PRC 1989 08 15
,.....
~
,...
3
PARK AND RECREATION COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
AUGUST 15, 1989
Chairman Mady called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m..
MEMBERS PRESENT: Janet Lash, Curt Robinson, Sue Boyt, Jim Mady, Ed Hasek,
Larry Schroers and Dawne Erhart
STAFF PRESENT: Lori Sietsema, Park and' Rec Coordinator and Todd Hoffman,
Recreation Supervisor
APPOINT ACTING CHAIR: Hasek moved, Mady seconded to appoint Sue Boyt as
the Acting Chairperson for the meeting. All voted in favor and the motion
carried.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Schroers moved, Hasek seconded to approve the
Minutes of the Park and Recreation Commission meeting dated July 25, 1989
as amended by Jim Mady on page 24 to read "1 acre per 75 people" and on
page 30 to change Krenowsky to Granowski. All voted in favor and the
motion cal:ried.
REVIEW REQUEST TO ACQUIRE ASSUMPTION SEMINARY PROPERTY.
Sietsema: We recently received a letter from, what is his name, Bob
Mueller, inquiring as to, basically informing the City that there is a
natural reproducing brook trout stream in the City of Chanhassen and
requesting that we somehow take measures to protect it through purchasing
the property around the stream or easements or whatever it was going to
take. He indicated that there was some work done by the DNR, that it
failed. Basically what the DNR has done has designated this as a
designated tl:out stream which does put certain protections on it. It
allows the PCA to protect it through regulations. That does not allow
development to alter the stream's water temperature and the DNR's Civision
of Water is also able to control development near or above the stream's
flood level. They tried to purchase easements around the stream but costs
were prohibitive at that time. Todd and Larry and I walked the site, part
of the site, they walked the stream. I walked the land and there are trout
in it. It's a nice piece of property but given that it's so south and
they're asking $15,000.00 per acre for it right now, the area, given the
costs and it's location, it does not look like something that's going to
serve as a park at this time although it is a 120 acres. At the time that
that property would come in for development that would be the time that I
would recommend that we acquire the right, conservation easements and
parkland through the dedication process. Right now I don't think
anything's going to happen to the property. It's for sale and no one's
bought it yet but as far as what the uses of the property right now and the
Game Warden is aware that it is a trout stream and he's keeping an eye on
it. I don't think that it's in danger right at this time but again I think
it's something that we may want to indicate in our Comprehensive Plan that
we want to preserve and eventually acquire property around in the future.
Mady: Did you guys contact the County? Would there be a possibility of
some type of Joint Powers Agreement between Chanhassen, Chaska, the County,
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
August 15, 1989 - Page 2
the DNR, to attempt to acquire this property. If we split it up four wal~
it might be a feasible operation.
Hoffman: It sounds pretty messy.
Mady: ...phone call to the County.
Sietsema: I can certainly call them and ask them if they're interested.
Mady: Obviously we don't need to rush on it. Do we also know if Chaska
is, what they're looking as part of their Comp Plan in designating it
somehow?
Sietsema: I contacted Tom Redman and he indicated at this point in time
they have no plans. He felt that given that it is a designated trout
stleam and with the DNR and PCA regulations protecting that, at this point
in time he wasn't pursuing acquisition of the upstream area. But he was
aware of it and was keeping an eye on it as well.
Robinson: How would we ever acquire the land around that stream? If it
was ever developed?
Sietsema: Right. Through the dedication process. If someone comes in
with whether they're going to put commercial or housing on that property,
we have the ability to require parkland just as we did with Lake Susan
Hills West or any of the other developments. Whether we want to take pal
dedication fees or parkland, we can require land and designate that are a'!l"'"
the area that we want to acquire.
Schroers: Has the DNR contacted the City of Chaska also?
Sietsema: I don't know.
Schroers: I wonder if the Park Board is Chaska is aware.
Sietsema: I believe that Bob Mueller is on their Park Board.
Schroers: Okay, because the source is in Chaska so if there was any
development around or near the source, that could jeopardize the whole
thing.
Sietsema: Tom indicated that Bob Mueller was on his Park Board and that's
why he was aware of it so I know that they, I can find out more. I had
just had called him. He said, yes we're aware of it. We don't have any
active plans right now to acquire anything in that area.
Schroers: Do you need a motion?
Sietsema: I would need a motion to amend the Comprehensive Plan to
designate this area as potential park open space for the future.
Schroers: So moved.
....",
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
August 15, 1989 - Page 3
,....,
Mady:
Second.
Schroers moved, Mady seconded that the Park and Recreation Commission,
recognizing the delicate trout stream as unique amenity worth preserving;
to recommend designating the area along the creek on both sides as park/
open space on the Comprehensive Plan's Land Use Plan. All voted in favor
and the motion carried.
(Bob Mueller came at this point in the meeting.)
Sietsema: We just got done with that item.
Bob Mueller: Oh. How it'd go?
Sietsema: Basically what we've decided to do is recognize it as a natural
area that is worthy of protection and at the time that the area is
subdivided or develops, that we would acquire property around the stream
through the dedication process. As the DNR has designated it as a trout
stream, therefore there are some regulations, protective regulations
through DNR and PCA that protect it. Are you on Chaska's Park Board?
Bob Mueller: No.
Sietsema: Oh, I thought that you were. Have you contacted or heard
~ anything from Tom Redman as far as what they plan to do with the upstream
portion?
Bob Mueller: No. I can do that.
Director real well...
I've been over to the Carver County Park
Sietsema: Okay. What I probably will be doing is contacting them and
letting them know what our plans are and also see if there's something we
can work cooperatively together to protect it.
Hasek: Can I ask just how you come to be interested in this stream? A
fisherman or property owner or...
Bob Mueller: I'm a fisherman and I like to see that beautiful area
protected too. It's a little bit of both. It's been frustrating to watch
these streams get ruin over the years because there's a lot of them that
used to be spring fed and to just lose that.
Schroers: I found out that stream has been producing trout for a long,
long time. I have an older half brother that is almost 55 years old and
when he was 12 years old he was catching trout in that stream.
Bob Mueller: I've never really fished it myself. Did they ever find the
poacher? Somebody said there was a poacher.
"....,
Schroers: He found two nets and talked to some of the neighbors who are
helping keep an eye out. As a matter of fact, it was a neighbor or
abutting property owner that tipped him off that he thought that there was
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
August 15, 1989 - page 4
something going on down there and then he went down and walked the creek.,
and found two traps. Took the traps out and he's keeping an eye on it.
Bob Mueller: I was going to ask one question. When you dedicate along the
creek like that, is that going to be, I'm just wondering how much of that
area around there is going to have to be protected to keep it from getting
damaged. Can it be done by just dedicating 59 feet or 39 feet along the
side?
Boyt: 75 feet.
Schroers: I think the State says that you can't develop within 159 feet of
a trout stream so nothing can be done within 159 feet of it if it is a
designated stream.
Hasek: Because it's a tributarv to navigable waters, there may be some
Corps restrictions on it as weli.
Bob Mueller: Well good. I'm glad it got some attention.
Sietsema: Thanks for bringing it to our attention.
DISCUSSION OF PROPERTY WEST OF LAKE MINNEWASHTA.
Sietsema: I drove along Minnewashta Parkway to check out the property
that's for sale there. It's 35 acres with 489 feet of lakeshore frontage~
on Lake Minnewashta and some frontage on Lake St. Joe. They are asking
$32,990.99 per acre for the property. It's zoned single family. It's
within the sewered area and that would bring the cost to $1,024,990.00.
The property would be very suitable for park purposes but at that price, I
don't think it's very feasible that we could come up with kind of money.
So basically what I would suggest is that we acquire a portion of the
property through the dedication process when it comes through for
development for a neighborhood park.
Hasek: Is there a way we can let the property owner right now know so when
he sells the property there aren't any surprises to who comes in on which
area we would like to acquire or are we going to have to work around
developments and end up with garbage soil?
Sietsema: Well, the only problem with that is that we don't have any kind
of topography or soil information and until they come in with a sketch plan
and we pretty much can tell them what we want. Often we do compromise what
we want but if you want to split the money out to find out that information
but right now we don't have any information. It's not, we don't have a
survey on it or any kind other than the half section map. Maybe some
aerial photos.
Hasek: I'm wondering if we can get some just generalized soil maps to tell
us basically what the surface soils are like which are a good indication
what's underneath that and to po maps aren't too hard to get a hold of. l~
guess basically just, we know what the slope is to a certain degree based
Pa~k and Rec Commission Meeting
Augnst 15, 1989 - Page 5
",.
upon the soils because those soils are rated by slopes. I don't know if
this map does that. ...County maps. I think that we might be able to pull
out a piece of that o~ at least spot a piece that's good for some p~etty
active recreational uses over there for that site as well without too much
t~ouble. Maybe Mark might be able to help us a little bit. Pull together
some information based on his best guess or information that's available.
He may be able to pull a piece out that looks like it wants to wo~k.
Hoffman: The front po~tion adjacent to the road there, just for a
visibility standpoint, for it to be able to see the facilities there, it
looked like it would be fairly conducive to that type of uses. A lot of it
is just a pasture.
Hasek: Yes, it slopes, if I remember correctly, there's kind of a hill in
the middle and it slopes, it must be flat on the top and drops down into
that big low area that's up there.
Hoffman: Adjacent to the lake.
Laseh: How many ac~es would we be able to get theJ~e?
Sietsema: Close to 10%.
Lash: That's not very much.
~ Sietsema: It depends on the density of it.
Mady: We do have some money set aside fo~ it so we could, through
dedication get 10% and squeeze a little bit more out of development and buy
a little bit. I think we'd be happy to get 3 1/2 if we could get it and
acquire plus.
Hasek: Is there a possibility that we may be able to make a lesser offer
on a portion of the property? He's obviously selling the whole thing. It
might be possible that he'd be willing to sell a po~tion of it to us and
then we could also take a dedication on it as well. You know we may be
able to buy something. I'd like to ask $200,000.00 for my house but I know
it's worth $150,000.00 so I know that there's room to deal on any asking
price. I don't know if he can be approached on that or not. It just seems
to me if we're really interested in acquiring that for the people on that
side of the lake, that to wait until something is proposed, until the land
costs go up, until somebody buys it for 28 and tries to sell it to us for
35, may be not the most prudent way to do it.
Sietsema: We usually pay what they've paid for the property before. The
undeveloped price.
Boyt: What do we have in the fund for that area?
Sietsema: The proposed 1989 was...
""
Hasek:
75?
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
August 15, 1989 - Page 6
Sietsema: Yes I think so. We changed it so it wasn't any specific area.-,
It was an acquisition fund but that was the fund.
Hasek: I'm not sllggesting that we burn, whatever the full number is. It
would be nice to be able to put together a 5 acre park of what we consider
a minimum park for that side of town. I don't think it's going to be hard
to get 10% of that particular piece of property simply because the park
isn't only going to serve that neighborhood. It's going to serve that
whole side of the community over there. I don't know if it's within our
power to take more than that based upon the need of the populations over
there but it seems that 5 acres is really a minimum that we're talking
about and you have to do something to try and achieve that.
Boyt: This sounds like the time to make an offer rather than waiting until
it's sold...higher price using the $75,000.00 to see what we can do.
Lash: But you said they wouldn't charge us the higher price didn't you?
We pay what they pay?
Sietsema: Right. When we acquire property through the dedication process,
we give them credit for what they paid for the property.
Lash: ...bigger chunk would get a better per acre price than us going and
trying to buy.
Boyt: Except we're the City trying to buy parkland and if they have a b:
hea r t . . . ....",
Hasek: We've seen good hearts. There's another possibility. What he's
asking for the piece of property, it may sit there for a while too. That's
both good or bad. The price may go up and it may, on the alternative, it
may end up being subdivided. If it's subdivided, at the time of
subdivision we can take, isn't that correct?
Sietsema: Right.
Hasek: So that's a possibility too.
Sietsema: Right. The dedication process is through the subdivision
process is that we have the ability to go in and require them to meet their
park and recreation needs that they are going to be producing and at the
same time we can negotiate to purchase additional property above and beyond
that.
Hasek: Quick question. Is that house on that property, that gray house?
Sietsema: Yes. The round?
Hasek: Yes.
Sietsema:
of it.
That house next to the round one and the round one are all par
...".
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
August 15, 1989 - Page 7
.,-.,
Hasek:
So that is all one chunk of property right now?
Sietsema: Yes.
Hasek: So somebody bought that and wanted to carve that house out of it
for some reason or if somebody just wanted to buy that house, they would
have to subdivide it?
Sietsema: Right.
Hasek: Because there can only be one house on, what's a minimum lot size
in town here on that?
Sietsema: No, that's within the MUSA line.
Hasek: Anything under 40 acres is a subdivision right?
Sietsema: Right.
Hasek: Okay. And they're under 40. They're at 38.
Sietsema: The minimum they could subdivide is 15,000 square feet would be
the minimum lot size for that lot.
Schroers: So if one developer bought the whole thing and through the
~ dedication process we could actually only legitimately ask for 3.2 acres?
Boyt: Unless it's high density.
Schroers: But if we could make an offer on say 3 acres for something less
than $75,000.00 and we're to accept it and then got slightly over 3 acres
through the dedication process, we'd end up with...
Sietsema: 32 acres would be roughly 100 units. That's 300 people at 1 per
75. Is that 4 acres? 4 acres is what a typical subdivision we would get
out of 32 acres.
Hasek: But isn't there a provlslon in the ordinance that would maybe, even
if you wanted to corne in with something under that based upon the need for
that side of town?
Sietsema: So if we wanted to buy above and beyond the 4 acres you mean we
could negotiate to do that?
Hasek: Yes, or take more than the simple 10% based upon need.
Sietsema: Well we can't require this guy to provide for all of the needs
on the west side of Lake Minnewashta without additional compensation. He's
going to create the need for 4 acres of parkland.
I"""
Hasek: I'm stating it incorrectly and I think you're telling me the right
way. We conld take 10% and based upon need, we could purchase more than
that at the price that it was sold at and justify it because of the need?
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
August 15, 1989 - Page 8
Sietsema: Yes.
dedication fee.
With additional compensation above and beyond the park
....""
Erhart: Would he be obligated to sell to us if...
Sietsema: I'd have to check on that. I'm not really sure. Now if he came
under PUD we could ask for a lot more.
Mady: We always have the opportunity to condemn. If we have based on
need, we can condemn and pay the going rate which is the $32,000.00.
Hasek: I don't want to do that.
Mady: No. We don't want to do that if we don't have to but that always is
an opportunity for the City.
Boyt: What do you need on this?
Sietsema: I don't need any action unless you want me to do something
specific.
Hasek: I would like to, if it's possible and if I could get agreement from
you, what's the word I'm looking for. Consensus from you to have either
the staff or our consultants take a look at spotting for us about a 5 acrp
parcel that could serve for future parkland on the west side of Lake
Minnewashta. --'
Schroers: Let's be optimistic and look at 7 or 8 acres?
Mady: We also have to realize that if he's got lake frontage, that lake
frontage will go for a heck of a lot more than the back.
Sietsema: Well the lake frontage is not very deep. The Minnewashta
Parkway is between the bulk of the property. I think what would happen is
it would be a beachlot or they'd propose something on that order.
Hasek: They haven't, by the new ordinances, I wonder if they have enough
land.
Sietsema: I don't know and I haven't checked.
Hasek: They need what, 50,000 square feet in order to get even 3 docks out
there by the new ordinance now if I read it correctly. Yes. We're just
going through that process now ourselves in our association thinking about
buying an abutting piece of property and our understanding is that the most
that we could get on any beachlot without abutting property, and they don't
have it because it's across the road and that is not abutting, is 3 slips
on a dock. I just can't imagine that that would work for a neighborhood of
38 acres out there which is about as big as the neighborhood that I live in
which indicates that you've got about 40 houses back there. Boy, that'd
tough and I guess strange things happen. -'
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
August 15, 1989 - Page 9
,....
Boyt:
Do we need a motion to have somebody look at it?
Sietsema: Yes.
Hasek: I would like to so move.
Sietsema: Ed moved to direct staff to look at a 5 to 10 acre parcel within
the property for potential future parkland.
Schroers: Second.
Hasek moved, Schroers seconded to direct staff to look at a 5 to 10 acre
parcel within the property for potential future parkland on the west side
of Lake Minnewashta. All voted in favor and the motion carried.
UPDATE ON LAKE SUSAN PARK DEVELOPMENT PROJECT.
Sietsema: The next item is just an update to let you know that the City
Council did authorize execution of the LAWCON agreement for Lake Susan Park
and construction is underway. They've got the temporary road going through
there. The grading should occur, if it's not already, it should occur soon
for the ballfield and that will, the plan is that that will be completed
and seeded before the snow flies so hopefully the grass will grow yet this
,.... fall and then season next year and be ready to play on the following year.
The rest of the facilities will be constructed next year and they will be
ready all at the same time then.
Mady: I drove on the temporary road tonight. They haven't started the
grading out there. There's a construction trailer sitting on the property
right next to the park shelter. If you haven't been out to Lake Susan in
a long time, it's a real easy way to get out there now there's nice smooth
roads.
Sietsema: It's changed the whole atmosphere of the park.
Mady: It's no longer a nice rural park.
Robinson: Did the Council address this last night?
Sietsema: Yes. They acted to authorize the execution of the agreement.
Robinson: Would you make a note to, I'm concerned again about the fact
that they will get it seeded and I think that's important this fall. Would
you make a note to bring that up in an October meeting or September
meeting? Otherwise we'll forget about it and I can see next July. If
they're going to seed it...
Schroers: They should seed in September.
""
Sietsema: And they probably won't right now because typically August is
hot and dry.
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
August 15, 1989 - Page 10
Robinson: I'm just concerned about it getting done this fall yet.
...",
Sietsema: They know. I mean believe me. Engineering is fully aware of
how important that field is to us and there are councilmembers that have
indicated their desire to have that ready to go by 1991 also so. I will
keep you updated as to the progress of the park and I will keep them on
schedule hopefully.
Mady: In line with Curt's question. It came to me when I was at Lake Ann
last weekend, seeing that they've got everything pretty well close to being
finally done. Just be concerned that next year when you have people
trampling on this brand new grass wrecking it. Is there a way we can not
put the chainlink up? They've got the posts up already. If they don't put
the final fencing in for the backstops and that, kind of deters people from
playing in it.
Sietsema: Well, there's two ways to look at it. I'm hoping they get the
chainlink up right away so that snowmobilers don't go in there and dig up
our new seed. The safety fence should still remain all through next season
while that seasons and we will have a park attendant on duty. Hopefully
we'll have the park patrol person on duty next year if that's all funded
and keep that area clear of park users. If it looks like it might be a
problem, we could put additional signing on there but I think, the schedule
is for them to have the fencing done this year. They're not going to want
to come back next year and put it up.
....."
Hasek: Maybe the other thing is just if a problem does arise out there,
either this fall or next winter, if we could just have a park board or from
the park commission, whatever, drop a note in the paper say that we're
going to tag people out there if there's a problem and explain to them that
destroying the field means the potential of somebody not being able to play
and recreation the next year or the following year.
Sietsema: And the sign out there does say that it will be ready for play
in 1991. All the paper articles and everything so people, as far as that
read the paper know, should not be expecting to be able to use that next
year.
Mady: I know one team in the over 35 league, they will be out there
playing on it. They take batting practice for an hour before every game
and they use any space they can so I'm sure they're going to be there. I
just want to make sure that we've got something in place.
Sietsema: If we're worried about the leagues, we can state that right up
front in the organizational meetings that are held in February that if
teams are caught out there, they're going to have to forfeit games. I mean
we can do any kind of penalties or whatever for using the fields when
they're not supposed to that we want to as far as that goes. I wouldn't be
as concerned about them because we can explain to those at organizational
meeting how important it is to give that grass a chance. It's more of tv
casual park user that I'd be more concerned about. -'
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
August 15, 1989 - Page 11
"""'"
Hoffman: ...we could put a snow fence from first to third that makes it
real difficult to play in the infield.
PROGRAM REVIEW:
JULY 4TH
TEEN NIGHT OUT
PLAYGROUND
Sietsema: You better have lots of questions for Todd because I made him
come to this meeting tonight.
Boyt: You did a wonderful job.
Lash: I heard a lot of comments about the teen night.. .lot of fun.
Hoffman: Yes, I think teen night went well and I think the Lion's and
Rotary were glad to help out and should be back again next year. I think
we'll look to change it just to include some different age groups so the
older or the younger ones don't feel left out and have possibly three of
them during the summer for each times. Something of that nature. Lots of
fun.
"""'"
Mady: Did you charge at all?
Hoffman: For this one? No, we did not. We paid for some of the
advertising and then the financing came right out of the Lion's and the
Rotary for all the supplies, crafts, games, prizes and they also solicited
the businesses that are listed here.
Mady: Most of the kids in this age group all have money. We don't have to
charge them $5.00 a head obviously.
Hoffman: A couple bucks?
Mady: At the door if we could defray some costs and bring in a nice band
for them or something.
Hoffman: The Hi Topps. The music OJ worked really well. They just
brought in some older kids with their stereo equipment and played and a few
brave ones danced but other than that, not a whole lot. Summer Discovery
Playground program went very well other than a few questions from parents
confused on why it switched from community education to City of Chaska and
the City of Chanhassen this year. I believe the program stayed as popular
and has and hopefully we can continue it's growth in future years. The
program, I don't know if it's stated in there, if you caught it but we
offered it at North Lotus Lake Park which I thought would really be a
~ popular location and not enough kids came out. The same with Minnewashta
Heights Park. It's a small geographic area but it's not served by a lot of
our programs so we offered it up there as well and we did not get enough
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
August 15, 1989 - Page 12
attendance there either.
-'
Boyt: Did the tennis go at North Lotus?
Hoffman: Yes. A portion of the classes. The majority of the classes for
tennis lessons were held at City Center Park. There will be an attendance
report coming up in later future packets as well.
Mady: Next year you'll still continue to attempt to have one at
Minnewashta and North Lotus Lake. There may just simply be, as more people
become aware of it...
Sietsema: No action is needed unless you want us to do something
different.
DISCUSSION OF PARK AND RECREATION COMMISSION MISSION STATEMENT.
Sietsema: As requested at a previous meeting, it was suggested that the
Commission develop a mission statement. I've included for your review,
maybe generate some discussion, the goals and pOlicies taken out of the
Comprehensive Plan for the Recreation section. I don't know if you want to
establish a time limit on how long you want to discuss this or whatever.
I maybe should have included that you had drafted but basically this is
just kind of a brainstorming session on what you think should be included
and I can take those ideas back and try to formulate some things. I'd al .
like some guidelines as far as how long you think it should be. Basicall~
how long the intent and your brainstorming ideas and I can bring back a
rough copy for editing at a later meeting.
Boyt: Jan, do you want to start?
Robinson: Are we going to set a time limit?
Boyt: Couple minutes each person.
Is that alright?
Lash: I tried to come up with a couple of ideas. I didn't come up with
.much more than I had on...before but I was trying to be very general
because I think that's the whole purpose of it. I came up with basically
two statements. To respond to citizen's park and recreational needs and
concerns in a timely, respectful and financially responsible manner. Two
would be to assist City Council members in researching or providing
background information and public input regarding park and recreational
issues.
Erhart: That is basically what I had included in mine too. We wrote it
together.
Robinson: I approached it I guess like you would approach a business
mission statement where the citizens of Chanhassen are the customer so
I said, and I don't have a statement, just some words that I think should
be in there. Meet the needs of the Chanhassen residents. That's the ~
customer. Provide a quality product or quality park and recreation
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
August 15, 1989 - Page 13
,....,
facilities at the lowest possible cost. If you said something about the
same thing and I think there should be safety mentioned someplace. With
safety reminders or something. I also think it should be, the long term
needs of the Chanhassen residents. I had trouble wondering our
responsibility I think is to adminster and plan for so I jotted those words
down. How you put all that together I'm not sure. But that's my thoughts
on it.
Mady: I guess my thoughts are, one, I like the... They're usually
addressed towards vour client and to vour... In our situation it's with
the same person...;o our goal, our co~itment, our mission is to serve the
people in this community with a good open eye toward the future keeping
close tabs on the present but being ever watchful of the future. Sometimes
we bow down to the present and totally miss the boat on the future
so...make sure that this community as a growing community, we do things
right the first time so 20 years down the road when the town is full or
whenever that happens, welre not trying to figure out we're going to do
this. So thatls where I think welre heading. What we've got here right at
this...
Hasek: I have a question. Are we putting together a mission statement for
this Park and Recreation Commission or are we putting together a mission
statement for the recreational part of the Comprehensive Plan?
Sietsema: I believe the intent was a mission statement for the this
,.,..., commission.
Hasek:
that we
we need
place?
This commission? Donlt we already have some kind of guidelines
are supposed to be using to make our decisions already? I mean do
a mission statement per se for this group or is there not one in
This is out of the Comprehensive Plan.
Sietsema: Right. Out of the City Code there are the By-laws of what pnt
the commission together and I can read that to you. That may be helpful
also.
Hasek: I guess then, I think that the goals and policies that are stated
within the recreational part of the Comprehensive Plan are exactly that.
They are comprehensive. They basically direct any commission and any
governmental unit in this city, to do and to abide by the polices and goals
that are set forth so they don't simply talk about us doing it. They're
talking about the next group and the next group and the next group. If
we're having some problems with how this particular commission is supposed
to function, then I think we ought to address the mission statement for
this particular commission rather than monkeying around with the
Comprehensive Plan.
Sietsema: I only put the copy from the Comprehensive Plan to generate some
ideas and discussion. It wasn't to revise what's in the Comprehensive Plan
but to give you some background as to what the Comprehensive Plan has set
~ up for the Park and Recreation Department or section of the City.
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
August 15, 1989 - Page 14
Hasek: I understand. I guess I'm not in any way trying to place any ~
blame. I'm just really trying to understand where our discussion and
mission statement...
Schroers: The only thing that I would like to add is that if we are going
to formulate a new mission statement, I would like it to say something
about protecting and preserving the environment of Chanhassen to maintain
the lifestyle that we enjoy now. We'd like to preserve forever.
Sietsema: I usually bring this down with me. The Park and Recreation
Commission shall advise the Council on the conduct of the public recreation
program and to that end the Commission shall advise the Council in
providing, conducting and supervising recreation areas, facilities,
services and programs for the public recreation. Including such facilities
as playgrounds, parks, swimming pools, beaches, camps and indoor recreation
centers either within or without the corporate limits of the City upon
property under the custody and management of the City or upon other public
or private property with the consent of the owners of such property. The
commission shall advise the City in the operation of parks, recreation
areas and like facilities now owned or acquired by the City and may advise
the City to enter into agreements of a cooperative nature with other public
and private agencies, organizations or individuals when, in the judgment of
the Commission, such procedure would prove advantagous. The commission
shall make recommendations to the Council concerning property acquisitions
needed to provide a comprehensive recreation system. On or before
September 1st, the commission shall render a full report to the Council
covering it's operation for the preceeding 12 months together with it's ~
recommendations and an estimate of funds required for it's work for the
ensuing year. It shall also render such other irregular or special
reports, advisory, recommendations or make such investigations as it deems
adviseable or as may be requested by Council.
Schroers: Sounds good but nowhere in there does it say anything about
protecting the environment.
Robinson: What was that you just read?
Sietsema: The functions of the Park and Recreation Commission as
established in the City Code.
Hasek: The reason why I had her read that Curt is because I guess I was
confused as to where the mission statement that we're talking about fits
in. It didn't appear to me as though a discussion about the way this
commission should be operate should be a part of the comprehensive plan.
That typically isn't. Those and the functions of the commission are part
of the Bv-Laws of the Citv. If we feel we need a mission statement, a
generaliied mission statement, it seems to me like that's where it goes.
Robinson: I don't know if it has to go anyplace. You know how we got
there? To looking at a mission statement? Right? When you two went to
the seminar or whatever it was and came back and some recommendations wer'
that hey, you should probably have a mission statement or an objective Ot~
statement or something to keep you on track and keep you headed down the
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
August 15, 1989 - Page 15
,....
straight and narrow to Park and Rec needs.
Sietsema: And it was suggested that that be adopted every year. Not
necessarily to go in the City Code but just something that we kind of live
by so it gets us back on track if we're straying and we kind of lost focus.
Hasek: So that necessarily does not have to be approved by Council then?
It's something that we do ourselves?
Sietsema: Right.
Hasek: That we maintain ourselves.
Lash: I think there was considerable Council input but I don't think it
needed to be...
Sietsema: I would think that you would want the council to review it and
agree with it.
Lash:
we're
We can say anything we want but if the Council doesn't support us,
lost.
Hoffman: A majority of the recreation departments use that short mission
statement in all their publications. It's just stated in there so people
of the community read that and they understand what this board is about and
.~ a vast majority of them probably don't even know what your goal is so it's
just good for that use as well.
Hasek: A mission statement such as to help and to serve.
Robinson: We've got that code she just read that was written by lawyers
and I think is too lengthy. We've got this in the Comp Plan that has some
nice specific things and I agree with Jan, this should be a couple of
sentences but pretty general.
Hasek: If that is the case, and I think a lot of the things that we talked
about or that have been mentioned here are good. Safety is our obligation.
Part of one of the things there. There might be some things that can be
dropped simply because they're our obligation. As a Park and Rec
Commission member, it's your obligation to fulfill those particular needs.
Maybe some of these are omitted either that statement or goals and policies
in the comprehensive plan and those are the things that we should be
addressing.
Boyt: That's one of the things that I came up with. Something that's not
in a policy. You talk about provide park and open space facilities. I
think another direction we've been heading is trails and that's not listed
in here. I think that will be addressed when the new City Planner is hired
too. I'd like to see that.
~
Hasek:
In the Comp Plan?
Boyt: Yes.
"
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
August 15, 1989 - Page 16
Hoffman: One thing we can do to assist you for next time is I can go
throllgh some of those publications that we have and pullout some of the
missions statements of the other departments and print those so you can
kind of take a look at those as well and see if there's any you do like.
...",
Boyt: We just need a paragraph.
Hoffman: That's all they are.
Robinson: So the other departments have?
Hoffman: Sure.
Boyt: Other park and rec departments.
Hoffman: In their publications or brochures they list their park and
recreation commission and here's what their philosophy or their mission
statement is and we have a bunch of those on file.
Boyt: I think it would be helpful if we had this part of the Comp Plan
with us at our meetings as well because it does define a lot of the
directions that we should be taking and there are things like emphasize
accessibility and use by Chanhassen residents. We haven't been real
certain as to whether or not we're supposed to emphasize accessibility and
it says right here that we should. There are other things in here that
would be helpful for us on a nightly basis. -,'
Hasek: That question you bring up is one of the reasons, I mean I read
this probably a dozen times, several times before I came on the Commission
and based upon some jobs we were working on in the City looking... Just
trying to get direction and the question I've asked and the reason why
accessibility keeps showing up is that I don't know exactly what they mean
and that's why I've tried to ask Lori to give us some typical definitions
and eventually that could be served.
Sietsema: I've got some information corning from Met Council and from
Hennepin Parks and from DNR. They've all got some things. That's
scheduled on a future agenda.
Boyt: I think a lot of this stuff is interpretation too. It depends on
how we interpret each paragraph as to which direction we take.
Hasek: And that's intention. The reason why this are a little open ended
is because it is intentionally written for flexibility and it's not meant,
I mean if it was specifically written that there were absolute guidelines
that were supposed to be followed, we wouldn't be needed. We would not be
needed. Our job is to interpret what this says based upon the time frame
that we're in as a commission to and for the City Council. That's our job.
Sietsema:
Lori, did you have a copy of the one that we put together roughl'-
--'.
I have it in another packet.
I should have included it.
Erhart:
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
August 15, 1989 - Page 17
~
Boyt: Maybe we can look at it when we look at the others.
Sietsema: I'll put it together. When I bring it all back, I'll have that
with it.
Erhart: It was real rough but it addressed what Larry brought up which
I think is real important.
Hasek: Yes, that's something that's not mentioned in here. If it
something that wasn't at the time that this was put together, it wasn't
necessary. We have all kinds of open space and natural areas.
Robinson: But there's one in here. I kind of put a key word on each of
these and I said protect the environment for wide open space areas for the
conservation, protection of ecological sensitive areas. Protect the
environment.
Sietsema: So were there any other things you want me to add to the list?
Boyt: I think we're going to need another work session on this.
~
Sietsema: Yes and I fully intended that you would. I just wanted to get
some ideas from each of you and I'll take what Jan and Dawne put together
and all of your ideas and we'll also compile what other departments have.
Park and Recreation Departments have as their philosophies and statements
and we'll put that all together and work on it again. This is just a
starting point for us.
Hasek: I think part of the confusion in reading through the policies is
that a lot of them are similar to each other but they're written apart from
each other. Maybe that's part of the interpretation. I think if they were
reorganized, the exact same policies were reorganized a little bit, and I
intended to do that. I started doing it and I ended up with only the one I
came...with all my notes on it. It might be a little easier to follow. It
does bounce around and I think like Curt did, if you put one word besides
each one that kind of tells YOll what that paragraph says, you'll see going
down through here that it would be real easy just to restructure this a
little bit and put them into a different grouping that would fall more
logically from top to bottom and I hope that...
COMMISSIONER PRESENTATIONS:
Mady: About 2 or 3 weeks ago a lady stopped me at church and thanked for
the job I'm doing with the City but her main, which is always nice to hear
but her main thrust was, she's I guess in her mid to late 60's, was on TH
101 to Lake Susan. She drives to Eden prairie all the time to walk on
their trails and she wishes we could do something to get the trails done in
Chanhassen. I talked to a couple other people about it. I'd like to see
~ this Commission think real good and hard in the very near future about
getting a trail referendl~ together for this winter. There's a very good
chance the community center will be going on a referendum this winter and
Pa~k and Rec Commission Meeting
August 15, 1989 - Page 18
r'd like to see us do something with Minnewashta Parkway and TH 101, both~
no~th and south of downtown Chanhassen. We'~e putting a park in in the
southern part of Chanhassen. The~e's no way to get there unless you want
your kid to be on TH 101. North TH 101 is a death trap for anybody outside
of a car so we have some real needs. They're not being addressed. Every
member on the cu~rent Council has indicated a desire to put a trail on TH
101 and Minnewashta Parkway so we should just stop talking about it. Let's
get it done before we start to kill some people out there. We all
recognize the safety problems. Let's find out what it's going to cost. We
have an oppo~tunity with the HRA and the Highway Department redoing the TH
101 intersection down here and TH l0l's going to be rerouted along that
trail can be done with no cost to the trail fund itself possibly. r'd like
to see us do some good hard thinking about it. Direct staff to doing some
research into it and hopefully in the next few months here we'll have a
plan to go forward with just addressing those areas. Dropping everything
else in the City off recognizing that there's a lot of concern in the past
2 referendums ove~ some of the neighborhood trails. We're just saying,
okay fine. We'll leave those for a later date. Let's tackle the real
serious p~oblems that we've got.
Sietsema: r have on a future agenda discussion of major trail connections
and maybe rill just revise that then as discussion of major trails and how
they could appear on a ~eferendllm or a referendum package or something like
that.
Mady: rf anyone else has any comments on it, I'd like to recommend that
direct staff to provide us with some information as to how much trail we'~
actually talking about. You're going to have to obviously work with other
people and find out what the HRA and the Highway Department is going to be
doing so we can see what they can do for us and then find out how much we
need to do. Get some cost estimates together.
Robinson: A~e you just talking TH l0l?
Mady: TH 101 and Minnewashta Pa~kway. I was talking basically TH 101 and
Minnewashta Parkway. Those two. I don't know of any other ones.
Boyt: That's something we can discuss on a future meeting on which major
corridors.
Robinson: I'm not sure that those are the major ones. I'm not saying they
not, r'm just not sure.
Lash: What kind of money do we have in the fund now?
Sietsema: The trail dedication fund? It's not very much.
Lash: Maybe what we can do is try to focus on getting a little more money
for the fund.
Mady: That's going to take quite a bit of time. We're talking about
$300,000.00-$400,000.00 here. We're not going to get that in our fund in~
the next few years.
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
August 15, 1989 - Page 19
""'"
Sietsema: We probably, and I'm guessing, but I think there's probably
about $20,000.00 to $40,000.00 in the trail fund right now.
Lash: Can you get information as to how much this would cost us?
Sietsema: Right. You need to know that yes. What I'm hearing him direct
me to do is to find out how much of alignment, footage wise. Cost. Where
we can share expenses. Where we can get other projects to pay for trails
and come back with information to put a package together, or at least get
some direction as far as where we want to go from here.
Boyt: It's something that the Council was pretty much in a majority of
opinion of that they wanted us to head in this direction.
Robinson: Dawne just said though there they're going to...
Erhart: There are plans to take bends out of TH 101 so.
Lash: When is that though exactly?
Erhart: In the near future isn't it?
Sietsema: I don't know when exactly it is. It is not too far off.
,...,.
Mady: Of course recognizing that we haven't got funding available for it.
What I'm saying is, if they're going to be doing something right down here,
they're not going to be taking curves out of TH 101 up here at all.
Minnewashta Parkway is going to get redone within 2 years up there. We've
got to have money available in two years.
Sietsema: I'll bring together all that information and then we can
determine how we're going to get the rest of the money that isn't going to
be covered out of the fund or out of other projects. Is there a second to
that motion?
Hasek: Just a second. Just a little bit of discussion. Haven't we
already done a portion of that? Haven't we already made some estimates as
to length of trail and cost for segments and so forth like that?
Sietsema: Yes. It needs to be updated and with all of, every year Gary
updates the state Aid money and that kind of thing so I can find out, I can
just update all that information. It shouldn't be too difficult to do.
Boyt: Is there a second?
Hasek: I'll second it.
Mady moved, Hasek seconded that the Park and Recreation Commission direct
~ staff to research and bring back information on shared areas for trails on
major corridors and collectors. All voted in favor and the motion carried.
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
August 15, 1989 - Page 20
Boyt: Any other commission presentations?
.....",
Schroers: Just one very fast announcement.
is a brand new outdoor recreation center and
dedicated at Clifton French Regional Park so
newest and latest, stop by and check it out.
If anyone is interested, there
play area that was just
if you wanted to see the
I think you'll be impressed.
Sietsema: What park is that?
Schroers: It's Clifton E. French Regional Park and it's in Plymouth. It
is on CR 9, 1 mile east of 494. You can't miss it.
Boyt: The dock at South Lotus needs to be taken out of the water.
Sietsema: It still hasn't been taken out of the water?
Robinson: I drove by there tonight. It looks like, if you jump now I
think you can keep dry feet. If the tree branches don't get you as you
approach it. It's just a bad set up. I think somebody did take it out of
the water a little bit it looked like.
Sietsema: Okay, I'll check on it.
Boyt: I haven't been... Do you know if the chain is down yet?
Sietsema: I understand that it is. I haven't gone over there myself to -'
look either but I understand that that is down.
Boyt: Any questions on the adminstrative section?
Lash: Actually I have two quick questions for Lori. The first one is, how
about the playground equipment at Lake Ann Park? I thought we were looking
at July or something like that?
Sietsema: It's not in yet and
the first week in August. The
it takes 6 weeks to get here.
down the old stuff and put up
I haven't received
end of July or the
As soon as it gets
the new.
it yet. We ordered it in
first week in August and
here, then they'll take
Lash: Would that be too much of a liability or a hazard if they took some
of that stuff and put it at Carver Beach?
Sietsema: The old stuff?
Lash: Yes. Is that in too rough of condition?
Sietsema: Well, it's...I don't think Dale would touch it other than to
take it down.
Lash: Then the other question, I was just approached by a resident the
other day and he had a question on the orientation of the fields at Lake -'
Ann. He said he had called several different people at City Hall because
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
August 15, 1989 - Page 21
,.....
he said it seems like they're backwards where if you're playing evening
games you're facing the sun. Is that the way it is and does it have to be
that way for a particular reason?
Sietsema: It's the only way those fields would fit on there if we wanted
three fields.
Hoffman: Fields I and 2 are the recommended way to go but.
Sietsema: Typically they'd go by the wheel configuration where all the
backstops are together and there's always going to be that one field that
isn't the best and a second one that's not the greatest. There's always
going to compromise some way but that was the only way we could fit three
fields on there if we wanted the soccer field and adequate parking and the
rest so it was the only configuration that could come up and we had two
different firms look at it.
Lash: Okay. Thank you.
ADMINSTRATION SECTION:
Mady: The goose report. I read through that thing. Was it his
recommendation that we not trap geese next year?
."""
Sietsema:
No.
Mady: Okay. Then I misunderstood that.
Sietsema: All he's saying is it's taking longer because there's
infiltration from other areas after they take out what's nesting here. It's
taking longer to reduce the population to the ideal size and it may very
well be that we may have to just continue it and eventually not take all of
the geese but take some every year just to keep it down to a moderate
level. We have reduced the problem significantly on the parks.
Hasek: Just as a point of interest, we've been working on a project where
we're involved with the Corps of Engineers and the Corps, one of their
responsibilities is to maintain the wildlife habitat anyplace related to
natural waters or streams which takes in a big chunk of ground. A part of
their policy has changed just over the past few years within the
metropolitan area to, they used to encourage the construction of open
waters and building of ponds for ducks and geese and so forth and so on and
recently they have cut back on that policy. They're encouraging people to
build more upland simply because the population of water fowl in the
metropolitan region has reached almost epidemic proportions and it's
started causing some health problems so they're taking a different look at
things as well. It's not only our goose program but there are some other
problems out there that are recognized.
~ Sietsema: The major problem with the whole goose population in the metro
area is that there are no natural predators in the metro area and the
population, therefore they're protected and they multiply more than just,
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
August 15, 1989 - Page 22
it's out of control.
--'
Hasek: I think that's part of it. I think if you really took a look at
what the Corps' program is, I think that's part of what they're trying to
do, the creation of upland habitat is supposed to perhaps bring back some
of that natural predator to kind of balance the problem again. I think
that's part of their whole program.
Sietsema: Ship in some foxes.
Schroers: A baby but it's very seldom that it could get at the baby
without the adult goose there and as long as the adult goose is there, the
baby fox will have nothing to do with it.
Sietsema: Well, whatever their natural predator is. A bear? A wolf.
Erhart: They have open season on them.
Mady: That's been pretty unsuccessful.
Sietsema: It's pretty difficult to open season the metro area though.
Mady: Did Council do anything on the Lake Lucy access?
Sietsema: It was not on the agenda. It wasn't on the agenda last night
because we still needed to get some information. The Mayor was schedule,
to meet with Joe Alexander today and as soon as he meets with him, then .-,
we'll know what we're dealing with but it was fruitless to go ahead and
figure out a site on the lake if there was anyway that DNR was going to
change their position. So that is scheduled for the next City Council
meeting. In the meantime, I have gone ahead and applied for LAWCON grant
money on one of the sites simply because we had, I had to get things
together. It doesn't look like funding is going to be very successful.
Lash: So do you think ultimately this is going to be coming back to us or
what?
Mady: I don't think so.
Lash: What about this other property that's now...
Sietsema: It's all in the City Council's hands. We don't have the time.
With the Watershed and their time restrictions and with LAWCON needs an
application by September 1st, we didn't have the time to bring it back here
again so it's simply at the City Council and it's going to be their
decision.
Mady: We're planning on a future agenda have a community center update for
this group?
Sietsema: Yes.
Boyt: Have you ordered our T-shirts yet Todd?
-'
Pa~k and Rec Commission Meeting
August 15, 1989 - Page 23
,....
Hoffman: No.
Boyt: Are you going on vacation any time soon?
Sietsema: Me?
Boyt: That's the only time he can do anything. He keeps saying Lori won't
let me. Lori won't let me.
Sietsema: You don't have it in your budget.
Hoffman: I've got a few points of interest. Number one, I'd like to thank
Jim for the nice letter. That's all we need is one letter to keep our
mo~ale up and that's the only one we did receive.
Boyt: No we got anothe~.
Hoffman: Oh Bill. Bill sent one. Thank him as well. A few other things
I was jotting down through the meeting here. We did not receive a grant
fo~ the dock at Lake Ann again in 1990. 5 of 13 in the metro area we~e
app~oved. 3 of those had some funds matched by the organization aplying so
we may want to look into putting a couple thousand dollars towards that
$30,000.00 fishing dock at Lake Ann to try to up our pe~centage for getting
that in 1991. We'll t~y to do that.
"...,
Lash: I have a question kind of concerning that. This just got mentioned
to me the othe~ day too about how fishing in Lake Ann used to be half way
decent and it's not so hot anymore. Now we have a boat launch and if they
want to put in a fishing dock, are we getting into some kind of a plan fo~
restocking or eventually it's just going to be fished out?
Hoffman: No. There's quite a bit more to fish management that just, I
don't believe that lake is over fished at all. If anything, it's under
fished and the population of small fish just kind of stunt out the growth
of some of the older fish. I'm not real clear on why the northern
population isn't greater there but it's basically a bass, sunfish lake and
I think that lake would be very healthy if we increased the fishing
pressure.
Lash: So the DNR is not involved with any kind of a program?
Hoffman: They're involved. They've done some minimal stocking out there
and they think the lake is very adequate for the fishing. The fish
population is there for this dock so they think it's a good application.
The fall brochure will be out the first week of September. Fall softball
starts next Tuesday. There's 8 teams that joined in that. The way we were
programmed, that was listed in the adminstration section here. Just a
point to talk about accessibility a little bit. We have a handicap
instructor that is with the historical society. That was their first
.~ question. Is that building handicap accessible and no it was not so we
needed to build a small ramp so that person could gain access to Heritage
Park building so we could operate this program so it's just a point of
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
August 15, 1989 - Page 24
interest. To talk about fields a little bit more. DataServ fields are ~
being upgraded. They're out there with the grading equipment. We will be
using them real extensively next year because there are people interested
in starting a Legion baseball organization in town again next year and with
Legion and with Babe Ruth, Field *1 at Lake Ann will not be available for
adult softball next year so there will only be 2 fields at Lake Ann and
then the 2 DataServ fields available for adult softball in 1990.
Robinson: Does the City maintain those at DataServ?
Hoffman: Yes we will maintain them while we use them for our programs and
I thought it was interesting. In the statement in the City Code it stated
in there, on public or private lands maintaining facilities so this is one
such agreement that is actually listed. And just one other little quirk
here, I thought about this occasionally over the summer. What are we going
to do with our Zamboni? We no longer have the use of the indoor ice arena
and we own a Zamboni?
Boyt: Let's sell it.
Hoffman: Yes, put it on the corner.
Hasek: Is there any reason to keep it?
Hoffman: No.
Hasek: So you foresee that we're going to have an ice surface in the nex~
year or two?
Hoffman: No.
Boyt: When we get an ice arena, we'll get a good Zamboni.
Mady: Get a new one.
Hasek: How did this one function for us?
Hoffman: Wonderfully.
Hasek: Did it give us any problems?
Mady: It didn't give us problems but it worked..
Hoffman: It's been maintained. We've put some money into it.
Sietsema: We've got it all fixed up.
Robinson: Is it ours or is it the CAA's?
Hoffman: It's ours.
Sietsema: It's ours and...
...."
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
August 15, 1989 - Page 25
""""
Hasek: Is there a possibility that we might be able to trade it for ice
time for...
Hoffman: I would think we'd just want to sell it.
Boyt: And buy t-shirts.
Robinson: We got such a good deal on it.
Boyt: We should be able to make some money on it right?
Mady: We might come up with information on, since the City did put a lot
of money into the Bloomberg arena, in putting in the lights and some other
improvements there...
Boyt: We didn't. The Hockey Association did.
Mady: They were paid for...
Sietsema: We didn't either.
Hoffman: Nobody's paid for it yet.
Mady: You mean the poor electrician never got paid for his lights?
~ Sietsema: The bank paid for it but that's not the City didn't. The City
didn't put much as far as money into that building at all except to pay the
electric bills and the ice attendant.
Mady: We guaranteed the loan?
Hoffman: Correct.
Mady: Ultimately the City will pay for it because that's the way it works.
Boyt: Brad Johnson's going to pay for it.
Mady: I guess I want to find out if there's any equipment there that maybe
we can sell it. Maybe talk to the Hockey Association and find out what
their plans are.
Hoffman: I don't think Bloomberg's. given it up.
Lash: How about Chaska? Do they need one?
Hoffman: A Zamboni?
Lash: Yes.
Hoffman: They'll get a brand new Zamboni.
".....,
Sietsema:
Believe me.
They won't have any use for this little thing.
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
August 15, 1989 - Page 26
Mady: Yes, this little one. It's an emergency situation...but you -'
definitely want to do it every other hour on a big sheet of ice.
Hasek: There's got to be a market for that.
Hoffman: Sure. We'll sell it.
Hasek: I have one question. You mentioned 4 fields for leagues next year
for softball. Is that adequate to serve what we had this year? Will that
take care of the problem?
Hoffman: Sure. We had them on 2 1/2 this year.
Hasek: Okay. I was talking to, is it Norquist from the Little League?
Hoffman: Yes.
Hasek: He was saying that he anticipated that there were going to be
between 6 and 10 additional teams next year in that league. How is that
going to impact our?
Boyt: There's going to be a little change. There's some fathers here that
are going to get together and start doing...
Hoffman: Yes, that's one possibility. We may have 6 or 8 in Chanhassen
and have a Chanhassen league instead of them being incorporated in SOllth
Tonka but that's still yet to be evolved. ~
Mady: With all that happening, do you foresee us having restrictions
placed on the in town leagues that exist as they do now?
Hoffman: We'll keep it at present and any new teams coming in need to meet
the requirement. The older teams that are here now have been grandfathered
in and will remain.
Lash: Do they need that every night for Little League?
Hoffman: Field #11
Lash: Yes.
Hoffman: Babe Ruth and then the new Legion team which will start up next
year.
Mady: Those teams practice every day but they don't play outside of
weekends.
Hoffman: And they also have much longer games. 2-2 1/2 hours.
Robinson: I wO\lld just like to nominate Sue Boyt for the quick meeting
award. It's now 8:44 and I bet the City Council will appreciate not
reading 65 pages of Minutes. So with that I'd like to make a motion to ~.
adjourn.
",.... ,
-"
I"......
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
August 15, 1989 - Page 27
Robinson moved, Hasek seconded to adjourn the meeting. All voted in favor
and the motion carried. The meeting was adjourned at 8:44 p.m..
Submitted by Lori Sietsema
Park and Rec Coordinator
Prepared by Nann Opheim