Loading...
PRC 1987 09 22 CHANHASSEN PARK AND RECREATION COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING ~ SEPTEMBER 22, 1987 Vice Chairman Mady called the meeting to order. MEMBERS PRESENT: Jim Mady, Larry Schroers, Sue Boyt, Ed Hasek and Carol Watson ".. .;--. MEMBERS ABSENT: Mike Lynch and Curt Robinson STAFF PRESENT: Lori Sietsema, Park and Rec Coordinator and Todd Hoffman, Park and Rec Assistant APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Page 33 from the September 8, 1987 Park and Recreation-tommission Minutes were missing from the packet. Therefore, the Commission decided to wait until they see Page 33 to approve the Minutes. REVIEW FINAL DRAFT OF THE RECREATION SECTION OF THE COMPREHENSIVE -- -- PLAN. Mark Koegler: You recall last time we said we'd come back with just the beginning run through of the balance of the recreation plan update. Just a couple comments on the format of this, since it's been a while since you've seen it. The way it was presented to you and the way the entire Comprehensive Plan Update is being done, specifically that it's going to be put on the Ci ty's word processors so we're going through and just doing scratch changes and substitutes and eventually it will all be packaged into one nice, neat little entity. There's a lot of material that you've received. The amount of change to it in some cases is fairly significant. In some cases it's minor and others there's none at all. The volume of it though, as you recognize, is fairly significant and as a result of that, my expectations aren't for you to give unanimous approval or modified approval or anything to us this evening. I don't think that's fair. We will give you a little bit of time to review that so certainly we will be glad to come back next meeting or the next two meetings or whatever it takes to go through this and continue to work with it. I almost think rather than going through item by item, it may be more beneficial if we just opened it up to comments or questions or things you have. I guess I particularly would like again, input from the Commission on the recommendation aspects as per the specific park sites. If there is anything you saw in there that you thought should be changed or added to, those kind of things I think are very important because that quite honestly is probably one of the sections of the recreation chapter that will be used the most. They'll use that in discussion with Council at budget time and there will be segment for the capital improvement programming. The trail plan is essentially as you've seen it before. There are some updates that still need to be done to that. They are fairly minor in scope but need to be done between now and the next time we meet. I should indicate that last night, I think you're probably aware the City Council had a general discussion session. One ,... Park and Rec Commission Meeting September 22, 1987 - Page 2 of the items on the agenda was the trail plan. It consisted really of me just giving them a brief overview and then a series of questions that the council members posed. I don't think there were anything in terms of new ideas or thoughts or concepts were brought up that hadn't been discussed before this body before and the general consensus was that there is now, or about to be, a proposed revised meeting date for the joint meeting between the Park Commission and Council, and at that time we will go through the entire trail plan in detail for the Council's benefit primarily and obviously it's kind of a refresher for the Commission. So with that as background, we can handle this however you like but I would suggest maybe if you just want to focus on comments or questions that you have as you were going through particularly paying attention to, as I mentioned the parks and what kind of recommendations you would make and then also, if there is anything in here that you think is either not heavy enough, if you will or anything that we missed. Any general thoughts or planning thoughts that you had which should be incorporated, if you could bring those to our attention, we'll certainly work with that and bring it back to you next time. So with that, I'll be quiet and listen. Jim Mady: I'll start. One thing I saw in the trail plan on TR-5. It talked about Western Hills Pond and it stated maybe a woodchip trail. I see the rollers in there and the asphalt lane, whatever they call ,... that machine, sitting there. I'm sure that's going to be done within the next week. That might as well be put in as bituminous now. Mark Koegler: I should also add that there are a number of those kind of items. There are some errors in here. I know park names and things that Lori and have talked about and we're going to sit down and go through this and pick up all those kinds of things but that's valid. If there are things like that that are just on the horizon that are going to be done, let's get those reflected in the copy at this time. Lori Sietsema: Did you mean all the way around the pond or just to the top of the steps? Jim Mady: Just to the top. The other trail isn't. Sue Boyt: Had we dec ided on what type of tra i 1 to pu t around the pond? Jim Mady: No, it's going to be a natural trail. Lori Sietsema: It hasn't been decided though. Mark Koegler: So the bituminous will go from the stairway area right now back to Laredo. Will there be any parking provided? ,..... Jim Mady: Not until next year. On the back of Page R-48 it says Meadow Green Park and in the middle of the paragraph it says, at the present Park and Rec Commission Meeting September 22, 1987 - Page 3 time tennis courts will be constructed in the park so this is a final plan.. . -' Jim Mady: On the back of page R-48. On R-59 talking about Meadow Green Park, the number 2 talks about the parking area. It's a general discussion, for the Commission at least, this year they would like to open that parking area up. Then there would be, with the recommendation. I didn't want to put in number 2. Parking area should not be opened. That doesn't reflect my view. Sue Boyt: We're still waiting from input from the Sheriff. Mark Koegler: That was a kind of interesting turn of events. This was the text from the 1989 plan. It kind of went full circle and back to that. Do you want to soften that language? How do you want to approach that? Jim Mady: It's my personal feeling that that parking area is going to be updated, upgraded so it's going to be a confined area to allow for 4 or 5 cars at the most. It will probably be paved with a series of bollards put in so it's going to be, not to allow people to get their 4 wheel drives into the lake and that type of thing. Allor for 3 or 4 cars in there. ....,., Carol Wa tson: If we stayed with one way or the other, it would be erroneous 9 months from now. We don't know how it's going. Sue Boyt: Should we just take out number 2? Mark Koegler: You can certainly change this at any point in the future. You can add. Carol Watson: Update it or something. Mark Koeg 1 er: There are two ways we can approach it. We could remove it or I could create some language that's ambigious in there that along the lines of, if it becomes appropriate, put parking in. Jim Mady: I'd like to see that. Mark Koegler: The value of having some reference in there to any improvement you think is a possibility is that we use this documentation in support of the LAWCON, LCMR grants. That's not to say you're going to go for one in Greenwood Shores but if you're going for one somewhere else, it's nice to be able to pull the plan out and say, look here, number 3 is exactly the project we're going after. So if there's doubt and it's appropriate, put it in. ......", Park and Rec Commission Meeting September 22, 1987 - Page 4 ,..... Jim Mady: On R-Sl, number 6 and 7 were taken out and the one talking about fishing docks, I'm not sure what the dock looks like that's down there. I know I've seen a couple of the other ones in the City. What's the one at Lake Ann Park fishing dock along the trail, is that a regular boarded dock with sides? Lori Sietsema: It doesn't have sides. Todd Hoffman: It's an aluminum plank dock rolled out. Jim Mady: I don't consider those fishing docks. They're not a fishing dock. The one I know that's at Lotus Lake Boat Access, I'm concerned all that dock is good for is pulling a boat out. doesn't provide a kid with a safe place to fish. I'd like the here better with similar to those of the cities lakes. That's in mind for fishing docks. safe as far as It wording in what I had Sue Boyt: with rails. Jim Mady: We don't need a dock there with a boat landing and tying boats up. Carol Watson: But our definition of fishing docks has always just been a .,..... regular dock structure right? Lori Sietsema: Yes, I know that you were interested in having railings on the dock that was at South Lotus Lake but we didn't have money in the budget for it. It was $1,000.00 more almost for that addition so we got the dock out there and we can add money for adding those railings. Jim Mady: I'd like to see us put railings on. Mark Koegler: Would you like to leave that one in? Jim Mady: I'd like to leave that in there. Larry Schroers: Are you talking about docks like they have in the Minneapolis lakes? Jim Mady: Fishing pier. Larry Schroers: Yes, we have a fishing pier like that at Hyland Park and it's a real nice unit but it's also a pretty costly thing. It's really large and you need to install that on a float basis to allow for the raising and lowering of the lake and so you can get it in and out so it's not damaged by ice when the ice breaks up. It's kind of a fairly large project putting the dock in and out. ,..... Jim Mady: I think it's something we need to get some thought to more just to make it a better situation. Providing fishing docks for the kids for all members of the City is important because we have some nice lakes. Park and Rec Commission Meeting September 22, 1987 - Page 5 ......, Carol Watson: Maybe we could redefine a fishing dock. The definitions end up being terribly important. How you define the structure. Jim Mady: On page R-52, number 12, at the end of that paragraph it talks about a new storage facility at Lake Ann Park and the City has recently taken action to remove the existing barn and to supply such a facility. That needs to be. R-53, which is Chanhassen Pond, number 3 says to provide adequate housing, roosting areas and food for a variety of species of wildlife. We've discussed that several times in the last couple of meetings and we would prefer it to remain as a natural area and not provide housing or food for wildlife that's going to attract more and possibly cause problems that we don't really need. Larry Schroers: We wouldn't do anything to attract a larger population. Carol Watson: But we wouldn't do anything to distract them either? Larry Schroers: No. Sue Boyt: We're taking care of number 7 too. Jim Mady: On R-62, talking about Zone 4, Lori at the last Council meeting that approved a number of developments. Is Curry Hills, is that Centex Homes? Lori Sietsema: Centex and Curry Farms is the same. .....", Jim Mady: Okay, that was approved. I think it could be added in...under the park area. There are a couple others for improvement too. Mark Koegler: I could include that one if you like. Jim Mady: I'd like to see that since it's, I'm not sure exactly what approval Don might need to check that but there's some type of approval from the Council. I saw it in the paper today. Lori Sietsema: Yes, it was given final plat approval. Mark Koegler: That question you had reviewed at one time and it shows, at least conceptual facilities. Ball diamond and parking up above, if I remember, does that have this group's blessing as far as facilities go? Jim Mady: No, when we looked at it I didn't like the location of a couple of things but if I remember right he had a ballfield, a tennis court, basketball court and totlot and parking area up above. Mark Koegler: The only reason I ask is because we would reference that if those were the facilities. Jim Mady: That's what they showed on the plot. .....", ,.... Park and Rec Commission Meeting September 22, 1987 - Page 6 Mark Koegler: Does that park have a name? Lori Sietsema: Not officially. It's been so long new land that we haven't really named the park yet. just recently approved. Do you want to name it now? probably just refer to it as Curry Farm park until we name. since we've acquired Being that it was I think we'll change it to some Carol Watson: Do the developers sometimes name them or do we name them? Lori Sietsema: We usually name them. They usually get the name of whatever the development is. Jim Mady: Lake Susan Park was changed from Chan Lakes Park and City Center Park used to be City Hall Park. Lori Sietsema: Western Hills Park is now Chan Pond Park. Jim Mady: That's all I had. We can start with Larry and go around for comments. JIll"" Larry Schroers: I just had a couple of general things. Referring back to what you said in your first comment about the woodchip. I would just like to address woodchip trails in general. It's been our experience that woodchip trails are a high maintenance, very higb maintenance type of trail surface. Also, they are not conducive to handicaps and we've found that wherever we can, we've been eliminating the use of woodchips because it's just too costly and too inaccessible for handicap people and elderly people. Anyone that has difficulty walking finds that they have a hard time on woodchips so if we could stay away from that as much as we can, I think that would be a good idea. Mark Koegler: What are you doing as an alternative? Are you using compacted rock? Larry Schroers: Either bituminous or lime rock. We have the lime rock handicap trail at Carver Park that seems to be working out pretty well. Ed Hasek: Is 1 i me rock, more or less suscept i ble to washout than woodchip? Larry Schroers: It's less susceptible than woodchip. Woodchips are made of wood and they float. They wash out very easily. A better alternative would be just to seed the area and have natural turf. In the long run it's easier to take care of and less expensive. You just run a lawn mower over it and you don't have to haul in truckloads of woodchips every few years to freshen up the old chips so in an area where you were going to have a nature trail or a hiking trail or a multi-purpose trail that would be for horseback riding and possibly cross country skiing, actually just turf because that's what we've corne up with so far. JIll"" Park and Rec Commission Meeting September 22, 1987 - Page 7 ....." Lori Sietsema: Did you have any other changes or anything? Larry Schroers: Not really changes. I just had some thoughts. New things that we're going to put into our parks, just for an example we've talked about an archery range at the last meeting. Something like that if we put that in a park such as Lake Ann or one of the major city parks rather than a neighborhood park, we would tend to increase seasonal ticket sales and even daily parking fees so we may want to make that a consideration. Do we intend to put gate houses or have fees at any of the other parks such as Lake Susan? Lori Sietsema: I have no intention of bringing it up unless you want me to. I would just as soon, my personal feeling is that I think the parks should be free so I wouldn't recommend it. Larry Schroers: So at any point in time that you can see down the road, you're going to just have Lake Ann be the only park that there is a charge for? Lori Sietsema: Unless we can do away with that. Ed Hasek: Has the Commission ever looked at that? Lori Sietsema: We address the fees every year. Jim Mady: We take in maybe $5,000.00 a year so it's not a major item i~ the budget. Lori Sietsema: It generates about $10,000.00 to $15,000.00 and every yea~ this Commission addresses whether they should raise the fees or not and usually the Commission recommends that they be raised. Larry Schroers: I guess I'm not opposed to the fees but keeping them at a real moderate level or where they're at right now, I wouldn't have a problem with that but increasing them I think would be a problem. I guess my personal feeling is, I don't think there's a harm in charging a fee for a large park such as Lake Ann and if Lake Susan would turn into that sort of thing I wouldn't be opposed to charging a fee for using a facility of that nature but if minor budgeting is a problem, that's just one way of helping out. Maybe it's only $10,000.00 or $15,000.00 a year but that $10,000.00 or $15,000.00 could pay for one more vehicle to help maintain the areas. Lori Sietsema: I understand the whole basis behind it. I guess I'm more opposed to having a high fee than anything because it seemed to me when I first came here it was $4.00 a day and I thought that was excessive. Larry Schroers: Did you have to add tax too? Did you add the tax to the fee or did you just absorb it? '"""" Park and Rec Commission Meeting September 22, 1987 - Page 8 """" Lori Sietsema: I think we just absorbed it this year so far but I don't know what we'll do next year. Larry Schroers: Anyway, that's really all I had. I didn't have anything else. Carol Watson: I just had the stuff that you already mentioned. I wasn't sure that that definition was accurate. It's accurate right now but if we run into a problem we can change it. The other thing is, Mark somewhere along the line can we get a list of definitions of the various definitions that are involved in the park section or would you have to pull those out of the definitions? That would be a real pain wouldn't it? Mark Koegler: You've brought up a new wrinkle because Comp Plans don't normally have definition sections like Zoning Ordinances do. What do you want to define? Carol Watson: Just the various things. When we talk about fishing dock, what do you mean? You're right, they don't. Where then are the definitions that we use? What a fishing dock is and what constitutes a natural parkland area and all these kind of things. All the various terms we use. Where are the definitions? ,.... Mark Koegler: They never are. It's a matter of interpretation by this group and passing that on to the Council. The only reason it can't be done is just unorthadox to define in the context of the Comp Plan what a fishing dock is. It might be more beneficial with this group, independent of this, adopt a policy that with the parks we have now and with the types of facilities, this is what I mean and this is what we're going to provide to the public. A fishing dock means a dock with appropriate code type side rails and so forth. Carol Watson: That's what came to mind for me. What exactly do we mean? When we say that, what are we actually providing and what can the expectations be? Mark Koegler: Most Commissions when faced with similar things like that, don't like to define too many things because you can get yourself caught. Right now you have fishing docks. Carol Watson: Right, now we can do anything because we can change the definition depending on... Mark Koegler: So it can be a double edged sword but normally it's just thorugh common usage that the definitions of those kind of things develop. Jim Mady: Lori, was there anything? ,.... Park and Rec Commission Meeting September 22, 1987 - Page 9 --' Lori Sietsema: Just on the Lake Ann section, you took out the deal on the shelter. I know that we have the shelter up by the ballfields but we continue to apply for... Mark Koegler: That's what I call the Ashworth Memorial Building. Don conceived that LAWCON grant application what 4 years ago or so. Lori Sietsema: Yes, we've applied for it at least four times. It continues to rank just one or two below funding so we keep applying for it but it's a community type shelter building that would have boat rental down by the lake more and I'd like to see that remain in the Comp Plan. Mark Koegler: I made a note on item 6 to write that back into it. Lori Sietsema: Another thing that I had come up with this on R-24 it talks about although the street and it's right-of-way are a form of public open space, I was wondering if the wordage in there reflects the Commission's dedication to off-street trails. They don't want to share the road surface that's used for cars with pedestrian or bicycle or recreation uses and I was just wondering if you wanted to make sure that that is reflected throughout here. That your commitment to off street trails is a priority. Carol Watson: On the trail section that is directed... Mark Koegler: Yes, I think some modification of this needs to be made.~ Lori Sietsema: The other ones were real piddely ones as far as acreage and that kind of thing that you and I can go over. Ed Hasek: I'd like to see this, even though we're not going to be passing on this tonight but I've always thought for me, when I'm reviewing something of this size I need to digest it and it takes 2 or 3 times through just to pick out little things and consistency. Lori Sietsema: I would like to remind you that the first part of this was in your last packet so if you've thrown away your last packet, you probably don't have the first portion. What I was getting at is if you've thrown it away, just let me know and I'll get you the first half if you want to review that again. Mark Koeg ler: The last i tern I'd 1 i ke to cover for just a moment, I want to make sure I have your direction clear regarding the trail plan. You recall a couple months ago we talked about phasing and budget and came back and talked to you about two different levels of potential phase 1 trails. One was about 1.3 million and the other was about a million, plus or minus. Those resulted in potential referendums of $899,000.00 to $900,000.00 versus $500,000.00 to $600,000.00. The consensus of this group that I got out of that meeting was let's go for the maximum and if the Council determines that to be not reasonable then you have a fall back position. Is that correct? --' ,..... Park and Rec Commission Meeting September 22, 1987 - Page 10 Jim Mady: Yes, exactly. Mark Koegler: I just picked up from the Council last night that there's going to be a lot of sensitivity to cost in everything that's coming up. Not just the trails so I just wanted to make sure that that was the direction so that can be relayed onto the Council. Jim Mady: One of the things I plan on bringing up later in the meeting is the community center task force and where we're heading at the moment. We appear to be heading, the Commission's viewpoint on community center versus trail referendum because we're obviously going to have a limited amount of dollars to spend. Mark Koegler: I would just ask that between now and next time that you continue to read through this a second or third time and note comments and we'll discuss that as well as the trail. UPDATE ON ITEMS OF INTEREST TO THE PARK AND RECREATION COMMISSION. Lori Sietsema: Number 3 is simply just for your information type memo. We did award the bids to Plehal. The low bid was $43,765.00 which was within $50.00 of Mark's estimate so that was very nice. The next closest was at least $10,000.00 or $15,000.00 more than this bid and he came in that morning and looked at the plans and specs right when they came in. ,.... Jim Mady: will they be able to get that in this year? Lori Sietsema: Yes. I just wanted to mention too, I know that there was some concern as to whether they knew what they were doing or not. If they had done tennis courts before because they can be, I guess tennis courts can be kind of tricky. Plehal did Flagship's tennis courts. They've done a number of them for Eden Prairie. I believe they've done some in Minnetonka. Tennis West is the company that actually does the construction I believe, or is a part of them and that's all they do is tennis courts so I'm pretty confident that they'll do a good job for us. Carol Watson: They're local and very accessible if we don't like what happens. ,... Lori Sietsema: The next item was the special meeting date. We had originally set the date for September 29th. City Council members were not all able to make that meeting and asked that we switch it to Wednesday, October 7th and I need to know if everybody here can make that. In addition to this, I was wondering, something I was just going to add onto this I guess because it's come up since I wrote this memo. The City is going to cosponsor an event with community education, the Chamber of Commerce called Community Connections. We felt there's a lot of new people in the communi ty. A lot of people that have been in the ,:,ommunity for quite a while and they haven't a clue what is available to chem. Where to find out about things as far as programming services Park and Rec Commission Meeting September 22, 1987 - Page 11 ....",. available from everything from the Chamber to County Health Services to Park and Rec to Community Ed to Fire Department to Women of Today to League of Women voters, Jaycees, Rotary, all kinds of services that are available to citizens, the residents of Chanhassen. What we've decided to do is have one night be like an open house night. Ask all of these people to come in and set up a booth type thing. Have some major presentations by the City, by the Chamber, by Community Ed to tell them when their publications are coming out. Where to look for information. Do people know that the South Shore weekly is the City's official paper? When to pay close attention to the South Shore Weekly because we have more news in it at some times of the year than others. The Chamber is going to be promoting that they have the Chamber Post. That anybody can put information in there. It's free. To get information in there unless it's an advertisement and that's mailed to every home and that's a good source of information. Also, it's going to be a deal where new people can meet other new people and get to know people within the community. We're hoping that a number of people will come and it will be a useful tool for residents. It's going to be held on October 13th at Chanhassen Elementary Library. That happens to be the date of our next Park and Recreation Commission meeting and I'm wondering if we could all go to that. Tell people about the Park and Recreation Department and what the Park and Rec Commission does instead of having our regular meeting. Sue Boyt: I think that sounds like a good idea. I have a suggestion for this community connections. Maybe it's already in the plans but to hav a local group of children who have a dance class at St. Hubert's, have -' them come and perform and that will bring all of their families in or have the soccer team come in and perform or karate class, whatever you can get. Carol Watson: Are we going to have kind of a booth that shows the city parks and what's available? Lori Sietsema: That's what I would like to see us do. I was hoping that CAA would have a booth up there and try and promote some new members, board members and that kind of thing. So if it's agreeable, I need a motion to that effect that we have our regular meeting in that fashion rather than the formal meeting. Watson moved, Hasek seconded to hold the Park and Recreation Commission meeting on October 13, 1987 at the Community Connection function rather than meeting at City Hall. All voted in favor and motion carried. Jim Mady: Do you anticipate that any other business will need to be transacted? Lori Sietsema: I know that the Herman Field access feasibility study will be on and I know we'll be talking about the Comp Plan but both of those thing s are not big rush items so we can put them on the last agenda of the month. So we will be meeting on October 7th, 13th and then the last week in October but this 13th won't be a formal meeting. -' ,..... Park and Rec Commission Meeting September 22, 1987 - Page 12 Carol Watson: And we'll have like a booth covering what our plans are? Lori sietsema: Exactly and I may be calling some of you to maybe set up a booth or come up with some ideas as to how we can make it look attractive or whatever. Todd will be working on that too. Ed Hasek: Do you have a slide projecter, city owned slide projecter? Lori Sietsema: Yes. Sue Boyt: That's something we often do is a little slide show. Lori Sietsema: We have the kind that has the little picture too. Carol Watson: Since the largest item people wanted was passive, just open park space, should we get some pictures of the big oak grove above Lake Ann Park? Lori Sietsema: The next item I have on here is the Halloween Party. The Halloween Party is going to be held on a Saturday this year, October 31st. The event will begin at 5:00. There are going to be a few changes to the party. We're going to have Domino's Pizza instead of McDonalds because it's free and we'll have a different entertainment besides ,..... cartoons. I think we're going to try and get a magic show or clowns or something. I'm not real sure. What I need are bodies there to help man the event. Running games, answering doors for the trick or treat doors and handing out candies, group leaders, you name it. I'd like to get a commitment from all of you tonight. What I really have to stress is, I don't want you to tell me you are and then not show up because tha t means I've got a door with your candy and nobody there to hand out the candy and that's a real problem for me. Or I've got a game all set up and I've got groups that are going to be playing this game and nobody to run the game. I can't run the party that way. It's vi tal that you're there if you tell me you're going to be there. If you're not going to be there, fine. I can plan around it but I really need people and I really need you to commit yourself if you're going to do it. Jim Mady: I'll be there. Sue Boyt: I'll be there in costume. Lori Sietsema: Yes, it is in costume too. Larry Schroers: I'm going to have a problem with that. Don't count on me for that. I'm traditionally out of town that weekend. Lori Sietsema: If for any reason you are in town, that week it gets cancel~ed or something and you want to do it, just let me know at the last mlnute because I can always use last minute bodies but I just won't count on you then. "...... Park and Rec Commission Meeting September 22, 1987 - Page 13 -' Carol Watson: Can I do it the same way? I don't think we're going up north but I can't be absolutely sure that we wouldn't. I don't really think so. Lori Sietsema: with that I'd take any commissioner presentations. Jim Mady: Did we need to talk at all about the special meeting? Do you want to go over anything on that? Lori Sietsema: agenda in mind. It's pretty much the same as I said last time with that I don't really know anymore than I did before. Ed Hasek: Is that just going to be held in discussion format? Lori Sietsema: No, we'll pull these two tables together and pull chairs around them. Jim Mady: There was one thing I wanted to bring up. The Community Center Task Force is meeting Thursday night this week and I'm not sure exactly what we'll be discussing but I wanted to get each individual's park commissioners thoughts on a community center versus, the way I look at it, from what I heard earlier tonight in the discussion, I'm going at we have a set amount of money there. It's not going to be a whole lot and if we want to put a million dollars toward a trail plan, if say the amount the City has for a bond issue is only 3 million dollars and the Ci ty has some updated, they need to do some expand ing. I'm not sure if""'" it's the Fire station or something of that nature. I think we need to prioritize what the Commissioners feel is important to themselves. Where they think we should be spending the money. Maybe it's not necessarily a community center. I've got some thoughts of my own but I want to hear what everybody else has because I think my position on the Task Force really should be to represent this body more than just myself. Larry Schroers: I guess my feeling on that would be if we had to go one way or the other, it would seem more log ical to me to go wi th the trail plan because that would better interact with the construction and the development of the new park and the developments that are going on within the city. If I had to pick one over the other, I would go with the trail plan first and possibly look at the recreation center at some point in time down the road. I think the trail plan may serve a broader portion of the community. I think that maybe recreation center would just serve more of a special interest type of thing. Carol Watson: I have been around here long enough now to have made that decision long time ago. We need a community center. We need it for several reasons. For one thing it would be a nice facility for us to have but it's also a draw to our downtown area. Putting the sewer in the street is not going to make a downtown and I think that if we have a reason for people to come to town and they come in here and there are facilities, things they can do and then they'll begin to use the ~djacepJ fac i 1 i ties. I think one is going to feed on the other. The tral1 ......,., ,..., """ .,.... Park and Rec Commission Meeting September 22, 1987 - Page 14 system will come. I really believe it will come but I think taking the city's interest as a whole, a community center would contribute to the downtown. To our ever someday having one as something that's really viable where we don't have to go around looking for people to come, they're coming to us. Ed Hasek: I think the survey that we took of the community should state what our position is because that's why we did it and that seems to indicate to me that the city is vastly interested in the trail system. That's really all I have to say about it. Sue Boyt: That's where I'm coming from too. I think the survey is what we need to start from and that indicates trails are our top priority for Chanhassen community. Jim Mady: viewpoint. viewpoint. Good. That's kind of all I really wanted was just everybody's I don't think I should go in there and just use my own That's not necessarily why I'm there. Larry Schroers: Well you've heard ours, now let's hear yours. Jim Mady: In the beginning I was really very, very strong for a community center. Right now, when I see the limited budget we've got to go with and seeing the plans that Kodet has come up with, to put a halfway decent community center is going to cost 4 to 6 million dollars so I'm concerned about if we only 2 million dollars to spend towards the thing, I'm not sure it's going to be the type of unit that we .need to do the things it needs to do. I'm concerned about that so I'm not sure if this is the year to do it. I think if we do it, we've got to do it right. You can't just put a quansant hut and expect people to flock to it because that's not going to happen so I'm kind of concerned in that respect. When I'm talking to people I've talked to in the community, by far, 99% of the time, if I even ask the question about parks, it's well why don't we have our trails in yet or when is our trail going to come in or where are we going to put trails. The questions are always trail oriented and I guess that's where I'm leaning right at the moment. That's why I wanted to get some more information. I think there are things I've heard through the rumor mill about possibly going with having a pr i va tely funded commun i ty center where the city just pays a fee to use it. Things of that nature instead of us putting up the capital up front to build one, it would be a private source fund. There are other ways of doing it I think and I'm not so sure what types of facilities we would put in. There are strong pushes for an indoor hockey facility. Possibly two indoor hockey facilities. I'm concerned about that because the reason they're using is all this ice time they're being able to rent out with the present indoor facility we've got. Eden prairie is pushing to get another ice arena in. Minnetonka is just opening one this year. Those are both areas tha t are us i ng the presen t fac i 1 i ty we have here so we're going to drop those so if we build a big free standing unit, I'm concerned that the things would sit open a lot more than we can afford to nave it sit open. It's not going to get the use. I'm concerned. Is Park and Rec Commission Meeting September 22, 1987 - Page 15 there any other commissioner have anything else they want to discuss? -' Ed Hasek: I had one I just hit by accident coming in here tonight.. I noticed that the trail adjacent to the paved surface is in along Lake Lucy Road now. I've riden that 3 or 4 times and the first time I noticed that they had some areas painted with a diamond and labeled as trails. No parking, whatever. However, it's not consistent down the whole thing. That's a real nice feature. I don't think I've ever seen that before. If it's going to be used, it should be more consistent. I don't know how often that should be. If it should be the other side of each intersection or a minimum of every 300 feet or something like that. Jim Mady: It would be nice every 100 yards. Ed Hasek: There should be some criteria set up so at least the people who are putting it in know what they've got to do and it would be consistent. It's not even marked coming off of Powers Blvd. here. It's not marked on either side but then you get down about 3/4 of a mile or so and all of a sudden it's marked regularly and then it disappears again so... Lori Sietsema: I think what might have happened and I'm not sure but they were just finishing up that project and painting when the big storm hit and they may not have gotten back to finish. I will drive it tomorrow and ask Dale to take a look at it so that is done consistently and done nicely. ~' Larry Schroers: We did bring that up earlier at one of our other meetings. That signage and painting should go in at the same time. Carol Watson: So people know what it's intended for and what it's not. Larry Schroers: And where the accesses are and where they're not. Then they get used to following a route rather than cutting through someone's private property. Ed Hasek: Are the people that do that the same people who paint crosswalks and things then too? Lori Sietsema: The City crew? Yes. I don't know who did the Lake Lucy, what's out there. I don't know if that was the contracter who did that. I really can't tell you but I know that, I'm pretty sure that our city crews could get out there and finish it if that's what needs to be done. Jim Mady: One other comment I was going to make in mind with the community center with the funding. I've been putting it together in my mind some of the things we've discussed. Things we need to do maybe in the next year or two and I'm seeing trying to prioritize some major projects. Phase 1 of the trail to me is very important. I also see getting Lake Ann graded which is $300,000.00 as being very, very important. I see us getting 15 acres in the southern part of the City '~ Park and Rec Commission Meeting September 22, 1987 - Page 16 ,....... very important. That might cost a few thousand dollars and I see us getting 5 to 7 acres of land out on the west side of Minnewashta around Lake St. Joe as being important. possibly important enough that we do it now before developers start developing when we can get the land now for $5,000.00 to $7,000.00 per acre instead of waiting until a development comes in and say oh gee, we want to get that land now we're paying $15,000.00 an acre to get it. I've gone through in my mind, I come up with 2 million dollars worth of things I'd like to see us do in the next two years that are to me very important and I plan on discussing it with the City Council at our Council meeting. I think each park commissioner should prioritize in their own mind things that they think are necessary to the community so those can be hashed out with the Council and we kind of get some consensus hopefully. Lori Sietsema: I know that the Lake Ann project was another one of those things that they were talking about giving people a choice along with the community center, the trails. putting in the three new fields and the soccer field. Hasek moved, Watson seconded to adjourn the meeting. All voted in favor and motion carried. The meeting was adjourned at 8:40 p.m.. ,..... Submitted by Lori Sietsema Park and Rec Coordinator Prepared by Nann Opheim ,.......