PRC 2006 02 28
CHANHASSEN PARK AND
RECREATION COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
FEBRUARY 28, 2006
Chairman Stolar called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m..
MEMBERS PRESENT:
Glenn Stolar, Paula Atkins, Ann Murphy, Steve Scharfenberg and
Jack Spizale
MEMBERS ABSENT:
Tom Kelly and Kevin Dillon
STAFF PRESENT:
Todd Hoffman, Park and Rec Director; and Jerry Ruegemer, Recreation
Superintendent
PUBLIC PRESENT:
Todd Neils 990 Saddlebrook Curve 401-8950
Shawn Siders Town & Country Homes
Kevin Clark 7615 Smetana Lane, Suite 180, Eden Prairie 253-0462
APPROVAL OF AGENDA:
Stolar: Todd and I just talked about that for, we’d like to move old business before new business
so that our guests in the audience could have a chance to speak earlier and not wait through the
entire meeting so item 6 and 7 will be the first ones we cover.
Murphy moved, Scharfenberg seconded to approve the agenda amended to move items 6
and 7 before new business. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a
vote of 5 to 0.
PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENTS:
None.
VISITOR PRESENTATIONS:
None.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES:Scharfenberg moved, Murphy seconded to approve the
verbatim & summary minutes of the Park and Recreation Commission meeting dated
January 24, 2006 as presented.
LIBERTY AT CREEKSIDE, TOWN & COUNTRY HOMES: RECOMMENDATION
CONCERNING PARK AND TRAIL CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR PROPERTY
LOCATED EAST OF AUDUBON ROAD, NORTH OF PIONEER TRAIL AND
NORTHWEST OF FUTURE HIGHWAY 312 (1500 PIONEER TRAIL).
Hoffman: Thank you Chair Stolar, members of the commission. We have a number of
development reviews this evening. The first one we’ll talk about is Liberty at Creekside. The
Park and Rec Commission – February 28, 2006
applicant is Town and Country Homes. We have a couple of their representatives here this
evening. They’ll speak in a few moments. This is one of the properties in the 2005 MUSA area
that the commission is becoming more familiar with this region of our community. It travels
south of Lyman Boulevard and then back east off of Audubon and is basically a triangular
shaped piece of property, very large piece of property for what’s left in the city as far as vacant
land. And then the southern border, the new Highway 212 corridor. This development is
proposed to be 146 residential townhomes. It’s the old Jeurissen farm. Anyone that’s familiar
with that property. Our comprehensive plan calls for 1 acre of usable parkland be set aside for
every 75 residents. Liberty at Creekside as proposed will result in an estimated 292 residents or
close to 300 new residents moving into Chanhassen. Therefore we generate 3.89 acres of new
parkland if we selected to take, elected to take parkland in this particular region of the
community. However our comprehensive plan also identifies park service areas, and we have
been working with another applicant in this area, D.R. Horton on the acquisition of just about,
just under 5 acre park site. It’s a little to the west and south of this particular property. That
subdivision was also on your agenda this evening and D.R. Horton is in, agree with the
recommendations tonight that you look at for the acquisition of that mark. Knowing that we are
not recommending, staff is not recommending acquisition of additional parkland as a part of
Liberty at Creekside development. Therefore we’re seeking park fees in lieu of land dedication
as a condition of this subdivision and that was our parks issues. Trails. There’s a significant
section of our comprehensive trail plan within this particular area of the community. We’re
calling for a 10 foot wide asphalt trail to be constructed adjacent to and paralleling the Bluff
Creek corridor as a part of this plat. The exact location for that, we’ll get into a little bit tonight
but still, I don’t think we’ll come up with the exact design of the trail. It’s currently not reflected
on the plans. These gentlemen here may go over some concepts for the trail. Additional
pedestrian trail sidewalks and trail connections also need to be incorporated into the project. It’s
important to have a facility in a feature such as the Bluff Creek trail that we have, convenient
access for the residents of these new subdivisions to gain access into the trail corridor. Bluff
Creek is going to be the largest, or longest interrupted trail corridor within our community. It
travels from approximately Lake Minnewashta just at Highway 41 all the way south to Pioneer
Trail. I counted up, I think there’ll be 9 underpasses or bridge crossings as a part of that trail.
It’s approximately 2/3 complete to date and this last piece between Lyman and Pioneer is a
significant section of that trail. When we have applicants that come in with a piece of the
comprehensive trail plan within their subdivision we ask that they incorporate it into their
planning in the design and engineering work, grading, and then the city reimburse for material
costs after the completion of that trail. So in this particular, in this particular subdivision it
would be the design and then we would pay for maybe the retaining walls or maybe just planning
on the exact design and then after completion and acceptance of the trail, we reimburse the
applicant with a check based on their cost for constructing that piece of trail and we pay for that
through park and trail dedication funds. So those are the issues relating to parks and trails.
Specific recommendation that staff is making to the commission tonight is that you recommend
to City Council that payment of full park dedication fees at the rate in force upon final plat
approval in lieu of parkland dedication. And then second, that the applicant shall provide all
design, engineering, construction and testing services required for the Bluff Creek trail. All
construction documents shall be delivered to the park and recreation department for approval
prior to initiation of the phase of construction. And the trail shall be 10 feet in width. Surface
with bituminous material and constructed to meet all city specifications. And then as I stated
2
Park and Rec Commission – February 28, 2006
earlier, the applicant will be reimbursed for actual cost of construction materials for Bluff Creek
Trail. This reimbursement payment shall be made upon completion and acceptance of the trail
and receipt of an invoice documenting the actual cost for construction materials utilized in that
trail. And prior to letting the applicant get up and talk I just want to make sure that all
commissioners understand the, at least the general location of where this trail is going to occur in
the plat.
Stolar: That’s on this drawing here?
Hoffman: Correct. Page 3 of 10. In what is called the east/west collector trail. This is basically
Bluff Creek traveling through the site. …townhouse units. So we want to see the trail corridor
within that Bluff Creek alignment and would just continue that conversation today with what
would be incorporated in. At present we’d like to keep the trail on the north side of the creek but
that may not be possible due to grades and such difficulties. There’s always trade-off’s in
getting these types of…put bridges in and those type of things so we’re not far enough along in
the design to make a specific recommendation to you this evening, but just know that the trail
will travel through this creek in some configuration. I’ll let these gentlemen to speak to that as
well. So I’d be happy to take any questions from the commission…
Stolar: Okay, any questions for Todd?
Spizale: I’ve got one. Todd, how close would the trail be to the creek? Bluff Creek.
Hoffman: The creek is one of the areas that is, trails are the only thing allowed within that Bluff
Creek setback, Bluff Creek preservation area so it may be 20-30 feet, but the exact design has
not been as yet so. I think all you’re familiar with it. It travels, it meanders within this, the Bluff
Creek area going north and it gets closer to the creek in some areas and if you’re familiar with it
north of the railroad tracks, it’s probably down to within 10 or 15 feet of the creek…
Stolar: Okay, other questions? Why don’t we let the applicants speak first and then we might
follow up with questions both for you and for Todd.
Shawn Siders: Good evening commissioners. Thank you for having us this evening. My name
is Shawn Siders. I’m with Town and Country Homes, a K. Hovnanian Company. With me this
evening is Kevin Clark. He’s our Vice President of Land Development and is charged with
developing the, you know he and I are charged with developing these sites in preparation of the
house building that will commence after streets, utilities and trails are constructed throughout the
site. If nobody minds I’d like to put this back up on the board…since we don’t have the
overhead in front of us.
Hoffman: It’s a new system. We’re not completely trained.
Shawn Siders: Todd was correct in pointing out that what we had, what Todd had roughly
proposed for a trail configuration, put it this way is, a trail configuration that comes off of the
east/west collector road and then is tucked in behind these proposed units here and then you
know meander it’s way down, without any creek crossings to a pedestrian underpass that will be
3
Park and Rec Commission – February 28, 2006
constructed somewhere in that area. And I don’t know that that specific area’s been identified by
anybody but nonetheless it’s somewhere in this area and that alignment does not pose any creek
crossings. However, if you look at your grading plan this is an awfully steep slope throughout
all this area and the sheet that we looked at, I think page 5. You can see here where that
configuration goes, it’s kind of penciled out in front of you. It’s awfully steep and our primary
concern with that is, there are a couple of concerns. One is…because it’s, because of how steep
it is, we’re a little concerned about our ability to stabilize that rough or that grade while
constructing the trail. Now you can kind of see how we configured this within that grading plan
and we have stayed out of the Bluff Creek Overlay District per directions specifically…that of
course trails are an exemption to that and that’s okay. So I guess what we would propose is to
perhaps you can make recommendation to the council something to the effect that the trail,
considering the configuration that would come down here, would actually make two creek
crossings come along you know and then shoot over to the east in this direction. Come back up.
Make another creek crossing and then tie into that pedestrian underpass. That does a few things.
This site has got, this area down here is going to be graded for wetland mitigation pond that
we’re going to develop in conjunction with Town and Country’s two developments out there.
Liberty on Bluff Creek as well as over at Creekside so there will be some construction activity
already underway down here. We’re also going to be finding this trail configuration may give
people a better opportunity to you know enjoy their trail experience a little more. They’re going
to be walking through native grasses and plantings. Trees, so it’s just going to be a little more
visually appealing as you traverse through the site, rather than looking up to a retaining wall if
this configuration works. Now we haven’t asked our engineer to kind of evaluate each one
independently and see which one works best and so what we’ve asked Todd is you know, the
ability to work with him and his staff to find a configuration that works well for the city as well
as for Town and Country and understanding it’s still going to be on the south side of this
development but the configuration may change. And I guess one point I didn’t hit on is, the
MPCA and EPA are taking very proactive approach, appropriately at protecting our natural
resources, the forest and why I mentioned stabilization earlier is because they, there’s a system
called the NPDES that they of course influence and we have of course during the construction
we have to comply with the NPDES and at first glance we’re a little concerned about our ability
to really stabilize this site because we might, you know there might be instances where we have
to get in to that slope 20 to 30 feet, really disturbing a natural area that we’ve all tried to preserve
yet then going in and disturbing it and we’re not sure that makes entirely the best sense but at the
same time we would like to look at the feasibility for us to work with the Riley-Purgatory
watershed district and see whether or not creek crossings make sense so that’s kind of where
we’re at this evening. We understand the need for a trail. There will be of course a pedestrian
sidewalk up here. Todd of course appropriately pointed out that that pedestrian you know,
pedestrian walkers on the sidewalk…and trail users are kind of a different animal if you will, and
so it’s a good idea to keep it separate so, that’s really what we would propose this evening is
perhaps give us a few days. We can work with Todd, Mr. Hoffman and his staff and develop a
trail configuration that makes sense for everybody so I’d be happy to answer any questions.
Stolar: Do we have any questions?
Spizale: What road takes you into the site?
4
Park and Rec Commission – February 28, 2006
Shawn Siders: This site will actually be accessed off the proposed east/west collector that will
go to construction this summer and then this will actually be accessed through the Peterson and
Degler property so planning staff is working with us to obtain the necessary right-of-way and
then we’ll construct a connection to the east/west collector road…
Hoffman: Right at the very location where this road is connecting to the east/west collector is
the underpass. It’s out in the field today. It’s being built out in the middle of the construction
that’s taking place.
Murphy: So when you say you’ll work with our parks and rec department, you’ll submit a
proposal or how would the process for that go?
Shawn Siders: We’ll come up with a configuration. Of course it’s going to be a part of a
preliminary plat approval that we’ll walk through next, you know the next step will be the
Planning Commission as well as in the final, the City Council so what we’ll basically do is work
together. Our engineers will come up with a proposal. We of course need to talk with DNR and
the watershed district. See what our abilities are to permit versus you know if we can’t get a
creek crossing, what design elements would need to be incorporated into that. Of course cost is a
consideration. You know working with the city. Partnering with the city. So I think what will
happen is we’ll have a couple of options that we’ll work with Todd and his staff and then we’ll
just basically sit down and evaluate which one makes the most sense for everybody.
Hoffman: Our engineering department and water resources folks are looking at this thing on a
daily basis as well.
Atkins: Sounds like everything’s in place to do a little more research on it. I don’t like the idea
of steep grades either. It seems like trouble.
Scharfenberg: I don’t have anything more.
Stolar: If not is there any issues that you have with going forward and suggested where they
come up with some suggestions and let staff and yourself work together to try to figure it out.
Hoffman: Yeah there’s still some unknowns. I don’t want to, I don’t think the commission
should be putting the council in a position of selecting one alternative or the other. The beetle
was designed with the trail on the north side of the road and any time you can eliminate creek
crossings you’re better off and so, if it comes down to the fact that these creek crossings are
necessary, it would have to be for a good reason. Steep grades is going to be too difficult to
construct. The cost for retaining walls are too significant. These bridges aren’t going to be
cheap either. They’ll be somewhere around $50,000. Something like that for bridge crossing so
those costs add up as well. The last bridge we constructed with the watershed district was down
here on 101 and the crossing between Lake Susan and Rice Marsh. The trail project and the
bridge that were just $99,000. The bridge cost was approximately $45,000-$50,000 for that
single bridge so. Aesthetically they’re very pleasant. People enjoy crossing the creek. They can
see the water. Experience it a little bit more and so the, that alignment and cost seem to work
out. We have redesigned numerous trails throughout the system to eliminate or reduce the height
5
Park and Rec Commission – February 28, 2006
of the retaining walls. In my work retaining walls don’t last forever and they’re going to be
issues in the future with those retaining walls and we might see that already in the projects areas
in our trail system so. It’s a pretty significant design issue. We just did not have enough time to
work with the applicant in solving those issues so if you’ll allow us to do that and then I think
it’s probably time to check back in with you in another month as well.
Stolar: That’s what I was wondering because there is, one the cost because, and it’s both for you
as well as the city and on the city side I’m worried you know, we’ve got to look at the initial cost
because reimbursed for all materials so from what I understand you’re saying, if they put in
bridges, we pay for that. If they put in retaining walls, we pay for that.
Hoffman: Correct.
Stolar: So understand the cost comparison. I think another thing we want to understand is the
long term maintenance cost because is one better than the other. May not be an issue. Then the
third thing I’d like to understand is the environmental impacts on both sides which have both
positive and negative because I do think the idea of bridges crossing the creeks, if done right add
value to the trail, but I don’t want it done at you know 4 times the cost of what it would take to
do the regular trail. Right you know, we’ve got to balance that. So if we’re able to take another
month and work out options for us to review or come to an agreement that you can present, I
think that’d be good. Because I haven’t heard anyone say for sure that one way’s absolutely
better than the other right now, is that correct Todd or?
Shawn Siders: And I’ll say on first blush on maintenance, I think you might find and hearing
this again was just gut reaction. This might be a little better from a maintenance standpoint if we
make a creek crossing only because with the slopes we’re talking about, I think you may find a
circumstance where the trails start to erode away, you know.
Stolar: I think that’s why you were talking about the retaining walls. They go away at some
point. So is that acceptable to you Todd if we table this for one month? Come back to us with
some recommendations.
th
Hoffman: Well it’s going to go to the Planning Commission on March 7 and so I’m not certain
that it’s appropriate to table it but to frame the, your desire and then allow us to bring that back
and make a recommendation with like you were talking about. The trail, we all know that the
trail needs to be constructed. Best overall alignment. Best design. Best value and so the things
that you’re talking about and make a recommendation to continue moving forward and I’m not
sure that we can hold it open until the end of March but…
Shawn Siders: Other than to say that we would like to have some type of recommendation this
evening only so we can proceed through the process with the Planning Commission so if there’s
a level of comfort. I don’t know…kind of evaluate you know both options if there’s going to be
a clear winner, I can’t realistically state that right now. I don’t know if you’d be comfortable
framing a recommendation you know we will be back for final plat as well with the city so it
certainly isn’t the end all deal of approvals. We’ll be in front of the city on a few occasions here
over the next few months so.
6
Park and Rec Commission – February 28, 2006
Hoffman: You can make your recommendation contingent upon seeing it again prior to final
plat. That could be fine for both staff and the applicant.
Atkins: I have one more question. Is it, what would be, will you be prepared to offer the
th
different options on March 7 to the Planning Commission?
Shawn Siders: Yes.
Scharfenberg: I have a question.
Stolar: Yes.
Scharfenberg: Do we have an option in terms of regarding the creek crossings Todd, that they
would be bridges as opposed to the Bluff Creek corridor trail just south of the train tracks where
you know now it’s a culvert with, I mean we’re not talking a creek crossing like that?
Hoffman: No. Bridges.
Scharfenberg: Okay.
Hoffman: Watershed district prefers bridges.
Shawn Siders: One of the concerns that Commissioner Stolar mentioned was long care
maintenance, which probably is a concern along with the constructability of it… We’ve been
working with the city on this project now for well over 3 years and have certainly been very
sensitive to the bluff setbacks, as far as our whole development and all the other natural
amenities that the sites have given us, so we just wanted to make sure that we’re making the right
choice. We know that it’s appropriate to have a trail here. We just want to make sure we put it
where it’s going to have long term effect. Are we giving the city you know, are we both thinking
we’re providing the best resource here at the end of the day for long term maintenance. For
best…for investment, and for the resource that we’re trying to provide to the public. So I think
we’re going to end up probably with a solution. It’s not that there isn’t going to be a trail. It’s
just what’s the right place for it.
Stolar: Any more questions on the trail because I have a question on the park dedication. And
this actually might fall into the other one. Any questions? Real quick on park dedication. If I
add up the, and I understand these are guidelines. The acres per residence for this plus the other
comes out to quite a bit higher than what we’re going to end up getting with the one park area
we’re purchasing south and west of here. I assume that we have, that that’s just something that
we have to do because that’s all that’s available to us?
Hoffman: Well yeah, you would add up the residents in this entire area would be much larger.
You know probably 15-20 acres and we’re able to acquire 4.75. It’s just due to the fact that the
value of this property, the cost of the property and the tight margins that all of these different
applicants are dealing, to take on a chunk of land out of one particular subdivision any larger
7
Park and Rec Commission – February 28, 2006
than 5 acres becomes very difficult to do economically and so you’re going to rely on a
neighborhood park. Public neighborhood park and then also two gentlemen that are here this
evening are planning neighborhood amenities of their own in the other projects to the, what’s it
called?
Shawn Siders: Liberty on Bluff Creek.
Hoffman: Liberty on Bluff Creek to the, which is to the west of D.R. Horton’s proposal. So
there’s going to be other amenities included in addition to the neighborhood park. The Bluff
Creek corridor is one of those. It’s not a park you know per se but it does provide recreation
amenities. It also will allow people to travel from this region north to the future school location
which will have additional public recreation amenities at that location.
Stolar: And does this trail connect to any, the park that we’re talking about putting in on the
other property, we have connectors then that they can get to that park also?
Hoffman: They’ll travel up the east/west collector trail right to the top of the hill to the…
Stolar: And that east/west collector trail, that’s the one that’s being put in with that east/west
connector. How does this connect up because it stops here?
Hoffman: Yep, you’re going to go north and then.
Stolar: So we’re putting in a trail here? Or is that going to be the development over. But this
will connect then off, okay. Alright, so do we, I just wanted to.
Shawn Siders: …what we were proposing on the other side is a swimming pool, a totlot, you
know picnic table. Stuff like that so, you know we’re making an investment. We’re…
Stolar: Would these residents be able to access that or is that, that’s only that homeowners, two
separate homeowners.
Shawn Siders: It’d be two separate homeowners associations.
Scharfenberg: Is the creek a buffer to the two developments? Okay.
Shawn Siders: Yeah, the elevation, this site is, well every bit, there’s the…
Stolar: Do we have a motion that we want to put forth or an amendment to what is
recommended? Or do we want to just, because you don’t actually specify a particular trail
approach do you?
Hoffman: No. Well I, no. Just as Bluff Creek trail. Required Bluff Creek trail.
Stolar: So if anybody wants to put some guidelines…
8
Park and Rec Commission – February 28, 2006
Spizale: I’ve got one comment. It’s too bad we don’t have, it’s really hard to get an idea of the
lay of the land without a picture or visual. You know it’s really hard to try and figure out exactly
where this would go and how the land goes. I know it’s steep and stuff but it’s a little bit hard to
visualize it.
Shawn Siders: You mean how the slopes on this particular site?
Spizale: Yeah.
Shawn Siders: Other than the grading plan, we do have a larger one here. Basically what will
happen is the site kind of walks down so you know these folks will be higher than these folks
and these folks will be higher than these folks here so it steps down if you will up here so, so this
certainly would be the high point in this. So what we try to do is you know situate or orient the
buildings so that you know everybody has a view.
Spizale: Does that go with kind of a natural flow with what’s there now or does that take a lot of
grading?
Shawn Siders: There will of course be some retaining walls only because you know the way the
site is configured but it’s natural the way it is now. It’s just there will be a little more
embellished with the grading that will happen on the site.
Spizale: And the other side of the creek is flatter?
Shawn Siders: Relatively, well I guess flatter yes.
Spizale: More of a meadow?
Shawn Siders: Yes.
Town and Country Representative: The other side of the creek that’s where, the irrigation and
slope restoration and basically prairie.
Shawn Siders: Prairization I guess for lack of a better word. There’s a variety of activities going
to take place on that side. It was earlier on decided, and this was over 2 ½ years ago, that that
slope in that area were really not going to be developable because there really wasn’t a, there
wasn’t a strong enough impetus to allow a creek crossing there for vehicular traffic and so that’s
why that area was really, was kind of collectively looked at for improvement to benefit the whole
AUAR area as far as how we were approaching both neighborhoods so that we could work to
bring all our mitigation and such into that location.
Spizale: What’s going to be the general cost of the townhouses?
Shawn Siders: There’s four products throughout both neighborhoods. In here we have 2
products. A row townhome product and then a true townhome product with a full basement. So
the prices will range mid 2’s to probably mid 3’s.
9
Park and Rec Commission – February 28, 2006
Stolar: Actually one other question. Regarding the, if you did go with the bridges and all, has
that been proposed yet? Does Lori have to look at that also for, or the watershed you said.
Kevin Clark: …separate from the idea if we can make it work.
Shawn Siders: It’s a balancing act. I mean it’s a balancing act between planning perhaps,
conserving the slope. There’s territorial, I mean not, welcome to my reality right so. It’s a
balancing act between how we would like to be asked to achieve the goal and also it’s a
balancing act between Todd’s whole goal, the watershed’s goal, natural resources, DNR so,
we’re all looking for trying to make it a win, win, win so that everybody understands that at the
end of the day we were true to our vision to preserve the bluff and…preserve the creek. We also
want to make sure this area’s accessible to the public and that was the purpose to allow
development and create this corridor, because all along the AUAR was really one of the
founding, this was how do we preserve this corridor from Lake Minnewashta south all the way to
Chaska and that’s really the goal is to preserve this green belt and that’s what we want to
continue to look at. So we’re just asking for the opportunity to put in place the right plan and
we’re kind of a step behind, and for that we apologize so we’re looking at this opportunity to
work through those and meet your’s, Todd’s, Lori’s and our input to arrive at the best solution.
Stolar: Okay.
Hoffman: We identified our construction access to that, the south side of the creek area yet so
when you’re doing the construction in that area you know what your construction access point
will be.
Shawn Siders: We can come up the Jeurissen driveway and the same, there’s a field road that
approaches that area. You can drive back there because there are tree branches and other things
that have been you know 5 years since.
Hoffman: Stock piling.
Shawn Siders: Stockpiled back there so there is an access there that was.
Hoffman: You can see it on the plan, on the cover sheet.
Shawn Siders: Yep, there’s a field road that you can access that driveway. So that will be, we
won’t be impacting the creek through the process of mitigation.
Hoffman: Yeah, there’s a culvert crossing there for that field road. Hard to visualize because
it’s a very isolated area. If you haven’t been up into Mr. Jeurissen’s driveway, you’ve never
been here.
Spizale: Sort of like an island.
Hoffman: It’s hidden way back in. …not me. I’ve been there.
10
Park and Rec Commission – February 28, 2006
Murphy: Well the recommendation calls for approval by the Park and Recreation Director for
each phase of construction. Do we need to be any more specific then that?
Stolar: We don’t. Not if we don’t want to. Do you want to make a motion then?
Murphy: Yes. Motion to recommend that we recommend that the City Council require the
conditions listed in the document.
Stolar: Can I have a second?
Atkins: I second.
Stolar: Okay. Motion put forth by Commissioner Murphy, seconded by Commissioner Atkins.
Any further discussion or amendments to the motion? Do we want to provide staff with
guidance after approval? Just no? Okay.
Murphy moved, Atkins seconded that the Park and Recreation Commission recommends
that the City Council require the following conditions of approval concerning parks and
trails for Liberty at Creekside subdivision.
1. The payment of full park dedication fees at the rate in force upon final plat approval in lieu
of parkland dedication.
2. The applicant shall provide all design, engineering, construction and testing services
required of the “Bluff Creek Trail”. All construction documents shall be delivered to the
Park and Recreation Director for approval prior to the initiation of each phase of
construction. The trail shall be ten feet in width, surfaced with bituminous material and
constructed to meet all city specifications. The applicant shall be reimbursed for the actual
cost of construction materials for the Bluff Creek trail. This reimbursement payment shall
be made upon completion and acceptance of the trail and receipt of an invoice
documenting the actual costs for the construction materials utilized in it’s construction.
All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0.
Stolar: I think the discussion states we do want, I would appreciate seeing the final plat and I
would like you guys to work together and come up with the best solution that balances the things
we talked about. And I think we’ve all done this enough that you know how to do that and let’s
work to the best solution, I think there are a couple good options. Each with their own downfalls
and advantages but let’s try and figure out across all the interested parties what the best option is.
But it sounds like we’ll have a trail no matter what.
Hoffman: And not all trails are easy. Some are. The important thing to remember here is that
this kind of trail is the one, these types of trails that people really value them. The appreciation,
the experience is so much more valuable and what the residents are going to do in this area is
they’re going to use the street corridor to do a trail loop back home, so if it’s a morning run or
11
Park and Rec Commission – February 28, 2006
you know Saturday morning walk or after work, they’re going to use this trail and loop back
around into their residential areas on a sidewalks or connector trails, but it’s really the creek is
going to be their destination so to make it the best experience possible, and we made a significant
investment in the 44 miles of trails that we have already in the city and this will be no exception.
And always the exciting thing is if you look forward 3 or 4 years, you’re going to be walking on
this trail. It’s going to be out there and so it’s in all of our best interest to make it the nicest
experience possible because it will continue to be a selling item. If this trail has problems in the
future, it’s not good to live next to a problem and so the applicants here want to create the best
experience as well so I trust they’ll work with us and we’ll bring that back, a resolution back to
you in March.
Stolar: Great, thank you very much. Thank you for your time.
RECOMMENDATION CONCERNING 2006 BALLFIELD IMPROVEMENT
PROJECTS.
Hoffman: We talked about our ballfield improvement project at the last meeting. Todd Neils
and others were here at that conversation. Thank you. Good night. And there was a variety of
issues identified if you’d like to quickly go through them. They’re on the cover of your report.
Dugout, player benches. Fence extensions. All those different things but then the important
thing is really staff our response to that and what our findings were. Turn to page 2. Dugouts or
player benches, we’re in total agreement with that. We would like to come up with a plan for all
of our different field locations, Lake Ann. City Center. Bluff Creek. Bandimere. Some are
going to be easier than others. They’re pretty well fenced in already and we just have to put
some framing on top and then some netting for those, but part of the design that we think we’ll
be looking towards is that netting design where you have the, it’s a shade situation. It’s not
going to be a hard type of surface treatment. And then the fence extensions along the foul lines
of Fields #1 and #2. Again we’re in agreement with that. Think it’s a good safety and
containment measure to take and have installed. The plastic fence toppings we’re not in
agreement with. Really could not locate a source that identified chainlink fences as a significant
threat to safety. There’s two different kinds. The rolled fencing where it comes with a rolled top
and then the type that comes to a spike which is less of that around but if it comes to a spike,
there’s a significant threat there to scratching and injury but with the rolled top, a number of
searches could not find a situation and just in my time in the park and rec business, we’ve not
talked about that at any of our conventions, nationally or locally. And if we put that yellow
topping, again depending on the eyes of the beholder, I think it would be distinctive or the word I
used is garish but I think if you lined Lake Ann ballfields 1 through 6 with yellow plastic
topping, it may catch the eye of some that may think it’s not as attractive as it might be without
it. Cracked home plate. We’ll fix that this spring as a part of our routine maintenance. Storage
building for association use at Lake Ann. You always want to be careful with what I would call
the proliferation of buildings in your park sites. It’s the reason we have zoning and master plans
in our community and the master plan for Lake Ann park features 3 buildings. The large
maintenance building, picnic pavilion overlooking the lake and then a shelter serving the
ballfields. The shelter serving the ballfields was a donation by the Chanhassen American Legion
back in their early days of park development here in Chanhassen and it really does not meet the
final demands for that particular location. It’s always been planned or thought of that you would
12
Park and Rec Commission – February 28, 2006
have modern restrooms there. Larger building with storage, concessions. Second floor for
observation, and we’ve made some accommodations for that as time has come along. When the
water was run into Lake Ann Park we installed water right through that particular corridor so
when the time comes you’ll have water available there. Sewer from that building will travel
down towards the lake to a pumping station that was designed to accommodate that into the
future and then that pumps the sewage around Lake Ann, all the way to Greenwood Shores.
There was accommodations made for a future building there, and it’s my recommendation that in
lieu of adding an additional building, that we explore a joint project with some of our
associations who utilize the fields and take a look at putting this building into a future capital
plan and solving that issue in that fashion. More accessible routes to the fields. Staff supports
this. We’ve heard from a number of people over the years that accessibility is more and more
important. The initial spine of trail has been added but there’s still fields that you don’t have
convenient access to. Barrier netting to contain balls. Again this issue was identified shortly
after the opening of Bandimere Park. We support it. I believe it was the Minnetonka baseball
group in today offering up some additional dollars. Chaska? Okay. District 112. Then the
pitching mounds, fields…again that’s a maintenance issue that we’ll evaluate with the
associations and make appropriate modifications. That’s not an exact science and it’s depending
upon the material that you have, weather conditions, those type of things but we can work with
those folks on that. Fields at Lake Ann didn’t seem to drain well after the significant rain events.
Again maintenance staff will evaluate that. They add material on an almost yearly basis and so if
you see stockpiles out there in the winter, that’s because they’ve driven the dump trucks out onto
the infields. Dumped the aggregate and then they grade that appropriately each spring. We do
get some lipping right around the grass areas and that can contain some water and they take that
out on a periodic basis as well. And the last item, need for additional Lacrosse space and nets.
We currently have enough nets for the fields that are being used for Lacrosse but staff is
evaluating the merits for that. Offering additional field time for Lacrosse. Bear in mind that any
time we give Lacrosse, you’re going to be taking away from soccer and so Jerry’s working on
that and coming up with a recommendation. So upon receiving your feedback from the
commission staff will continue to develop the project plan, including cost estimates for each one
of these items. We’d welcome Mr. Neil’s comments as well this evening.
Stolar: Let me ask if Todd has any comments you want to add.
Todd Neils: Todd Neils, President of Chanhassen Little League. I guess my only question
would be the dugouts or player bench covers. I was confused by what that meant necessarily. I
know that the, there was been discussion both about chainlink enclosure as well as cement or
block enclosure and I would like to see a broader range of dugouts being put in across the area
and therefore would love to see the chainlink option, since it’s less expensive. But would like to
know if it’s going to be an enclosed dugout or just simply a covered area.
Hoffman: Enclosed meaning enclosed completely by fence?
Todd Neils: Yes. And on sides.
Hoffman: Yep.
13
Park and Rec Commission – February 28, 2006
Todd Neils: Okay.
Hoffman: Similar to what Bandimere has now.
Todd Neils: Okay. And then also will have a top.
Hoffman: Yeah.
Todd Neils: And then we’ll have the netting.
Hoffman: Yeah.
Todd Neils: Great. That’s fantastic. And then I guess beyond that I will wait to hear the cost
estimates and would love to see you know this get going as soon as possible because our intent
as an organization, or an association in the area is to utilize the Lake Ann complex for
tournaments in the future, whether it be softball where we would like to host a State tournament,
or baseball where we offer it up to other associations. So again, have a hammer in hand and
ready to help any way I can.
Stolar: Okay, great. Thank you. Steve.
Scharfenberg: No questions.
Stolar: Paula.
Atkins: How soon were you thinking about bringing up the new shelter? Putting that into the
CIP. Redoing the shelter up on the hill.
Hoffman: It’s not currently in the 5 year CIP so if you want to accelerate it, then we need to get
some consensus among the commission and talk about it.
Atkins: I just hope that we have less significant rain events in 2006.
Stolar: Just a few question. The Bandimere netting, that was a separate line item right? So
we’ll have that, but you’re just going to look at all this together and make sure we plug it off
against.
Hoffman: Right.
Stolar: And then do you think given what you’ve recommended that we’ll be within the budget?
Hoffman: I don’t know yet.
Stolar: So you’ll come back to us with that, okay.
14
Park and Rec Commission – February 28, 2006
Hoffman: And my thinking in all cases is that we’re going to do a good job on the things that we
can afford and not do the rest. So we’ll see. We’ll pick out our high priority items and get as far
as we can, and then leave the rest for later.
Stolar: Okay. And some of these things don’t hit that budget like the cracked home plate and
some of those. The extended trail, that’s in the CIP?
Hoffman: Yep. Yeah most, the costs are going to be in netting, fencing and then the asphalt.
Those are going to be your primary costs.
Stolar: Alright. Then regarding the building, the storage building. I mean it’s not in the CIP and
I know we’ve got the other big ticket items we’ve got, one of which is the lighting for the fields
which may in fact be meeting Lacrosse space because if you light soccer fields you get extra
time on it. So for the building, the Legion donated the current one. Is this something that might
be consideration for the commission also to seek community support?
Hoffman: Oh certainly. You know the intended community, just about any different plan or any
different, any variety of projects that needs to have some sort of a tie in back at the time the
Legion was hosting a lot of softball tournaments so they had a vested interest. Today they may
not have that same interest.
Stolar: I don’t know if it was in this one I read somewhere but, and several other parks
surrounding have a parks foundation. There isn’t one for Chan right now is there?
Hoffman: You have pull tabs flying around your city. Good place to start. They built a very
nice facility in the Minnetrista and each one of the four different establishments sponsored a field
and part of the building so, but they had…pull tabs.
Murphy: Just a question at the last line here, receiving feedback from the commission on the
report. Staff will continue. Are we looking at, as far as feedback, as far as ranking the items or
what type of feedback are we talking about?
Hoffman: Any type you want. If you want to rank them. Right now I would rank the protective
netting, the dugouts and then the asphalt trail as the highest priority items. Majority of the rest is
maintenance, is basic maintenance so. If you’ve got ideas or if you’ve seen other facilities that
have, we can take a look at. That type of feedback would be important.
Stolar: Ann did you want to do a poll here or provide your ranking?
Murphy: I don’t have a whole lot right now. I don’t know if anyone else does.
Scharfenberg: Well it sounds like again netting at Bandimere is the biggest issue. I think that
needs to be taken care of first but that’s, there’s already a line item for that, right? Then the
dugouts and the trail as Todd has indicated.
15
Park and Rec Commission – February 28, 2006
Stolar: So I think that prioritization sounds good. The one question I have on the dugouts is, as
you start getting the cost is the question of do we do it nicer at fewer to make sure that we get
those done and then try and get some budget nets the following year or to do the other ones. Just
something to think about. I’d rather do it right, as you said, even if it means fewer fields get it.
And then we do more the next year and keep continuing on and on.
Hoffman: Yeah, and we’ll select the parks based on their age level. The higher the age level, the
more issues you have with foul balls and balls…
Todd Neils: Todd Neils. I would like to talk about the storage building a bit more, if it wouldn’t
be too much to request a, some type of look at how much something like that would cost. I have
some ideas floating around in my brain where I can’t guarantee but may be able to tap our big
brother in Little League National or some of our world wide sponsors on the shoulder to possibly
donate funds to help with the cost of the new building. So if we’re able to get an idea about size
or square footage and how much that would cost, we may be able to start working towards that.
Stolar: Is this something that would require a design consultant to look at?
Hoffman: We’re talking about 100, 150,000 dollar project.
Stolar: There you go. Design consultant… You’ve probably looked at this a little bit before
huh?
Hoffman: Well the others, you know there’s basic elements that are there but any time you
include public restroom, the plumbing and the heating and design and electrical and concrete and
lumber, you know 100 to 150,000 dollars is probably a very good target.
Stolar: And would it be something that would allow, I think about Bennett Park for example.
They have kind of a kitchen there to allow concessions to be sold. That’s part of that 100, you
would have a concession… Okay, so is that what you were seeking?
Todd Neils: Yes, thank you.
Hoffman: The concession warming house at the Recreation Center was a quarter million dollars
built in 1997. So it’s, this building probably would not be all brick. More the brick and wood
structure. So the construction costs are, just think of it as building a, you’re building a small
dwelling.
Stolar: Now you would take down the current building and you couldn’t add on to that
footprint?
Hoffman: No.
Stolar: Jack, did you have anything?
Spizale: No.
16
Park and Rec Commission – February 28, 2006
Stolar: Alright. There was no action required on this but I do appreciate staff coming back
exactly as we asked and looking at these and providing us with some guidelines and
recommendations and thanks again to all the people who came out to give us their input and
Todd, for you coming out a second time. So I appreciate it and we’ll see you next month. I’m
sure there’ll be something for you to come out for on the next one. Alright, do you see foresee
us being able to get some of these dugouts in this year?
Hoffman: Absolutely.
Stolar: Okay, great. Awesome.
Todd Neils: …that information at the next meeting or.
Hoffman: Probably March or April. Depends on how quickly our consultants turns this stuff
around…
Todd Neils: Great, thank you again.
RECOMMENDATION CONCERNING REACH FOR RESOURCES ADAPTIVE
RECREATION CONTRACT.
Ruegemer: Thank you Chair Stolar. On an annual basis we do review the contract provided by
Reach for Adaptive Recreation Services. We have been contracting through Reach since 1999 to
provide those type of services for our population with disabilities within Chanhassen. We did
again in the past Reach has trained our summer staff and they’ve done a fine job with that. It’s
nice to bring awareness to not only our staff but the rest of the kids in the programs to include
kids with disabilities so it’s been really a very positive thing for us. If you look at the overall
2006 contract, the dollar amount does reflect a decrease of over, a little bit over $2,000 over
2005. The decrease is a direct result of participation numbers. We had a high number in 2005,
9% that did go down to 4% roughly as the overall participation numbers of the consortium of
cities, so if you look at the base charge or the base price, that is $2,000, 4% of the population
within that consortium. That dollar amount equals out to be $1,819.88, which calculates into the
total contract of $3,819.88 for 2006. Staff has been very happy with the service that Reach did
provide with the City. As you look at the agreement that’s attached, it kind of goes through a
number of different services that Reach does provide, not only to the City of Chan for the rest of
the cities within the consortium of cities. The contract agreement and then the overall numbers
so, what I wanted to do tonight, we’re not really looking for any specific recommendation from
the city to move on to City Council. We wanted to make the council, or the commission aware
of the contract, the dollar amount. Kind of where we’re at for 2006. Just kind of a little more for
your information tonight…
(There was a tape change at this point in the presentation.)
Ruegemer: You know we really as a staff we’ve been talking a lot about that on a number of our
contracts. Not only this contract but also, it may be a little bit harder with this contract as far as
17
Park and Rec Commission – February 28, 2006
the fluctuation of numbers, but that’s really something we are definitely willing to explore. We
also, I talked about that with the lifeguard contract, also the fireworks contract as well, so we’re
at the kind of reinvent the wheel every year. Kind of go through that process and do it that way
so, we can certainly explore that in the future.
Stolar: Yeah I think it’d probably be a good idea to look at that so we don’t have to do it every
year.
Ruegemer: You bet.
Stolar: Thanks. No action was required you said?
Ruegemer: No.
Stolar: Alright. Should we go onto the other three development proposals.
RILEY-PURGATORY-BLUFF CREEK WATERSHED DISTRICT: REVIEW
REQUEST FOR A WETLAND ALTERATION PERMIT FOR EXCAVATION AND
MAINTENANCE OF FIVE (5) STORM WATER PONDS FOR THE PURPOSE OF
IMPROVING WATER QUALITY IN RICE MARSH LAKE AND LAKE RILEY
WATERSHEDS. (THREE OF THE FIVE PONDS ARE LOCATED WITHIN RICE
MARSH LAKE PARK.)
Hoffman: Thanks Glenn Stolar, members of the commission. This item does not require a
recommendation from the commission tonight but if you have additional input, basically what is
taking place here is that we have another government unit that’s going to do some good things
within our community in regards to storm water basins, sediment retention and water quality and
water quantity. I’m going to go over them individually for you to make sure that you’re familiar
with the locations and where the activity will be taking place. It’s in very public areas and 3 of
them are directly within the Rice Marsh Lake Park area, which you were down working on this
summer. Are the commissioners familiar with the Watershed District? A small percentage of
the tax dollars goes into a special fund and they’re appointed by the Carver County Board,
Hennepin County Board. In our particular watershed district I think one is appointed by Carver
County Board of Commissioners and the other 3 or 4 appointed by Hennepin County. Then they
serve with a staff, engineering consultant to do water improvement projects within in the
watershed district.
Stolar: And just so you know, Chanhassen has multiple watershed districts. This is I think our
largest by far.
Hoffman: The first pond, as you go to the plan set and hold the one up that, the plan set that
shows Lake Susan and Rice Marsh. This is the general vicinity and as you flip over the plan
sheet to sites RM1.1, it’s a very large basin to be constructed right now adjacent to Rice Marsh
Park. The trail that comes through and then there’s a little stub trail that comes down into the
park at this location off of Dakota so you have Rice Marsh, Lake Susan and then this pond. It’s
presently, currently located there but it’s going to be expanded quite extensively and the feature
18
Park and Rec Commission – February 28, 2006
that you’ll notice most dramatically is the trail runs along the north side of the pond and they’re
going to put a split rail fence along that trail. Currently they have it 3 feet behind the trail. It’s
not far enough to offer snow plowing and regional maintenance so we asked them to move that
back. It may require some redesign of their pond slopes but we want at least 6 feet of clearance
on that trail. There are some trees coming out on the park. This is the park property on this side.
There’s some vegetation being removed. We have the basin, the four basins for sediment
retention and then the rest of the basin’s being enlarged to allow for additional water quantity,
and eventually water quality improvements. So you’re driving trucks right down a public trail
and primarily during the winter construction season. They’re talking to the applicants here, road
restrictions are probably going to come off here in the next week or two so these projects are not
going to happen this year. They’re going to be bid in the next month or so, but they’ll all be
winter construction next year. So allow the areas to freeze. Move in with their heavy
equipment. Dig these ponds out. Make the improvements and then do the restoration, final
restoration in the spring.
Stolar: Now they’re doing replanting also over there, correct? I’m looking at the next page here,
it shows some replanting.
Hoffman: Yep. These are a million dollar project. Includes excavation, revegetation, piping
and then the reclamation of the trails. You’ll note the existing, it says existing bituminous trails
shall be checked by contractors, city representatives and engineer prior to using as a haul road.
Any damage to the existing trail shall be repaired and included in the project at the owners
expense, the owner is the watershed district and any damage adjacent to the trail shall be restored
and turf established. Trail closure shall be coordinated with the City so those are the things
we’ve asked for already that we want to make sure that when these projects are underway that
our residents are aware that they’re happening so they can alter their routes.
Scharfenberg: That trail will be closed down for.
Hoffman: A day. At a time. So it will be during construction day. Opened back up for the
evening. And they’ll move in very quickly. When these contractors get to these pond projects,
they don’t want to spend any more time there than they have to because once you get in and start
moving in the water, you want to get in there and get it done. …some smaller basins. RM2.2.
It’s a small pond located north of Highway 5 and Lotus Lawn and Garden, and what you’re
doing is you’re collecting this water as it’s traveling down, through Rice Marsh, into Lake Riley
so they’re working hard on improving water quality in Rice Marsh Lake and Lake Riley and
eventually the Minnesota River, and this is one of the basins early on in the process. It’s on
privately owned property. The watershed district has an easement over the property to have the
pond there and now they’ll improve the pond as a part of this project. Continue on to the linear
type of improvement. RM2.5 and this is situated again back down on Rice Marsh but on the
Chanhassen-Eden Prairie border. There’s a creek way that travels down through from Lake
Drive and you’ll notice on the north side they’re cleaning out the muck basin that has a steel weir
and then installing a new culvert. Set the trail right at the Eden Prairie-Chanhassen border and so
this is one part of a two part project which we’ll look at here after this one. You’ll note that
they’re constructing a 10 foot wide gravel maintenance road. That will stay in place so they can
continue to maintain this upstream basin with the muck excavation. Continue on through the
19
Park and Rec Commission – February 28, 2006
sheets. Probably see the most dramatic change in this basin. It’s immediately south of where,
the one we just looked at. Again right at the Eden Prairie-Chanhassen border. In fact the line,
the pond is being enlarged in the Eden Prairie. At present the pond is only in Chanhassen.
Being enlarged to the east in Eden Prairie. Trail is located right on the north side. Very popular
trail between Lake Susan area and then Eden Prairie area. And they’re going to have an
additional feature, that nature trail along the berm. It’s slated as 4 feet. We’re going to request
that that go to 6 feet to allow for easier maintenance of construction vehicles, pick-up’s, Bobcats,
those type of things. But a significant impact. They are removing wetlands as a part of this and
they’ll be reclaiming or restoring that. That’s about another million dollar part of the project,
and so the project total is approximately $2 million dollars so when they’re taking out the
wetland areas to create these ponds, they have to go ahead and mitigate that in other locations.
And the last one. This pond just down the street. The largest pond and it’s right at the
intersection of Highway 5 and Market Boulevard. Right over here on Highway 5 and Market.
It’s the pond just down, behind Festival Foods and.
Stolar: Cub Foods.
Hoffman: Cub, thank you. County Market. When the consultant investigated this pond they
thought they would need chest waiters. All they had with them was hip boots. They put on hit
boots and they walked across the entire pond so it’s very shallow. This four bay was excavated
but that was…last two day rain events and it again filled up with sediment. Comes out of the
streets and parking lots in our downtown. Travels down the storm sewer system. Comes into the
pond and then it does not allow for the, I think it was the September rain where it flooded up and
over this pond. Across in front of, which was then the bank. Is not Walgreen’s. It flooded the
street on the other side. A person drove their car into that and stalled out right in that particular
area there because the water was so deep, and that’s due in part to the fact that this basin didn’t
have the capacity to take that rain. So they’ll again excavate the four bay. People always say
that why don’t they make these things deeper? Why don’t we make them 10 feet deep and
interesting, something I’ve never thought of is ground water just fills it up so there’s really only
about 4 feet of depth in any given area where you can have that it will stay dry, free of ground
water that would allow you to have that capacity of the 4 feet times the size of the pond. It still
doesn’t matter, you go 10, 12, 14 feet, it just fills up with ground water and you don’t have that
capacity there. So read through the recommendations that staff has requested of the watershed
district. All neighbors shall be notified via U.S. Mail and they already have the mailing labels
for that. Restoration of trails damaged by construction should be included in your bid package.
Trail closures should be thoroughly reviewed and addressed as necessary. We want appropriate
signage. Back on the front page of the staff report. Proposed timing of the projects should be
conveyed to the City and the project neighbors. The Market Boulevard pond is highly visible.
Keeping the truck drivers alert and keeping the streets free of mud. So those are the
recommendations that we have. If you have any additional comments for the watershed district,
we’d be happy to pass them on. We’ll be working through Lori Haak, our Water Resource
Coordinator. She’s the point person for the project for the City.
Atkins: I have a question. Where is the funding coming from?
Stolar: Your tax dollars.
20
Park and Rec Commission – February 28, 2006
Hoffman: Yep, tax dollars. It’s a special taxing district. Watershed district. They get a small
percentage, if you pull out your tax statement, you’ll see right on there watershed district.
Stolar: I don’t know, are they getting any grants for this one too?
Hoffman: Not that I’m aware of.
Stolar: Okay. Sometimes they get grants for projects. Sometimes they give grants for projects.
Hoffman: They have the money Paula. It’s good that they’re spending it here in Chan.
Stolar: The one thing I noticed, and I forgot to look back at my notes but from the Surface Water
Management Plan, these weren’t necessarily the main lakes with issues that we discovered but
they also weren’t necessarily the best rated, so this will help some of the lakes in Chan. I mean
these are rated as okay but we should still keep an eye on them.
Hoffman: Yep. Their primary impetus for this is the conditions of the structures that they’re
currently in place.
Scharfenberg: Is it similar to what they did on the holding pond at Lake Susan a couple years
ago?
Hoffman: Similar.
Scharfenberg: Similar type of project.
Hoffman: Yeah.
Stolar: Similar in that I think some of the activities they’re doing here are a little different but
similar, yeah.
Hoffman: That’s the biggest pond in the city, that Lake Susan pond.
Stolar: Alright. Any other questions, comments? Alright, then we want to go to item number 4.
PETERSON PROPERTY, D.R. HORTON: RECOMMENDATION CONCERNING
PARK AND TRAIL CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR PROPERTY LOCATED
NORTH OF PIONEER TRAIL (1600 PIONEER TRAIL), AT FUTURE HIGHWAY 312.
Hoffman: Thank you Glenn, members of the commission. This property again is located within
the 2005 MUSA area. It’s at the edge of Bluff Creek. It’s proposed to be developed into 81
single family homes. It’s immediately south of the property that you looked at with folks here
from Town and Country. Across and up the bluff. And again, if this is developed as proposed
will result in 284 new residents and we arrive at that figure by multiplying the 81 homes by 3.5
persons per home. That’s recently gone up from 3 persons per home. The 3.5. It was a look at
21
Park and Rec Commission – February 28, 2006
new demographics we had from the school districts. Therefore the subdivision generates a need
for 3.79 acres of new parkland. Staff and the applicant identified a park area called Outlot H to
be acquired as a condition of the subdivision application. Little history on the acquisition of this
park site. If you’ll recall, we had originally identified as our hope of acquiring park on the
Degler property to the north. That did not come to bear so we quickly moved our attention to
the, our second most desirable location which is just to the south of the creek. The north site at
the Degler property was a little bit more centrally located in the 2005 MUSA area, but we
wanted either one of the other. Either right on this knoll on that side of the creek, or on the knoll
on the south side of the creek, and so we’re looking at the crest of the hill on the south side of the
creek, immediately south of the round about. That particular location and it makes for a nice
neighborhood park. In addition to Outlot H, Lot 1, which is a 21,000 square foot lot shall be
incorporated into the borders of the park and combine those two parcels total, 4.72 acres. You
subtract the dedication amount which is 3.79, we will be required to purchase .93 acres. The
applicant paid $235,000 per acre for this property and if you do the math on that, we’ll, the City
shall pay $218,550 for our additional .93 acres. The applicant, D.R. Horton has agreed to rough
grade and cover seed the park site. Construct a 20 stall parking lot and for those improvements
we will agree to pay $50,000 in a not to exceed amount so…pay the actual construction costs for
those improvements. There’s two access points currently being evaluated for the park. One off
of the main street, which is Street D and one off the cul-de-sac. There are again pluses and
minuses to both those locations. Staff would be interested in hearing your viewpoint on that.
From the commissioners standpoint. The engineers and the planners like to weigh into those
type of issues but we’d certainly like to hear from you as well. And so that’s the park issue.
Trails. The Peterson plat will have access to that trail we talked about and there’s no need for
additional comprehensive trail plan construction as a part of this plat. However they will have
multiple connectors to the trail, city’s trail system. This acquisition of the park or
recommendation to acquire this park did not come to the commission without significant
negotiations between staff and the applicant. As you can imagine when you come in and pay
$234,000-$235,000 per acre, our park fee’s based off of a land value of $125,000 per acre and so
any applicant would just as soon give you the cash versus giving you the land. But we have the
dedication ordinance in place and we have a responsibility to provide our new residents with
public parks and so they understood that and they understood our ability to take that property so
we negotiated on a few other items in regard to assessments that our engineering department
looked at for D.R. Horton and they had come to the conclusion that they will agree with this
recommendation. They offered to be here this evening to speak to the commission but they also
had another meeting to be at so with their agreement with our recommendation, I suggested that
they did not need to be here. Since they had another commitment. Be happy to answer any
questions of the commission and I would imagine that upon acquisition of this property we will
start development in a very rapid fashion because we’ll have a graded site and with a parking lot
ready to go with a couple of thousand new residents coming our way so we’ll want to play a
playground and ballfield…
Spizale: Would this be a rough idea what the park would look like? What you’d have in the
park.
Hoffman: Just conceptually. We will master plan with the commission. Have a park planner
come in and meet with you and go through the exact design.
22
Park and Rec Commission – February 28, 2006
Spizale: But you’ll definitely have a playground area. Definitely have a soccer field. Definitely
a ballfield.
Hoffman: Yeah. I wouldn’t label it a soccer field. More of an open field area.
Spizale: Okay.
Stolar: Well is that something for us to consider given some of the previous comments we’ve
had about soccer space and such?
Hoffman: Well yes, but then in a neighborhood park we’re not traditionally scheduling, trying to
restrict scheduling team sports so. If we were building another community park, which we will
be shortly at hopefully a school site, then we’ll be able to.
Atkins: Is this going to be constructed before the new road goes through? 212.
Hoffman: The park?
Atkins: Yeah. Well the whole.
Hoffman: Concurrently. Concurrently at the same time.
Atkins: And is this very close to that Liberty Heights, or the Liberty one that we were just
looking at? Is it like directly across the street?
Hoffman: Across the creek.
Atkins: Creek.
Hoffman: Across the creek, yep.
Atkins: Okay.
Hoffman: The property, Liberty is the, if you look at the cover page. Liberty at Bluff Creek is
this one right here.
Atkins: Okay.
Hoffman: And the creek’s right there. And then you can see the townhouse units at the bottom
of the page. That’s the other townhome development that they’re working on and that accesses
out onto Audubon. All of these properties are coming in at the same time.
Scharfenberg: So what will the trail access to get to this park will be what? Since it’s right
along a road or street, will be what? Just sidewalk.
23
Park and Rec Commission – February 28, 2006
Hoffman: Trails.
Scharfenberg: Trails.
Hoffman: Trails on both sides. 10 foot wide trails. Obviously access to the residents on the
south side of the creek is going to be better than those on the north side. They’ll have to travel
down and come back up the hill. But you’re serving these 81 homes and then I think it’s 371
homes to the west of here in the townhomes development. So you’re serving approximately 450
homes at this particular park site.
Stolar: So for the Degler property we couldn’t get what we were originally envisioning. Are we
getting any parkland over there?
Hoffman: No. The creek corridor. You haven’t reviewed it yet but our staff’s current position is
that we’re not seeking additional parkland acquisition on that property, but the creek corridor and
the creek trail will be one of the amenities that comes through. It’s not in for preliminary review,
preliminary plat. At that time you will see it but that’s our current position.
Stolar: Okay. So this MUSA area, we’re really, I’d love to see at some point what the actual
density per park is given all these plats of real parkland because really it’s, if the
recommendation is for every 75 residents, they’re going to be somewhere in the neighborhood of
200 probably per acre. Or more. It’ll be more than that. Could be close to 300. I think that’s
something worth telling City Council.
Hoffman: I believe you’re right. If the, we have enough park acreage in the community to meet
all future development and all future residents but it’s not located in the right spots. We still
have to have it every one half mile from a home so, that’s where the…
Stolar: You know I think if we could have some assessment of you know as we get pretty close
to understood if we can just run that by us and because I think that still relates to the whole land
prices are much greater than, there’s no incentive for them to give the land. Right now they’re
better off giving the fees.
Hoffman: Correct.
Stolar: By at least half, it’s half the cost. So congratulations to these guys and to yourself for
working out a way to get the land with what seems to be a fair compromise of giving some and
selling some and working together so I think that’s great. And appreciate it. I think this does
need a vote so is there a motion?
Scharfenberg: Move to accept staff’s recommendation for the Peterson property.
Murphy: Second.
24
Park and Rec Commission – February 28, 2006
Scharfenberg moved, Murphy seconded that the Park and Recreation Commission
recommend that the City Council require the following conditions of approval concerning
parks and trails for the Peterson subdivision:
1. The designation of a 4.72 acre neighborhood park site, including Outlot H and Lot 1,
Block 4. This property shall be transferred to the City by Warranty Deed with 3.79 acres
of the site being dedicated/donated by the applicant/owner and the remaining 0.93 acres
being purchased by the City of Chanhassen. The City shall compensate the owner/
applicant $218,550 in total compensation for said 0.93 acres.
2. That the applicant rough grade and cover seed the park site and construct a 20 stall parking
lot for an additional not to exceed payment of $50,000 from the City. The parking lot shall
include insurmountable curb. Construction plans for all improvements within the borders
of the park shall be submitted to the Park and Recreation Director for approval prior to
initiating construction of these improvements. All material and labor costs are
reimbursable. Design, engineering and testing services associated with these
improvements shall be provided by the applicant.
All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0.
BOULDER COVE: RECOMMENDATION CONCERNING PARK AND TRAIL
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR PROPERTY LOCATED ON NORTH OF
ND
HIGHWAY 7, EAST OF CHURCH ROAD AND SOUTH OF WEST 62 STREET.
Hoffman: Boulder Cove is a property located north of Highway 7. It’s going to be developed
into a couple of different types of units. Townhomes and two single family properties as well.
In the general vicinity of Cathcart Park. If you’re familiar with that neighborhood park. It’s an
interesting park site. It’s shown here on one of the attachments. It’s owned by the City of
Shorewood but it’s within the City of Chanhassen and the church across the street originally
owned the property and then they donated it, or dedicated it to the City of Shorewood for a park
since the church was in Shorewood. And so now we have a multi-jurisdictional facility where
we mow the grass and trim the trees and they own it and take care of the capital improvements
and the design. Both residents of Shorewood and Chanhassen use it as a park. It’s located just a
block to the west of the proposed Boulder Cove. Provides good access for parks and so staff is
recommending that we accept park dedication in lieu of land acquisition. Trails. There is one
section of the regional trail system within the vicinity. It’s the South LRT running from Hopkins
to Victoria and it’s, there’s no trail head at this location but there is a direct access just one home
away from Cathcart Park, and then the corridor slices northeast and southwest. So if you move
into the Boulder Cove development you’re going to have convenient access to both the parks and
trails, and staff is not recommending any additional construction of trails at this point of the
development. It’s our recommendation that the Park Commission recommend that the City
Council accept full park fees in lieu of parkland dedication and/or trail construction, and as a
condition of Boulder Cove.
Stolar: Any questions? Do I have a motion to approve the staff’s recommendation.
25
Park and Rec Commission – February 28, 2006
Murphy: Motion to approve staff’s recommendation.
Spizale: Second.
Murphy moved, Spizale seconded that the Park and Recreation Commission recommend
that the City Council approve that full park fees in lieu of parkland dedication and/or trail
construction be collected as a condition of approval for Boulder Cove. The park fees shall
be collected in full at the rate in force upon final plat submission and approval. All voted
in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0.
RECREATION PROGRAM REPORTS:
2006 EASTER EGG CANDY HUNT.
Ruegemer: It’s kind of an FYI on behalf of Nate tonight to kind of give the commission the
th
Easter Egg Candy Hunt date. It will be April 15 out at the Chan Rec Center. Sure to be, there
will be information, he’s putting all that information together right now to distribute through the
schools. Looking for volunteers. Stuff like that again so if the commission would like to help
out in any way with that, feel free to give myself or Nate a call and we can put you on a task.
The reservations have already been made for the facility. Entertainment has been secured last
October. So we’re pretty much just kind of falling into place here and just wanted to give you,
the commission a little update as to when the dates are going to be.
Stolar: Thank you. Any questions?
Spizale: Jerry, what time of the day is this?
Ruegemer: 9:00.
Spizale: 9:00.
Ruegemer: Everything will be over by about 10:30. Hopefully being a couple weeks later we’ll
have, we’ll be outside and warm.
Stolar: Hopefully. Without any rain. Okay, next.
DADDY DAUGHTER DATE NIGHT EVALUATION.
th
Ruegemer: Thanks. Daddy Daughter Date Night, a successful event again. Held February 9
th
and 10. Thursday and Friday nights out at the Recreation Center. We had really good numbers
on Friday night and roughly about 30 to 32, 35 couples roughly on Thursday night so a good
event. We changed up the catering a little bit this year. …and that was a rousing success so, but
the kids certainly enjoyed that and I think the dads appreciated that as well to get their kids to get
a little something at the event so. A lot of the components were the same again this year. The
dance with the DJ and face painting. Balloon sculpture. One of the events was the same. We
had great help again with Nancy Gagner. She’s one of our, kind of our craft instructors and
26
Park and Rec Commission – February 28, 2006
Sailor Johnson also assisted Nancy with that. They’ve been with, involved with the event for a
number of years so it was a nice transition for Nate. His first year with the event to have some
seasoned staff to help him with that so, Nate did a great job on really paying attention to all the
details on that. Very thorough with decorations and details of the event and did a great job his
first time around. We kind of looked at continuing Friday night is by far the successful, most
successful night. That fills up I would say a week or two after the newsletter goes out on that
and if we had 3 more Friday nights you could probably fill those up as well, so we’re looking to,
potentially looking to expand that and possibly holding a Saturday night event option again next
year. Either we eliminate the Thursday and just go Friday to Saturday or provide all three
options, which we certainly can pull off from a logistic standpoint. So look into that and Nate
made some improvements this year on kind of the photo options of that as far as keeping track of
the, kind of the sequential picture taking corresponding with the people who are in the picture, as
far as identification so, that worked our really good this year and we’ll continue on with that.
And just a simple, you know just kind of logistics placements. Runway out. That sort of thing
with that. All accounts, everybody that attends has a fantastic time. We’ve certainly had our
mayor, Mayor Furlong attend, along with some city council members and other members of the
commission. Kevin was there this year. So everybody seems to really enjoy the night out with
their daughters. Kind of a little special time so, it’s a great event.
Stolar: Any questions? Great.
FEBRUARY FESTIVAL EVALUATION.
Ruegemer: Seems so long ago, doesn’t it?
Stolar: Have we finished the investigation into the winning fish yet and the situation there?
Ruegemer: That’s an ongoing task. So just you know, it was another fun year. Certainly we had
some challenges with ice conditions and all that but all that being said, we sold the same amount
of tickets as we had last year. Identical to the numbers so it was a great event. Down to the
ticket. 1,061. So great event again. Had a lot of help. Great help from community members.
Park maintenance staff did a wonderful job again on preparing the site, and also facilitating the
logistics of the event during the day of the event. I want to thank all the commissioners that were
out there providing help with the prize board ticket sales. All the above so we couldn’t have
done it without you. And it was a little bit of a chilly day out that day so we appreciate
everybody taking the time and coming out and helping us again and seeing really first hand what
a wonderful event it is. We’ve got some people who enjoy it. We have people there that haven’t
missed one yet in 13 years so, it’s a tradition that’s engrained not only with our community but
even really people outside of our community that keep coming back so. It’s a fun event. You
know kind of looking at the comments regarding the deal. It certainly was helpful to have
everything labeled. I hope everything, you know the coordination within the prize board area.
The commissioners were really responsible for really went smooth with that, which we try to
take a look at labeling and numbering and putting things in order and hopefully that helps with
the speed and ease of distribution during the event itself so we’re certainly always looking for
comments or suggestions to certainly to help out with that. You know great to announce the
prizes as well as names and ticket numbers. Fred did always does a wonderful job with that and
27
Park and Rec Commission – February 28, 2006
I think people really try to make an effort this year to go out and go out into the community and
really try to lower our expense overall. Kind of bridge the gap between revenue and
expenditures and we did a better job this year on going out. Did a lot of door knocking this
year. I did a lot of door knocking after Corey had left and certainly was one of my goals was to
make the debt a little bit more friendly as far as expenditures versus revenue so we did a better
job lowering the event by about $1,100-$1,200 in expense to bridge the gap so, always looking
for ways to cut expense without cutting the overall experience for our participants. You look at
the overall, really the overall prize per participant that the won a door prize. It really was a
phenomenal value this year for a $5 ticket so we did a great job on getting a number of books
donated from a publishing company here in town, and just a lot of other callers came through
with a lot of value baskets and desserts and there was just a lot of great event. Gander Mountain
donated poles and other types of items. Ivan Sinclair donated some fishing poles and other, ice
auger and some other prize board items so it really was a great event. It was fun to get out and
make some new sponsor contacts and get excited and rally people around the event so. Overall
we certainly talked amongst the staff as to way we can improve again next year. Eliminate some
costs with that. It does seem like we’re, you know the advertising that we do certainly is
beneficial but you know are we kind of at the point now where it’s kind of engrained in people’s
mind as to when the date’s going to be and I’m looking to maybe look at doing maybe some
different advertising next year that we can eliminate maybe some of the ads in the paper to save
some costs somehow that way but, just really looking for the commission tonight, if there’s any
items or general comments, suggestions that you were willing to pass on tonight that we can
improve the event or you know kind of looking forward to it so.
Murphy: I just think people were really pleased with the prizes and winning whatever they won.
They were just glad to get something. So I think that went really well with the amount of prizes
that we had.
Stolar: The question, a couple things on the prize thing. If they could add another sheet, and I
don’t know if that’s going to be easy or not but one of the things, you know I’d take the sheet
and I’d go running and then I’d come back. Well they had new numbers so I have to wait for
those to be written. If you had like two runner sheets, then I could just you know take one,
because Fred was waiting on me a lot. It wasn’t fun. He’d be sitting there waiting. I do have a
question about the, just when looking at the numbers. The total expenses didn’t match in the two
areas, and I’m sure that’s just a typo.
Ruegemer: On what, actually I have an updated one.
Stolar: And like when we see prizes here for Cabin Fever Sports and Sheraton Bloomington
Hotel, those are where we bought prizes, correct?
Ruegemer: If you look at, Cabin Fever Sporting Goods, yeah. Jeff does donate the portable fish
house for that and certainly then we supplement.
Stolar: With buying other.
Ruegemer: Correct. Buying some other prizes.
28
Park and Rec Commission – February 28, 2006
Stolar: And the hotel, same thing? That’s one of the prize.
Ruegemer: Actually the Sheraton Bloomington Hotel is the PA system for the ice.
Stolar: Oh okay.
Ruegemer: We actually did go out for about 2 or 3 quotes on that this year. Sheraton is who
we’ve used for the past you know 10 plus years for that and they definitely did sharpen their
pencil on us after they knew we were kind of going out for some other options. It’s expensive,
without question.
Stolar: But you’ve got to get the right equipment there.
Ruegemer: Yeah. When you’re stringing out you know 1,200 feet of cable and.
Stolar: Right, they set it up and they take it down?
Ruegemer: Yep.
Stolar: It’s worth it.
Ruegemer: Turn key for us, yeah. We just provide power.
Stolar: Yep. The only thing, and I’m going to play off of something that Todd did this year
which is, it would be fun to maybe have a ice fishing lesson there. Like maybe the half hour
beforehand, a couple people go around and coach or do like what you did with Dave… Be kind
of fun. See a couple volunteers out there. Either the Friday before or you know like people can
come at noon and there’ll be a few holes set up with some.
Hoffman: Beginner area.
Stolar: Yeah. Actually you could set up a beginner’s area where someone just kind of walks
around and.
Hoffman: Yeah, we could get some Lions. $5,390.32 is the actual total expense on the updated
sheet. 5390.32.
Stolar: For $90 of investment, boy was that worth it. That was a great payback.
Murphy: I have to say it took me a while to thaw my feet out.
Stolar: The year before of all the water that was on there, that had melted, actually this year
went out and bought different boots just, and they worked great.
Hoffman: Thanks again for all your help.
29
Park and Rec Commission – February 28, 2006
Atkins: I just want to know what Minnesota Gambling Control Board is.
Ruegemer: The $50?
Atkins: Yeah.
Ruegemer: We have to go through a permit application process to get, since it’s considered a
raffle. That’s why if you look on those fish tickets there that’s X065 number. That’s all based
on, it’s gambling essentially so we have to go through that State agency to get a permit to host
that raffle.
Hoffman: Through the Chamber of Commerce.
Ruegemer: Yeah. So we do that process every fall. We go through the Chamber of Commerce
actually did pass an ordinance that we don’t need board approval anymore. The Board of
Directors did pass that so on an annual basis they automatically give us the official okey dokey
and we go through that process and get everything approved so.
th
Atkins: Do you have to do that for the 4 of July?
Ruegemer: No.
Stolar: Correspondence section. Anything anybody needs to.
Murphy: This was pretty neat.
Hoffman: Which one is it? Dog?
Murphy: Yeah.
Stolar: For the Shorewood.
Murphy: Funding raiser going.
Stolar: That’s where it was. The foundation, the Shorewood Parks Foundation.
Murphy: I haven’t seen that anywhere.
Atkins: Me either. …distributed in Chanhassen?
Hoffman: I received it in the mail.
Scharfenberg: Is there any update Todd on that process for Marty?
Hoffman: No updates.
30
Park and Rec Commission – February 28, 2006
Stolar: Well even though there are no updates, I would like to ask for him to come to either the
March or April meeting. If that’s possible. Even if he has no updates so we can ask him
questions.
Hoffman: Sure.
Murphy: I would also like to contact him just to see what I can do to help maybe make this more
visible in Chanhassen.
Stolar: I guess the question I have is, even if we raise all this money, if Marty’s group isn’t
going to do it, it doesn’t really help us to have the money. It’s a time constraint and resource
constraint for us more than the money right now.
Hoffman: I didn’t receive the nomination form but I see Karen included in the packet, for the
Distinguished Service Award last year. I’m not sure if we talked about that or not. I think we
did.
Stolar: We reviewed the nominees last year.
Hoffman: At this point you’re eligible to make a nomination of the community. As an
organization you can make a nomination for a person to be considered. And today’s the
deadline.
Stolar: Are we going to see who was nominated again?
Hoffman: You will. But you also have the opportunity to nominate somebody if you so choose
as a commission.
th
Stolar: Also remember the gala is April 29. Your names are on the list to get an invite.
Hoffman: Is there any desire by any member to nominate a person?
Atkins: Did you say Karen was nominated? Oh, I don’t know why I thought I heard that. Karen
Engelhardt.
Stolar: I think if you have somebody, I guess now would be the time. Just one other quick note,
this letter for Dale. It sums up a lot of things he and his group have been doing for this
community. I thought that was great. Really appreciate it.
Hoffman: Nice letter.
Stolar: Alright. Does anyone have any other business to bring towards this committee? I guess
I can wrap up my final committee report. We’re done with the Surface Water Management task
force. There’s going to be a public hearing March, when is the Planning Commission meeting?
31
Park and Rec Commission – February 28, 2006
th
Hoffman: The 7.
thth
Stolar: The 7. So March 7, Planning Commission is going to have a public hearing. They
now own the recommendations and the watershed districts, all watershed districts have to review
it and give their input. Carver County has to review it. Give their input. City Council’s seen a
briefing of it. I didn’t think, I guess you could bring in a March to bring our deal into it so
maybe why don’t we put something in March and I’ll just, I’m trying to get at summary
document from them so I’ll see if they have the updated exec summary yet and we’ll use that as
our input document. But I thought a lot of it was done really well and again as I mentioned last
time, the key thing was, we were able to classify water bodies, including calling a couple of them
pristine, meaning you really want to focus on them and keeping them with extra regulations and
codes and stringent adherence to codes to make sure they don’t get disturbed and those would be
Seminary Fen and the creek.
Hoffman: Assumption Creek.
Stolar: Assumption Creek. So, and City Council when they were told that didn’t seem to have
any comments at that time but it was just a preliminary briefly for them. And then from a parks
perspective, just we’re going to continue to try and make the city the show case so one of the
things we’ll talk about is some things downtown that Lori may propose which the parks, Dale’s
crew maintain downtown so maybe some things there. Native vegetations and things like that to
help improve runoff. Of course that runoff goes…we were just talking about. Do I have a
motion for adjournment. I guess there are no other committees right now going on. Motion for
adjournment?
Spizale moved, Murphy seconded to adjourn the meeting. All voted in favor and the
motion carried. The Park and Recreation Commission meeting was adjourned.
Submitted by Todd Hoffman
Park and Rec Director
Prepared by Nann Opheim
32