot of people don't want no parking out there. That's just because they were so mad because we took it for so long because the boat launch down there, we go no relief from that for years and years. And the dust, we got no relief from that for years and years. Now everybody says, hey, now all of a sudden they want it back and we fought and fought for the no parking and now we fought so long for what little we got, now I want them to give it back. I think something could be worked out down there. But you've got to keep in mind also that it is a neighborhood park. It's not Lake Ann. It's for everybody but everybody's not going to come. The neighbors are going to use it probably 90% of the use and some other people come down there with a fishing pot you know and they should have someplace to park. I'm sure something can be worked out there. I think something should be worked out there. That can probably be worked in with cleaning up. When they clean up, if we have a couple extra trees, bulldoze them up and put a little gravel in and you've got a parking spot. Boyt: Is this something that we're going to work with Mark on? Sietsema: Yes. ',oyt: Okay. So now should we hear the commission comments on it? ~ Sietsema: Yes. You want to discuss it amongst yourselves and then direct staff to include different, whatever you want to include in a plan and Park and Rec Commission Meeting April 11, 1989 - Page 7 I"'" Mark and I will come up with a concept plan with different facilities and improvements. Erhart: I agree that this site needs to be cleaned up first. Some of the trees maybe taken down, the dead ones anyway and some waste containers. Maybe some grading, like he mentioned, for parking. Widening the road. Hasek: I guess I'd like to see as many facilities as we can possibly put down there that the people would like to see. I don't know how that's going to be accomplished. I think that a fishing dock is in order. I would like to see the trail cleaned up. I know we walked it last year and it was bare and muddy and I think that might be a little bit of a problem for a quick and dirty solution. I think it's going to have to be looked at a little bit more closely. Maybe even designed on site to accommodate some drainage so we don't get washouts with whatever we do down there. I'd like to see an aggregate trail as opposed to woodchip trail or bi tuminous trai 1. I don't see any problem wi th the raft. Weed control is something that we're constantly working on. The major clean up is going to have to be done no matter what we do down there. picnic tables are a good idea. They'll get used no matter what. New raft is something I'd like to take a closer look at. I'd like to see some canoe racks looked at. I think that will probably take care of everything. The parking is something I'd like to look at but I certainly don't want to ~ver park that road down there. I know that it's narrow and it's got some .rainage problems. We can accommodate a few spaces for the people that want to fish off the pier that don't live in the neighborhood. Mady: Previously when we toured the park, when Mike Lynch was on the commission, Mike had offered the Boy Scouts for park clean up. They've done it before so possibly I'd like to see staff contact Mike and see what he can arrange with a quick clean up as soon as possible and then we can see really what we have there to work with. They're willing to do it and I know they'll do a good job for us. On the raft, if we've taken the raft away, we should be putting the raft in this year too. We've got $3,000.00 in our budget for this park. I'd like to see staff get some numbers for us as soon as possible so that by the 1st of June we can have something available. With the trail, I agree with Ed in ago An ag lime trail is probably the best thing down there. Woodchips are simply just going to float away into the lake. They'll look nice for about 3 months and then we won't have any trail again. We need to probably do it on site. Try to find out what we need to do with possibly culverts to direct some of the water away from the trail after it gets put in. There is a fairly natural path down there. A couple of spots have been pretty overgrown but if you're willing to really work hard, you can get through but I don't think it'd be too much trouble to brush that out and we can do that. The rest of the items, the trash containers and picnic tables, we've got those available in our budget and just through our yearly acquisitions shouldn't be any problem putting in a few tables down there and whatever number of ~rash containers are necessary so that we can control the trash problem. . ust park maintenance is already going to the main beach down there. They go another half block and pick a couple other cans up too. To the parking issue, my main concern is to be able to handle maybe 2 or 3 cars for the fishing. The guys that come down there to fish because there are a number Park and Rec Commission Meeting April 11, 1989 - Page 8 -" of people that use that because there's a real nice drop off off of the wooded part of the trail. Usually in a good year you can reach that. We should make that available. The fishing pier is a great idea. I'd like to see us work with the DNR and maybe get one of their grants. Was it about half that they'll pay for Todd? Hoffman: They'll pay for the entire thing. Mady: There's some great fishing spots along that shoreline. Hoffman: We applied for that grant for the Lake Ann fishing pier in '88. It was not approved. It will come up again this year for approval in 1989 for installation in 1990 if possible. There are certain stipulations that need to go along with that. Parking is one of them. You would need to have a certain number of cars available. Handicap access. Asphalt trail to and from the pier. Those types of things which would need to be looked into. I'm not sure if that type of pier, through the DNR would be the most appropriate here because of some of the stipulations they attach with that grant application. Mady: Why don't we find out exactly what that is for the next time we meet with the residents so they'll have a good understanding of that. Maybe it's just going to be us putting a dock in ourselves. noffman: with the steepness of the drop off there... '"""" Mady: It might be difficult. Hoffman: A regular dock would probably serve the purpose but something certainly would be nice. Hasek: Will they move off of the bituminous trail at all? Have we tried them on that? Hoffman: I doubt it. They receive so many applications, if you question them about trying to make amends with them, they'd certainly just drop you to the bottom of the list. Hasek: How about if we just throw a little bituminous in with the aggregate? Boyt: Just bituminous down to the pier. It's only 5 feet. Mike Wegler: Are you talking about the fishing pier kind of in the middle or are you talking where I have it drawn? Because if you have j.t where it's drawn, you're only about 50 feet off of the main blacktop. Or not even. So to get a DNR from there, and there isn't a drop off out there. It's a gradual slope. We fish down there and it's good fishing in there. Everobyd's getting bass and crappies and whatever so if you try to get it 'own the middle, that will be a heck of a job. ....." Hasek: Maybe we can just look at some small... I know you don't have to go out very far and you pass the trees. Park and Rec Commission Meeting April 11, 1989 - Page 9 '" Schroers: Since Mike just brought that up, your pier, where you have it drawn here, and it's right by where the old access was. Mike Wegler: A little bit south. Schroers: Yes. Do you think that that area there would lend itself to 4 or 5 parking spots? The old access. Would the neighborhood have an objection to having a few parking spots there? Mike Wegler: It's going to be hard there because if you're going to put them on the lake side, you're going to be right on where there's only a 15 foot strip when there's high water of grass and you're going to have your car right there. If you put them on the other side, there's a ditch. There's springs running in there. They're going to run off and I've pulled them out, many times cars get stuck in there in August. Schroers: So basically what you're saying is that there isn't enough space there for parking? Mike Wegler: Unless you could get up on the blacktop and maybe make it one side somewhere. ,..... ~chroers: Parallel parking? Okay. Well I am in favor of.. .exact distance of feet but that's quite a ways. If we only have $3,000.00 in improvement to spend, that can get eaten up pretty fast by putting that trail in. But I am in favor of having an aggregate trail if we can get it in there. I also would like to see the City maintain the raft. Also, the trash definitely needs to be taken out. I got the impression that some of the residents indicated that we should maybe clean up some of the brush and the poison ivy and things too and I think that would be atfpropriate just right along the trail area but I don't think we should clean the underbrush up on the hillside. I think we'd run into some erosion problems there and I would like to see the environment stay as natural as possible. I think what would be nice along that trail, if we could cut a couple of viewing areas right on the lakeshore. Just open it up a little bit where we could install a bench or picnic table just for sitting and looking out onto the lake. I'm talking from between the trail and the lake. I would also like staff to check into a canoe rack. I think that we could possibly install one canoe rack and number it or issue permits on a first corne first serve basis and see how much it gets used. That would tell us whether or not one would be adequate or if we'd need more. I think that's all I have. Don Peterson: I wanted to suggest that I wouldn't mind help getting a neighborhood, like Saturday clean up party for the beach if the City provided us with a dumpster just for the weekend because with the shallow ~aters, it's an excellent opportunity to get at some of the glass that's een in there for years. We're talking back to the fifties and stuff. We did a lot of it on our own already but a lot of this has just been exposed because of the low water. As far as Boy Scouts, maybe they might be a little bit too young for that kind of work because there's a lot of Park and Rec Commission Meeting April 11, 1989 - Page 10 _...,;1 broken, because there used to be a jar factory so I personally know of quite a few people that would spend the day and that'd be the immediate thing we could do while the water's still shallow. Boyt: Lori, do you want to work with Don on that? Sietsema: Sure. Don Peterson: All we need are some flyers and maybe just on a Saturday and then have a dumpster for the weekend. I think a lot could be accomplished by volunteer service. Sietsema: Do you have a daytime phone number? Don Peterson: Yes. 474-2003. I think a lot could be done with volunteers. If the budget's that limited, we'd like to get at it but a lot of the stuff you just can't haul up hills. Some old tires that are off of Model T's with rims. There's stuff that's been down there for 30 years. Leneda Rahe: I'd like to add something too if I might. The suggestion of the bench, I think that'd be a great idea but I wonder, it couldn't be put right by the lake because lots of times when I'm watching my kids ~wimming, the natural place to sit or if they're just down there playing, It'd be nice just to have a bench. ...go for a walk and the kids say can we just go down there and play. There is no place to sit right now and that would be a really good idea but I'd like to see that. Resident: Are you talking about... --' Leneda Rahe: Yes, I'm talking at the other end. Where the swimming beach and the parking area is. Mady: You're talking the main beach. Leneda Rahe: Yes, the main one. Lash: I guess I'd agree with the suggestions here. I had the idea of the Boy Scouts, or Eagle Scouts. They're a little bit bigger and have a little more muscle power. But to try and coordinate some kind of effort with the residents too, I like the idea of trying to get the neighbors so they can start out saying we helped. So if we can try and coordinate the residents and maybe get some bigger Eagle Scout involved in there. I'm in favor also of keeping it natural. If it eats up a majority of our money to put in a trail, I guess I would go for some of the other things first and clean the trail out so people can get through there but maybe look at that at a little later date. See how much we can get for the $3,000.00 out of these other suggestions that people made. I think the fishing dock looks like it would be a nice thing. I think people will use it. That ~ounds great, especially if the DNR paid for it. I like Larry's idea of ....". starting a canoe rack up and then maybe wait and see how much of a demand there is for it. Maybe expand on that. Definitely the trash cans and maintenance, it sounds like that's something that absolutely has to go in Park and Rec Commission Meeting April 11, 1989 - Page 11 ,.... down there. And picnic tables are nice. I know we've had problems with people, kids mostly, taking the picnic tables into the water and using them for a dock so if we're going to put picnic tables down there, I think they need to be anchored in some fashion to curb that from happening. Sometimes chaining them to the tree works but then a lot of times the chains get cut so you might want to think about different ideas. That's about it. Boyt: The only other thing I have is signage. it's a park if we have a park sign down there. from us? That will help tell people Do you need anything else Sietsema: No. What I'll do is I'll try and incorporate as much as to what your ideas have been. They're all real similiar and come up with a sketch plan and we can revise it from there. Also, I'll try to get some costs associated with some of the things that you've outlined here as well. I did want to mention that I've got a couple of Eagle Scouts in that are looking for projects. One of them is looking at breaking the trail through the Lake Ann woods and the other one has put his name by reclaiming the trail along Carver Beach in that area. I think the clean up, if it's major clean up, they can't do trash pick up or litter pick up as an Eagle Scout project but if it's a major clean up effort as well as reclaiming the trail, they could brush it out and get it all ready for ""'ggregate to go down and do the clean up and that might qualify. I don't .~now if you'd have to do the aggregate too or not but tha t would be a way to get some free labor. They're usually, we've had good luck with our Eagle Scout projects so far. I will include the trash part of that on that project and also we can organize the neighborhood as well. Mady: Lori, could we, because I know the residents are real concerned about the raft. Would you like a motion to direct you to go forward with the raft as soon as possible? Sietsema: I'd like a motion for you to direct staff to pursue coming up with a plan and also yes, the raft. If you want me to go ahead and get some prices and that kind of thing on that. Mady: My understanding with the meetings we've had in the past, that raft is important no matter what we do on the whole outline of the park. The raft is going to ultimately go in front of that sandy area so we might as well do that now instead of waiting until Mark comes back with a plan because then we're looking in August. Sietsema: Sure. And Dale may be able to build something with what's there too. I don't know. Maybe just revise or use some of the parts and build something or come up with something. Boyt: And then we'll bouy the area a swimming area? ".., ietsema: We probably should. Don Peterson: On the raft, that's been there for over 30 some years and if you want us to, we'll put it back in. We have no problems with that. Park and Rec Commission Meeting April 11, 1989 - Page 12 ...." The reason it got so run down last year was because of this whole thing. We knew that this was corning up and there was a big deal about it and we didn't know how you guys were going to feel about it. Now if you're having trouble with money and stuff like that...but there's never been an accident out there. I'm not saying there won't be one but we can't look at it that way. We want that raft back. That's number one. Hasek: I think from a liability standpoint, it only makes sense that the City puts it in. We're responsible for it and if it's not kept up to a standard that we're responsible for, we're liable anyways so we would just as soon take the responsibility to do that. Mady: It's the same question we have with swingsets and those types of things. We have to make sure we put in an item that there's no doubt about how good it is. The quality and everything is. Just so the liability issue doesn't corne back and haunt you. Boyt: It is a high priority. have a motion. We do want to get a raft out there. We'll Hasek: I'd like to make that motion just as Lori stated. There's no point in restating what she just said. Schroers: I'll second it. '--' Hasek moved, Schroers seconded to direct staff to pursue corning up with a park plan and also getting a swimming raft to replace the one taken out. All voted in favor and the motion carried. Don Peterson: One more suggestion if you want, we just talked about it here, I'm sure if we talked to all our neighborhood and we could get enough money I'm sure to rebuild it, if you wanted that. Boyt: Could the neighbors work with staff on that? Don Peterson: That would save a few dollars. Roger Byrne: We were going to rebuild it anyway so it's in A-I shape. We'll donate it to the City. Mady: again sheet being One last thing before you all leave. This will be corning back here and ultimately up to Council. If you haven't signed the sign up back there, please do so. That's the only way you're guaranteed of notified when this comes back up. Roger Byrne: Do all your plans, what you decide to do ~ith that park, has to go to Council before it can be done? ~dy: To an extent. -'" Sietsema: The basic overall plan has to go to the Council for approval. If we do anything different than what's actually there. The $3,000.00 Park and Rec Commission Meeting April 11, 1989 - Page 13 ".... could be spent on improving the raft or reclaiming the trail or doing some landscaping without going to Council but if we're going to do a full fledged plan that calls for a future dock, fishing pier, canoe rack, and all of that, that should go to Council for approval. It's our standard procedure. The money, the $3,000.00 that's budgeted for 1989, when it was approved, those types of things were what it was designated for at that time. Roger Byrne: You can get that much stuff for $3,000.00? Sietsema: No. It would be probably one or the other. We probably can't do that much. Not all three. But we have to make sure the City Council endorses our future, what we're planning for the future if we want to get funded for it. SITE PLAN REVIEW, OAK VIEW HEIGHTS. Sietsema: The Oak View Heights townhouse development is a planned unit development of 18.9 acres. They're planning to build 140 townhouse units. It's located between Kerber Blvd. and Powers Blvd. west of the West Village Heights apartments. The proposal will also include the extension of the road that currently goes into the West Village Heights apartment ..........uilding. That will continue through onto Powers Blvd.. At the time that _he West Village Heights apartment development was approved, we required them to give additional easement right-of-way for sidewalk development in the future because we had plans on that road going all the way through. Therefore, staff is recommending that they also dedicate additional right-of-way so that we can accommodate a sidewalk within the development. There then will be a trail on Kerber Blvd. and on Powers with a sidewalk connecting that high density area to our trail system and to our downtown and to the schools and they have a safe way of getting there. We would require them to build the 5 foot concrete sidewalk along their development and the City would pick up as a street improvement on the rest of the way. That's the intent. Also in the Comprehensive Trail Plan identifies an 8 foot wide bituminous trail along Powers Blvd.. This connection will connect into the trail that will be built by Saddlebrook and that connection will then be in place. It will be a 20 foot wide trail easement with an 8 foot wide bituminous trail within that easement. Staff is recommending that they get 100% of the trail dedication fee credited for the trail and sidewalk construction and easements. Because there's parks so close to the development, it's not within a park deficient area. We have City Center Park just down the street and then Chan Pond Park is not far from their meeting the different types of needs. But because of the high density of the development and because they are requesting PUD status, which requires them to give above and beyond the minimum requirements, staff is recommending that they be required to install an extensive totlot equipment to serve the young families that that type of ~nit usually attracts. And because that would just be meeting the needs f their development only, we would not give them a credit towards the park dedication fee would be the recommendation of staff. So in summary, it is the recommendation of staff to require 10 foot wide trail easement to be dedicated and a 5 foot wide sidewalk constructed along Jenny Lane Park and Rec Commission Meeting April 11, 1989 - Page 14 -' and a 20 foot wide trail easement be dedicated with an 8 foot wide bituminous trail constructed along Powers Blvd.. The developer would then be given a 100% credit towards the trail dedication fee and as far as parks required, that they put in the totlot equipment and pay 100% of the park dedication fee. Mady: Where is the totlot equipment going to go? Sietsema: They proposed that, I should have made an overhead of this. If you see the one with all the buildings on it, you see this dotted line that's future parking area. They were proposing to put it in this corner here. Mady: As part of their parking area? Sietsema: It would fit in between the parking area and that corner. Mady: How big a proposed apparatus are you looking at? Sietsema: Something that would be considered about 3 of our normal phases. Mady: Okay. My concern is with a unit this big, they're going to need to ~e accommodate 50 to 100 kids down there in the middle of an afternoon. ....,., Sietsema: The equipment, I've sent them a picture of equipment that staff was looking at and it was roughly $30,000.00. A $30,000.00 set. Mady: Dollarwise tells me how big a piece it is. To me that's the minimum they're going to be putting down there. Sietsema: What we put in at North Lotus Lake last year was $7,000.00. Mady: That's not very much. Sietsema: No. What you see at Meadow Green Park, to give you an idea, Meadow Green Park's is roughly $15,000.00. Boyt: I've looked through the catalogue and I know $30,000.00 is a nice structure. Do we recommend at the same time that they put in benches or picnic tables near the totlot? Sietsema: I would include that in your recommendation. Hasek: I just have a quick question. What happens to trail easements that we take if they're not developed? Are they in perpetuity or do they revert after a certain amount of time if we have some changes? Sietsema: No, they're in perpetuity. ~ash: Aren't you talking about if they get this easement, that the developer has to put in the strip of the trail? --' Park and Rec Commission Meeting April 11, 1989 - Page 15 ,..... Sietsema: Right. The easement is just ~o we make sure that the trail's on public property. Then they can meander that as the topography or the landscape or whatever calls for. We only want actually an 8 foot wide bituminous trail somewhere within that 20 feet along that street. Then what the easement along Jenny Lane actually is, they just widened the right-of-way there and that would become public property rather than an easement. Lash:, So this equipment you're talking about, they're talking about putting it by the parking lot? The tot lot equipment? Sietsema: The totlot, that's where they had identified it. I have to meet with them and look at a more realistic plan and I haven't had the opportunity to do that. Hasek: I don't mind the corner that they've chosen I guess. It's just the proximity to the parking that concerns me a little bit. Sietsema: The problem that they're dealing with and I know that this is really kind of a lousy picture but I didn't have a whole lot to deal with, the problem they're dealing with is that this is a slope that goes straight down so they can't really go much further out. It's a wooded area and it's a pretty significant slope. ,..... asek: Is the parking required by ordinance? Siestema: They plan to expand. They plan to put apartment buildings into that slope eventually and that's... Hasek: Oh, that's the parking for that? I see. Sietsema: Basically I think if we just tell them we want them to put the equipment in, they can figure out where to put it on their property. Mady: If it's going to be a park it would be nice to get it fenced. Boyt: Any further questions? Can we have a motion. Mady: I move we recommend to Council to require the developer to provide a 10 foot trail easement to be dedicated and a 5 foot sidewalk constructed along Jenny Land. A 20 foot wide trail easement be dedicated and an 8 foot wide bituminous trail constructed along Powers Blvd.. That 100% of the trail dedication fees be credited. Additionally, that the developer will provide sufficient totlot equipment in the area to handle 50 to 100 children minimum and that no credit be given to the park dedication fees recognizing that this is a PUD and that they should be providing more than their minimum for the City and also recognizing the fact that they will be putting in a large number of people into our park system. Then to direct ~taff to work with the developer to provide an optimal location for the ;,tlot site. Mady moved, Hasek seconded that the Park and Recreation Commission recommend to require that a 10 foot trail easement be dedicated and a 5 Park and Rec Commission Meeting April 11, 1989 - Page 16 ......" foot wide sidewalk be constructed along Jenny Lane. That a 20 foot wide trail easement be dedicated with an 8 foot wide bituminous trail constructed along Powers Boulevard and that 100% of the trail dedicatio"n fee be credited for the trail and sidewalk construction and easements. Additionally, that the developer will install sufficient totlot equipment in the area to handle 50 to 100 children minimum and that no credit be given to the park dedication fees. Also, to direct staff to work with the developer to find the optimal location for the totlot site. All voted in favor and the motion carried. 1990 CIP BUDGET WORKSESSION. Sietsema: What I concluded in the packet is your wish list that you identified at the last meeting. On the first page of my report I tried to pick out of the 1989 budget what we weren't going to spend. The $40,000.00 for the totlot equipment at City Center Park and the $60,000.00 for development at South Lotus Lake. That's $100,000.00 that we would roll over into the 1990 budget. It's anticipated that we'd get roughly $110,000.00 in park dedication fees and $37,000.00 in trail dedication. That brings the total up to $247,000.00 not including what we have in reserve which in this year we have $35,000.00 in Herman Field if we don't do any development in that area. We have the $55,000.00 for Lake Ann ~ommunity shelter out at Lake Ann Park which was the boat rental and bath .louse shel ter. That was put in there for a matching grant for LAWCON grant. Then the other one was fund reserve of $100,000.00 so that's $190,000.00 in reserve that would be rolled over. So if we want to keep the $100,000.00 in unused 1989 expenditures allocated to those two projects that we rolled over and the reserve as that is, that would leave us with $147,000.00 that we could spend on park acquisition and improvements in 1990. ....", Hasek: Okay, help me through that again. We've got $247,000.00 to start with unused 1989 expenditures anticipated for dedication fees and anticipated trail dedication fees. In addition to that we have $35,000.00 that could potentially be rolled over from Herman Park. Siestema: That's the only one we have to leave in Herman Field because that money was dedicated to the City with the property for the development of that property. We do not have the option... Hasek: So that's not a reserve? Sietsema: Well it's a reserve but it's for that park specifically and can't be changed. The other two we could allocate to something different. The $100,000.00 has sort have been our policy to keep that for an emergency type situation and $55,000.00 for the Lake Ann shelter was the matching grants in case we ever got the LAWCON grant for that. tasek: So that's just those three numbers, $35,000.00, $55,000.00 and -' $100,000.00 are in addition to the $247,000.00? Sietsema: Right. Park and Rec Commission Meeting April 11, 1989 - Page 17 IfI""". Hasek: How did we get from $247,000.00 back to $147,000.00? Sietsema: The $100,000.00 from unused in 1989, if you want to roll those over to the same projects for the totlot and for the development at South Lotus would give you $147,000.00 for new projects in 1990. Hasek: Okay, got it. Mady: Lori, the $55,000.00 roughly at Lake Ann. The contract carne in at $220,000.00. We've got roughly $270,000.00 available from the referendum. Where's that money? Sietsema: It's not in here. It's a different program altogether. Mady: So that's not in the park improvement area of Lake Ann or anything like that? Sietsema: No. Mady: So your thoughts on that are in here? Sietsema: I"""" chroers: spend that No. Do you have any foresight Lori as to what you would want to money on in 1990? Sietsema: I included the list of things that you had identified and the numbers on there are really rough. I didn't do extensive research on each one of these things because I knew that it was going to have to be scaled down quite a bit. But as far as what my personal, what I feel are priorities would be? Schroers: Yes. Mady: There's a couple things here we need to do and discuss this year. I'd like to see us corne up with a budget number, just a number, kind of a goal that we want to hit. My thoughts are not to spend the whole $147,000.00. ...rollover or anything but the $100,000.00 that we're not going to be able to spend this year that we've already committed to, that's going to carryover. The $147,000.00 that we pick up this year, I'd like to see us spend a good portion of that but not all of it, I'd like to see us add a little bit to our reserves since we've got a lot of building corning up. We're going to have to kind of save a little bit in the sock so to speak. To me $100,000.00 seems to be a number to hit. That would leave us $47,000.00 and another $50.,000.00, we'd spend about two-thirds. Save a third for the future. We do need to do a lot of things in our parks. Unfortunately a lot of things that weren't done in ~he past and we're trying to play catch up. dasek: Jim, what's your thought? Why would we need to bump another $50,000.00 into our reserve? Park and Rec Commission Meeting April 11, 1989 - Page 18 .......... Mady: I want to see us have something available things slow down. When development ends. Development's going to end in the City of Chanhassen in the next 3 to 4 years. Hasek: What makes you believe that it's going to stop? Mady: Because of where the MUSA line is. ~- ~, Hasek: But the MUSA line will just move. Mady: It will but not until the year 2000. Hasek: If we built out in the next 2 years, all we've got to do is go back to Met Council and they'll move it. Mady: I don't see that happening though. Realistically, I don't see that happening right away. There's a lot of land in Eden prairie that isn't filled up yet and they're just not going to, because they've got to get the Blue Lake treatment plan expanded before they can move the MUSA line. All those things have to happen. Blue Lake I don't think is going to be expanded until after 1995. I'm saying the City's got to be full prior to 1995 and we're going to have 2-3 years down the road where it's going to be slim pickings and we're still going to have people coming in asking for things. Be it boat docks, totlot equipment. We're going to need to have some money to be able to go after it because I don't think the Council's .-, going to give us money out of the general fund. (There was a tape change at this point in the meeting.) Sietsema: Anyway, it's just a suggestion to move into an acquis'tion mode and putting money into, I don't know into reserve or whatever to identify and actively pursue parkland in those deficient areas. Once we have the land, then move back into the development mode. Now we've done that. We were really acquisition happy back in the early 80's and now in the mid-80's we've been into development and we may need to switch gears again. Again, must a suggestion. Mady: I agree with you to an extent with the exception of Chan Hills. I know there's been a request there and it's been there for a while. Sietsema: There's been a lot of requests from Curry Farms too. I get phone calls quite frequently from them. Hasek: How about if we do this? How about if we think about what we're going to do and what we need. Does 25,000.00 for each of those, how much of the plan that we have for those areas does that provide? Sietsema: Well $25,000.00 will buy us a tennis court or a half court basketball court, a couple of parking spaces and some totlot equipment. )r a backstop and a half court basketball court or a backstop and some totlot equipment and a little bit of parking. ....",,; Hasek: Okay, but the parking is being served as parking as opposed to Park and Rec Commission Meeting April 11, 1989 - Page 19 ".... just... Sietsema: Parking really isn't, I was thinking paved parking but we wouldn't have to pave it right away so that really isn't. The $25,000.00, if we don't have to do a lot of grading which we shouldn't have to on either of those sites, we should be able to get a backstop, first phase totlot equipment and a half court basketball court. Schroers: Another way to think about that is 5 to 10 years down the road would you be willing to trade that $25,000.00 worth of totlot, parking and backstop for property out around western Lake Minnewashta that will not be available then. Sietsema: Right. The $50,000.00 will probably buy us half a piece of property out at Minnewashta Parkway. Boyt: I would like to hear sometime from the Council their opinion of our budget and should we be using just the park funds or would they like to see us use some of their general funds? Maybe they'd like to see acquisition and development. Maybe next time we talk to them that could be on the agenda. ~ady: That's a good point because right now we're taking money that's . eing provided by new residents of the City really and building in old dreas of the city that have never provided dollar one to their parks which is just the way it is. Hoffman: You're just never going to catch up. Mady: So you're not using the new money to provide parks for new people. Sietsema: Although there are a lot of people out there that have paid too. Mady: Ultimately the City's going to have to come to the point where taxpayers are going to have to provide for their own park development too. Not just new residents coming in. Boyt: I agree with Larry that I think this is the time to acquire property and I would say we can delay, even Chan Pond, since it's a passive park. Delay Chan Pond. That one has been getting requests too but delay development and work on acquisition. Lash: Have you heard from people what it is they want? Can we just give them a little bit? Sietsema: They'll be in next time on Curry Farms, Chanhassen Hills and Lake Susan Hills West. Those people will be invited to come in here and ~'ive their input on the master park plan so we'll know next time what they ;ant to see there. Lash: If they're happy with just maybe a little totlot equipment, stick a little bit in and leave the rest of the money for buying some property. Park and Rec Commission Meeting April 11, 1989 - Page 20 ~ Sietsema: I honestly think that they would be happy with that for now. There's a lot of young families in those areas and they'd be just tickled with some tot lot equipment. Mady: But you're still talking top grading and totlot equipment, you're talking $7,000.00 to $10,000.00 for the equipment. When you get that all said and done, you're still talking probably $20,000.00. We're not going to be saving that much. I don't see us putting up a tennis court in any one of those things. I just don't. Not now. Totlot equipment and a backstop is probably what we'd be looking at. Hasek: I'll tell you, I think Curt would push for that. Tennis court and parking has been next to him for a long time. Sietsema: What I have in here for general development is $25,000.00 for Lake Susan Hills West, Curry Farms and Chanhassen Hills. That's $75,000.00. Mady: We've got a feasibility study for $7,500.00 that we're going to have to do next year. Hasek: we call ""hat it co do. I would like to suggest that if we do start an acquisition, that it an acquisition fund. That we don't put it in the general fund. takes some thought to move it out of that if that's what we want ......,; Boyt: Do those funds earn interest? Sietsema: Yes. Last year we earned, I think it was $25,000.00 in interest. Boyt: And we're still getting funds from the pulltabs? Sietsema: From the Lion's? We can't count on it but we do. Boyt: I think it's important that we keep the miscellaneous stuff, and that's $21,000.00. Schroers: I definitely support Ed's idea about labeling a fund as an acquisition fund. It's only inevitable that if we wait to acquire, there's not going to be anything to acquire. We can just look at what happened tonight. We have a park that's been a long time park available to the residents and they have finally gotten to the point where they've come in and said hey, let's get it fixed up and taken care of and we'll help. We could probably anticipate more of that type of community and neighborhood response in the future down the road but only if we have the park. If they come in and say, we don't have something. We want it and we say hey, we can't give it to you. It's not there. 'oyt: We've run into that too. .....", Schroers: So development absolutely has to be after acquisition. Park and Rec Commission Meeting April 11, 1989 - Page 21 ".... Hasek: Do we have to solidify this tonight? Sietsema: Well I need it cleaner than this because we've got to solidify it by next time. Hasek: Okay, but next time we're going to have Curry Hills, Chan Pond and. . . Sietsema: Let's say we have to have a recommendation all clean and ready to go to City Council by their second meeting in May so we could talk about this again on the first meeting in May. Hasek: Okay so we could kind of pull together a ballpark number that's something short of what we've got and listen to those... Sietsema: Yes. Just tell me what you want to delete for sure out of here and then I can get cleaner numbers for the rest of it. Hasek: Let's talk about what we want to keep. You were talking about $75,000.00 worth of acquisition is what you said right? Sietsema: No. There was $75,000.00 in general development for those ~hree parksites. rlasek: Okay, for those three. So that would not be a positive or that would not necessarily be a solid number. It might be something less than that. Schroers: Can we just start at the top of the list and go down? Let's start with Lake Ann. Do we need the trail through the woods at Lake Ann? Hasek: No. Schroers: Could we save $10,000.00 there? Boyt: That's the one that an Eagle Scout had signed up for. Sietsema: This was to pave it. The Eagle Scout project would be to clear it and possibly put the aggregate down. I'm not sure about that even but he would clear the trail and then the $10,000.00 was to put the base down and pave it. Again, that's really a nebulous number. I just kind of picked it out of the sky. Schroers: Where was that trail going to go to? From where to where? Sietsema: We talked about meandering it through the woods starting at the trail that's there and maybe looping it around so you could take a nature walk and clear out some areas with benches and picnic in more remote """""icnic areas. Hoffman: A couple different access points and exit points. Accesses off the parking lot which are close to that tree line. Access to the beach so you can walk to and from the beach through that area. It's really a nice Park and Rec Commission Meeting April 11, 1989 - Page 22 ....", portion of the park which is unused at this time. It would add another different type of use to Lake Ann. A nature walk. People who come from Greenwood Shores around the lake could then take that other loop . through Lake Ann Park to extend their walk and make it a little longer. Schroers: Okay, in your opinion then it's something that you would like to see stay in? Hoffman: It's something that I would like to see stay in place. It could be reduced somewhat if we just want to go with an aggregate base at this time and not blacktop it. That certainly can be on in the future. Hasek: I don't think that's a bad idea on any of these trails. It's like your driveway. If you put the ag down and let it set for a while, a lot of times you get a lot better surface out of it so I don't think that's a bad idea. Boyt: Had you included the aggregate base in the Eagle Scout project number at the bottom? Sietsema: No. Mady: Make it $5,000.00? ~offman: Yes, $4,000.00 would probably get by there. -JIIII Hasek: Is the Eagle Scout going to go to four? Sietsema: No. The trail through the woods would go at $4,000.00. The park shelter would be the one that we talked about that would go at the top of the hill which would just be the open air shelter because that's where our big groups go. Mady: Clarify something for me. Where is this $50,000.00, I still don't know where this $50,000.00 is from the referendum that we're not spending on the contract left for expansion of the park. Sietsema: It's in the referendum fund. It's not in this fund. Mady: That's park development. We can do anything we want with it at Lake Ann so we can do these things with it. Sietsema: Yes. What I was going to kind of propose was the community park shelter with the bath house and the bathrooms and the boat rental and the upstairs community room. The screened house type room. If we put the money that's left over in the referendum and the $55,000.00 in reserve, we could probably build that thing. I see that's something that's becoming more and more a need. I don't know. We might want to roll this over into acquisition too. Hoffman: That excess money in that referendum dollars may also get nit picked and eaten away as the development comes along. .....", Park and Rec Commission Meeting April 11, 1989 - Page 23 "".... Sietsema: Change orders along the way. Schroers: Can you refresh my memory on the picnic shelter? Is this something that we would be open to the general public all the time or is this something that we would rent out to special groups? Hoffman: It's something that would be open to the general public at all times. Currently we're almost filled at this time as far as group reservation picnics through June, July, August, into the beginning of May and into the beginning of September. The first thing they ask for is a park shelter. Do you have a large park shelter? No. You can bring in portable tents if you wish. A lot of those company picnics, family reunions, class reunions, they rent those large tents and put them up there on that hill. Any group over 100 people or more I encourage them to set up on top of that hill, we provide additional picnic tables for them so they can do that to kind of separate the group picnics from the general use of the park. The other people using the park during that time. I can see, I'm sure you all have experiences with the nice park shelter like that for a family reunion, for some type of picnic of that nature and it's a high cost item but it's something that certainly would be used. But it may be something that needs to be put off because it is such a high dollar item. ,..... chroers: You would more or less be earmarking this then as a reservation area with the shelter but would we charge for this? Hoffman: It certainly could be charged for. for a group reservation because they pay the fee. If we had a nicer facility for them to instate a picnic reservation fee for the use Right now there's no charge $2.00 parking fee, the entry use, we certainly could of that facility. Hasek: So 100 people generate $200.00? That's if they're not residents. Sietsema: And most of them aren't. Lash: And that would be per car too so chances are they're going to be coming in... Hasek: So it generates less than that. Hoffman: They do generate quite a bit of revenue currently. Mady: My gut feeling is though, I agree 100% with what you said but it's kind of pie in the sky, and the wagon comes first. Lash: I guess I would be a lot more in favor of this picnic shelter type thing than this other thing. The one on the other column? ,~chroers: The one with the bath house? Lash: Yes. That sounds like really pie in the sky. This is just a shelter. I think a lot of major parks have that. I think it's a real drawing card to parks although you said it's booked already so, but we Park and Rec Commission Meeting April 11, 1989 - Page 24 --" could recoup some money from it if it's charged a fee for it. Mady: The Lake Ann boat shelter is a changing place, a picnic thing. Hoffman: Water and electricity need to be available as well. Mady: It's been pie in the sky for us for as long as I've been here. We've been trying and trying and that item always ranks real high in the grant application and then it just never seems to get it. Lash: Would this picnic shelter have electricity and water? Mady: No water. Hasek: Similiar to the one we have out there now. Siestema: Right, only bigger. Hoffman: It would just be a large open aired shelter with a concrete slab. Sietsema: It's a roof on stilts. ichroers: I'm just amazed at the current trend for renting space for ,~roup functions. Almost all the facilities that we have in all Hennepin parks are booked and they're not cheap. People are willing to pay for these places and we may be missing the boat by not having an area like that that we can designate as a reservation area and charge an appropriate fee for it's use. I believe if it was a decent facility, it would have very little idle time. ....."" Mady: Larry, could you find out for us what they charge for a facility? Lash: I can tell you one in particular because my family has a reunion up there every year and they charge $100.00. Hasek: For what? Lash: It's a shelter. It does have electricity and it has bathrooms. Hasek: This is where? Lash: It's up in Fridley. I can't think of the name right now. It's right on the river. Boyt: Moving onto playground equipment. Mady: Are we funding some this year on top of the hill? ~ietsema: Yes. ....." Mady: As long as we're putting in as much as we've got there now, I don't have a problem with deleting it. We're putting in a sizeable piece up Park and Rec Commission Meeting April 11, 1989 - Page 25 ""'" there. Sietsema: $10,000.00. Lash: And this is an extra $10,000.00 for next year then? Sietsema: Yes. Mady: I guess I'd be in favor of deleting that for 1990. Sietsema: Is that the general consensus? Boyt: If it isn't, you guys speak up so we can get through this. Schroers: We all had collectively agreed that the playground equipment at Lake Ann was definitely lacking and is the $10,000.00 that we're spending this year going to be adequate to get it up to par? Sietsema: It probably won't be as big as what's there but, will it? Hoffman: Sure it will. ~ady: All you've got is a slide and two swings up there. dietsema: So you want to take this out? Boyt: And Ed wanted us to wait on moving the trees. Sietsema: Take the trees out? Hasek: Yes. The tree moving, that might not happen. Who knows. Sietsema: That is something that definitely could come out of the referendum money. That could be a change order. Boyt: Let's recommend to do that. Sietsema: Okay, I cut the trees. Boyt: But we had asked for playground equipment out of the excess funds from park development at Lake Ann. Sietsema: What excess funds? Hasek: That's if there's excess funds. Sietsema: But we won't know that until... .~asek: Unles we're done with the changes. Boyt: But we were making a list. We were talking about batting cages. We were talking about dugouts. Park and Rec Commission Meeting April 11, 1989 - Page 26 ....",.; Sietsema: See now that's change order stuff too. Boyt: Okay. Well, totlot equipment was in there too. Sietsema: I cut it. Boyt: Put it back. Sietsema: I'll put that in the other one. Hasek: The picnic shelter is in? Mady: It's tentative. Hasek: Okay. And how about the Lake Ann boat shelter? Is that coming out of the budget? Mady: That's a reserve. Boyt: Let's go to North Lotus. Phase 2 totlot equipment. Sietsema: Do you want my opinion? '..asek: Cut i.t? .......,P Sietsema: Cut it. Was I supposed to take that $7,000.00 out for North Lotus? Boyt: Yes. Sietsema: Anybody say no? Gone. Landscaping Chan Pond. Hasek: I think that comes out and I think we need to put the trail in. Mady: We need to put that graded trail in. Sietsema: Is that all agreed? Schroers: I agree with we can put the landscaping on the back burner. The graded trail, I'm in favor of a mowed trail around Chan Pond and I don't think we need to spend $9,000.00 to get a mowable trail around Chan Pond. Mady: I think you're right. Bobcat. All we need to do really is go down with a Schroers: But we can just leave that $9,000.00 in there for trail grading and whatever is not used... lady: Let's drop it. ....."" Hasek: Just a second. Wasn't there some discussion at Council about that trail and what they wanted to see? Park and Rec Commission Meeting April 11, 1989 - Page 27 "".... Sietsema: They had recommended that we pave it. That can be a long term part of the plan. In the interim we can have a mowed. Schroers: We can maybe phase that trail and have a phase 1 just a mowable. Sietsema: So my pen is erasing $9,999.99? Hasek: Yes, and it's going to change it though. We're going to change it to a grading number. Mady: A grading number, maybe a third of that. Boyt: Is it going to take that to grade the trail? Sietsema: It's just smoothing out the bumps so you can take a buggy over it. Hasek: Is there a trail basically in place now? Sietsema: Yes. ""'\ady: They mowed it. Boyt: But it's really uneven and bumpy. Schroers: It depends on how we want to do it. It's going to cost some money if you're going to go in there with a cat and knock off the high spots. Fill in the low spots. Get it flat and level and just drag it, seed it so you can have a nice base then because that's what you're going to need anyway. No matter what kind of a trail will ultimately end up there, if you don't have a good flat solid base, you don't have anything to work with so at some point in time, that needs to be done. Sietsema: How much? Schroers: I'm saying leave the $9,999.99 in there for grading. Sietsema: Is that agreed? Anybody against that? Hasek: I can't argue with it. I'd like to but I can't. Mady: I don't have any basis for a better number. Lash: Is $9,999.99 a realistic thing for paving it? Sietsema: No, for grading. .,..., ,oyt: Chan Hills. Sietsema: Take the 2 off and leave 5 for totlot? Park and Rec Commission Meeting April 11, 1989 - Page 28 '""""" Hasek: How about make it 7 or 10. Schroers: We don't get nothing for $5,000.00. Hoffman: The road's not even to the park yet. So we can wait until next year and then it will be houses built up around it. Sietsema: Put it off a year? Is the 25 gone for Chan Hills? Anybody against that? Erhart: I'd want to keep a little something in there. Lash: Even if they can just walk in. You don't have to have a driveway. Mady: You won't be able to get to it. Sietsema: It won't be graded though until the road's there. I will not take away any of these numbers. I'll just give you back something with a delete after it or something so if you want to pull anything back, you can do that. Boyt: South Lotus. ~ady: The park plan's important. Will the TH 101 realignment be done tlext year? .....", Siestema: Oh no. Mady: Not in the ground but on paper done so we'll know? Sietsema: Should. Mady: There's no reason to do a massive park plan if you don't know where the road's going to be. Which apartment comes out or whatever they're doing. Sietsema: I think we'll have lines to do a master park plan. I don't think the road will be aligned so we could do any work in there though. Hasek: So you're saying the drawings will be done but... Schroers: I would like to see enough money stay in South Lotus to accommodate a neighborhood skating pond for that next season. Sietsema: That won't take much. Hasek: $5,000.00? $3,000.00 for grading? Hoffman: Less. $3,000.00. ...."" Schroers: Dale went and looked at and he said that it needed some work. Sietsema: But they could do that in house. Park and Rec Commission Meeting April 11, 1989 - Page 29 If!"" Mady: They could do Chan Pond in house too. Hasek: This $3,000.00 for grading? Boyt: What about the rollover funds? Sietsema: They rollover to something else then. They become available for something else then. Mady: Rollover funds are this year's money that we've already got. I really have a tough time...that rollover. We've done it twice. This is going to be two years in a row. Sietsema: The only thing is, it doesn't make any sense to go in there with a grader or putting ballfields in if they're going to come in the next year to redo TH 101 and tear everything out. Let me do this. Let me find out when the anticipated realignment of TH 101 and West 78th is and then you can make your determination on that after next week. Boyt: Bandimere Heights. I would say cut them. Especially after looking at the park site and the possibilty there. Any opposed? ~ietsema: You took out Bandimere? Mady: Yes. Sietsema: I've got a question mark by it. I'll bring it back. Boyt: City Center Park, master park plan. Mady: God willing we'll have some information by next year on the school. Hasek: Master plan cut? Boyt: No. We'd like to leave that in. Schroers: We need to do something with City Center here. Mady: That park's going to be there come thick or thin and will get a lot ' of use. That park probably gets more use than Lake Ann even. Boyt: And leave the rollover. Hasek: year? Okay, the whole thing's intact? So we're park developing next Okay. Carver Beach landscaping $3,000.~0. That's the playground and tot playground right on Carver Beach That was to put some more trees in there. Mady: ~oad. Boyt: Yes, we can wait on that. Curry Farms? Schroers: Scratch that. Park and Rec Commission Meeti.ng April 11, 1989 - Page 30 -' Sietsema: Everybody agreed to scratch Curry Farms? Boyt: Yes. Mady: We're still going to invite those people in. Isn't that what you were talking about last time? Sietsema: Yes. Hasek: Does this one have a road to it? Sietsema: Yes. This has houses all around. Hasek: So this one is actually in better shape to be developed than Chan Hills? Sietsema: There's houses all around this one. Hoffman: But again something to consider. Both those areas are still just black dirt. Dale will most likely be in there to seed and do some landscaping. Going to put in a totlot equipment on a dirt lot is not real attractive. Maybe we want to give those parks a year, 2 years to start ~rowing to look like a park before you go ahead and put in playground equipment. --' Hasek: That's even more reason why we should get those parks graded when development begins and not wait until the end. Get them graded and seeded so that when the thing gets developed out, we can do something with it rigth away rather than having to wait 2 or 3 years for it to establish it's seed. Sietsema: I agree with that philosophy. The only argument to that is that would mean that Chan Hills would have had to have gotten the road down to Phase 3 when they started 3 years ago right away. Hasek: Rough grading for the road and cutting the rough grade for the road and putting the base in. Mady: Phase 1 creates the need. Phase 3 doesn't create the need. Hasek: I think it's just common sense to get it done early. (A tape change occurred during the 1990 CIP program discussion.) Hasek moved, Schroers seconded that the Park and Recreation Commission recommend that the Maintenance Department include a Cushman vehicle. All voted in favor and the motion carried. ....". Park and Rec Commission Meeting April 11, 1989 - Page 31 ,.... DISCUSSION OT TOT LOT EQUIPMENT PURCHASE. Sietsema: Have you guys had an opportunity to go out to different sites and look at totlot equipment? Boyt: Yes. It was a lot of fun and we found out lots of stuff. We took kids with us and let them play on it. Sietsema: What did you decide you like? Mady: There's something, you shouldn't play on playground equipment when there's ice underneath it. Boyt: along. Somebody put it where it was too short. We took kids with us. We took some 8 year olds Mady: Edina and Eden Prairie. Hasek: That was kind of explained to Wes when he was here before. He said a lot of times they'll put it in not thinking about what they have to put in for a base and they're going to go out and put the base in and they're a foot low. ~oyt: We like the timber. We didn't like the metal. Lash: Do you like the combination? The timbers with the plastic? Boyt: The slides that are real long. The kids get burned on them. Lash: That's why I like the chute and the curved. Boyt: The kids love curving slides. The kids love slides. The kids like some things that are real dangerous too. They like merry-go-rounds. We tried the new fashion swing. Have you seen it in the book? Do you remember that swing that they were on where you have handles? Mady: Do not like the roller slides. Those are bad. Boyt: They hurt. Mady: They hurt and fingers can go down in those things. Schroers: Yes. Little fingers could get smashed in those rollers. Sietsema: I'll contact the representative and corne back with a picture of something that's in our price range for your approval and then upon that approval I'll order it. ~chroers: Mainly a timber, wood structure. Sietsema: Timber structure like we usually have with the color corning off of it. Like the slides. Park and Rec Commission Meeting April 11, 1989 - Page 32 -" Boyt: We had an idea. When we go to a more expensive structure, they have these platforms at the top, 6 feet tall, interconnected so you can go in a triangle or a circle from one structure to another. The kids thoughts that was pretty neat. Only more expensive. When it comes to buying more expensive stuff, we'll design what you want. Lash: That would be my suggestion. pick out the things we think we like because the company will, if they know what we want, they'll come up with 'a design that will incorporate all the different features that we want. We just did something very similar to that at the school that I work at last year and it was this exact company. Every day I watched kids play on it and the things that really attracts them and the things that are just really a waste. These little portable windows, they're just a waste. These tic tac toe things, dumb. The little wheel, that's bad. Everyday I sit and watch kids play on this exact equipment. I have a real good idea. Age range was 5 to 8 basically... Hasek: Which wheel thing are you talking about? Hoffman: Steering wheel. Lash: The steering wheel that you mount on a ball and they're supposed to pretend it's a boat or something...and that's supposed to tie in with the ~ortable one. Usually it's in an active spot. I talked with some of the ~eachers and I said what did you find to be real loser ideas and which ~ ones would you really support having so they gave me an idea of the things that they really liked. Did you guys try that trap thing? Boyt: They all tried it but it's, where you grab on jerk across? Lash: It doesn't just kind of go by itself? You have to make it go? Mady: Your body weight makes it go and it stops in the middle. Schroers: Isn't that what Jim's daughter fell off of? Boyt: Yes. Schroers: And that was a metal one and I guess I didn't really care for that. Boyt: No, but they made things for upper body development. Like the old horizontal ladder. They'll do that. Sietsema: So would you like me to do then, I'll take the Minutes of what you've just said of the things you don't like to make sure we don't include those things and go to the timber form style and come back with some ideas? 'oyt: It's fun if they can use their imagination to make the play structure something it isn't. Or a spaceship or a stagecoach. ~ Hasek: That's why that one out at Lake Ann got destroyed. Park and Rec Commission Meeting April 11, 1989 - Page 33 I"'" Sietsema: Because of imagination? Hasek: No, you've got to hide in it. Lash: The bridge, the connecting bridge things, they really like that. And the tire swings. I think you need to look at things for little, the 3 year olds. UPDATE ON SOUTH PARKLAND ACQUISITION. Sietsema: Since we met tonight, we won't meet on Thursday or do you still want to meet on Thursday? Boyt: I don't think so. Sietsema: I can't be here so you'd have to meet on your own. Boyt: When are we going to make a recommendation on this? Sietsema: In our discussion we should discuss now how we want to proceed. ,.f we want to proceed with the Bandimere property, it sounds like we kind f have to make some movement in that area and I think if we start ~egotiations, that may at least, like you were talking about, tie it up. If we start talking that we want it and enter into negotiations without actually entering into a purchase agreement, that ties up the process and we can look further into it so I'd need a recommendation if you want to recommend to the City Council that we pursue the Bandimere property. There is not the big rush on the other so whatever you want to do. Hasek: I have a question. Is anything being done with TH 101 in that location at all? It's not going to be straighten there? There are no plans to straighten it out or to realign it? To widened it at all? Sietsema: Not that I know of. The only place I know that they're going to do any straightening is up at the S curve at Lyman as it goes by Chan. Hasek: I like the Bandimere location. I like it's location. I don't particularly like the lay of the land there. I think they talked a little bit about ba11fie1ds and being a wind tunnel out there. If you've ever played in an open field which that one would really be. You can hit a ball to right field and go out of the left field line. It's just incredible what wind can do. It's not just ball parks that are going to be up there but there will be other things as well and unless we can do something to accommodate that, I think it could be a bad lay for a park. What I'd like to be able to do is to have perhaps us tie that piece up and have the traffic engineer look at an access to that piece of property to ~ee if there's a good access for a major, if there's a good location for a .ajor access to that park. Also, the potential for access into the other parcel of land. That might give us a little bit of time to have somebody take a look at the possibility of the grading of new ballparks and so forth in that piece. Does that make sense? Park and Rec Commission Meeting April 11, 1989 - Page 34 .......", Boyt: So have the piece in the water? Hasek: And the piece in the water would be... Sietsema: So you want to look into where you would gain access to the Bandimere property? Hasek: The traffic and the location of that road. I'm a little concerned. You've got a road that carried quite a bit of traffic there. It's a narrow road to start with and it's not like they're going to be turning off TH 5 where we've got the right sight distance and how does that figure with maybe a real conceptual idea of how that park might lay out. Sietsema: And you want to compare that to the other site? Hasek: Just the access. Sietsema: Because the other one is a straight shot. It's going to clearly be a safer access onto the other site. I can see that and I'm not a traffic person. ~asek: But where would the straight shot be? Across from... -'" Hoffman: The first spot we stood. Hasek: On the second park? Sietsema: On the second part, Lyman Blvd. is straight. Hasek: I know Lyman Blvd is straight there but you can't access along the whole thing. We walked up a probably a 30 foot hill just to take a look at the thing so that wouldn't be where the access would be. It'd have to be towards their wood lot. Mady: As you drive further down, CR l7's going to get cut through in there. The second parcel on Lyman has some drawbacks in that ultimately CR 17 is going to cut through that parcel on the east side and potentially TH 212 could cut across the southeast corner of that property also. Hasek: When I was talking to AI, he said that he thought it might hit that corner but he wasn't positive. The second thing, I don't know that CR 17 is necessarily going to be punched through. I don't know how much support there is for that. I think we've got two sites that are within our budget and we might as well take a look at both of them. I would hate to lock up Bandimere and then just have it completely undesignable for some strange reason. I think we ought to attempt to lock it up by starting a purchase agreement on it. Schroers: I kind of wish Al was here for that discussion because my perception of information that he put out tonight was that there was a definite sense of urgency. He indicated that he could make 3 phone calls --' Park and Rec Commission Meeting April 11, 1989 - Page 35 ,....., and sell that property. " Mady: He indicated that it will be coming on the market. Hoffman: This coming Monday. Schroers: So basically what he's doing is giving us the inside tract and the first shot at this but if I interpret him right, if we don't move on it, it's going to be gone. Boyt: That's right. Schroers: So I think we need to decide which of the two practical parcels that we looked at would be the best. I think as far as the wind and being open, they're both big open fields and are going to be hit by wind. That's something that we would have to try to curtail through planting. Hoffman: I don't think you want to bear a whole lot of weight on that situation. City Center Park is known to be one of the windiest spots in the city. Boyt: At least it blows the mosquitoes out. ~offman: And it's used currently right now as the only youth park. Mady: We don't have our management decision analysis information available do we? Boyt: No, he's at home. Mady: We did, a year and a half ago the Commission spent a Saturday and went through a management decision analysis on acquiring parkland and we do have written down the process by which we should be selecting this park. Schroers: I have some of that here with me I think. There's just a few things there that seem kind of obvious. They're both open. They're both going to take a certain amount of grading. It looked as though Bandimere would take less grading. Erhart: They said more. Schroers: They said more on Bandimere? Erhart: Don Chmiel anyway said more on Bandimere. Mady: It depends on where you stand. ~oyt: It's probably a judgment call. riasek: I think the reason is because you can't find a spot that's even half way close to Bandimere. It's either on top of a hill, which you have to put the thing, put a field, or maybe perhaps down in one of the corners Park and Rec Commission Meeting April 11, 1989 - Page 36 '-' but any corner you look at is going to take a substantial amount of grading. It's like was mentioned before though that Lake Ann was up on a hill and we got three fields into that. The problem with that is the amount of money that we spend just preparing the park to receive the facilities and if we could save some of that, that would be real nice. I think if you look at the second location off of Lyman Blvd., that the south part of that is a lot flater even though there's a drainage swale over there. It's a lot flater to begin with than Bandimere was. Schroers: Also, there would probably be less resistence from neighbors at that location because there are less neighbors. So that's something else to consider. Aesthetically, I like Bandimere better myself. Hasek: I said I like the location. I think it's more southerly and I think it's more remote from Lake Ann and the other park. Schroers: I like the fact of having a lake there and that is really a big plus. I think that the Lyman may be a little more easily accessible. Mady: To whom though? Schroers: To the people who would be using it. ~oyt: There's a lot of people down by Bandimere. There's a big Jevelopment down there. ....,., Mady: The access to the Lyman site would be the north end and in our decision analysis, we indicated that Lyman would be the upper edge of the south park. So the main entrance of that park would be facing the people who it's not supposedly going for, the south. Schroers: Supposedly but generally what we're looking at that for is our youth area. We're developing active areas for the youth and they would be coming from all parts of town so I don't think that would be that big of a deal. Boyt: Jan, do you want to give us your comments? We'll go down the line. Lash: Okay. I think Bandimere...lake property great but if it is more grading or would be more expensive in the end to try and get it set up for ballfields, that's the down side. For me the down side is if this is supposed to be for youth things, and I don't know if that's been decided for sure or not and if we think logically people have 2-3-4 kids and you have a bunch of kids in sports and you've got one playing over in Minnetonka at the same time as the one that's playing way down in TH l~l and you're trying to get kids allover town where it would be easier if it was a little closer to say City Park and Lake Ann if you're shuttling kids allover. But if it's to service the people in southern Chanhassen, then you want to go further south. You have to determine I 'uess what you think the actual useage is going to be. If it's to service the people down there, you want it down there. --' Park and Rec Commission Meeting April 11, 1989 - Page 37 ,.... Hasek: That is the point. The point is to service southern Chanhassen but our line of demarkation was Lyman Blvd. so both actually fall within that and from that standpoint they're equal. If we were to say it had to be, we gave it more weight for being farther south of Lyman Blvd., that'd be one thing but they're both south of Lyman so they both are equal with that. Mady: And that was a must and not a want. Lash: I still have mixed feelings. I like the lake access but I think the other one is more easily accessible to the majority of people in town. Erhart: I think the biggest drawback with the Bandimere piece of property is the road access. I think that will be a problem. Then also with the neighbors east of there. You have more neighbors to deal with whereas the property off of Lyman, you only have the one neighbor and a better access onto Lyman Blvd.. But I think we should still try to look into Bandimere property because I agree with AI. I think he could make a few phone calls and it would be gone real quick then we'll only have one choice. I still like Bandimere best but I can see a lot of drawbacks. Hasek: How about heads is Bandimere and tails is... ~ady: No way. Schroers: Maybe we should each just cast a little individual vote. Mady: I've got some comments. Concern over the neighbors. Going through the referendum process, people we talked in the south park, they want a park bad. Real bad. They were promised a park back in the late 60's, early 70's. Whenever Lake Ann was first bought. It never happened. They don't care. They want it bad. You're not going to be seeing lights on this field for 20 years. Those people are going to be long gone out of there by the time this park will have lights on it and I don't think the neighbors are really going to be a problem. I really see these people saying this is nothing but positive. Anyplace in south Chanhassen is going to be positive for a park. The access on TH 101. I think there's some opportunities there that can be addressed and I think the City Engineer can probably come up with that pretty quickly. He can get a feel for that pretty easily. The development issue, which one's easier to develop, we've said all along the Corps of Engineer's Reserve is more than willing to come up here and for the price of their fuel, they will do whatever grading we need done on the property, the rough grading. As long as you give them a year and a half notice, they can do it free basically. So whichever site we're doing, we're going to have to do it that way because we do not have the funds to develop that park. There's no way we're going to have $200,000.00 to $500,000.00 to grade either one of these sites in the very near future so I see that development is going to ~appen through the use of free labor. I think Bandimere aesthetically has t heads and tails over the other site. The other site is a nice square piece of land and with the hill maybe provides a little bit of wind protection but that's all. It's ultimately going to have possibly two roads going through it and you're going to lose some pieces of parkland. Park and Rec Commission Meeting April 11, 1989 - Page 38 ---' At 40 acres or 35 acres, whatever it is, we're not going to be able to give a whole lot of land. We're going to need every bit of it since we ultimately wanted 50 to 100 acres and now we're looking at 30 to 40 acres because of price. Bandimere provides us those unique little things that you want in a park. The aesthetics. The natural areas that you're not going to get in the other one. When it comes down to it, Bandimere's got the better park. It's near to where the majority of the neighbors are right now. It's closer to them. Boyt: I like Bandimere too because it's not near where the new highway is going through. I did not want a park on a major highway. I think that detracts from the park and it's aesthetically more pleasing. Hasek: TH 212 is going to go within 2 blocks of Bandimere? Boyt: Well, it's not going through it. Hasek: That's true. Hoffman: Farther than that. Mile. Half a mile. Boyt: We have the possibility of acquiring property adjacent to Bandimere Heights and I think that's pretty important. Aasek: But that also exists with the other park as well. There's going -' to be property eventually developing south of there so there's an acquisition possibility there too. Like I said, Bandimere I think is in the appropriate location. More appropriate location even though Lyman Blvd.... I just hope that we don't have to spend a lot of money because the Corps of Engineer's dies on grading Bandimere, that's all. I can see goofing on a grader out there and spend more money to regrade it, and I'm being facetious now. I guess I would personally vote to go ahead with Bandimere. Schroers: Is that a motion? Hasek: We're taking a straw poll here. Boyt: Larry's ready to move here. Schroers: I would like to move that we recommend pursuing the acquisition of the Bandimere property in both cases and direct staff to work with AI. Sietsema: What I hear you saying is that you want to recommend that we proceed with negotiations to acquire the two Bandimere pieces? Schroers: That's it. Hasek: Second. ~ady: I'd like to add to that. Include in the motion to direct staff at the same time to review the access question. -' Park and Rec Commission Meeting April 11, 1989 - Page 39 ,.... Sietsema: I already have that down. Schroers moved, Hasek seconded that the Park and Recreation Commission recommend to proceed with negotiations to acquire the two pieces of the Bandimere property and to direct staff to look into the access situation. All voted in favor and the motion carried. Mady: I'd also like to recommend to staff that we hold a public hearing at our next meeting and notify the south area as much as we can. I'm not sure how we do that but I think we need to move quickly with this and we need to get a public hearing done on the south park and maybe just notify through the paper or something but an article in the paper would do it. Hasek: The reason just to see what they want? Mady: Get their input before the contract actually gets signed. Hasek: Why would that affect the purchase price? Mady: It didn't sound like the purchase price was, Al has a fairly solid ~urchase price right now. It was $6,5~~.~~ an acre for this parcel. jietserna: For the record it was $6,3~~.~~. It was $21~,~~~.~~ for the 33 acres. Schroers: I'd like to see us get along with the acquisition and then open it up. Boyt: Once that's taken care of. Sietsema: I think we can do a purchase order contingent upon a lot of different things. Lash: I would like to see something done that is a committal, a definite committal so in case, I don't want to go into this thinking everybody's going to think it's great and then have 5~ people in here...they don't want it in their back yard. We have to be committed to it. Hasek: We talked about that but, I think if we write in the proper contingencies. Sietsema: I just am hesitant to schedule a public hearing that quickly in the process. Besides that, our next agenda, we'll have the room full on our next agenda already. Boyt: It's almost an emergency situation and we have to act and if we ~on't, we could lose it right away and if everybody knows about it, is hat the best way to go about it too? Schroers: This situation is not going to differ no matter where it is or what piece of property or what. There are going to be those that think Park and Rec Commission Meeting April 11, 1989 - Page 40 ......., it's great and those that are adamantly opposed and that's something that we're going to have to deal with at the time and we can't let that determine whether or not we get property that's available when it's available. We'll end up with nothing. Lash: I'd stil be interested in seeing if we can't get some kind of an agreement with the seller saying we're definitely interested. We want to do some investigations into other options. If you get another offer, please contact us first before and see if we couldn't get an agreement like that. That would be tied up. We wouldn't have any money invested but a definite commitment then if we wanted to get input from people down there of what they want. Hasek: We've got a problem that Jim just brought up and that is the fact that Council's not going to act on this until when? Two weeks? Sietsema: Right. I'll talk to Don and our City Attorney and find out. Mady: We may not have the luxury of a time period. Boyt: We might have to get together before then just to act on this. Hasek: We would like to make the offer before it comes on the market. ~here's no question about that. If that could be accomplished before clonday or Tuesday of next week, that's what we want to do. ~ Mady: Because the price is out there. Hasek: You bet you. If it hits the market, you're going to have a Gagne or somebody, especially if they know there's another interested, they're going to buy that piece of property. Erhart: ...real estate before, I did have somebody call me, a personal friend who has a relative that's a developer and they were asking me about that property so there are people out there that are interested. Schroers: I've got to believe there's a whole bunch of developers that would just love to get a hold of that. Mady: Lori, will you talk to Don Ashworth tomorrow about this parcel? Sietsema: Yes, and he's aware of the situation. Mady: I would hate to see us lose it. (A tape change occurred at this point in the meeting.) COMMISSION PRESENTATIONS: Hoffman: ...this year those 3 businesses combined gave $400.00. ~ Rosemount declined to give money. McGlynn Bakeries has not responded yet. The trend is to scale down on corporate donations. Park and Rec Commission Meeting April 11, 1989 - Page 41 """" Mady: Update us on last night's consent agenda. The Eagle Scout project and the basketball court. Sietsema: Both passed. Hasek: What was the configuration of the basketball? Are we putting them on one side so we can keep one...?, Sietsema: It hasn't really been determined yet. I've got to have Dale take a closer look at that and see but generally we know we're not going to have the poles inside the fence. We can get the poles to mount outside the fence and then come up and over so that nobody runs into a pole. Then I think it will work fine. And I talked to the guy that wrote the request and he thought that would be fine too. The only concern I have is the two posts that hold the net up. If you're playing basketball, that's about groin high and that might be a problem. Hasek: Well if you paint the stripe there. Sietsema: No, we don't plan to stripe anything. Mady: If you put the hoops up they'll be happy. ~ietsema: They don't even want to playa full court. They just want to ~e able to shoot baskets. They said they're old. That they don't want to sweat. Boyt: If we're going to put two baskets up, and we talked about it before, we want it regulation height and not for kids. Sietsema: Todd has another item from Adminstrative Presentation if you would just bear with us a little longer here. Hoffman: This item came in. It's addressed to Mayor Chmiel and then it passed through the circuit on down to me because it is a recreation program item so I was not able to put it on the agenda. The key paragraphs here are the third paragraphs. This is a program through the Carver County Historical Society and it's a youth program which they have done in Waconia at their local home site there. It's been very successful. I was aware of it last year. I was aware of it again this year and was going to advertise it for the Waconia location. Now they've offered to hold it here in Chanhassen. It's a week long program. Five 90 minute segments. Children go for an hour and a half and they do old time, if you will, type activities. Making butter. Making bread. Making candles. Doing that type of thing. A little pioneerish type activities. I think we have a good setting for it in our Heritage Park down in the old City Hall. That building is not being used yet. It would be an ideal setting for this type of program. It has a price tag associated with it ~f $250.00 for that week. Just a lump sum fee to pay them to come out ere and sponsor this program. I'm just bringing this item to the Commission for some feedback. Some of your thoughts. Park and Rec Commission Meeting April 11, 1989 - Page 42 -""" Boyt: I've been through the program with the kids. It's wonderful. $250.00 is a pretty good deal. They're entertaining. They tell stories while they teach the kids. Mady: The room at Heritage Park, is that going to be big enough to handle it? Hoffman: 20-25 kids. Yes. Boyt: In Waconia, it's done outside sitting in the grass. Schroers: What are you looking for Todd, an approval? Hoffman: Yes. Hasek moved, Boyt seconded to direct staff to initiate the Carver County Historical Society youth program. All voted in favor and the motion carried. Mady moved, Schroers seconded to adjourn the meeting. and the motion carried. The meeting was adjourned. All voted in favor Submitted by Lori Sietsema Park and Rec Coordinator --' Prepared by Nann Opheim ......",