Loading...
PRC 1989 11 28 PARK AND RECREATION COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING ,..... NOVEMBER 28, 1989 Chair~an Mady called the ~eeting to order at 7:30 p.m.. MEMBERS PRESENT: Jan Lash, Sne Boyt, Curt Robinson, Larry Schroers, Ed Hasek, Dawne Erhart and Jim Mady STAFF PRESENT: Lori Sietsema, Park and Rec Coordinator and Todd Hoffman, Recreation Supervisor APPOINT ACTING CHAIR: Hasek moved, Robinson seconded to appoint Sue Boyt as Acting Chair for the meeting. All voted in favor and the motion carried. AUTHORIZATION TO PREPARE PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS AND EASEMENT ACQUISITION FOR HERMAN FIELD PARK. Public Present: NaPle Address Betty Lang Bob & Jodi Riesselman """'Marcia & Bob Schiferli Randy Herman Candi StOrPl Ar thnr KiIllber Judy & Darrell Hinklin 2631 Forest Avenue 6320 Forest Circle 325 George Street, Excelsior 2792 Piper Ridge Lane 6360 Forest Circle 2820 Tanagers Lane 6345 Minnewashta Woods Drive SietsePla: This i tePI is placed on the agenda. Recently we reviewed a conple of drawings for the HerIYlan Field Park plan and sent a recommendation onto City Council. They approved that plan as recoIY~ended by the Park and Recreation COP\I"lission. Now what we need to do is simply go forward with the plans to develop that park and determining the costs of all of the different features and preparing plans and specs and also entering into negotiations to acquire the easements to get access to the park. So it's really siplple and straight forward but we're not reviewing any of the features of the park really until we get an idea of how much they cost. Then we look at how much money we have to spend and what we want to do first. There are people here in the audience for this item. The other thing that I wanted to bring up is that there was a suggestion from one of the residents in the area that suggested we develop a cOIY~littee of friends of Herman Field con~littee and we'd like to establish that comn.ittee tonight. I know there's a number of people that are interested and most of theIYI are here tonight that have called PIe and there may be additional too so. There's another sheet of paper back there. I put a couple out there and if you're interested on being on the Friends of Herman Field COmPlittee, ,...... I'd like you to sign up on that and indicate IYlaybe on the sign-up sheet that you're interested. Make sure that I get your address and a daytime phone nUIYlber so if we hold a meeting, I can give YOll a call. If it's late notice or if I need to contact you for anything. Park and Rec Compdssion Meeting November 28, 1989 - Page 2 -' Hasek: This is jl1st a discussion meeting tonight? It's not a public hearing? SietseI'la: No, it's not a public hearing. It's basically authol:ization to proceed with the development process. To get cost estiplates and enter into negotiations to acquire that easement. Boyt: We can start with that and we'll have discussion on acquiring easelllents. Do we have any COIlII'lents froPI the COPlPtission on that? Hasek: On acquiring easePlents? Boyt: Yeah. Hasek: I have a question. Are we trying to acquire an easement or are we trying to acquire a piece of right-of-way? Sietselha: We'll look at both options. Hasek: I guess I'd be in favor of making it a permanent right-of-way right off the bat...problems down the road so if we make it a public street. Sietsema: I would imagine that the landowners would probably be more in favor of that because that would make it more clean for the property owner . too but we'd 1 ike to discuss tha t wi th theIlI in the negotiation process. --' Boyt: here? Any other.: COlllPlents on the easePlent? .. I think we might have someone Betty Lang: I 'PI Betty Lang and the only cOPIPlent I have is I hope they do a survey and what we would like is that they don't divide up any of our lots. That they go to the boundary lines of the two properties and not break up our lots down there. Hasek: You mean like taking a chunk out of the middle of one of the lots? Betty Lang: Right. Exactly. Sietsellla: And leave one piece off all by itself. Boyt: Wait a I1tinute, this is being recorded so we do need to have you come to the I1tic. Betty Lang: Betty Lang, 2631 Forest Avenue. The request that I have is that in doing the survey, and I hope they do a survey and stick to it, is that they don't break up our lots down there. The way we understood it is that they would come between the two property lines. Hasek: Or along the property line that abuts to...right now. You're talking about the survey for properties. -'" Betty Lang: For the access to Herman Field. Park and Rec COIlIIllission Meeting NoveI"lbel: 28, 1989 - Page 3 ,..., SietseIlla: The Ci ty would need to do a survey to get a property descr iption or land description of the property before we could enter into a . transaction. I think the City would find it most desireable to go along the property line rather than dividing a piece of property. Boyt: We need a Illotion to approve authol:ization to start negotiations to acquire the easement. Mady: A question first. Do the Schiferli's have any concerns other than what Betty brought up? Marcia Schiferli: No, that's our biggest concern too. Mady: Okay, thank you. of entry into the park. owners. I'll move to request staff to pursue acquisition Enter into negotiations with the two pl:operty Robinson: I think we really should consider that they go along the property lines and not divide that by any means. SietseIlla: Tha t' s the way the plan was shown. ~ Resident: Excuse I"le. Where' s this entrance? Is this the one that they .. talked about on Forest Tl:ail? Sietsema: Yes. Off of Forest Circle. Betty Lang: No, Forest Avenue. Sietsema: Forest Avenue. Mady moved, Hasek seconded to authorize to proceed with negotiations to acquire an easeI"lent off of Forest Avenue for access into Herman Field Park. All voted in favor and the motion carl:ied. Boyt: Now we can organize a committee tonight. talk about Phase I facilities. It says that we need to Sietsema: Well basically what we need to do is, with your authorization to go ahead, staff will proceed with getting cost estimates and rough plans and specs together to deterIlline what the costs and the implications of doing the plan are and what's involved so you can have more information to base your decision on what you want to include in Phase 1 and Phase 2. So we'll have sOIllething done for the entire park and then you can determine, pick and choose what you want done in Phase 1 and Phase 2 or perhaps it can all be done in Phase 1. ,...., Boyt: with the plan that we have now that we've discussed before? Sietsema: Right. Park and Rec ComIllission Meeting November 28, 1989 - Page 4 --' Boyt: So the COIllIlli ttee would llIeet wi th yon? Sietsema: Well first of all, staff will go ahead and work with probably Mark's firm and get all the estimates and the specs and the information that we need and then we'll bring it to the cOIllIllittee and to the Park and Recreation COIl~ission to review and determine what you want to do in Phase 1 and Phase 2. Boyt: I wonder if we need to have the committee review the plan before we take it to Mark. SietseIlla: Why? Mady: The plan had been previously reviewed by us with the help of the neighborhood and it looked at the neighborhood concerns. Boyt: I remeI"lber we had qui te a discussion that evening and I wanted to make sure that it did. SietseI"la: I bel ieve it was. To the approval of the neighborhood. We didn't have any objections to it. And we alllended it to take into consideration their concerns. Betty Lang: I just would like to, I can't reI"leI"lber what was decided on th property line as far as we are concerned. Did they decide, I know they --' weren't going to go with the fence but did they decide about any type of trees or bernls or anything that wOllld protect our property frolll trespassers? Sietsellla: anything. as far as or second A landscaping plan hasn't been done to plant additional trees or A fence was shown and a cost estimate would go along with that what that would cost and if it would be done in the first phase phase but it was shown in the plan. Hasek: Just a COlllIllent. We had tal ked about a 1 i ttle bit abont a fence and I don't know where that callie from but that certainly doesn't preclude any of the neighbors froIlI putting a fence on their side of the property line too. They still have that right if they need that protection. SietseI"la: But the issue wasn't that we want to revise the plan anynlore because we haven't made all the revisions and had it alllended at the Council level and that has been approved. Now we want to deternline, with the help of the residents in the area, what we want to do first and how it's going to be done and there may be residents up there that have SOllIe interest in exactly what type of surfaces and what actually we put into the park and how it's maintained and that kind of thing. Those are the kind of things that I think they're interested in being a part of. Boyt: Okay, instead of just planning and developlllent bnt it's l'lore of a developlllent. .."., Sietsellla: Planning developl"lent. Park and Rec COI1mlission Meeting Novenlber 28, 1989 - Page 5 ,.... Hasek: I was just noticing that we put together at least a ballpark idea of what we want to do with our capital inlprovement plan over the next 4 years and we've allotted $35,000.00 in 1990 to Hernlan Field. It seems to nle like $35,000.00 would alnlost dictate that we have some some of phased developl'lent Ollt there. It's going to take a lot more than $35,000.00 to do that plan isn't it? Sietsel'la: What that $35,000.00 is is the $35,000.00 that was donated when the park was donated. That's in the reserve and whether we spend it next year or in phases or whatever, that's what we have to start out with for development in that park. Hasek: Still, we don't have anything else allotted for that. Boyt: We'll get to our plan later. We can still add more. We're not done wi th it yet. What do you need froITI llS now? SietseITla: I need author i zation to proceed wi th plans and specs and then if YOll wanted to develop this Friends of Herman Field COIT~ittee. That would be two different motions. Boyt: Okay, do we have a ITlotion to proceed wi th the plans? ,... Hasek: I ITIOVe that we proceed wi th the developITlent of plans. Are we into specifications right away too? Are they going to get to that detail or not? Sietsenla: Probably not the deta i led specs, no. Hasek: Plans for Herman Field considering the possibility of developing that park in several phases. Mady: Second. Hasek moved, Mady seconded that the Park and Recreation Con~ission approve proceeding with the development of Plans for HerITlan Field Park considering the possibility that the park will be developed in phases. All voted in favor and the motion carried. Boyt: Okay, a ITlotion to form a conlITd ttee. Sietsema: You may want to ask people to introduce themselves to you so you know who's on the cOITlnli ttee. Boyt: Is there anyone interested in being on the conlITlittee? Anyone that's here tonight? ~ Mady: I think if yon stood up, stated your nanle and address so it is part of our Minutes. That's for us. Park and Rec COJllnlission Meeting Noverrlber 28, 1989 - Page 6 -' Bob Riesselrrlan: Can I submit a proposal? I'm Bob Riesselman, 6320 Forest Circle. Betty's neighbor. I worked out a petition a while back and ran it to sorrle of the neighbors. I'd like to just l:ead it tonight and present it to Lori. This is dated October and November, 1989. Whereas, Herrrlan Field is a 13 acre park donated by the Herman Family to the City of Chanhassen with the stipulation that it should be used for park purposes, and Whereas, $35,000.00 was dedicated for the park in 1978, and Whereas, the City of Chanhassen has designed a number of park plans for development of Herman Field since that tirrle, and Whereas, action to develop the si te has been delayed due to the controversy over the access, and Whereas, even with sinlple interest of 8% compounded annually, $35,000.00 in 1978 would have accrned to nearly $65,000.00 today. Whereas, the concerned residents of this area bordered by TH 7 to the north, TH 41 to the east and Lake Minnewashta Regional Park fenced and non-accessible areas to the south and the west have no siI'lilar recreational arrleni ties wi thout crossing a busy TH 7 or TH 41, Whereas, a survey conducted by these neighborhood residents in June of 1989 indicated a high use rate. 66% indicated both spouses would use a park. 57% indicated they had children who would use the park. And Whereas, demographics show a reasonably broad distribution of ages of neighboring residents, including a significant number of young children who would use the park as a safe alternative to playing in the street, Now Therefore Be it Resolved, that we the concerned citizens of this neighboring area of Hernlan Field request that the City proceed with the construction of Modified Plan B, is what we have so far, approved at the August 29th Park and Recreation Corrmlission meeting wi thOl1t further delay. ..."", And, Be It Further Resolved, that we request $30,000.00 be budgeted in the City's fiscal year 1990. Of course now this might be 1991 because it got delayed, for the developPlent and construction of a second phase of the park which would include a paved biking trail with maybe biking access on Forest Avenue, a tennis court, a ballfield, picnic shelter, etc. and I took this 'around to about 30-40 hOPles and got a number of signatures. I will present a couple copies tonight. One other comment, I do think obviously I'l'l very pro for the park but I'd like every concern for the property owners who are actually giving the property... I would recomPlend that the Langs and the other folks are on the Friends of the Park conmlittee and guide as far as an appropriate park. Boyt: Are you interested in being on the conmlittee? Bob Riesselman: Yes. Boyt: If anyone else is interested in being on the conmlittee, would you come up and give us your name and address please. Randy Herman: My nanle is Randy Herman and I'm interested in being on the cOlllmi ttee. Art Kil1lber: My name is Art Killlber, 2820 Tanagers Lane in the Manor. We've been trying since 1982 to get this thing underway and talked to the COl'mlission here several times. We've got 10 til'les as I'lany kids in the neighborhood that use the park now as we did in 1982 so we'd like to get -' behind any effort it takes to get it handled. Park and Rec Corl\nlission Meeting Nove~ber 28, 1989 - Page 7 lflii"" Judy Hinklin: Judy Hinklin, 6345 Minnewashta Woods Drive. Candi Stor~: I'~ Candi Storm, 6360 Forest Circle. I'~ interested on serving on the con~ittee as is my husband Ji~ who's ho~e ill tonight. Our particular concern is the form and style of the walking trail that would go around that snlall nlarsh area in the west end. Boyt: Yes, we received the letter from your husband that talks about his concerns. Thank you. Betty Lang: Betty Lang, 2631 Forest Avenue. Boyt: Now we need a motion to establish this con~ittee and then Lori will be in touch with the~. Mady: Were you looking for conln.i ssion invol venlent on thi s i tenl? Sietsenla: As a conlIllittee? Yes. Mady: Anyone have an interest? Brhart: I would be. ".....Mady: I nlove to reconlnlend tha t the Fr iend s of Her.nlan Field be fornled to review the park plans and assist in ongoing care of the park. Robinson: Second. Mady: I just want to thank everyone who ca~e tonight. It really nlakes our job a lot easier when we get neighborhood involvenlent because otherwise we can maybe visit a park a couple of times but we still don't get the inti~ate knowledge of the area and it makes it a whole lot easier designing an area and really doing the job well when the neighborhood's there initially and showing us what needs to be done instead of us trying to figure out what needs to be done. Hasek: Just a quick question Lori. Do they have the use of our facilities if they want to put together a little newsletter... Sietsema: Sure. Yep. Hasek: So nlaybe what they should do is pick or choose a chairman who can work with you. Mady nloved, Robinson seconded that the Park and Recreation Conmlission establish that the Friends of Herman Field con~ittee be formed to assist in developnlent and ongoing care of Hernlan Field Park consisting of Bob ,...., Riesselnlan, Randy Hernlan, Art Kinlber, Judy Hinkl in, Candi and Jinl Storm, Betty Lang and Dawne Erhart. All voted in favor and the ~otion carried. Park and Rec Con~ission Meeting NoveI'lber 28, 1989 - Page 8 --" SITE PLAN REVIEW, SATHRE ADDITION. Sietse~a: This item is fairly straight forward in that it's simply creating two single fanlily lots out of 3.2 acres on the north side of Lotus Lake. The property is zoned Residential Single Family and it lies right next to North Lotus Lake Park. The Comprehensive Plan does not call for addi tional parkland in this area or trails. It's the recomI'lendation of this office to approve the proposed subdivision requiring HHn paynlent of the park and trail fees. Mady I'loved, Hasek seconded that the Park and Recreation COI'mlission recon~lend approving the Sathre Addition subidivision as proposed and requiring 100% paynlent of park and trail dedication fees. All voted in favor and the motion carried. REVISED 5-YEAR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM. Sietsenla: I thought the Capi tal Improvement Program for 1990 that yon reco~lended to the Ci ty Counc i I would help as we discuss thi s . I found a couple of inconsistencies with the 5 year plan that I revised than what this is so before everything is final approved, I hope to have all those glitches taken off. I don't claiI'1 any accountability. But at the last meeting, what I had given you in your packets was simply a 5 year capital iI'lproveI'lent program that was prepared in 1987 I believe and it hadn't ... really been looked at or revised since that tinle. SOI'le things have changed"' and some things were done and budgeted for in 1987, 1988, and 1989 that weren't on that plan and I wanted to bring it back to you to update and to revise so that we have in the future when we get additional money available to us, say it's the Lion's donation or whatever or at budget time, we have sOI'lething to work from. It wi 11 make ita little bit easier than crea ting a new wish list every year and so~e of the things that we plan on kind of get lost, fall to the wayside. So that's really the purpose of bringing this all back together. I didn't want our efforts from before to be totally not used. So what I've done is taken your comments that I got fronl Todd's notes and revised what was given to you last tinle. Again, the last one was really off the wall in sonle areas because it was done so long ago. This also shows funds that are in the referendum funds and it also shows funds that are in the reserve account. So that's basically where we're at. If you want to review that maybe park by park again or I'laybe you've all reviewed it enough and you just want to go... Hoff~an: If you have any concerns on a particular one. Hasek: well. Maybe what we should do is ask you if you've got some concerns as As the Park Board or COI'~ission. Sietsenla: Well, if you look at the last page, the very last page. Page 24, you'll see the bottOI'I 1 ine figures of what we're proposing to spend in each year. Actually we're right in line. 1990 looks like a hefty amount. It's actnally $447,500.00 when I compared this sheet. It looks like a lot......... but $310,000.00 of that is from the reserve fund so we're really right in line. It's not atypical for us to spend $120,000.00. We're spending Park and Rec Con~ission Meeting Noveplber 28, 1989 - Page 9 ,... $170,000.00 this year in our capital improvement program not including the reserve fund so that, it's not out of line I don't feel. 1992 is 1992 and beyond so that's why that one is so astronomical and that's got some real big items like starting deve10pnlent out at Bandimere Park. The Bandimere Farm and sOPle land acquisitions in and around Lake Ann Park. Hasek: Where are the two numbers that were off here? We're off the $200,000.00 for land acquisition in 1990. Sietsema: That's actually $175,000.00 for land acquisition and that's reflected in the reserve account. The other spot is on City Center Park. That should be $71,000.00 instead of $67,000.00. Hasek: Now these are new revisions you've made? Sietsepla: Right. Just for 1990. And South Lotus, instead of 0 there, that should be $26,500.00. Lash: I kind of agree with Ed's point earlier about Herman Field. Is there some way that we should, we can't do anything for 1990 but... Sietsema: Well 1990, see what's confusing is that there's $35,000.00 in the reserve fund and we can spend that at any time so that can be spent next vear. "'. . Lash: Yeah, except for I nlean what if it costs us that nluch jllSt to get access? Sietsema: Then at budget time next year that becomes, this doesn't mean that we've done our budget for the next 5 years. Mady: All this is a a worksheet. Sietsema: All this does is show. If you want to stick something in there in 1991, another $30,000.00, or pull a number out of the sky. Schroers: They were asking for additional. Lash: They were asking for another 30 so. Hasek: They were actually asking for an additional 60. They were asking for their 35 plus the interest over the last 10 years plus $30,000.00. Boyt: Yeah, we can put in what we think is reasonable for a year. Sietsema: If you want to figure the interest that's been earned over the years and want to put in another $30,000.00 in 1991, that's fine. It may cost us $100,000.00 to do that park and at that point in tinle, at budget tiple next year, we Play decide that we need to go with 3 phases and do ~$30,000.00 in 1991 or $50,000.00 in 1991 or whatever. This doesn't mean . that we're stuck to anything. It just has already established a wish list for us so that we don't have to reinvent the wheel every year. Park and Rec Cop~ission Meeting November 28, 1989 - Page 10 ...."" Boyt: I don't think we can use the rationalization that interest accrued because it didn't and that's reality. Robinson: Is that right? sietsema: No, it did. It just got, but the interest is accrued in the whole fund. There's interest accrued and it's put back into that fund overall. It's not accrued in each individual project. Mady: It's just going to have to be something that comes out of our general development fund period. Sietsema: When you look on the revenue side of the budget, it shows $10,000.00 from the Lion's. $10,000.00 of interest accrued for the whole overall fund that we've earned in the last year and it gets du~ped into the whole capital improvement 410 fund. Hasek: That's true but what they're... SietsePla: But what they're saying is they should get $30,000.00, a bigger hunk and there's some... Lash: There's SOI1'\e logic to that. SietsePla: That's fine but if it's going to cost us $100,000.00, nothing's....,., to say that we're going to limit it to $60,000.00 or cut something out. Mady: And if we don't need $30,000.00, we're not going to spend $30,000.00. We're going to do whatever we need to do. Sietsema: Right. You've approved the plan and now you just have to determine the time line that you want to get the plan accoo~lished. We've got $35,000.00 in the flmd designated for that and in 1991, if we need more, we can alloca~e as much as we want to it as long as we can afford to do it. Mady: Recognizing the concerns from every other neighborhood that's been in here over the last 2-3 years. Hasek: I've got 2 points. One, the money was given. The interest was not given. Actually 3 points. The second one is that Rloney was intended to be spent on the park. There wasn't a time limit put on it. The third thing is that, I think like Judy said, and perhaps ever more importantly, that park just did not need to be developed at the time it was given and now the demand is there. I think there's always been to a certain degree of deRland there but there was a real chance that that park wasn't going to get developed for a long time because it was to a degree, private people didn't want that thing developed, at least from the other direction, and only until we considered access to that park from the westerly access, I think it makes it...interest over the last 10 years. ....,., Boyt: We can't put nURlbers in right now. Park and Rec CO~\Iltission Meeting November 28, 1989 - Page 11 """" Mady: The only question I have in putting nUlnbers in is we simply don't have them. Every item on this 1 i st we have an i telll assigned wi th a fa i r1y good idea of what it's going to cost. Sietsema: We can revise this in 6 months when we have the cost too. Mady: It's a ~leaning1ess nU~lber though. Erhart: It wi 11 spur develop~lent. Boyt: We still have the $35,000.00. Mady: NO, we don't know that. Hasek: We know that it's not going to be enongh to afford the whole park but we don't know how far $35,000.00 will go. Mady: I don't like throwing $20,000.00 at a budget, or $30,000.00 or $50,000.00 at a budget when it's a totally meaningless nU~lber. It has no basis of fact on it in either way. Sietsema: To a great extent all of these are meaningless numbers because they haven't had... ~Mady: We know a tennis court is going to be $25,000.00 and we know that we don't have any other money conling in for. This part we don't know any of those nUI'lber s . Boyt: We could put down $25,000.00 for a tennis court for that park. We know that that's one of the things in there and it can be taken out of the first $35,000.00, we've still not going to have it done. They've asked for a tennis court. Sietsema: I don't think that's unreasonable at all. Lash: We don't have specifically stated what we're going to put in Chanhassen Hills Park for $30,000.00. But that's what we're talking about for here. Jim's saying we have to have a specific thing... Sietsema: The thing is is that we know what's going in Chanhassen Hills Park because we've approved a plan for Chanhassen Hills Park and we know that grading and a backstop and that kind of thing is going to cost us roughly $10,000.00 and tot10t equipment is going to cost roughly $10,000.00 and tennis cour ts are going to cost $25,000.00. So you put a nUI'lber in there to get it started so you can at least do, I mean that's where these numbers in this whole thing have come frolll. There's no specs done and we can rough, the only thing is is that we don't know, the reason why Hernlan Field is different is that we haven't done a meandering trail through a park. We haven't even measured how long that trail is. We don't know what ~it's going to cost or how long the access road is going to have to be. If it's going to be paved. If it's going to be gravel. There's a lot of things we don't know so it's nlore difficult to put in there. We know we have $35,000.00 that has to be spent there. We know there's a tennis court Park and Rec COIlIInission Meeting November 28, 1989 - Page 12 .."". in the plan and we know that's rougly $25,000.00 so I don't think it's unreasonable to say we've got $35,000.00 to spend on Phase 1 next year and there's no way you're going to get a tennis court in Phase 1 in $25,000.00 when you only have $35,000.00. So to put $25,000.00 in Phase 2 in 1991, I don't think is unreasonable. Robinson: Even if you put SOttle dollars in there, it doesn't... SietseIlla: It doesn't mean you have to put it there. Robinson: No. Mady: Point one. There is no tennis court in the development plan at this point in time. It's not shown on any of the development plans that I've seen on this so thev may want a tennis court but we have not yet shown that in there. ~ Sietsema: Alright, I stand corrected. Lash: It doesn't take a rocket scientist to see that there's going to be at least $35,000.00 worth of work there and as sad as it may seem, I see the logic in these people's thought that they've been on hold all of these years and the Illoney's been sitting there and so say next year we've got the $35,000.00. We get the access. We put in the little gravel road and the ttloney's gone and then we haven't got anything in our budget for the next 2 years to do anything else except for a little gravel access to... -' Sietsema: Just because it isn't in the 5 year plan doesn't mean next year at budget time you can't put it in there. Lash: I knbw. I don't understand why we're even arguing about this. This is kind of stupid. Just put it in. We did it for everything else. Mady: The other side of the arguIllent on this is, if you throw $50,000.00 at it without any background on it, they're going to say well I want you to spend $50,000.00 here. My fear is, I want to see, because we've got the detail on just about every other iteIlI here, we don't have anything here yet. We will have that information in about 2 months so why don't we wait for it. We adjust this thing all the tiIlle. Boyt: So it wouldn't matter if we put it tonight though. Mady: We don't have any idea what it's going to be. Boyt: We know there's going to be something. Mady: Well, what's the number going to be? Boyt: It doesn't matter. Robinson: 10, 10 and 10 in 1990, 1991 and 1992. --' Sietsema: What difference does it make? Park and Rec COIl\lllission Meeting Nove~ber 28, 1989 - Page 13 ",...., Boyt: Does it matter if we do it tonight or in 2 ~onths? Mady: Well yeah. SietseIlla: It's a wish list. What this is is a wish list. Mady: What's behind the wish list? What are you going to spend $10,000.00 on? Boyt: Do we have any motions? Lash: I Illotion that we aI\'lend this thing and put 10, 10 and 10. Erhart: I'll second it. Lash moved, Erhart seconded that the Park and Recreation COI\'~ission recoI\'\Illend to aI\'lend the 5 year Capi tal Il'lprovePlent Progra~ to include $10,000.00 for each year of 1990, 1991 and 1992 for Her~an Field Park. All voted in favor except Ji~ Mady who opposed and the ~otion carried. ,....., Hasek: Just for your own gratification there JiI\'l, I understand what... I think it is a wish list. We know it's going to cost I\'lore than $35,000.00 so put a nUPlber in there and assign something to it later. It really doesn't ~atter so I'~ not opposed to doing it. Boyt: Does anyone else have any concerns for a specific park? We don't need any ~ore work on this tonight do we? Robinson: In the 1990 Capi tal Il'lproveI\'lent, has that been done? SietsePla: It's not approved yet, no. It won't be approved until probably I\'tid-DecePlber. Robinson: Was that a typo or does $170,000.00 versus $116,000.00? SietsePla: Yes. Well what I think it did was included, I don't know. I can't even explain it because I wasn't clear on what it was. Hoff~an: You punched something the wrong way. Sietsel'la: Yes. Lash: I had a question on, what one were you just talking about? Boyt: On this page. "Lash: Okay. On South Lotus Lake, that's on page 5. The nUPlbers that are under 1989, were those things done in 1989 or are we supposed to be... .park and Rec COITiInission Meeting NoveITlber 28, 1989 - Page 14 "..,.,; Sietserna: No, that's the correction that I said on the last page under South Lotus Lake was $26,500.00. That was rolled over and you had amended that so that it would just be the park plan and the tennis courts would be in Phase 1 and the rest of it would come later. Boyt: I think we decided to take the tennis courts out. Sietsema: Or was it the other way around? I'd have to get the Minutes out but I definitely reITleITlbered that you had phased it. Fro!'1 what it was, it was $60,000.00 and you had scaled it back to $25,000.00 worth of deve I opITlen t . Hasek: I thought we talked about the motorized BMX course. Schroers: Do we have to earmark funds specifically for sOITlething specific on our wish list here? I would like to earolark whatever funds it takes to define the boundaries of Bluff Creek Park. Erhart: It's there. Schroers: Where is it? Sietsema: I could take you out there. HoffITlan: I conldn' t. ....", Mady: You couldn't before. SietsePla: I can now. Hoffman: Get some signs there that say Chanhassen park instead of State park and put them on the border. SietseITla: What number is Bluff Creek? The reason why you can't really find it is because there's no road to it. The road ends at the golf shack or the clubhouse or whatever it is at Bluff Creek golf course and if you go down, imagine that the road kept going down along their boundary there and then you look to the south, you'd fall into it but you can't get to it, you can't see it from any road because there's no access to it. Schroers: Once you fall into it, how would you know if you were crawling out onto park property or onto private property? SietseITla: All the sides all the way up is park property. Once you're on top, you're out of the park. Boyt: That's page 12. Is that like a survey? Schroers: Not a survey. I was just thinking like the area defined. If it was accurately done on a Plap or just sOITlething that says Bluff Creek Park is bordered on the south by such and such, on the north by such and such, ....", east, west. Just so we can pinpoint it. Park and Rec COl'llIlli ssion Meeti ng Nove~ber 28, 1989 - Page 15 " SietseI'la: It's right here. It's defined. Mady: Lori, if you traveled that imaginary road further past Bluff C~eek Park, does that i~aginary road legal ease~ent for us or would that be trespassing? Sietse~a: We'd have to gain... Mady: We do not own an easeIllent to the park? Sietsema: Not that I know of, no. Mady: I want hi~ to know that so Larry, what difference does it make? You can't really get there anyway. Hasek: Isn't there a road easement that goes to the park? Sietse~a: Not that I'm aware of. It's landlocked. There's a railroad along the south and private property along the rest of it. Schroers: I'd just kind of hate to get arrested for trespassing trying to get to one of our parks. '" Mady: Well in this park you defintely could. Boyt: Should we move this up to 1991? Robinson: I think that's a good idea. Boyt: Access road, $10,000.00? Schroers: At least we'll be taking a look at it. Hasek: Yeah, I don't think we even want an easement. I'd like to get a right-of-way. I can't believe that we've got an inaccessible park in the city. SietseIlla: Well it wasn't Illeant to be a park. Schroers: We had Council direction to have park areas accessible. Sietsema: When we got it, it was a no man's land. It was a drainage area that nobody wanted and it got deeded over to the City. Hasek: Did it cOPle out of Hesse Fa rill when that developed or what? Sietse~a: I don't know. I don't know the history of it and there's not a whole lot on the files about it because it was done before I was here. ~Hasek: Still. To try and acquire access to that park.isn't unreasonable. SietseI'la: No, if you saw something you wanted to get to. Park and Rec Con~ission Meeting November 28, 1989 - Page 16 ......; Hasek: I bet you it's the most beautiful part of the City. Robinson: I agree that we should...in 1991. Schroers: There could also be a situation where the Scout groups or sonleone is looking for a worthwhile project and they want to clean up the area...and not have a way of getting there. Erhart: Let's move the $10,000.00. Schroers: Do we have to have a motion for that? Mady: No. Just do it. Boyt: Any other concerns on this? Robinson: Just a question. Is the 1988 amount in here actual? Sietsema: Probably not. It was proposed. That was taken off the proposed. That's why the South Lotus Lake stayed in there. So I will change that to what was actually done. Robinson: I was just wondering. I was looking at Meadow Green Park on page 3. Sietsenla: When I would anticipate the Bluff Creek would be an important thing to get to is when we have nlore of the alignPlent along Bluff Creek as it's acquired through our trail developrlent plan. Once we have the next link that goes up through the golf course, which we were supposed to get wi th the Bluff Greens developttlent but that one kind of... Mady: Slipped through our fingers? -" SietsePla: No. The development never went through. They went past their deadline and so if they want to develop, they have to cOPle back through the process and we'd get it eventually. Hasek: We still have an opportunity to plake sOPle sort of connection to that park...? Sietsema: Right. And then we Inay have access to it from the north side of Bluff Creek Golf Course, although we may want to have another access down by the golf course since that road's in there anyway. But just to clarify, the original intent of the reason that we got that piece of property was like, it's like the holding ponds up in Pheasant Hills. It was a drainageway that was deeded over to the City and they said, well here. You can pretend it's a park. It wasn't sOPlething we acquired and gave credi t to anybody for. It just is a piece of property that was city owned. Schroers: Lori, at the bottoPI at your astericks there. Does that mean if we were to have a referendl~ on one of these proposals, on budget proposal~ that we would have to add the cost of the referenduPI? Park and Rec Co~~ission Meeting Nove~lbel 28, 1989 - Page 17 ,...., Sietsema: No. These are approved referendu~l funds. The Lake Ann project and the Bandi~lere property acquisition and there's $100,000.00. Schroers: Okay, so you're saying that those costs are already occurred but are not shown in the totals? Sietsema: Right, because it COllIes out of the referendum fund. It doesn't actually COllIe out of the 410 fund. What they would do is deposit that money into the 410 fund when the bonds are sold and it would eventually come out of there but it would screw up our totals if we showed that it did because it's not in there yet. Boyt: Any other questions? Erhart: Yeah, just one on Bandimere. That $300,000.00 in the 1992+. Are we looking at 1992 or are we looking beyond that? Starting the develop~lent of Bandimere's property. Sietse~la: The development of the Bandil'lere property... Erhart: For the youth cO~lplex. Mady: It will take at least 2 years before the Corps of Engineers will ~even start doing the rough grading. Erhart: Okay, and it is not purchased yet right? Sietsema: Right. It's still not closed. Erhart: Okay. I ask the same question every time. I wasn't here last ~Ieeting. . . Sietse~la: They thought they had clear ti tIe on it and they found 3 people that need to sign off on it and one of the~1 had SOl'le questions about what the property was going to be used for and I talked to him today. They're hoping that they get those signatures and we can close on Friday but I'm not pro~dsing. Erhart: Are these family members? Sietsema: No. They're people that have easelllents. They have some easements over the property and they have to sign off on thelll. Hasek: That I s the reason why we don't want easelllents to go to the parks, we want right-of-ways. Right there. Boyt: Yep. We've had trouble with easements in other parks. Mady: And we'll continue to have trouble with easements. .,.... Boyt: Any more on this? Park and Rec Cop~ission Meeting November 28, 1989 - Page 18 .....", APPROVAL OF PROPOSED PARK/OPEN SPACE FOR UPDATED LAND USE PLAN. SietsePla: The planning department is in the process of updating the Lane Use Plan which is part of the COPlprehensive Plan. What that does is it shows where we're planning to see residential, low, high, Pledil~ density, single faplily, rural. It also shows where the agricultnral, industrial, cOPlPlercial, park property. Any different types of land use. This is the old one and they're going to be updating this and what we want to make snre we include in that, as they update this map, is anywhere that we, and I know we've talked about a number of things and we Plade recoPlplendations to amend this. Now they're going through the formal process and I wanted to make sure that we didn't I'liss anything. I know that we had talked abont that the property, I believe it's the ZlP.merI'lan property that's over on the east side of Minnewashta, there was a developI'lent where they were going to create 3 lots and one hnge outlot and we had talked about that being potential COPII'tuni ty park because Mark's study had shown that we were goi ng to need a community park in the western part of the City. So that was one area that we want to identify as potential parkland. Just as the area around Lake St. Joe is. Whether we actually acqnire it or not will deterI'line when it beconles available through the developnlent process. What this does is that they cannot develop this property without us signing off on it. They can sell it front seller to seller as long as it's not developed and we don't have to sign off on it but if they want to develop it, that's when we will review it. Our Conlprehensive Plan and our Land Use Plan shows that that's shown as potential park property and we have th option to purchase it or get it through the developnlent process or whateve~ I'leans we can. Again, one of the pieces was east of Minnewashta. One of thenl was west of Mi nnewashta. One of thenl was in the Pheasant Hi 11 s area that we continue to talk about. We've also talked about acquiring the property north of the Bandimere Farnl as that conies in and if you recall, there was a piece of property south of Sever Peterson's down in the southern part of Chanhassen that had sonle ravines and SOI'le natnral areas that we wanted to preserve that we felt we could get through the developnlent process so I wanted to point that one out as well. Hasek: Is that the one at the end of Bluff Creek there at the park? Mady: It's the one on pioneer Trail down there. Sietsenla: Yes. South of pioneer Trail. See this one is so old it doesn't even have sonle of the Plaj or roads on here. Hasek: It's old but it's the existing one. \,.. Sietsenla: It's the existing one. It's what we go by right now and I wanted to, I have the reconlI'lendations froPl what you had previously but I wnated to put it all in one synopsis and then review the City and add anything else that you nlight want to include. We don't necessarily need to go through the neighborhood portion of it at this point in tiple. When we get their first rough draft back and we see that this is going to residential, then we can go in and say, if this is going to be residential-, and it's going to be single fap,ily and it's going to be sewered, then we're going to need parkland in that area. Those standards are upheld with our Park and Rec Con~ission Meeting Novenlber 28, 1989 - Page 19 ,.., subdivision process and through our ordinances but the biggest thing that's ItIost iItlportant is to get our 1 inear and our cOItlnluni ty parks shown on here so people know up front if where they make their first application, they know up front that there's going to be parkland required and we ItIay require an all or a portion of their land. Hasek: Did I or did I not see a linear park plan on trails? Boyt: There's a trail plan. Mady: So what's going to happen here is you're going to be cOItling back to us with a proposed ItIap of the City showing what the Planning COItlItlission feels at this point in tiple the City is going to look like in the future? Or what they want it to look like. Sietsepla: Before it goes to Planning, I want to present to thePI that this is the areas that we know are going to need a con~lunity park or we ItIay need a COPIPllmi ty park so they have that inforIt,ation. The big chunks, they have that inforItlation up front. If they know that we need that 80 acres of the zin~erman property up front, then they won't zone that residential. But then we get it back again and look at it for neighborhood parks. We also want to look at th~.s froItl pntting our nature trails and that kind of thing. Show those in there as well. !I""- Mady: My concern I guess though is, thi s Itlight be, we could tell thep, ki nd of the areas we're thinking about. We're basically saying we want to put sOPlething in the westeJ:n part of the City but until we find out where they want to put their business fringe district, because we don't want to back our park np to that. We want to find out what their thoughts are now before we say okay, here's what. It's going to have to be a give and take the whole way. We should find out what their thonghts are initially before we start to plan ours. Then give it to theItl and they can cOItle back to us again. It's going to take 2 or 3. Sietsepla: It is going to take a conple but I was staJ:ting here because we know big chunks of land that we can tell thenl right off the bat that we are looking at for potential parkland. We ItIay not acquire both the piece on the west side of Minnewashta and the piece on the east side of Minnewashta but we I1lay want to designa te both of those on the land use plan so tha t we have the option when they COllIe up for developnlent. I 'It I just saying, let's show theI11 the big areas that we know of right now. We've discussed and we know of right now. They'll review that. They'll put all their little labels on all the different pieces and then we'll come back and Plake our revisions. But it gives theItI an idea of what... Mady: My concern was if we go first, they Plight be doing something...right after that and then it's going to be harder to change it. SietseI1la: No, they're going to know right up front that we're looking at ~this as a large chunk and we will be making revisions also as we see their. , plan develop. \ Park and Rec COI',nlission Meeting November 28, 1989 - Page 20 ..",,; Hasek: I guess two things. I know what they're going through now and I know that they're thinking about changing SOI'le of the things on there. One thing they're looking at is changing the MUSA line that goes through the middle of Lake Minnewashta and moving that back over to TH 41 and taking that chunk inbetween there out of the MUSA line. That's one of the draft lines that I saw and then moving the MUSA line down to TH 5. Including that within the MUSA line. Making some changes so they can develop along TH 212. Then there's a bunch of things that they're talking about, they're real prelinlinary at this point. A qnestion before I I'lake a statement I guess. Are we still thinking about a cOI'lmunity sized park west of Lake Minnewashta or is that a neighborhood park? Is that supposed to represent something or... Hoffman: At least the property just north of Lake St. Joe. Schroers: Mark had indicated that at some point in tiI'le we were going to need another large cOInnllmi ty park in westeJ~n Chanhassen. Hasek: That's true. I guess I 'I'I wondering though, do we want to put it west of Lake Minnewashta or do we want it east of Lake Minnewashta? Boyt: Well we have two options. Hasek: We have two stars in here, that's why I don't know if we need both Sietsen,a: either. No, but I don't think we want to make that decision right now .....,,; Boyt: This keeps us open. Hasek: Let's look jnst one point farther. If our point is to keep our options. open, then we might as well put 5 or 10 of thenl on here. SietseI',a: Wi thi n reason. I I'lean we could put a blanket over the whole thing and say well all of it, we I'lay want. We can't put something over the south half of Chanhassen and say we're going to want sOI'lething in there but we don't know quite where. We know. We've looked at a few different places. We've looked at an addition to what we're purchasing now and we've looked at that natural area over by Sever's property. We know we've looked at the ZiI'~lerI'lan property and we have shown. Hasek: Is ZiI'~lerrlan's this one? SietseI'la: No. And we've expressed interest in the piece of property that's for sale over on the west side of Minnewashta but just because right now they said it's worth, that they're asking over a million dollars for it, doesn't nlean they're going to get it and "doesn't mean that... Hasek: I thonght that had been sold? SietseI'la: It cOllld have. I don't know. I haven't seen any plans in for ..."., it. Park and Rec Cop~ission Me~ting November 28, 1989 - Page 21 "..., Hasek: My understanding, and this may be scuttlebutt maybe but I think that's one reason why the Illember of the Planning Cottmtission left is because he's sOPlehow involved in the development of that property. SietseIlla: I don't know. Mady: A question before we go too much further. I was under the impression that the land around Lake St. Joe, that whole area, there simply isn't a large enough chunk to even consider it a cop~unity park. It might becoIlle a large neighbohrood park but it's siIl'lply not going to be 40-50-60 acre site and so if we identify the area as parkland but I don't think this comIllission should be thinking in terIlIS of a COIl'iIl'luni ty park because it's simply not going to be large enough to call it a cOIl'~unity park. SietsePla: And we don't need to label it communi ty or neighborhood. All I'm saying is that it's open space at this point. These are where I know there are large chunks that we've talked about. Mady: My concern was that he's throwing out cOIl'mlunity park plan here and I think it's not, that's not the terIl'I we want to be using there in that particular case. Because it's probably not going to fit into our definition. SietseIl'la: Large park. In Lake St. Joe... ,..... Mady: ...specific area we know we want to put a park in, we've already identified. Whether it's going to be a neighborhood park or not. In the rest of the City that's undeveloped yet, we haven't found specific sites yet. Hasek: Let's ask the question. What are the recoIl'mlended areas that you're looking at adding to the existing park... Sietsema: These are the recop~ended that you've already made the recoIllIl'lenda tion. Hasek: And the Comp Plan hasn't changed to reflect it yet. Sietsema: That's what they're doing now. They're reconfirming that this is where your ideas are. These are still valid recoIl'mlendations and this is what I'm going to send onto Planning as they go through the initial process. They'll look at that and take that into consideration as they make their amendments and it will be sent back to us for anv final revisions. At that point in time, we can see well, you hav~ a large area here that's shown for residential and it's really in a park deficient area. Especially if it becollles a sewered area and we're going to want SOllIe park in that area. Whether we can identify that now or not, it doesn't preclude us, it's just an opportunity for us to check our work. To double check, to make sure that something doesn't slip through the cracks and we didn't get ~,a chance at it and we had planned to do something there. Hasek: The level they're at right now and probably what we're going to get a shot at isn't going to be that detailed. I think they're going to be Park and Rec COl1mdssion Meeting November 28, 1989 - Page 22 looking at basically the fnture land use plan without open spacing on it. ..."." Ani I right or wrong? What they're basically doing is they're going to take that MUSA line and move the thing down and they're going to say, this area's going to be all residential. This corner's going to be...between Mark and the Planning Department and the Planning COl1~ission and some decision is made on what the future cOl1lplexion of the Ci ty is going to look like. I'm wondering if it wouldn't be better if we just simply waited and say we want the opportunity to take a look at your plan so we can tell YOIl where we would like to put park space based upon your planning decisions. Sietsema: We could do it that way. Hasek: That'd make more sense. Then we're not putting the cart before the horse, so to speak. Doesn't that make sense? Boyt: . . . he has 1,260 acres coming np wi th the population of 4,032. I don't think that would include any multiple family dwellings at all in those acres. That's 3.something people per acre and we've seen some pretty packed developrrlents come in here recently so I'Ill not sure if the nurrlbers, I think the nnl1lbers are a little on the low side of what they're going to be. And when we're looking at our need for soccer, softball and baseball fields, I wonder how our neighboring communities are planning to meet those needs and I don't want to tell therrl what to do but I'd just 1 i ke to know becanse I know we're getting a lot of men in our softball prograItI froItI other cOl1~unities that are not providing for their people. If they continue to not prov ide for their people, we're goi ng to end up prov iding ....." for theItI so I'd 1 i ke to know and I think we know which communi ties those are. Mady: Either that or we're just going to kick therrl out is the way it's going to be. They'll have to make a decision to live wherever they can get the services provided. Lash: Is this like forever into the future? Is that what you're looking at? Sietsema: No, it'd be a 10 year. To the year 2000. Lash: It sort of looks to me like in the south of TH 5, there's kind of a gapping area there that has no stars and has no park now. And I'rrl sure that 11lavbe not in our lifetime but sOl1letime south of TH 5 is going to be develop~d and there's going to be a ton of houses down there. Sietsema: And that's exactly what I'm saying is that it would come back because then we would know where the MUSA line was going to be changing. We'd know what kind of density is going to be in there and at that time we can identify the areas that we're going to need in addition to what we're already doing. I was just trying to go in. I know that they're going into the planning stages and I wanted to let them know what we know so far. But if we want to wait uRtil they get their blobs on the map and move the MUSA line and then bring it back to us, we can do it that way too. ....." Park and Rec CO~lission Meeting November 28, 1989 - Page 23 ,.... Mady: They've already received or been informed of these items becallse they're already shown here because didn't we Illake recoITIPlendations... to that? SietsePla: Right and wha t I was going to do is, you've made the recon~lendations and I've known that they're going to revise the land use plan so I haven't sent anything because I was going to send one recon\Illendation that these are the areas that we want. In talking to Paul, he said well we're going to want you to review the whole thing and outline where, so it's like we're being very proactive in this whole thing and that's very good and I'm glad we're all thinking of that. It's just whether we want to wait until we see their MUSA line and where the zones are or if we want to let thenl know what we know so far. I don't know that it's going to Plake that Pluch difference to thelll at this point. Boyt: Would Paul know? Sietsema: He doesn't really know if they're going to want to know that infoIItlation. Boyt: Well it's available fOl them if they want it. It's right here. Mady: I don't see any problelll with giving this information. I think just so they fully understand that this does not even come close to reflecting IfI""'" what our ideas are for the future. It just shows the things that we've kind of hit on so far. We know that we're going to need until we find out a good solid piece of information as to what's going to be developed and what areas we simply can't plovide them with othel or further information. SietsePla: Then what I can do is plepare a memo that says in the last 6 months the Park and Recreation COll~ission has reviewed areas that are park deficient. This is where we know we're going to be looking toward cOJl~lunity parks or different parks and we'd like you to take that into consideration as you start the amendment process and keep us abreast and let us review your amended land use plan as you get down there. So I will do that. Hasek: Can you take that one step farther and have Mark and Paul, who by then ought to be real familiar with those areas that are going to be lesidential. . ., let them Jllake SOllie suggestions to us about where we Jllight want to put our spots. I nlean we can look at this thing, here's a nice piece of property but I don't know what the land looks like...so I guess we should let our planner tell us where the appropriate spots to put those dots. SietseJlla: Makes sense. Mady: Do you need a motion? ".... Sietsellla: No. Park and Rec Con~ission Meeting November 28, 1989 - Page 24 CONTINUED DISCUSSION OF LAKE ANN PARK FEE. ...." Boyt: Can I have a motion on number 8? Schroers: Yeah, I'd like to make a ~otion that Lake Ann Park parking fee for the year 1990 be conducted in the same ~anner like it was in 1989. Boyt: Do we have a second? Robinson: What? Would you repeat that? Boyt: Do it the same way we did it last year. $2.00. No second? Hasek: Just out of curiousity I called the City of Bloonlington. I was going to call sonle others but I didn't have tiPle to do it today. I apologize for that. BlooPlington charges a $3.00 fee to get into Hyland Beach. They have an agree~ent with Hennepin Parks. Their $3.00 gets the~ into the parks and the park sticker gets them into the beach. They are looking at raising the price of getting into their beach to Plore cOPle in line with the park fee. In other words, they're going to raise theirs probably to $5.00 or $7.00 to get into that beach. SietsePla: Daily? Hasek: That's a yearly pass. The daily's going to go up though too she said but she didn't know to what. It's just something that they're kickin~' around right now. All of the money's that paid to that park, that conIes out of those stickers, goes back into the park. In 1988 they made $33,000.00 on that park and they have approximately 100,000 people use it. They fully expect the people that use their parks will pay for the parks. That is the bottom line premise. This is a highly used park by a lot of people froPI outside the comunity and they fully expect those people are going to help pay for it. Boyt: We had a lot of interest 2 weeks ago I think, on the cOmPlissionof charging for the beach rather than the park. Right? Schroers: Ed, I just want to I1lake one correction. You said that it was Hyland Beach. It's Bush Lake. Hasek: It's Bush Lake, you're right. It's Bush Lake Hyland it's call isn't it? I think that's what she called it. Bush Lake Hyland Park. Lash: Hyland's further down isn't it? Schroers: No, Hyland is right across the street but it's actually... Hasek: I think she called it Bush Lake at Hyland Complex or something like that. Schroers: Yeah, it's a ~erger but... .....", Hoff Plan : Separate. Park and Rec COI1'IIhission Meeting Nove~ber 28, 1989 - Page 25 IfI1I1"'" Schroers: Yeah, a separate merger. Mady: But they're charging for the beach? Hasek: They're charging for the beach. They don't charge for any of the other facilities in the City. All of the I1'IOney cOPIes ont of the general fund and she said that they have never registered a single complaint for anyone paying to use that beach ever. They have not gotten one on file. Mady: So if they use the beach for swi~ling lessons or anything, they still have to buy the park sticker? Hasek: Yep. Schroers: It's not only the beach that they're paying for. In Bnsh Lake they also have a boat access. They also have picnicking. They have volleyball and it is the total aI1'leni ty, not only speci fically the beach. Hasek: That's the point. The swiI1'lI'ling beach gets thenl into the park and the park sticker gets thenl into the beach so you're not only paying for the beach, you are paying for everything else that's in that park. You are paying a fee to get into that park and use all the facilities. There's a free picnic facility I understand across the lake but PIOSt of the people IfI1I1"'" COllie to thi s one. Schroers: They have their own gatehouse at the entrance to Bush Lake and you can't get to the picnic and the volleyball, the boat access or the beach without going through that gatehouse. Boyt: . . . Lake Ann Larry? Schroers: I want to operate Lake Ann for 1990 the sa~e way that it was operated in 1989 becanse there doesn't seenl to be a logical or sensible procedure for dealing with collecting the fees froPI the out of town people that participate in our youth recreation progra~s. There's not a fair way to deal with that. Boyt: Jan? Lash: upping City a people I'm in favor of keeping the fee although I would be in favor of registration by $5.00 and giving people who register throngh the parking fee. At least we're making a little bit more money off the that are using it. Softball and things. Boyt: JiPI? Mady: My favorite topic. Lake Ann. NUPlber one, I'nl opposed to charging a fee at that park. I think the people of the city who are using parks deserve to use all the parks. I haven't seen anything in staff's PlettlOS ~that show that any of the other locations are doing it on more than just on an occasional basis. It seems to be the exception rather than the rule. However, I realize that our budget is tight and reading the Council Park and Rec Commission Meeting November 28, 1989 - Page 26 ...",; COII1l"lents, it looks like we're going to do this anyway. If we're going to do it, we ~hould by golly do it across the board, 100% without any exceptions to anybody. What we're doing right now is the very people are paying taxes in this City are also paying the fee to get into their own park. The people who live in Lake Minnetonka area, Wayzata, Excelsior, Chaska, wherever who are using our swimming facilities, which actually costs "'Iore probably than the whole rest of the thing, aren't paying the fee to get into the park. That's ludicrous to me that the people who live in this town are paying twice. The people who we should be charging a fee to use our facility aren't paying a fee. Let's make it across the board and they pay their $2.00 at the gate and if they don't like it, they don't come in but it's our facility. Not their facility. If they don't like it, they can use a program sOl"leplace else. We just do it across the board. Whether they come up to City Hall and buy their yearly sticker or they buy it out there, fine. Let's cut out the bickering about this whole thing. Let's do it across the board. Evervbodv does it and let them know when thev're going to have a program ou~ heie, that everybody's going to use thIs facility is going to have to pay to use it. Boyt: Curt? Robinson: Boy, I'm really waffled on this one this year. I'm back and forth. Every other year I've said yes to cover the fee but what really got me was Todd's survey of the number of other places, surrounding cOml"luni ties. Not a one charged for general parking fee. Some charged for publ ic beach use. I guess I'd have to lean to exactly what Larry said and-" that is contrary to what Jim said. I think I'd prefer to keep it simple and you can't keep it simple I don't believe by being consistent and treating everybody fairly so I'll now second Larry's motion. Erhart: I guess the biggest proble"'l I have with this is, it doesn't really Platter which way we charge. The big probleIIl is that I think this is a real inefficient way to collect dollars to maintain a park because I also look at it like Jim. That we're paying for it twice and I would like to see, until a better way is figured out for it, I would like to see it across the board also. Hasek: I guess all the discussion we've had in the past was trying to find a way that people would feel cO"'lfortable about paying it basically not knowing they were paying and paying anyway. Which is kind of Curt's approach I think but I understood what he said. I would like to, if we do go ahead and charge everybody at the gate which is the sblple way of doing it, and charging a parking fee for that park, then I think it's important that we get somebody at the gate that can handle grief that they're going to get. I think Jim is right. If somebody does not want to pay to use that park, they simply don't go into the park. But everybody has a sticker. I don't know if you can pass stickers out along with your tax statements to the people that live in town to make it easy for them. I don't know if there's a way of doing that but I think that the users of the park, that particular park and Bandimere when that cO"'les around and any other major city park, that we ought to try and pay for this facility because not everybody uses it. ...,I Park and Rec COIll1'lission Meeting NoveIllber 28, 1989 - Page 27 ,...., Schroers: Anyone way or the other, there are other cOIll1'lunities that are charging for access to their parks. Like all the parking meters around Excelsior lake and that's not only for the beach and it's for the picnic areas and everything else. Hasek: One last question and then a COIll1'lent. The other thing that I liked about having not only a gate house but a fee for that is that it would certainly discourage misuse of the park. Schroers: If that was an open and free park, the word's going to get ont what a nice park it is and it will accoIll1'lodate a certain aI"lount of people but it's not going to accomIllodate the whole world and we could have onr facilities overused. Boyt: I agree with Ed and Dawne and JiI"l. I'd like to see everyone pay for it and I'd still like to offer reciprosity to Chaska with their paid park. Offer theIlI Chanhassen residential status as a neighborly thing to do. Do we have a ~otion on this? Hasek: What kind of a Illotion do you want? I I"lake a motion that... SietsePla: Do you want to hear froI"1 staff at all? Hasek: Not this time. ,...., Boyt: Go ahead Todd. HoffIllan: I like YOllr idea that we do that and as I discussed earlier, I tried that once and for some reason or another, it fell apart. Lash: Tried what? HoffIllan: Across the board. I sat down with, I had eIllp10yee orientation ~eetings and I said, this is the ordinance. We're going to charge evervbodv and all of theIlI started to do that and then so~e of the weaker or the ~ore.meek decided instead of taking that grief they would be a little Plore lenient. There were two individuals that were very good gate attendants and charged everybody and they called me all the time with the hassles they were taking. Sietse~a: And they didn't reapply. Boyt: Let's get the City Council to... Hoff~an: Jay and I were out there one night with this particular individual and plenty of cars turned around. Did not want to pay. That was on a particular night when a Little League, a Minnetonka team was coming down. So things just did not work out. I'll go along with it and enforce it. It's unfortunate that we went and did what we did last year JlI"""and then we're trying to turn it around just in one year. It shows that we're uncertain on this item and I question the fact that we go through this every year. It's in our ordinance. It says we need to do it every year but I question the validity of that. So that's all IllY cOIl~ents. I Park and Rec COIl.nlission Meeting November 28, 1989 - Page 28 really like the idea that we didn't have a big debate tonight. We just heard your comments and hopefully we'll pass a Illotion. .....", Robinson: Does Lor i have cOmPlents? SietsePla: No. Hasek: What is the current fee structure? SietsePla: $2.00 daily pass. $5.00 per year for a resident and $10.00 a year for a non-resident. Schroers: Well, I'PI ready to... Boyt: Okay, go ahead. Hasek: I think I started one didn't I? SietseItla: No. Mady: No. Yon asked about whether you wanted to ask for a Plotion. Hasek: Go ahead Larry. Schroers: Okay, I'p, going to restate the plotion that I I'lade earlier. I a going to plove operate Lake Ann in 1990 the saple as we did in 1989. .....", Lash: I second that. Boyt: There's a second now. Schroers moved, Lash seconded that the Park and Recreation COmPlission recopiI'lend to leave the Lake Ann Park fees the saple in 1990 as they were in 1989. Schroers, Lash and Robinson voted in favor. Boyt, Mady, Erhart and Hasek voted in opposition. The motion failed with a vote of 3 to 4. Hasek: Okay, we've got $2.00, $5.00 and $10.00. $2.00 daily. That's the one that's giving everybody the hard time because nobody wants to pay $10.00 for out of town. How about if we just make it across the board the saple for everybody no Platter whether you live in town. Lash: Is it the $10.00 one that people? I think it's the $2.00 one. Sietselna: It's the $2.00 one. Hasek: Nobody wants to pay the $10.00. They're forced to pay the $2.00 and they don't like that choice so how about if we make it $5.00 and $2.00 for everybody? Is there anything wrong with that? Lash: ...."" I think it's still the $2.00 when they're going to only use it once. Park and Rec Con~ission Meeting Novenlber 28, 1989 - Page 29 ".... Boyt: They have a choice if they're coming back for baseball at another tiItle during the year, it'd be a better deal. Lash: What is it that you get the cOItlplaints about? HoffItlan: The conlplaints from the people that are conling froI'\ out of town to use this park in an organized activity which we associate. Chan Little League associates with South Tonka Little League. We go play on their fields. We don't pay to get into their parks. They COI'\e down to our park, and they're upset about that. Schroers: So it's not a dollar figure, it's just the idea that they have to pay here and we don't have to pay there? Hoffman: Correct. Mady: Well they're not paying to use the park. They're paying to pnt their car. Boyt: Do you want to work on your I'\otion? Hasek: I just thought I would change it. I make a motion that we change the fee structure at Lake Ann Park to across the board for residents and ".... non-residents alike, $2.00 a daily fee, $5.00 seasonal and seniors over 65 or whatever the lintit is for that, get to enter free. Boyt: Do we have a second? I'll second it. Discussion. Mady: Ed, that was meant across the board. That meant anybody who went in the park has to have a sticker? Lash: I can't go with non-residents paying the same as residents. Then residents are still, we're still paying the taxes. Hasek: Would you like to amend the I'\otion? Boyt: Would you like it that out of town people pay more? Lash: Out of town people pay more. Hasek: How rr.nch would you 1 ike them to pay? Robinson: $10.00. Lash: I was going to say $30.00. Sietsema: It can't be more than twice the resident. Lash: Okay, so $10.00 then. But that's what it is now. "" Hasek: You're in favor of leaving it the way it is and just charging everybody? Park and Rec Co~~ission Meeting Novelllber 28, 1989 - Page 30 Lash: No. -" Sietsema: Leave the fees as thev are and just enforce it across the board is what she wants you to amend it to. Lash: No. Boyt: No, she doesn't want it enforced across the board. Lash: But I don't want to change the fee structure. Hasek: But then you're not going to vote for it anyway so you're not amending the motion? Lash: Right. Hasek ~oved, Boyt seconded that the Park and Recreation Co~mission recoll~end that the Lake Ann Park fees be $2.00 for the daily pass and $5.00 for a yearly pass, seniors over 65 free for 1990. Hasek, Boyt and Erhart voted in favor. Mady, Lash, Schroers and Robinson voted in opposition. The motion failed with a vote of 3 to 4. Boyt: Do we have one more motion? --' Mady: I'~l consistent on this every year I've been on the commission, I 'Ill against the fee at Lake Ann Park and I will continue being against a fee at Lake Ann Park so don't ask ~e to change your motion. Hasek: Okay, so then it's either C~rt or Jan or Larry that we have to appeal to. How can we make it agreeable to you? Sietse~a: Can I offer a suggestion? Robinson: Yeah, please do at this point. Sietse~la: We want to charge for the beach because that's the biggest cost. Hasek: I want to charge for the whole, excuse the language, damn thing. Sietse~la: Okay, let's charge everybody that comes into the park as a casual use, the $2.00 a day, $5.00 for the season, $10.00 for the non-resident. If you're involved in a youth ball program, you get in free. If you're in an adult program, you don't have to have a sticker, but we'll charge. We'll beef up the teall\ registration fee and apply that toward it. Whether we give them stickers and do that or one way or the other, what happens is cities charge to use beaches and if they feel that they're not getting enough money, they need money to help maintain fields, they beef up the teall. registration fee. So if you want to beef that up and give the~ stickers or if you just want to beef it up and not charge, it's the youth .-, ballplayers that are driving us crazy. That we get the biggest cO~iplaints about. Park and Rec COI"\I'1i ssion Meeting November 28, 1989 - Page 31 ~ Hasek: Parents of the youth. SietseI"la: Right. Hasek: I can't hear a little kid complaining a lot but I can hear his parents. Sietsema: Oh you should have heard him. He said the f word to Todd. He was a 10 year old. Erhart: Oh really? Is it coming out of his allowance? SietseI"la: Hi s dad told him to shut up. Schroers: Can I ask a question? The way that the program was handled last year is just exactly what you're describing with the exception of raising the fee for the adult league, is that right? Boyt: pay. And anyone who would feel like, who didn't feel like paying, didn't ...1 don't think I should pay because of this... HoffI"lan: No, that's not correct. ~Boyt: Well, that's what you led us to believe last year. Hasek: I talked to a guy at the gate last year about that. I said if I cOI"lplain enough, are you going to charge I1le? No. Hoff Plan: That's what I instruct them to do. He's not there to take... Hasek: Well then what's the point? HoffI"lan: He's not there to take that verbal abuse. Schroers: At that point he should just take down your license nUI"~er and turn it in and let Todd deal with it. Sietsema: There's no way we're going to be able to pay someone who's big enough and brawn and brainy enough to argue with every single adult that plays softball and complains about that fee. There's no way we can afford to do that and still bring in money. Schroers: Was that a workable, feasible, decent way for you to operate last year? Reasonably trouble free? We did collect funds for the park. Maybe not the maXil'lllIl"t that we could but we did take funds in for the park. It was a working situation. Until we can find something that's significantly better, I don't feel that it's worth changing stride halfway through. ~)oyt: Al right, can we have another II"totion? Robinson: I'd make a motion that we table this. Park and Rec COP~ission Meeting NovePlber 28, 1989 - Page 32 .....""., Boyt: I'll second that. Sietsenla: Until what? Boyt: until the next meeting. Lash: I was going to make a rtlotion on her suggestion. Can we do that and take a vote. Maybe we'd be done with it. Boyt: We have to vote on this first. Lash: Okay. Robinson moved, Boyt seconded to table action on the Lake Ann Park fee. Robinson voted in favor and the rest voted in opposi tion and the nlotion to table failed. Lash: I'll nlake a nlotion tha t we leave the fee structure the way it was last year, $2.~~, $5.00, $10.00. Beef Chanhassen registrations by $5.00. Give them a permit and let the out of towner Little Leaguers in if they're in uniform for free. Schroers: 1111 second that. """'" Mady: And the beachlot people pay. In other words, the only people we let in free would be... Lash: The little kids in their uniforms. Erhart: Okay, they're the only ones that are getting in free? Hasek: You're going to beef up the league and you're going to give then. a sticker? Lash: Right. Mady: What we did 2 years ago. Hasek: That's what we talked about 2 meetings ago too. Erhart: Would that be...for staff? Sietsema: Well, it's doable but we're going to hear complaints about it because we just changed it last year from the year before. We told thenl last year they no longer have to buy the sticker and we'll just deal with it. I really would like to put this to bed. I don't think you guys are enjoying talking about it anymore. SchJ:oeJ:s: Just tell them that...need to be paid fOJ:. ......, Park and Rec ConU'"lission Meeting November 28, 1989 - Page 33 " Hoffman: So this is the adult leagues we're talking about? So up their reg i stra tion fee $ 7 5.00 and give theI'l stickers? Lash: $5.00 a head so it depends on how many people. Lash Ploved, Schroers seconded that the Park and Recreation COmI'aission recon~end that the Lake Ann Park fees for 1990 be as follows: $2.00 daily fee, $5.00 seasonal for resident, $10.00 seasonal for non-resident, raise the adult softball league registration fee and out of town Little League players in uniforI'1 will enter the park for free. All voted in favor except Mady who opposed and the motion carried with a vote of 6 to 1. Erhart: ...putting up a sign. That kind of reminds people what they're paying for. Maybe they won't complain about it, like Larry said. SietsePla: We can put up a sign. Erhart: Maybe that will help you. Schroers: Those adult softball leagues are going to cry about something anyway so this is Playbe just as good a thing for thelll to cry about as anything else. "'" Lash: If they say something, just say last year our revenues went down drastically and... Erhart: Just put a sign up. Your fees pay for these jerks to collect fees at the gate. Mady: I recoPU'"lend that the staff hire big people and pay theI'1 double what they pa id thelll last year so we can get bigger people. Schroers: You can tell thenl if they don't like go play in Shorewood. Hasek: I'll tell you what, Filly's bouncers are looking for work all day long in the suItllnertiI'le. DISCUSSION OF ACCESSIBILITY. SietsePla: What we're talking about is a continuation of our discussion on accessibility before. I've included information from the Minnesota State Building Code, Accessibility. Information from Bloomington which is kind of the forerunner in handicap accessibility and also Hennepin Parks accessibility study and since Ed kind of started this whole thing, I think I'll let him carry the ball on it. ",Hasek: I don't know that we've conle any farther. I've still tried to get SOI'le information frop\ the national level. I've called the wOPlan and she said that she'd send it and I haven't received it. I think it's a small organi zation. But, the question sti 11 reItlains, do we want to I'lake sonle Park and Rec COItiPdssion Meeting NoveItiber 28, 1989 - Page 34 sort of exerted effort to ~ake at least a portion of each of our parks accessible and define what we Itiean by accessible or leave it as kind of vague as it currently is within the policies in the Comprehensive Plan. That's the question. I would like to see us tighten it down a little bit. I think I would like to see us begin to at least consider the old, which I will be here in another 20 or 30 years. Robinson: What are the benefits of tightening it down? "WfIIF Hasek: Simply because it's become sort of a local/national campaign to begin to think about ItiOre than the heal thy people in the comItiuni ty. . . Sietserria: It's a trendy thing to do. Robinson: Have we been called on it or have we had a probleIti wi th it? Hasek: Yes we have. I think a couple of things. First of all there isn't a single tennis court in the city that's accessible to a wheelchair. It's got fences all the way around it. Hoffman: Meadow Green and North Lotus Lake. Hasek: Well, there's two of them. Boyt: Do they have concrete ramps going up to them? They don't. They have grass. If they're accessible they need a concrete or some sort of ~ hard surface pad to the courts and we don't have that. Robinson: So what's the probleIti? Boyt: We have citizens in Chanhassen who like to play tennis. I know of one who I saw crawl through the doorway and then pull his wheelchair in behind him because his wheelchair couldn't fit through the gate at the tennis courts. He plays tennis. Robinson: But have they cOItiplained to us? SietseItia: Yes. Boyt: I don't care if he's complained or not. Hasek: Can we be proactive or isn't that our job? Boyt: I'd like to be proactive on this. Who knows if it's going to happen to Itie tOlliorrow or one of ItIY children and I would like to designate some of our parks and portions of our trails as accessible. I don't think we can do it to every park and every trail but I think we can designate certain, maybe an area. Maybe a park and portions of trails and then just see what they do. Schroers: Yeah, I thought that we went through that the last time we -' discussed this and decided we were going to try to do what was reasonable and start with one and see how much it gets used and how well it works and Park and Rec CorrlIttission Meeting November 28, 1989 - Page 35 ,.... develop from that point as the need depicts. Hasek: I think to me that's a beginning. That's a very slow beginning. I think if we're really diligent about doing this, I think what we ought to do is we ought to solicit inpnt. I think we can do it throngh papers. I think we conld do it through local groups. I'm not only talking about handicap. I'm also talking about some of the elderly in town and maybe it's not only the parks. Maybe it's other programs that they'd like to see implemented. Maybe their idea of recreation is, I don't know, shuffleboard or sOrtlethi ng sOrtleplace. Who knows. Where do they 1 i ve? Where would they congregate? What would they be interested in doing and maybe that's what we need to look at. I don't rertlember exactly what was addressed in the survey that we did several years ago. Boyt: I don't think this was. Sietsertla: I don't think handicap was. Hasek: I don't know what kind of response if any of that but I think there's a lot of people out there that, there are very few older groups. There are very few handicap gronps. I'm a member of the DAV and I've never been to a I',eeting sirrlply because you kind of wonder whether you want to be involved with that. You separate yourself from those types of things I think and as such, maybe the response is a little bit slow in cOI'ling but I ~think if we solicited it, we'd probably get it. Boyt: How about a task force? Hasek: A task force would be one way but maybe it's just a matter of, there might be a siI'lpl ier way of beg inni ng and it rtlight be a rrla tter of sorrle sort of advertisement through the City or something. I don't know exactly how that might be orchestrated but through SOrtie sort of an advertiseI'lent through the City or something, I don't know exactly how that might be orchestrated just to try and get a few people going out there. It's not like I'm trying to get everybody in town to rebbleroust about it but I think if there is a group, we may have to do the...to find them. Boyt: Wi thin our school distr ict we have a higher than average nUI'lber of handicap children, different special needs and they don't all live in onr area but we have a higher than norPlal percentage that do. There are groups around, parent groups, with physically handicapped, ertlotionally handicapped. Maybe an ad in the paper asking for interest in this topic. Hasek: Sure. Maybe if we get absolutely no response, then it's a Platter of digging a little bit harder but I don't think it's a nlatter of just assunling that they're not there and not responding. Schroers: I think that soliciting input or researching the need is an excellent idea. I definitely think that's worth pursuing but I would like ;t""'" to say why I at'1 conservative about just going ahead and I'laking things accessible and that is, I can show you many, many, many thousands of dollars worth of accessible things that just plain do not get used. They don't get touched. I think that I want things accessible but I also don't Park and Rec Con~ission Meeting November 28, 1989 - Page 36 want money wasted needlessly. I'd like to see theITI nlade accessible in an -' area where it's going to be a benefit to SOITleone. Boyt: That's where this group of people coule be our beginning. We don't have to spend any money. They can come up with plans and say, we have 30 children of this age that live in this one area that would use an accessible playground area or maybe the seniors want something specific and then they could come to us. Robinson: Or if you didn't get a response, it would tell you there's really no interest in it probably also. I think that's a good idea to take this approach. Sietsema: Something ties in on this is the City has some funds through the developITlent block grant money that is going to be approved at the Council, maybe it was last night. They didn't meet last night, on Monday night it will be approved by theni to hire a consultant to do a senior needs study. That will tie into this and Paul and I will both be working with that consul tant and I will alert the!'1 that we're looking for this kind of inpllt at the sartle tinle. Lash: Maybe you could get the guy from the paper to put, not an ad. I don't think nlany people see those but if there was SOITle kind of an article put in jllSt stating that this is sort of being reviewed and we're interested in getting input from the public. So interested could contact you . ...."" Boyt: Do you want to do that? Sietserr,a: Yes. Hasek: If you do that Lori, could I have a chance to review what it is that you put in before you do it? Sietsert,a: Sure. Hasek: Not to edit or anything. Just to make sure... Sietserr,a: To check nlY work? Lash: Ed i tit. Hoffman: It may be beneficial in writing an article like that, Dave likes to sit down with a few people that have the ideas. To interview them personally and that may be an option. Mady: Dave is always looking for good articles. Hasek: He can call me if he wants to. Larry, it's interesting that you say that the equipnlent doesn't get used because I called Hennepin County Parks and they talked a little bit about their policies of putting things ...."" in. Nothing but rave reviews. Park and Rec COJ'\~ission Meeting November 28, 1989 - Page 37 ,..., Schroers: On what? Hasek: On the equipIlient. Yes, it gets used... Schroers: What specific equipIlient? I think there are things that get overused and then there are other things that just don't even get looked at. Hasek: Regarding or related to equipment for handicapped? Schroers: Yes. Hasek: Okay, that's possible. All I did, I talked to I think it was a WOIllan over there that I talked to and whoever it was that I talked to over there said that the prograIlI was really good and they were looking at sOJ'\le J'\lore things and J'\laybe they weren't rating things. Schroers: I agree with you. We have many successful handicapped programs. We have the Courage Center cOIldng out with.. .and we have J'\,odified SOllie canoes and boats for the handicapped so they can use theIl\ and that's all very sllccessful but we also have the Iliaximum nUJ'\iber of handicapped positions in parking lots and I haven't seen a car parked in for 2 years and the rest of the lot is full and people are going into overflow parking and they can't use. In one parking lot we've got 8 parking handicap ~parking spots and I have yet to see a car in anyone of them. And it is hard to say, it's hard to find out exactly where you need the accessibility and where you don't and too much, when we're talking about accessibility only to the handicapped. We should be talking about accessibility to everyone. Just making everything accessible and do away with stairwells and have elevators in buildings and things of that nature so that everyone whether they're old or whether they have a physical handicap or a piental handicap or whatever their situation may be, can use it and not target a specific group. Accessibility should be equal accessibility for everyone. Mady: Did we need action on that? SietseJ'\la: No. Hasek: I think we just directed staff to prepare that. HoffIllan: The other instance which I J'\\entioned earlier was the class that we sponsored at the old Village Hall. We had a handicapped instructor that had a wheelchair and couldn't get in the front door. We had to build a temporary ramp just to get into that building. Mady: Are there funds available through the federal government or the state government to make handicap accessibles? Sietsema: Yes. Block grant money is available. ~Mady: Put a path from the parking lot to the gate in the park there and take the stupid post set up you've got out of there. It's going to cost a little bit of money but not astronomical. Park and Rec COlll1'dssion Meeting Novelllber 28, 1989 - Page 38 .....", Sietsema: As a matter of fact we've got $7,500.00 to go towards making the fishing pier we put out at Lake Susan Park handicapped accessible. Mady: Does it have to go specifically there? Sietsellla: Yes. Mady: If we only spend $6,000.00 there, can we use $1,500.00? Sietsema: No. PRIORITIZATION OF AND MODIFICATION TO THE CHANHASSEN COMPREHENSIVE TRAIL PLAN. Sietsellla: I don't have a whole lot to add frolll ItIY ltieItIO. We need to look at the plan and deterniine what we want to prioritize. How we want to go about prioritizing and phasing this thing. It's very clear that we're not going to have the funding to do very much of this any time soon. Boyt: Jill,? Mady: Not this but later on in COItl1'iission presentations which isn't on the agenda, I have an i tena to present. .....", Schroer s: I'd like to know who designed thi s agenda for tonight. I Plean we put a whole bunch of Ilaaj or things on here. The Capi tal Improvement. SietseIt,a: chairing. Robinson: I did. Sue's never been late on any agenda so I knew she was I was putting her to the test. Do we have to do anything with this tonight? Sietsenaa: You don't have to do anything to it ever. Mady: We have to come up with authorization though because there are... in May we should know how we're going to proceed. Sietsema: We've already made the prioritization of Minnewashta Parkway by allocating $7,500.00 to go towards the feasibility study with the road improvements as our share of that feasibility study so that that could be done at the same time that those road improvements are made. Hoffman: Is there enough funds available to worry about it? How much do we have to work with here? Boyt: $7,500.00 for a feasibilty. Hoffnian: For addi tional developllaent? Sietsepaa: That's about all we have in the trail fund right now. """"'" Park and Rec Con~ission Meeting NoveIllber 28, 1989 - Page 39 ""'" Hasek: Okay, but is Minnewashta Parkway on the State Aid Program? SietseIlia: Yes. Hasek: So that we can get a trail potentially developed, at least to a certain degree through State Aid funds? Sietsema: Yes. But we will have to kick something in and it may have to come out of the rest of our capital improvement program because the trail fund was depleted with the Laredo Drive and Carver Beach Road sidewalks. Hasek: When is Minnewashta scheduled right now for upgrading? Sietsenia: 1992. Hasek: That's the bids are let or that's when road is developed? Sietsen.a: The feasibility study is going to be done in 1990 and I believe the bids nlight be let in 1991 and developnient... Hasek: Beginning in 1992? Because that's got to be a year long project I would think. SietseIlia: I really arr. not certain. I know that the feasibility study is """'going to be done in 1990 and it's either 1991 or 1992 that the upgrading is supposed to occur. That it's scheduled on the State Aid program. Schroers: What about along TH l0l? Boyt: Are we talking about north and south TH l0l? SietseI'la: Yes. Schroers: If they're going to do a realignment of TH 101, it sure doesn't pay to prioritize it and plan on doing anything before they realign it. Mady: They're going to realign it in the next couple of years. For our side. Schroers: And...would be a part of that. It just should be done at the sanle tinie. Hasek: Yeah, that was the one thing, the realignnient that I saw when I was here one night at a Planning Carr~ission meeting, they made no mention whatsoever of trails. None. It was a concept plan at that point but they were talking about, well is there a trail? It was real hodge podge at that point and I asked then, to please let us know with that plan before it got too far along and we still haven't seen it. ~ Sietsenia: They are aware though. The Planning departItlent is aware that there is a trail proposed along TH 101 so it is in the back of their niinds at any rate. Park and Rec Commission Meeting November 28, 1989 - Page 40 Schroers: Update them on that and let the~i know that we would like to see~ it go in along with and at the same time of the improvement. Sietsema: I would think that one of our priorities would also be that we have SO~ie kind of a trail systel'i on the south TH 101 by the ti~ie the Bandimere Park is developed because it is going to be an attraction for kids to get down there and they should be able to get there safely. Mady: That portion of the road is... Sietserr,a: So it l"iay not be a bad thing to do table this. I can go back and try and get some schedules from Engineering and Planning as far as when sO~le of the road hlprovements are going to be I'iade and that rnay help you in deterIldning what kind of prioritization you want to put on these. But sOIllething else to consider is how, even if we do this as the streets and the roads are upgraded, we're still going to have to kick in IIloney and so some creative funding ideas are very appropriate. Boyt: Do we have a motion to table? Mady moved, Hasek seconded to table prioritization and modification of the Chanhassen Comprehensive Trail Plan for IIlore information. All voted in favor and the motion carried. ~ DISCUSSION OF ZAMBONI. Boyt: Todd, are you our Zamboni man? Hoffman: Sure. I was the Zamboni operator quite a bit last year and the year before. Robinson: Were you authorized? Hoffman: Authorized and trained, yes. Lash: It's gone? HoffIlian: No, it's still here. It's in our rr,aintenance shop. We had the City of Orono, up north, they called and scheduled SOIlie ice tirr,e and we said it's not available and we talked about the Zamboni and they said, well maybe we'll buy it. Lash: How much do you think you could get for it? Mady: At least 5. Hoffman: I hope we can get what we put into it. Mady: We should at least start there. Robinson: What'd we put into it? $6,500.00? -' Park and Rec Con~ission Meeting Novel'lber 28, 1989 - Page 41 ,....... Hoffry-Ian: Yep. Boyt: I think we should ~ake at least another hundred bucks so we can get shirts. Lash: I just want to say I thought these Minutes were aIrlusing. Schroers: . .. use the Za~boni as a bargaining item and niaybe we could shine it up. Put a wax job on it. Make it look real nice and take it up to the bank and see if they wouldn't, since we already have such a nice piece of ~aintenance ~achinery, that they would finance an indoor rink for us. A no interest loan. Mady: Is that a motion? Schroers: No, not a motion. Creative thinking. Robinson: I make a motion that we authorize staff to sell the Zamboni for starting at a price of the $6,500.00 that we've got into it. Lash: I second that. ,..... Robinson I'loved, Lash seconded to author i ze staff to sell the Zanlboni at a starting price of $6,500.00. All voted in favor and the motion carried. Robinson: I'd still like to say I told you so. SietseL'ia: But it served us for 2 years. Mady: It served it's purpose and did us a heck of a good job. COMMISSION PRESENTATIONS: Boyt: At our next meeting would you report to us on morals and ethics as adopted by the Council. Lash: Are you talking about this thing that the Citizens... Sietsel'ia: The Youth COIrlI'dssion. Lash: Is that what you're talking about? Boyt: Yes. Hoffman: They're posted in our lobby. ,..... Boyt: I think we need a full presentation and it would have been helpful when we were doing our ndssion statenient when there was a concern that voiced by the COIrlI'dssion that we don't want to dictate I'lorals to people when our City has adopted a plan to support a stance on Riorals and ethics. ~ Park and Rec Co~~ission Meeting NoveItlber 28, 1989 - Page 42 That's an okay thing to do so we need the entire presentation. ..""", Hasek: FroIll? Boyt: Fro~ Lori or Todd... Mady: Or the con~ittee that did it. Sietse~,a: That's no probleni. I can do that. Boyt: Thank you. Ji~? Mady: A conple things. We had on the agenda 2, 3, 4 nleetings ago soniething on nandng parks and I don't think we ever did anything. Sietsenla: No, yon still haven't naItled parks. Mady: I think we need to start thinking serious about this. We have abont a half a dozen parks that are going to be coniing on line in the next 2 years that absolutely have no na~es. Sietsenla: Right now they're called Lake Susan Hills West 1, 2 or G, Hand I can never renienlber which is what. Mady: So we have to do sonie serious thinking about that. Starting to do soniething about the~l. -' Sietse~a: Also the Bandi~ere Farm Park is going to need a na~e. HoffItlan: Contest. Sietsenia: Specifically we don't have na~les for the Lake Susan Hills West parks. There's four of them. We don't have one for the Bandimere Farm. We have not for~ally named Chanhassen Hills or Curry Far~s or any of them. We should adopt theIti as na~les if that's wha.t they're going to be. Boyt: Maybe we should do an informal meeting. SietseIt,a: How about a Christnias party? At Sue's house after the next nieeting which is the 12th of Deceniber. Robinson: Put it on a light agenda item sOItletiIlle. Boyt: That's fine. We can have the next meeting at my house. It's all the saItle. Sietse~a: Well we'll have to have a formal meeting because there are some things on the agenda but we could probably get out of here pretty good. Erhart: Lori, do we just have one Itleeting in Decernber? Sietsema: That's what I was going to ask you. I think that we could probably get by with one. ...,. Park and Rec Co~~ission Meeting November 28, 1989 - Page 43 "..... ADMINSTRATION PRESENTATIONS: Boyt: Are there any questions on the Adriinstration Section? I think Todd did you want to talk about Breakfast with Santa? HoffIhan: Breakfast wi th Santa, just to lI'iake everyone aware of it, that this is sponsored by the Chall'iber-Rotary-Volunteer Fire Department. I help out as a ~leIhber of the Chapiber on the Good will CO~lI'dttee per se and I think if you were there last year, it's a heck of a lot of fun so bring your kids. Come on down. Sietsep,a: And don't you think that Todd should put also sponsored by the City of Chanhassen Park and Rec Departll'ient if he's spending his till',e on it? Schroers: Absolutely. Mady: I believe so. Hoffman: That was a suggestion by Lori. We'll have it in there. Mady: One thing that was a heck of an idea I heard last night. I don't want to take credit for it but I did think it was a heck of an idea that carie frorl one of the ~le~lbers of the Lion's Club...it happened to be an individual that applied for the Park and Rec COll'lI'iission open position. I 11""'-. don't rell'ieriber his naPle but he was the guy who went to Arizona 3 months out of the year. Well, in any event, last night at the cOll'lI',unity center presentation at the Lion's Pieeting, he suggested that the City look seriously into changing the new State property tax law that allows localities to initiate a sales tax in their community and his suggestion was that we charge say a 1% sales tax on all entertainment and motel and hotel rooriS and that that ~Ioney be ear~,arked to park and recreation i teriS so it's really not a tax on the residents here but on the people who use the Dinner Theatre and the people who sleep in our hotels and motels. We do have a new motel breaking ground shortly. We have a couple in town. It's soo,ething that I think staff should seriously look into and make it aware of the Council. He indicated that the City of Scottsdale, Arizona did this and they're Obviously a lot larger cOll'~unity... That's how they developed their park system. Lash: So what would we get, maybe 50 bucks? Mady: 1% of all the drinks. Lash: You didn't say drinks. Mady: That's entertainment. That's a bar. Right now you're already paying a tax, roughly 15% in this state anyway. Boyt: Well make a recoPlI'iendation and it can be presented to Council ~because they have to do that right? Mady: I' Pi not sure who but I thought it was a heck of an idea and it needs further study to find out what the rap,ifications are. Park and Rec Cop~ission Meeting November 28, 1989 - Page 44 ......" Lash: I like the water bill one better. The one that was in our packet a long time ago about people rounding up their water bills and then the excess goes to Park and Rec. Like if your water bill's $59.00, you write the check out for $60.00 and that goes to Park and Rec. Mady: In any event, that's an idea. I don't think we need a recoP~aendation or motion or anything on it but I thought it was a heck of an idea. He thought of it in terllaS of a cOmIt,uni ty center. I think it's an excellent idea for anything. Maybe trails. Anything that's not easily... Hoffllaan: One naore cOPll'aent. The letter on the Regional State Softball Tournan,ent applicant that we were turned down. That does have a reflection on, each manager gets a survey at the end of their tournament and some of the results on that survey is that we didn't have all the facilities available at this park that other complexes do that host these tonrnaments and that's part of the reason we were turned down. Schroers: What specifically were the facilities that we didn't offer? Hoffl'aan: Phone, water and restrOOl'as. Electricity. That type of thing. Mady moved, Robinson seconded to adjourn the meeting. All voted in favor and the motion carried. The meeting was adjourned at 9:30 p.na.. ---' Subl'aitted by Lori Sietsel',a Park and Rec Coordinator Prepared by Nann Opheim .....,