HomeMy WebLinkAbout2011 09-26 City Council/Manager Workshop Packet*Times Listed Are Approximate
AGENDA
MAPLEWOOD CITY COUNCIL
MANAGER WORKSHOP
5:15 P.M. Monday, September 26, 2011
Council Chambers, City Hall
A. CALL TO ORDER
B. ROLL CALL
C. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
D. UNFINISHED BUSINESS
1. Board & Commission Interviews
E. NEW BUSINESS
1. Discussion on Stop Sign Policy
2. Discussion on Renaming a Maplewood Park to Veterans Memorial Park
F. ADJOURNMENT
THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
Work Session Agenda Item D1
AGENDA REPORT
TO: James Antonen, City Manager
FROM: Charles Ahl, Assistant City Manager
Sarah Burlingame, Senior Administrative Assistant
DATE: September 20, 2011
SUBJECT: Board & Commission Interviews
INTRODUCTION
The City Council will be conducting a continuation of interviews of candidates for the Housing
Redevelopment Authority and the Environmental and Natural Resources. Interviews were also
conducted during the September 12 Council Workshop. There are a total of seven (7) openings
due to commissioner terms ending: Three (3) on the Housing Redevelopment Authority, two (2)
on the Environmental and Natural Resources Commission and two (2) on the Business and
Economic Development Commission. Applicants are given 15 minutes to interview.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Council interview the candidates as indicated in the schedule below.
The suggested questions will be submitted under separate cover to the Council. During the
interview process, Council Members should fill out their ballots. Once the Interviews have
concluded, Council Members should submit their ballots to staff, which will be tallied with the
results brought back to the Council during a regular meeting at a later date with
recommendations for appointments.
Time Candidate Commission
5:15pm Question Selection
5:20pm Nick Nelson Environmental & Natural Resources
5:35pm *Judith Johannessen Environmental & Natural Resources
5:50pm *Bill Schreiner Environmental & Natural Resources
6:05pm Lisa Hlavenka Environmental & Natural Resources
6:20pm *Gary Pearson Housing Redevelopment Authority
* Indicates Candidate is Seeking Reappointment
Attachments:
1. Candidate Applications in order of interview schedule
2. Applications from interviews on September 12, 2011
Packet Page Number 1 of 24
Workshop Agenda Item D1
Attachment 1
Packet Page Number 2 of 24
Workshop Agenda Item D1
Attachment 1
Packet Page Number 3 of 24
Workshop Agenda Item D1
Attachment 1
Packet Page Number 4 of 24
Workshop Agenda Item D1
Attachment 1
Packet Page Number 5 of 24
Workshop Agenda Item D1
Attachment 1
Packet Page Number 6 of 24
Workshop Agenda Item D1
Attachment 1
Packet Page Number 7 of 24
Workshop Agenda Item D1
Attachment 1
Packet Page Number 8 of 24
Workshop Agenda Item D1
Attachment 1
Packet Page Number 9 of 24
Workshop Agenda Item D1
Attachment 2
Packet Page Number 10 of 24
Workshop Agenda Item D1
Attachment 2
Packet Page Number 11 of 24
Workshop Agenda Item D1
Attachment 2
Packet Page Number 12 of 24
AGENDA REPORT – COUNCIL WORKSHOP
TO: James Antonen, City Manager
FROM: Michael Thompson, City Engineer/ Dep. Public Works Director
SUBJECT: Stop Sign Policy Discussion
DATE: September 19, 2011
INTRODUCTION
The council will discuss possible revisions to the current stop sign policy.
BACKGROUND
The City receives a handful of requests each year mostly for installing neighborhood intersection
controls, such as stop signs. Proponents of stop sign installation typically present a relatively emotional
appeal based on a recent accident or series of “near misses”. Likewise, opponents to stop signs voice
their dissatisfaction with the inconvenience, noise, pollution, and determined motorists who simply
ignore or circumvent stop signs. Over the past few years the City often has installed intersection
controls at the request of neighborhood residents per the current policy, only to be opposed by other
residents with a dueling petition.
In 1992 a neighborhood stop sign policy (see attached) was adopted by the City to accomplish the
following objectives:
1. Provide the opportunity to consider any proposal that demonstrates reasonable neighborhood
support.
2. Provide information to the entire community about the proposals under consideration.
3. Provide for open discussion before the city council representing all sides of the issue.
4. Utilize the city council’s and staff’s time most effectively.
The following approach was then adopted in 1992 by the city council:
1. At least 12 signatures required to show neighborhood support.
2. Response mailed to requesting party about public meeting time.
3. Article published in the city newsletter about stop sign pros and cons, along with subject area of
consideration.
4. Either a special meeting or regular city council meeting would serve as the open meeting for the
public discussion and consideration.
DISCUSSION
The current policy is dated and does not reflect best practices regarding regulatory intersection control
and sign applications. A majority of the petitioner requests do not meet regulatory sign warrants.
Research suggests that at most locations, increasing the level of intersection control will not improve
safety (FHWA-RD-81-084 Stop, Yield, and No Control at Intersections).
According to the Minnesota Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MnMUTCD), stop signs cause
a substantial inconvenience to motorists and should be used only where warranted by facts and field
studies. A stop sign may be warranted at an intersection where one or more of the following conditions
exist:
CMW Item E1
Packet Page Number 13 of 24
1. Intersection of a less important road with a main road where application of the normal right-of-
way rule would not be expected to provide reasonable compliance with the law;
2. Street entering a through highway or through street;
3. Unsigned intersection in a signalized area; and/or
4. High speed, restricted view, or crash records that indicate a need for control by the STOP sign.
The following is the guidance from the MnMUTCD for multi-way stop applications:
It is important to remember that installing unwarranted intersection control signage (i.e... stop signs)
does not control speed and can have a number of negative outcomes such as:
Increased traffic noise (braking and accelerating)
Increased traffic speeds to make up for lost time
Increased automobile pollution
Stop compliance is poor because drivers feel it serves no purpose
CMW Item E1
Packet Page Number 14 of 24
Pedestrians get a false sense of security at the intersection because they expect all vehicles to
stop when signed as such (but many drivers do not)
Increased costs to the local jurisdiction for sign installation, maintenance, and replacement.
Also, there are associated costs for enforcement.
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the city council and staff conduct a discussion about the current policy and
possible revisions. The current policy does not reflect best practices. The MnMUTCD should be the
guide to all requests, including neighborhood stop signs. A possible direction moving forward is that
the engineering staff reviews each request and response to the requestor according to best practices.
If regulatory signs are warranted the recommendation would be brought to the city council for action. If
the request is found to be unwarranted, then the engineering staff would notify the requestor(s) that no
further action will be taken.
Attachments:
1) Stop Sign Policy
2) MnMUTCD (Stop Sign Information)
CMW Item E1
Packet Page Number 15 of 24
CMW Item E1
Attachment 1
Packet Page Number 16 of 24
CMW Item E1
Attachment 1
Packet Page Number 17 of 24
February, 20082B-1
Chapter 2B. REGULATORY SIGNS
2B.1 Application of Regulatory Signs
Regulatory signs shall be used to inform road users of
selected traffic laws or regulations and indicate the applica-
bility of the legal requirements.
Regulatory signs shall be installed at or near where the
regulations apply. The signs shall clearly indicate the
requirements imposed by the regulations and shall be
designed and installed to provide adequate visibility and
legibility in order to obtain compliance.
Regulatory signs shall be retroreflective or illuminated to
show the same shape and similar color by both day and
night, unless specifically stated otherwise in the text
discussion of a particular sign or group of signs (see Section
2A.8).
The requirements for sign illumination shall not be
considered to be satisfied by street, highway, or strobe
lighting.
2B.2 Design of Regulatory Signs
Most regulatory signs are rectangular, with the longer
dimension vertical. The shapes and colors of regulatory
signs are listed in Tables 2A-4 and 2A-5, respectively.
Exceptions are specifically noted in the following Sections.
The use of educational plaques to supplement symbol
signs is described in Section 2A.13.
Changeable message signs displaying a regulatory
message incorporating a prohibitory message that includes a
red circle and slash on a static sign should display a red
symbol that approximates the same red circle and slash as
closely as possible.
2B.3 Size of Regulatory Signs
The Mn/DOT “Standard Signs Manual” (see Map &
Manual Sales Unit, page ii) and the Federal "Standard
Highway Signs" (see Government Printing Office, page ii)
book contains sign sizes and letter heights for regulatory
signs.
SUPPORT:
GUIDANCE:
SUPPORT:
STANDARD:
The Expressway and Freeway sizes should be used for
higher-speed applications to provide larger signs for
increased visibility and recognition.
The Minimum size may be used on low-speed roadways
where reduced legend size would be adequate for the
regulation or where physical conditions preclude the use of
the other sizes.
The Oversized size may be used for those special appli-
cations where speed, volume, or other factors result in
conditions where increased emphasis, improved recognition,
or increased legibility would be desirable.
Signs larger than those shown in this chapter may be used
(see Section 2A.12 and Appendix C).
2B.4 STOP Sign (R1-1, R1-3, R1-4)
When a sign is used to indicate that traffic is always
required to stop, a STOP (R1-1) sign shall be used.
The STOP sign shall be an octagon with a white legend
and border on a red background. Secondary legends shall not
be used on STOP sign faces. If appropriate, a supplemental
plaque (R1-3 or R1-4) shall be used to display a secondary
legend. Such plaques shall have a white legend and border
STANDARD:
R1-4
450 x 150 mm
18” x 6”
R1-3
300 x 150 mm
12” x 6”
R1-1
750 x 750 mm
30” x 30”
ALL WAY4WAY-
STOP
OPTION:
GUIDANCE:
STANDARD:
The sizes for regulatory signs used on conventional
roads, expressways, freeways, and low-volume roads, and
under special conditions shall be as shown in Appendix C
at the back of this Manual.
Compliance Date: December 22, 2013
MN Rev. 2
CMW Item E1
Attachment 2
Packet Page Number 18 of 24
May, 2005 2B-2
on a red background. If the number of approach legs
controlled by STOP signs at an intersection is three or more,
the numeral on the supplemental plaque, if used, shall
correspond to the actual number of legs controlled by STOP
signs.
Because the potential for conflicting commands could
create driver confusion, STOP signs shall not be installed at
intersections where traffic control signals are installed and
operating except as noted in Section 4D.1.
Portable or part-time STOP signs shall not be used except
for emergency and temporary traffic control zone purposes.
STOP signs should not be used for speed control.
STOP signs should be installed in a manner that
minimizes the numbers of vehicles having to stop. At inter-
sections where a full stop is not necessary at all times, con-
sideration should be given to using less restrictive measures
such as YIELD signs (see Section 2B.8).
In many low volume situations with no unusual history of
intersection crashes, no control at the intersections is a cost
effective strategy. Research suggests that at most
locations, increasing the level of intersection control will not
improve safety (see FHWA-RD-81-084 Stop,Yield and No
Control at Intersections).
Once the decision has been made to install two-way stop
control, the decision regarding the appropriate street to stop
should be based on engineering judgment. In most cases, the
street carrying the lowest volume of traffic should be
stopped.
A STOP sign should not be installed on the major street
unless justified by a traffic engineering study.
The following are considerations that might influence the
decision regarding the appropriate street upon which to
install a STOP sign where two streets with relatively equal
volumes and/or characteristics intersect:
A. Stopping the direction that conflicts the most with
established pedestrian crossing activity or school
walking routes;
B. Stopping the direction that has obscured vision, dips,
or bumps that already require drivers to use lower
operating speeds;
C. Stopping the direction that has the longest distance of
uninterrupted flow approaching the intersection; and
D. Stopping the direction that has the best sight distance
to conflicting traffic.
The use of the STOP sign at highway-railroad grade
crossings is described in Section 8B.7. The use of the STOP
sign at highway-light rail transit grade crossings is described
in Section 10C.4.
SUPPORT:
GUIDANCE:
SUPPORT:
GUIDANCE:
STANDARD:
At intersections where all approaches are controlled by
STOP signs (see Section 2B.7), a supplemental plaque
(R1-3 or R1-4) shall be mounted below each STOP sign.
Compliance Date: January 17, 2004
The ALL WAY (R1-4) supplemental plaque may be used
instead of the 4-WAY (R1-3) supplemental plaque.
The design and application of Stop Beacons are described
in Section 4K.5.
2B.4.1 CROSS TRAFFIC DOES NOT
STOP Plaque (R1-X2)
The CROSS TRAFFIC DOES NOT STOP sign may be
used at intersections where geometric, topographic or other
conditions exist and motorists approaching a STOP sign
may expect cross traffic to stop. When used, it shall be
installed on the same structure as the STOP sign beneath
all other supplemental plaques.
Its use shall be limited to those intersections where an
engineering and traffic investigation indicate a need.
2B.5 STOP Sign Applications
STOP signs should be used if engineering judgment
indicates that one or more of the following conditions exist:
A. Intersection of a less important road with a main road
where application of the normal right-of-way rule
would not be expected to provide reasonable
compliance with the law;
B. Street entering a through highway or through street;
C. Unsignalized intersection in a signalized area; and/or
D. High speeds, restricted view, or crash records that
indicate a need for control by the STOP sign.
GUIDANCE:
STANDARD:
OPTION:
R1-X2
600 x 300 mm
24” x 12”
CROSS TRAFFIC
DOES NOTSTOP
SUPPORT:
OPTION:
CMW Item E1
Attachment 2
Packet Page Number 19 of 24
2B.6 STOP Sign Placement
The STOP sign shall be installed on the right side of the
approach lane to which it applies. When the STOP sign is
installed at this required location and the sign visibility is
restricted, a Stop Ahead sign (see Section 2C.29) shall be
installed in advance of the STOP sign.
The STOPsign shall be located as close as practical to the
intersection it regulates, while optimizing its visibility to the
road user it is intended to regulate.
STOPsigns and YIELD signs shall not be mounted on the
same post.
GUIDANCE:
STANDARD:
2B.7 Multi-way Stop Applications
Multi-way stop control can be useful as a safety measure
at intersections if certain traffic conditions exist. Safety
concerns associated with Multi-way stops include
pedestrians, bicyclists, and all road users expecting other
road users to stop. Multi-way stop control is used where the
volume of traffic on the intersecting roads is approximately
equal.
The restrictions on the use of STOP signs described in
Section 2B.5 also apply to Multi-way stop applications.
The decision to install Multi-way stop control should be
based on an engineering study.
The following criteria should be considered in the
engineering study for a multi-way STOP sign installation:
A. Where traffic control signals are justified, the multi-
way stop is an interim measure that can be installed
quickly to control traffic while arrangements are being
made for the installation of the traffic control signal.
B. A crash problem, as indicated by 5 or more reported
crashes in a 12-month period that are susceptible to
correction by a multi-way stop installation. Such
crashes include right- and left-turn collisions as well
as right-angle collisions.
C. Minimum volumes:
1. The vehicular volume entering the intersection
from the major street approaches (total of both
approaches) averages at least 300 vehicles per hour
for any 8 hours of an average day, and
2. The combined vehicular, pedestrian, and bicycle
volume entering the intersection from the minor
street approaches (total of both approaches)
averages at least 200 units per hour for the same 8
hours, with an average delay to minor-street
vehicular traffic of at least 30 seconds per vehicle
during the highest hour, but
3. If the 85th-percentile approach speed of the major-
street traffic exceeds 40 mph, the minimum
vehicular volume warrants are 70 percent of the
above values.
D. Where no single criterion is satisfied, but where
Criteria B, C.1, and C.2 are all satisfied to 80 percent
of the minimum values. Criterion C.3 is excluded
from this condition.
GUIDANCE:
SUPPORT:
2B-3 May, 2005
There should be no sign mounted back-to-back with a
STOP sign in a manner that obscures the shape of the STOP
sign.
Compliance Date: December 22, 2013
Section 2A.16 contains additional information about
separate and combined mounting of other signs with STOP
signs.
Stop lines when used to supplement a STOP sign, should
be located at the point where the road user should stop (see
Section 3B.16).
If only one STOP sign is installed on an approach, the
STOP sign should not be placed on the far side of the inter-
section.
Where two roads intersect at an acute angle, the STOP
sign should be positioned at an angle or shielded so that the
legend is out of view of traffic to which it does not apply.
Where there is a marked crosswalk at the intersection, the
STOP sign should be installed approximately 1.3 m (4 ft)in
advance of the crosswalk line nearest to the approaching
traffic.
At wide-throat intersections or where two or more
approach lanes of traffic exist on the signed approach,
observance of the stop control may be improved by the
installation of an additional STOPsign on the left side of the
road and/or the use of a stop line. At channelized intersec-
tions, the additional STOPsign may be effectively placed on
a channelizing island.
Figure 2A-2 shows examples of some typical placements
of STOP signs.
SUPPORT:
OPTION:
GUIDANCE:
SUPPORT:
CMW Item E1
Attachment 2
Packet Page Number 20 of 24
Other criteria that may be considered in an engineering
study include:
A. The need to control left-turn conflicts;
B. The need to control vehicle/pedestrian conflicts near
locations that generate high pedestrian volumes;
C. Locations where a road user, after stopping, cannot
see conflicting traffic and is not able to reasonably
safely negotiate the intersection unless conflicting
cross traffic is also required to stop; and
D. An intersection of two residential neighborhood
collector (through) streets of similar design and
operating characteristics where Multi-way stop
control would improve traffic operational characteris-
tics of the intersection.
2B.8 YIELD Sign (R1-2)
The YIELD (R1-2) sign shall be a downward-pointing
equilateral triangle with a wide red border and the legend
YIELD in red on a white background.
The YIELD sign assigns right-of-way to traffic on certain
approaches to an intersection. Vehicles controlled by a
YIELD sign need to slow down or stop when necessary to
avoid interfering with conflicting traffic.
2B.9 YIELD Sign Applications
OPTION:
SUPPORT:
STANDARD:
R1-2
900 x 900 x 900 mm
36” x 36” x 36”
YIELD
OPTION:C. At the second crossroad of a divided highway, where
the median width is 9 m (30 ft) or greater. A STOP
sign may be installed at the entrance to the first
roadway of a divided highway, and a YIELD sign may
be installed at the entrance to the second roadway.
D. At an intersection where a special problem exists and
where engineering judgment indicates the problem to
be susceptible to correction by the use of the YIELD
sign.
AYIELD (R1-2) sign shall be used to assign right-of-way
at the entrance to a roundabout intersection.
2B.10 YIELD Sign Placement
The YIELD sign shall be installed on the right side of the
approach to which it applies. YIELD signs shall be placed
on both the left and right sides of approaches to roundabout
intersections with more than one lane on the signed
approach where raised splitter islands are available on the
left side of the approach. When the YIELD sign is installed
at this required location and the sign visibility is restricted, a
Yield Ahead sign (see Section 2C.29) shall be installed in
advance of the YIELD sign.
The YIELD sign shall be located as close as practical to
the intersection it regulates, while optimizing its visibility to
the road user it is intended to regulate.
YIELD signs and STOPsigns shall not be mounted on the
same post.
GUIDANCE:
STANDARD:
STANDARD:
2B-4May, 2005
YIELD signs may be used instead of STOP signs if
engineering judgment indicates that one or more of the
following conditions exist:
Compliance Date: January 11, 2011
A. When the ability to see all potentially conflicting
traffic is sufficient to allow a road user traveling at the
posted speed, the 85th-percentile speed, or the
statutory speed to pass through the intersection or to
stop in a reasonably safe manner.
B. If controlling a merge-type movement on the entering
roadway where acceleration geometry and/or sight
distance is not adequate for merging traffic operation.
There should be no sign mounted back-to back with a
YIELD sign in a manner that obscures the shape of the
YIELD sign.
Compliance Date: December 22, 2013
Section 2A.16 contains additional information about
separate and combined mounting of other signs with YIELD
signs.
YIELD lines, when used to supplement a YIELD sign,
should be located at a point where the road user should yield
(see Section 3B.16).
Where two roads intersect at an acute angle, the YIELD
sign should be positioned at an angle, or shielded, so that the
legend is out of view of traffic to which it does not apply.
Except at roundabout intersections where there is a
marked crosswalk at the intersection, the YIELD sign should
be installed in advance of the crosswalk line nearest to the
approaching traffic.
GUIDANCE:
SUPPORT:
CMW Item E1
Attachment 2
Packet Page Number 21 of 24
At a roundabout intersection, to prevent circulating
vehicles from yielding unnecessarily, the face of the YIELD
sign should not be visible from the circulatory roadway.
At wide-throat intersections or where two or more
approach lanes of traffic exist on the signed approach,
observance of the yield control may be improved by the
installation of an additional YIELD sign on the left side of
the road and/or the use of a yield line. At channelized inter-
sections, the additional YIELD sign may be effectively
placed on a channelizing island.
2B.11 Yield Here to Pedestrian Signs
(R1-5, R1-5a)
This section has been removed because it is in conflict
with Minnesota Statute 169.
2B.12 In-Street Pedestrian Crossing Sign
(R1-6b)
The In-Street Pedestrian Crossing (R1-6b) sign may be
used to remind road users of laws regarding right of way.
The In-Street Pedestrian Crossing sign shall only be
used at mid-block locations or at intersection approaches
not controlled by a STOP sign or a traffic control signal.
The In-Street Pedestrian Crossing sign shall only be
installed at in-street locations. It shall not be installed on the
outside shoulder nor in a parking lane.
If an island (see Chapter 3G) is available, the In-Street
Pedestrian Crossing sign, if used, should be placed on the
island.
GUIDANCE:
STANDARD:
OPTION:
R1-6b
300 x 1100 mm
12” x 44”
STATE
STOP
FOR
WITHIN
CROSSWALK
LAW
OPTION:
In order to avoid overuse, the In-Street Pedestrian
Crossing sign should only be used at locations having high
pedestrian crossings.
If used, the In-Street Pedestrian Crossing (R1-6b) sign
shall have a black legend and border on a white and
fluorescent yellow-green background. According to State
Statute, the legend STATE LAW and STOP FOR shall be
included on the sign.
The In-Street Pedestrian Crossing sign shall have either
the same sign message on the back side or a strip of
retroreflective sheeting not less than 50 mm (2 in) in width.
The color of this strip shall be the same as that of the lane
line the on which the sign is placed.
If the In-Street Pedestrian Crossing sign is placed in the
roadway, the sign support shall comply with the breakaway
requirements of NCHRP-350, Category 2 for 70km/h (45
mph) (see Section 1A.11). The maximum mounting height
from the roadway to the bottom of the sign shall be 0.6 m
(2 ft).
The In-Street Pedestrian Crossing sign shall only be
installed on roadways with posted speed limits of 35 mph or
less and shall not impede normal through or turning traffic
movements.
There shall be only one In-Street Pedestrian Crossing
sign installed for each approach to marked crosswalks (see
Figure 2B-2).
In-Street Pedestrian Crossing signs should be mounted
back-to-back only when used on two-lane, two-way
roadways.
The Provisions of Section 2A.18 concerning mounting
height are not applicable for the In-Street Pedestrian
Crossing sign.
When used as an informational sign and not at
pedestrian crosswalks, the In-Street Pedestrian Crossing
sign may have the same legend on both sides.
The In-Street Pedestrian Crossing sign may be used
seasonably to prevent damage in winter because of plowing
operations, and may be removed at night if the pedestrian
activity at night is minimal.
OPTION:
SUPPORT:
GUIDANCE:
STANDARD:
2B-5 February, 2008 MN Rev. 1MN Rev. 1MN Rev. 2MN Rev. 3
CMW Item E1
Attachment 2
Packet Page Number 22 of 24
2B-6May, 2005
Four-Lane Undivided Roadway
Four-Lane Divided Roadway
with Turn Lanes
Two-Lane, Two-Way Roadway
R1-6b R1-6b with
SCHOOL plaque
STATE
STOP
FOR
WITHIN
CROSSWALK
LAW
SCHOOL
STATE
STOP
FOR
WITHIN
CROSSWALK
LAW
Direction of travel
Sign Structure
Single Sided Structure
Back-to-Back Structure
Legend
Two-Lane, Two-Way Roadway
with Center Turn Lane
Figure 2B-2. Typical Placement of In-Street Pedestrian Crossing Signs
CMW Item E1
Attachment 2
Packet Page Number 23 of 24
Agenda Item E2
AGENDA REPORT
TO: James Antonen, City Manager
FROM: DuWayne Konewko – Parks and Recreation Director
Jim Taylor – Recreation Program Supervisor
SUBJECT: Renaming a Maplewood park to Veterans Memorial Park
DATE: September 20, 2011
INTRODUCTION
As per Council direction, staff would like to work with the Parks and Recreation Commission to
rename an existing Maplewood Park “Veterans Memorial Park” in honor of our veteran’s. The
mission of the park would be to honor Minnesota Veterans that have fought for our freedom, our
State, and our great Nation.
DISCUSSION
Upon review of our parks system to find a park that would be not only highly visible but highly
used, staff feels that Goodrich Park would fit the mold to accomplish these goals. Goodrich
Park houses our entire adult softball program as well as many tournaments yearly for youth
fastpitch softball. In addition to the athletic offerings Goodrich will be redeveloped over the next
couple of years and we will be able to incorporate the memorial aspect into the redevelopment.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff is looking for Council’s direction on this matter.
Packet Page Number 24 of 24