PRC 1988 03 22
26
CHANHASSEN PARK AND RECREATION COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
MARCH 22, 1988
,....,
Chairman Mady called the meeting to order.
MEMBERS PRESENT: Sue Boyt, Larry Schroers, Jim Mady, Mike Lynch, and
Curt Robinson
MEMBERS ARRIVED LATE:
Ed Hasek and Carol Watson
STAFF PRESENT: Lori Sietsema, Park and Rec Coordinator and Todd Hoffman,
Recreation Supervisor
Boyt moved, Mady seconded to move the Lake Ann Park Parking Fee Schedule
to the end of the agenda per Ed Hasek's request. All voted in favor and
motion carried.
PARK DEDICATION FEES.
Sietsema: This item was tabled after the January meeting. If you recall,
the Park and Recreation Commission asked staff to research further what
exactly we base our fee on instead of picking a number out of the air or
simply being comparable to other cities. What I've done is kind of
outlined how we come to what our fee is based on what our park dedication
~ ordinance outlines. If you read through this, it shows that it's based
on the average raw land value of the undeveloped land which, if you
average out all the different areas, it comes to $10,500.00 per acre.
I've shown three different illustrations of what would be required of a
developer with a 100 acre site. The examples illustrate that our current
fee is pretty close to right on target. We could raise it somewhat but I
think it is comparable to what other people are charging and if we do it
in this manner, it's staying within the intent of the State Statute. If
you wanted to raise the fee, it would be $425.00 for a single family
residential from the $415.00 and $1,050.00 for the industrial and it's
currently $1,035.00. That would be up to you.
Lynch: Lori, I've been hearing that $10,500.00 for a long time. The
$10,500.00 average land value. Wasn't that compiled...
Sietsema: Where I got it was the County Assessor and I called him up and
this is based on the 1987 survey of what he did. It's an average of the
all the different land values. It takes into account what the rural land
value is in the industrial and the urban residential and averages that
out and that's how it came to that number.
Lynch: It just seems to me I've been hearing that number for 10 years.
Doesn't it seem odd that land values would stay that for 10 years.
Mady: That's my big concern. A question on how old that number is.
11""""
Sietsema:
He said that he did the survey in 1987.
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
March 22, 1988 - Page 2
.,.,.,1
Lynch: Look at it this way, if what we have now matches the $10,000.00
or whatever. In other words, we take the $424.00 and work it backwards,
does that justidy the $10,500.00?
Sietsema: You lost me.
Lynch: Start out with the fee that we have and the percent of x that it
equals. Run a standard algebraic equation on it and see what x equals.
What kind of percent of the land value now are we charging versus anybody
else around the surrounding communities? Not so much dollar value. In
other words, fine it's a $424.00 charge. What percent of the land value
is that?
Sietsema: Every city does it different and nobody really knows how they
come about it but I did include, I think the last time...
Lynch: I looked into it myself about 6 or 8 years when we were trying to
figure out then what we had done and it wasn't at all clear then and I
found out that it isn't very clear in any city. It's just sort of well,
we've always done it that way or we started doing it that way and it
seems to work so we still do it that. We raise it when we feel we can
get away with raising it. In other words, $424.00 is based on how many
lots per acre?
Sietsema: 2 1/2. It should all be spelled out in the bottom of that -'
memo. 100 acre site, 2 1/2 units per acre. 250 units times 3 people per
unit and our standard is 1 acre for 75 people. That would make a
requirement of 10 acres of parkland. If we chose to take the cash in
lieu of the parkland, it comes out to 10 acres times $10,600.00 equals
$106,000.00 divided by the 250 units is $424.00 per unit. What we want
to do is be able to standardize this so that we don't have something
different for each different subdivision or each different development.
Boyt: That's what the courts have said...
Sietsema: I know that the courts have upheld that.
Lynch: Are we getting back to that 10% again? The magic number?
Sietsema: But the courts won't uphold it if it's just a straight 10%.
It has to be based on density so in our industrial, because there isn't
any density, that should hold up but in the residential, in the court
cases that we have reviewed, just because it's 10% for the sake of being
any kind of percentage, is not a good reason. It has to be based on
density which gets back to your 1 acre per 75 people and it happens to
work out in our equation to be 10%. If we want to increase it, then we
should go 1 acre per 50 people or something like that and change our
density rather than...
Boyt: Who would set the density? Could we set that?
......"
Sietsema: You set that with the update of the Park and Rec Section.
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
March 22, 1988 - Page 3
JI""-
Mady: When you talked to the assessor, this $10,500.00, was his estimate
of the land in Chanhassen itself? That's not including like Waconia?
Sietsema: No, that was Chanhassen.
Mady: I'm a little concerned, if the number is including, because the
bulk of development is happening in the sewered area. That land is worth
a heck of a lot more than the land that's being developed outside the
sewered area.
Sietsema: But he said that the land in the sewered area was appraised at
like $7,500.00 per acre and he indicated that the developer couldn't
purchase land for more than that and still make a profit.
Lynch: That sounds awful low.
Sietsema: It sounded low to me too but I didn't know what else to do
except call an appraiser.
Lynch: Do you know what some of the lots have sold for in my immediate
neighborhood?
JI""-
Sietsema: But that's developed. That's got utilities on it. That
includes roads and utilities so you can't count that. It's got to be the
raw land value without any improvements.
Lynch: What I'm saying is that the $7,500.00 sounds low because this
acreage is going for 6 or 7 times $7,500.00 which~certainly doesn't equal
$7,500.00 an acre plus assessments which is way over the top of that.
That's why I think the $7,500.00 sounds so low.
Sietsema: I thought that it did too but I called him twice and asked him
to check his figures and that's what he came up with. I don't know who
else to base it on other than the County Assessor.
Lynch: Well, in the sewered area, I was under the same misunderstanding
perhaps that Jim had. I thought the land in the sewered area in was more
valuable than that in the rural area.
Sietsema: The rural area was going for like $3,500.00 an acre.
Lynch: Then how do he come up with a $10,500.99 average?
Sietsema: Our industrial is worth anywhere from $15,990.99 to $30,909.09
an acre.
Lynch: And there's that much of it?
Sietsema: I just took the figures and averaged them.
,....
Lynch: A per acre average?
Robinson: It's not a weighted average?
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
March 22, 1988 - Page 4
..."",
Sietsema: It would go down because there's a lot more area in the rural
area than there is in the urban.
Schroers: Did the Assessor give you the figures for the tax base for
that property that assessed?
Sietsema: I asked him the fair market value. The raw land value. I
asked him for the fair market value and that's what he told me.
Boyt: That's supposed to be real close to the assessed value. I think
we should call a realtor.
Public: I have just done some research because I was looking to purchase
at $5,600.00 an acre. Lake Susan Hills is $6,700.00 an acre
and...$6,500.00 an acre.
Sietsema: And what was Eckankar going to go for?
Public: We're not going to talk about that.
Sietsema: That's considerably higher.
Public: Eckankar is selling his property for around $12,000.00 an acre.
Robinson: Is that commercial?
...""
Public: There is some commercial zoning in there. There's 173 acres of
property and about 40 acres of that is commercial.
Sietsema: The zoning map is right behind you. Part of that is
residential and some of it's business campus.
Public: So that increases the value.
Sietsema: That gets into the neighborhood of the industrial.
Boyt: It's also the assessor's we use. I think what we can look at
though is the density. When we think about our neighborhood there are 50
families and if we looked at a 1 acre survey.
Mady: I wondering if the 75 people per acre number, the density number,
is enough.
Sietsema: It's not set in stone yet. It hasn't gone to Council for
approval and if you're going to change that standard, it should be done
now before it does get sent onto Met Council.
Mady: That changes all of our numbers.
Sietsema: I would recommend that we have justification for changing
that.
...",
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
March 22, 1988 - Page 5
""
Mady: I almost think that this year go with what we've got then let's
start taking a good hard look at the number.
sietsema: The Comp Plan won't be updated for another 5 years so whatever
you put in that Comp Plan, you're stuck with for the next 5 years. What
I'm saying is, our policy is not to accept anything less than 5 acres so
you have 5 acres of land for 375 people and given the mixed population
and park users and non-park users.
Boyt: We've seen that what we have in parkland is way over what we
require we are barely meeting the needs for citizens in Chanhassen so
I think shows us right there that are numbers are off for our population
and density.
Schroers: What were those figures you quoted before Lori on the single
family? You just said something about $424.00 or $425.00.
Sietsema: What we currently charge is $415.00 for single family. If we
went strictly by what I've outlined in here, we could justify an increase
to $425.00 from $415.00. And from $1,035.00 in the industrial to
$1,050.00.
Schroers: That doesn't seem like a lot of money.
~ Sietsema: I don't think anybody would really balk at that slight
increase. But if you make slight increases year by year as you evaluate
what that assessed value of land is and change it little by little rather
than every 5 years and change it by $100.00, it's a lot less noticeable.
Schroers: Is that why you're proposing? Is that what you'd like to do?
Sietsema: I didn't really make a recommendation because $10.00 isn't
that big a deal. If you felt like it needed to be increased minimally,
that would be reasonable but otherwise, if you don't think that it's
enough money, then instead of raising the fee just at the end, we have to
look at the density. That's where I'm coming from.
Boyt: I think we need to look at density and hold off on this until we
decided on the density question.
Mady: We have a real problem with density. I'm thinking too that we've
got the parkland and how it's being utilized, we're short. We really
truly are.
Sietsema: But remember, another thing to consider is this is not the
community park development. This fund is for neighborhood park
acquisition and development. So if you look at our neighborhood parks,
are we serving our existing communities with what we have? I would say
at City Center Park, no we're not but at Minnewashta Heights, yes we are.
And at Meadow Green Park, I would think we're right at.
,...
Mady:
park.
I really think we're deficient and seriously deficient in any
Chaparral might be close as it's exists right now but with the new
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
March 22, 1988 - Page 6
...."
stuff coming on board this year, that park's full. The density really
something maybe we should be looking at.
Sietsema: So what's your next step? Do you want to direct staff and see
how many people are using the existing parks or are in the service areas
of existing parks? If you table this, I would like some direction on how
to proceed.
Boyt: I think we should look at all the parks that we use now and have
some sort of information on that.
Sietsema: So you want to table this and find out how many people are in
the service areas in each park now?
Mady: Yes.
Schroers: Then we also have to look at those plats for proposed
developments. Take that into consideration. We'll have to look at the
plats for the proposed developments and consider that also.
Boyt: Like Lake Susan.
Sietsema: That one is directly related to 1 per 75.
Mady: We won't be changing anything.
..",.
Sietsema: We can't.
Boyt: No, but we need to look at it.
Sietsema: No, but if we change the fee, they'll be charged more because
they're at 50% so right now 50% is $207.50. If we change it to $500.00
for single family, it will be $250.00.
Boyt: Isn't that only a small portion? The important thing is serving
Chanhassen.
Robinson: When we tabled this before simply because I think we wanted
more money and told Lori to go do this. She comes back and it looks the
same. It sounds to me like we're saying, by god we're going to justify
this for money. Go look at density and if that doens't work out, we'll
have you go look at something else until we've got $500.00-$600.00 it
sounds like.
Boyt: I don't think it's to get more money and I've seen the figures
saying Chanhassen needs this many acres of parkland to serve this number
of people and we're way beyond that and we don't have room for our kids
to play baseball. That our numbers are wrong. We need to deal with
that.
Mady: Ed was the one who pretty much wanted us to table it at that time ~
and he was looking at how many people in his firm, he wanted that
information.
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
March 22, 1988 - Page 7
,...
Sietsema: I did work with him when I was putting this all together and
he was comfortable with it.
Lynch: One thing we have to keep in mind is that some of the old burden
neighborhood facilities that exist now, the upper Carver playground
facility and the old Chan Estates, these went in during the 50's. People
with one acre plus, they were pieces of property that happened to be
there and were given to us or a developer put a park in there to sell
houses and those are some of the low park facilities.
Boyt: We know how many acres we have.
Mady: One thing we find though, if we find out how many people we have
in the service area, and the number of acres of parkland we have, then we
have a pretty good feel for how each park is being utilized, we'll have a
good idea of what our density should be. If it's too high or too low.
Then we can proceed for future park development. Is it possible to get
that information for our next meeting?
Sietsema: Yes.
Lynch: My memory is not good enough to recall why we picked the number
that we did.
,.....
Sietsema:
Because that's what Lakeville did.
Lynch: I couldn't remember if it was Lakeville or Metro Council.
Hoffman: One thing to consider is the time lag we have between some of
the new parks and some of the new development that is coming in. That
will serve more people in some of those service areas that are a little
over crowded now and once those facilities are available, it will spread
out some of the people that are using certain overrun and rundown
facilities. Some of those things are in the works.
Boyt: We're getting a lot of people into the City Center Park area that
use the park.
Mady moved, Lynch seconded to table the park dedication fees item until
the next meeting pending information from staff concerning densities of
existing park areas. All voted in favor except Robinson who opposed and
motion carried.
Hoffman:
to you?
What type of specific answers or numbers can we come back with
We don't want to just come back with generalizations.
Boyt: That service area 1 has 10 acres of park and 75,000 people in it.
~ Hoffman: And what type of organized programs takes place in those parks
at this time?
Lynch: We're addressing neighborhood parks.
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
March 22, 1988 - Page 8
...",.,
Mady: There aren't any organized things going on.
Sietsema: We have playground programs and tennis programs.
Hoffman: Chaparral is really booked Monday through Friday with girl's
softball and we can't book anymore people down there.
Mady: Is that considered more of a community thing or neighborhood?
Hoffman: Meadow Green is neighborhood.
Boyt: It's a neighborhood park but it serves a community need which
there's a question as to whether it should.
DISCUSSION OF REFERENDUM RESULTS.
Sietsema: I just wanted to bring to your attention that they have
scheduled a meeting for April 4th and I still don't know what time of day
that will be. It may be a work session over dinner. It may be later but
it's tentatively set for April 4th and I would recommend that anybody who
has some input or message they would like the Council to hear regarding
the referendum, to either let me know that or put it in writing so I can
forward that to them or attend the meeting. ~
Lynch: Will some sort of a schedule of tentative action be available at
that meeting or will it be discussed at that meeting as far as when each
of the items...
Sietsema: I think they are planning to discuss the schedules.
Boyt: Just Jim and I looked at another piece of property.
Sietsema: I haven't had a chance to go out and look at it closely.
Boyt: It's available and it's cheap.
SITE PLAN REVIEW - WOODCREST ADDITION.
Sietsema: This proposal is located just north of the Triple Crown
Estates Subdivision on the south side of Woodhill Road about a 1/4 mile
east of Nez Perce. The proposal lies within the service area of the
Carver Beach, Meadow Green Park and Chanhassen Pond Park. As it's
currently being served by those parks, additional parkland is not being
called for and the trail plan does not call for trails in this area. It
is my recommendation to accept the park and trail dedication fees in lieu
of parkland and trail construction.
Schroers: I think staff has looked into this and I don't see a problem
with that at all.
.....",
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
March 22, 1988 - Page 9
,....
Schroers moved, Mady seconded that the Park and Recreation Commission
recommend to accept park and trail dedication fees in lieu of parkland
and trail construction. All voted in favor and motion carried.
SITE PLAN REVIEW - TRAPPERS PASS.
"'"
Mike Flaum: A little bit of history. Some of you may recall, in fact
some of you were even present when this project originated in 1970-1971.
It has been off of the municipal floor and on the development floor and
back to this proposal... The basic trail concept was connecting that
line here, an on-street trail up to here, on-street trail here and here
and here. The original concept had nothing of a trail going on this part
of it. The only non sepeletric type street that that trail, with this
section... These are basicly strip unit, residential streets. I'm not
sure exactly how your policy reads but normally we don't see off-street
trails in other communities on typical residential streets. Typical
residential streets are deemed perfectly safe and adequate for pedestrian
traffic. These are all typical residential streets. The other
observation I would make, other than the fact that it will do damages to
property in terms of valuation. As has been pointed out, there is
development here and as I just said, normally a residential street is
safe for pedestrians. There's an outlet every 300 to 500 feet of this
outlet. There's another trail off of the street. The other question
that crossed my mind is, if you start a paved trail running down the
street...is contrary to what has been approved on the project before,
what happens when it gets to the point where it goes back to the street?
Basically you can plan people to go someplace and then dumping them right
in the middle of another bracket on a subdivision. My expectation is
that you're going to have people wandering around not really too certain
where they're going and agitating people who are living there.
Mady: I think you might be a little confused as to what we're talking
about a trail. We're not asking you put in an 8 foot trail in. It's
basically a 5 to 6 foot trail. It's just like a street set-up. We're
not talking about putting a major trail in there. It's just a collector.
It's for getting those kids who live in that development to the park
without going on the street. I believe I speak for the Commission, the
view of this commission is there's no such thing as a safe street to walk
on.
Mike Flaum: Is it the City's policy to put these 5 or 6 foot trails on
all of the streets that you construct?
Boyt: No, not all. We have a trail plan.
Mike Flaum: Does the trail plan show this, not the design included in
the trail plan, I guess my confusion is, this to me is the normal way to
get in the street.
,.......
Sietsema: The trail plan covers the subdivisions that had not been
designed at the time the trail plan was, by saying that any through
streets, we aren't putting trails or sidewalks along cul-de-sacs but on
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
March 22, 1988 - Page 10
......"
through streets and connecting streets, there will be sidewalks. The
City has made a commitment in providing a safe way to get from
neighborhood to neighborhood, from neighborhood to parks and other areas
of interest within the city. That's basically the basis of why that
trail is being recommended by staff because it has been set forth by the
Commission through the trail plan pOlicy.
Lynch: That was not a capricious decision, if you're wondering, this
Commission gave a lot of thought and research and discussion as to
whether or not the City should have a sidewalk type format allover the
City or whether we should simply have streets. ...undoubtedly there will
be other subdivisions such as yours which are not going to have sidewalks
in some portions and will in other portions. I agree with you that
there's going to be some hazards. There's going to be some old...There's
never going to be a perfect date that we can come up and say, well now
we're going to start doing this and there won't be any dead-ends. I
agree with Jim's point in that I'd like to point out a trail on Pleasant
View that goes back in the neighborhood. I look at it from the other
end. I look at it keeping people on the neighborhood on these collectors
and moving out to the main park which is across the street. You
certainly wouldn't go home that way but I think your residents will, I
have a feeling that they will would much rather have their children walk
down to the park on that walk rather than on a normal neighborhood
street.
....;
Mike Flaum: One of the reasons we design the streets the way we do is to
account for that. It's like a pile of worms and one of the reasons it
looks like a pile of worms is to save aesthetic values and I guess living
values for the people aspiring to have slow and go traffic in their
community. Obviously we have cul-de-sacs where you have extensive looped
streets as a means of traffic control. I know that when you are
engineering the streets there is a higher degree of danger with
pedestrian traffic. I really don't see that particular problem here. I
was a little surprised about having a trail that goes almost all the way
from someplace that you get to by using a street...
Mady: You have to understand that children being as they are, they're
not going to go 500 feet out of their way to stay on the trail. They're
going to take the most direct means and the illusion I think that traffic
is going to move quickly on a winding road, I live on a road that has a
hill on it and some sharp curves right by my house. There's a stop sign
at both ends of the block. My neighbors, for whatever reason, feel that
they need to go 40 mph by my house and it's not a long road but they do.
People being what they are seem to be in a hurry to get to wherever
they're going to get to no matter how wide the road is and how severe the
curve. They take a challenege sometimes ano that's why my personal
feeling is we should be putting trails off-street wherever. We have the
opportunity to start planning this city out so 20-30-40 years from now
when this city is full, these kids have a place to get to wherever they
want to get to without having to go across either private property or ......"
have to go out in the public streetway where other traffic is happening.
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
March 22, 1988 - Page 11
,.....
Schroers: I think that after considerable deliberations we have set
policy that is stated that wherever possible there will be off-road
trails.
Robinson: That's right. It's wherever possible and I had a problem with
that. I thought it should be wherever possible and practical but we went
wherever possible.
Schroers: And that is our policy.
Robinson: 6 to 8 months ago.
Schroers: I don't see anything here that would indicate that we want to
try to change our policy.
Sietsema: I have just one other thing to add and that is that in the
existing neighborhood I have had requests that the on-street trail that
goes along Near Mountain Blvd. be striped on one side of the road because
they do want a definite place that's just pedestrians and not for
vehicles. Some of the neighbors in that area are considering petitioning
for an off-street trail in that area so it won't just end anywhere, we
will eventually stripe that so that it does continue but it will be on
street.
,.....
Hoffman: Another thing that's probably obvious to us all, it just hasn't
been brought up tonight is not only are those off-street trails
pedestrian traffic flows but they are an actual play area for kids to go
out and ride their bikes, put their skateboard jumps. It brings the kids
off the street, off that hard surface onto an off-street, non-traffic
flow area for their activities. I think they all can use that in their
day to day activity.
Schroers: If you are unfortunate enough to live right on Carver Beach
Road, you would definitely be for that. It would take about 5 minutes of
observation to do that.
Lynch: I'm not sure where the neighbors from the area are more vigorous
than myoId neighbors or what it happens to be but the pedestrian road
traffic has got to be up several thousand percent. You used to see I or
2 fellows jogging once in a while and most of our children grew up
playing in the street, that's basically where they were but now when I
drive home, you can see at least 2 or 3 or 4 sometimes, sets of
pedestrians on the east and west part of Pleasant View and you can see
another 2 or 3 on that north-south leg. Up in the Trapper's Pass
Subdivision, on the streets there, and there's going to be a new park
road, in driving through there and you're talking 15-2~ sets of
pedestrians. The area is really getting used. They are walkers and
bikers and baby buggy pushers and dog walkers and practically everything
you can think of. It's interesting to see the multi-uses. I think the
park is really going to be used.
,...,
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
March 22, 1988 - Page 12
....."
Lynch moved, Robinson seconded that the Park and Recreation Commission
recommend that trails be constructed along Trappers Pass, Oxbow Bend and
Timber Hill Road with 100% credit in trail dedication. It is also
recommended that park dedication fees be accepted in lieu of parkland.
All voted in favor and motion carried.
Lynch: A quick question, if I could sneak it in, is the ballfield going
to get functionable?
Sietsema: We've got plans. I'm rattling Gary's cage to make sure that
he gets the final grading done so they can get that done early spring,
summer.
Lynch: Do you think we'll have an outfield for the season?
Sietsema: I would say that it would not be done by June but it will be
done. . .
Lynch: August?
Sietsema: Yes, I would think it's pretty safe to say they would have it
done by August.
"-'
Hoffman: Can I ask a side question here? When we ask these developers
to go ahead and build these sidewalks, trails, whatever, do we have some
set guidelines as to what specifications? Is this going to be asphalt?
Sietsema: We have specs. He can either do it in 6 foot bituminous or 5
foot concrete. It has to be centered within the remaining right-of-way.
Hoffman: Are we going to keep tabs on this?
Boyt: Who's inspecting it?
Sietsema: The Engineering Department is right on it. Gary tells me he's
out there inspecting and telling them where they're supposed to go and
what they're supposed to do.
SITE PLAN REVIEW - CHANHASSEN LAWN AND SPORT.
Sietsema: This site plan includes a 19,048 square foot commercial
building located on West 79th Street right next to the MGM. This being
West 79th Street, MGM and over here would be the Holiday gas station.
There aren't any parks currently serving this area. Although there has
been discussions that the holding pond would be a picnic area for the
downtown people to walk down and have picnic lunches and what not there.
The trail plan does not call for trails along this street. "-'
Boyt: I think we should put it on. I didn't see that before but I see
kids walking down to the Video stores down there.
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
March 22, 1988 - Page 13
~
Mady: The Community Center is down there right now. Every kid in town
is hanging out at the Holiday station or Kenny's.
Sietsema: There is a trail along TH 5 and there would be a trail along,
if you take the north side of the railroad tracks.
Mady: I would like to see us in the commercial developments, retail-
commercial developments which this City is not real strong in. We want
to help these people.
Boyt: But we encourage more customers coming in.
Schroers: This is for the new Lawn and Sports Building?
Sietsema: Right.
Schroers: How would this location lend itself to people riding
snowmobiles in that particular area. The store where they have now,
there's always somebody plowing through the alley to see what's wrong
with their machine. They make an adjustment or two and then they get on
it and drive around a little bit again. Does that area down there lend
itself at all to that?
.~ Sietsema: By the tracks between TH 5, no.
Schroers: Are they taking into consideration with other future plans
going out to that area?
Hoffman: I'm not so sure that in the future this city might take another
look at a snowmobile regulation. Right now it's real lax.
Lynch: Along the same lines, is there anything that's intended or is in
that area now where noise might be a problem? They do sell chainsaws.
You have to try one outside.
Schroers: They did up here.
Lynch: Sure, every chainsaw store does. Even Lynda1e Hardware has one
and it's right downtown but if there is some sort of a noise sensitive
building next door that it will bother a lot of other styles of
businesses...
Boyt: There's a motel right across the street.
Sietsema: I think planning will address those types of things and I will
forward the Minutes so if they don't think of it, that it's brought to
their attention. It's more of a planning item.
,....
Schroers: Those kind of things are mainly done during daytime hours and
it's something that probably wouldn't affect most hotel guests.
Lynch: Some of it could occur at 8:00 in the morning.
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
March 22, 1988 - Page 14
",.,.
Sietsema: If you want to put a trail along West 79th Street, what I
would recommend is that you direct staff to see if we can't do it within
the right-of-way.
Watson: I'm guessing that we should be able to put that within there.
Sietsema: That should be wide enough but I could check with engineering.
We don't have any additional right-of-way along any of the other
frontage.
Boyt: On that road?
Sietsema: On that road, right.
Boyt: It would all be on the north side of the street. Any trail would
have to be on the north side.
Mady: The pond is on the other side.
Boyt: The gas station is on the south side.
Sietsema: They have the same setbacks as anybody else from the right-of-
way. The road is built right down the middle of the right-of-way. I
really don't know. I'll have to check with Gary to see if he thinks
there's enough room in there or not. I don't know what you want to do. -'
Mady: Is Market Blvd. going to have a set of trails along that?
Sietsema: Market Blvd. will be corning in two lots over to the west. You
see the up and down line between BG and BH zoning on your map? It comes
in somewhere through there.
Mady: The new pond doesn't show on this because that is going to be a
fairly nice drainage space. I'm of the view that anywhere in the retail
establishment, especially this is our downtown, people are going to be
walking, supposedly walking back and forth. If your taking your lawn
mower to the Lawn and Sports and you're going to pick up a case of beer
or a six pack or something, you'd just as easily going to walk as you're
going to drive. We should have walks for people.
Sietsema: The question comes in, where do you want the sidewalk because
the parking lot is in front of all these buildings and it's not, in my
way of thinking, I don't think they put a walk out here and walk up to
MGM. They're going to cut right across the parking lot so maybe we want
to have, we need that sidewalk in front of the building and if anyone
wants a sidewalk that connects right in front of the building but if
they're going to walk from the corner down to the park area, then they'll
walk out along the street.
Mady:
prefer
retail
that's
Can we ask planning to take a look at it and tell that we would
a trail being put on there and ask them how it works best in a
establishment area. If it's more of a mall type thing because
basically what we're talking about doing is getting people from
....",
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
March 22, 1988 - Page 15
,...,
one retail area to another retail area versus a trail that's actually
going to be used for people going from St. Hubert's over to the pond.
Boyt: I think people will walk to that area from another area of town, I
don't think they'll walk. The kids will walk from St. Hubert's. A few
kids will walk from the edge of town down to this area to the Video
store.
Robinson: It's a bear right now. They walk down to Holiday and there's
just no place to walk...
Mady: We have an opportunity to make that a better situation. Start
getting it and the other two properties will develop as that road gets
open so we should at least make the effort on how to do it right. Show
them what we want to do. I'm not comfortable where to put the sidewalk
myself.
Robinson: I don't see anything wrong with just a place to walk. You can
walk in front of MGM and the videos. You can walk in front of pryzmus'
Barber Shop and he's got a little sidewalk there. Maybe it just needs
something should go...
,.....
Schroers: How about if we just move to accept the park dedication fees
and ask the Planning Commission to look into routing pedestrian traffic
in an acceptable manner?
Mady: I'm not sure if the Park Commission is the one who should be
planning this...
Boyt: We're not giving up the trail fees?
Schroers: No, we're not giving up the trail fees.
Mady: Basically we're allowing the Council to make the change.
Boyt: The Planning Commission should make a recommendation to us or they
can make a recommendation, if they want to make like a mall type
atmosphere, they can be looking at this saying you're giving us a trail
plan. . .
Mady: They would have their own sidewalks around the parking lots but
they don't connect between buildings.
Boyt: No, when you go between buildings you're walking across parking
lots and roadways.
Sietsema: Then over the little green.
~ Schroers: I don't feel real comfortable down in that area myself. When
you pull into parking and stuff, it just seems a little cramped. It's
like you don't have a lot of room to pull in to park and back up and turn
around. It's kind of cramped in there already so I don't really know
what the answer would be but aren't we just talking about making a
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
March 22, 1988 - Page 16
...",
connection from there to the pond area? That's all we're talking about
but we're going to save the trail dedication fee and hopefully have
something to work with them depending on what the Planning Commission
recommends.
Mady: What we're asking for is the Planning Commission to make a
recommendation to us.
Schroers moved, Robinson seconded that the Park and Recreation Commission
recommend accepting trail fees and park fees in lieu of parkland and also
to ask the Planning Commission to make a recommendation on pedestrian
walkways in this area. All voted in favor and motion carried.
SET SPECIAL MEETING DATE AND AGENDA (SATURDAY).
Sietsema: At the last Park and Recreation Commission meeting we talked
about setting special meeting dates, one being a Saturday to go visit
different sites and some things that have come up that we haven't been
able to do. The other one to have a session with Bill Boyt on selecting
a southern park site. Some of the items that I had for the Saturday
meeting, or potentially a Saturday meeting, the agenda included the old
Chanhassen Depot, going to look at that. Reviewing what uses it could ~
have. Kurver's barn. Going to see the Lake Ann shelter. I incidentally
had talked with the person who is working on that and told them that the
Legion's deadline is to have a memorial service on Memorial Day and they
wanted to be able to have it done and the structure complete so that the
Legion could come and finish the inside by Memorial Day so that is in the
works. The other one was looking at different parks, southern park
parcels and then looking at the Bluff Creek Park where there is a dumping
problem.
Mady: Also you should add on the Commission tour of Carver Beach
Playground.
Schroers: Are we going to plan on doing this, all of this on one
Saturday?
Sietsema: Yes.
Mady: I have a feeling that the south park acquisition is more or less
just going to be a kind of a look and see right now and when we get down
to it, this summer actually really walking a bunch of areas.
Schroers: That was just what I was going to say. If we're going to get
out and actually get into it and be looking at things like at the Bluff
Creek park area and actually get out there and walking around, I think
you're going to want to do that after the spring thaw is over. If you
try walking around out there now you'll be falling down and it's muddy -'
and wet and slick.
Sietsema: Maybe we want to take that off.
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
March 22, 1988 - Page 17
"'"
Mady: Those two items off until May.
Sietsema: I don't think we have to go very far into Bluff Creek.
Hoffman: Bluff Creek you can look at it from the gravel road.
Sietsema: We can look at it from the road, what we wanted you to see.
We can take the southern park acquisition site review and do that at a
later date after the session with Bill Boyt.
Mady: What Bill's looking to do, is basically a seminar teaching us
decision making processes and what to look for in the decision making
process more than what we should be looking for in parks.
Boyt: He does have selecting a park format. I talked to him about the
week and saying an evening would be easier for us to attend and he said
that he would prefer to work with us on a weekend morning because we are
fresh then and it would go better.
Schroers: What we're looking for down there is an active use area,
right?
,...
Boyt:
Right.
Sietsema: Right. I think our priorities were suitable for active use.
Schroers: I think generally what we were thinking about was youth
accomodations down there more than anything right. We wanted to get the
sanction regulation type Little League deals and soccer fields and all
that.
Hoffman: A flat, level area with good drainage is going to be important
if you're creating two ballfields, two of this ballfield, a soccer field,
you're going to need a lot of flat, tillable drainable area.
Schroers: There is some but
lot of hills and ravines and
area that I'm thinking about
that's necessarily desirable
that area back in through there,
rolling terrain back there also.
is mostly low. Low ground. I'm
either. Can that be flooded?
there are a
The flat
not sure if
Sietsema: We can set up the meeting with Bill to discuss the decision
making process and then schedule a time at that point to go out and look
at different sites. Staff will have done some research and some review
and some elimination in that process too so I'm not taking you to swamps.
I'll have identified areas that could potentially be suitable and we can
make our decision from there. I think first off, I guess it doesn't
matter which one we do first. The one with all this agenda or the one
with Bill.
",....
Boyt: We need two Saturdays.
Sietsema: Yes, it sounds like we need two Saturdays.
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
March 22, 1988 - Page 18
....",
Schroers: Do we need a quorum?
Mady: No. There are no decisions to be made. It's just informational.
Schroers: I don't know how peritnent this is to anything but I've got my
house for sale right now and Saturdays are just nuts. There aren't
enough hours in a Saturday for me right now.
Boyt: Are you trying to sell it yourself?
Schroers: No, it's going through a realtor but Saturdays are really the
only time I have to get things organized. They're dragging people
through 2, 3, 4 showings a day and with my work schedule and everything,
I need Saturdays to clean and reorganize and do things like that.
Boyt: I don't know about the other people, maybe Sunday afternoon to
look at things.
Schroers: Sunday afternoon would be better for me than Saturday.
Lynch: It is for me too. My wife has a tendency to organize Saturdays
pretty strongly.
Sietsema: So does anybody have any ideas on what dates?
...".
Boyt: Sunday the 10th in the afternoon.
Schroers: I was going to say, Larry has us going to this beer bust on
the 9th.
Boyt: This after Palm Sunday and after Easter and it's also right before
the next Park and Rec meeting.
Sietsema: How does Sunday the 10th sound for everybody?
Mady: I think the 10th sounds fine.
Sietsema: Fine with Larry? Mike? Curt? What time? To go look ats?
Lynch: 1:00 here?
Mady: What time do you get home from church?
Robinson: 12:30-12:15.
Sietsema: What time, 1:30?
Schroers: Lori, can we ask for a little note or a little memo?
Sietsema: Sure. Meet here at City Hall at 1:30 on April 10th.
"""""
Hasek: That's a little too close for me. Can you move it back? We're
taking our Sunday School class to a Baptist church downtown Sunday
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
March 22, 1988 - Page 19
~
morning and we're not going to be back until 2:00.
Sietsema: 2: 30?
Hasek: That would probably be alright.
Sietsema: Then for the next meeting.
Boyt: How about the 17th? 1:00?
sietsema: 1:00. This is a four hour session so we're commiting to 1:00
until 5:00. Okay, we have the 17th from 1:00 until 5:00 with Bill Boyt
then. That's a Sunday also. I will send you notes. Please let me know
if you can't be there as soon as you know.
SET CITY COUNCIL MEETING SCHEDULE.
Sietsema: The Council is now meeting on the 2nd and 4th Mondays. I
listed the next about 6 or 7 meetings.
Mady: I haven't said a word and I've been to a lot of them.
~ Lynch: I'll take March 28th.
Boyt: I'll take April 11th.
Robinson: I'll take the 25th.
Hasek: I'll take one in June sometime.
Sietsema: Which one do you want Ed?
Hasek: June 27th.
Boyt: May 9th is open.
Schroers: I'll go with that.
Mady: I'll take May 23rd. Carol gets June 13th.
LAKE ANN PARK PARKING FEE SCHEDULE.
~
Mady: Two weeks ago we talked about it and I asked each commissioner to
give their feelings on parking fees at Lake Ann and staff went over what
the fee has been in the past and what kind of money is generated.
Schroers: In my opinion I think we're in good shape. I think $3.00
daily is fine. A resident seasonal $5.00 is very good. Non-resident
seasonal $10.00 is acceptable. The access only is for a season?
Sietsema: Yes. Under the LAWCON regulations we can not charge, for
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
March 22, 1988 - Page 20
.....",
someone who just wants to come in and use the access only we can't charge
a non-resident fee that's more than a resident fee. So if someone from
Chaska wants to come in and they say all I want to do is use the access,
we couldn't charge them $~O ,we have to charge them $5.00 but then all
they can use is the access and they have to have a boat with them every
time they come in. Nobody's ever asked for it. It's just something for
LAWCON more than anything.
Schroers: And I definitely believe that Senior Citizens should be free
so as it stands, I would vote to keep it the same as it is.
Lynch: I don't mind $3.00, $5.00. I think the non-resident is too low.
Sietsema: We can't charge more than double the resident under LAWCON.
Lynch: I still think it's too low. The access only as with the
facilities and I may have missed this but where do the buses get
introduced here?
Sietsema: They've always had a fee for buses way back because we
sometimes do have like a field trip out there. Maybe a bunch of girl
scouts will go out there.
Hasek: We've also had softball teams show up by the busfull.
....,.,
Sietsema: Or company picnics or like an elementary school field trip.
We usually let them in free.
Lynch: That's what I was going to ask. You don't charge the schools to
go in for field trips?
Sietsema: Well, they're not in session, they don't do that when we
charge out there anyway. We don't have a lot of buses.
Hoffman: Some company picnics are probably going to get smart and get
around that. They have 200 cars come in, they pay a substantial
amount to have their company picnic there and the company picks up that
tab. A lot of this money that is generated for a daily fee comes from
some of the bigger company picnics that were held out there last year.
Lynch: Are we ever going to establish a straight line fee for company
picnics as has been discussed in years past? I know it's becoming more
appropriate to discuss it now that we have some companies that have
picnics. In the past we haven't had companies that had picnics.
Sietsema: The thing is, the local companies, the majority of them like
United Mailing, Instant Webb, the Press and victory Envelope and now some
of the other ones have been making donations for the fireworks and in .
exchange, we give them season passes for their employees so it's out of
the non-resident businesses that come in and have picnics and we do have ~
quite a few of those. They get charged the daily fee for every car.
Lynch: The company grouping you just rattled off there, how about our
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
March 22, 1988 - Page 21
JI!I"".
friends in the record business and some of the newer businesses? That
donation to the fireworks, maybe that's a good thing for Sue. Maybe it's
one of these things where you want to go to a new business and say, all
the businesses do this and for this they get.
Hoffman: We do that.
Sietsema: We get them at their budget time. We send them a letter,
budget for the 4th of July.
Lynch: Someday I would think that we would want to look at something a
little more policy.
Sietsema: We do have a policy in that they do have to book a big group
with us and there is a damage deposit that they have to put down. This
is all starting this year, and a form that they have to get a permit. In
our ordinance it's always stated that you have to have a permit to have a
big group at any of the parks and we now have that form in place and a
damage deposit required so I think we're working towards that more and
more every year. But they still are charged the $3.00 per car. Often
they'll let us know ahead of time that the company wants to pick up the
tab so we'll send them tickets in advance and we'll charge them for as
many tickets as we collect. Then we just bill the company.
,....,
Hoffman: That park reservation ticket is just waiting to be printed
after this is all approved. We put down $150.00 damage deposit for a
group picnic and groups also reserve the picnic kits and we put in there
a deposit for those also so we make sure that all the balls and bats and
all that gets returned. There is no fee for reserving any of the parks
at this time so that's something that can be looked at. Definitely in
the future. I think all other communities probably have that.
Mady: The softball teams all pay a league fee to use the facility as
well as paying to get into the parking. Kids who get swimming lessons
there pay for their swimming lessons as well as having to pay to get in
the front gate.
Hasek: How about if their parents drop them off?
Sietsema: They show their receipt for their program and they don't have
to pay for parking. Most of them do because they are residents and they
have the sticker anyway but if they have paid for the program, they
haven't been charged for parking.
Mady: Then why do we charge softball teams when we pay a fee to use the
park?
Sietsema: That's a good question.
~ Mady: This all gets back to where my contention all along that I don't
understand why we charge people to use the park. That particular park
offers nothing that a different park in Chanhassen doesn't already offer.
It's got a beach there, we've got a beach at Carver Beach and in
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
March 22, 1988 - Page 22
"""'"
Greenwood Shores.
Sietsema: Not a guarded beach that costs $12,000.00 a year to run.
Schroers: And this generates $17,239.00. That's the reason for charging
the fee right there is just to pay for the guards. Can we back up here
for a second? On this access only, I see a problem with that. I don't
think we should have an access only.
Sietsema: We have to.
Schroers: How are you going to enforce that?
Sietsema: We have to. No one's ever gotten it. Nobody ever asks about
it. Nobody really even knows about it but because of LAWCON regulations,
we have to offer it. So for them, we have to.
Schroers: That seems like...
Sietsema: What we would do is if anybody came in and said I'm a non-
resident and I want a sticker to use the access only, is we would write
in big black marker across their sticker "boat only" and when the
attendant sees that, they have to have a boat with them or they're
charged the daily fee. So they would have the sticker plus a daily fee.
to my knowledge I've never sold a boat access only in ~
the last 3 years.
Schroers: I wasn't aware that it was required. It just seemed like
something that was kind of unnecessary.
Sietsema: It is but it's an unnecessary requirement.
Mady: My contention was and still is, I don't understand why we charge a
fee for someone to use a park, this park. If we do it here, why don't we
do it to all those community parks. I don't feel we're being logical or
consistent with the use of our community parks. All I see here is we're
trying to raise some revenue. That's all I see it and that's basically
what I feel the City is doing is charging me a tax for a park. If they
want to do it there, maybe do it at other places. I don't like to see us
restricting our parkland to Chanhassen residents who are already paying
taxes anyway because this $17,000.00 doesn't even come close to covering
the upkeep for that park. That's where I came from.
Robinson: As I said two weeks ago, I vote to leave it.
Hasek: I also felt that it was a good idea. to leave it in place just
because of the useage of the park. There was a comment made by someone
that Excelsior doesn't charge. Well in fact they do, they have parking
meters and the parking meters help pay for the park so yes they do.
Boyt: I'd like to seemo park fee.
.....,I
Mady: I believe Carol also had that opinion.
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
March 22, 1988 - Page 23
,.....
Sietsema: Given that, we have 4 leave it and 2 drop it.
Hasek moved, Robinson seconded that the Park and Recreation Commission
recommend to adopt the 1987 Lake Ann Park Parking Fee Schedule as
presented by staff for the year 1988. All voted in favor except Mady and
Boyt who opposed and motion carried with a vote of 4 to 2.
> BR.E A K Ii...} 'TH P"e-
Boyt moved, Hasek seconded to direct staff to encourage Council to
establish uniform policy on conference attendance. All voted in favor
and motion carried.
REVIEW AND PRIORITIZE 1988 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM.
Boyt: Before we start on 10, I just have a couple of general comments
about the budget. I wondered if it was possible to get the quarterly
printout of how much we're taking in in park dedication fees and trail
fees in what areas of the City?
Sietsema: Yes.
Boyt: I'd like to see that. The park fees are turned over to the 410?
,..... What is it?
Sietsema: The 410 budget which is a fund and it's the last one on item
2. That money goes into that fund and that's what we do our capital
improvement program with.
Mady: When you say matching grant, that's what we use for matching
grants. It's our development money. That's where our capital
improvement program comes out of.
Boyt: Last year we had 335 housing starts. If those had all been in
developments that didn't donate land, we would have taken in $139,000.00
for park development for that year and our budget isn't anywhere near
that.
Mady: If you look at the bottom of the reserves for the '88 budget, Lake
Ann Phase 1 grading, we've got $100,000.00 in there. It shows
$100,000.00 for the installation... We're setting aside $50,000.00 for
Lake Susan. We're looking to keep $100,000.00 there for just anything
that comes up. Then Herman Field has the existing $35,000.00 reserve
there.
~
Sietsema: At the end of 1987, I asked the Auditors today, it's real hard
to get a clear picture of what exactly is in this fund because you are
shifting funds. Money from the 410 fund into like the Lotus Lake Boat
Access. We put the local share into and develop a new fund and wait for
the State and Federal money to come in and we put that in and we pay all
our bills out of that fund. When the projet is closed, then we close
that. Whenever we start a new project, like a major project, let's say
we're going to do the Lake Ann Park grading, we will develop a new fund
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
March 22, 1988 - Page 24
".,
and we will take whatever we've got set aside out of the 410. Take that
money out of there and put it into the new fund so there's money shifting
around. We might have money left over from another fund and that goes
back into it. At the end of 1987, we had $293,243.00 in the 410 fund.
That is these things that are on reserve. The Lake Ann, the Lake Susan
and the Herman Field and the LAWCON reserve.
Hasek: That's not on here.
Sietsema: Not the $293,000.00, no. We have $285,000.00 that's on
reserve and we've got scheduled for improvements in our neighborhood
parks a total of about $95,000.00. You add the capital outlay, the
contractual service and the materials and supplies together and that's
what we've got to spend on the capital improvement program. I do have
every month what the totals are each month and subtotals on the park
dedication. I can bring that in. If the City's broken up into areas and
the $415.00 goes into the area that that development is so I have that
broken down.
Boyt: What did we rent?
Hoffman: Indoors ice arena is under rental land and building.
Sietsema: Under what fund?
".,
Boyt: 4400 and then Lotus Lake...
Sietsema: 146, that's ice arena. All of our programming comes out of
that. Your Karate classes. The 4th of July. The Easter Egg hunt. All
of those things come out of the 146. The softball. Any other questions
on that.
Mady: Okay, let's move on to the Capital Improvement Program because
I've got some ideas ~nd thoughts on this thing.
Sietsema: Gary had asked me to prioritize the Capital Improvement
Program as I envisioned it happening because he's the one who oversees
the park maintenance department and has to get things going. So this is
basically how I prioritized it for him. If you want to change this
priority, then I should know.
Mady: One thing on here that, after the referendum results on trails, I
took a good hard look at it and I felt all along that the trails were
going to go through and we were going to get the very badly needed two
segment~ of trails in, approximately 1 mile of trails. Because the
referendum didn't pass, we're not going to have an opportunity to do that
until next year and I don't want to see us lose a summer with these kids
walking on roads going to the two major parks in town. So I looked at
the capital improvement program and looking at what we had done in the
past, what we did last year. We had to cancel the wellhouse site and
tennis court at South Lotus Lake. Now I believe we need a tennis court
at that site in a public parkland. I'm concerned though that that
particular site is not as important to the wellbeing of the citizens of
--'
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
March 22, 1988 - Page 25
,....
Chanhassen as a trail, and actually more of a sidewalk situation along
Laredo Drive and Carver Beach Road. Especially Laredo Drive where we
have kids walking on that road every day of the year. School and then in
the summer going to the park. I took a look at, I clocked both streets.
The Carver Beach Road requires from Nez Perce right to CR 17 is one-third
mile. And Laredo from West 78th Street to Frontier Trail is two-thirds
of a mile so that's one mile of trail. Mark's estimate was at about
$28,000.00 to $47,000.00 for a mile of trail depending on what was
necessary to put it in. Looking at those sites, there's not a whole lot
that's going to be necessary in bad slopes or that type of thing.
Especially on Laredo where it's all developed land right now. It's just
putting in new subsoil and putting a trail on top. Carver Beach Road is
going to be a little bit in one swampy area right at the start but after
that it's just cutting into this area. I was talking to Larry Brown, it
sounded as if we had sufficient road easements to put the trail in in
both areas so I'm going to ask the Commission to set aside and recommend
to the Staff and City Council to amend our budget to put the trail in on
Laredo and Carver Beach Road early this year. By early I mean as soon as
the frost is out of the ground and we can get going on it. Everyday a
kid has to walk on those two roads, especially going to school everyday,
bothers me. There are a lot of kids on that street everyday. I'd like
to see us amend our capital improvement budget to put those two trails in
this year as soon as possible and defer the tennis court at the wellhouse
site until next year.
,....
Schroers: Is that a motion?
Mady: I guess I'm going to make it in the form of a motion either now or
later. That's what my feelings are right now. I've got some other
thoughts for the improvement program but that was the most important
thing I had.
Schroers: I think that's really good. I appreciate your efforts on that
and I'll definitely support that.
Mady: Carver Beach is a real problem.
Schroers: It's dangerous. I get scared everyday. You hear the tires
squealing and you don't even want to look.
Hasek: Where's the wellhouse on here?
Mady: For South Lotus Lake. $25,000.00. Right by Curt's house.
Robinson: And I'd be opposed to your change because it is next to my
house and I want a tennis court there.
,....
Boyt: This is just something to bring up but the access road to Lake
Susan, right now they're doing some work out there. What is that?
Sewer?
Sietsema: It's the Lake Ann Interceptor.
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
March 22, 1988 - Page 26
....",
Boyt: Can a road go on top of that? I'm wondering, since they have it
torn up.
Sietsema: Yes, there is a holding pond that's going to be right in the
low area so I have to go out there and look again and see exactly where
they're going. As I recall, it's closer to the lake than where we could
put an access because there's going to be water standing there.
Hasek: There's a problem with, that's the interceptor going there?
There's a real problem, they have to redesign to stick that in before
they put a road on top because roads tend to drive across the street.
Schroers: They have problems with subsoils there probably.
Sietsema: But the $50,000.00 would be adequate to put the road in along
the property line and that's what we had applied for a LAWCON last year
for that.
Boyt: I just thought if these people were in there working, take
advantage of that.
Sietsema: The other thing is would cut the park in half with the access
road rather than having it along the edge.
Boyt: It's pretty much over to one side. Where they're working right ~
now. It's not down the middle of the area and I just thought if we could
save $50,000.00 or $25,000.00 to put that road in but we can't so.
Hasek: I guess my position is, if we do have a problem with the trails,
I'd be in favor of voting for the trails and not necessarily against the
tennis courts.
Mady: We need the tennis court but I was hoping that we were going to be
able to solve a public safety problem on Laredo and Carver Beach Road
with the referendum and we're not going to be able to do that now until
next year which means those kids are going to have to walk on the road
for another full school year. I don't want to see that happen.
Robinson: Is there room for an off-street?
Mady: Yes. I talked to Larry Brown and he felt, he gave me the
dimensions at one time. I said how much right-of-way do we have there?
It's not a lot of right-of-way but we can get a 6 foot trail in and some
green space also.
Schroers: There is a daycare there on Carver Beach at a private
residence. There's 12 little kids at one spot at one residence. There's
a lot of kids there. We threatened a guy with a shovel there today. He
was passing another car. We had to kind of shake our finger at him and
he's coming down the street passing. ~
Sietsema: I know I get on this often but the best thing to do is to take
license plate numbers down and report it because documentation will do,
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
March 22, 1988 - Page 27
,....
the police can do so much more if it's documented with instances so
anytime you see that happening. I know you'll be on the phone every 5
minutes but especially gross incidents like that.
Schroers: It makes you so made that you don't even think about it.
You've got a shovel in your hand and not a paper and pencil. You're just
kind of looking at the idiot behind the wheel and not watching for the
license plate number. That's really a problem area.
Robinson: Have you got any idea of what this would cost?
Mady: I'm going with Mark's estimate was $28,000.00 to $45,000.00 for a
trail for a mile and this is a 6 foot instead of an 8 foot and I doubt
that we have to acquire any land.
Sietsema: I would say $30,000.00 would be a ballpark figure just because
the person isn't in there doing something else. It's cheaper if they're
putting in the street at the same time.
Mady: There are some other things in this budget that Lori found out we
just aren't going to be able to do all that we asked for. The open
shelters are $10,000.00 to $15,000.00 and not a grand so when we've got
three open shelters sitting in here.
.,.....
Sietsema: Yes, I don't know if you guys had something in mind that you
knew about.
Boyt: No.
Sietsema: I didn't either. I didn't know how much it was going to cost
either but in talking to the guy who sells the kits, they're $15,000.00
starting.
Mady: You have to look at the situation, they're going to get a lot of
abuse so you have to build a minimal...
Hasek: When you think of a number and then you triple it, you're
probably real close to what it actually is.
Sietsema: I didn't realize all that went into a park shelter.
Mady: I think we have the room in our budget to do it this year and I'd
like to see it done.
"....
Mady moved, Schroers seconded that the Park and Recreation Commission
recommend to amend the 1988 Capital Improvements Budget to delete the
tennis court at South Lotus Lake and to install a trail along the west
side Laredo and the north side of Carver Beach Road in early 1988.
Direct staff that as soon as Council approves it, to move it to the top
of the priority list. All voted in favor and motion carried.
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
March 22, 1988 - Page 28
Mady: There are a couple other things in here. Lori brought out, at
Lake Ann, we're asking for a totlot equipment down by the lake and also
up by the softball fields. The thought was to expand on the totlot
equipment at the softball fields. I talked to Lori and that's a handmade
type of arrangement and it's not conducive to adding other types of
structures to it.
...,I
Sietsema: Not so much that but they won't take the liability of doing
it. It's not that it can't be done. It's that the company won't take
the liability.
Mady: One of the things I asked here, in looking at putting totlot
equipment in a number of places throughout the city and one of the places
is Greenwood Shores which is a small use park. It's never going to have
a large totlot equipment. It's going to be a basic structure.
Watson: It has a lot of use but it doesn't have a lot of room.
Mady: Yes, so a small structure would be perfect for it. The one at
Lake Ann right now is a small structure. It's got three swings on it, a
nice slide and a climbing apparatus. It's not real big. If it's
feasible to move that to Greenwood Shores and use the $5,000.00 plus the
money budgeted for Lake Ann into something that can be expandable.
Sietsema: I did not get a chance to talk to Dale on whether the
structure would survive the move and if it isn't, it might have only 5
years left in it.
-'
Hoffman: It's not in the best of condition.
Hasek: I was just going to say. My kids play on it and I almost
encourage them not to.
Boyt: It's dangerous. The way it was designed is dangerous. When the
kids swing, they're coming right at children coming off another piece of
equipment.
Sietsema: So maybe we just want to take it out.
Boyt: Maybe there's a church that we could donate it to.
Hasek: On this Lake Ann, are you thinking about two separate large
pieces of totlot equipment?
Sietsema: Yes.
Hasek: That's necessary with the ballfield~.
Sietsema: Especially with the addition of three more ballfields. I
thought another site would be appropriate.
Mady: I think you're right. We need a more centrally located site for
the ballfields.
-"
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
March 22, 1988 - Page 29
,...,
Sietsema: Even two sites.
Hasek: Yes, I think two sites. Just keep it small so you don't get a
ton of kids and a lot of problems. Just spread them out a little bit.
Mady: Maybe what we should do, since we're going to be looking at the
park shelter there in a couple of weeks and it's only 50 feet away, we
can hold off.
Hasek: Are we going to prioritize your trails?
Mady: I asked for that to be number one.
Sietsema: I put that in the motion.
Mady: We need to talk about the park shelters, the ice skating shelters.
We were asking for $2,000.00 for them.
Hasek: Have we found any structures or have we had our eyes out for any
structures at all? pieces of buildings or pieces of houses?
,......
Mady: I've got a couple to look at. Monday night at the Council meeting
they were talking about a Senior Citizens fund that's there. They spent
$15,000.00 but there's still $22,000.00 left. If there's a way for us to
put our monies together and maybe we could use, say the depot, if that's
useable for our purposes, we could make that into a senior citizens drop
in center part-time and also use it for our purposes part-time.
Boyt: Maybe the barn would be better suited for that. I don't know what
they use it for. It's a public building. Isn't that a barn by Chutes
and Ladders?
Schroers: No, that is an outdoor recreation center. It's a very new,
expensive facility.
Boyt: What's the building called?
Hoffman: Recreation Center.
Boyt: There's a building that's there that you go inside of.
Hoffman: Recreation Center.
Boyt: That's what it's called?
Schroers: It's the outdoor recreation center.
Boyt: I don't think the seniors are going to want to go out to Lake Ann.
~ Mady: Maybe they would. As long as they can park close to it and they
get into Lake Ann free anyway because they're senior citizens.
Schroers: What are we using for that depot?
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
March 22, 1988 - Page 30
-"
Boyt:
house.
house.
We talked about maybe putting it up here in place of the warming
Take the warming house out and use the depot for the warming
Use it as a warming house, concession stand and...
Schroers: So what are you going to do? Move it out to Lake Ann for the
senior citizens and then move it up here for the this?
Boyt: We talked about different possibilities of use. It's there to be
used and if we can come up with a good idea, we might get it.
Mady: I just heard at the City Council meeting, $22,000.00.
Hasek: How big is it? How many square feet?
Mady: It's about 16 by 30 maybe.
Hasek: Big enough for like a woman's restroom on one end and a men's
restroom on the other end and a concession stand in the middle?
Mady: Oh yes, easy. It's at Natural Green right now.
Hasek: That structure up there is not what I had envisioned. I guess I
saw it laying on the ground and I thought we were going to have a
building of something approaching not quite but almost the size of this
room that would have some bathrooms in it and concession stand. Maybe a
little storage area. That isn't big enough for a mens room. I tell you
that would take care of a lot up there.
Sietsema: By the ballfields you're talking about.
-"
Hasek: I guess what I'm thinking is a warming house, when you think
about warming houses and how they get beat up and most of the times it's
not intentional.
Sietsema: It's hard on them though and if it's got historic value.
Hasek: But it's inadvertent vandalism by kids that are kicked in the
middle. They don't think about what they're doing. I think it would
just get destroyed for that and if it's not large enough for a center, at
least then it is big enough to serve that purpose and maybe we could get
some restrooms in there and also, if we do decide to do that, I'd like to
see the women's restroom twice as big as the men's so the women aren't
standing in line 50 feet long and guys are walking in and out. I haven't
seen it but maybe that would be a good use for it.
Sietsema: That sounds like it would be a good idea. If it's up on the
hill closer to the road. Jerry Schlenk brought to my attention of the
things, he said I don't think you want a wood structure down by the lake
because wood structures go through a lot of abuse and with all the
vandalism we have down there in the isolated, we've had to have a steel
box just to keep the beach equipment in and it gets broken into every -"
year a couple of times.
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
March 22, 1988 - Page 31
,.....
Watson: That's because you can't see down there.
Sietsema: It's very isolated. Once the park is closed and if they get
in there.
Hasek: You're talking about closer to TH 5.
Sietsema: By the ballfields so you can see it from the road. That
sounds great but he really had some legitimate concerns about a wood
structure down by the lake.
Mady: We also have the possibility of the Kurver's barn too.
Boyt: I think that would make a good senior center.
Watson: Where do the seniors want their center to be? Have you asked
them?
Sietsema: They like where they are.
Watson: That's right. We're not going to move them very far. I don't
care what grandiose plans we have. They've got it in their minds they're
not going there, you can forget it. They'll end up in the elementary
school cafeteria.
,...,
Mady: I have a letter sitting on my desk at home from the seniors, a
group of concerned senior citizens to the community center task force and
they were looking for a pool table, tables for playing cards, a drop in
center, a place to have a coffee pot. They want room. They want a room
about this size. Something they can spread out a little bit and have
their own that they can call theirs. They don't have to share with
anybody.
Watson: But the school is very restricted.
Mady: It's not restricted enough. 10 minutes to eat lunch. It's not
the seniors fault. I think it's the school's fault.
Boyt: Council I think probably has some ideas what they want to do with
it so we can just request.
Schroers: How long is that structure at Lake Ann right now? Is that big
enough or can we stop and take a look at it?
Hasek: Larry, I don't think it's 12 feet across.
Hoffman: Oh yes it is.
Mady: It's 12 feet across but not more.
,.....
Schroers:
Is there a concession stand in there?
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
March 22, 1988 - Page 32
Mady: About a third of it is supposed to be concession. It's going to
be small. I was amazed when I saw it. I was just amazed.
Sietsema: Where we're going with this is that we have to figure out if
you're going to consolidate all the park shelter money because we had
identified park shelters in a couple of different places. Where do you
want to put it?
Boyt: Maybe we can use the park shelter money towards relocated the
depot.
...."",
Mady: I'd like to see us not act on the park shelter money at this
point.
Sietsema: That's fine.
Hasek: I bet we can get that thing moved for, it was moved to where it
is so it's just setting there.
Mady: It's not on a permanent foundation. It's on concrete block.
Hasek: I bet we get that thing moved out to the park for $2,999.99.
Watson: It isn't very far away either.
Hasek: It takes money to pick it up and get underneath it but I bet -'
$2,999.99 would that thing over there.
Schroers: Maybe we should add that onto our agenda on that Sunday when
we look at things.
Sietsema: It is on there. So let's just leave the rest of these. We'll
decide what we want and just put it on another agenda after that Sunday
meeting and we've looked at it.
Mady: Then we can talk about the Lake Ann totlots. Were there any other
capital improvement items that anybody wanted to talk about? I believe
the Greenwood Shores thing, did the Council ask us to do anything? Do we
have to go back to the residents? They approved this thing so I'm
envisioning that we can just go and do this now.
Sietsema: The Council asked us to see if the problems were solved at
Greenwood Shores and then readdress this year the opening of the parking
area. That will be on a future agenda to discuss opening the parking
area.
Mady: We should probably set that for our second meeting in April then.
Sietsema: I do have a memo from Jim that came in too late to put on this
agenda about the policing of the parks and what's going on so I will
schedule this for initial discussion in the first meeting in April.
--'
Lynch: Lori, what does the Council expect us to do with...
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
March 22, 1988 - Page 33
""'"
Sietsema: The reason they didn't approve the opening of the parking area
at Greenwood Shores last year was because the residents came in and said
there's always this problem. There's always that problem. They've got
this. They've got that. We said, we'll have a park person on duty and
they'll patrol it and we'll solve those problems then we'll reevaluate it
and see if we can open it next year if those problems are solved. So
according to Jim, there wasn't any problems and we should be able to go
ahead and open it. It's just putting it on the City Council agenda.
Lynch: They have another open meeting anyway? They're simply going to
be another series of reasons why they don't want it.
Watson: You've got it.
Mady: At least let them air it out.
Sietsema: We can do this and decide at that point that this is the last
time we're going to try this.
Lynch: I'd be more in favor, if Jim says the problems are cured out
there, you ought to be able to produce complaint calls. The number of
complaint calls that carne in and what the reactions were and if there has
not been a problem out there of record, why are we having the next
meeting? I really resist these useless meetings that are for somebody's
political benefit.
""'"
Sietsema: So what are you suggesting?
Boyt: We don't need another community meeting.
Sietsema: We don't need to invite the residents into our meeting. All
we need to do is put it in a motion to the Council to say, this is the
Minutes from last time. These were your concerns. We've solved them.
According to Jim everything is hunky dory. We recommend opening it. At
that point it will be a public meeting and the residents will be invited
to come in.
Boyt: I have one more thing that was not on the CIP. The church I
belong to has 3,500 members. It's a large church. They have something
called a wish list that's published. Things they want. I was thinking
we could do that for the City so when I bring my brownie troop in and
we're looking for a project to do for the City, I can look at this list
and say oh, they want flowers planted at Lake Ann in front of the sign or
if all the brownies in town want to do a project, they need bleachers at
Chan Estates Park. We could raise enough money to do that. Maybe we
could all think of a few things and make up with a list for Park and Rec.
So when the eagle scouts come in and they're looking for a project, the
list is already done.
,.....
Lynch: We've been asking for a list of this sort for some years but
there haven't been that many of the projects that were "worthwhile"
projects take some funds to accomplish and we either haven't had the
funds or if we had the funds, we said oh, we have the funds, have the
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
March 22, 1988 - Page 34
city approve, put it in there so if the funds were there it was an
immediate project. I had a young man corne in the other day and Roy and I
were scratching our heads about what we had that was appropriate and had
funds available for it and could be done this summer. I hate to tell the
kids go out there and put a tennis court in next to Curt's house.
..."."
Mady: Maybe what we should do then, each one of us sit down and scratch
our heads and figure out what projects to do.
Sietsema: I'll put it on the next agenda.
Lynch: We should make up a list but we just never got around to it.
Sietsema: I'll put that on the next agenda. Establish wish list.
Lynch: I know a couple that are cost free basically. Carver trail is in
terrible shape. It needs some culverts put in. The one that runs from
the beach.
Mady: The last thing I had was concerns with our meetings. I believe
our last meeting agenda was in the paper. I would like to see us put at
least a preliminary agenda in the paper prior to our meeting if it's at
all possible and public our meeting date. Every meeting should be
published if at all possible.
..."."
Hasek: Can we put a standing notice that the Park Board meets...
Watson: But we have some agenda items that have created, we got several
calls after the last agenda people hadn't known and they maybe would have
corne.
Sietsema: On what item?
Watson: TH 7 and TH 41. Not knowing that we were discussing that road
and that we had anything to do with where that street would go. It's a
very hot neighborhood issue. They wanted to know what we based our
opinion on and I said, really nothing but park access because we don't
have any information besides that. We .aren't given any background. We
aren't told who's going to pay for the street. It just looked like a
good way to get to the park.
Boyt: We just make the recommendations.
Sietsema: The thing on that one though is that, it wasn't that we were
going to make the decision that the road was in or not. We were just
saying, if it does go in, we'd like park access off of it. When we had
the discussion of whether we were going to extend Forest Avenue to get
park access off of that, we did invite them in because the only reason
that would be extended was for that purpose but this was going to happen
anyway. We're just going to tie onto that to get into the park. So ~
there was some confusion on their part that we were requesting that it go
through so we could get access. I said no, that's not the case at all.
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
March 22, 1988 - Page 35
,....
We will get access if the road goes through but they're not going to put
the road through so we can have access.
Watson: But they would have maybe known that if they had been able to
read the agenda and see that.
Mady: That's what I'm looking for is to have our meeting published and
in the paper. I'm also looking at we should reserve time at the
beginning of our meeting for visitor presentation. Some citizens come
across and ask for stands at the City Center park. There should be time
available and we should also have time available for Commissioner
presentations at the end of the meeting.
Boyt: Maybe we should set a time limit for each citizen to speak.
Mady: I think the Chairman can take care of cutting off.
,....
Sietsema: Just to tie in on that, there are some items that come up that
you would like to see. I'd like to see this and we should put this on
and we should discuss this. If you could call me with those. If you
think of them in advance. I try to build the agenda by Friday, it would
have been built a week ago last Friday so I have a whole week to work on
my reports and get it copied and the packets together and in the mail so
if you think of them, even if it's the Wednesday before, if it's not a
packed agenda, I can add things on. If it gets there Friday it's going
to go on the next agenda. But even then, I have a file that's agenda
next and I can shoot it in there and then I know. I'll just put a note
in there that that's what you want to discuss or like you did today,
could you bring this information for me tonight. Then I have it here and
I don't have to go upstairs and dig for it or I might not have access to
it after hours. So anything that you want in addition to what's in that
packet, feel free to call me and ask me for it. To bring it or to put it
on the agenda or whatever. I would encourage you to do that.
Hasek moved, Robinson seconded to adjourn the meeting. All voted in
favor and motion carried. The meeting was adjourned.
Submitted by Lori Sietsema
Park and Rec Coordinator
Prepared by Nann Opheim
"....
..."I
......,.,
~
Park and Recreation Commission Meeting
April 26, 1988 - Page 45
,.....
Hasek: No, but the championship?
Hoffman: They have some people that live here but they're an outside
sponsor.
Hasek: There was one other that came basically from that league...
Excelsior is another one.
Schroers: I think we just have to look at it from kind of a logical
perspective and that we need to provide facilities for the teams that we
have in Chanhassen and we accomodate Chanhassen teams first and then fill
up whatever is left over is on a first come, first serve basis. We set a
limit. We say we'll accomodate this many teams and we can accomodate 15
teams. We have 10 teams from Chanhassen. Those 10 teams get first,
they're in and then we have room for 5 additional teams and the first 5
teams that show up with their money and their roster and when we're
filled, we're filled. We're sorry about that.
,....,
Hoffman: Basically I just brought this to your attention to inform you
that that would be the direction we're heading in the future. It's just
to restrict it to whoever works in Chanhassen. Some of the cities can
include three outside players just as a grace factor. You can have three
outside players on your roster. Include them here and in future years
we'll inform the teams but you'll hear a lot of repercussions from it.
I'm sure our Over 35 league probably has more outside people than our
women's league proportionately. I think we've got 9 womens teams. 6 are
Chanhassen sponsors. It's not that overly unbalanced. The league has
been maturing to a Chanhassen league.
Hasek: I think the important thing to remember is we've got to be fair
to the residents of the city and I don't care if they're taIlor short or
fat or thin, if they live and work in this city they should have
priority.
Hoffman: It was just an issue that needed to be brought up with our
field constraints that are coming into play. If we had that policy in
place at this time it would probably have a place for the two Babe Ruth
teams to play which at this time we don't.
Mady: I have one last thing. The South Lotus Lake Boat Access. Would
you please ask the Carver County Sheriff to go down there on Saturdays
and ticket every truck and trailer that's parked in the driveway?
Every time I go by that access, there's at least two or three that have
left their truck and their trailer sitting down there. They're not using
the parking lot. They're parking in the boat launch. It's been
every time I've gone down there and I'm surprised that the Lotus Lake
Homeowners Associations isn't screaming at us.
,-..,
Sietsema: They have and there was lengthy discussion last night at the
City Council meeting on that item. They are looking at beefing up an
ordinance that would involve an increased fine and possibly towing if you
park illegally with a trailer.
Park and Recreation Commission Meeting
April 26, 1988 - Page 46
Mady: Every time I've gone by there I look down there and every time I see
three or four trailers sitting down by the access.
Schroers moved, Hasek seconded to adjourn the meeting. All voted in
favor and motion carried. The meeting was adjourned.
Submitted by Lori Sietsema
Park and Recreation Coordinator
Prepared by Nann Opheim
.....",
........",
\
.........,