Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutParks and Recreation - 03/21/1977 1. 977 MARCH 7 ,, 21 MINUTES CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE ti 5 AGENDA EDEN PRAIRIE PARKS, RECREATION AND NATURAL RESOURCES COMMISSION Monday, March 7, 1977 7:30 PM, CITY HALL COMMISSION MEMBERS: Marvin Erickson, Tim Pierce, Richard Anderson, Paul Choiniere, Steve Fifield, William Garens, Francis Helmer, Jerry Kingrey, Geneva Middleton, Randy Retterath, Mary Upton COMMISSION STAFF: Marty Jessen, Director of Community Services Approx. Time to Begin Item r 7:30 I. ROLL CALL II. APPROVAL OF AGENDA 8:30 III. MINUTES OF JANUARY 17, 1977 MEETING MINUTES OF JANUARY 31, 1977 MEETING MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 7, ' 977 MEETING IV. PETITIONS, REQUESTS AND COMMUNICATIONS 8:45 A. Communication From Dennis Solie, President E.P.A.A. - Association Purpose 8:50 B. Letter From Jim Osberg, President Eden Prairie Jaycees - Jaycees Concession Stand At Round Lake Park 8:55 C. Communication From Fred Boomer - Land For Sale 9:00 D. Metro Council - Trails Policy Plan and Special Use Policy Plan V. RECOMMENDATIONS AND REPORTS A. Reports of Commissioners 1 . 2. B. Reports of Staff 9:15 1 . 1977 Spring Recreation Program 9:30 2. Community Gardens 9:45 3. Round Lake Park Plan/Valley View Road 10:00 4. Tree Nursery (over) Parks, Recreation & Natural -2- Mon. , Mar. 7/77 Resources Commission VI. OLD BUSINESS 7:30 A. Purgatory Creek Study - Lower Creek Sector B. VII. NEW BUSINESS A. B. 10:15 VIII. ADJOURNMENT 4 t r 'APPROVED 4 r PARKS, RECREATION AND NATURAL RESOURCES COMMISSION 700 PM CITY HALL MONDAY, March 7, 1977 MEMBERS PRESENT; Chairman Marvin Erickson, William Garens, Jerry Kingrey, Randy Retterath, Mary Upton, Steve Fifield, Richard Anderson, Paul Choiniere,(8:00) r , Tim Pierce, and Francis Helmer(8:00) MQmERS EXCUSED: Geneva Middleton ' MEMBERS ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Marty Jessen, Director of Community Services F-• Chris Enger, City Landscape Architect Sandy Werts, Recreation Supervisor `4 j OTHERS PRESENT: Tom Bartel, E.P. News, Mike Thurston, Eileen ,} Dirlam, Al Teas, Lynne Forster, Dorothy Menalis, Sharon Hutchnson, Mr. & Mrs. J. G. Campbell, Mr. & Mrs. H. Lykken, Jim Ostenson,-Wally Hustad, Hustad Development, Jim Osberg, Larry Heinan, Bob Kruell, Ray Welter, Sr., and Ray Welter, Jr.. •. , ls.. Chairman Erickson called the meeting to order at 7:35 PM- �. VI. Purgatory Creek Study - Lower Creek Sector Chairman Erickson requested that this item be moved up to 7:30 PM. Jessen spoke to joint meeting of PR & NR Commission and Planning Commission t ; on public preservation of the lower creek sector of Purgatory Creek and pre- liminary development concept presented by Mr. Wally Hustad of Hustad Developers. Jessen had graphics available representing discussion of joint meeting and pre- sent compromise proposal by Hustad which he would present tonight. �rf Hustad spoke to revised proposal and re-stated landowners position that private ownership would be the best way to preserve the valley. He agreed that there was a legitimate concern regarding future owners who may not have the same concern for the environment. He said the new subdivision boundaries would stay away from conservancy zone, and re-stated thathere was categorieseteagreement thatd o one mshould 4µ_ have access to the valley. He suggested ent land 2. acquisition land, which public would acquire for public use 3. conserva- tion area, lying between property line and creek, would remain private through the use of an easement until otherwise decided. He added that the criterea for use of the valley would be agreed upon. He also added that they have discussed this plan with most of the people involved. Jessen spoke to how this plan relates to the Purgatory Creek Study. He said that the trails remain, and development on the slopes will be restricted to certain points,which he feels is consistent with the minimum protection standards of the Study. Hustad added that they were asked to develop concept for entire valley, and that this plan was only a preliminary concept. Minutes - Parks, Rec. and Natural March 7, 1977 is Resources Commission .approved Page Two Tom Bartel, E.P. News, asked about the third land category referred to by Hustad. " Hustad explained that this was a way of conserving that section in perpetual ease- ment until the public is able to implement some type of public program. He said that one of the concerns is to see what happen in fifty years when ownership changes hands, and that there has to be a way that restriction of the valley be perpetual. Hustad added that the landowners are also concerned with how the public will imple- ment what they say they are going to do. 4I Garens commented that anything we do is going to disturb nature, and was concerned ±.a . with how we are going to keep people out. He asked amount of acreage of acquisi- tion area. Hustad responded approximately ninety acres, with about forty acres in �1 each of three nodes and said the public will not be allowed in the valley at all } and it would be a view only. Chris Enger, City Landscape Architect, explained the concept of the trails, which had been developed directly in reply to the joint meeting. He spoke to the Brauer ,. Study, describing this area as outstanding., and they developed the idea the same n as Anderson Lake. He said it became clear that it'should- become a place to view the valley. He added that one idea of how both public and private could cooperate, . would be to develop a long trail with an overlook, using foot bridges, and fencing r the trail to keep people out of the valley,but to allow a high visual access. n Garens asked what the cost of acquisition for this area would be. Jessen responded for these ninety to one-hundred acres, his guess was about seven to twelve thousand dollars an acre, without any depth appraisal. Erickson asked whether this could qualify for any funding. Jessen answered that the liklihood of LAWCON funding would be extremely good, and that there was a chance for funding through Metro Council Special uses and Trail funding. E _ ry i Kingrey commented that the easement gill be an interim agreement until land owners and the City would be sure that the easement could be bettered by another approach. IIe asked whether LAWCON monies would be granted on that kind of situation? Jessen answered affirmative, and that if easements are properly established and perpetuated, he is certain that it would not deter from any chances of Handing. He added that the Federal governmant has experience with easements of this type and this is usually acceptable. GM Y, 10 Chairman Erickson opened the floor to the public. Dirs. Dorothy bMenalis, 9715 Idill Creek Dr., asked who owned the land on the other side of the creek and what was the future of that land. Hustad answered that one of the reasons they were asked to start developing was because they control most of the land ( on the other side, and that the staff is concerned with total program. He added that there is not a lot of individuals involved on the other side. r • Minutes - Parks, Rec. and Natural March 7, 1977 _ Resources Commission approved Page Three Sharon Hutchnson, 9734 Mill Creek Dr., asked about placement of the fencing. Enger responded that there would be only one fence, occuring on the back lot line of the properties, which would be on the east side of the road and trail. He added that it would probably be.a cyclone fence, about five feet high. F't Al Teas, Box 1156, asked whether this proposal was directly relating to the Purgatory Creek Study adopted by the City. Erickson responded affirmative. Teas inquired whether the City had made a Study. He added that he was under the ,a impression that two studios were going to be made for both private and public and to consider non-implementation. Jessen responded that the City Council had adopted t,the Study last April to use as a guide for Eden Prairie, which included various , alternatives, among which was non-impletation. P' Teas commented that he has not seen any evidence about directing the PR & NR Commission to prioritize all of the critical areas here. He felt there was no l', planning to it, and that the Park Commission was too vague on funding. He added that the practicality of the trails and the policing and maintenance of these trails was also unclear. Jessen responded that all of these questions were discussed at the Joint meeting with the Planning Commission, including the funding, but would be glad to go over them again if necessary. C. c Menalis inquired what the average size of lots were. Hustad responded that they were basically like the lots in the Prairie East development. He added that a variety of size of lots is the need today. Anderson commented about plan presented at joint meeting and the one presented tonight, but wanted to remind Commission members of the original plan drawn up by Brauer. MOTION: Anderson moved that we accept recommendation of original for Lower Creek Sector. Garens seconded. Motion failed wit a roll ocalllvote of Brauer Anderson Ityayu Erickson °na n 3-5-2. Fifield "3'ayI� Garens unaYu Pierce - abstain Choiniere n e Y Helmer - abstain , YaY Kingrey nt1ayn Retterath "nay° Upton °nay° Anderson commented that we would never know whether we can get funding unless we try. 'a Ile added that we have spent years looking.,at Study, and in studying it have recognized it as one of our major resources. 1 Kingrey, addressing Anderson, asked what; his main concern would be with the compromise if the funding was not s problem. ded and the Brauer Study is the best weAcouldocome upnwith, andthat ainoorderise isto u a compromise, ' maximum protection, Ve should go public. guarantee its ( Jessen responded to time element as far as funding sources for LAWCON, which would take about a year, and for Metro funding, which he felt could be accomplished by this Fall. i Minutes - Parks, Rec. and Natural March 7, 1977 Resources Commission approved Page Four IIr. Robert Engstrom, spoke to the motion on the floor, and said he was confused as to its real intent. He said that strictly interpreted, -the Study is encouraging public in the floor of the valley. Anderson responded that the Study was done for implementation of a trail, and if you are going to preserve it, you have to make plans to preserve it. fie added that the rest of the proposal was to stay out of the valley. Upton expressed support for Hustad's compromise proposal, because she felt this would be best for the greatest amount of people in Eden Prairie. Anderson commented that this Commission started with a plan a long time ago and agreed to this plan in concept. He felt that we will never really know if ?' we can implement this plan, which he thinks is the best plan, if we never try. r Garens called the question. Campbell spoke to significant loss of tax base to Eden Prairie and felt that would j be unacceptable to the people of Eden Prairie. Kingrey pointed out' that the significant develolment 'wotild not b© retained, because of the stated interest by Hustad, to request tax abatement on the property held, easement encumbered, land. Choiniere felt that the Commission was reacting to the proposal because we do not have a plan. He felt there was not enough reference material to make a decision on. Helmer expressed agreement Frith Choini.ere's position. Garens felt that acquiring this amount of money for the purpose of the few people who would use the area was not in the best interest of Eden Prairie. Choiniere felt that in voting for compromise plan, your concept is destroyed, and you have a piecemeal study, and that we will continue to react. Hustad, to the p rovious coimient by Kingrey, toted that there is a substantial difference because the land we are talking about is easement line and is below property lines. t I-Ie added that we lost 50 lots from one proposal to the other, but we still have an area where high value homes will be built. There was discussion as to whether the entire creek was being considered or Just the sectors. Menalis requested the Council's position on the issue. Garens responded by reading the memo containing the Council action on the Purgatory Creek Study. Teas asked whether the Riley-Purgatory Watershed District had studied the creek . corridor. Jessen answered that the District Board of Managers have received the Study, and that they also use it as a tool to evaluate land proposals that come be- fore it in regard to any water issue. Anderson spoke to all of the background research that had been done within the past two years, including the public meetings held at the schools, where the entire plan / was laid out. ;3. Hutchnson pointed out that not all people involved had been residents at that time. ; ti G Minutes - Parks, Rec. and Natural Harch 7, 1977 r Resources Commission .approved Page Five Erickson inquired whether LAWCON would fund such items as fencing. Jessen res- ponded affirmative. i 3. Kingrey asked what amount of land would have to be acquired according to original plan in Brauer Study. Jessen answered 300 acres, with an alternative for minimum protection in which the conservancy would be set aside and sensitive coptrols for recreational and private use occur in transition zone. Kin ey then, k d for a prox. noe r; of acres to be acquired.by the- so-called Ilustad proposal. g5essen sal �0 to 10�i acres. Mr. J. G. Campbell, 9901 Riverview Rd., asked whether there had been a study done on acquisition and loss of tax base. Jessen spoke to loss of 100 lots, which he said was previously discussed at joint meeting, and would amount to 0290,000 for +' one year. t Campbell. asked what the cost of acquisition was for the 300 acres. Jessen answered 4 it would be approximately $2,000,000. Hustad added that this only represents the west side of the Creek. Menalis spoke to previous inquiry she had made at previous meeting on whether a Study would be made on run-off end water level of the Creek. Enger responded that the City Staff is undertaking environmental assessment of lower Purgatory Creek, which was precipitated by Hustad's development proposal. He said that the assess- ment looks at all of those issues and balances the pros and cons. He added that r they are still in the process of studying soils and gathering data. Mr. Robert Kruell, 6780 Tartan Curve, asked about acres involved in proposal. Hustad answered approximately 3_20 acres 'Ln development area, 60% development and r 400/06 preserved. Kruell asked what percentage of unbuildable land would you be proposing into ease- ment; and hoCT much ,lnnd is the City being asked to consider. Hustad responded 20% in the easement, 20% in acquisition, and 60% development. He added that you are looking., at 80 acres, 40 to be acquired, 40 in easement. Kruell suggested that attention be given to unbuildable land as zero value to use as a starting point. IIustad said as far as he is concerned, there is no zero value land. Menalis asked how much tax money is involved and how are tax paysers expected to pay for it. Anderson said that the purchase of this type of land could be funded through non-taxable money from off-shore drilling, gasoline tax etc.. He added that if we have that valuable of land, the State and Federal governments will provide -the funu ng. Bartel asked whether the cash park fee could be used as local share. Erickson responded ' that the City could decide to allocate these funds toward this purpose, but generally ahoy are used for neighborhood playgrounds. it Bartel asked about land dedication in lieu of cash as an alternative. Jessen said the dedication of easements would be as partial local share. IIr. Ray Welter, Jr., Pioneer Trail, expressed his opinion that the cost of purchase r would exceed ;'2,000,000 because you will have to go all the way to the river. I4inutes - Parks, Rec, and Natural March 7, 1977 Resources Commission approved Page Six i I40TION: Pierce moved to recommend to the Council, that using the Purgatory Creek ' Study as a guide, being that this sector is highest E p priority and using method of I. public and private ownership as presented to us in the compromise plan of March 7, 1977, that we accept in concept this plan with the following concern: Clarification is needed as to whether the Study should be used in this way, since all points in Resolution 1125 have not been completely answered. Garens seconded. Motion carried, with Anderson casting the dissenting vote, and Helmer abstaining. t' Bartel asked as a point of clarification whether it was the intent of the motion to go ahead with outside funding sources. Pierce responded affirmative. r Choiniere commented that outside funding will be required according to Res. 1125. Chairman Erickson called for a five minute recess. Erickson left the meeting at 9245 PM, with Vice-chairperson Garens continuing. Garens called the meeting back to order at 9:45 PM. II. APPROVAL OF AGENDA I.Kv Upton moved to accept Agenda as published. Pierce seconded, motion carried unanimously. i 4� I. MINUTES OF JANUARY 17 1977 MEETING ti 'µL Kingrey moved to approve Minutes of January 17, 1977 meeting as published. Upton 54 seconded, motion carried with Pierce abstaining because of absence. MINUTES OF JANUARY 31, 1977 MEETING •old Pg. 3, para. 9, last line, add "Choiniere stated that the "cash park fee" did not have to be used specifically in the area where it was assessed." Kingrey moved to accept Minutes of January 31, 1977 as amended. Upton second, motion carried with Helmer and Pierce abstaining because of absence. ;t Garens requested that Jessen contact the E.P. News regarding correction of statement on "cash park fee" being required by Ordinance to be used in area where it is assessed. MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 7 1977 I4UWING .' Jhoiniere moved to approve Minutes of February 7, 1977 as published. Anderson seconded, motion carried, with Helmer, Kingrey, and Pierce abstaining because of absence. Upton left meeting at 10:00 PM. IV. PETITIONS. REQUESTS AND C0111JUNICATIONS f A. ;communication from Dennis Solie President EPA A - A ociation a so Ohoiniere movEK; to receive and file Purpose of EI1AA and commend them for pro- S vidinF; it to us, and request that HAEP provide us with the same by our next meet- inn. Retterath seconded, motion carried unanimously. s T�. Minutes - Parks, Rec. and March 7, 1977 � . Natural Resources Commission approved Page Seven B. Letter from Jim Osberg, President Eden Prairie Jaycees Jaycees Concession Stand at Round Lake Park Jim Osberg, President of Jaycees, spoke to the needs and problems of the communityregarding development of existing� g pm g parklands into actively useful • � areas for our citizens, and also the litter problem. He added that the Jaycees are proposing to build and operate a concession stand according to requirements of the City as to location, building materials, and design. ;fir Osberg answered questions regarding building materials, manpower and litter problem. He said the stand would be vaidalptoof cement building, with the ifi a members each working two nights on the stand during the baseball season. "t rn Werts asked whether there.-would be any conflict with- the concession stand at the beach. _ Jessen said it would be located far enough away, therefore avoiding any conflict. Choiniere asked about age control. Osberg responded Jaycees would be responsible, and would require identification, and added that all members are covered by dram shop liability insurance. fit•. 140TION: Helmer moved to recommend to the Council the proposal made by the Jaycees in their letter of February 4, 1977 regarding the building and operating of a concessioh stand at Round Lake Park. Choiniere seconded, motion carried rF;` s �. unanimously. C. Communication from Fred Boomer - Land For Sale Choiniere asked why we have a need for this piece of property. Jessen answered that it would complete enclosure of that part of Purgatory Creek, and that it was different from the Lund property in that it is not surrounded by park land but would add on to the west. .1 MOTION: I.ingrey moved that we receive and file the memo dated March 4, 1977 received from Mr. bred Boomer and advise him that we have priorities higher than (,F, acquisition of this property, and that we do not have the capability to purchase ?' this land at this time. Choiniere seconded, motion carried unanimously. r D. Metro Council - Trails Policy Plan and Special Use Policy Plat} Jessen spoke to the Regional Open Space Plan that we have considered over the year, and asked Enger to address the Trail Policy Plan and Special Use Plan. Enger referred to public hearing continued to the sixteenth of the Metro Council regarding these two plans, and said that comments etc. are still being received. He spoke to the criterea used for active recreational facilities such as golf courses, indoor-outdoor ice or tennis arenas, and regional malls, and added that the Staff ` felt that we had some of these facilities that would fall under their criterea such as:Anderson Ltikes, regionally s3.gnificant Bryant Lake Stables, and Cedar Hills gold course and ski area. He continued that specific criteria for funding the trail system .for Nine Mile Creek and Purgatory Creek have been identified and have Minuted - Parks, Rec. and March 7, 1977 Natural Resources Commission approved Page Eight Ea <r to connect areas of regional. open space. He said it would be of benefit to Eden Prairie to adopt a master plan in order to be considered. r Choiniere proposed the addition of the Deaver Property as a natural area, connecting the two communities of Eden Prairie and Minnetonka, to be added to 'i=r the trail system plan. ` Jessen informed the members that we can investigate funding in a very general ' sense only, unless we submit a master plan for acquisition and maintenance. S' He said we cannot get a committment for funding without a committment of the ri?. City. , Pierce commented that the Purgatory Creek Study needs to be approved by the f City as a plan, rather than a guide. MOTION:Choiniere moved to recommend to the Council that we have heard the reports , regarding the Trails Policy Plan and Special Use Policy Plan, defining Lower Purgatory Creek and trails along Purgatory Creek to tie in with Minnetonka trails f . to the north, including Minnetonka Lake region, as well as including Deaver property in Special Use Plan as a natural area which concurrently ties in with the present trails; both forks of the Nine Mile Creek from Glen Lake through to Braemar; and the Riley Creek corridor. Garens seconded. Motion carried unanimously. I} MOTION:Anderson moved acceptance of the Purgatory Creek Study by the Council, 'in the light of the urgency of development of Lower Purgatory Creek. Choiniere seconded. - Anderson withdrew motion.. with Choiniere withdrawing his second. Some members expressed reluctance to people y xp pass this motion when eo le have ahead left the meeting. MOTION:Pierce moved to recommend that the Commission send communtoation to the Council, stating that because of the two items appearing on our Agenda tonight; Metro Council - Trails Policy Plan and Special Use Policy Plan, and Purgatory Creek Study - Lower Creek Sector, it has become evident that we cannot use the Purgatory Creek Study as a guide - but need a plan. Choiniere seconded. Motion carried unani- mously. V. RECOMMENDATIONS AND REPORTS f' s� A. Reports of Commissioners - none Fn B. Reports of Staff �- 1. 1977 Spring Recreation Pror-ram j. Jessen spoke to the program, informing the Commissioners that there is a 1 question of which programs will be offered and that there will be some changes because of administrative re-organizing of the Community Education services. r Ll Minutes - Parks, Rec. and March 7 1977 } Natural Resources Commission :approved Page Nine MOTION:Anderson moved to request that the Council request representation and input into the re-organization of the Community Education program. Choiniere seconded, motion carried unanimously. MOTION:Choinier.e moved to accept the 1977 Spring Program as P P g g presented to us by Sandy Werts, Recreation Supervisor, in its entirety, with one addition of: d. adult athletics & fitness under Areas of Program Involvement - Rec , in order to not short change any person in the community. Kingrey seconded, motion carried unanimously. 4' t, 2. Community Gardens Choiniere spoke to offer by Don Peterson, Edenvale, for land to be used for i community gardens. He questioned the restriction of only allowing a single plot. i•„ MOTION:Choiniere moved that regarding community gardens, we amend program to allow persons to apply for two plots, and that we also consider Edenvale area according to Don Peterson!s offer. Retterath seconded. Motion carried unanimously. ry 3. Round Lake Park-Plan/Valley View Road There was general discussion of the plan. .;I MOTION:Choiniere moved to accept the plan as 5i p p presented by Jessen. Anderson ,5 seconded, motion carried unanimously. i, L,. Tree Nursery r Enger spoke to present "bare bones" program started a couple of years ago, starting seedlings to transplant. He said the Twin City Tree Trust program was based upon participation of three communities in the Hennepin County area, of which one would provide land, one would provide materials and tools and one would provide their :..y share of CCA kids to work in the nursery. He said they felt that the Horak property y on the east side of Bryant Lake would be a good area. He felt it would be an ad- } vantage for Eden Prairie because trees will end up costing only $9.00 per tree, comparing that to the $15.00 per tree they paid for last year's reforestation pro- gram. he continued that each community is responsible for purchasing trees to be planted in the fall, and after a five year period, a number of trees would be dug out to be moved to other sites in the City. IIe said the only cost to the City would be the original whip material of ;$4,000. k; Choiniere asked where the money would come from, and why Eden Prairie kids couldn't T: be involved in the program. Jessen responded that funding would come out of the Forestry Bud et and that the y Budget, youth involved are specifically from a specially funded program involving low income families. i .n MOTION:Kingrey moved that the Staff contact Twin City Tree Trust and come back with more specifics on the proposed program. Retterath seconded, motion carried unanimously," VIII. AWOURNMEDIT Kingrey moved to adjourn at 11:40 Pb,. Choiniere seconded, motion carried unanimously. Submitted by, Donna Stanley, Recording Secretary AGENDA ` EDEN PRAIRIE PARKS, RECREATION AND NATURAL RESOURCES COMMISSION Monday, March 21, 1977 7:30 PM, CITY HALL COMMISSION MEMBERS: Marvin Erickson, Tim Pierce, Richard Anderson, Paul Choiniere, Steve Fifield, William Garens, Francis Helmer, Jerry Kingrey, Geneva Middleton, Randy Retterath, Mary Upton COMMISSION STAFF: Marty Jessen, Director of Community Services Approx. Time to Begin Item 7:30 I. ROLL CALL II. APPROVAL OF AGENDA III. MINUTES OF MARCH 7, 1977 MEETING IV. PETITIONS, REQUESTS AND COMMUNICATIONS A. Land For Sale Along Riley Creek ,.. � V. RECOMMENDATIONS AND REPORTS A. Reports of Commissioners 1. 2. B. Reports of Staff 1. Forestry Program 1977 2. Development Proposals a. Prairie East VI. OLD BUSINESS A. B. VII. NEW BUSINESS A. B. VIII. ADJOURNMENT APPROVED PARKS, RECREATION AND NATURAL RESOURCES COMMISSION MONDAY, MARCH 21, 1977 7:30 PM, CITY HALL MEMBERS PRFSENPt Chairman Marvin Erickson, Richard Anderson, Jerry Kingrey, Mary Upton, Paul Choiniere (8:00) Randy Retterath, and Steve Fifield MEMBERS EXCUSED: William Garens 14EMBER ABSENT: Francis Helmer, Tim Pierce, and Geneva Middleton STAFF PRESENT: Marty Jessen, Director of Community Services OTHERS PRESENT: Jim Voyen, representing Metropolitan Airport Commission, and Jim Ostenson, Hustad Development Chairman Erickson called the meeting to order at 7:30 PM. MOTION:Anderson moved, as a point of order, to either move to adjourn the meeting at 11:00 PM, or vote to continue the meeting if there is any business left to con- sider. Kingrey seconded. Motion carried unanimously. II. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Addition of IV. B. - IZetropoli.tan Airport.. Commission - Jim VoyM It " V. A. l.City limited term use-so 1�7. fi-Ids --kin en 140TION:Upton moved to approve the Agenda as amended. Fifield seconded. Motion carried unanimously. IV. PETITIONS. REQUESTS AND COMMUNICATIONS B. Metrovolitan Airport Commission - Jim Voven Jessen spoke to communication on cooperative use of baseball fields at east end of airport, and added that last Fall the City had received communication that 1,VLC was considering purchase of the Wolf property (letter of Aug. 24, 1976). He said that procedure for that acquisition provided An opportunity for further joint utilization of property. Mr. Jim Voyen passed out information which they have discussed the past few months. He spoke to boundary of property, which was part of the east airport boundary, and lay on the other side of Highway 169. He added that the 28 acre tract is now owned by the Fraser schools, and it was offered to the Commission at a reasonable price, and would be useful as approach protection to the exist- ing run-way. lie spoke to the fact that the Master plan has not been approved, but it does not contemplate any extension of the airport, and it was voted on by the Council to continue as a general utility airport in its present condi- tion. He .referred to ' the two zones (A zone - no development, B zone-would permit some development). He said the property is in the B zone, and unless { there is some compatible use, this area could be put to use for non-spectator type recreation, with little or no cost to the City of Eden Prairie. Minutes — Parks, Roc. and Natural page Two Resources Commission ,approved March 21, 1977 Voyen spoke to public hearing, conclusion (whether or not to purchase), community ' input from citizfsns, decision to proceed or not, and presentation to the Metro Council. Jessen said the Staff will consider question and look at potential B zone in greater detail, and put into perspective with the A zone, along with Hustad and Browning and Ferris Co.. Upton asked whether there were any buildings in the B zone? Jessen answered that there was a possibility of maybe one home. Upton inquired about the land topography. Jessen responded that the westerly part was high,then it drops downward. i Anderson asked for a couple of examples of what they mean by low recreation use. Voyen responded that probably the trail use would be appropriate, and also a golf course, which would be good examples of low density, non—spectator use. � In response to questions about other land involved in this plan, such as land to � the west of Co. Rd. /+, Voyen said there were several areas in the process of planning at the present time, and tl-mt allprocesms have to be meshed together to get to the same place at the same time to arrive at the conclusions. He was sure a study would be made and they Trill have a look at these approaches. Voyen added that all agencies, State and- City should study the issue and cooperate on the timing. Kin grey asked when h�' Y the deadline was. Voyen responded that hopefully the public hearing will be in June, and that it will have been considered by all City advisory groups, endorsed by the Council, and entered in the public hearing. Kingrey inquired irhether they were likely to convey to somebody else; that portion or site north of the glide path -and fronting on Co. Rd. 1, so that the'rlkminder would bd landlocked pardel. Voyen answered that it',is outside of_the, approach area`and that there would be access through another direction, and added that the City might addreso that concern. r10TION:Kingrey moved to receive MAC presentation by Mr. jim Voyn, and to direct the Staff to study the question and come back with a report. Retterath seconded. Motion carried unanimously. 2. Development Proposals ? a. Prairie East Jessen spoke to increased single family home building activity in the Irairie East III section, extending south from current portion. He said Of the two sites identified in the neighborhood facility study, the pond site and inner section site, the Staff is suggesting the inner site as the best recommendation. Ile spoke to pg. 2 of Staff memo dated March 18, 1977, referring to cash park fee figures, and where $206,300, plus another possible M65,000 was anticipated, and which would provide adequate money for sewer and cantor assessments for the lots. Ile spoke to the 17 acres, which would be reviewed with the School Board and Administration as to whether it would t ' r i 1 L Minutes - Parks, Rec. and Natural Page Three Resources Commission approved March 21, 1977 Cfit into elementary school concept, and the City could enter into a purchase ' agreement so there would be no development pressure. Upton asked about the ;.ot assessments. Jessen explained that the City and developer ewh will pay for half of the assessments of sower and water. Jim Ostenson, Hustad Developers, spoke to activity in the smaller lot area, of which there were sixty lots and they expect them to be sold out soon. He continued that they were in the process of platting 85 more lots and anticipate a good two year cycle. He said they have generated about 5% of the cash park fees and anticipate about 300 lots built out in about three years. c: Kingrey asked if Nottingham Street presented a problem as to traffic. Jessen s answered negative, there would be good access to the site, with bike trails put in t : for easy non-motorized access. ''' .' Ostenson added that the County has put a moratorium on using Co. Rd. 18 as an access, and they must now use Co. Rd. 1. He spoke to the Finholt property, which he said would not be developed within the next two or three years. Kingrey asked whether it was possible to adda protective covenant, in case development of cash park fees does not come in time for payments. Jessen agreed to confer with City Attorney Perbix to work out some arrangement protecting the City, and yet being fair to developer. Choiniere expressed his opposition to the use of the cash park fee to pay for special assessments because the Ordinance did not state that this could be done, and he felt it would destroy -the purpose of the cash park fees. Jessen explained the .front footage involved will be directly related to this site and the property has all been assessed for sewer and water at $$1,600 per acre. I3e added that the Ordinance does not speak specifically to assessment, but it is improve- ment to the land. He said it provides the City with an opportunity to acquire the site it wants, spreading the cost for all who would benefit from it. Kingrey agreed with Choiniere in theory, but was concerned that the City would not have this money in the general fund. Choiniere felt very strongly that another method to pay for the special assessments must be used. Anderson suggested presenting; it to the Council and requesting a legal interpretation � of the question. k Jessen spoke to a suggestion he had proposed to be included in the general fund bud- get, which would include a ''sinking fund" for this kind of situation, but it was turned down. Choiniere asked how many homes could be put in 17 acres. Ostenson responded the density per acre was 2.5. MOTION:Kingrey moved that the Commission identify the corner parcel as the neighbor- hood park site chosen, and that the Commission request the Council consider the use of the park fee for special assessment purposes vs. the use of general funds or some other r F Minutes - Parks, Rec. and Page Four Natural Resources Commission approved March 21, 1977 type of re-imbursement for special assessment and also request that the Staff secure advice regarding protective covenant, whereby the terms of the contract for deed may be extended to meet the secured park fee. Anderson seconded. Motion carried, with Choiniere casting the dissenting vote. Choiniere felt the language of the motion was not clear enough and asked for clarification. Kingrey said the intent was not to use the park fee for special assessments, what is their interpretation of the Ordinance, and what other options are available. A Jessen commented that he felt it was a cost that should be associated with this property, because some property has been bought without assessments, and was in favor of paying for it on a long term financing plan such as a five year contract for deed to buy the land with.an eighteen year payment of the assessments. ,commission members discussed further the assessment question, with Kingrey commenting ,. on general improvements- and general assessments vs. special assessments of benefit to the site by improving that property. Erickson called the question. r: Jessen asked for point of information on whether Staff should proceed as per recommen- dation of Staff report. Kingrey responded that the identification of the site should be carried out, but felt the appraisal and securing of contract should be delayed. \� Anderson commented that he agreed with Choiniere, but felt that Kingrey was speaking specifically, and that we should speak in general that we are concerned with what is down the line, and that we should not use park fee money for special assessments. Jessen read Ordinance 332 for the purpose of identifying direction. It spoke to acquisition of land, development of land, and retirement of debt. He added that he felt that assessment is a legitimate improvement to the land. MOTION:Anderson moved that the Commission recommends that assessment fees on the land are not to be taken from the park cash fee. Upton seconded. Choiniere requested amendment -to the motion of:"as per Ordinance 332 . It is the understanding of the Commission that the cash park fees are to be used for the acquisition and physical develolunent of the park site." Anderson accepted amendment, Upton seconded. Motion carried unanimously. Choiniere commented that the Ordinance spoke to development of the area, but not to the improvement of the area. Jessen responded that in the series of Staff reports donling with the cash park fee issue and in the process of developing the fee, we talked about land acquisition and improvements made in the land in developing the ul.timzte site, (Feb. 1976), and spoke to this action taken by this Commission. A1.0ZED I•IOTION:Anderson moved that the Commission recommends that assessment fees on the land are not to be taken from the park cash fee as per Ordinance 332. It is the understanding of the Commission that the cash park fees are to be used for the ac- quisition and physical development of the park site. tie recommend that the Council .resolve a method in which the special assessment type assessments might be reimbursed from other sources. Upton seconded, motion carried unanimously. r Minutes - Parks, Rec. and Page Five j Natural Resources Commissission approved March 21, 1977 Choiniere askedwhat the per acre purchase price was in that area. Jessen responded that the City has not appraised that kind of land in five years and for the sake of discussion, he felt it may be about $9,000. He added that at Uis point, there are enough revemies projected in the cash park fee in this area to pay for this site. B. 1. Forestry Program 1977, Jessen spoke to recent meeting held about this question and feels it is a good idea to involve young people of the community. He said we are currently being considered along with Edina, and possibly Richfield, by the Tree Trust. He added that we will provide the land, and we feel that the Horak ,property at Bryant Lake would be a good facility for this purpose because we have people on the site. He continued that he felt the cost would be very minimal to us because of our situation, and that the approximate cost would be about w9,400, mainly for purchase of 820 trees. He said we could not match that price any- [ where else. Choiniere asked whether we could keep the trees. Jessen answered affirmative, and that each community provides their own. trees. He spoke to the memo of i March 18, and to the fact that Edina would provide supplies and tools, while ;t Richfield would provide the labor. MOTION:Anderson moved to recommend to the Council that Staff recommendations in memo of March 18, 1977 regarding the Forestry Program 1977 be accepted. Upton seconded. Motion carried unanimously. Fifield left at 9:10 PhI. W.A. Land For sale Along Riley Creek Jessen spoke to the land for sale, which included a major chunk of property and nearly the whole creek valley. He said that the Joe Semrad dedication in the Cedar s Forest development ties in with the present land for sale. He said it was mag- nificent property. n i Commission members expressed concern for the creek bed, presently used by the Hidden Valley Stable, and requested that Jessen contact the Watershed District to see if anything could be done about the condition. MOTION:Erickson moved to receive the communication and direct that Jessen set up tour date, so he could communicate this to the owner. Anderson seconded. Motion carried unanimously. V.A. 1. City limited term of softball fields - Kingrev Kingrey said it was brought to his attention that we are woefully lacking in softball fields and they are poorly developed and maintained. He asked the Staff to identify fields that are available in the City, who operates those fields, whether time may be available to utilize fields for prac- tice or games, and if there is any possiblility that we can got maintenance help. ( Jessen responded that the City is in the process of screening 280 applicants for maintenance help, along with some new equipment, and available time to take care of some of these problems. Minutes - Parks, Rec. and Page Six Natural Resources Commission approved March 21, 1977 III. MINUTES OF MARCH 7. 1977 MEETING Pg. 2, para. 6, delete entire paragraph. 5, delete "responded that with the'Brauer approach and Hustad approach, you end up with the same result because of the easement." add "pointed out that the significant development would not be retained because of the stated intEaest by Hustad, to request tax abatement on the property held, easement emcum- bered, land." r. Pg. !,., para.10, delete "as a point of clarification, commented"; add "to the previous comment by Kingrey, noted" after "Hustad". Pg. 5, para. 2, add "Kingrey then asked for approximate number of acres to be acquired by the so-called Hustad proposal. Jessen said 90 to 100 acres." after 112nd sentence". Upton moved to accept Minutes of March 7, 1977 meeting as amended. Anderson seconded. Motion carried unanimously. VIII. ADJOURNMENT Kingrey moved to adjourn at 9:30 PM. Upton seconded. Motion carried unanimously. Submitted by, Donna Stanley .� Recording Secretary