Loading...
1997-05-13 Parks and Rec Comm Agenda Packet CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS DAKOTA COUNTYZE NESOTA AGENDA PARKS AND ON COMMISSION May 13, 1997 6:30 p.m.-Large Conference Room 1. Call to Order 2. Roll Call 3. Approval of the April 8, 1997 Minutes 4. Open Space Tour(Please bring a mini-van if you have one!) 5. Consideration of Doyle Park Donation Offer(810 Ridge Place) 6. Park(Open Space Inventory and Park Dedication Fee Increase Proposal(Available Tuesday) 7. Updates • PARAC Meeting • Wentworth Park Shelters • Making America Walkable • Parks Report • Police Report(Available Tuesday) 7. Adjourn Auxiliary aids for persons with disabilities are 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 452-1850 with requests. 1 • CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS MEMO May 13, 1997 TO: Parks and Recreation Commission FROM: Patrick C. Hollister, Administrative Assistant SUBJECT: Park Dedication Fee Increase/ Recreation Facilities Inventory Discussion At the April 8, 1997 meeting of the Parks and Recreation Commission, the Commission had asked Staff to come back to the next meeting with an updated open space/park facilities inventory and a proposal to increase fees. The Commission felt that an increase in the Park Dedication Fee could be justified based upon an increase in trail demand, the City's need for various types of open space(passive, active), and an increase in demand for ballfields, and that these increases could be documented. Any Park Dedication Fee that a City wishes to exact from a developer must meet two legal tests in order to be considered legitimate: 1. The City must be able to demonstrate that the fee or land exaction is necessary to meet an increase in demand for park services or to mitigate a negative impact upon the park system caused by the development itself. 2. The amount of the fee or land exaction must be roughly proportional to the increase in demand or negative impact caused by the development itself. The City's Park Dedication policy should be consistent with goals and standards for parks and open space as expressed in our Comprehensive Plan. The current park dedication policy can be summarized as follows: Residential development. Upon subdivision, the developer must either pay the City$750 per residential lot created or cede to the City an equivalent value in land, at the choice of the City. Commercial/industrial development. Upon subdivision, the developer must either pay to the City at least 10% of the fair market value of the gross area created as a result of the plat, replat or lot division, or cede to the City an equivalent value in land, at the choice of the City. For sake of discussion, Staff has increased the fee for residential lots from$750 to $900. Assuming an average of 3% inflation rate, $750 x(1.03)6= $896—$900 Action Required Discuss the attached information and proposed Resolution and provide directions to Staff and/or make a recommendation to Council as necessary. i • Mendota Heights Recreation Facilities Inventory Facility Standard Need at 14,000 Pop. Current Inventory In City Parks Tennis Courts 1+1/2000 people 8 courts 12 courts Multi-Use Had Surface 1+1/park+1/2000 people 8 courts 9 half courts 1 full court Softball Fields 1+1/2000 people 8 fields 6 youth 7 adult softball/ youth baseball Baseball Fields 1+1/6000 people 3 fields 1 full size Soccer 1+1/3500 people 5 fields 4 dedicated(1 youth) 3 overlay Hockey 1+1/3000 people 6 areas 3 Free Skating 1+1/half--mile radius 6 areas 4 Note: Additional facilities are made available to City residents through Independent School District 197, Visitation Convent, and St. Thomas Academy. i CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS . DAKOTA COUNTY, MM4NESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 97- RESOLUTION AMENDING RESOLUTION 80-16., ESTABLISHING A PARK CONTRIBUTION FORMULA WHEREAS, pursuant to Minnesota Statute, Section 462.358, Subd. 2, and Mendota Heights Subdivision Ordinance, Section 6, the City Council is authorized to require a park contribution for the platting or replatting of land; and WHEREAS, said park contribution may be either in the form of a cash contribution or a percentage of the gross area of the plat, which ever is deemed most appropriate by the City Council of the City of Mendota Heights; and WHEREAS, said open space contributions or cash contributions must be used for the purpose of maintaining and protecting open space or developing existing public open space; and WHEREAS, it is deemed advisable that the cash contribution be based on a standard contribution formula. NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Mendota Heights that Resolution No. 80-16 be amended in its entirety; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the following park contribution formula shall apply to all requests for platting, replatting or division of existing lots for which a cash contribution is deemed appropriate by the City Council: a. Property owner or developer shall contribute a minimum of&58 900 for each residential lot created as a result of plat, replat or lot division approval; and b. Cash contributions in the case of commerciaUmdustrial plats, replats or lot divisions shall be at least ten percent of fair market value of the gross area created as a result of the plat, replat, or lot division; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the contribution shall be payable upon approval of the plat, replat or lot division or in a manner as outlined in the Subdivision Ordinance. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Mendota Heights this 20th day of May, 1997. ATTEST: CITY COUNCIL CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS • By By Kathleen M. Swanson, City Clerk Charles E.Mertensotto,Mayor � r I. I - -1 l •'� II' '� �, I I _ �� Fib��! ��:' - ., i n I Ir � C _ i CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS MEMO May 8, 1997 TO: Parks and Recreation Commission and City Administrator FROM: Patrick C. Hollister, Administrative Assistant SUBJECT: Existing Park/Open Space Inventory At the April 8, 1997 meeting of the Parks and Recreation Commission, the Commission asked Staff to come back to the May meeting with an updated open spacelpark facilities inventory and a proposal to increase park dedication fees. Please see the attached map showing the acreage of each park and the total acreage for all parks in the City of Mendota Heights. Further analysis of the existing park facilities and a proposal to increase the park dedication fees will be available on Tuesday. Mendota Heights Parks System 1) IVY HILLS - (8.8 ACRES) x 2) WENTWORTH - (10.5 ACRES) w E 3) VALLEY- (93.79 ACRES) 4) VICTORIA HIGHLANDS - (6.7 ACRES) s 5) MARIE - (6.18 ACRES) 1 �/�(❑ 6) MARIE AVE. POND - (3.08 ACRES) ❑� 7) CIVIC CENTER BALLFIELD - (13.19 ACRES) 8) ROGERS LAKE - (8.67 ACRES) ❑ 9) MENDAKOTA - (19.67 ACRES) f /❑ 10) SIBLEY ATHLETIC COMPLEX - (10.97 ACRES) ❑❑�Q 11) FRIENDLY MARSH - (31.53 ACRES) 12) COPPERFIELD - (24.92 ACRES) o0 13) FRIENDLY HILLS - (13.94 ACRES) 14) KENSINGTON - (14.52 ACRES) ❑ ❑8© �� 15) HAGSTROM-KING - (9.93 ACRES) 0 TOTAL ACREAGE = 276.39 ACRES p� O i �f ❑ � n� M I E U❑ 7 � 10 T.H. 110 0� 9 a ❑ Lo o ❑ o /� 8 ❑❑❑ ° M CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS MEMO May 8, 1997 TO: Parks and Recreation Commission and City Administrator FROM: Patrick C.Hollister, Administrative Assistant SUBJECT: 810 Ridge Place Park Donation Offer(Mr. John Doyle) Discussion Mr. John Doyle of 810 Ridge Place has talked with Staff about subdividing his back yard from his house. Staff informed Mr. Doyle that the City does not permit the creation of lots with no street access. Mr. Doyle then asked about the possibility of subdividing his back lot and offering it to the City as an addition to Valley Park for a tax deduction. Staff has agreed to place this item on the May 20, 1997 agenda of the City Council for discussion. Before the Council meeting, Staff would like any comments from the Parks Commission. Staff wishes to note the following concerns about the City acquiring this land and adjoining it to Valley Park: 1. Possible neighborhood opposition. Mr. Doyle's neighbors may not want his back yard to become City park land. Some neighborhood notification process will have to occur if this transfer is to take place. 2. Li& . The City will incur liability for this parcel, not only regarding potential injury,but also general cleaning and maintenance. 3. Limited use as part of the park. It is possible that this acquisition could be of little recreational use. There are some attractive aspects to acquiring this property, as well: 1. It is adjacent to an existing park. 2. It may allow the City better access to the sewer easement which runs across the back yard. 3. It may be more attractive if the City could also acquire the back yard of the parcel immediately to the east. Y If Mr.Doyle decided to pursue this donation, it would involve the following steps: . 1. Mr. Doyle would need to hire an appraiser to determine the worth of the parcel. 2. Mr. Doyle would have to pursue a subdivision/lot split application. 3. Neighbors would have to be informed of this proposal and be given a chance to make input into the process. 4. Mr.Doyle would bear all the costs of this application procedure. For sake of discussion, Staff has divided the parcel into"Lot A" and"Lot B". (See attached map from Mr. Kullander.) If the City is to acquire part of this parcel, however, it is possible that the City may only want that portion up to the sewer easement. Action Required Discuss whether or not this would be a worthwhile contribution to Valley Park and the City's park system and make any recommendations or comments to the City Council before this item appears on their May 20, 1997 agenda. Y CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS DAKOTA COUNTY_NIINNESOTA PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION MINUTES APRIL 8, 1997 The regular meeting of the Mendota Heights Parks and Recreation Commission was held on Tuesday, April 8, 1997, in the Large Conference Room at City Hall, 1101 Victoria Curve. The meeting was called to order at 6:40 PM. The following Commissioners were present: Norton, Libra, Kleinglass, Linnell,Liberacki. Chair Spicer was excused from the meeting. Also present was Administrative Assistant Patrick C. Hollister. APPROVAL OF MARCH 11 PARK AND RECREATION MINUTES Commissioner Linnell moved to approve the March 11, 1997 Parks and Recreation Commission Minutes with corrections. Commissioner Libra seconded the motion. AYES: 5 NAYS: 0 (Commissioner Damberg arrived at this point.) PARK DEDICATION FEES Mr. Hollister explained that at the March 11, 1997 meeting of the Parks and Recreation Commission, the Commission had asked Staff to place the park dedication policy on the April 8, 1997 agenda. Mr. Hollister continued that the Commission had also asked Staff to provide a comparison of what other cities require for their park dedication. Mr. Hollister said that the Commission was concerned that$750 may be low compared to what other Cities were asking for, especially in proportion to the land values in Mendota Heights. Mr. Hollister summarized the current park dedication policy. Mr. Hollister also explained that any Park Dedication Fee that a City wished to exact from a developer must meet three legal tests in order to be considered legitimate: 1. The City must be able to demonstrate that the fee or land exaction is necessary to meet an increase in demand for park services or to mitigate a negative impact upon the park system caused by the development itself. 2. The amount of the fee or land exaction must be roughly proportionarl to the increase in demand or negative impact caused by the development itself. i 1 x 3. The entirety of the fee or land exaction must be used for the park system, and may not be merged with the general fund or used for any other purpose. Mr. Hollister concluded that the City's Park Dedication policy should be consistent with goals and standards for parks and open space as expressed in our Comprehensive Plan. Commissioner Linnell said that an increase in the Park Dedication Fee could be justified based upon an increase in trail demand. Commissioner Liberacki said that an increase could be justified by the City's need for various types of open space(passive, active) and that the City was short-changing itself. Commissioner Libra asked Staff to research what the City had required from the BRA senior housing development in terms of park contributions. Commissioner Liberacki asked if there was a land exaction in addition to these fees. Commissioner Liberacki continued that there had been an increase in demand for ballfields and an increase in demand for trails, and that these increases could be documented. The Commission asked Staff to come back to the next meeting with an updated open spacelpark facilities inventory and a proposal to increase fees. OPEN SPACE PRIORITIZATION Mr. Hollister presented the"short list" of highly desirable remaining open space parcels which was compiled at the Joint Workshop between the Parks and Recreation Commission and the City Council on January 14, 1997: • Map #6 Acacia Area TIF Acquired Property • Map#9 Slowinski Property • Map#11 Foss Homestead by Wentworth Park • Map#16 Acacia property north of Acacia Boulevard • Map#18 Resurrection Cemetery`Break Off' Area • Map #19 Visitation Convent Property • Map#21 Tousignant Property off Mendota Heights Road Commissioner Linnell said that the Commissioners should go on a tour of open space either individually or as a group, and that passive and active use could be combined on one park. Commissioner Damberg said that the City should talk to Foss about acquiring his land. Commissioner Liberacki said that he disagreed with what he perceived to be the prevailing philosophy among his fellow Commissioners, that anything of natural or scenic value should be publicly owned. Commissioner Liberacki said that due to a combination of 2 environmental regulations and a landowner's own incentives to preserve the beauty of a given site, in general those views which we value in the City would be preserved. Commissioner Liberacki continued that rather than use limited government funds to buy land to prevent trees from being cut down, it would be better to use the funds for park land that was visible, accessible, and usable. Commissioner Linnell said that there should be an overlook at Acacia with a plaque explaining the history of Pilot Knob. Commissioner Linnell said that the Foss land would be good for an extension of the Park and Trail system and could be compatible with Single Family Home construction. Commissioner Libra said that the Resurrection Cemetery land would be good for a park and picnic area. Commissioner Liberacki said that when Resurrection develops, the City should get the 10% dedication in land and hook up a trail around the lake. Commissioner Norton agreed with Commissioner Liberacki. Commissioner Linnell suggested that at the next meeting the Commission take two cars or a van and do a tour of these sites. Commissioner Linnell offered to talk to Mr. Slowinski to try to get permission to walk his property during the tour. UPDATES Mr. Hollister provided updates on the following items. Caren Road Detention Pond Commissioner Damberg said that the ponding area of Caren Road should be enhanced by replacing some of the plantings. Commissioner Damberg suggested putting up signs saying"Wild Flower Restoration Area." Commissioner Damberg also requested that Mr. Kullander make an on-site visit and talk to the neighbors. Commissioner Linnell offered to come to that meeting if it could be arranged. Commissioner Liberacki suggested that the Caren Road ponding area be included in next month's open space tour. Commissioner Damberg said that the City should pay more attention to the appearance of its older neighborhoods. 3 Commissioner Libra said that some of the project money for the Tilsen reconstruction should be used to replace trees and put up signage for the wild area at the Caren Road site. North Kensington Park Commissioner Linnell said that he thought he had reached a compromise with Councilmember Smith about North Kensington Park, and that W. Kullander would be presenting his revised plan to both of them before bringing it to Council for approval. Commissioner Norton said that she knows of a non-profit organization that runs seminars for homeowners on the advantages of native plantings in their yards which would reduce the need for fertilizer and pesticides and would be good for water quality, as well as give their yards a more natural appearance. Commissioner Norton said that this approach should also be taken for the public land around City Hall. Wentworth Picnic Shelters Commissioner Libra said that he would like to see specific plans for the Wentworth park shelters. Wentworth Park Warming House Commissioner Libra said that he wanted a Staff review, cost parameters and a capital budget review for warming houses. Commissioner Libra asked staff to identify locations in the City where new warming houses should be built. Commissioner Norton said that Mr. Kullander should build a new multi-use, multi-purpose shelter for summer programs. Commissioner Liberacki said that continuity of architecture was important, and that the new shelter should resemble the existing shelters. Commissioner Liberacki recommended a pre-fab building on a poured slab with garage-type doors around it that could be rolled up for summer programs. Dakota County CIP Commissioner Liberacki said that he was disappointed that in the most recent Dakota County CIP there was no reference to road widening or trails apart from the NURT trail and the Big Rivers Trail. Commissioner Liberacki asked Staff to inquire as to why that was the case. Commissioner Liberacki said that roadways are in the 5-year plan, but not widening shoulders. 4 Commissioner Libra said that the County was spending a disproportionate amount of money for trails in the southern part of the County, and that some of that money should be channeled into trails for the north. Commissioner Norton said that the Mayor and City Council need to lobby the County for trails. Commissioner Libra said that one major barrier to the NURT Trail is that Valley Park neighbors don't want that trail widened very much. Commissioner Norton asked Staff to invite someone involved in trails and roads from Dakota County to come to a future meeting Wood Duck Houses in City Ponds Mr. Hollister explained that the Council had authorized the expenditure for wood duck houses and that the Public Works crew had started making these birdhouses. Full-Time Recreation Facilitator Mr. Hollister said that the Council had decided to discuss the issue of a full-time Recreation Facilitator at a 5-year plan setting workshop in mid-May. Park Police Summary for 1996 Mr. Hollister distributed a summary of all police incidents in City parks for the year 1996. Other Mr. Hollister announced that Mr.Esser was married on Saturday, April 5 and that he was now on honeymoon until April 14. Commissioner Damberg announced that she would have to miss next month's Commission meeting because she will be in Istanbul. Commissioner Liberacki asked Staff to bring back the issue of Mr. John Doyle of 810 Ridge Place who wanted to donate his back yard to the City. Mr. Hollister distributed a letter submitted by Chair Spicer inviting interested Commissioners to attend the Dakota County Parks and Recreation Advisory Committee information sharing meeting in May 7, 1997 at Camp Sacajawea. Commissioners Norton and Linnell said that they would try to attend. 5 Parks Report Mr. Hollister presented the Parks Report for the month of March. ADJOURNMENT Motion to adjourn made by Damberg and seconded by Kleinglass. AYES: 6 NAYS: 0 The meeting adjourned at 7:55 p.m. Respectfully Submitted, Patrick C Hollister i 6 ' 8 9 4 i i//'j I � t 5 1 1 '• ��� � + � j//�! 1 9 ? ❑ + '\ ` ��� � 1 ; :; "Srda-a4`-�-cam 43 IT Q� T 4 1 NEWE ,. + Uri -4 17 18 0 rlj( t C ----- ------ -2---- , t j r `�^�♦ /r nI* _ 1fi Xr�1 1i e1 Cl o o ; + 1 22 19 I/'♦``�.. `\ 45 1 ,{ CITY C 1 4 1 �- 3-04 + 21 1 ,/ + C ' 1 2 — —+ (p C you w -2 o C------------------ -- 1 23 � ; . ♦ y 26 r o TY v V V f S 0- 2 5 �`�.� t 25 231-00 N 9 � 2 �-, ..j �.; o ,13 .. 14-05 � � � � S o~ + 1 29 ' + 1 1 1�- 2 / .—..:a.:.... 1............. ......4...soot•.t Ae ---- -- _ �! I 5 14 3i 3 -�------ -- \s =� ®� 1 CITY i��sa� A. +♦ 1 1 1 __ _ _ `--- _ q - ----- _ =---- -1_--®-% .Ir� r�rrt�rx-try-tea- --_-_-___—------_ _ -- ----- --� ------ _-_ - - — = _--4 —_—---� --_-- -- ----------a----------- -"�Al __ - ---- ------_� c--—--------+-----_t----+-mot_ r=-- - - I ——-----_�-_-_---a---_ _ — ---_ _------_------ �-'- �•lA A A A AMA A 1997 Estimated Market Current size of parcel = 166,204 Sq. Ft. (3.82 Acres) Value is: Land =$ 44,800 Size of lots after split: With house = 31 , 100, balance = 135, 104 sq.ft Bldg = 122,400 Description: Lot drops down 35 feet behind back of house into $ 167 200 � 'O PARK LAND PROPOSAL BY (�1G Valley Park drainage way. A 50 ft wide sanitary sewer ' AAA AA Mendot& John Doyle easement crosses the lot. The 3 acre Lot B @.270 s.f. Heights 810 Ridge Place fo- Newly formed Lot "B" would not be a buildable lot-no street frontage. is valued at $ 36,450.00 tjol VI:•IDRIACIIRVE a SUM=IIEIGrMNGM (M452-1850 1,11'R1 • CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS MEMO May 8, 1997 TO: Parks and Recreation Commission and City Administrator FROM: Patrick C. Hollister, Administrative Assistant SUBJECT: Potential Park/Open Space Tour Discussion At the April 8, 1997 meeting of the Parks and Recreation Commission, the Commission asked Staff to schedule a tour of the"short list" sites for potential park/open space acquisition for the May 13, 1997 meeting. Staff requests that those Commissioners who have a mini-van or similar vehicle bring it to the meeting if possible. The following sites are scheduled for the Open Space Tour in the following order. (Please see attached map.) 1. Resurrection Cemetery`Break Off' Area 2. Acacia Area TIF Acquired Property 3. Acacia property north of Acacia Boulevard 4. Tousignant Property off Mendota Heights Road 5. Visitation Convent Property 6. Doyle(810 Ridge Place) 7. Foss Homestead by Wentworth Park 8. Slowinski Property 9. (Caren Road Site) Staff estimates that the above tour will traverse 13.5 miles and take at least 1.5 hours, assuming that only 5 minutes of discussion occurs at each venue. Please note that Staff has neither sought nor received permission from any landowner to walk on their property. Action Required Take the above tour and discuss these parcels. fi O la•r• rr mi v Rai �F}"1'''�-+�•7t.,�{..:I;Y ��I � � ,�:1'rt+,'.35"3?,�'� �_�_S�,ii� I �� I_�` --- � ;1 r r 1 Com 5' Ua � � m U1 � �--CIA 1.1 OOP s ¢I � GEPAR FAFGIA m z v � � b ::E! `1oP aF cow fit LAMINA P REAM --3 m H z n z l7 O Of F R=14 �WU� i U� y 03 N Ul y �r OP SLP�'i toIQ n 1 Q co M fn N �t"oP oP Fr�tlrlG TYPICi441 1.k ' SI 'ER<, EI�E;VATICJIV �.. �� /� - ►` ¢OOF voflrS 1 C ~ 6 b m • m VLAi6I z a 00 'Iof'eF cow mr-J, m H k� tos,o,� �►' � y H � z (7 O w J . ..A 03 Nt.--i Fd O P y —� GOI-IG-Sl-Ab �bP OF 5Lh3. co cn 1_ -wr of rc h 1 . o ►' < I-- - — -- -- — ------ - ---� _o m t+ q � �5 FT ZAJ • � I y' t7o{ {EL. �'15• T �.// I �.nlP.lJhN OD om 2� 0 D,LGtr� I SI,o�E 51 aPE NnF-L- NE feg- n m H kT1 n � z (7 0 I .o 4LPbW/(or(p j � y � WI.4 � ►,II.¢ 1,.1.I,.l.N. o CD O A W/3 �ta5 K 2'�,-a�N IZ ` \� WA / o I PI NIC, SHELTER 1F0UL�DATION & .FLOOR PLAN 1 V 1 `..1 n / Pl tlrloH of FLYWooP 4 OA rPA m UlO/ L391) /� GoNTnJUoUs 1 Y 2 _ 6 E DAR '1-R-I M p'T PIL PIP.Cv PNPtJe) m z i LLx �o AG,c-�t� O5 NP g61ZNE PER N tj �_j t �I LL x z � � 7p{t55�j _� •5o1=PiT Vet-Ir5 ollE cn 61&W SiPE. 4 pp-te- 2PILFIIL 15wc-L 44?- 1 CO1 P-O of V e t-J T- 2- W 12- v H M , N \ 6UILPIIIG co r — o PICNIC SHELTER�•'�.RtJC,�F. :F? A . M • ur wwrl tivmflkc� FILL, `N v I MEli- lyl- City of WENTWORTH PARK ,..,., Mendota PICNIC SHELTER Heights 1101 VICTORIA CURVE • MENDOTA HEIGHTS, MN 55118 (612) 452-1850 *�lK Cott toc4i�FfC� SP GRaJT6p�Ob D 1I i WeRY�DbrA tO�R�It 06-rW ftH WYr4" `R q O Cr:'t111S 510� 1b Fpa snoa-rN FAcF. city of WENTWORTH PARK (a Mendota HE Heights PICNIC SHELTER 1101 VICTORIA CURVE • MENDOTA HEIGHTS, MN 55118 (612) 452-1850 • - PaWi & FLMS 3/a x IZIO I-Z 4'"NO x G" 5TLP5-VEHFY } 1 P4FPELDFr4GoFIc.BiK.Cc�RES i /4* MI- W Lviz1-IEiz- ?cf of �� 1� �A•Si1 D)= > i.di�l oLrr d5CUP Res �FI~. \\ F IEIA p 14 Li, SEt%M PT R LOGATIo}-IS r&w., z City of WENTWORTH PARK �] .....,� Mendota PICNIC SHELTER Heights 1101 VICTORIA CURVE • MENDOTA HEIGHTS, MN 55118 (612) 452-1850 �/b fI.YN�bD 5N6A`fNtl'I( 15� FELT PPPER- DoYat-1 $/5 2'GEv o5��Kos pou�l.� srP�-T� couRSE F�F MI P EE ly LYWCOP 'T- 1-11 4OFFIT GEIUr1G 2 x 8touu�y I I�t yz" ' Z y.1COP T¢iM-pOr4 LAI`�i hlA��D 6EA►��((- 5EE FRAMiwot PLAN Ix 10 CW,6,9 TR M I X 4 GEDP,Iz'F-irl 5 TY�1G/�LS�IEL �- /4% I'-0" city of �JENTWCRTH PARK Q Mendota Heights PICNIC SHELTER 1101 VICTORIA CURVE • MENDOTA HEIGHTS, MN 55118 (612) 452-1850 �z SURFACE TRANSPORTATION POLICY PROJECT *PROGRESS 3u. From the Directors Chair. a Wa a eNti ; Making Amenc by Hank Dittmar,Executive Director Z tit�t-,:---• t a recent hearing in the nP non-motorized transportation. in the national interest Ina Senate's Environment First, S percent of all trips recent non-partisan national -4Y d Public Works made each day are walling trips, poll,two-thirds of Americans " Committee,a senator asked me far more than the less than 2 supported dedicating at least 1 '`; to justify the expenditure of percent of ISTEA funds devoted percent of federal gas tax funds s ISTF-A funds on projects to to walling and biking. At some to walling and biking,and fully facilitate walking and bicycling at point,every driver is also a 70 percent agreed that another 1 a time when traffic fatalities are pedestrian. If we are looking to percent should be devoted to the on the rise. Somehow,the ques- invest in a transportation other enhancement activities, on implied, "wasn't it true that system,simple equity demands including historic preservation. an auto trip somehow served the the expenditure of funding on Grassroots campaigns across national interest more than a non-motorized travel. the country are rising up to _ - try ; - wok trip? Second, the highwaycrowds make the coon more walkable. _-In recent months,much of citation of the death toll on the People know that there is a the Highway User's Alliance nadon's roads as a higher priority national interest in promoting "highways only"campaign has ignores the fact that 15 percent travel by foot and bicycle. Non- centered around just this asser- of all traffic fatalities year in and motorized trips don't pollute lion—that walking and bicycling year out are pedestrians and and don't contribute to sprawl. are somehow frivolous and that bicyclists.As our new report Accommodating bicyclists and we should rededicate our federal Mean Sneers demonstrates,less pedestrians can reduce traffic IR this '= - program to the more serious than 1 percent of ISTEA safety fatalities and promote healthier Issue - activities of building and widen- dollars are expended to improve and more vital communities. ing roads. After all, as the old safety for non-motorized trans- ISTEA's reauthorization mem Stre& saw goes,"isn't what's good for portation. Again,if safety is a should continue to provide alter- page 3 General Motors good for compelling reason for national natives to the automobile,giving RedI11169 America?" investment in transportation, Americans the choice not to Pedwrim More and more,America is simple equity demands that we drive as well as continuing to Advatmy finding out that investing in devote more funds to providing recognize that most trips will page 3 walling and biking is good for for safer travel for walkers and continue to be made by car. In America. In answering the sena- bicyclists. reauthorizing ISTEA, Congress Walkable tar's question,I focused on three Third,the public clearly should move forward,not back- fmnntumifes Main reasons to continue understands that investing in ward. This issue of Progress pqe 7 ISTEM investment in non-motorized transportation is focuses on moving forward on foot Mean Streets : In the U.S., a pedestrian is more likely to be killed = s by a stranger in an automobile than by a stranger with a gun. Thef0110WMg u Mean Streets produced by Eavircmnemd Workia Group and S ace Transpor=on Policy H;. Praject. All data is cmnpikd from FHWA and A=A data. Ordering information may be found an page 10. Hundreds of millions of dol- States after being hit by cars. that typically remove the obsta- lats are spent every year to This is a significant public health Iles to more rapid traffic flow. ''= make America's roads safer,yet and safety problem—the equiva- The Highway Capacity this investment is failing to lent of a commercial airline crash Manual—one of the industry - - -w ensure the safety of all of us who with no survivors every two bibles— provides the typical ' engage in the most basic form of weeks. And for every pedestrian highway engineer's definition of r, transportation—walking. Our who is killed by an automobile, a pedestrian: a traffic"flow inter- _ findings indicate that from 1986 almost 20 more are injured— ruption." Traffic safety features -- to 1995,approximately 6,000 more than 110,000 pedestrians are designed primarily to allow pedestrians were killed by auto- are injured by automobiles each drivers to move at higher speeds. mobiles each year,and more year. This basic tenet of highway than 110,000 were injured. This engineering often makes roads Highway Safety Money carnage is attributable only is more dangerous for pedestrians. pan to individual misjudgment is Not Being Used To -_ ways" Protect Pedestrians " a failure to look both wa as Senior Citizens Are >: children are taught. These Pedestrians account for 14 At The Highest Risk -- aths and injuries are also the Percent of all motor vehicle- de Senior citizens(persons age consequences of a transportation related deaths,yet only 1 percent 65 and over)comprise 13 per- system gone badly wrong—a sys- of federal highway safety funds rent of the population, but tem focused on making the are spent on pedestrian safety. account for 23 percent of all - streetsThe remaining 99 percent is safe for cars instead of pedestrian fatalities—meaning making communities safe for spent on automotive safety mea- people. People are 1.6 times sures(such as road widening) wnrirmed page 4 _more likely to get killed by a car while walling than they are to be shot and]tilled by a stranger with More Than half of All Pedestrian Fatalities a gun. Occur on Neighborhood Streets The following analysis is based on Federal Highway Freeway/ Interstate(119/0) (FHWA) and Expressway Administration Load Roads(13%) (b°Ji) _-_ _ National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA)data. Thousands of Pedestrians Are Collector Wed Each Year by Automobiles Roads(15%) Between 1986 and 1995, Primary approximately 6,000 pedestrians Arterials 128%) :::o died every year in the United Minor Arterlals(22%) STPP Progress•Aprg 1997 page 3 are walking in the wrong places, rather than on the motorist or • Top Ten Most Dangerous but that our local streets are road condition. Instead of blam- Metropolitan Areas for Walking becoming speedways designed to ing pedestrians for being hit by accommodate more can passing cars,planners and engineers 1. Fort Lauderdale, Florida through,not the people who live must design communities and 2. Miami,Florida in their communities. roads that are safe for walking. 3. Atlanta,Georgia Communities can take a variety 4. Tampa,Florida The Most Dangerous of actions designed to make 5. Dallas,Texas Cities For Wuilaing roads safer,including: 6. Houston,Texas The high rate of pedestrian • Traffic calming through the 7. Detroit,MI fatalities is a national problem. installation of speed bumps, tmf- 8. Riverside-San Bernadino, California In some communities however, fic circles or other devices in res- 9. Phoenix,Arizona the problem is worse than most 10 Charlotte,North Carolina In this report,for the first time, can d l neighborhoods that slow we present a list of the most dan- cars down,and ensure that Top Ten Safest Metropolitan Areas gerous communities in which to Pedestrians are safe. Walk. • Providing separate walkways for Walking (t6otrgh they're not that aofel} The cities with the largest and other spaces for pedestrians. 1. Pittsburgh,Pennsylvania numbers of walkers—New York Designing public spaces to be 2. Milwaukee,Wisconsin for example,will have the most gig P P 3. Boston,Massachusetts pedestrian fatalities. This does more pedestrian friendly;inciud- 4. Rochester,New York not always mean,however,that ing the installation of sidewalks, 5. New York,New York cities like New York are the most handrails for the infirm,bricked 6. Minneapolis,Minnesota dangerous places to walls relative aOssw •and even actions as 7. San Francisco, California to the number of people walking. simple as changing the patterns 8. Philadelphia, Pennsylvania The most dangerous metro- of the lines on the road. 9. Norfolk,Virginia politan areas for walkers tend to • Enhanced public education 10. Columbus, Ohio be nearer,sprawling,southern on pedestrian safety, and ade- and western communities,where quate enforcement of laws The above mezropolitan arm have popula- transportation systems are most designed to protect pedestrians. dons greater than 1 million, biased toward the car at the expense of other transportation These tools are already mak- that seniors are almost twice as options. ing the roads safer for pedestri- likely to be killed by an ans in some communities. In automobile as members other The Solution: Malting a Seattle,the taty's traffic calming agegroups. group, Streets Safe For People ro reduced pedestrian u As u senior program citizens are particularly depen- Solutions to make our streets accidents by more than 75 per- dent on safe streets for walking safer for pedestrians are well cent. In Portland, OR, traffic because many of them no longer underst°od,but too seldom circles reduced the number of drive implemented.The key to reported accidents by 50 percent improving pedestrian safety is to These examples clearly indicate Most Fatalities Occur On arrack the problem at its source, that America has the means to Neighborhood Streets and reduce hazards by improving make our nation's streets safer 55 percent of all pedestrian� poorly deed roadways and for pedestrians. We lack only deaths by automobiles occur on transportation systems. For the public demand and political neighborhood streets. The years,tre b mengi on is have resolve to reduce pedestrian problem is not that pedestrians placed the blame on the walker injury and death. pugs 4 S7PP Prognss 9 Apri 1997 RethinlCing Pedestrian Advocacy by Bill liikbuon,Bicycle Federation of ATnerica and Campaign to Make America Walkabk �r the past 20 years the think of the issue not as simply indicator of a livable community. 1 Bicycle Federation of bicycling but in terms of trans- Who are we aiming at..It's = America(BFA)has worked with portation reform and livable neighborhood associations,PTA's . bicycle advocates to make com- communities. and other school groups, com- munities more bicycle-friendly. Many bicycle issues are state munity traffic sahty programs, a . With the passage of ISTEA in and regional in scale while most law enforcement agencies and 1991 we expanded our efforts to pedestrian issues are very local. personnel,elected officials, help bicycle and pedestrian The bicycling agenda is heavy transportation agencies,public activists create and sustain effec- with policy and planning consid- health agencies,senior citizens - _ - tive advocacy organizations at erations focussing on transports- groups,and so on.It's the people _. the state and local levels. lion.Pedestrian issues are more who live along a section of high- Initially, the BFA set out to likely to have a local community way that divides their neighbor- encourage bicycle advocacy focus. "Walkability"is a quality hood and make prisoners of any- groups to expand the scope of associated with livable communi- one who would like to travel by their mission to include making des and it is frequently consid- any mode other than a motor communities walkable.In most ered on a neighborhood by vehicle.It's parents who would cases this approach didn't work neighborhood,street by street like to see their kids able to walk but it did teach us some basic basis. or bike to school,to parks and principles of organizing and Last June,the Campaign to playgrounds,or to a friends same important distinctions Make America Walkable house.It's a mayor or city council between bicycle and pedestrian (CMAW)convened a two-day with a vision of a more livable advocacy. meeting of pedestrian advocates community with an economically Bicycle activists identify and specialists to consider a viable downtown and main street strongly with bicycling.They strategic plan to make America And,rather than ask them to think of themselves as bicyclists walkable.The group of 30 indi- join a pedestrian advocacy group and of bicycling as a mode of viduals included Federal,state or to make pedestrians and walk- transportation.This is rarely the and local government trans- ing a priority,we try to show case with pedestrians.Although portation professionals,repre- them how making their commu- there is a large community of sentatives of non-governmental nity or neighborhood more people who are interested in organizations,leaders of local walkable will help them better walking,they don't tend to think pedestrian advocacy groups,and address their own priorities and of themselves as"pedestrians." the media.We discussed our needs.Think about it,a more For them,walking is an activity common vision for a walkable walkable community not only not a mode. America,a set of strategic objec- addresses such obvious topics as Individuals get involved in an fives to take us from where we traffic safety and balanced trans- issue because the feel strongly are to where we want to be,and portation,it can promote physi- about it.If the issue is bicycling, the kinds of actions needed to cal fitness,help reduce crime, that's what they are interested in make it happen. increase property values,stimu- ...period.Hence,the bicycle We adopted an organizing late economic activity,and foster advocacy groups have by and strategy and tactics intended to a return to civility.As large not picked up the pedestri- get existing community groups Congressman Earl Blumenauer an agenda.The exceptions come and leaders to embrace walkabili- put it recently, "walking and where there are leaders who ty as an important quality or continued page 6 ST?P Progress•April 1997 page 5 bicycling are the indicator tate a desire and willingness to objectives.Think about it:isn't species of livable communities." act.When we stir-up this inter- this something that you want for CMAW is implementing a est and enthusiasm,we've got to your community? variety of programs to promote make it obvious what needs to actions at the community level happen and provide people with including walkabilit r audits, the tools they need to get the job F,mo,.e hypo rnaumt the Campaign pedestrian road shows,walkable done. to Make America Walkable—including communities courses, charretres, So,the focus of the QMAW's the National Pedestrian Cotjerence this pedestrian facility design course, pedestrian advocacy initiative is Sk ye,.in Washington, DC—Write and regional pedestrian confer- more on action than organiza- them at 1306 21st Strew NW, ences and training workshops. don.We believe that the way to Washingtmt,DC 20036 The feedback on our initial make America walkable is to get Fax 202.463.6625 efforts has been very positive.It the essting leadership of com- Fanaik walk@tramatxorg takes only the introduction of munities and neighborhoods to Web(after May 1)mtoanpromalk.org some sort of catalyst to precipi- adopt walkability as one of their Campaign to Make America Walkable Points for ISTEA Reauthorization: + Require appropriate fatalities for pedestrians on every street and highway right-of-way on which pedestrians are permitted. • Require that every statewide and metropolitan planning organization(MPO)long range transportation plan include an element assessing the needs of pedestrians and proposing specific actions to respond to these needs. + Require that every state and MPO transportation improvement program demonstrate that pedestrian needs are being addressed at a rate at least equal to that of other modes. + Require that every Federally-funded surface transportation plan,policy,project and/or other action include an assessment of the potential impacts on walking/pedestrians;and,if any such action is found to likely reduce or negatively impact the access and safety of pedestrians,require specific measures to be included in the proposed action to fully mitigate the impacts. ♦ Direct the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA)to ensure that every state highway safety program develop a pedestrian safety action plan and allocate funds to implement the plan at least propor- tional to the percentage that pedestrian fatalities make up of the state's total annual traffic related fatalities. + Amend the Surface Transportation Program"safety set-aside"to require that at least ten percent of the funds be used on pedestrian safety measures(e.g.,traffic calming projects). ♦ Direct the Bureau of Transportation Statistics to develop and implement a system of data collection proce- dures to accurately measure and monitor pedestrian/walking use and safety. ♦ Require the Intelligent Transportation System research program to under take feasibility/demonstration stud- ies of ITS technologies for motor vehicle speed control in residential areas,school zones,and shopping areas. + Direct the NHTSA to under take such actions as may be required ("including r alemaldng) to mandate the use by states and local governments of photo-radar type devices fur detecting speed limit and traffic control viola- dons and issuing appropriate citations. . • Establish a program modeled after Operation Lifesaver to fund a non-profit organization to focus on promot- ing and implementing actions to address pedestrian(and bicycle)safety. page 6 Sip?Progress•April 1997 (reating Walkable Communities - ` w •n�SE+-`i�� by Dan Burden,Director Walkable Communities,Inc. T> Walkable communiries are soda can with you. How long atioa,school siting, transit,etc. `v cornerstones to all forms did you have to carry it before Make sure your plan includes _ of efficient ground transporta- you could find a place to discard better ways of planning—mucht :. lion. Every trip begins and ends (recycle)it? How far do you have conventional planning overlooks - _ with walking. Walling remains to walk to t to transit? How get Pedestrians. the cheapest form of transport far do you have to walk before ; for all people, and the construc- you can find a place to sit? How Step Four—Set Realistic Goals, lion of a walkable community is many curb cuts are there and are Objectives an the most affordable orta- the a to negotiate? Do you transp y easy a y Change cannot occur _ � N• lion system any community can feel welcome walling in these overnight. But over a 15-20 year plan,design,construct and main- places? All these attributes are period,any town can restructure -- - - rain.Truly waBmble communities necessary to create welcoming enough of its thinking and action lead to places where crime and spaces- to make a difference.Set achiev- other social problems are able and measurable objectives addressed. Until we build truly Step TWO—Expand Your Audit that work within your communi- walkable places,we cannot begin Once you have performed an ty budget. Set priorities.Fund " to succeed with transit,ride shar- audit as an individual, and to near shopping districts asp projects PPS , ���.._s�"w:•- ing,van pooling and other trans- a team audit including key peo- schools,transit centers,and portarion alternatives. p your ty. complexes le from ur communi Have medical first. Below are steps that citizens, the chamber of commerce,set- staff,political leaders and others vice club,or group with signifi- Step rive—Reverse r:can take take to build the kind of cant clout serve as sponsors of Funding Priorities towns that our grandparents and the walling audit Include the Omitting sidewalks should be all previous generations knew mayor, council members, com- the exception, not the rule. how to build. missioners,senior planners, Require every builder and devel- engineers,school officials,safety oper to provide walkways. Step One—Conduct a officials,health officials, and law Require appropriate facilities Walltab1'lity Audit enforcement staff. Expand your (sidewalks,crosswalks,mid-block The first step is to conduct audit by reviewing how pedestri- crossings) on every collector, your own walkabiliry audit. Take ans are hurt when walking. arterial or other principal street a nine year old child with you, or Whir crimes keep people from and highway right-of-way pro- push a baby stroller for tours of walling and what injuries are ject in your community. Start your neighborhood,your central caused by cars? Interview people with city and county policies and business district,strip commer- as you walk" Share your findings expand to regional and state pro- cial section of roadway, and local with the press. jects.Even resurfacing projects school zone. Ask yourself how should be keyed to going back comfortable you feel walling. Step Three—Develop a Plan and retrofitting those where Do you feel secure? Are there Your planning must be com- appropriate facilities were for- continuous walkways and cross- prehensive.Your plans should be gotten in the past ing points convenient to your built into every level of commu- needs? Are the walkways well nity planning--transportation, Step Six—Set Criteria • separated from traffic? Carry a community development, recce- Review the criteria for side- onddnued page 11 SSPP Progress•Apnl 1997 Page 7 *Walkable Communmes from p A want,crosswalk and other infra- neighborhoods.Mixed use devel- adopt walking as a key com o- :-'�=`!'-'• � . structure standards,and set opment brings shopping and neat of both short and long n . workable wallnble minimums. some commute trips back to range transportation planning. y' Lam.: Two people cannot walk side-by- local neighborhoods. The scope is immense—banking side on a four foot sidewalk. Five Governments must take action rules currently favor sprawl - -.• - feet is a fine width for most local to serve as initial developers, if development. Even rules for streets,as long as the sidewalk is urban infill projects are to work. affordable housing(Federal set back from the curb two to six Housing Administration)rules feet. Commercial areas and Step Eight—Collaborate favor dropping sidewalks and _- school zones require sidewalks 8 and Communicate curbs for two-car parking. feet wide or wider.Review the Communities that cannot fig- design standards of cities where ure out how to communicate Step Ten—Don't Give Up you enjoy walking.If shade is between agencies or levels of Dozens of towns of all - - important in your region,call for governments are doomed.Towns descriptions have made rapid and - canopies.Trees are cheap to and cities that do not communi- substantial change in the past ten plant and greatly increase prop- cate with counties and regions to twenty years.Places like Davis erry values and enjoyment of will always be working at cross and San Diego, California; walling. Review design criteria purposes.Strong community and Portland and Gresham, Oregon; for intersections.Most intersec- regional visions are needed.If Seattle,Bellevue and Kirkland, -- -. - tions work best for everyone your town lacks this cooperation Washington;are all examples of (motorists too),when they are and coordination,start by towns and regions that have compact and well designed. rebuilding good town govern- made a difference.Each one of - ment first,then expand to the these places set forth effective = Step Seven—Fix the Land Use region and state strategies to reclaim the urban Current land use practices core,bring back transit, change favor automobile transportation. Step Nine—Expand to local and regional policies and We cannot walk to our most Regional and National Issues develop collaborative teams. if basic destinations such as pur- Walkable communities can- you don't believe you can bring chasing groceries, banking,mail- not be developed in isolation. change,go out and visit success- ing letters or getting to school. Much current regional and ful places that did it—you will be Walling,transit and public safe- national thinking is still focused inspired.Courtesy,community ty(eyes on the street and park) on moving vehicles,not people. and passion are found in require 5-8 dwelling units per Let your state legislators and America's most walkable places. acre,not the conventional 1-3 congressional delegation know units.The most beautiful and you expect them to change non- beloved streets in America,to sustainable policies and practices Den Burden it direcmr of Wadikable this day,have cute 25-50 foot to those that make sense and Communides,Inc,a small,non-profit wide lots that support bungalow save money.Before investing in organiaarion,zmbicb belps neighbor- and cottage size houses with nar- the next mega-million dollar IYWA sown and cities become more row sides fronting streets.We intersection,they should be malkabk,livable and su=mable get twice the infrastructure approving budgets that reduce Walkable Communide4 Inc, 320 Sourb (roads,water,sewers, cables)for sprawl and auto congestion. Mane Sneer;Mgb Springs,FL 32643, half the cost from such simple Require every MPO(metropoli- 904-454-3304, Principles as building traditional tan planning organization)to email address DBurden@aolcom STPP Progress-Apri 1997 Pogo 11 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS MEMO May 8, 1997 TO: Parks and Recreation Commission FROM: Terry Blum, Parks Leadperson SUBJECT: Parks Report for April 1. Sweep all pedways in City. 2. Cleanup and inspect all playground equipment. 3. Grade and drag all ball fields. 4. Stripe all foul lines and stripe soccer fields. Install soccer nets. 5. Cleanup restrooms for season. 6. Sweep ball fields and soccer fields. 7. Start up sprinkler systems and make repairs where needed. 8. Install job box for MHAA at Visitation. 9. Burn off wild flower areas. 10. General maintenance (check trash daily). Change over winter equipment to summer equipment. STATE OF MINNESOTA . Office Memorandum DEPARTMENT: NATURAL RESOURCES, DIVISION OF PARKS AND RECREATION DATE: APRIL 9, 1997 To: Fort Snelling State Park Planning Advisory Committee FROM: Grant Scholen, State Park Planner(612) 296-7381 C*4� SUSIECT: Draft Fort Snelling State Park Management Plan Review Enclosed is the draft management plan for Fort Snelling State Park. Please review the draft prior to the Open House scheduled for Wednesday, May 14, 1997. This review period includes 30 days to meet the requirements of the Outdoor Recreation Act. Plans are available at the libraries listed on the meeting announcement. If you would like additional plan copies, or if you know of someone who would like a copy, please contact me. The DNR, Division of Parks and Recreation and the Fort Snelling State Park Management Plan Technical Team have already reviewed the draft, and their comments have been integrated into the text. The topics and actions follow the directions set in the"Direction Document" you reviewed a few months ago. The only new topic added was"dredge material placement," found on page 80 of the draft. Following our Open House on May 14,the plan will be reviewed and approved by the Department of Natural Resources. When this final planning step is completed, I will contact you to get together for one more meeting,probably at the park picnic shelter sometime in August. If you have any questions,please feel free to contact me prior to the May 14 meeting. See you then, and thanks again for your attendance and help in pulling this draft plan together. C: Fort Snelling State Park Management Plan Technical Team Bill Morrissey Kathleen Wallace Wayland Porter Ron Hains John Strohkirch Nancy Albrecht Joel Stedman David Radford Dan Breva David Berg Steve Johnson Sandra Fecht,DNR Critical Areas Program Sandra Pinel, Metropolitan Council Critical Areas Program I t STATE OF MINNESOTA � Office Memorandum DEPARTMENT: NATURAI.RESOURCES, DMSION OF PARKS AND RECREATION DATE: FEBRUARY 20, 1997 TO: Fort Snelling State Park Planning Advisory Committee and Technical Team Members FROM: Grant Scholen, State Park Planner (296-7381) coor SUMECr. Notes from February 19 1997 Open House Attendance: Advisory Committee - Dorothy Waltz, Shawn Corwin, Ed Olsen, Ken Vraa, C.J. Lilly, Randy Oppelt, Joan O'Brien, Chris Esser, Sandy Welsh. Technical Team - JoAnn Kyral, Bill Weir, Wally Bartel, Judy Thomson, Mark Cleveland, Paul Kurvers, Dave Berg, Grant Scholen. Also, Phyllis Hanson from the Metropolitan Council. Approximately 25 persons attended the open house. Following an informal discussion session, a summary presentation of the Direction Document began at 7:30 p.m. Major discussion items included: • Uyner Bluff Area Statutory Boundary- Include a sentence in the draft plan which indicates the majority of advisory committee members addressing this issue felt the statutory boundary should be expanded to include this area as soon as possible. Bill Weir explained we are currently pursuing this area through the DNR Commissioner's authority which extends beyond statutory boundaries. . Northwest Corner Area - Several dog owners in attendance indicated they used this area for walking their dogs. They stated the direction document language appeared to be negative pertaining to dogs/dog owners. One owner stated they had not heard of anyone being intimidated or attacked by dogs in this area; examples of both intimidation and dog bites were cited by parks staff. Some owners suggested garbage bins for dog feces. They also stated this was one of the only places to walk their dogs in the area. One person stated dog walkers and bikers have displaced inappropriate uses which had been occurring in this area for years. It was clarified that leashes are required not only in the state park-administered areas, but in the Minneapolis Park Board area as well. Sandy Welsh from the Minneapolis Park Board offered to meet with dog owners during the informal discussion period following the meeting. • Scholen noted he had received 3 e-notes recently advocating the continuance of mountain biking in this area (copies attached). 0 t • Mark ling/ motion/Access - Add language peratining to the "mini-tours" being discussed from the Mall of America to the park. Also, expand on the possible concept of a transportation connection (e.g. tram) between Minnehaha Regional Park, Fort Snelling State Park, and the Historic Fort. NEXT STEPS: TENTATIVE DRAFT PLAN REVIEW SCHEDULE • Division of Parks and Recreation ( 2/21 - 3/14) • Technical Team ( 3/18 - 4/3) • Planning Advisory Committee/Public Review ( 4/11 - 5/14) • Open House (Wednesday, May 14, 1997) • Dept. of Natural Resources (June/July, 1997) c: Bill Morrissey Kathleen Wallace Ron Hains Pat Arndt John Strohkirch i i d t' To: Grant Scholen<grant.scholen0dnr.state.mn.us> From: Denny Rue <dennyrue @ pioneerplanet.infi.net> CC: Subject: Fort Snelling State Park Management Plan Date Sunday, February 16, 1997 5:59 PM I applaud the efforts of the DNR to solicit opinions from the community in regards to land management. This is necessary in all instances such as these (why did this not occur with the Battle Creek area?). I may not be able to attend the February 19 open house. As such, I feel that my opinions need to be expressed. The particular area I am interested in is the °Northwest Comer- Minnehaha Park Area." It is my favorite place in the Twin Cities to ride my mountain bike. It is basically the only place I can ride year round. As a matter of fact, I was there today to enjoy the beautiful weather. Responsible management by the users of that area can be employed to keep it open. I bike with regards to the environment and do not tread where the soil is soft and wet. It is my goal to leave no marks. This attitude needs to be adopted by all users of this area. Signs can be used to remind people of this. I see more damage caused by those who choose to use this area as a party grounds. Why was this not stated as a concern in the flier? I often encounter dogs when biking in this area. I've learned to stop and let the owner gain control of their dog. In extreme circumstances, a forceful ONO" shows them I mean business. Basically, this area can be shared amongst all people. It would be a shame if such a nice place in the midst of a major metropolitan area might be lost. If you like, the IMBA (International Mountain Bike Association) has a web site (httpJ/www.outdoorlink.com/IMBA). Publications can be obtained about procedures necessary to support harmonious multiple use. There is one part of the flier I received that I found rather ironic. It was stated that, due to the unleashed dogs and mountain bike conflicts (of which I never have encountered in 10 years), there are liability issues. However, the °sport" of snowmobiling, regulated, supported and promoted by the DNR, is on a pace towards a record year in the number of related deaths. Yet, there appears to be little concern over the issue of liability. I have not heard of any deaths resulting from dogs or mountain bikes in any part of the Fort Snelling Park area. Is the issue of liability a little bit overstated? 1101 Page 1 0 i To close, please realize that people can make the correct decisions when presented with the facts. If bikers and dog owners are banned from the Northwest Comer, where will they go that provides comparable beauty and terrain? Regards, Denny Rue President ATB Consulting, Inc. St. Paul, MN Page 2 • To: DNR.intemet('dennyrue*pioneerpianet.infi.net') From: Grant Scholen • CC: grschole Subject: Fort Snelling State Park Management Plan-Reply Date Wednesday, February 19, 1997 11:43 AM Hello Denny - Thanks so much for your note. I made a hard copy of your comments and will make them part of the planning process record. I also heard from one other person recently with similar comments on the "Northwest area.' This area has several different administrators and at this point, we are simply trying to identify them, where the ownership lines are, what rules apply, and what types of issues there might be so the administrators can cooperatively address them. I'd like to try to clarify some points on potential liability. The way it was worded, I can see where there's room for misinterpretation. The liability 'conflicts" would be most likely from dog bites/attacking users (which I have personally witnessed and heard from users who were bitten) and mountain bikers who get hurt and end up sueing. These types of lawsuits are relatively common in the recreation business, and I think we need to list this as a potential management issue so we can address it along with other issues. Thanks again for taking the time to write. Hope to see you tonight, R not, stay in touch. Grant Schoien Page 1 V 1 To: DNR-Cientrail.DNR-TAW-Parks(GRSCHOLE) From: <Gpbikeman®aol.com> CC: Subject: Restricted use of Fort Snelling Date Monday, February 17, 1997 4:44 PM I am writing to voice my opinion on the use of the north comer, please do not restrict the use of this area to bicycles, it is a low use area by people and bikes and is a nice area to casually ride and to play on our bikes for all ages especially youth who are loosing safe areas to ride out of traffic. Please don't let us loose more land to cars, and allow us to continue to ride in this area. Thank You Daniel Casebeer Grand Performance 699-2640 i Page 1 L To: DNR.intemet('Gpbikeman@aol.com") From: Grant Scholen CC: grschole Subject: Restricted use of Fort Snelling-Reply Date Tuesday, February 18, 1997 2:11 PM Hello - Thanks for the note. I think the north area you are referring to must be adjacent to the "Minnehaha Trail," which connects Fort Snelling State Park and Minnehaha Park. The area is currently used by bicyclists and dog-walkers. It is owned by the Mpls. Park Board, the Minnesota Historical Society, the National Park Service, and the Vets Admin. The state park starts where the yellow and black posted signs are south of Camp Coldwater, plus state parks manages the Minnehaha Trail connection under a real estate license with the Vets Amin and Bureau oif Mines. This area has a variety of owners/administrators and we are proposing in the Fort Snelling plan process that these administrators get together to coordinate management. Thanks again for your note. My number is 296-7381 if you'd like to discuss further. Grant Scholen, State Parks i Page 1 i To: DNR-Centrall.DNR-TAW-Parks(GRSCH0LE) From: brian.dukek<bdan.dukek0mci2od0.com> • CC: Subject: Fort Snelling State Park erosion due to Mountain Biking Date Tuesday,February 18, 1997 4:28 PM Dear Grant Scholen, Today on a newsgroup for mountain biking I found the following posting. First I include the posting, and at the end of this E-mail I will comment. The Fort Snelling State Park Management Plan will be discussed in an Open House on Wednesday, February 19, 1997 at 7:00 PM. This meeting will be held a the Fort Snelling Memorial Chapel. The use of the land bordering the Mississippi, below the Minnehaha bike path on the Minneapolis side is at stake. This land is currently owned by a variety of organizations and is an excellent place to ride MB's within the Twin Cities area. Even though the land is not managed by the DNR (Department of Natural Resources), they state that "resource and operational issues 'spill over' into the state park" and are attempting to manage it. In particular, they state: "Mountain bikes cause trail damage and erosion, which can impact sensitive resource areas. Black-ash seep areas were noted in the MN CBS report which were being negatively impacted by mountain bikes. There is also a potential for trail users conflicts." Furthermore: "There are liability issues related to unleashed dogs and mountain bike conflicts.' I find it rather ironic that the 'sport" of snowmobiling, regulated, endorsed and promoted by the DNR is on a pace to a record number of deaths. No concerns about liability there. Anyway, I digress. In the 10 years I've been riding there (in all seasons), I've learned to stay out of soft areas during the wet times. You can't go where the foot traffic hasn't been so I don't see where all the erosion is. I've never had any conflicts with other users -- we're all a pretty agreeable bunch. Education and responsible management is the key here, not exclusion. Page 1 • V 1 Now for my response to this issue. Last summer I spent many enjoyable hours on the paths that are in question. I do not know precisely how big of an impact mountain biking is in regards to erosion, but I do know that there are rules out that most mountain bikers follow in order to keep erosion to a minimum. These rules include not biking on extremely wet earth, such as might happen immediately after a thunderstorm or during early spring. Most responsible mountain bikers follow these rules, though there are always the few who ruin things for everyone else. Additionally, mountain biking is a growing sport that many people from the city use to get away to nature while exercising at the same time. Throughout the city more and more paths are being tarred or banned all together for use by bikers. This is leading to a reduction in the amount of parks that offer off road biking, which may backlash by increasing the concentration of bikers in the remaining parks. Please do not let the actions of a few irresponsible people (most likely young teenagers) rain the opportunities for off road biking in the Twin Cities. The same irresponsible people who are causing problems now will probably disregard any bans that may be put into place. This would lead to a lose-lose scenario of continuing erosion and the elimination of a great park for those of us who obey rules. Perhaps instead of removing parks from the use of mountain bikers you could help to make the "NORBA rules of the road" more known among younger people. Thank you, Brian Dukek bdan.dukek@mci2000.com Page 2 o,t 0 I To: 0NR.intemet(1brian.dukek*m62000.com") From: Grant Scholen CC: grschole Subject: Fort Snelling State Park erosion due to Mountain Biking-Reply Date Wednesday, February 19, 1997 12:15 PM Hello Brian, thanks for your note. I have had two other enotes from mountain bikers on this area today. At this point, our direction is just to acknowledge the area, identify ownership boundaries, administrators, and rules. There are several different agencies involved. Our direction states "work in partnership with the other administering agencies... to cooperatively manage this area." The list of potential issues was developed by a variety of managers, planning process participants, and users of the area. We are trying to list potential issues so the administrators can cooperatively address them. Liability concerns are an issue in any recreation area, no matter whid ft use. In this case, I think the examples brought up were dog bites/attacking other users and mountain bike accidents where the bicyclist sues after being hurt. Thank you for your suggestion regarding education and the NORBA rules. And thanks again for the enote. I'll make a hard copy and add it to the record of planning comments for this park plan. Grant Scholen, State Parks Page 1 • • CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS DAKOTA COUNTY.MINNESOTA PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION MINIMS APRIL 8, 1997 The regular meeting of the Mendota Heights Parks and Recreation Commission was held on Tuesday, April 8, 1997, in the Large Conference Room at City Hall, 1101 Victoria Curve. The meeting was called to order at 6:40 PM. The following Commissioners were present: Norton, Libra, Meinglass, Linnell, Liberacki. Chair Spicer was excused from the meeting. Also present was Administrative Assistant Patrick C. Hollister. APPROVAL OF MARCH 11 PARK AND RECREATION MINUTES Commissioner Linnell moved to approve the March 11, 1997 Parks and Recreation Commission Minutes with corrections. Commissioner Libra seconded the motion. AYES: 5 NAYS: 0 (Commissioner Damberg arrived at this point.) PARK DEDICATION FEES Mr. Hollister explained that at the March 11, 1997 meeting of the Parks and Recreation Commission, the Commission had asked Staff to place the park dedication policy on the April 8, 1997 agenda. Mr. Hollister continued that the Commission had also asked Staff to provide a comparison of what other cities require for their park dedication. Mr. Hollister said that the Commission was concerned that$750 may be low compared to what other Cities were asking for, especially in proportion to the land values in Mendota Heights. Mr. Hollister summarized the current park dedication policy. Mr. Hollister also explained that any Park Dedication Fee that a City wished to exact from a developer must meet three legal tests in order to be considered legitimate: 1. The City must be able to demonstrate that the fee or land exaction is necessary to meet an increase in demand for park services or to mitigate a negative impact upon the park system caused by the development itself. 2. The amount of the fee or land exaction must be roughly proportional to the increase in demand or negative impact caused by the development itself. • 1 3. The entirety of the fee or land exaction must be used for the park system, and may not be merged with the general fund or used for any other purpose. Mr. Hollister concluded that the City's Park Dedication policy should be consistent with goals and standards for parks and open space as expressed in our Comprehensive Plan. Commissioner Linnell said that an increase in the Park Dedication Fee could be justified based upon an increase in trail demand. Commissioner Liberacki said that an increase could be justified by the City's need for various types of open space (passive, active) and that the City was short-changing itself. Commissioner Libra asked Staff to research what the City had required from the BRA senior housing development in terms of park contributions. Commissioner Liberacki asked if there was a land exaction in addition to these fees. Commissioner Liberacki continued that there had been an increase in demand for bal fields and an increase in demand for trails, and that these increases could be documented. The Commission asked Staff to come back to the next meeting with an updated open space/park facilities inventory and a proposal to increase fees. OPEN SPACE PRIORITIZATION Mr. Hollister presented the"short list" of highly desirable remaining open space parcels which was compiled at the Joint Workshop between the Parks and Recreation Commission and the City Council on January 14, 1997: • Map#6 Acacia Area TIF Acquired Property • Map#9 Slowinski Property • Map#11 Foss Homestead by Wentworth Park • Map#16 Acacia property north of Acacia Boulevard • Map#18 Resurrection Cemetery"Break Off' Area • Map #19 Visitation Convent Property • Map#21 Tousignant Property off Mendota Heights Road Commissioner Linnell said that the Commissioners should go on a tour of open space either individually or as a group, and that passive and active use could be combined on one park. Commissioner Damberg said that the City should talk to Foss about acquiring his land. Commissioner Liberacki said that he disagreed with what he perceived to be the prevailing • philosophy among his fellow Commissioners, that anything of natural or scenic value should be publicly owned. Commissioner Liberacki said that due to a combination of 2 ienvironmental regulations and a landowner's own incentives to preserve the beauty of a given site, in general those views which we value in the City would be preserved. Commissioner Liberacki continued that rather than use limited government funds to buy land to prevent trees from being cut down, it would be better to use the funds for park land that was visible, accessible, and usable. Commissioner Linnell said that there should be an overlook at Acacia with a plaque explaining the history of Pilot Knob. Commissioner Linnell said that the Foss land would be good for an extension of the Park and Trail system and could be compatible with Single Family Home construction. Commissioner Libra said that the Resurrection Cemetery land would be good for a park and picnic area. Commissioner Liberacki said that when Resurrection develops, the City should get the 10% dedication in land and hook up a trail around the lake. Commissioner Norton agreed with Commissioner Liberacki. Commissioner Linnell suggested that at the next meeting the Commission take two cars or a van and do a tour of these sites. Commissioner Linnell offered to talk to Mr. Slowinski to try to get permission to walk his property during the tour. UPDATES Mr. Hollister provided updates on the following items. Caren Road Detention Pond Commissioner Damberg said that the ponding area of Caren Road should be enhanced by replacing some of the plantings. Commissioner Damberg suggested putting up signs saying"Wild Flower Restoration Area." Commissioner Damberg also requested that Mr. Kullander make an on-site visit and talk to the neighbors. Commissioner Linnell offered to come to that meeting if it could be arranged. Commissioner Liberacki suggested that the Caren Road ponding area be included in next month's open space tour. Commissioner Damberg said that the City should pay more attention to the appearance of its older neighborhoods. 3 . Commissioner Libra said that some of the project money for the Tilsen reconstruction should be used to replace trees and put up signage for the wild area at the Caren Road site. North Kensington Park Commissioner Linnell said that he thought he had reached a compromise with Councilmember Smith about North Kensington Park, and that Mr. Kullander would be presenting his revised plan to both of them before bringing it to Council for approval. Commissioner Norton said that she knows of a non-profit organization that runs seminars for homeowners on the advantages of native plantings in their yards which would reduce the need for fertilizer and pesticides and would be good for water quality, as well as give their yards a more natural appearance. Commissioner Norton said that this approach should also be taken for the public land around City Hall. Wentworth Picnic Shelters Commissioner Libra said that he would like to see specific plans for the Wentworth park shelters. Wentworth Park Warming House Commissioner Libra said that he wanted a Staff review, cost parameters and a capital budget review for warming houses. Commissioner Libra asked staff to identify locations in the City where new warming houses should be built. Commissioner Norton said that Mr. Kullander should build a new multi-use, multi-purpose shelter for summer programs. Commissioner Liberacki said that continuity of architecture was important, and that the new shelter should resemble the existing shelters. Commissioner Liberacki recommended a pre-fab building on a poured slab with garage-type doors around it that could be rolled up for summer programs. Dakota County CIP Commissioner Liberacki said that he was disappointed that in the most recent Dakota County CIP there was no reference to road widening or trails apart from the NURT trail and the Big Rivers Trail. Commissioner Liberacki asked Staff to inquire as to why that was the case. Commissioner Liberacki said that roadways are in the 5-year plan, but not widening shoulders. 4 Commissioner Libra said that the County was spending a disproportionate amount of money for trails in the southern part of the County, and that some of that money should be channeled into trails for the north. Commissioner Norton said that the Mayor and City Council need to lobby the County for trails. Commissioner Libra said that one major barrier to the NURT Trail is that Valley Park neighbors don't want that trail widened very much. Commissioner Norton asked Staff to invite someone involved in trails and roads from Dakota County to come to a future meeting Wood Duck Houses in City Ponds Mr. Hollister explained that the Council had authorized the expenditure for wood duck houses and that the Public Works crew had started making these birdhouses. Full-Time Recreation Facilitator Mr. Hollister said that the Council had decided to discuss the issue of a full-time Recreation Facilitator at a 5-year plan setting workshop in mid-May. Park Police Summary for 1996 Mr. Hollister distributed a summary of all police incidents in City parks for the year 1996. Other Mr. Hollister announced that Mr. Esser was married on Saturday, April 5 and that he was now on honeymoon until April 14. Commissioner Damberg announced that she would have to miss next month's Commission meeting because she will be in Istanbul. Commissioner Liberacki asked Staff to bring back the issue of Mr. John Doyle of 810 Ridge Place who wanted to donate his back yard to the City. Mr. Hollister distributed a letter submitted by Chair Spicer inviting interested Commissioners to attend the Dakota County Parks and Recreation Advisory Committee information sharing meeting in May 7, 1997 at Camp Sacajawea. Commissioners Norton and Linnell said that they would try to attend. 5 Parks Report Mr. Hollister presented the Parks Report for the month of March. ADJOURNMENT Motion to adjourn made by Damberg and seconded by Kleinglass. AYES: 6 NAYS: 0 The meeting adjourned at 7:55 p.m. Respectfully Submitted Patrick C. Hollister 6