Loading...
2004-04-13 Parks and Rec Comm Agenda Packet2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA AGENDA JOINT CITY COUNCIL/ PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION WORKSHOP Tuesday, April 13, 2004 6:00 p.m. 7:00 p.m. —Large Conference Room Call to Order 6:00 Introductions 6:00-6:05 Parks and Recreation Commission's Purpose/Role/Mission 6:05-6:15 Long -Term Funding for Pazks Improvements &Maintenance 6:15-6:30 • Special Parks Fund • Parks Maintenance Budget Pazks and Open Space Land 6:30-6:45 • Acquisition • Preservation Staff Resources for Parks and Recreation 6:45-6:55 Other Comments or Concerns 6:55-7:00 Adjourn 7:00 Auxiliary aids for persons with disabilities ate available upon request at least 120 hours in advance. If a notice of less than 120 hours is received, the City of Mendota Heights will make every attempt to provide the aids. This may not, however, be possible on short notice. Please contact City Administration at (651) 452-1850 with requests. City of Mendota Heights FEBRUARY 12, 2004 Joint Workshop = April 13th, zuu City Council / Parks & Recreation Commission (Rescheduled from March 9th, 2004) BACKGROUND MATERIALS City Ordinance Establishing a Parks and Recreation Commission a. Section 2-2-6: Powers and Duties 2. Mendota Heights Comprehensive Plan 2002 a. Mendota Heights Vision Statement - pgs 1 to 3 b. Natural & Open Spaces - pg 7 c. Environmental Features - pg 12 d. Demographic Profiles - pgs 19, 22, 26, 27, & 28 e. Park Plan - pgs 71 thru 79 Park Dedication Fee Policy a. Resolution No. 03-89 (Raising fee to $2,700.00 per dwelling unit) 4. Estimates of Future Trail and Playground Maintenance/Replacement Costs a. Rehabilitate 21 miles of trails - 4 year plan - $165,000.00 b. Replace/rehabilitate playground structures and components at eleven parks during next ten years - Estimated cost $500,000.00 5. Mendota Heights Park and Recreation Facility Needs Study - 1985 a. Chapter IV "Goals and Policies" - pgs 58 thru 66 1. Overall Goal - pg 58 2. Acquisition and Development Priorities - pg 63 3. Roles and Relationships with other agencies - pg 63 b. Chapter V "Community Trails" - pgs 67 thru 76 1. Purpose - pg 67 2. Goals - pg 70 c. Park & Recreation Survey Responses - June 1985 6. Options for future Trail Routes or Segments a. Complementation of trail improvement projects previously discussed or considered by the Commission. b. City Park and Trail map illustrating location of proposed trail segments Compiled by Guy Kullander 1 1 J 1 1 L J 1 1 L: CITY CODE MENDOIA HEIGHTS 2-2-1 2-2-3 CHAPTER 2 PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION SECTION: 2-2-1: Commission Established 2-2-2: Composition; Appointment; Terms Of Office 2-2-3: Officers 2-2-4: Vacancies In Office 2-2-5: Meetings; Procedures; Records 2-2-6: Powers And Duties 2-2-7: Compensation 2-2-1: COMMISSION ESTABLISHED: The parks and recreation commission for the city is hereby established. (1981 Code 109§1) 2-2-2: COMPOSITION; APPOINTMENT; TERMS OF OFFICE: The parks and recreation commission shall consist of seven (7) residents of the city, appointed by the mayor with the consent of the majority of the members of the city council. The members shall serve terms of three (3) years. The terms shall be staggered so that terms of at least two (2) members shall expire each year. Terms of members shall commence on February 1 and shall terminate on January 31 of the year of termination. A member whose term of office has expired shall serve until a successor has been appointed. (1981 Code 109 § 2) 2-2-3: OFFICERS: The February meeting shall be an organizational meeting at which the commission shall elect a chairperson and a vice chairperson from among its members. The terms of such officers shall be for a period of one year. (1981 Code 109 § 2; amd. 2003 Code) City of Mendot¢ Heights 2-2-4 2-2-6 I! 2-2-4: VACANCIES IN OFFICE: ( A. Causes For Vacancy: Any of the following may cause the office of a member to become vacated: Fl 1. Death; 2. Disability or failure to serve, as shown by failure to attend four (4) regularly scheduled meetings in any one calendar year; 3. Removal of residence from the city; or 4. Resignation in writing. B. Filling Vacancies: Vacancies shall be filled as soon as possible for the unexpired portion of the term by the mayor with the consent of the majority of the members of the city council. (1981 Code 109 § 6) 2-2-5: MEETINGS; PROCEDURES; RECORDS: The commission shall hold at least one meeting each month at a time regularly established and approved by the city council and shall hold such special meetings as may be necessary for the conduct of its business. The commission may waive a meeting for a stated sufficient cause with prior consent of the city council based upon a request from the chairman and the city staff. The commission shall adopt rules for the transaction of business and shall keep a record of its resolutions, transactions and findings, which record shall be maintained as a public record. The commission shall submit to the city council a true and correct copy of all of its minutes, recommendations and other reports. (Ord. 313, 2-18-1997) 2-2-6: POWERS AND DUTIES: The parks and recreation commission shall: A. Advise the city council on matters pertaining to parks and - recreational development programs and shall cooperate with city personnel in implementing the parks and recreation programs. - - B. Advise the city council on the establishment of written rules and regulations for the use, management and operation of the public parks and recreational facilities, the same to be approved by action of the council before being put into effect. City of Mendota Hedghts 2-2-6 2-2-7 C. If requested by the city council, prepare plans for the acquisition, development and improvement of the city public parks and recreational facilities and shall, if requested by the city council, develop a comprehensive plan for future park development and open space. D. If requested by the city council, prepare a capital improvements program for the purpose of determining priorities and apportioning costs of scheduled improvements. E. In performing the aforementioned duties and responsibilities, exhibit the initiative in formulating policies which will be responsive to the anticipated need and objectives of the community. (1981 Code 109 § 3) 2-2-7: COMPENSATION: The members of the parks and recreation commission shall serve without compensation but shall have the right to be reimbursed for expenses incurred in the performance of their duties. (1981 Code 109 § 5) City of Mendota Heights 1 1 1 1 t 1 1 1 1 fj 1 1 5775 Wayzata Boulevard, Suite 555, St. Louis Park, MN 55416 Telephone: 952.595.9636 Facsimile: 952.595.9837 planners@nacplanning.com I N T R O D U C T 1 O N The City of Mendota Heights has a long history and commitment to planning which has resulted in unique residential living environments and business centers. The City's first Comprehensive Plan was adopted in 1960, about 16 years before the Metropolitan Land Planning Act went into effect, requiring communities to do such planning. The City amended its Comprehensive Plan in 1979 to incorporate regional policies and guidelines pursuant to the Land Planning Act. The City has used its Comprehensive Plan to guide decisions for the past 38 years. Mendota Heights takes pride in the fact that it has accomplished the objectives of its plans. As a result, the community looks much like it was envisioned in 1960, with an emphasis on high quality residential neighborhoods, open space and parks and well -planned commercial and industrial areas. The community is almost fully developed and is now enjoying the fruits of its long-range vision and development policies. The remaining infill properties will continue to be built out, following the community's successful development philosophy. The City understands its role as part of the greater Metropolitan Region and will continue to plan accordingly. However, Mendota Heights will not compromise its growth philosophy or the interests of its citizens, at its final phase of community development. The fundamental objectives of this Comprehensive Plan are to continue and strengthen the City's traditions and development philosophy. The goals and policies found herein remain consistent with the original vision, to achieve a residential community with open spaces and quality neighborhoods that provide a desirable place to live and raise families. To this end, the City operates according to the objectives of the Mendota Heights Vision Statement, which is printed as follows. Mendota i�eights Elision Statement "Mendota Heights is a high quality, family oriented residential community, with the feel of the country and the amenities of a city. While n is centrally located in the metropolitan area, the Minnesota and Mississippi Rivers form a natural green belt around it, allowing the community to maintain a quiet, private way of life, unique in the Twin Cities. Mendota Heights achieved its successful business community and exceptional residential neighborhoods by following the detailed comprehensive plans set forth by its forefathers over forty years ago. Innovative and forward thinking on the part of community officials has resulted in a planned community which affords a quiet lifestyle for its residents while providing a full array of services and employment opportunities. The community has preserved an abundance of parks and open spaces, encourages spacious residential development, and has planned for diversified, high technology offices and business areas. Excellent schools and a well-educated populace complement the traditional but progressive character of the City. Civic pride and aesthetic excellence are high priorities in Mendota Heights. - MENDOTA HEIGHTS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE 1 PLANNING TACTICS I N T R O D U C T I O N The mission of the Mendota Heights City government is to preserve and enhance the quality of life in the community and to plan, direct, and implement orderly growth. This is achieved by encouraging and fostering: ❑ Community identity, citizen participation and open access to government decision -making. ❑ High quality cost effective public service. ❑ Conservative financial management and low tax rates. ❑ Development and maintenance of parks, trails, and open spaces. ❑ High standards of diversified housing stock. ❑ A commitment to strengthen and maintain community heritage through preservation of older, well -established neighborhoods. ❑ Further development of well -designed commercial and office projects. The Mayor and City Council, as the elected representatives of the people, supported by recommendations from the Parks and Planning Commissions, are responsible for establishing the policies necessary to carry out this mission. The staff of the City implement the policies established by the Council and provide direct services to the community, making the vision a reality." Adopted by the Mendota Heights City Council on June 3, 1986. In October of 1997, the process of developing an updated Comprehensive Plan for the City of Mendota Heights was initiated with a workshop held for members of many of the City's various issue -based commissions. Through a series of exercises, the workshop participants developed a list of principal issues, which it was believed were most important to the Mendota Heights community. Issues, which rose to the forefront from this effort, were impacts and issues related to the Minneapolis -St. Paul International Airport, proper development of the few remaining parcels of land, and continued attention to housing, open space, and parks. Another issue that was identified through this process included the continued impact of the regional highway system. A summary discussion of each of the issues identified during the initial phases of the Comprehensive Plan update process is located in Technical Plan C. Combined with the airport, these regional systems have challenged the City's ability to maintain the long-standing quality of its residential neighborhoods. I# was determined that the City could use the Comprehensive Plan process to work with other jurisdictions in the preservation of the community's many assets. This Comprehensive Plan is a formally adopted document stating the City 's goals and policies as they relate to land use, parks and open space, housing, transportation, utilities, and other issues. Sections on the Capital Improvement Program (CIP) and other Implementation efforts are also included. MENDOTA HEIGHTS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE 2 PLANNING TACTICS I N T R O D U C T I O N The community set out early in its incorporated history to create attractive residential neighborhoods by planning for aggressive protection and wise use of its abundant environmental assets. The rich abundance of woods, wetlands and open space areas that provide the natural feel of the community today, are a testament to the forethought and planning of Mendota Heights' forefathers. As the Twin Cities metropolitan area has grown up around it, Mendota Heights has actively pursued its objective of preserving the open spaces, which have made the community one of the region's most attractive places to live. Whether these efforts have been concentrated in active or passive uses, the environment has played a central role in the City's land use planning. Approaching the turn of the century, the values, which have resulted in livable, sought- after neighborhood development, are under assault. The regional interests in business development, highway construction, and airport growth threaten to consume the few remaining tracts of Mendota Heights land. This Plan has been formulated to achieve two primary goals: (1) meet the State Legislature's requirement that all metropolitan communities update their Comprehensive Plans at this time, and (2) see that the land use objectives originally spelled out in 1960, and reaffirmed through the years, are carried to their appropriate end. MENDOTA HEIGHTS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE 3 PLANNING TACTICS N ATURAL FEAT U Interstate 494 comprises the southern border of Mendota Heights. Its intersection with Interstate 35E acts as a primary "gateway" into the community as does Highway 55 as it crosses the Mendota Bridge, the Interstate 35E/Mississippi River crossing and Highway 110, as it enters the community from the east. The Mississippi and Minnesota Rivers and steep bluffs along with the natural open spaces of Fort Snelling State Historical Park, Minnesota Valley National Wildlife Refuge, Lilydale Regional Park, Dodge Nature Preserve, and Olivia T. Dodge Nature Center provide a greenbelt which surrounds and infiltrates Mendota Heights. The location of the aforementioned features and places is illustrated on the Community Features map located on the following page. The natural and open space areas, when combined with the 265 acres of community parks, three golf courses, Rogers, Augusta, and Le May Lakes along with the naturally rolling terrain and mature woodlands, create the appealing "natural open" setting of the City. These features and spaces are often located adjacent to the major roadways and as such create a unique, natural setting for small, intimate neighborhoods. The views of the River Valleys from adjacent bluffs and bridge crossings are nothing less than spectacular. The predominance of scenic, natural vistas and corridors within a community located so close to the core of the Twin Cities, is truly unique within the Metropolitan Region. This being the case, the City of Mendota Heights considers it paramount to protect and enhance the natural living environment for its residents. MENDOTA HEIGHTS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE 7 INVENTORY N A T U R A L FEATURES Environmental Features The natural environment is an important asset to residents of Mendota Heights. During the City's developing stages a strong emphasis has been placed on preserving high quality open spaces and wooded areas. This provides tremendous benefits to the residents and is an important focal point of the community. Residents enjoy numerous lakes and wetlands, open space parks, and the Mississippi and Minnesota Rivers. The following two maps illustrate the location of lakes, rivers, wetlands, and wooded areas within the City. For further information on habitat and species along the river valley and bluff lands, refer to Technical Plan A: Mississippi River Critical Area/Mississippi National River and Recreation Area (MRCA/MNRRA) Plan. M ENDOTA HEIGHTS 12 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE INVENTORY G RAP H I C PRO F 1 LE 11150 11453 10900 ..._..._......------------------ .--------- .................938.1..........................._...._..........__.__............. 7288 6565 4200 4300 4405 ......................_................................................................ ___ _. _................... ........ .`....._. 33012 --�` 2210 1641 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 1995 Estimates Mendota Heights' population increased from 6,565 persons to an estimated 10,757 persons from 1970 to 1995, In 1980, the Metropolitan Council forecasted 9,000 residents in 1990 and 11,000 residents in 2000, These projections are similar to the actual 1990 and projected 2000 populations. MENDOTA HEIGHTS Year Source: City of Mendota Heights Metropolitan Council . In 2020, the projected population for the City of Mendota Heights is 11,453 persons. The projected number of households is 4405, This assumes a 2.60 persons per household ratio. The City is experiencing its last significant period of growth in the 1990's. Future development will occur either by filling in the few remaining vacant parcels, further subdividing larger lots, or redevelopment. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE 19 INVENTORY D EMO G RAP H I C P R O FILE AGE DISTRIBUTION • Mendota Heights demonstrated an older population in 1990 than in 1970, This creates new challenges and may require additional services and alternative housing types: townhomes, assisted living, etc. + The median age of Mendota Heights residents in 1990 was 37.8. • In 1970, forty-six percent (46%) of the population was 19 years and under. In 1990 this age group represented only twenty-nine percent (29%) of the population. Nine percent (90/6) of the population in 1970 was age 55-74, compared to twenty-one percent (21%) in 1990. + In general, the younger age brackets contain more males, while the middle and older age brackets are comprised of more females. MEDIAN HOUSEFIOLD INCOME, 9989 $70,000 $60,000 $so,000 $403000 $301000 $20,000 $107000 $0 Mendota Heights M EN DOTA HEIGHTS Dakota Metro County 1970 10% 8% 6% ■Male L 4% OFemale o. 2% 0% r N co > O O ul Ln 0 r N cM to 0 C m Age 1990 10% 8% C 6% ■Male m n 4% p Female IL 2% 0% a v v a C v N a 0) 0 0 in o .--. N C N Age ti The median household income in 1989 was $60,514, significantly higher than the Metro Area's. + As shown in the table below, Mendota Heights also has a much higher percentage of married a Mendota Heights couples without children. This is D Dakota county likely a result of an aging population t7 Metro consisting of empty -nesters who are in their 50's and 60's. The City has a lower percentage of single persons and non -family households than the Metro Area, COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE 22 INVENTORY D E M O G RAP H I C PRO FILE Population & Household Projections The population of Mendota Heights is expected to gradually rise as the remaining five percent of the community develops. The population, household and employment projections for Mendota Heights are outlined in the following table. Population, Household, and Employment Forecasts 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 Population 61565 71288 8,400 10,224 11,125 11,426 Households 11553 21210 21800 31932 41279 41395 Employment 11254 21400 61000 71020 71897 81712 Household Size (Person/DU) 4.2 3.6 3.0 2.6 2.6 2.6 Source: City of Mendota Heights The Metropolitan Council estimates for Population, Households and Employment are provided in the following table. Metropolitan Council Estimates 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 Population 67565 71280 91381 11,200 13,900 15,900 Households 11641 21210 31302 41300 51700 71000 Employment 11140 21998 51805 71650 81400 91000 Household Size (Person/DU) 4.0 3.29 2.84 2.60 2.43 2.27 Source: Metropolitan Council The City of Mendota Heights estimates a total build -out population of approximately 11,500 people. The City's estimates are lower than those forecasted by the Metropolitan Council. The reason that the City estimates are lower is based upon the belief that the remaining residential land will only accommodate the addition of approximately 1,200 people within the community. The City does not anticipate that build out of the community will occur at the density suggested by the Metropolitan Council estimates because of careful planning since 1959 and adherence to and following the formally adopted Comprehensive Plan, M ENDOTA HEIGHTS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE 26 INVENTORY C O M M U N I T Y F A C ILI T I ES SCHOOLS Minnesota Independent School District IF I M serves West St. Paul, Mendota Heights, part of Eagan and Sunfish Lake. The District is comprised of five elementary schools, two middle schools and a high school. The majority of Mendota Heights' students attending public schools are enrolled at Henry Sibley High School. Total enrollment for the district in the 1998/1999 school year is estimated at 4,885 students. As of the 1990 census, a total of 1,982 school age children resided in Mendota Heights, thus comprising 40.5 percent of the district total. The following table provides a breakdown by public school of the number of students enrolled by grade and school at the start of the 1998/1999 school year. 1998-1999 Student Enrollment per Grade by Public School School Grades 1998A999 Enrollment per Grade 1998-1999 Total Enrollment Garlough Elementary School 1740 Charlton St., West St. Paul K 79 366 1 70 _ 2 69 3 76 4 72 Mendota Elementary School 1979 Summit Lane, Mendota Heights K 82 414 1 82 2 89 3 76 4 85 Somerset Elementary School 1355 Dodd Rd., Mendota Heights K_ 55 335 1 69 2 71 3 77 4 63 Heritage Middle School 181 W. Butler Av., West St. Paul 5 177 760 6 191 7 201 8 191 Friendly Hills Middle School 701 Mendota Heights Rd., Mendota Heights 5 206 783 6 200 7 177 8 200 Henry Sibley High School 1897 Delaware Av., Mendota Heights 9 430 11476 10 362 11 347 12 329 Source: School District #197 MENDOTA HEIGHTS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE 27 INVENTORY C O M M U N I T Y FA C I L I T I E S 19984999 Student Enrollment per Grade by Private School School Grades 19981999 Enrollment per Grade 1998-1999 Total Enrollment St. Thomas Academy 949 Mendota Heights Rd., Mendota Heights 7 73 694 8 90 _ 9 147 10 138 11 131 12 115 Visitation School 2455 Visitation Dr., Mendota Heights Montessori 36 530 K 22 1 21 2 22 3 22 4 24 5 24 6 24 7 42 8 41 9 77 10 64 11 72 12 61 Source: St. Thomas Academy; Visitation School The Community Facilities Map located on the following page illustrates the location of the various public, semi-public, institutional and private uses within Mendota Heights including schools, churches, synagogues and major employers. MENDOTA HEIGHTS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE 28 INVENTORY P A R K PLAN PLAN SUMMARY The City of Mendota Heights enjoys a park, open space, and trail system with zoo acres of City parkland and 21 miles of trails. The City also has Fort Snelling State Park, Big Rivers Regional Trail and other park facilities located within or near its boundaries. The park system is recognized as an important asset to the community because it provides opportunities for residents to relax, recreate, and enjoy nature, while also enhancing the physical landscape and improving property values. Previous comprehensive plans (1959 & 1979) and park plans (1971 & 1985) have guided the City in the development of its park system. As development has occurred, parkland has been dedicated to provide residents with recreational opportunities. Since the adoption of the 1979 Comprehensive Plan, the City has developed the following parks; Civic Center, Copperfield Ponds, Hagstrom-King, Kensington, Mendakota, Sibley, Valley View Heights and Victoria Highlands. The location of these new parks closely resemble Plan recommendations and reflect the City's commitment to providing park services to all residents as opportunities arise. The City of Mendota Heights currently has sufficient park acreage to serve its residents, although not all residents have equal access to those facilities. Future improvements will focus on updating existing facilities, adding facilities to neighborhoods that lack access to parks, and increasing the amount of open space. This may be accomplished through either park dedications or purchasing land. Trails are also an important component and focus of this plan because they connect neighborhoods to one another and the community to regional recreational opportunities. The Parks and Recreation Commission is an appointed citizen body responsible for evaluating park facility needs. The needs are determined based upon the adequacy and accessibility of existing facilities, the availability of a desired piece of land, and budget considerations. Recommendations are forwarded to the City Council during the City's annual budget and Capital Improvements Program (CIP) process. RECREATION PROGRAMMING The City of Mendota Heights currently has one part-time recreation program director. This person is responsible for coordinating adult and senior activities and non -athletic youth activities. The Mendota Heights Athletic Association coordinates youth athletic activities within the City. MENDOTA HEIGHTS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 71 GOALS AND POLICIES Goals 1. To provide the optimum amount of active and passive open space for the enjoyment of all Mendota Heights residents. 2. To provide a park system that assures the quality of facilities will match resident's desires and standards of living. 3. To use the park system as a means to enhance the environment of each neighborhood and the City as a whole. Policies 1. Encourage the preservation of open space by private property owners and the City. 2. Maximize the use of existing park facilities and consider establishment of additional facilities for all age groups when necessary, including facilities for the handicapped. 3. Explore new opportunities and continue to work cooperatively with School District #197, Fort Snelling State Park, and other entities to provide maximum recreational opportunities and avoid duplication. 4. Improve bicycle and pedestrian connections to City parks and other community destinations. 5. Provide each neighborhood of the City with open space and usable park playgrounds. EXISTING PARK FACILITIES Mendota Heights has 265 acres of City parks and open space. The following table identifies each City Park and its facilities. A brief discussion of the four types of parks that typically comprise a local park system is provided below. The descriptions and standards should serve as a guide. Other factors, such as proximity to regional or county parks, financing, or major trends in recreation, will also influence the evolution of the City's park system. MENDOTA HEIGHTS 72 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK P A R K P L A N Neighborhood Park Neighborhood parks are the basic unit of the park system and serve as the recreational and social focus of the neighborhood. They accommodate a wide variety of age and user groups, including children and adults. They create a sense of place by bringing together the unique character of the site with that of the neighborhood. Mendota Heights should seek to achieve a balance between active and passive neighborhood parks. Neighborhood parks range from 5-30 acres and serve a '/ mile area. Communities often will operate a joint neighborhood park with the school district and elementary schools. The City's neighborhood parks include Copperfield Ponds, Friendly Hills, Hagstrom-King, Ivy Hills, Marie, Valley, Valley View Heights, Victoria Highlands, and Wentworth. Community Park Community parks are designed to meet the recreational needs of several neighborhoods or larger segments of the community. They are intended for lighted ballfields and larger athletic facilities or community gatherings. They can also be designed to preserve unique landscapes and open spaces. They serve a'/2 mile to 5- mile radius. The City's community parks include Kensington,Valley, Roger's Lake, Mendakota, and Sibley Athletic Complex, Natural Resource Area Natural resource areas are areas set aside to preserve significant or unique landscapes. They are often, but not always, properties unsuitable for development with steep slopes, drainageways, and ravines or wetlands. In addition, there may be locations where local tree protection, shoreland and critical area ordinances, or state and local wetland ordinances restrict development in some way. Natural Resource areas include Friendly Marsh and Copperfield Ponds. There are also a number of regional, county and private facilities within or near the City's borders. MENDOTA HEIGHTS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 73 (aigeYod) ■ � ■ s ■ ■ a ■ ■ : ■ e lallol Buleog paZuoloyy ■ -�oN IIaVSPue9 ■ r»,I�,ed ■ ■ ■ m ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ a�la � ® ■ fiu9eHS ■ HU1M ® ■ ■ ,teHooH (s)ia11a4S ■ w w W O ■ ■ ■ ■ (salgel 'sllu�) ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ 0 O ■ eaya!w!d ryauM!n63 B ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ Reld ® IlegRalloA ■ ■ ■ ■ � yno� ., M �'+ m ■ � m n .�, m IleglaHse9 ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ sleual ■ ■ ■ ■ e ■ ■ o O y O o iaaaoS Y > ■ ■ ■ Y Y ® ■ ■ e s pegaseg ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ v s ■ IlegUaS Veil ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ O ® ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ (Puad) a d eav a n ■ a. ■ n � ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ v ■ ■ ■ amleN :aay _ _ m % ? � z � _ � > o W a < d c _ a �y ^'� '^ a .y o � 3 „�❑Y3 �� VLL Qx�df Um �E Op`aQL _`N S C� `v w`� n T ` v n n� � v -yam, a m � c w� t c m 9ix� ��aA �e o f c �� �u Ex a� o3 �3t Prc es '�E�_ g ao A� as na y-m 3 o - .`c 33 eci vt _ _ `a m U m Y n_ — � � S m t � a v�_ m _ � o c c _ m u_ y zi�_m Yu �z �o°�3 m�>�''»33>��� iUa uw E G QLL zw° a°Y° di Y 0 2 F c� U W U u! E vi op �- U - oE9e _ __LLB -pmc x� iav� E � o c �� U� i.--ems nNO>y m�. <�e>°��u uUS _ _ ^v1LF� 'In z a 3. LL W Z x O w a W wr K I� 74 P A R K P L A N Fort Snelling State Park: the largest park with 611 of its 2,642 acres located in the City. Fort Snelling State Park is a recreational state park offering swimming, large group and family picnic grounds, a boat launch, interpretive center and historical areas, trails, and scenic overlooks. Most of the park's active facilities are located on the Bloomington side of the River, requiring most Mendota Heights residents to drive or bike across the Interstate #494 and Mendota bridges. The Mendota Heights portion of the park is left primarily as a natural area as it contains extensive floodplain marsh habitat. Facilities located in Mendota Heights support less intensive uses, such as biking, hiking, cross country skiing, and fishing. The Sibley and Fairbault historic sites are also located on the Mendota Heights side of the River. Big Rivers Regional Trail: developed in 1996 by Dakota County along the old Union Pacific Railroad right-of-way, this trail enables residents to bike, walk and roller blade along the Minnesota and Mississippi Rivers. This trail serves as an important link to other communities and has greatly improved the awareness and accessibility of the River. Harriet Island-Lilydale Regional Park: located just north of Mendota Heights, this park is managed by the City of St. Paul. The lower portion of the park in the City of Lilydale is planned to remain passive open space. A beach and concessions area is planned, but highly unlikely due to wetland issues. The area also has a ramp for boat access to the River. A trail through the park, separate from the roadway, is planned to link St. Paul to the Big Rivers Regional Trail. Dodge Nature Center: a 170-acre private facility dedicated to the restoration of native plant and animal communities. The nature preserve provides excellent educational programs and events. School District 197: The City and School District work cooperatively to provide for joint use of facilities and recreation programs within the community. Play equipment, two softball fields, soccer and T-ball are provided at the Mendota and Somerset Elementary Schools. Friendly Hills Middle School is utilized for soccer, two softball fields and fitness programs. Tennis, baseball, softball, track and soccer are all accommodated at Sibley High School. Other Private Facilities /Open Space ❑ Mendakota Country Club (18 hole private golf course) ❑ Somerset Country Club (18 hole private golf course) ❑ Mendota Heights Par 3 (9 hole public golf course) ❑ Acacia Park Cemetery ❑ Resurrection Cemetery ❑ St. Thomas Academy ❑ Visitation School MENDOTA HEIGHTS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 75 P A R K PLAN PARKS, OPEN SPACE, AND TRAIL NEEDS Parks City Park needs can be determined by evaluating the number, size, and accessibility of parks. It is often recommended a park system contain 25 acres of park for each 1,000 population, which is equal to 1,089 square feet per person. To meet this standard, the City would need to provide 286 acres of parkland (based on the projected year 2020 population of 11,453 persons when fully developed). The City currently has 265 acres of park, and essentially meets the standard. Some additional parkland may be obtained as the few remaining larger parcels develop. It is also important to evaluate residents' access to parks. Residents are typically willing to walk % to '/ mile to reach a neighborhood park. Major roads, railroad tracks, and bodies of water also restrict access. The following Park Service Area Map identifies park service areas based on distance and barriers. As the Map demonstrates, most residents are served well by the City 's park system. The following three areas of the City are under served by the City's park system: 1. North of Somerset Country Club and east of Dodd Road. This neighborhood is lacking a City Park facility. However, most of these residents are within walking distance of Cherokee Regional Park in West St. Paul. 2. North of Highway 110, east of Dodd Road and south of Wentworth Avenue (Somerset). Although the Sibley Athletic Complex is located in this area, it does not serve a neighborhood function. A new neighborhood park should be developed as some of the larger lots re -subdivide. 3. North of Highway 110 and west of Lexington Avenue, there is a ball field at the Civic Center site. Marie Park is the nearest permanent park facility (aside from the aforementioned ball field) and for many residents is more than ''/z mile away on the other side of Lexington Avenue. There are limited opportunities for a larger neighborhood park because the area is nearly fully developed. However, a mini -neighborhood park should be developed to serve the residents. The City has identified several sites for additional park and open space. The sites are identified as follows. Areas of Interest ❑ Resurrection Cemetery "Break-OfP' area ❑ Visitation School property ❑ St. Thomas property off Mendota Heights Road MENDOTA HEIGHTS 76 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK P A R K P L ❑ Acacia property north of Acacia Boulevard ❑ Foss homestead by Wentworth Park ❑ Acacia area TIF acquired property ❑ Somerset area Mendota Heights will pursue additional park and open space land to the extent it becomes available and is within the resources of the City. Trails Trails for biking, walking, and roller blading have become very popular in recent years. Twenty-one (21) miles of trails currently extend through portions of the City's neighborhoods. These trails are both off- and on -road and serve as important connections for recreational opportunities and travel. Improved trail connections are important because many residential areas are divided by highways and arterial roads. The recent construction of the Big Rivers Regional Trail along the Minnesota River has also heightened the awareness and demand for improved access to the river valley. Access to the Big Rivers Regional Trail is difficult due to the significant elevation changes. As a result, many areas of the community cannot be easily accessed on bikes, roller blades or foot from other areas of the community. Additional or improved trail connections are needed to provide residents access to City parks and other recreational opportunities in the region. Trail connections and improvements planned by the City are shown on the following map and are listed below. ❑ Copperfield/Centex Area Trails ❑ Delaware Avenue/T.H. #110 ❑ Lexington Avenue south of T.H. #110 ❑ Ski Trails in Mendakota Golf Course ❑ Valley Park/Par 3 Golf Course ❑ MRCA/MNRRA Plan Trail Connections — MRCA/MNRRA trail improvements and who will be responsible for their development are listed below. (for a more detailed description of these improvements, please refer to the MRCA/MNRRA Plan located in Technical Plan A.) • Overlook to I-494 (Dakota County) • Mendota Bridge to Big Rivers Trail (Dakota County) • I-35E to Big Rivers Trail (Mn/DOT) • Big Rivers Trail to Lilydale Regional Park/St. Paul (Dakota County) MENDOTA HEIGHTS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 77 Valley Park to Big Rivers Trail (City of Mendota Heights) • Wachtler Avenue to Highway 13 (City of Mendota Heights) Highway 13 from Victoria Avenue to Lilydale Road (Mn/DOT) MENDOTA HEIGHTS K P L A N COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK f�J of z 3 0�l m a i 3 F - � � 7 U L^�E o c =•'v t � Z � m � � vU��� _� nY °1�a `va � � � _ � � d 0 a �� � B � � J 9 fined ;g }saM c ' ...�. E o�'.m U U o_ Y � � -_ Y � s � � m Y K� a _ �� � ada Y Y� ZYi Nye Q Ka JQ� � U. H o -SY�z dYY U'x .. Cm�m.. a Ya z_ x ��aO�f-JQxK t ���U o O� J Z 2 Y N}� �I .3 �� ��=� r z zwJ-wQzw I ..^ w wOxz�c °z ���z� om>�N'a �KQ�wQwoQuw s-tea c LL LL S _ Y � Cc LL' > > � 3 � � i s n n n � N U Q m'O O y QC. vUU ' w^ ~O .- w a�e� ysi�uns z e- m m m. W 79 1 1 1 1 LJ ri 1 1 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO.03-89 RESOLUTION AMENDING RESOLUTION 91-94, ESTABLISHING A PARK CONTRIBUTION FORMULA BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Mendota Heights that Resolution No. 91-94 be amended in its entirety to read as follows: PARK DEDICATION FEE POLICY Subdivision 1 The City Council recognizes it is essential to the health, safety and welfare of the residents of Mendota Heights that the character and quality of the environment be considered to be of major importance to the planning and development of the City. In this regard, the manner in which land is developed and used is of high priority. The presentation of land for park, playground, and public open space purposes as it relates to the use and development of land for residential, commercial, and industrial purposes is essential to the maintaining of a healthful and desirable environment for all citizens of the City. We must not only provide these amenities for our citizens today, we must also be mindful of our future citizens. It is recognized by the City Council that the demand for park, playground and public open space within a municipality is directly related to the density and intensity of development permitted and allowed within any given area. Urban -type developments mean greater numbers of people and higher demands for park, playground and public open space. To disregard this principle is to inevitably over -tax existing facilities and thus diminish the quality of the environment for all. It is the policy of the City of Mendota Heights that the following standards and guidelines for the dedication of land for park, playground and open space purposes (or cash contributions in lieu of such dedication) in the subdividing and developing of land within the City shall be directly related to the density and intensity of each subdivision and development. Subdivision 2 The owners of land being subdivided shall dedicate to the City a reasonable portion of the land for use as public parks, playgrounds, trails or open space. The reasonable portion shall not be less than 10% of the total land in the proposed subdivision. The City may determine the location and configuration of any land dedicated, taking into consideration the suitability of the land for its intended purpose and future needs of the community for park, playground, trail, or open space property. This paragraph shall apply to all additional lots created through plats or subdivisions. It shall not apply to previously existing lots that develop or redevelop without requiring a replat or further subdivision. Subdivision 3 At the City's option, the subdivider shall contribute an amount in cash, in lieu of all or a portion of the land required under subdivision 1, according to the following fee guidelines: Single Family Residential Townhomes/Duplexes/Condos Apartments Office/Industrial Property Commercial Subdivision 4 $�508-2700 per dwelling unit $�50�2700 per dwelling unit $1380-2700 per dwelling unit 10% of current market value of the unimproved land as determined by the County Assessor 10% of current market value of the unimproved land as determined by the County Assessor Prior to the dedication of the required property, the subdivider shall provide the City with an acceptable title opinion or title insurance policy addressed to the City that insures the title and the City's proposed interest in the property. In any dedication of required land, the subdivider must transfer good and marketable title to the City, free and clear of any mortgages, liens, encumbrances or assessments, except easements or minor imperfections of title acceptable to the City. If this land is not formally dedicated to the City with the final plat, the subdivider shall record all deeds of conveyance of the property to the City at the same time as the final plat or other appropriate division documents. Subdivision 5 At the City's option, the following properties shall not be accepted for purposes of the owner's compliance with Subdivisions 1 or 2 of this Resolution: a) Land dedicated or obtained as easements for storm water retention, drainage, roadway and other utility purposes. b) Land which is unusable or of limited use, and c) Land that is protected wetlands/floodplain area. Subdivision 6 Cash contributions for single-family residential development will be one and payable at the time of final plat approval by the City. Cash contributions for multi -family residential or commercial, office or industrial development will be due and payable at the time of final plat approval by the City, or at the option of the City, all or a portion of such. Payment may be deferred until building permits are issued at the option of the City. Cash contributions for single-family residential developments will be based on the number of new developable lots created and for multi -family residential developments will be based on the number of units included in the complex. Cash contributions for commercial, office and industrial developments will be based on the fair market value of the gross area created as a result of the development. Subdivision 7 Any cash contribution received pursuant to Subdivision 2 of this Section shall be placed in a separate City fund and used only for park, playground, trail or open space purposes. Subdivision 8 The City Council, at its discretion, may waive or reduce the requirements of this Resolution when the subdivision includes a City -assisted development or redevelopment area or achieves some other public purpose and the requirements would create a financial hardship for the project. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Mendota Heights this 16th day of September, 2003, ATTEST: SIGN: City Clerk Kathleen Swanson Mayor John Huber Sewer & Water Permits Sewer $25.00 Water $10.00 Planning and Zoning Fees Variance Residential $100,00 Commercial $150,00 Vacation $250,00 Wetlands Permit Residential 135.00 Commercial $175,00 Critical Area Review 100.00 Minor CAO Review $50.00 Zoning Ordinance Amendment $250.00 Conditional Use Permit $350,00 Rezoning $350,00 CUP for PUD $500,00 Concept Plan Review $250,00 Subdivision $750.00 Lot split $350,00 Comprehensive Plan Amendment $750,00 Park Dedication Fees$ Single Family Residential $2700 per dwelling unit Townhomes/Duplexes/Condos $2700 per dwelling unit Apartments $2700 per dwelling unit Office/Industrial Property 10% of current market value of the unimproved land as determined by the County Assessor Commercial 10% of current market value of the unimproved land as determined by the County Assessor *Permit Fee Refund Policy— The building official may authorize refunding of not more than 80 percent of the permit fee paid when no work has been done under a permit issued in accordance with the building code. The building official may authorize refunding of not more than 80 percent of the plan review fee paid when an application for a permit for which a plan review has been paid is withdrawn or canceled before any plan reviewing is done. The building official shall not authorize refunding of any fee paid except on written application filed by the original permittee not 1 L 1 1 1 1 1 1 iJ f February 10, 2004 Memo to: Parks and Recreation Commission From: Guy Kullander, Parks Project Manger Subject: Trails - Future maintenance costs Background Information for Council / Commission Workshop City has built approximately 21 miles of eight -foot wide bituminous trails Crack repair (routing and filling) costs: $600 to $1,000.00 per mile Crack occurs every 50 feet = 100 per mile x 8 ft = 800 lineal feet @ $1 to $1.50 per It Surface treatment: a. Seal coat @ $2,500 to $3,500.00 per mile (7 to 10 years) b. Slurry seal @ $6,000 to $7,000,00 per mile (7 to 10 years) c. Thin overlay (1-1/2 inch thick) @ $11,000 to $14,000.00 per mile d. Total replacement @ $25,000 to $30,000.00 per mile Note: Cracks must be addressed prior to "a, b, or c" above. 4. Budget for 2004 includes $20, 000.00 for trail maintenance Recommendation: Rehabilitate entire system over four-year period beginning in 2004: i. Seal cracks - 21 miles @ $18,000.00 b. Seal/slurry- 18 miles @ $92,000.00 c. Thin overlay- 3 miles @ $39,000,00 Staff time &contingency @ 10% $15.000.00 $ 165,000.00 Current budget for 2004 000.00 Budget in 2005: $48,000.00 Budget in 2006: $48,000.00 Budget in 2007: $49,000.00 In 2008 lower budget to $30,000.00 per year and establish a 7 to 10 year cycle of maintenance, repair, and replacement (if necessary) of all trail segments. February 10, 2004 Memo to: Parks and Recreation Commission From: Guy Kullander, Parks Project Manager Subject : Playgrounds -Future maintenance/replacement costs Background Information for Council / Commission Workshop The City installed and maintains playgrounds in eleven city parks The last of the timber play structures, installed in seven neighborhood parks in the early 1970's, was removed in 2003. Playground equipment suppliers recommend replacing play components that receive: a. Heavy use: 7 to 9 years b. Moderate use: 8 to 12 years c. Occasional use: 10 to 15 years 4. Improvement plans in 2004 propose the installation of new or additional play components in five parks, with a total budget of $91,000,00, a. Roger's Lake Park Skate Park (ramps/jumps/obstacles) @ $27,000.00 b. Wentworth Park (replaces timber unit removed in 2003) @ $29,000.00 c. Victoria -Highlands Park (additional components) @ $14,000.00 d. Ivy Hills Park (additional components) @ $12,000,00 e. Kensington Park (additional components) @ $9,000,00 5. Current cost for replacement of all existing/in-place playground components: a. Play components 0 to 7 years old: $154,000.00 b. Play components 7 to 12 years old: $ 35,000.00 c. Play components 13 years or older: $4792000,00 Note: Following passage of Parks Referendum in 1989 seven existing neighborhood playgrounds received new play components and several new parks and playground facilities were constructed in 1990 & 1991. 6. City Council has approved a budget of $4,000.00 in 2004 for replacement of worn or broken parts and/or replacement of components) that are unsafe or un-repairable in eleven parks. Recommendation: 1. Determine funding source for replacement costs of play structure or play components that are no longer safe to use: a. Capital Improvement - Special Park Fund ...or.. 0 b. Maintenance item to be funded from the Parks Maintenance Budget (General Taxes) 2. During the next 5 to 10 years approximately $500,000.00 in funding may be required for replacement of play structures and components. -, J 1 1 �l 1 �1 I� 1 1 1 i [� CHAPTER IV GOALS AND POLICIES This chapter suggests policies that can guide the City of Mendota Heights in Lite day to day implementation of its park and recreation facility plan. The goals and policies included here document the intent of the city to enhance the overall community environment by providing appropriate recreation facilities. This chapter also examines some questions on the city's relationship with other recreation providers. Overall Goals In previous planning efforts, the City of Mendota Heights evaluated future park needs, but never formally adopted goals and policies to guide the development of their park system. The statement below is recommended as an overall goal for the City of Mendota Heights. The overall goal far park and recreation planning should be to provide an adequate supply of recreation space, to offer an ample choice among recreational facilities, and to assure peoplg that the quality of facilities will match their desires and standards of living. This general statement is further defined by the following three goals: 1. To provide a variety of facilities for both active and passive recreation. 2. To provide a park system to serve all community residents, regardless of age, sex or economic group. 3. To use the park system as a means to enhance the environment of each neighborhood and the city as a whole. Park Hierarchy Concept The concept of a hierarchy of parks helps the city to recognize the different roles and purposes various parks are intended to fulfill. While few parks perfectly fit the model for each type of park, the suggested standard does serve as a guideline for appropriate acquisition, design development and use of the various parks within the community. Overall, parks should be designed and developed to enhance their role as unique components of the city-wide system. Table 7 outlines the suggested park hierarchy system standards for Mendota Heights. Further policies have been grouped below by type of park. Neighborhood Parks 1. The primary functions of the neighborhood park are to serve the recreational needs of the surrounding neighborhood and to help establish a sense of neighborhood identity. lAdapted from the Orleans County, New York, Park and Recreation Plan. � k ; { a k � k ] j [ ) j -�_ 2/ J ;; _ � _2- \[ | (] \\� �\ }\ \\�\. \\ \\ \\\ �\��\\( \! \)){\ %]�®§ __i l;22za= §f\ƒ!2� „ �<� )\i� ){( _ ( ( /{]} . -,;. � )°;: - - )ƒ}! !f\§ �|;{] ®\!! —>�&� »2Z; ) ! _ j;|_ _ �\ - - �®^� `{`)[\ /�§�ij\ k� j\k\\ ^{}ƒ%«f m : ;!. _, a�;71; J� ;l,Isz=� _ `®�`) §§r4#!,. �i\§\;/E� ; ) - [f|!{!§ 33 - E>E;I;$]i �; {I!!&;,» . -_ ;liar \)ƒj){«!a[; ) < \_ )k}\/}\ )/\\\\(\\\ ±/l;;:l7£\[ ;\ k � �_.� � \ � k k � � � | � ! )}2 ) } k ) � uE! u a ) a 2. When neighborhood parks are acquired and designed, consideration should be given to surrounding land uses, and care taken to avoid duplication of facilities within the same service area. 3. Preserving and enhancing a site's natural characteristics shall be an important development priority and will help maintain each site's individuality and identity in the neighborhood. 4. Neighborhood parks should provide something for all age groups. Community Playfield/Athletic Park 1. To facilitate flexibility of use and ease of maintenance, a minimum size of 25 acres shall be established. 2. Community -scale organized recreation shall be programmed into community playfields and school properties. 3. Community playfields/athletic parks shall be located and designed to minimize the conflict of lights, traffic, noise, etc., with adjacent neighborhoods. 4. The need for community playfield facilities is best determined by an analysis of program demand that considers facilities available at area schools. Many of the parks in Mendota Heights serve dual duty. For example, Valley Park serves both neighborhood park and community needs. This is entirely appropriate provided that the same considerations are given to planning the neighborhood park component (location in proximity to residential service area) as are given to freestanding facility. Implementation Tools Tools for implementing the park plan include the park dedication ordinance, city zoning and subdivision ordinances and capital improvements budgeting from park dedication fees, general fund or other sources such as donations, grants and bond issues. Park Dedication Ordinance The idea behind park dedication is that developers share responsibility for the cost of providing new city residents with park facilities. While new residential development obviously brings new people to the community, commercial and industrial development also affect community growth by providing jobs and services. Table 8 outlines the recommended park dedication requirements for Mendota Heights. The percentage of land dedication and cost per unit requirement vary with residential development density. This recognizes that higher intensity land uses will need a proportionately higher percentage of the land area for park needs; however, the cost per unit will decline as density increases. Below are suggested policies regarding the park dedication requirement. Table 9 Recommended Park Dedication Requirements RESIDENTIAL Land dedication or cash contribution will be based on the following table. Dwelling Units Land Dedication Cash Contribution* Per Acre (% of Net Land Area) Per Unit 0-1 Single Family 5% $450 2-3 Single Family 10% 450 4-5 Duplex 12% 400 6-7 Townhouse 14% 325 8-10 Townhouse 16% 325 10-16 Apartment/Condo 18% 275 Over 16 Apartment/Condo 18% 275 Plus an additional .5% for every 1 D.U./Acre over 16 D.U./Acre COMMERCIAL OFFICE AND INDUSTRIAL Five percent (5%) of the gross land area or fait market price *Residential cash contribution amounts should be reviewed every third year. 61 1. The park dedication fee schedule (for fee in lieu of land) shall be reviewed every third year and adjusted as necessary to ensure that it is adequate for the neighborhood park needs and is comparable to land and construction costs. 2. Commercial and industrial land uses should also be subject to park dedication fees, calculated on a percentage of the gross land area or market value. 3. Park dedication fees are intended to meet the increased demand on a city's park and recreation facilities generated by new development, whether residential, commercial or industrial. Residential development primarily generates the need for neighborhood parks. High priority should be given, therefore, to funding neighborhood park acquisition, and developing and improving park dedication funds. General Funds The city may transfer monies from the general fund to augment the park capital improvement budget derived from park dedication fees. As these funds are generated by property tax levies, park improvements compete with all. other city functions for these dollars. General funds can appropriately be used in park improvements where the facilities or improvements are community -wide in nature (serve much of the community) or are targeted toward upgrading existing parks. Grants Grant funds are available on a much more limited basis, with the competition for grant dollars much more fierce than five or ten years ago. The future of grants is uncertain as even traditional sources such as the Federal Land and Water Conservation Fund (LAWCON) and State Legislative Committee on Minnesota Resources (LCMR) face budget cutbacks. The city should continue to he aware of grant programs, maintain eligibility and apply for them, but not rely on them to meet their needs. Donations/Gifts There may be potential in the community for gifts to the city for park and recreation purposes, either in terms of land, cash or other assets, or volunteer labor. Gifts and donations can be encouraged by keeping the community informed of needs and the potential tax benefits for corporations or individuals. Community groups may seek outlets for community service or recognition. Bonds Because of the large costs of park development, it is often necessary to supplement park dedication fees and general revenues with funds from general obligation bond sales. Bonds must be voted on and approved by the public, so it is important that the public understands the need for and benefits of the bond issue and the consequences of not approving the bond sale. Improvements from a bond sale should benefit a large sector of the public to ensure widespread public support. 62 Joint Powers Agreements The city may be able to implement some improvements via formal joint powers agreements with groups such as the school district or neighboring communities. Opportunities for cooperative arrangements are discussed later in this chapter. Considerations far Acquisition and Development Priorities In setting criteria for budgeting priorities, the following considerations are suggested: 1. Availability or adequacy of existing facilities 2. Population served 3. Time frame of need (present or projected deficiency) 4. Time frame of opportunity -Will this opportunity be lost if not taken now? This policy could relate to land availability or to funding availability such as grants or cost sharing opportunities 5. Potential method and alternatives for implementation (park dedication, grant, cooperative agreements or joint funding with another agency, bond issues, etc.) Roles and Responsibilities; Relationships With Other Agencies The City of Mendota Heights is but one of several providers of recreation programs, facilities and services for the community. Other recreation providers include the public and private schools, private enterprises such as the golf courses and country clubs, and other units of government. The a11-volunteer Mend -Eagan Athletic Association provides valuable services for the community in organizing and conducting youth athletic programs. Among other units of government there are the neighboring communities of West St. Paul, Eagan and St. Paul as well as higher units of government such as Dakota County, the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources and the United States Fish and Wildlife Service. The city should recognize the importance of these other entities in the recreation arena and seek to cooperate with them as much as possible to avoid duplication of facilities and services. The long range plans of other providers should be considered in future planning by the city. The next few years represent a critical opportunity for Mendota Heights to explore and develop stronger relationships with other agencies. There are several reasons why this is a critical time to evaluate these relationships: o The City of Eagan has indicated its programs and facilities will soon be filled by Eagan residents and Mendota Heights residents relying on those programs will be displaced. o Mendota Heights has recognized the need to provide more athletic facilities for its residents. It behooves the city to seek the most cost-effective means of providing for its needs, whether it be developing its own facilities or utilizing joint -agreements with other agencies. 63 o West St. Paul is in the process of building some new athletic facuties as a result of their recent bond issue. This may or may not affect the availability of athletic facilities owned by the school district. o There is presently a climate of receptivity for exploring stronger relationships among both the City of West St. Paul and ISD #197. o Other units of government may be at key stages in planning or evaluating their own programs. o The City of St. Paul is in the process of preparing the master plan for Lilydale Regional Park. o Dakota County is in the process of reevaluating its bikeway program. Ideas and Suooestions to Cooperative Efforts Mendota Heights should take apro-active role in investigating opportunities for greater cooperation with other agencies. Cooperative efforts could range from informal meetings to legal joint powers agreements. The following list of ideas is intended to stimulate thought on current and future opportunities for Mendota Heights. At this point, they have not necessarily been evaluated in terms of economic or political feasibility; they are merely outlined here, arranged in broad categories with some brief discussion. I. Staff Opportunities A. Recreation Services -Mendota Heights presently has one part time recreation program director. Other program services are provided by Community Education - ISD #197, Eagan and West St. Paul. As the city's population grows and as Eagan discontinues service to Mendota Heights residents, Mendota Heights will feel pressure for more recreation services coordination, particularly for adult athletics. It is difficult to say when the need for more than one half-time position will be felt --it could be one to five years or longer. Some alternatives to meet this need: - Keep staff level at one-half time. - Go to full time staff or equivalent. - Expand service delivery through cooperation with West St. Paul or ISD #197. Consider merger of recreation program services with West St. Paul or broker for these services through West St. Paul. (Minnetonka and Hopkins presently have a joint recreation department that could be used as a case study for evaluating joint services with West St. Paul.) Be Maintenance Services - Mendota Heights will need an increased maintenance staff as additional park acres and facilities are acquired and developed. This will be particularly true if an athletic complex is developed in the future. At present, it is acknowledged that additional maintenance efforts are needed in the winter for snow removal from ice rinks. Additional maintenance and grooming efforts could also be 64 used for city trails which receive infrequent attention. At current staffing levels (two full time and one part time seasonal), the existing parks are well maintained in the spring, summer and fall seasons. Alternatives for maintenance staffing levels include: - Stay at current staff levels and accept somewhat reduced levels of service as requirements increase. - Increase city staff with additional seasonal or part time staff. - Explore cooperative agreements for maintenance services with West St. Paul or ISD ��197. Efficiencies in staffing or equipment may be available. - Explore ways to use volunteers to assist labor intensive maintenance efforts. (i.e. perhaps Mend -Eagan could remove snow from rinks, youth groups might wish to assist in trail maintenance efforts.) The use of volunteers is not a panacea, but is used successfully in some communities for special purposes. II. Other Coordination Efforts In addition to potential coordination for staff arrangements, other cooperative efforts have potential: A. Cooperation with ISD ;'1197 - Coordinate delivery of recreation programs and cross reference each other's programs in brochures, city newsletters, etc. - Coordinate scheduling of athletic facilities at Sibley. High School. - Explore potential for joint facility development and expansion at Sibley. There may 6e room to add additional facilities, install lighting for extra hours of use, etc. B. West St. Paul - In addition to potential for coordinating recreation and/or maintenance services, programs for groups such as the senior citizens could be evaluated. West St. Paul has strong senior programs that already serve many Mendota Heights residents. - Separate agreements could pursue shared use of the ice arena in West St. Paul. C. Dakota County - Invite Dakota County representatives to Park and Recreation Commission meetings on a periodic, perhaps annual, basis so that they can apprise each other of their plans and needs. D. City of St. Paul - Request an active role in review of plans and the timetable for development of Lilydale Regional Park. - Monitor future plans and programs (annual meeting). !� E. Minnesota Department of Natural Resources - Invite DNR staff to a meeting on an annual basis to review and discuss plans and progress on Fort Snelling State Park and the Minnesota Valley State Trail. F. Mend -Eagan Athletic Association - Seek liaison position between Mend -Eagan and Parks and Recreation Commission to establish and maintain good communication. The Mend -Eagan representative could be allotted a formal, voting position on the commission, or asked to serve as an ex-officio member. G. West St. Paul Athletic Association - If Mendota Heights and West St. Paul pursue more formal coordination efforts in recreation services delivery, the West St. Paul and Mend -Eagan Athletic Associations may likewise wish to pursue coordination or consolidation. H. Dodge Nature Center, Country Clubs - The city should continue coordination with these private enterprises in providing trails and opportunities for cross-country skiing. Summary It should be remembered that coordination in and of itself will not solve all problems. At the minimum, coordination will lead to better communication and understanding of each other's goals and needs. Other considerations on coordination include: o It can lead to efficiencies of scale in service delivery and operations and save money. o Each side needs a clear understanding of its own goals and needs, so these can be communicated and mutual benefit sought. o One side will not seek to reap windfall benefits at the expense of the other. The goal is to seek common ground and mutual satisfaction of needs. o Coordination will take time and effort to establish and administer. It is an on -going process that requires attention and nurturing to succeed. CHAPTER V COMMUNITY TRAILS Introduction The purpose of the Community Trails Plan is to develop a coordinated program for trail facility improvements based on an assessment of existing and projected needs. While the plan is geared toward recreational trail use, it also recognizes the very basic function of trails as transportation corridors. Formation of the trails plan follows three basic steps. First, an inventory is made of existing trails, both within Mendota Heights and in adjacent areas. Trail needs are determined by demand, analysis of likely trail origins and destinations, and discussions with related parties. Second, potential corridors are selected based on review of man-made and natural linear elements. Selection of the corridors is then determined and appropriate design standards recommended. Existing Trails and Pathways A number of formal and informal trails have been developed intentionally by the City of Mendota Heights or resulted from pedestrian desire lines. A summary of these trails by use type follows. Bicycles Segments of a bicycle backbone system have been developed recently through the city's efforts. These trails exist as on -road signed lanes, trails adjacent the road, or independent trails. Most surfaces are bituminous and have appropriate signing and striping. Existing bicycle segments as of January 1986 include: 1. A two -block segment on Pilot Knob Road between I-494 and Mendota Heights Road. 2. A north -south link which runs east from Trunk Highway 55 on Mendota Heights Road to the eastern edge of I-35E then north adjacent the interstate right-of-way, crossing the interstate on Wagon Wheel Trail, continuing north on Timmy Street and Lexington Avenue to Marie Avenue. On Marie Avenue, the trail turns east to its terminus at Victoria Road. r' � ,n 3. A short segment on Mendota Heights Road east of F�agtl Road. 4. A trail segment which parallels Huber Drive from Apache Lane North and east to Delaware Avenue. In addition, Dakota County has designated several on -road bike lanes within Mendota Heights. This designation is largely insignificant due to the lack of existing signing or appropriate striping and the insufficient funding available for implementation. Roadways carrying this designation include portions of Mendota Heights Road, Lexington Avenue, Marie Avenue and Delaware Avenue. Pedestrian Pedestrian facilities in Mendota Heights are limited and vary in type, quaility and neighborhood location. Pedestrian use does occur on neighborhood streets and 67 those trail links previously developed for bicycle use. In addition, formal or informal pedestrian trails occur in the following areas: 1. A passive trail with a grass surface runs the length of Valley Park. 2. An informal trail within the unused TH 149 right-of-way links the Friendly Hills neighborhood to the South Plaza Drive commercial area. 3. Short trail segments or Linkages have been developed within many of the existing municipal parks. The pedestrian system for the most part lacks consistency and must rely upon city streets for any pedestrian movement. Minimal recreation related trails exist. Those which do occur are primarily in the park system. Other destination movements such as school children must rely upon existing street systems. Cross -Country Skiing Cross-country skiing within Mendota Heights is localized to four areas including: 1. Somerset Country Club - a private golf course 2. The School Forest property north of Mendota Heights Road at Huber Drive 3. Valley Park 4. Dodge Nature Center - a private nature preserve Of these locations, the city provides trail grooming at the School Forest site and Valley Park. Dodge Nature Center provides grooming of their facilities while Somerset Country Club does not. Equestrian/Snowmobile Trails Trails set for equestrian or snowmobile use do not exist within Mendota Heights. Equestrian stables exist within the community; however, any riding which does occur is on an informal basis within the community's open space or natural trail corridors. Snowmobile use within the municipal limits is prohibited. Other Corridors A number of corridors in Mendota Heights are currently being used on an informal basis for trail movement or offer future potential. These include: 1. Streets and highways and their right-of-way 2. The Northern States Power Company high line corridor 3. Natural drainage corridors and related easements Those natural or man-made corridors often provide convenient trail links which can functionally co -exist. m Adjacent Community or Other Agency Trails Mendota Heights trails are influenced by existing trail corridors in abutting communities and by corridors developed by state and federal government. These trails may serve as linkages or destinations for Mendota Heights users. The City of Eagan is in the process of developing acommunity-wide trail system. A number of possible links between Mendota Heights and Eagan could provide some inter -community trail connections. Pilot Knob Road, Trunk Highway 149 extended and Delaware Avenue may provide linkages across I494 into Eagan. Links should also be considered into West St. Paul providing access to neighborhood parks and the Robert Street commercial area. These links may be best provided via Marie or Emerson Avenues. Links with St. Paul are constrained by the river corridor bridges. Reconstruction of the High Bridge over the Mississippi River may provide some opportunities for a trail connection on Cherokee Avenue. Another trail opportunity exists in Lilydale Regional Park. This open space area, when developed by St. Paul, will serve as a logical linkage between Valley Park and the City of St. Paul. Bicycle traffic destined for the Summit Hill and Grand Avenue areas of St. Paul is constrained by I-35E. Interstate 35E Parkway provides bikeway facilities through its southern terminus at Seventh Street. Unfortunately, I-35E south of this point, including its river crossing, is not bikeway compatible. Bicycle enthusiasts in Mendota Heights are also attracted to the Minneapolis Park Board system. The most logical linkage into the Minneapolis Grand Round system is across the Mendota Bridge. From this location, trail connections can be made to the Minnehaha Falls area and the remainder of the Minneapolis system. The existing Mendota Bridge does not safely accommodate bicycle traffic due to the lack of protective barriers between the bridge's sidewalks and vehicle travel lanes. The bridge's programmed 1988 reconstruction is planned to include safe bikeway facilities. However, the planned reconstruction of the TH 55/TH�}interchange is presently not planned to be bikeway compatible. This roadway link is critical to gain Mendota Bridge access. The existing I-494 Minnesota River bridge provides bikeway facilities on its southern side. This crossing enables Mendota Heights and Eagan bicyclists access to Fort Snelling State Park and the planned Minnesota Valley Trail. The Minnesota Valley Trail, when completed, will link the metropolitan area with Minnesota Valley Refuge amenities as far south as Jordan, Minnesota. Trail Origins and Destinations Figure 18 illustrates destinations where Mendota Heights trail users are likely to go such as schools, parks, shopping areas, employment concentrations and areas of higher residential density. - Schools are especially important destinations in considering pedestrian and bicycle trail networks because of the number of students who could use trails. Major school destinations in Mendota Heights include the Henry Sibley Senior High School, the Somerset Elementary School, and the Mendota Elementary School site. Students from abutting neighborhoods walk to the school sites, whereas, students in outlying neighborhoods either take buses or bike. St. Thomas Academy and Visitation Covenant private schools are considered significant destinations. m Retail shopping areas may serve as a destination for trail users, primarily bicyclists. Mendota Heights primary commercial node exists at the intersection of Dodd Road and TH 110. To some extent this is complemented by the Robert Street commercial strip in West St. Paul. Aside from the community's existing parks, a number of other trail destinations or generators exist. Users may be attracted to the Dodge Nature Center, private golf courses, and the city's industrial park located at Pilot Knob Road and Mendota Heights Road. Trail Needs Needs generated by trail users are difficult to assess because trail users tend to lack a vocal organization representing their interests. The recently completed park and recreation survey, June-1965, requested Mendota Heights to express their desire for specific park facility improvements. The top three responses were for trails and included: 1. Bike/walkway trails 2. Cross-country ski trails 3. Self -guided nature trails These responses clearly identify the need for trail development and related facilities within Mendota Heights. Trail facilities such as signage, rest areas, and interpretive facilities are important to provide an interesting trail experience. Trail use is also contingent upon having a system which works collectively, allowing users access from one end of the city to the other, connecting trail trip generators and desirable destinations. Goals and Policies The following goals and policies are intended to guide implementation actions in the development of the trail system. Goals provide an overall statement of a desired objective, the end point toward which effort is directed. Policies are used in guiding day-to-day decisions, and are structured to help attain the desired goals. For easier reference, the goals and policies are organized according to the following topics: - General - Functional considerations - Design considerations - Maintenance considerations - Welfare, safety and security considerations - Programming and financing considerations General 1. Goals A. Should reflect citizen desires and be consistent with other elements of the Park and Recreation Facility Plan. B. Should allow for year-round multiple use. C. Should be consistent with related county, regional and federal/state objectives and coordinated with those implementation efforts. D. Should be developed and maintained in a cost effective manner. E. Should reflect and highlight community scale and physical/cultural characteristics. F. Should serve existing community and parallel growth trends of the city. G. Should recognize property owners right and minimize impacts on their privacy. 2. Policies A. Shall respond to community desires and satisfy user group needs. B. Shall conform to the Mendota Heights Park and Recreation Facility Plan by: - Designating routes for pedestrians and hikers. - Separating trails from streets where possible - Utilizing ROW's and easements where possible - Providing plantings, furniture, lighting and signing where practical - Connecting park, open spae and recreation nodes and areas of commercial or cultural importance C. Shall be efficient, and avoid duplication. D. Shall accomodate a broad range of year-round use. E. Shall conform to standards set by upper levels of government. F. Shall comply with federal/state trail planning efforts. G. Shall comply with plans supported or recognized by: - City Park and Recreation Commission - City Planning Commission - City Council - Area school districts - City residents and organized trail groups - Private or quasi -public trail organizations - Dakota County - Minnesota Department of Natural Resources/Transportation - Federal Fish and Wildlife Service H. Location and design of corridor shall minimize negative effects and maximize beneficial effects for adjacent land owners. 71 Functional Considerations 1. Goals A. Safety considerations should be applied to the separation of trail and highway facilities. B. Should perform a transportation function and link neighborhood, educational, recreational and other community activity nodes and tie into existing or proposed public and private trail facilities. C. Should conserve or preserve natural amenities and buffer incompatible land use from the user. D. Should consider maximum potential use capacity and provide alternative facilities for special user groups. 2. Policies A. Trails shall be physically separated where possible from highway facilities or lanes designated within highway corridors. B. A pedestrian network shall be established Criss-crossing the city linking the various neighborhoods. C. Schools, parks and commercial shopping areas shall be linked. D. City trails shall link up with state, county and federal trail systems. E. Where possible, trail corridors shall utilize, make accessible and preserve natural amenities including: drainage courses, slopes, wetlands and major wooded areas. F. Trails shall be designed and developed with easements acquired for maximum corridor use. Design Considerations 1. Goals A. Trail design should reflect specific use. 8. Design should utilize but remain sensitive to natural areas. C. Trail patterns should be dictated by population density and development. D. Highway and utility easements should be considered for corridors. E. Ample access and comfort/support facilities should be provided. F. The trail system should integrate new residential and commercial areas as they emerge. 72 G. Design consistency should occur with other trail systems. H. Proven design standards should be applied with localized sensitivity. 2. Policies A. Trail elements shall be designed with the following user groups in mind: - bicycling - hiking and pleasure walking - ski touring B. Trails shall utilize open space occurring due to natural features where possible. C. Trails shall be developed proportionate to city development patterns and population density. D. Highway and utility rights -of -way shall be used where appropriate and feasible. E. Trail support facilities shall be provided including access points, signing and striping, parking, bridges and where appropriate, seating and shelter items. F. The trail system shall be continually extended into new housing or commercial areas. G. Trail elements must be integrated into existing environments with sensitivity to design and neighborhood character. H. Trail type, design and signing consistency shall occur within the city and smooth transition take place between trails of differing jurisdiction. I. Creativity shall be exercised when conforming design and construction standards to specific sites. Maintenance Considerations 1. Goals A. The trail system should generate minimum maintenance. That which does occur should be within the capabilities of the City of Mendota Heights. B. The trail system should encourage user upkeep. C. User groups generating high maintenance or negative impacts should be restricted or avoided. 73 2. Policies A. The trail system shall be located, designed and constructed to minimize maintenance costs. B. Trail maintenance procedures shall 6e feasibly by Mendota Heights both now and in the future. Where possible, maintenance procedures shall conform to existing city activities. C. Trai! system implementation through its organization, design and construction should encourage maximum user maintenance and upkeep. Potential for vandalism should be kept minimal. D. Users which cause high maintenance or are potentially destructive to trail facilities should be limited or alternate facilities provided which can bear the user impact. Welfare, Safety and Security Considerations 1. Goals A. The trail system should have a positive impact on the city both culturally and environmentally. B. The trail system should be compatible with adjacent land owners and land use whenever possible. C. Safety considerations should be integrated into the system through design and regulation. D. Adjacent property should be protected. 2. Policies A. The trail system shall enhance the city's aesthetics where possible and shall not produce undue noise, physical erosion or degradation. B. Physical barriers shall be maintained or developed where possible along portions of the trail system which are incompatible with adjacent land use. C. Safety considerations including sight distances, trail dimensions and other items of personal well-being shall be integrated into trail standards. D. Policing policies shall be drawn up utilizing city, community and user group resources previous to any significant trail development. E. City ordinances addressing health, safety and legal factors shall be established. These shall coincide with existing state or federal regulations which may apply. F. Nodal areas should be considered for those user groups which potentially could disturb adjacent property. 74 Programming and Financing Considerations 1. Goals A. Design construction and maintenance costs associated with the trail system should be within existing or anticipated city fiscal capabilities. B. All available financial assistance should be used to implement the trail system. C. Trail coridors should be secured as soon as possible. D. Whenever possible, trail system elements should be provided by private interests. 2. Policies A. Trail costs shall not place unreasonable demands on the city's fiscal resources. B. Federal, state, metropolitan and county financial assistance shall be actively requested to develop the trail system. Assistance efforts shall focus on: - State of Minnesota - a. Office of Local and Urban Affairs - LAWCON Minnesota Department of Transportation - a. Bikeways Grants Program County - Dakota County Private - a. user groups b. land holdings c. developer contribution C. Innovative methods to finance or expand the trail system shall be explored. D. Trail system development shall be based on a logically sequenced program and shall be included in the city's capital improvements programming activities and coordinated with major utility and road construction projects. E. Land for trails shall be obtained as soon as possible. Corridor acquisition should generally have a higher priority than development proposals. F. Upon the selection of trail corridors, all major subdivisions shall provide appropriate trail corridors as a part of required open space dedications to maintain the trail network. Trail System Plan The following narrative outlines a system for each three trail modes: bike, pedestrian and cross country skiing. Each trail system is discussed on an individual basis, with emphasis given to the overall system, critical sections or crossing areas, and the relationship with other trail modes. Implementation and phasing concerns are also addressed, with attention given to support facilities, coordination with other agencies and groups, and possible funding mechanisms. Implementation The trail plans serve as guides for both immediate and long range implementation and development. Implementation is dependent on the availability of funding and the land or easements where trails will be routed. Implementation can be initiated on some trail segments where development costs are modest and land ownership is not a problem. Trail segments requiring negotiation among various land owners and agencies will understandably require more time to develop. Close coordination with affected land owners, user groups, and other levels of government will be essential to the development of a meaningful trail network. It is important to remember that trail use is proportional with the amount of trail system completed. User safety is an important concern in all trail development. The primary safety concern areas usually occur at intersections with major roads or highways. A grade separated crossing is the ideal solution at intersections because it eliminates the potential for conflict; however, because of the large cost involved, it cannot be used in every case. In some cases, the cost factor is overriden by concern for safety to ensure that the trail system is a viable route for recreation and travel. All trail system development requires attention to safety in the routing, design, development and maintenance of the trails themselves. The trail plans were designed to minimize conflicts with vehicular traffic while striving to accommodate the convenience of the user in reaching desired destinations. Maintenance activities such as removing branches growing over cross-country ski trails and making sure that storm water drainage grates are perpendicular to the direction bicycles will be traveling are important details in insuring the safety and comfort of the trail user. As with any plan, the trail plans are not absolute and unbending. As circumstances change, new development occurs or discussions with coordinating groups take place, adjustments and refinements to the plan will be made. This is in accordance with utilizing the plans as a tool to guide, not dictate, future actions. Bicycle Trail System The bicycle trail system, as illustrated on Figure 18, is the most extensive of the Mendota Heights trail systems. It is important that this system provide convenient city-wide north -south and east -west access as well as linkages into adjacent community or other agency trail systems and related amenities. In addition, it is assumed that pedestrian traffic will be with the bike trail system within Mendota Heights. To this end, it is recommended that bike trail implementation will occur separated from the travelled roadway by standard curbs or setback separated entirely from the roadway. On -road application should be limited to low volume neighborhood streets, complemented by safety signing and appropriate striping. In any application, the proposed bikeway surface should be of hard surface construction, such as bituminous. A six foot trail width is minimum and an eight foot wide trail width is desirable to comfortably accommodate two pedestrians and a bicyclist. EXISTING BICYCLE/PEDESTRIAN TRAIL ®®®®® PROPOSED BICYCLE/PEDESTRIAN TRAIL °°•°°°°°•°° PROPOSED PEDESTRIAN TRAIL ACCESS TO ACCESS TO MINNEA C 4 kz ACCESS TO ST. PAUL _ . ,;L �. iTx f it LLL a j b AGGESS-Tp-EAG-AN-AND _ d o MINNESOTAi RIVER VALLEY r^ PARK AND RECREATION FIGURE 18, FACILITY NEEDS STUDY BICYCLE/PEDESTRIAN TRAIL PLAN CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS, MN, rlmjm mJ ACCESS TO WEST ST. PAL PARK AND RECREATION SURVEY RESPONSES, JUNE 1985 1. Have you or any other member of your household used the City parks in the past year? NO-29 1-5 TIMES - 27 6-10 TIMES - 22 MORE THAN 10 TIMES - 153 2. Name of park nearest your residence. IVY - 32 WENTWORTH - 41 VALLEY - 26 MARIE - 53 ROGERS LAKE - 31 FRIENDLY MARSH - 41 3. Number of members in household by age group. UNDER 5 - 69 6-9 YEARS - 75 10-13 YEARS - 79 14-18 YEARS - 79 18-35 YEARS - 141 35-50 YEARS - 222 OVER 50 - 140 4. How many years have you resided in Mendota Heights? 1 YEAR - 10 2-5 YEARS - 38 6-10 YEARS - 36 OVER 10 YEARS - 124 5. Which of the following recreation programs have you or any member of your household participated in during the past year? City Park & Rec. Programs T-BALL, GIRLS - 34 T-BALL, BOYS - 34 VOLLEYBALL - 8 ART IN THE PARK - 23 SENIORS CLUB - 3 TENNIS - 57 MendEagan Programs HOCKEY - 53 GIRLS SOFTBALL - 37 BOYS BASEBALL - 55 SOCCER - 55 FOOTBALL - 9 6. Do you or any member of your household participate in recreational activities offered by other communities or organizations? YES - 93, NO - 121 7. Should the City of Mendota Heights offer additional recreation programs? YES - 65, NO - 108 8. Do you participate in any recreational activity within the city or state, school, city, or private property which has not been covered by the previous questions? (i.e., slow pitch softball, cross country skiing, etc.) YES - 112, NO - 91 9. Do you or any member of your household participate in recreational activities sponsored by neighboring communities? (i.e., swimming, softball, etc.) YES - 74, NO - 118 10. Below are potential areas of improvement for our City park facilities. Please rank the following improvements in order of their importance to you. (Ranking: 1-very important; 2-somewhat important; 3-not important). 1 2 3 ARCHERY 6 33 128 NATURE STUDY 64 60 47 ADULT SOFTBALL 46 54 69 OUTDOOR BASKETBALL 42 62 71 BASEBALL FIELDS 62 47 59 BIKE/WALKING TRAILS 141 43 13 CROSS COUNTRY SKI TRAILS 105 52 36 FOOTBALL/SOCCER FIELDS 39 43 37 HORSESHOE COURTS 12 50 104 MORE NEIGHBORHOOD PARKS 42 33 94 MORE PARK SHELTERS 27 47 91 SWIMMING (BEACH OR POOL) 61 61 50 OUTDOOR VOLLEYBALL COURTS 49 67 58 PICNIC AREAS 46 59 65 PLAYGROUND EQUIPMENT 50 40 74 PRE-SCHOOL PLAYGROUND AREA 33 39 89 PERMANENT RESTROOM FACILITIES 57 64 49 SELF -GUIDED NATURE TRAILS 61 66 51 OUTDOOR AMPHITHEATRE 10 30 128 LIGHTING FOR BALL FIELDS 30 35 102 LIGHTING FOR TENNIS COURTS 63 47 73 Rank Order of Expressed Desire for Park Facilities Improvements If No = 208 Yes (1+2) No 1. BIKE/WALKWAY TRAILS 184 (88.0%) 2. CROSS-COUNTRY SKI TRAILS 157 (75.5%) 3. SELF GUIDED NATURE TRIALS 127 (61.1%) 4. NATURE STUDY 124 (59.6%) 5. SWIMMING (BEACH OR POOL) 122 (58.7%) 6. PERMANENT RESTROOM FACILITIES 121 (5B.2%) 7. OUTDOOR VOLLEYBALL COURTS 116 (55.6%) Be LIGHTING FOR TENNIS COURTS 110 (52.9%) 9. BASEBALL FIELDS 109 (52.4%) 10. PICNIC AREAS 105 (50.5%) 11. OUTDOOR BASKETBALL 104 (50.0%) 12. ADULT SOFTBALL 100 (48.1%) 13. PLAYGROUND EQUIPMENT 90 (43.3%) 14. FOOTBALL/SOCCER FIELDS 82 (39.4%) 15. PRE-SCHOOL PLAYGROUND AREA 77 (37.0%) 16. MORE PARK SHELTERS 76 (36.5%) 17. MORE NEIGHBORHOOD PARKS 75 (36.1%) Be LIGHTING FOR BALL FIELDS 65 (31.2%) 19. HORSESHOE COURTS 62 (29.9%) 20. OUTDOOR AMPHITHEATRE 40 (19.2%) 21. ARCHERY 39 (18.7%) a 1 C 1 1 i 1 �1 L 1 1 1 1 [J [� 1 City of Mendota Heights MEMORANDUM February 4, 2004 Memo to: Parks and Recreation Commission From: Guy Kullander, Parks Project Manager Subject: Future Options for Trail Improvements Background: The existing trail system contains approximately twenty-one miles of paved trails, predominately off-street and constructed to a width of eight feet. The last Commission workshop related to future trail projects was in January 1996, Discussion: The Commission expressed a desire to prepare a long-range plan to expand the trial system by providing "missing -links" within the existing system and to look for opportunities to provide new trails, when land development occurred, or when roadway improvements by other governmental units provided opportunities to include trails within their project. Attached is a copy of the City's existing park and trail system to which I have highlighted (in yellow) various trail improvements that have been discussed during the past several years. Recommendation: Review the information provided. CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS February 2004 Prepared by: Guy Kullander, ParksProjectManager Options for Future Trail Improvements: (Refer to attached map for locations) A. Delaware Ave. (Huber Drive south to I-494/City of Eagan) Construct off-street trail in conjunction with future Dakota County upgrade of County Road 63/Delaware Ave. Additional right-of-way must be acquired. Cost trail could be funded as part of the County project. B. Delaware Ave. (Huber Drive north to Hwy.110) The City funded a widening of the shoulder (west side-4 feet) with the County funding the east (Sunfish Lake) side. Off-street trail has been requested. Trail could be included with a future roadway upgrade/improvement by Dakota County funded by the County. Additional right-of-way required. C. Delaware Ave. (Hwy. 110 north to Marie Ave.) An off-street trail section exists from Hwy 110 to frontage road and a widened shoulder (4 ft to 8 ft wide) extends to Marie. A separated trail is desirable to better separate trail users from the traffic on Delaware. If the County were to upgrade this section of County Road 63 a separated trail would probably be included. D. Warrior Drive (Hwy 110 frontage road north to existing trail) The existing trail was constructed by the School District to provide walking access to Sibley High School grounds. Due to the amount of traffic and parking on Warrior a separated trail should be considered. E. Dodd Road (North of Town Center to Marie Ave.) Trails to be constructed as part of the Town Center development end at the northern boundary of the project area. An existing six foot widen shoulder, on Dodd, is now used by bikes and pedestrians. A separated off-street trail would be safer, especially for the groups of high school joggers that use the trail. F. Dodd Road (1-494 north to Mendakota Park) Dodd Road/S.T.Hwy 149 is heavily used. Existing shoulder areas from Mendakota Park to Wagon Wheel Trail/Decorah Lane is from one to three feet wide. South of Wagon Wheel to 1-494 the shoulders average six feet in width. A separated trail would provide a safer facility from pedestrians/bikes. G. Wagon Wheel Trail (Dodd Rd./S.T.Hwy 149 to Lexington Ave./County Rd, 43) This low volume two-lane roadway has no shoulders or curb and gutters. Pedestrians and bikers have reported excessive speeding as hazardous. Trail can be added when project to upgrade the existing roadway goes forward. H. Lexington Ave. &Wagon Wheel Trail (Mendota Heights Road to 1-35 E Bridge) The plans and specifications are almost complete on this project that is to be predominately funded from state MSA funds and Dakota County. Currently scheduled to be bid this spring and constructed during 2004. Lexington Ave./ County Road 43 (Wagon Wheel Trail to S.T.HWWI 110) Lexington is a two lane roadway with no shoulders and limited right-of- way. Due to opposition from property owners along this section the Council declined to order construction of this trail section. Lake LeMay Trail (LeMay Lake Drive southerly to Mendota Heights Road) A trail extending south from the Augusta Shores development through property owned by Resurrection Cemetery and continuing south to Mendota Heights Road was considered a desirable route if or when development occurs in this area. K. Big Rivers Regional Trial (Hwy 13 southerly along old RR right-of-way to I-494) The Big Rivers Regional Trail, as originally proposed, was to be extended by construction of an tunnel under Hwy 13 and then proceed south along the former RR right-of-way to Mendota Heights Road and then continue south and across 1-494 into Eagan. This was a Dakota County project to be funded from Federal/Metro Council grant. L. Mendota Heights Road (Pilot Knob Road to S.T.Hwy 13) This segment would be a continuation of the existing trail on Mendota Heights Road and would provide a continuous trail from east to west through the City. This section was originally "left out" due to expectations of low usage. Due to completion of Big Rivers Regional Trail and overlook off Hwy 13 this link should be considered for completion. M. Pilot Knob Road (Acacia Boulevard northerly and westerly to Big Rivers Trail) This segment would be installed if/when the area north and east of Acacia Cemetery is developed. N. Big Rivers Regional Trail (Scenic Overlook off Hwy 13 south to I494 River Bridge/Eagan) This segment of the regional trail will be constructed along the west side of Hwy 13 on highway right-of-way or within Fort Snelling State Park. A ramp from Hwy 13 up to and connecting with the existing trail way on the 1-494 Bridge across the river into Bloomington is part of this project. O. City Hall (Railway around pond/wetland north and west of City Offices) Trail would begin at City Hall and extend westerly on the north side of the pond, then south to the trail on Victoria Curve by the synagogue. Future land dedication, if/when Olin property is developed would provide most of the land needed for the trail. Remaining easements would be sought from the synagogue and two residents. P. Lexington Avenue/County Road 43 (Hwy 13 north to Douglas) Lilydale requested the City help fund this link when they were constructing their trail along Hwy. 13. The City Council declined to participate in that project. This is a very difficult segment because of the steep slope, limited right-of-way, it is a County maintained road, and there are steep rocky side slopes. To re - engineer the roadway to lessen the steep slope would be very costly. Q. Mayfield Heights link (Douglas northerly to Mayfield Heights Rd.) Residents of the Mayfield Heights area requested a trail linking their neighborhood to Douglas Road. Council did not approve a trail concept plan, requiring condemnation of easements between two unwilling residents. R. Victoria Road (Celia Rd to Celia Rd) An existing trail connects the south leg of Celia Rd. to Victoria Highlands Park. At the north leg of Celia Rd, the trail begins again and goes northerly past County Day and down to Hwy. 13. This segment was not built due to an existing 26" gas main located in the ditch along Victoria where the trail would be located. To construct the trail the storm sewer pipe must be installed before the ditch can be filled in. When Victoria Rd is upgraded, with curb, gutters, and storm sewer a trail would be part of the project. S. Wentworth/Trail Road (Wentworth Ave. south along the west end of the Par 3 Golf course connecting to Valley Park/Marie Ave Trail) Trail would provide north south access from Park Place, Cherry Hills and Wentworth Ave. residents to Valley Park and southerly trail segments. Also construct east -west connection from new trail to existing trail in Valley Park. T. Wachtler Ave./Sibley Memorial Highway (Cherry Hill south to Hwy. 13 then westerly to Lilydale Rd./1-35E Bridge) These two segments would connect the existing trail on Wachtler Ave. at Park Place to Hwy 13 and thence to Lilydale Rd and the Big Rivers Regional Trail. It would also provide access to the future trail to be constructed on the new 1-35E Bridge that would connect to St. Paul and trails on the north side of the river. U. North Urban Regional Trail (Dodd Rd. to Delaware) This regional trail, to be constructed by Dakota County, is intended to provide trail access to the new Dakota County Government Center in West St. Paul. if the project proceeds construction should be completed in 2005. Part of the original project concept was to enlarge, from eight to ten feet wide, the City's existing trail through Valley Park that connects to Lilydale Rd. and the Big Rivers Regional Trail. V. Lilydale Regional Park (Yacht Club east to Harriet Island/St. Paul) Extension/completion of the Big Rivers Regional Trail from the Pool and Yacht Club into St. Paul will be part of the development of the Lilydale Regional Park, which is a City of St. Paul Park Department project. W. 1-35E Bridge Reconstruction Project (Hwy 13 to Shepard Rd) A pedestrian/bike trail is included with this project along with an access ramp connection down to the Big Rivers Regional Trail by the Pool and Yacht Club, X. Emerson Avenue (Dodd Road to Delaware Avenue) On or off-street trail should be considered when street rehabilitation project for this neighborhood is discussed with affected residents. Y. Wentworth Avenue (Dodd Road to Delaware Avenue) Lack of shoulders and ditches makes this segment a danger for walkers and bikers. Lack of right-of-way along this roadway (County Road #8) will impact any trail design. -- Proposed North Urban Regional Trail (Dakota County) ��— Proposed Lilydale Pedestrian Trail •-••• Widened Shoulders Off Street Bituminous Trail (6' to 8' wide) City Hall / Police / Fire / Public Works City Park Land C] Water Mendota Heights Lilydale & Mendota Open Space irks Friendly Hills Park Friendly Marsh Park Hagstrom King Park Ivy Hills Park Kensington Park Marie Park Mendakota Park Rogers Lake Park Valley Park Victoria Highland Park iWentworth Park tll (rails shown within the City limits are maintained by 'ity crews except• (A) Big Rivers Regional Trail -Dakota County. (e) Dodd Rd/TH 149 shoulders-Mn/DOT. oncrete sidewalks are not shown on plan. opperfield Pond (C) is a gravel trail. [! �l 1 �I �I 1 1 1 L [� 1 1 1 1 1 1