Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout6.18.08 packetI1'Y L MMISSI®N SPECIAL ME TI Wednesday, May 7, 2008 6:30 p.m. Council Chambers -Maplewood City Hall 1830 County Road B East 1. Call to Order m 2. Roll Call -Four members present, no quorum. Meeting held as information meeting. 3. Approval of Agenda 4. Approval of Minutes 5. Visitor Presentations -none. 6. Comprehensive Land Use Discussion -Jennifer Haskamp, consultant, explained her role is to update the Summary Chapter of the Parks, Trails and Open Space Plan for the Comprehensive Plan. Every ten years the Metropolitan Council requires an update of Comprehensive Plans. Ms. Haskamp has been working with Parks Plan Advisory Panel on several topics: Goals and Objectives; Trai{ System, and Land Use and Parks. On May 8 they will look at park needs in South Maplewood. 7. Objectives and Discussion Items • Land use classifications have been consolidated to group similar items together. • The land use plan includes two classifications for parks and open space. • Natural resources will have its own chapter in this edition of the Comprehensive Plan. • In south Maplewood, most of the area will be low density residential. But the proposal calls for the Bailey Farm to be mixed use. • In the parks plan, all open space will be shown on the map, not just parkland. • Ramsey County owns a lot of open space in this area. The plan should include a policy statement that if the county sells its land, we may need more open space in this neighborhood. • A commissioner indicated that the ski jump area may present some opportunities for partnerships. • Pleasant View Park has tennis and basketball courts, winter skating area, picnic area, ballfields and natural areas. It is a multi-use park, approximately 14 acres in size. • There are about 67 acres of parkland in this neighborhood, including active and passive parks. • A question was raised: What parcel would you like to protect if you had to make a choice? Commissioners present agreed Fish Creek is the most important area to protect in south Maplewood. • A consultant is going to do an ecological evaluation of parcels in South Maplewood in late May and early June. 9. Discussion on Parks Needs in Other Neighborhoods • Vista Hills neighborhood has about 18 acres of parkland. There might be opportunity some day at the gun range property, which is used by police. • Battle Creek neighborhood is almost all county property. Battle Creek Park is 392 acres and includes a dog park. Afton Heights Park is 12 acres and Carver School partners with our recreation program. • Beaver Lake neighborhood has a lot of mobile homes. Geranium Park is 9 acres. Gethsemane Park is not owned by the city and there is proposed development for this site. If the city cannot work out an agreement for park facilities at Gethsemane, we will need to find other parkland in this area. The Park Plan will mark a search area for this. • Lions Park is 3 acres; Jim's Prairie is about 5 acres; and the Nature Center about 40 acres. Beaver Lake has county land. Beaver Lake School has ball fields. • Lions Park is run down. It's about 3 acres and has a tot lot and drainage problems. Storm water management will need to occur on part of the site. • The 3M complex includes a large wetland. This will have a special designation in the natural resources plan. • The Gladstone area parks encompass over 62 acres. The design process for Gladstone Savanna is on :hold. Totlot facilities from Glouster Park will be incorporated into tl-~e Savanna. The Comprehensive Plan will classify Flicek as a neigE~~r~orhood :<~i~(~. Commissioner Sonnek stated she would like to have a historical marker ~.."'I_c;_ts«=:>>~~e. • There is ar ~ opFrr space pares! at Kennard and Frost. The plan shouid identify ownership cf this parcel. • Sherwood Glen neighborhood has 20 sores awned by the city. Sherwood Park and Robinhood Park serve active park needs in this area. John Glenn fields are used by the city. • Maplewood Height f °< i ages; Play Crest Park is 16 acres; Jay 61 acres. Prairie Far. ~ ~ruentrup Farm buildings. This are 125 acres, and is possibly "~ r-parked.,` • Hazelwood neighborhood has wetlands and open space. Parks include: Four Seasons Park Hazelwood Park (all major soccer fields are here), Harvest Park, Kohlman Creek Preserve, and county open space. There are 105 acres of parkland in this neighborhood. • The Kohlman Lake area has Sunset Ridge, Kohlman Park, Fischer's Corner Preserve, Spoon Lake Preserve. There are about 72 acres of parkland in this area v 21 active acres and 51 passive acres. There are good trail components in the area. • Parkside neighborhood is west of Highway 61 and north of Larpenteur. It has Maplecrest, Edgerton, Roselawn, Keller, and Kenwood Parks. The Edgerton School site has a total area of 22 acres and most of it is active. Roselawn is designated as a stormwater holding pond and is an area of opportunity. We need to determine whether Roselawn should be a park or an open space. The site needs signage to show it is public land. • Mississippi Street park was looked at about a year ago. On the maps it is shown as open space. • Western Hills is about 6 acres and is an active park. This neighborhood is probably an area that is underserved. St. Paul Regional Water owns Sandy Lake. • There are a lot of natural areas in Maplewood and Ms. Haskamp will note these on the Parks map as Open Space. • Land near Hill Murray and St. Paul's monastery is currently being discussed by a group of partners. • A portion of Sterling Street west of Hill Murray is going to be vacated in 2008. There is wetland and open space in this area. • South of the Priory Preserve there are a lot of wetlands and green space that are owned by the city or the county. • The group discussed whether there should a playground at Sterling Oaks. • The area near Priory does not have much active parkland. • Hillside Park does not have parking. This could possibly be a neighborhood park. The trails are well connected in this area. The city needs signage in this area to designate where parks are. • Ms. Haskamp will update the plan based on the comments provided at the meeting. • A draft of the chapter will be ready at the next meeting. 10. Comprehensive Plan Open House Dates -May 22"d at Maplewood Community Center. This will include an in-depth presentation. A third Open House may be scheduled. 11. Adjourn -(9:30p.m. E~ext meeting is May 21, 2008, at 6:00 pm. 1. Called to Order by Commission Fischer at 6:00 p.m. 2. Roll Call Commissioners Binko, Brannon and Sonnek were a few mirliates late. 3. Approval of Agenda a. Commissioner Fischer requested that the May 7, 2008 Meeting Minutes be removed from the agenda. The set included in the packet was not complete. The May 7, 2008 meeting minutes will be placed on the next meeting agenda. b. Commissioner Christianson made a motion to accept the amended agenda and was seconded by Commissioner Schmidt. Motion carried. 4. Approval of Minutes a. Commission Fischer asked if there were any corrections to meeting minutes: b. Commissioner Schmidt and Commissioner Fischer had some corrections to the minutes. c. The approval for the May 7, 2008 Parks Commission Meeting Minutes was tabled until they are complete. d. Commissioner Brannon made a motion to approve the March 13, 2008 meeting minutes as amended. Commissioner Roman seconded the motion. All ayes -motion carried. e. Commissioner Roman made a rnotion to approve the March 19, 2009, meeting minutes as amended. Commissioner Brannon seconded the motion. All ayes-motion carried. f. Commissioner Roman made a motion to approve the April 16, 2009 meeting minutes as amended. Commissioner Schmidt seconded the motion. All ayes-motion carried. 5. Visitor Presentations -None Delay update on preserve. Mr. Konewk~~ ~ ~°~uested ~~:~~oving the Park Plan up on the agenda and then have Citizens Servic:~> °_)!?d.`'' ~: report. iv. A special section on the proposed park and trail system in South Maplewood. b. After the Summary is approved the sections and tables will also need to be updated. c. The maps are almost complete and should be available for the next meeting The primary objective for this evening is to have an informal discussion on fhe materials in the Draft Summary Chapter. d. Introduction and Background i. Separate City Owned property from other property. Commissioner Fischer asked that the number of acres of county and state owned park land be made more general because of properties owned by watersheds and the Battle Creek Ski Jump area. ii. Commissioner Fischer also requested changing the last sentence of the first paragraph to read within a half mile of their homes not a half hour. iii. Background -This section lays the framework for the rest of the document. Explains the Advisory Panel and their involvement. It also includes community demographics and what regional studies have been done in Maplewood. e. Parks Trails and Open Space Goals and Objectives i. This section starts with general goals and objectives for the system and then gets more specific. ii. This talks about how the Parks integrates with Natural Resources. Ecological resources which is the tie in to the Natural Resource Systems. iii. Park land management, acquisition and development section focuses on management rather than acquisition because the City is already largely developed. iv. Trail Corridors /Right -of -Way Acquisition and Development has two goals. a) Acquire, develop and maintain an interconnected trail system for transportation, recreation, and educational purposes. b) Promote and encourage residents to be active through the development of an efficient and accessible trail system f. Comments on the first section i. Commissioner Christianson commented that the word holistic is used quite a bit in the document. What exactly does that mean? Ms. Hasskamp stated that the idea is how all parts work together to create a system and i~ow this system integrates with other systems. How Parks, Trails and f r;n~portatif;;; <~II work together. There will be one extensive and cc+rr~~rehent~ive glossary in the fine! document. Ms. Flasskamp will make a note ~,,~: ;,~~li tic" to the glossary. g. Commur~ii:~, ~;~ is Partnerships -This section discusses relationship building by working wili ~ school systems and other governmental entities. The majority of th(~ section looks pretty close to th°° ~riginaE daft. Crmmissioner Peterson qE' ~tior~ed the word neighbor , ~" .~ ..gat men,,; , ~,,~~,oring communities? The i. Park Land Management, Acquisition, and eveiopment, i. The advisory panel was insistent that archeological objectives be in the objectives. j. Trail Corridors i. Commissioner Fischer asked does the transportation plan include the trails. Ms. Hasskamp stated yes and she believed that the entire trail plan will be in the Transportation Chapter also. ii. Commissioner Schmidt questioned the meaning of "potential easement where land acquisition is not possible". Ms. Hasskamp stated that if the other party would not sell the property but would grant an easement so that the trail could go through that land. Commissioner Fischer asked if this was limited to voluntary easements or would it include condemnation? Ms. Hasskamp stated that our goal is to work with the land owner first and try to work out any. problems first. iii. Commissioner Brannon asked to explain `'improve accessibility". Ms. Hasskamp stated it would mean classifying the trail system correctly and letting residents know how to use trails properly by using maps and/or signage. A way to understand and communicate the trai6 system to others. Ms. Hasskamp will support that statement with some examples. iv. Safety concerns were expressed by Commissioner Christianson and Commission Schmidt. Ms. Hasskamp stated that when planning a trail system the City's goal or objective would be to be conscious of citizens' safety not guaranteeing the citizens safety. k. Recreational and Educations! Programs i. Commissioner Fischer asked if fine arts were considered educational. Commissioner Fischer's feeling is that fine arts are more entertainment than educational. ii. Ms. Gaynor stated that artistic and cultural events/programming needed to part of the plan to include the MCC and its programs. iii. Commissioner Fischer wanted these words added at the higher level. Ms. Gaynor stated it needs to be at all levels. Ms. Hasskamp will make that change. iv. Commissioner Christianson's concern was including the economically disadvantaged. He questioned the statement "fair and equitable basis." Scholarships are available commented Pauline Staples. Ms. Hasskamp stated that language could be added stating along the lines of continuing to support programs such as the scholarship fund and developing similar ~~~~~~ rarograrr~s, Commissioner Peterson mentioned that Maplewood is st~CfiY1C1 pmrramming geared toward seniors who would also need sc',E F l= ~ to participate in the programming. I. Funding i. Ms. Hasskamp explained that you need to maintain the areas because if you don't you will have un~welcomc~ ~° •~sts ,°~~~' tF°~ park would become a r~~~erment to the City. She st; ;r~ i § ~ weeds to show how muc' t` _ o City has -haw do~ :., what is the parcel _oing to be maintained f h eve funds to maintain it. if e do not havc .' ~e funds to mR' . it, maybe fend could be used some other wr ~uldn't be fins ~ iafiy burdensome. Instead of being an active park maybe it should be an open space. Ciscussion took place regarding maintaining the number of parks in the City. ii. Commissioner Peterson stated the danger of losing a park that the City will never get it back. iii. Commissioner Christianson asked what the difference is between manage and maintain. Ms Hasskamp stated that manage is daily activity; maintaining is keeping the level of service. She stated these words could be part of the glossary. iv. Commissioner Sonnek stated that she feels this is the first negative statement in the document. v. Commissioner Brannon stated there should be a policy for when dollars are not available to maintain all parks. vi. Commissioner Yang also agreed that the statement was negative. Look at it as ensuring a proactive approach on how we manage the system so that it is cost effective and efficient. vii. Ms. Hasskamp stated that this section was more about being proactive. The statement is more about who is here and what their service needs are, and are we meeting the demographic needs. It is more about planning parks purposefully with a balanced approach. Are the parks being used for there best use? viii. Commissioner Peterson stated we need to look into a different system to restore PAC funds. ix. Commissioner Fischer believes that the last sentence needs to be reworded. Ms. Hasskamp will look at this objective and bring back new wording. m. Existing Conditions section discusses the existing system and identifies areas where we have made improvements, areas that continue to need improvement and emerging issues and opportunities. i. Draws attention to what the City has done. ii. Park and trail classifications are in this section. iii. The dominant use of a park is how a park will be classified in this document. iv. Important for citizens to know that you intend to do the things listed in this document. v. Ms. Hasskamp can add a sentence to refer that that the dominant use is how the park is classified. It doesn't mean it is the only use of the park area. vi. Commissioner Sonnek asked if a dog park is active or passive. Ms. Hasskamp stated it would be an active use. n. Park, mils and Open Space Plan i. Table .5 will be updated. There will be a mileage counter on every proposed trail First number is the overall mileage and the number in parenthesis is what actually developed of the trail. ii. ®iscussion took place about having a park or open space within .5 miles of every neighborhood. This is our standard and criteria. iii. Commissioner Yang is concerned about neighborhood desires to change an active park to a passive park or an open space. The park maybe used by "outsiders". We need to be conscious of the neighborhood needs and the City needs. iv. Ms. Hasskamp suggested that we have to think of the systems holistically as the City and neighborhood by neighborhood Ms. Hasskamp will add bullets to clarify this. - v. Commissioner Christianson questioned how neighborhood parks could be used. vi. Commissioner Sonnek questioned having the .parks use fit the geography of the area. What would be practical? Commissioner Fischer stated that park land has been graded to meet the needs of the park. vii. Commissioner Christianson questioned the limit of 4-6 acres of active park plan in the Carver Ridge area. Ms. Hasskamp said that there isn't a limit, but the amount of land was based on a formula/parameters. Suggested changing the wording to a minimum of 4 acres. viii. Commissioner Peterson had a concern about the Highwood neighborhood having access to City open space and county open space. There are trail component that connect this neighborhood to other parks and open spaces. ix. Commissioner Schmidt has a comment about Special Use Parks - 2nd bullet point -stated that there is a desire for dog park not a need. x. Commissioner Peterson commented on Bruentrup Farm. The City of Maplewood wrote a lease agreement with the Maplewood Historical Society. She doesn't feel the relationship is described accurately. She suggested adding a clause to acknowledge the relationship. xi. Ms. Gaynor followed up with Mr. Moriarty, Ramsey County Parks; he stated Ramsey County does not have a Fish Creek Trial on their plan. p. Ms. Hasskamp will make changes. Her intent is to have the document back to you with the changes and the maps possibly at the June meeting. 6. Citizens ;_~,-~fic>e Upr±-?~~~lNature Centerll`~eighborhood Preserves a. Taste ~{ ~.naple~.~-<~od will be on June 19, 20Q£3. b. New pr~,~r~;,~;~:; ~~ailable at the Community Center include: C"atin dance, kids speed, po~iurt kick, senior smart, progressive Pllates, ballroom dance, youth floor hockey, youth yoga, and senior beat, There is membership special going on no°.°° th~°~: when a customer buys a thr~°° m°~nth m€m"~~~":~ they would gee ~!~~ ~~!!rth free. table tennis, c. Bf e. ~ activity: The Rf C~. , . ~r s _ . _ . V~'ithi oek period, 70 people ` - -rvice. d. W ~. f. U~,vvming Events include: Blues and BBC in July in the Community Center, a Fall 3ridal Expo, and a Craft Show on November nth and 9th, g. MCC Birthday parties have been enhanced to include theme parties. h. The Community Center will start charging for Child Care starting June 1, 20013. Adrop-in day Dare will also be added. i. ®addy/daughter dance. j. Kids Sale -Swim lessons are up and beaches are open tomorrow. k. July 4th Celebration will feature the Lamont Cranston Sand. Melrose Pyrotechnics will be presenting the fireworks. I. Adult softball, approx 100 teams. T-ball starts first week in June. MAA softball 160 girls are signed up. Gym Jammers -enrollment is up -after school program -School dances m. A lot of energy is going into Recreational Programs and the Community Center. One concern with the Center is that they want to be self sufficient. Commissioner Yang asked if the Center is nearing self sufficiency. n. Commissioner Fischer suggested scheduling the financials for the Community Center at a future meeting. Mr. Konewko will extend an invitation to Karen to come in July to our meeting. o. Ms. Staples stated that in the next City News there will be an event guide. Also watch the newspapers there will be a special section in St. Paul Pioneer Press. p. Commissioner Yang expressed concern that many banquet facilities do not offer Chinese food. Ms. Staples stated that four of•the five caterers on contract with the Community Center will work with Asian population to meet their catering needs. j. If the Commissian recommends the funding of this project, staff recommends that ~/2 of funds come from Environmental Utilities Fund and the other half from RAC funds. k. Commissioner Yang asked if the Commission only recommends paying for of what the Association is asking for, what would the Association do. Mr. Konewko stated that the expenses have already been incurred by the Silver Lake Improvement Association. I. Dr. Mike Manthei informed the Commission of the noxious weed situation on Silver Lake and what has been done so far and what needs to be done. The Silver Lake Improvement Association received a grant from the DNR to help offset the costs of the treatment. The DNR is watching the Lake closely. The new treatment is 5 times the expense of last year's treatment. The Association has tried to be cost efficient. m. Dr. Manthei invited Commission members to attend the Association's meetings. n. The Association calculated the City of Maplewood's share would be 33% which would be $19,800. Staff calculated that the City of Maplewood had 27.5% of the lake shore. Shann Finwall suggested funding 50% of $16,000 which was calculated on the 27.5 % of shoreline. o. The City of Maplewood only has two parks with lake.. shore -Wakefield and Silver. p. Maplewood is the only one that hasn't given the full amount. q. Commissioner Sonnek stated that there are only two parks on lakes in Maplewood. r. Mr. Konewko stated that the City of Maplewood has 7 lakes that are impaired; Silver Lake is not impaired. Kohlman Lake is impaired. s. Commissioner Roman asked why you wouldn't need to spray any more after five years. Dr. Manthei said there will be continued management of the lake. There would be spot treatments. It would take 5 years to so the full lake treatment. Commissioner Roman asked if other things have been done to help eliminate the problem. t. The Association will work with Maplewood for the shoreline preservation and storm water run off. u. Discussion took place. Commissioner Schmidt stated that removal of the noxious weeds would mainly be for recreational purposes, requests from other lake associations were not approved for funding in past for recreational purposes. The Watershed Commission ensures water quality in lakes and weth,r!Ets not to ~~~~~sure recreational purposes. The emphasis is on recre~tio~,~l n~!„r,=~~ses. v. Commis. ~~ ~ ~; ~ acnnek stated this is a recreational lake. The City of Maplewood leas a boat launch on the lake. She feels we have an obligation for the treatment of this lake. This is the only bast launch in Maplewood City Rarks. w. This is a pilot project end that is why the DNR. is offee~ing grants for the program. x. It is up to the Corr....' a recommend to staff who yauld be br< ~°7t ~ t` City ~: cll. y ~ i ~ e .e ... W Lake a` ta,e $~ ,500 a~~~A. Co missioner onnek ac' :+' a frie~~dly amendment conditi~.n~: thy.:: testing shows progress with the treatmento A full report would be brought back to the Commission next year. And Commissioner Fischer adjourned the meeting at 10:10. The next Parks Commission Meeting will be on June 4, 2008 at 6:30 pm. TO: City of Maplewood Parks Commission Members FROM: Jennifer Haskamp DATE: June 12, 2008 RE: Draft Parks, Trails, and Open Space Chapter Parks, Trails, and Open Space Comprehensive Plan Update GenerallBackground The attached Parks, Open Space and Trail Comprehensive Plan Chapter is provided for your review and comment. At the Parks Commission meeting on May 21St, commission members commented and provided suggested changes to the document. Those changes have been included within this draft. To more easily identify changes astrike-through and underline method has been used. Additionally, an implementation plan is included for your review and comment. The implementation plan was developed by staff and reflects current and projected projects in detail over the next five years, and also includes projects identified in the CIP for the next 10 years. AP Update The Advisory Panel reviewed the draft document on June 12, and at the time of this memo the meeting had not occurred. The Advisory Panel was asked to review the draft document and identify any substantive issues or concerns and make recommendations regarding those issues to the Parks Commission. A follow up memo highlighting those issues will be sent to Parks Commission members prior to the meeting to ensure these comments/recommendations are considered by the Commission at the meeting on June 18tH Parks Commission Objectives (June 18, 2008) The objective for the Parks Commission is to review the revised copy of the Chapter, and to focus specifically on the implementation section. Ideally, the Parks Commission will make a recommendation to the Planning Commission to include the Parks Chapter in the Comprehensive Plan Draft. lintrcucticr~ The City of Maplewood has an extensive park, open space and trail system that requires extensive management, maintenance and planning. The City's park system provides a high quality of life for all residents and contributes to the overall appeal of the city as a desirable place for people to live and recreate. The system includes approximately 860 acres of city owned and managed parks and open space land, and residents also have access to an additional 890 acres of countyxstate, and agency o_wnetl dark land. The_recent Statewide_Co_mprehensive Outdoor Recreation Deleted: and Plan (SCORP) prepared by the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR) stated that, "About two-thirds of all recreation use in the state occurs within a half hour of home." Maplewood provides recreational opportunities throughout the entire city, thereby providing residents with opportunities well within a half an hour of their homes, and in most cases within ahalf-mile of their homes. The following plan provides an update to the existing Parks, Open Space and Trail System component of the Comprehensive Plan that was adopted in December 1999. The previous plan provided an extensive inventory of the entire parks system, and while some changes or additions have been made to the system, the overall plan remains valid for purposes of this plan. The summary includes a set of new goals, objectives and future plans for the parks, trails and open space systems. A change from the previous plan is the separation of the natural resources section into an independent chapter. This change was made due to the rising significance of the natural resources system in the community. Maplewood also wanted natural resources to be a building block for all other sections of the 2010 Comprehensive Plan Update. Background The Parks, Trails and Open Space chapter is an important component of the City's overall comprehensive Plan. This chapter is included in the City's Comprehensive Plan to ensure good planning of Maplewood's parks system, as well as to meet the requirements of the Metropolitan Council. The City used the existing Parks, Trails and Open Space plan as a baseline for updating this plan component. Since the last comprehensive plan update some significant changes have been made and are reflected in this plan. From a document structural perspective, the city placed increased significance and focus on the City's natural resources. As a result, that component has been placed in its own chapter to ensure the appropriate attention and significance is placed on that component of the plan. The Plan also includes additional focus on clear and concise action oriented goals to help guide future planning efforts. Finally, a shift in focus from active parks to trail development and connections is presented in this plan. Because the city is almost fully developed, further park acquisition in most neighborhoods is not necessary, but the trail system will require acquisition and development to adequately support the parks system already in place. Parks, Trails, and Open Space Advisory Panel The Parks, Trails and Open Space update included the participation of an Advisory Panel that was assembled with participants from the city's various commissions and a few members of the public at large. The purpose of the Advisory Panel was to review the parks, trails and open space system considering all of the other components of the Comprehensive Plan, The Advisory Panel reviewed the system and made recommondations on this plan, and subsequently passed the recommendations along to the responsible commissions. The meetings held by the Advisory Panel included the following topic areas: ® Goals and objective setting, development, and refinement ® Natural Resources and Natural Area Greenways Trails ® Land Use South Maplewood -Special Area Discussion The meetings covered general topic areas of the Comprehensive Plan to give the Panel context for making recommendations. At the time of this document, the South Maplewood Area (described as area south of Carver Avenue) was one of the few relatively undeveloped areas in the community. Additionally, in the previous plan a parks, trails and open space plan had not been prepared for this area. As a result the Advisory Panel spent a great deal of time discussing this area and understanding its unique attributes, The Advisory Panel concluded their efforts by reviewing this document and making recommendations to the Parks Commission and Planning Commission. Community Demographics As mentioned in previous chapters, the demographics in the community are changing. (See Chapter X for more detailed information). Understanding who lives in the community, and how many people are projected to live in the community helps the City understand potential park and trail needs. According to the Metropolitan Council, the Twin Cities Metropolitan Area is projected to grow by over a million people by 2030, and the vast majority of chose people will move into the 7-county metropolitan area. Although the area will grow because Maplewood is largely developed, only an additional 2,500 people are projected to move to Maplewood. Even with a small growth rate, the demands on the system are likely to increase, particularly for parks or trails that serve the region. Special attention to commuting trails and regional parks should be considered and monitored as growth occurs. Another consideration is the changing demographics in the community. The baby-boomer generation is the fastest and largest growing population throughout the region. This demographic is an active population that enjoys walking, nature hiking, fishing and other passive recreational activities, New residents are also changing and different cultures can be seen throughout the community. Although a full survey was not completed for this plan document, understanding the population in the community will continue to be important to ensure that residents' needs are being met. Regional Studies Over the past 15 years several studies have been completed with respect to regional planning for parks, trails, and open space. The following discussion highlights some of those studies to provide additional perspective on planning for the City's system. University_of_~nnesota -- Leisure Trends in the Twin Cities In 1996, the University of Minnesota's Survey Research Center published a study of leisure trends entitled, "Leisure Trends in the Twin Cities". The study looked at resident's desires for a variety of recreational opportunities and their perceptions on current facilities and future needs. In the previous Parks Comprehensive Plan dated December 1999 a thorough study was completed for the City. Although an extensive survey was not completed for this update, many of the trends highlighted in the survey will carry over into the current planning effort. In many respects, study findings parallel those of the Maplewood survey, with natural area preservation and walking areas being high on the list of priorities. This plan builds on those principles to help create a strong park, trails and open space system. The Regional study identified the following trends and generalizations: ® Walking around the neighborhood and in large, natural parks. ® Individual sports over organized sports, at least at the adult level. ® People valuing parks even if they didn't use them. • Especially strong desire to set aside land for nature areas/open space, bike paths, and general use trails. Statewide Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plan (SCORP) The Minnesota Department of Natural Resources prepares the Statewide Comprehensive Plan every five years to keep apprised of recreation trends across the state. Because the City of Maplewood does not have the resources to prepare a survey every time it prepares a comprehensive plan update, the SCORP plan and associated surveys can serve as a good interim survey of needs in the community. The DNR administered a survey in 2004 entitled; Outdoor Recreation Survey 2004 which revealed similar trends to those identified in Maplewood's 1998 survey. Respondents identified walking, boating, swimming, picnicking and biking as their top outdoor recreation activities. Additionally, the survey identified changes in demographics, an increasing metro area population (additional one million residents in the area by 2030), and rising obesity rates as contributors to the state's mission of increasing overall activity in the outdoor recreation system. Ramsey County -Active Living Ramsev County (ALRC The Active Living program is administered at a county level through the Active Living Ramsey County program. The program has actively solicited participation by local governments to introduce Active Living and Healthy Living infrastructure into their city and subsequent planning efforts. Studies have been performed at a state and national level to help support the need for Active Living characteristics throughout a community. Such principles include well connected walking paths and bike trails, clearly delineated and signed trails, and pedestrian friendly environments, to name a few. Several programs and grants are available throughout the County and State. These studies were used directly to help support the parks and trails plan identified in this plan. Parks, Tra~ls9 anc~ ~ ~a ~ ~~cti~e General Parks, Open Space, and Trail System Plan G®als The following goal and objective statements apply to the parks, trails, and open space plan holistically. These topics cover many issues that are important to the community including the function of the system, the protection of natural resources, and city staff. More detailed goals are identified by topic in subsequent sections. General Goal 1: To prepare and implement a comprehensive park, open space, and trail system plan. Objectives: ® Inventory and evaluate the existing park and trail system, recreational needs of the community, park and trail classifications and standards, and acquisition/development guidelines to ensure adequate parks and trails are provided in the city. ® Prioritize and preserve high quality natural resources that support a diverse system plan. Prioritize and preserve areas of historic value. Implement the plan for the purpose of guiding parks, trails, open space and recreational facility development in the forthcoming years. ^ Develop a means for ongoing and systematic evaluation of park and trail system components, thus allowing for actual and perceived changes in community needs to be reflected in the system plan. • Enhance the community's and public agencies' understanding of the park, trail and natural resources system and development objectives. Create and establish a strong vision and marketing plan that encourages residents to use the parks system and participate in associated programming. Develop and create clear, concise information about that parks and natural areas system within the community that is accessible to all residents, policy makers and staff. General Goal 2: To maintain and support the natural resources system as an integral part of the parks system. Objectives: Enhance the community's understanding of biodiversity and natural systems as a part of the overall parks system. ^ Prioritize natural areas within the community that should be preserved and maintained as a part of the parks system. ^ Support the Natural Area Greenways as a part of the parks and natural resource system. Explore opportunities to support the natural resource system as a part of the parks system. General Goal 3: To maintain and support awell-trained, highly motivated staff to carry out the City of Maplewood's mission of developing a quality park, natural resource and recreation system. Objectives: Support and provide professional staffing to manage and direct the park system and programs in a professional, effective, and efficient manner. Maintain and promote high quality staff through communication and coordination of the system holistically. ® Support staff and policy makers through effective long-range planning initiatives. ® Effectively and efficiently coordinate efforts between staff, city and adjacent jurisdictions. ® Create and establish a strong vision and marketing plan that attracts high quality staff and commission members. Community and Partnerships Relationship building and commitment to working with our neighbors and residents will help ensure successful implementation of this plan. The following goals and objectives identify ways in which we should conduct business internally and how we should work with other regulatory agencies. Community Goal 1: To establish effective communication and interactions with residents about parks, open space and trails. Objectives: ® Update and distribute park system map and information. ® Create signage to educate park users. ® Promote active and ongoing interaction between the city and residents. ® Actively engage with under-represented members of the community, ® Promote ongoing communication between the Park and Recreation Commission and city residents. a Develop and support volunteer programs and other organizations that encourage residents and community organizations to assist in park and natural resources improvements, maintenance, recreation programs, and educational programs. Explore and develop new methods and technologies that promote more effective communication and accessible information. Community Goa12: To maximize the recreational opportunities available to city residents through the development of fair and equitable working partnerships between the city and the local school district, adjacent cities, county, churches and civic organizations. Objectives: Communicate and promote the City of Maplewood facilities internally and externally to potential users. Fairly and equitably integrate the City of Maplewood programs with those of the other members of the partnership. Effectively communicate programming and facilities available to residents and the region through these partnerships. Work with adjacent jurisdictions and regulatory agencies to provide an efficient and accessible parks and recreational system that encourages activity throughout the community. Ecological Resources Restoration and Management A key component of the parks, trails and open space plan are the preservation, acquisition and management of important natural areas in the community. These goals and objectives support the creation of environmental corridors and providing natural areas for the enjoyment of city residents. More detailed natural resource goals can be found in the Natural Resources Chapter of the Comprehensive Ptan. Ecological Goal 1: To preserve and protect ecological systems and natural resources within the city. Objectives: Preserve and protect significant natural resources within the city. ® Identify, prioritize, and protect sites of high ecological value or sites within Natural Area Greenways that increase habitat value of the greenway. p Engage in a comprehensive approach to natural resources planning that includes parks, neighborhood preserves, Natural Area Greenways, city open space, and other public and private lands. Enhance the character and appeal of the community by connecting natural resource areas. • Increase the value of public natural areas by encouraging adjacent landowners and others in the neighborhood to maintain natural vegetation on private lands, • Identify and protect natural areas within active parks. ® Identify opportunities to convert turf grass in active parks to natural vegetation, Ecological Goal 2: To maintain and enhance ecological systems and natural resources within the city. Objectives: ® Inventory and evaluate natural areas. • Prioritize, manage and restore natural areas including neighborhood preserves, natural areas at active parks, wetland systems, and other city open space sites. ^ Develop restoration and management plans for city natural areas including neighborhood preserves, natural areas at active parks, wetland systems, and other city open space sites. ^ Ensure restoration and management plans are economically and ecologically feasible, are sustainable long- term, and are based on science and up-to-date restoration methods. • Adjust natural resource plans as new information on global warming becomes available. • Increase diversity of plant communities and diversity of species in Maplewood. • Enhance enjoyment of the natural world and understanding of biodiversity and natural systems within the community. • Promote environmental stewardship of public and private lands. • Educate and engage residents in restoration and management activities on public and private lands, • Promote environmentally sensitive stewardship of active parklands and other city land that reduces amount of turf grass and minimizes use of pesticide, fertilizer, and irrigation. Park Land Management, Acquisition and Development The City is blessed with a strong parks system that includes various types and sizes serving neighborhoods throughout the community. The City is largely developed, with some exceptions, and therefore the following goals and objectives are focused on maintenance, management and development or redevelopment activities for the future of fhe system. Park Land Goal 1: To maintain and enhance existing active parks and passive parks to provide a high quality of life for all residents. Objectives: • Promote the parks system (including open space, and natural areas) as the foundation of the character, ambience, appearance, and history of the community. • Create and follow an implementation program that provides for the adequate maintenance and enhancement of the park and natural system throughout the community. • Enhance and improve the quality of life within the city by providing adequate parkland and natural resource areas to fulfill the present and future physical and psychological needs of residents. Park Land Goal 2: To adequately provide and maintain open spaces and natural areas to ensure each resident has access to green spaces and nature. Objectives ® Use the parks and natural resource areas and interconnecting trail corridors as significant factors in shaping the future of Maplewood. ® Maintain and connect active and passive parks with neighborhoods, community facilities and schools to ensure accessibility, Enhance and maintain environmental carridars, natural areas and open spaces to provide access and educational opportunities to all residents. Park Land Goal 3: To acquire land far parks, natural areas and open spaces, that can be maintained and used by the community and the city. Objectives ^ Maintain and enhance the character and aesthetic appeal of the community through the provision of parks. Provide access and space to all residents to escape the hard surfacing of the urban environment and to provide the opportunity to enjoy nature and the City's park system. ® Maintain and enhance areas in the community that support the character, ambience, appearance, and archaeological history of the community. ® Plan for the system holistically and in conjunction with adjacent jurisdictions to provide opportunities to complete a regional open space and natural resources network. Trail CorridorslRight-of-Way Acquisition and Development The City is committed to providing trail connections that encourage residents to bike, walk and stay active. The following goal and objectives support the development of a frail system for recreational and transportation purposes and are intended to support the overall system. Trails Goal 1: Acquire, develop and maintain an interconnected trail system for transportation, recreation and educational purposes. Objectives: Provide a trail system that emphasizes harmony with the built and natural environment. Create a network of relatively uninterrupted hiking, walking and biking trails. Effectively tie parks together into a comprehensive park and trail system -with an emphasis on enhancing the recreational experience of the user. ® ,Create trails with an awareness of safety. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Work with other local, state and federal entities to effectively tie the City trail system with those of adjacent cities and the county. ® Work with private landowners to identify potential easements where land acquisition is not possible. ® Delineate trail use categories to improve accessibility and efficiency of the system. (For example clearly identify bikeways hiking trails walkways etc.) Trails Goal 2: Promote and encourage residents to be active through the development of an efficient and accessible trail system. Objectives: ® Create signage to provide directions and educate users. ® Encourage residents to commute and access natural, commercial and cultural resources using non- motorized modes of transportation. ^ Create user-friendly trail and transit connections to promote transit and trail use in Maplewood and adjoining communities. ® Promote use of the trail system through creative and innovative tools such as GPS or other technologies that improve efficiency of the system. Deleted: Safely protect users from vehicular traffic. Recreation and Education Prograt~s A critical component of the parks system is the ability fo provide recreafional~ educational and fine arts programs fo the residents. These facilities and programs help improve the quality oflife for aft residents and provide opportunities to residents to participate in a more active lifestyle. Goal Statement: Provide the opportunity for all community residents to participate in recreation education and arts activities through the implementation of well-designed, cost effective and interesting programs. Objectives: Develop and provide recreational programs that adequately address the recreational desires of all segments of the community including children, teens, adults, elderly, and the disabled. ^ Develop and provide recreation and outdoor education programs that teach people about nature and environmental issues and empower citizens to be good stewards of the environment. Promote and encourage programs that take place out of doors in nature. ^ Provide opportunities for artistic and cultural activities throughout the city, Find and execute programming and facilities to support a broad diversity of cultures. Administer programs on a fair and equitable basis to ensure all individuals and groups receive adequate representation and opportunity. ^ Create and provide programming for up and coming activities and opportunities. ^ Continue to support and provide options for all residents to participate in organized programming though efforts such as the city's Scholarship Program. Funding The City acknowledges that a robust parks, trails, and open space system requires significant funding and planning to be sustainable. The following goal and objectives identifies broadly how the city intends fo continue managing, enhancing and supporting the system. Goal Statement: To secure the funding necessary to carry out the mission of the Maplewood Parks, Open Space and Trail System. Objectives: ^ Identify and define the funding options that are available for parks land acquisition and development. Create and implement plans for the neighborhood preserves. ^ Identify and establish a sustainable funding source to adequately support the parks, trails and open space system. Research and evaluate available grants that could support the goals and objectives identified for parks, trails and open space. ^ Maintain and improve the existing parks, trails and natural systems. Prepare a parkland acquisition and development implementation plan for South Maplewood that depicts the relative timing and extent of future parkland acquisition and development. ® Create and refine a parks and trails programming plan that responds to current recreation trends and the changing community demographic. ® Create and prioritize parks, trails and open space initiatives to ensure adequate and available funding. ® Develop and maintain a systematic proactive approach to management of the park system to ensure a balanced and cost-effective s sy fem. A critical component of the Parks, Trails, and Open Space planning effort is to understand the existing system and to establish a baseline. Understanding the system as it exists today helps to identify areas where we have improved since the last comprehensive plan update, areas that continue to need improvements and emerging issues and opportunities. The following table provides some definitions of Park Classifcations to aide in the future plan and analysis: Table 6.1 Park and Open Space Classifications Classification Function General Description Size Criteria Mini Park Active Used to address limited, isolated or unique Less than an acre recreational needs, typically at the nei hborhood level. Neighborhood Park Active with Passive Neighborhood park remains the basic unit of Typically 5 acres or Areas the park system and serves as the more, with 3 acres as a recreational social focus of the minimum size neighborhood. Focus is on informal active and assive recreation. Community Park Active Serves broader purpose than neighborhood Varies, depending on parks. Focus is on meeting community- function based recreational needs, as well as preserving unique landscapes and open s aces. Youth Athletic Park Active Consolidates programmed youth athletic Varies, with 20 acres or fields and associated facilities to fewer more most desirable strategically located sites within the community. Also provides neighborhood-use functions. Community Athletic Active Consolidates programmed adult and youth Varies, with 20 acres or Complex athletic fields and associated facilities to one more most desirable or a limited number of sites. Tournament level facilities, also provides neighborhood- usefunctions. Park-School Active Combines parks with school sites to be used Varies in conjunction with or in lieu of other classes of parks, such as neighborhood, community, athletic com lex ands ecial use Special Use Active/Passive Covers a broad range of parks and Varies recreation facilities oriented toward single- purposeuse, such as a nature center, historic sites, lazas Neighborhood Passive Lands set aside for preservation of natural Varies, depends on Preserve resources, remnant landscapes, open space, resource opportunities and visual aesthetics/buffering. Also and qualities provides passive use opportunities (i.e., nature type trails, overlooks, interpretive ro ram, etc. Natural Area Passive A full description and analysis of the Natural Large patches of Greenwa Area Greenway system can be found in the habitat over 200 acres Natural Resources Chapter City Open Space Passive Natural areas owned by the city that are not Varies part of the Neighborhood Preserve system. These may be lowlands or uplands. Some are appropriate for park uses such as hiking. Some are used for storm ponding or other functions. County Open Passive Natural areas owned and managed by Varies Space Ramsey County. Some are appropriate for park uses such as hiking. Some are used for storm pondin or other functions. Agency Open Passive Natural areas or open space owned by Varies S ace a encies. County/Regional Passive Parks and recreational facilities owned by Varies Park Ramsey County. Table 6.2 Trail Classification Classification General Descri tion Description of Each T pe Park Trail Multipurpose trails located within parks and Separate/single-purpose hard surfaced natural resource areas. Focus is on trails for pedestrians and bicyclists/in-line recreational value and harmony with the skaters. natural environment Multipurpose hard surfaced trails for pedestrians and bicyclists/in-line skaters. Nature trails for pedestrians. May be hard surfaced or soft surfaced. Connector Trail/ Multipurpose trails that emphasize safe travel Type: Separate/ single-purpose hard Independent for pedestrians to and from parks and around surfaced trails for pedestrians and Bikeways the community. Focus is as much on bicyclist/in-line skaters. Typically located transportation as it is on recreation. within road ROW On-Street Bikeway Paved segments of roadways that serve as a Bike Lane: Designated portions of the means to safely separate bicyclists from roadway for the preferential or exclusive use vehicular traffic. of bicyclists, Bike Route: Shared portions of the roadway that provide separation between motor vehicles and bicyclists, such as paved shoulders. The existing parks, open space, and trails were evaluated to determine their existing condition and establish a baseline for system planning. Parks and trails area classified based on their dominant use unless otherwise notated. While it was found that some parks function very well, others clearly showed the wear of time and no longer effectively served the intended purpose. In a number of cases, existing park features were simply worn out and needed replacement. As with many park systems within a maturing city, it was evident that the design for individual parks needs to be reevaluated in light of current community and regional needs. Table 6.3 describes a summary assessment far the overall system. 10 Table 6.3 Summary Assessment of Park System Issue Summa Assessment Overall Park Land Area The general land area set aside for parks, and open space is adequate and well positioned to serve the present and future needs of the city, The neighborhood preserve sites coupled with the city's active park areas greatly strengthens the city's capacity to meet emerging recreational trends. With the park land largely in place, most of the future development initiatives will be focused on redevelopment of existing properties to service community needs. Overall Design Design quality varies widely throughout the system. In general, parks developed or redeveloped in recent years are often well designed and go beyond simple function to create a pleasant park setting. Pleasantview is a good example of a neighborhood-level park that serves the neighborhood needs very well. On the other hand, many of the older parks lack a strong design theme and often only offer a collection of amenities that may or may not serve neighborhood or community needs. Many of these parks followed the same general blueprint and offer little in the way of an individual sense of place or overall park-like appeal. Aesthetic Quality A visually appealing setting is lacking in may parks, resulting in a feel that is functional rather than inviting. This lack of design character does not entice people to use the park nor develop a level of comfort when they do visit. Since the last Comprehensive Plan update the city has begun to identify parks in need of upgrades and is slowly improving parks for aesthetic quality, These initiatives will continue into the future. Outdoor Recreation Facility Current facilities need to be evaluated against definable community needs. The Mix extensive use of neighborhood parks for programmed activities in an example of where short-term solutions for servicing burgeoning demand for athletic fields has turned into along-term proposition that is hard to adjust, but may be affecting the overall quality and accessibility of the neighborhood facilities. Natural Resource Quality Signs of degradation can be found within the natural resource areas spread throughout the city. Examples include: invasive non-native plants (European Buckthorn) out-competing native plan species (oaks, maples, etc.); surface erosion in areas lacking native ground cover, and siltation of wetlands and pond/lake edges resulting in changes in water quality and vegetation diversity. Restoration and management of these resources is critical to the overall success of the system. In response to growing demand for protection, and management the City should initiate a full study of the natural areas in the community. A full analysis and discussion can be found in the newly created Natural Resources Chapter of this Comprehensive Plan. Trail System Development The State and Regional trails are highlights of the trail system and are vital to the system plan when considering demand and regional connections. At the local level, the trail system is slowly being developed and better improvements and connections are being made as development and redevelopment occurs in the community. The system continues to be limited to predominantly a sidewalk plan as well as connections to the existing park system. A primary initiative of this Plan will be to improve the existing trail system for increased accessibility, interconnectedness, and efficiency. The general assessment in Table 6.3 describes the averali existing condition of facilities in the City. Whlle performing the plan update, an assessment and review of the parks system was completed based on the city's neighborhood structure to determine existing conditions as well as identify deficiencies or excess areas in the system. The neighborhood structure became an important structure for evaluation because the overall system was originally developed on principles related to the neighborhood boundaries. To evaluate park needs, both passive and active, the following standards were followed: ® All residents should be within a'/:mile of a park, which could be active or passive and is independent of ownership (city, county, state, etc.) ® For every 1,000 people approximately 5 acres of park land should be provided to serve the residents. These parameters were the standards used to evaluate the existing park system, and were the standards applied to future planning efforts. Table 6.4 Existing and Future Parks/Open Space (table found in Proposed Plan section) identifies the existing parks and open spaces by neighborhood, a more detailed inventory of equipment can be found in Section V of the overall park system plan. Changes and Improvements Since the Last Plan Several changes and improvements to the svstem have occurred over the past ten years. The following information highlights some of the major improvements and projects that have been completed. These improvements directly support the goals and objectives that were identified in the previous comprehensive plan. Development and redevelopment has occurred in the past ten years and ensuring that the appropriate amount of park land was available and functional was essential to the overall success of the neighborhoods. Legacy Park was developed as a part of the Legacy Village master planned development Applewood Park Afton Heights Park Sterling Oaks Park and Egerton Park were all updated to more adequately serve residents of each neighborhood. Finally planning efforts for the Joy Park Master Plan were completed and the redevelopment of the park is scheduled to begin in the summer of 2008. Several trail improvements have been completed including several segments of the Lake Links Trail a r'ull sidewalk and trail along Century Avenue as well as trail along Lower Afton Trail In addition to the trails along major road corridors and the regional svstem nature trails in the Priory Neighborhood Preserve have been developed to offer another trail option to residents. Signficant progress in the Neighborhood Preserves has also occurred Site analyses has been completed for 12 preserves in the community and Master Plans have been completed for four or the preserves. Restoration and re_planting has also begun in the Preserves including a 20-acre prairie planting project at the Prairie Farm Preserve. Management and restoration efforts of invasive species are underway at several preserves throughout the community. Natural Resources A significant change from the last comprehensive plan is the inclusion of a Natural Resources Plan independent of the Parks, Trails and Open Space chapter. The City took a proactive and innovative approach to natural resources in this plan update and felt that providing an independent chapter with a specific natural resources plan gave it more significance and focus for this planning effort. 12 The natural resources plan becomes an important building block for all components of the comprehensive plan including this chapter. Throughout this document references to the chapter are made, particularly reference to the Natural Area Greenways. It is the intent of this plan to support and contribute to building the greenway system, and to plan the parks, trails and open spaces in a way that is ecologically sensitive and supports the natural resources plan directly. 13 Tra° This section of the report describes the various components of the Maplewood parks, open space, and trail system, The plan is based on the findings of previous sections and the framework presented in the existing conditions, background and goals sections. In line with the goals and objective statements provided, the system plan seeks balance between servicing the social, individual, environmental, and economic needs of the community. The plan provides a guide to parks, open space and trail development based on the current needs of the community and the opportunities and constraints facing the city. It builds upon a solid park and open space infrastructure already in place in the city. The guiding themes throughout this plan include: ^ Continue to develop a comprehensive and interconnected parks, open space, and trail system. ^ Manage and maintain only the amount of park and open space land that the city can maintain for its highest and best use. ^ Recognize the limitation of resources (fiscal and physical). ^ Organize and prioritize the system based on the neighborhood structure but also on city wide scale to ensure the needs of all residents are made. ^ Develop a plan that allows for incremental and orderly improvements - be visionary but realistic. Based on the detailed goals and objectives, the following generalizations can be made: ^ Create and maintain an accessible and high quality system that serves all residents ^ Prioritize the development of a comprehensive trail plan to help connect residents to parks, schools, community facilities and the region; ^ Support an extensive network of open spaces that contribute to the natural resource system and natural area greenways; ^ Evaluate the park system to ensure that parks and open spaces are high-quality, safe, and well-maintained and a benefit community; ^ Service neighborhood and community park and recreation needs; ^ Service youth and adult athletics by providing high quality facilities strategically located throughout the city. Neighborhood Service Areas As a maturing community, Maplewood has thirteen well-established neighborhoods that are identifiable to residents and public officials. The park system plan developed in the 1970s was largely built upon this neighborhood structure, with land selection for parks based on reasonable local service areas, especially as it related to neighborhood park units. As stated in the Existing Conditions Analysis, the following standards were used to develop Maplewood's park system: ^ All residents should be within a''/z mile of a park, which could be active or passive and is independent of ownership (city, county, state, etc,) For every 1,000 people approximately 5 acres of park land should be provided to serve the residents. Since most of the land area for parks has already been acquired, the neighborhood service area structure best serves as a means to: ^ Identify the park and recreation needs and desires unique to a given geographic area of the community. ^ Understand the potential demands in a developing or redevelopment area of a neighborhood. 14 Organize the park system geographically. Ensure that the neighborhood park needs of all residents can be met within a reasonable distance fram their home. Determine where efficiencies could be implemented to make the system of higher quality and affordable. Of these points, the most important theme is the assessment of needs, demands, and services that can be provided in ahigh-quality and effective manner. As stated in the existing conditions section, the parks and open space system was evaluated by neighborhood based on proximity of residents to recreation type, and acreage per population. Table 6.4 inventories the existing system and outlines proposed parks. Further discussion on specific neighborhoods with potentially significant changes follows the table. Table ti.4 Existing and Future ParkslOpen Space NeighborhoodtPark Classification Ownership Acreage Other -Notes Western Hills __ _ _ __- Western Hills MiniiNeighborhood City 6.0 Park 5-Tri-District Neighborhood City 7.0 Preserve Sandy Lake Area Open Space St. Paul Board of 59.1 Water Trout Brook Open Space Joint City/School 27.3 District Parkside ----- Maplecrest Mini/Neighborhood City 2.0 Park Edgerton Youth Athletic City 14.0 6-Roselawn Nghbd. Preserve City 5.0 Opportunity to better serve area Keller Lake` County Open Space County 121.6 Within multiple neighborhoods Open Space @ 35 Open Space City 0.9 and Miss Kohiman Lake ___ Sunset Ridge Mini/Neighborhood ', City 7.0 Park '~ Kohlman Mini/Neighborhood City 11.0 Park 1-Regnier Neighborhood City 6.5 Preserve 4-Kuslich Neighbarhoad City 30.4 15 Preserve 12-Carbey Neighborhood City 17.4 Preserve Fisher's Corner Neighborhood City 17.4 Preserve Spoon Lake Open Neighborhood City 27.5 Space Preserve Kohlman Marsh Open Space City/County 24.5 Open Space KellerLake* County Open Space County - Within multiple neighborhoods Hazlewood _ _ Four Seasons Mini/Neighborhood City 10.0 Park Hazlewood Youth Athletic City 50,0 Harvest Community Athletic City 25.0 Complex Legacy Village Mini/Neighborhood City 10.0 Park 2-Pearson Neighborhood City 7.5 Preserve Open Spaces -East Open Space City/County 70.9 of Hazlewood Open Space -West Open Space City 37.7 of Harvesf Open Space East of Open Space City/County 27.9 61 @ City border Maplewood Heights Maplewood Heights Mini/Neighborhood City 25,0 Park Joy Community Park City 21.0 3-Joy Neighborhood City 20.0 Preserve Special Use Special Use Park - - -- City - 33.0 _ - Sherwood Glen - - Timber _ Mini/Neighborhood City 0.5 Park Giadstane Mini/Neighborhood City 3.0 Park 16 Sherwood Mini/Neighborhood City 15,0 Better Development Park opportunities Robinhood Mini/Neighborhood City 4.0 - Park Gladst~rrE _ -- ___ i - __ __ Gloster Mini/Neighborhood City 6.0 Gladstone Master Park Planning Effort Gladstone Savannah Neighborhood City Preserve Wakefield Community Park City 28.0 Flicek Youth Athletic City 4.0 7-English Neighborhood City ___ 24.0 _. Preserve Wetlands @Frost Open Space City Look Out Park Mini Park City Needs to be shown on the map Park South of School ISD 622 1.7 Robinhood Counfy Park North of Within multiple Phalen* neighborhoods Historical Marker Mini/Neighborhood City 0.5-2.0 Opportunity for Park Historical -_ __ Marker/Context Hillside ___- - --- Nebraska Mini/Neighborhood City 2.0 Park Hillside Mini/Neighborhood City 11.0 Park Goodrich Community Athletic City 24.0 Complex 8-Priory Neighborhood City 46.5 Preserve Sterling Oaks Open Space City 11.5 Wetlands Complex Open Space State of Minnesota 19.1 @RR Trust Holloway Marsh Open Space County 37.8 School Site School Park ISD 622 17.27 36 ,:,g- T 17 Geranium Mini/Neighborhood City 9.0 Park Gethsemane Mini/Neighborhood City 10,0 Will be replaced Park Lions Mini/Neighborhood City 3.0 Park 9-Jim's P, Mini/Neighborhood I, City 5.0 Park Nafure Center Special Use Park I City 40.0 Beaverlake County Open Space County 23.5 Park Wefland Area Open Space City 34.4 @Maryland Search Area Mini/Neighborhood City 4.0-6.0 To Replace (Pipeline Properties) Park Gethsemane Battle Creek Afton Heighfs Youth Athletic City 12.0 Battle Creek Regional Park ~ County 292.2 Vista Hills ~ ~~ Crestview Mini/Neighborhood City 2.0 Park Mailand Mini/Neighborhood City 2,0 Park Vista Hills Mini/Neighborhood City 14.0 Park The Ponds Golf Active Park County 181.46 Within multiple Course' neighborhoods Gun Range Active Park ;Highwood ___._ Sterling Oaks Mini/Neighborhood City 5.0 Park Applewood Mini/Neighborhood City 8.0 Park Pleasant View Mini/Neighborhood City 14.0 Park 10-Kayser Neighborhood City 16.0 Preserve 11-Grandview Neighborhood City 25.9 Preserve 18 Carver Neighborhood Preserve City 22.3 Ski Jump Active Park Private 18.7 Open Space of Open Space City 10.5 Lakewood Open Space at Open Space City 2.4 Timber Carver Ridge __-_ Fish Creek Open County Open Space Ramsey County 34.9 Space Haller Woods City Open Space Private 8.7 Conservation Easement Active Park Search Mini/Neighborhood City 4.0-6.0 New Active Park to Area Park be located in Mixed- Use Area and determined as part of a master plan. Community Centers, School Sites, and Regional Park Facilities In addition to the facilities identified in Table 6.4, the city's park system is augmented by the Community Centers (indoor facilities), school sites, and regional park facilities (of which several are included in the previous table). Community Centers include: ^ The Maplewood Community Center -offers extensive indoor facilities including two pools, large gymnasium, racquetball courts, aerobics room, exercise room, walking/jogging track, massage room, child care, banquet room, performing arts theater, and other features. ^ Edgerton school Community Center -offers gym space for open play. ^ Carver School Community Center -offers gym space for open play. At the school district level, the city has joint use of outdoor athletic facilities at the following schools: ^ Weaver School ^ John Glen School ^ Maplewood Middle School ^ Beaver lake School ^ Carver School ^ Edgerton School The city and local school districts have long-term relationships forjointly using these school sites within Maplewood. In each case, the school district uses the outdoor facilities for their programs during the school day and for after- school programs. The city then uses the sites in the evenings for city programs and programs offered by local athletic associations. The system plan calls for the continued joint use of these facilities to maximize the efficient use 19 of limited land resources wifnin the city. This partnership will bo of considerable importance to the city as it focuses on reducing the extent to which its neighborhaod parks are used for programmed athletic uses. The continued use of the athletic fields provided at the various school sites is vital fo the overall success of the system. Regional parks also play an important role in the local park system. The regional and county-based park areas and facilities that directly affect Maplewood are administered by the Ramsey County Parks and Recreation Department. Key regional and county-based park areas include: ^ Battle Creek Regional park • Keller Regional park - 248 acres which is contiguous with Phalen Regional Park • Beaver Lake County Park -offering picnic sites and trails ^ County Ditch 7 Pond Protection Open Space Site ^ County Ditch 18 Protection Open Space Site ^ Fish Creek Protection Open Spaces ^ Marsh 212 Protection Open Space Site ^ Aldrich Arena Special-Use Facility ^ Goodrich Golf Course Special Use Facility ^ Golf Course South of Lower Afton Road Parks and Open Space Plan Analysis With the assistance of the Parks Commission and Advisory Panel a Park and Open Space plan was updated and established for the City of Maplewood. Each neighborhood was evaluated for park and open space needs, where parks referred to active park areas and open spaces that included neighborhood preserves and any formally protected and accessible open spaces. The preceding table identified all of the park and open space land by neighborhood with general notes referring to the future plans and development. The following information categorizes the future park and open space plan according to park classification and includes reference to specific neighborhoods that need particular attention which can be cross referenced with Table 6.4. 20 Fa~k~ (A~fi~~) Mint end Neighborhood Park Description: Neighborhood parks continue to serve as the backbone of the park system in Maplewood, The park system plan includes a total of 25 existing mini and neighborhood parks to serve the thirteen neighborhoods. Individually and collectively, the primary focus of these park units is: ® Providing neighborhood recreational facilities focused on non-structured individual and family activities. ® Creating a social center for the neighborhood. ® Providing open space for informal group play and limited use for organized/programmed activities. In general, the mini and neighborhood parks in one neighborhood function together to service the localized needs of that neighborhood. As such, the development of one park in a neighborhood should take into consideration the facilities and amenities provided in other parks within the same neighborhood to ensure a full palette of recreational opportunities is available to residents. Key Developmental/Use Considerations In general, there are a number of key developmental and use considerations that can be applied to all of the mini and neighborhood parks, including: ^ General reduction in the extent to which neighborhood parks are used for organized and programmed uses. The focus of these parks should be on servicing neighborhood needs for recreation and providing informal open play areas. Programmed activities should be secondary. ^ General upgrading of facilities in response to neighborhood input on the type of facilities most desired. Particular attention needs to be given to ornamentation and beautification, which Is lacking in many of the parks. ^ More attention needs to be given to providing a broader spectrum of active and passive recreational opportunities. Given current trends, much more attention needs to be given to passive park uses and the concept of having "nature in the back yard." ^ The use of both manicured turf and naturalized vegetation should be considered within mini and neighborhood parks to add interest and aesthetic appeal and to reduce the cost of maintenance. The balance between turf and natural vegetation should be determined on a site by site basis. Specific Neighborhood Plans During the Comprehensive Plan update process the following neighborhoods were specifically identified as having additional neighborhood/mini park demands in this planning period: ^ In the Sherwood Glen Neighborhood, Sherwood Park could be better developed to meet the active park needs of the neighborhood. During this planning period a feasibility and use study should be completed to fully evaluate the needs of the neighborhood. 21 In the Gladstone Neighborhood, as the Gladstone master plan progresses the Gloster Park and Gladstone Savanna area will need to be evaluated to ensure the active park needs of the neighborhood, including future residents is met. ® The Hillside Neighborhood is light on active park facilities. Hillside Park is currently predominantly used for passive uses and could be transitioned to provide some active park facilities for the neighborhood. In addition, there may be opportunities with Hill Murray School and the Marshlands project. ® In the Beaver Lake Neighborhood, a replacement of the active park Gethsemane should be located to adequately provide active park facilities to this neighborhood, Gethsemane will likely be reduced or eliminated in the future, and a search area for the replacement park is identified on the future parks and open space planning map (Figure 6.2). ® In the Carver Ridge Neighborhood a minimum of 4.0-6.0 acre active park should be located within the Bailey Farm property to serve the active park needs of future residents. The search area is identified on Figure 6.2, and the exact size and location should be identified at the time of development in this area. Development of this park will be a priority at the time of residential development in the Carver Ridge and Highwood neighborhoods south of Carver Avenue. Community Parks Description With a strong neighborhood park focus, along with the contribution of neighborhood preserves and the regional parks, the use of community parks within the park system is limited to the special opportunities provided by Joy and Wakefield parks because they offer: • Unique feature that have city-wide appeal. • Opportunities to accommodate group facilities, such as larger picnic shelters. • A setting appropriate for facilities that is too costly to duplicate in more than one or two parks throughout the city. Examples include group picnicking at Joy Park and winter facilities at Wakefield. Key Developmental/Use Considerations There are a number of key developmental and use considerations that can be applied to the community parks, including: • General upgrading of facilities in response to community input on the type of facilities most desired. Particular attention needs to be given to beautification in Wakefield Park. Natural resource restoration and management is a key issue at Joy Park. ® Developing trail linkages to these two parks should be a key priority. ® A mix of manicured turf and naturalized vegetation should be considered within community parks to add interest and aesthetic appeal and to reduce the cost of maintenance. The balance between turf and natural vegetation should be determined on a site by site basis. Youth Athletic Park Description 22 The concept of the youth athletic park was spawned from the desire of the user groups to consolidate athletic facilities to fewer and more strategically located sites to: Gain program efficiency. ® Create closer associations between players, parents, and coaches, ® Provide greater conveniences, like parking, restrooms, and concessions. This concept also works well from an operations and maintenance perspective. The fact is, having fewer and larger facilities is the most efficient and effective way to meet community needs. This approach also ensures neighborhood parks are not dominated by athletic associations and noise and congestion in neighborhoods is reduced. Since youth are usually less mobile than adults, youth athletic parks are strategically located throughout the city. The park system plan defines four sites specifically for servicing youth sports, although some adult cross-over can occur to service the broader needs of the city. (Note that the community athletic complexes will also serve youth athletic programs. Additionally, note that each of the youth athletic parks also function as neighborhood parks to varying degrees,) Key Developmental/Use Considerations There are a number of key developmental and use considerations that can be applied to the youth athletic parks, including: ® General upgrading of facilities to better service the needs of the user groups and to increase general facility safety. Many of the existing facilities are old and in need of replacement. • Developing trail linkages to these parks should be a key priority to encourage alternative forms of transportation. ® Continuing the involvement of the user groups in the design of these facilities to ensure that what is developed is in line with actual needs, • Giving more attention to beautification, this is lacking in many of the parks. • Consideration of neighborhood park needs as defined under Mini and Neighborhood Parks previously listed in the table. Community Athletic Complex Description The concept of the community athletic complex was again spawned from the desire of the user groups to consolidate athletic facilities to fewer and more strategically located sites to: ® Gain program efficiency. ® Create closer associations between players, parents, and coaches. ® Provide greater conveniences, like parking, restrooms, and concessions. As with Youth Athletic Parks, this concept also works well from an operations and maintenance perspective, whereby fewer and larger facilities are the most efficient and effective way to meet community needs. And again, this approach ensures neighborhood parks are not dominated by athletic associations and noise and congestion in neighborhoods is reduced. 23 The primary difference in community athletic complexes and youth athletic parks is that the former services adult athletic needs in addition to youth. The park system plan defines twa sites for community athletic complexes. Note here too that the community athletic complexes also function as neighborhood parks to varying degrees. Kev Developmental/Use Considerations There are a number of key developmental and use considerations that can be applied to the community athletic complexes, including: • General upgrading of facilities to better service the needs of the user groups and to increase general facility safety. Many of the existing facilities are old and in need of replacement. Some are poorly designed and do not function very well. • Developing trail linkages to these parks should be a key priority to encourage alternative forms of transportation. • Continuing the involvement of the user groups in the design of these facilities to ensure that what is developed is in line with actual needs. • Giving more attention to and beautification, which is lacking in many of the parks. • Consideration of neighborhood park needs as defined under Mini and Neighborhood Parks previously listed in the table. Park-School Site Description Park-School Sites are joint-use sites between the city and school district for shared use of facilities. There are a total of six school sites that fall under this classification. Of those, Edgerton and Carver are also community center sites, whereby the city also uses the indoor facilities. Kev Developmental(Use Considerations Clearly defining development, use, and maintenance of these facilities is important to ensure that all parties understand their role and responsibility. Specific Neighborhood Plans The school sites are unique because they are predominantly controlled by the school district, but coordination and collaboration is critical. An overall assessment of uses and facilities should be made to determine the extent to which school sites are integrated into the recreational programming of the city. For example, the ball fields at Beaver Lake School were being used in current recreation programming but the current status and availability of the facilities is not known. The availability and use of these facilities should be verified to determine if there are any deficiencies in the system. Special Use Park Description The Special Use Park classification refers to parks that are unique and do not readily fall under any other classification. The existing system identifies two such parks: 24 ^ Maplewood Nature Center offers protection of a unique natural resource, has a visitor center, and provides extensive programming, ^ Bruentrup Historical Farm at Prairie Farm Neighborhood Preserve is a special use park. The city (eases approximately 2 acres to the Maplewood Historical Society which maintains the farmstead buildings and yard. The city has a lease agreement that identifies specific activities and opportunities available through the joint agreement and should be referenced to ensure the city recognizes the benefit of the relationship Key Developmental/Use Considerations ® The Maplewood Nature Center is a well established community hallmark that continues to serve an important function. Continuing its educational programs and maintaining its natural resource qualities and infrastructure are key priorities in forthcoming years. Deleted: the need for ® Parks Commission members have identified an interest in developing,a city-owned dogpark. _ _ _ _ ~ ' ® Maplewood would like to have a permanent site for a Community Garden. Specific Neighborhood Plans During this planning period, the Parks Commission and Advisory Panel identified some opportunity areas for special uses throughout the community, the areas specifically discussed include: ^ In the Highwood Neighborhood, the ski jump site may have opportunities for special programming and uses in the community. This site should remain on the city's radar as an opportunity site. ^ In the Sherwood Glen Neighborhood, at the John Glen site there may be opportunities to collaborate with the school on special programming needs related to archery and similar activities. Open Space (Passive Parks) Neighborhood Preserve Description The Neighborhood Preserve park classification was created to integrate the open space parcels into the larger park system, thereby more clearly defining their role in servicing community needs and protecting open space. The neighborhood preserves have to important functions: ^ Preserve and protect natural areas and open space within the city. • Create additional opportunities for human use and appreciation of the community's natural areas. The preserve sites are defined in a neighborhood context to: ^ Address trends toward greater demand for natural areas and passive recreational opportunities close to home. ^ Foster a local sense of stewardship in the protection, restoration and management, and human use of these parcels. In the neighborhood context, the preserve sites coupled with neighborhood parks will provide a full palette of both active ar:d passive recreational opportunities for local residents. 25 Key Developmental/Use Considerations There are a number of key developmental and use considerations that can be applied to the neighborhood preserve sites, including: ^ Completing ecological plans for all sites, including analysis of existing conditions, refinement of ecological prototypes, and ecological restoration and management plans. ^ Integrating human use of the sites within the context of their ecological underpinnings. (The community should be involved in this process.) ^ Developing trail linkages to these parks. ^ Looking for opportunities to support, build, and complete the Natural Area Greenways proposed in the Natural Resources chapter. ^ A not-net loss policy to ensure the preservation of all sites throughout the City. Specific Neighborhood Plans The following neighborhoods were identified as having opportunities for additional neighborhood preserves based on the quantity of active park land or open space that might be better used for a neighborhood preserve: Maplewood Heights Neighborhood may have some opportunities to revert some active park land for a more natural or passive use that could serve as a neighborhood preserve, further study of this would be required prior to any recommendations or plans should be made. In the Highwood and Carver Ridge neighborhoods a large amount of land is in the County's open space system. If any of this land were ever to be sold, the City should evaluate and review the feasibility of acquiring that land for a neighborhood preserve or open space use to help maintain the more rural quality in these neighborhoods. Regional ParklCounty Open Space Description Regional parks and open spaces serve a regional population. However, the location of several regional parks in the city makes them important factors in the overall park system. Key Developmental/Use Considerations The most important consideration here is maintaining a strong working partnership with the County to foster development in these parks that serve the needs of Maplewood Residents. Specific Neighborhood Plans During this planning period, the South Maplewood neighborhood including Highwood and Carver Ridge were discussed heavily due to the relatively undeveloped nature of the area. Currently both neighborhoods have several parcels that are a part of the County's Fish Creek Open Space system. It is imperative that these open spaces be monitored by the City because the proposed park plan is based on the assumption that the county open spaces remain undeveloped natural areas. !f these parcels are ever up for sale, or a use change is proposed, the City should reevaluate the park needs in these twa neighborhoods to ensure the City's park standards are upheld. 26 Try -~ In this Comprehensive Plan Update much more emphasis was placed on the need for a comprehensive trail system throughout the community. The City has always been blessed with the State and Regional trails that pass through the City, but connecting to those trails as well as creating a network that is not only for recreational purposes but as a transportation alternative has never been realized. This plan identifies an integrated, easy to use and friendly trail system as a key priority and component of this plan. Since the last planning effort, the city has been dedicated to integrating trail and sidewalk development as part of redevelopment and road reconstruction projects. Those efforts are recognized, and this plan seeks to build on the existing system to make a more comprehensive and accessible system. In spite of the obstacles and difficulties, the idea of creating a city trail system is well worth while when considered in context of current demands for recreational and utilitarian demands. As fuel costs rise residents will look for alternative transportation options, and the city can provide an accessible trail system to help provide additional options. Additionally, as the aging baby-boomers reach retirement demands for recreational opportunities and well connected facilities will be critical to keeping this population in the community. The trail system will provide those opportunities and add to the overall quality of life for residents. The trail system plan presented here is much more robust and plans for a significant amount of trail throughout the community to create emphasis on interconnected trails that provide essential linkages throughout the system so that residents can move through the system safely regardless of their purpose for using the trails. The plan is based on the following principles: • Focus and priority is placed on primary north-south and east-west corridors that will provide the greatest access and accessibility to all residents; • Connections between schools, community facilities, parks, and the region are emphasized to help support alternative transportation options for all residents; • Trail construction and specific location (for example north or south side of a street) is not emphasized in this plan because the City will create a plan for detail at time of development or redevelopment to ensure the appropriate needs are being met for the area; ^ The proposed system is ambitious, and is focused on creating the ideal plan for the future of Maplewood. As demonstrated in Figure 6.2 Existing and Future Trails, the city has prioritized the creation of an interconnected trail system as a part of this comprehensive plan update. The table that follows, Table 6.5 Existing and Future Trails, identifies the existing and future trails, the classification and the length of trail developed and proposed. Table 65 Existing and Future Trails (This able to be apdated - MFRA) Trail Classification Miles (Proposed Ke DevelopmentallUse Consideration Gateway Trail State Trail 3.7 (0) The trail is a state trail corridor with extensive Segment of the connections to the metro area and greater Willard Munger Minnesota. Connecting residents to this system is State Trail a priorit of the overall trail Ian. Burlington Regional Trail 3.3 (0) Regional trail corridor of over 13 miles in length Northern Regional with extensive connections to other systems, Trail Corridor includingstate trail systems 27 Highline Trail Park Trail 3.9 (?} Follows existing power line easement east to west through northern end of the city. Provides important linkages between key park sites and linkage to the regional and state frail system. Developmental Challenges: ® Obtaining trail easement rights ® Varying topography, with some areas exhibiting steep slopes Traversin throw h developed areas Beaver Lake Park Trail 1.6 This trail is developed as a part of the residential Neighborhood land development in the area. Greenwa Williams Pipeline Park Trail 3.0 Greenwa County Road C Connector Trail The County Road C Trail is partially completed, Trail and the proposed plan connects this corridor through the northern half of the city to create a strong east-west connection. This trail will connect to other major trail corridors to provide efficient . County Road B Connector Trail The County Road B Trail will provide key east- Trail west linkages throughout the city and will connect residents to other major corridors and services alon the corridor. Gervais Trail Connector Trail Beam Ave Trail Connector Trail Frost Trail Connector Trail The Frost Avenue Trail is proposed to create a connection between the regional trails and the White Bear Avenue Trail. This trail is proposed for development at the time of redevelopment in the Gladstone Master Plan and when/if road improvements are made in the area. Century Avenue Connector Trail The Century Avenue Trail is projected to be Trail completed as a part of an overall street improvement project. This corridor will be a primary north-south corridor through the city and will be constructed to connect to other key trail corridors in the Cit . Arcade Trail Connector Trail White Bear Trail Connector Trail The White Bear Avenue trail is completed and provides a key north-south corridor through the northern part of the city connecting residents to the reater re ion. Larpenteur Trail Connector Trail The Larpenteur Avenue Trail is undeveloped and is proposed as a key east-west corridor through the City. This trail will be the primary corridor to link residents between the east and west sections of the city. The corridor also links residents to key natural resources and the existing regional trails that run throw h the tit . 28 McKnight Trail Connector Trail The McKnight Trail is completed and connects the south leg of the city with the northern area of Maplewood, This trail connects residents to the high quality natural resource areas in the south le . Stillwater Trail Connector Trail Minnehaha Trail Upper Afton Road Connector Trail The Upper Afton Road Trail is completed and Trail provides connections to adjacent communities in the south le . Mailand Trail Connector Trail Highwood Road Connector Trail Trail Carver Trail Connector Trail Carver Trail is proposed as the only connection under 494 in the south leg of the community. This trail connection would be made when Carver Road is reconstructed. This connection would be ~ ~ critical at time of development in Highwood and Carver Rid e net hborhoods. Sterling Trail Connector Trail Sterling Trail in south Maplewood would connect residents with adjacent communities. This trail will require a feasibility study as there are significant topo ra hic challen es in the area. Henry Lane Trial Connector Trail The Henry Lane Trail would connect residents in the Highwood neighborhood to County Open Spaces. Linwood Avenue Connector Trail Jo Trail Nature Trail South of Nature Trail Larpenteur South Maplewood Nature Trail This trail is ~ro~osed as a soft-surface, sustainbly- (Area Seuth of _ _ _ _ designed, hiking trail to provide residents access Carver Ave. to the natural areas in South Maplewood and is focused on preservation of the creek and other hi h ualit natural areas Analysis The City has prioritized development of a comprehensive trail system in this plan update. With a priority toward improving the overall extent of the trail system within the city, providing on-street bikeways was extensively discussed, and although not formally proposed as a part of this plan, the bikeability of the system was prioritized in discussions. On-street bike lanes should be considered in neighborhoods without trails or sidewalks, and should be considered along major corridors to help encourage and support biking as a means of transportation. The overall success of the system will rely on the prioritization of creating and maintaining the system. Historically the parks have been prioritized above the trail system because new development and neighborhoods were developing. However, now that the City is largely developed acquisition for park land is no longer the priority it was in previous planning periods. As a result a shift towards trail right of way acquisition can occur to help complete the park and open space system in the city. The focus on trails does not eliminate the need to maintain and manage the parks to ensure a high quality system, but it shifts acquisition to help complete a comprehensive trail system. Deleted: Fish Creek Area \ Deleted: The Fish Creek Trail is identifed on Figure 6.5 as a search corridor due to the ecological sensitivity of the area. Deleted: ,but to maintain the high quality natural areas along the creek. 29 ~D This section of the report focuses on establishing a framework and priorities for implementing the park, open space and trail system plan, This includes: p Partnership approach to implementation ® Cost analysis ® Evaluation criteria for prioritizing park and trail development ® Prioritization of park and trail initiatives ® Funding sources ® Joint-use agreements Partnership Approach to Implementation Success in implementing the park and trail system plan will be based on the strength of the relationships that includes the Park and Recreation Commission and Environmental and Natural Resources Commission, City staff, residents, user groups, and adjacent cities, school districts, the county, churches and other civic or business organizations. These relationships, and partnerships where appropriate, will help ensure the needs and demands of the system are met, as well as ensure that efforts are not duplicated within the system. Cost Analysis The Cost Analysis Table in the report defines the potential costs associated with each major component of the system plan. The cost figures are intended to be used for budgeting purposes, implementation planning, comparing the relative cost of one item to that of another, and developing funding scenarios. A summary of the cost analysis table is as follows: Table 6.6 Cost Summary for Park and Trail DevelopmentlRedevelopment (2008-2013) Item Cost Summar (Dollars Contin enc 15% Total Parks Mini/Neighborhood Community Youth Athletic Complexes Community Athletic Community Centers Neighborhood Preserves Total $1,460,000* Trails Regional Connector Nature $1,300,000 Neighborhood Preserves Management and Restoration $2,250,000 Total $5,010,000 Figures were rounded up to reflect an estimated projected fee. 30 The range of development and redevelopment scenarios is broad with respect to implementing the system plan which has the potential to significantly impact the costs associated with the project. These figures provide a general budget framework from which to plan, and makes the following assumptions: ® The park estimate assumes management and maintenance far the next ten years and does not plan for large-scale master planned changes for any individual park. An area study and feasibility study would be required to determine the cost associated with such a project. ® The parks figure assumes only the acquisition of one additional park into the system, to be located in the Carver Ridge neighborhood. ® The figures are based on a no-net loss policy. This means that parks and open space could change uses, but could never be taken out of the system entirely, unless comprehensive plan amendment was adopted. This policy would suggest that acquisition, as well as gain from sales would not affect the system, ® The trails figure was estimated based on a single shoulder off-road, bituminous, multi-use trail. If alternative materials, or trails along both sides of a road, or shoulders, etc., are proposed that will change the overall cost of the system. The following figure illustrates how changes in the system will affect the preliminary budget estimate: Maximum Level of Plar~ Complete All Aspects of the System Plan Implementation o ~ .~ .c o ~ Go Beyond basic needs to provide a Q- ~ ~ broader palette of recreational ~~ Q ~ opportunities for residents. Q~~ `6 a~ o W -o Limited Level of Plan Meeting Minimum System Plan Objectives Implementation Evaluation Criteria for Prioritizing Park and Trail Development Projects With limited resources, ranking the development of one park, trail, or development initiative against that of another will be necessary. Certainly, all development issues identified in the plan are pressing concerns needing attention. Realistically, the city is going to have to pick and choose those that are the most pressing and those that improve the services to the residents and user groups most in need. Making this as objective as possible is a key concern. Through the use of ranking criteria, reasonable objectivity can be infused into the decision making process. This criteria is based on and evaluated against factors that influence the demand for parks and trails. It must be broad based enough to consider the important and predominant factors, yet limited enough to be manageable and practical for decision makers to gain consensus and take action. Evaluation criteria included: Development pattern and population density Community demand 31 Recreation program demand • Redevelopment/upgrading of facility or adjacent uses Funding availability/partnership opportunity ® Preservation of significant natural resource Prioritization of Parks, Open space, and Trail Development Initiatives The forthcoming priorities for parks, open space, and trail development initiatives were derived by applying the evaluation criteria previously defined. The basis for these priorities goes back to the goals, objectives, and needs outlined in previous sections. Table 6.7 Parks Plan Implementation 2008-2013 -Key Projects Topic Date Activity Cost Estimate Planning 2008 • Seek site for community garden • Continue discussions on Marshlands project • Continue discussion on Gethsemane Park • Conduct feasibility study for Lake Links trail from McKnight to Joy Road $20,000 2009 Update Parks System Plan $10,000 • Parks Brochure and Map • Conduct needs assessment and prioritization for $15,000 upgrading of tennis courts, basketball courts and hockey rinks • Evaluate opportunities for natural areas at active parks _ _ Funding 2009+ • Develop long-term funding strategy for parks Active Parks 2008 • Joy Park - Phase I $200,000 • Lion's Park -Design and stormwater management Development & $50,000 Redevelopment 2009 • Lion's Park - Phase I $50,000 2010 Joy Park --Phase II $50,000 • Lion's Park -Phase II • Neighborhood Park upgrades $50,000 32 $5o,oao 2011 ~ Joy Park - Phase fll $100,000 Lion's Park Neighborhood Park upgrades $100,000 $50,000 2012 ® Joy Park -Phase IV $200,000 Neighborhood Park upgrades $50,000 2013 Neighborhood Park upgrades $50,000 - -- - Active Parks - 2008 _ _.. Upgrade 2009 Upgrade fields (Goodrich, Wakefield) $35,000 ® Upgrade park equipment, courts $25,000 2010 Upgrade fields (Goodrich, Wakefield) $35,000 ® Upgrade park equipment, courts $25,000 2011 Upgrade fields (Goodrich, Wakefield) $35,000 ® Upgrade park equipment, courts $40,000 2012 Upgrade fields (Goodrich, Wakefield) $35,000 2013 Upgrade fields (Goodrich, Wakefield) $35,000 33 Trails 2008 • Lake Links Trail at Joy Park $50,000 • Overlay Maplewood Heights Overlay Pleasantview $25,000 • Beaver Creek Trail $25 000 • Sherwood Park Trail , • Hazelwood to Munger Trail, near Hwy 36 $100,000 (streets funding) (streets funding) 2009 Connect Gateway Trail to Round Lake and Hwy 61 $75,000 • Lake Links Trail - McKnight to Joy Road $100,000 2010 • Lake Links Trail -near Mall $150,000 • Overlay Wakefield $50,000 2011 • Sterling and Marshlands $150,000 • Stillwater Road • Overlay City Hall campus $50,000 2012 • South Maplewood trail $150,000 • Overlay 2 parks $100,000 2013 Overlay 2 parks $100,000 __ _ _ -_ - i _ __ 34 Neighborhood 2008 ~ Priory entrance and shoulder parking $20,000 Preserves Applewood trail and restoration Nature Center yard $50,000 ® Gladstone Savanna park and stormwater design $50,OOD + grant $75,000 2009 Gladstone Savanna $900,000 ® Demo projects at Priory, Applewood, Farm ® Install rule signs at preserves $50,000 $10,000 2010 Beaver Creek restoration $50,000 ® Gladstone Savanna ® Joy Park Preserve trails $100,000 $50,000 2011 Gladstone Savanna $500,000 2012 Carver Preserve trails and buckthorn removal $50,000 2013 Spoon Lake preserve buckthorn removal $50,000 Table 6.8 Parks CIP 2009-2013 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Total Joy Park 200,000 50,000 100,000 200,000 550,000 Lions 50,000 100,000 125,000 Gladstone Savanna 900,000 100,000 500,000 Trails 100,000 150,000 150,000 150,000 150,000 700,000 Field upgrade 35,000 35,000 35,000 35,000 35,000 175,000 Parks equip, courts upgrade 25,000 25,000 40,000 90,000 Preserves 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 250,000 !~C?~5 NCJt INCLUDE: MCC, Vehicles/mowers upgrades .. z 36 . .: ~ t r _meg ' I R c y' J ?N ;t__ IJin~ts P~~k Lions Park is located in east-central Maplewood, betweei~i Century Avenue and Farrell Street and south of Margaret Avenue. In addition to open grassed play areas, the Park current has a baseball field, hard court area and playground. At the time these features were purchased in about 1973, the ball field, court and playground were estimated to have a useful life of about 20 years. The Park has also had a long history of drainage problems, including areas of standing water, areas that are too wet to get maintenance equipment into and areas that are difficult to establish vegetation. While the Park is used on a regular basis for T-ball, the Park overall is under used due in part to these drainage issues and out-dated equipment. The City has budgeted $50,000 in funds in 2008, $50,000 in 2009 and $50,000 in 2010 to evaluate and implement improvements to Lions Park that would update the Park facilities to better reflect the needs of area residents, address drainage problems and provide water quality treatment within the Tanners Lake watershed. The first priorities are to gather preliminary engineering data, evaluate the drainage system needs and gather input from City Commissions and residents. These efforts will be conducted in 2008 to produce an overall Park Master Plan. The City's goal is to implement the first stage of identified drainage system improvements in the fall of 2008. As part of the first stage of work in 200$, the Park will be surveyed to obtain site topography, culverts, tl•ees, facility playground and baseball field feahires and property boudaries. This survey will serve as the base mapping for the analysis in 2008 and subsequent improvements in 2009 and 2010. Soil borings will be taken throughout the Park to determine opportunities for infiltration, Park drainage improvements and firture playground facilities and structures. A Master Plan will be prepared for the drainage system improvements and will identify other park facilities/amenities that are selected by City staff and input form the Parks Commission and Neighborhood Meetings. The Storm Water Plan will identify opportumities for storm water infiltration and/or filtration practices, the ability of the City to bank infiltration credits for future street projects, possible grant funding available to help pay for the improvements and concept designs and locations of BMPs. The Plan will inchtde a planning level opinion of construction costs for the various Park linprovements. A budget of $20,000 has been estimated for the preliminary engineering work and development of the Master Plan. The remaining $30,000 of budget allocated for work in 2008 would be used for preparing construction documents and constructing the first phase of drainage system improvements that are defined during development of the Master Plan. V ®Parks, C~per~ Space, a,..~ Trael Sysgerrt [plan -:.; .., w __ ~ ~, ~_ r ~ ~ ,~+~" ; J 4 'L'.' _ ~'~Y "' a c. ," ~ ~ , a R.'-- _ F• .e' ~ y ~ s f _ 4 ~ v,,s " .~ i ; i .erg "~+' .~ ~ ~~;~', _ __ __,, MapieGVOOd Parls, Open Space, and Trail System PI 5.47 m gf ®Parks~ OE~-° ~ ..., and Trai[ System Plan h:ame: ®~a.3 .~..a Park Statistics Classification: Neighborhood Park Location: 618 Farrell Approximate Size: 3 Acres Basis for Park Need/Primary Program Focus The park services established neighborhood park needs in this fully developed residential area. The primary focus of the park is: - Providing neighborhood recreation facilities focused on non-structured individual and family activities. - Creating a social center for the neighborhood. - Open space for informal group play (with limited use for organized/programmed activities. Interrelationship with Other Parks Lions, Gethsemane, and Geranium parks work in concert to service the neighborhood-level park needs for this area. In conjunction with the Maplewood Nature Center, a full palette of outdoor recreational opportunities is provided in this neighborhood, ranging from active play areas to nature trails. Park Features/Amenities This park is reaching the end of its lifecycle and will require upgrading in the near future. As illustrated by the aerial photograph, current features of the park include: 1) Children's play area 2) Skinned ballfield infield with backstop and players benches 3) Hardcourt area for basketball 4) Open play area. Visual Characteristics The park is highly visible from the adjacent streets as shown on the aerial. Visually, the park is very open and aesthetically uninteresting. Buffering between the park and residential areas to the south and north is also lacking. Neighborhood: Beaver take 7"rail Access Trail access from the neighborhood is not provided. Pedestrian access is limited to the adjacent streets. There is also no internal trail system. Ecological/Natural Resource Issues With the majority of the park covered by manicured turf, ecological issues are limited. Although there is some potential to introduce a more naturalized landscape, the limited size of the park will preclude extensive use of native plant communities. Management of any introduced natural areas should be included in the city-wide program for restoration and management of natural areas. Development Program I Although the park contains many of the amenities typically ': found in a neighborhood park, it lacks an overall design character and theme. The amenities that are there are old and i do not meet current design standards. Future development of the park should focus on replacing the worn out facilities and improving its aesthetic appeal. Relocation of existing facilities should be considered as part of any future design to improve the relationship between them and new features and improve pedestrian circulation and flow within the park. A drainage problem in the center of the park should also be addressed as part of any improvements. In addition to replacing the existing features, potential future development considerations include: - Enhanced landscaping to improve site aesthetics and buffer adjacent properties. - Small group picnic shelter (3 or 4 picnic tables) - Loop trail with benches - Volleyball court-grass or sand - Sitting areas and architectural features, like an arbor, to add visual interest - General amenities enhancements (i.e., benches, picnic tables, grills, bike rack, drinking fountain, etc.} The general design of the park is functional in character, offering little in the way of design appeal and park atmosphere. This has resulted in a lack of an overall sense of place within the park. '. Maplewood Parks, Open Space, and Trail System Plan 5.48 ---- ~ ~' ~ ~_~ e boa a ~' - -~: ~ ~~~ T DuVVayne Konewko -Deputy Public iNorks Director ROMm Steve Kummer -Civil Engineer II SUBJECTm Hazelwood Street Improvements, City roject 07- Bruce Vento Trail Connection to Hazelwood Street DATE: June 11, 2008 INTRODUCTION On May 12, 2008, the Maplewood City Council awarded the contract for the reconstruction of Hazelwood Street from Highway 36 to Frost Avenue to Tower Asphalt, Inc. The contractor's operations started the week of June 2nd, 2008. The newly constructed Hazelwood Street will be a base width of 28 feet from face-to- face of curb widening to 34-feet at areas of proposed on-street parking stalls. Along the east side of the street extending from Highway 36 down to Frost Avenue will be a 6-foot wide concrete sidewalk that will generally follow the east curb line of the street. As part of the Hazelwood Street construction contract, City Staff have proposed a trail connection between the Bruce Vento Trail and Hazelwood Street to be constructed within the Minnesota Department of Transportation (Mn/DOT) right-of-way along Highway 36. The proposed trail connection will be constructed to the north of (essentially behind) the properties that line both Sherren Avenue and Cope Avenue from Hazelwood Street to the Vento Trail crossing. The Parks and Recreation Commission will consider a motion supporting the proposed trail construction and will also include considerations for proposed trail amenities. BACKGROUND An at-grade marked pedestrian crossing currently exists near the intersection of Hazelwood Street and Highway 36. City staff feels that a marked, at-grade pedestrian crossing on Highway 36 is a potentially unsafe situation for pedestrians looking to cross Highway 36. City staff at this point also feels that the city council is also supportive of removing the pedestrian crossing and providing an alternate route for pedestrians to cross Highway 36 in this general area. City staff feels that the safety of the intersection is important enough that, at the least, an interim solution, in the form of a bypass to the Bruce Vento Traii from Hazelwood Street, should be implemented. P SAL City staff is proposing to construct a 10-foot wide bituminous trail extending from the Bruce Vento Regional Trail to Hazelwood Street. The trail would be constructed within the south side of the Highway 36 right-of-way and behind property owners that have frontage along Sherren Avenue and Cope Avenue between Hazelwood Street and the Vento Trail (a sketch is enclosed for your reference). The edge of the trail would be a minimum of 5 feet off the back property lines of these area residences and businesses. With the construction of the trail, an approved barricade would be constructed on Highway 36 to discourage pedestrians from using the Hazelwood Street crossing. Pedestrian traffic would be encouraged to use the new trail spur and to cross Highway 36 at the Vento Trail bridge about 1,600 feet west of Hazelwood Street. To discourage trail users from crossing abutting properties, city staff would propose an 8-foot high chain-link fence to be installed along the south side of the trail. Installation of a chain-link fence versus aboard-on-board privacy fence would discourage graffiti and vandalism. PROPERTY OWNER INPUT AND RESPONSE City staff sent out a notice to 15 residences along Sherren Avenue west of Hazelwood Street and 2 businesses along Cope Avenue just east of the Vento trail regarding the proposed trail construction. The back lots of these 17 properties are adjacent to the south side of the Highway 36 right-of-way. Although the properties would not be directly impacted by the physical construction of the trail, there would be indirect impacts to them by the increased pedestrian traffic near their back lots. 0 I~owaa i and a;nten~nce: Will the City be responsi~~ le for maintaining weed ~~ ~-w° ~`° ~` ~°~~~t to the trail? n1~C)T ._ _ a_ _ _ ...-,~ ~_ k _ o Privacy and Screening: What will be done to screen the trail from the back yards? Wil[ a privacy fence or some type of shrub screening be installed? o Tres easing: Several residents and one business owner brought up concerns about people walking between yards and through parking lots to get to the trail. How will this be addressed? o Vandalism: One business owner near to the Vento Trail has had past problems with vandalism and graffiti on their building and is concerned about the increased pedestrian traffic along their back lot. o Trash: One resident indicated the need for possible trash receptacles along the length of trail. They are concerned about accumulation of litter along their back lot. o Visibility: There are concerns that the trail will not be visible enough at night and that increased police patrols may be needed to keep suspicious activity down. o Aesthetics and Existing Vegetation: Several residents have shrubs, bushes and trees along their backlot that are actually in the Mn/DOT right-of-way. Will those trees be removed as part of this project? How will the grading impact my back yard? BUDGET City staff is currently working with Mn/DOT on the design and permitting of the trail to be constructed within the Highway 36 right-of-way. As it stands, Mn/DOT is supportive of the project and will provide 50% funding of the trail improvements up to $40,000. The City would fund the other 50% of the improvements through the Hazelwood Street contract. The trail improvements were included in the Hazelwood Street Improvements contract as an add-alternate. Tower Asphalt came in with a bid of $42,290 to do the work. This price includes the following: o Excavation, grading, and paving of the proposed trail surface. o Minor drainage improvements including an 1 ~" culvert to facilitate back yard drainage. o Restoration, including seeding and erosion control blanket installation. o Clearing of brush and removal of select trees (if necessary). The price does not include shrub planting, fencing and other trail amenities above and beyond items f cilit; ~~in construction of the trail itself. If other amenities are required, ~~~°.. °°°ill °. ~ti~°~al unit pricing from the co~_A~__ ~.~ ~r look to perform ~m ~r ~ . .. As a minimum amenity, city staff recommends that chain link fence and shrubs be installed on one side for the full length of trail connection, which is approximately 1,700 feet. City staff estimates that this will add an additional X39,710 to the project cost, bringing the estimated total trail cost to X82,000. n/DOT would oast-share 0% of the improvements. CBVIM i City staff recommends that the commission motion for the following: 1) A motion recommending support for the proposed 1700-foot long, 10-foot wide trail construction in the Mn/DOT right-of-way of Highway 36 connecting Hazelwood Street to the Bruce Vento Trail. 2) A motion recommending, at a minimum, the addition of 1,700-foot long chain link fence and shrub screening along the south side of the trail. Included in the motion would be other recommended amenities. The motions, if accepted, will be accounted for in the staff recommendation to the city council for construction of the trail at the July 14, 2008 city council meeting. Attachments: 1) Trail Schematic 2) Ramsey GIS showing 17 property owners 3) Meeting Notice to Residents 4) Follow-Up Notice to Residents C n C7 -- _h - 1=.'3 sue,,. ,. 'a.i -"^~' r ~ ~ ~ ~ a v~ -tom <<' .~ ;Y ' ' rr+ ~ d i4a -~- s ! K. ~ - ~ 'fit', ~~ ~~~~ ~o- ,1~ "iE y ~~ ~ ~ e~ ~' i Y N m ~~,~_ a f~ _ ~ r Nw ~ '~~~~ ~,+ ~ ~ _ ~~ ~ # ~ gyp" }~,sa 1 4 6t~~ ~" i 3` ~}~ ~ s J .^.] W ?~ _ TT t4'l'R~...I.d11D.1~15fyl.,k '. _ __ _ ,}~~' ~ ~ ~ ~~ ...fir ~yi ~~~~~ I.~~ ~ ~ r ~ ] :& ~' y - r ~ ~ ~ ~ ~o F.J ~~~' i-'~ ~1'.~:~tl_ __. ~_ty~ #`3 _ ~' #.. ~ f=~ 's ;~,T g' ao N W ~. j "'AIf ^ _ 7 X11 ~ " ~ ~ ' ` _{{ _ y ' e t ','.fin. ~, c~ ~ ~ _ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ + ~ ,,,-. x w ~s a ~ ~ ~ _~, ~ i ~ ~ ... ~1:{~~ ~a ~ Rr tip'. L e ~ ° .~ y ~~iuieaf-~ ~ i'~ ~_..~ fin- "'M ~~ , r} ~ ' ~ ` j ~ r~ i%~_- b ~ _ ~ t ~~ x ~ ~ ~ ~'~~ ~'f faD G p ~ ~ ' •~? ~ i b ,~ s~ ,~~ ~ j ~' uo ~ ~~ ~ In+tic r~~ .i ~ ~ ~ ~ ~' ' ~x h .:~,.:'i~a ~ r D p "~ ~ m ~ f i ~- r w cu N' S55S5 - ~ ~~ ~, g _ w r~ A"t.~''/ ~t'_~.-fir 1~, ..E ~ .:~~ '~+±~~--... t -: { ,~` ~~~ O m ~ ~~~~ S a ~'rk ~ yae '",~ ~~ -'' ,~L•S@_ ~ 1 `• ~ p ¢j y '_~~~ :~ 'T1 < ~f I j, aa.,~ ;~~~~~ ~~a~*~ Imo( ~~`~ ~~F~ ~ 4 ~ ~ ~ '~ ~ ! ~~ ~' ~~~ ~,~. o ~ ~ ~ ~` N ~ ~~ ~,.-'~ ~~ I ,yam ~ ~~~~;~ ~ r ,~~ ~~~ ~ r a1 ~ ~ ,~.d ~ r ~ ,c. '4 ~~ oc. 1'~ , : ~, ~ i F G 1 /.,ff,~r~ ~~ .~ - < •^ ~ yy n ~ Y~ - ~ ~ __._. '. < F C_ C_ ' C~ CV P tr 4 ~ ~ ' CTJ N O A~ n O CD f'1 O R 1~ N ~c_ C O O !"' t"'F H 0 <: #~ -.. 4 _ .s > May 19t", 2008 ®ear Maplewood Resident: RE: Hazelwood Street Improvements, City Project 07-25 Bruce Vento Trail Connector along Highway 36 On May 12t", 2008, the Maplewood City Council awarded the contract for the reconstruction of Hazelwood Street from Highway 36 to Frost Avenue. Construction on Hazelwood Street is anticipated to begin on May 27t", 2008. As part of the Hazelwood Street improvements, the City is proposing to construct a 10-foot-wide trail within the southern portion of the Highway 36 right-of-way. The new trail construction near Highway 36 will extend from Hazelwood Street and connect to the Bruce Vento Regional Trail. A drawing of the proposed trail connection is enclosed for your information. We would like to invite you to a neighborhood meeting regarding this proposed trail connection at the following date, time and place: Neighborhood Meeting for The Proposed Vento Trail Connection Thursday, May 29th, 2008 6:30 p.m. to 7:30 pm. at the Maplewood Public Works Building 1902 County Road B East (Uphill from City Hall in the Maplewood Municipal Complex, Engineering Entrance) Those property owners that are receiving this notice are those owners whose back yard or side yard abuts the south side of the Highway 36 right-of-way from Hazelwood Street to the Bruce Vento Trail. Although the trail is proposed to be built exclusively in the Highway 36 right-of-way, we would like your input on the proposed trail connection since it will be running behind your properties. If you cannot make the meeting or you would like to comment prior to the meeting, please contact Steve Kummer at 651-249-2418. Sincerely, Maplewood Public ~(orks June 3rd, 2008 Dear Maplewood Resident: RE: Hazelwood Street Improvements, City Project 07-25 Sherren Avenue Residents Bruce Vento Trail Connector along Highway 36 On Thursday, May 29t", 2008, Maplewood Public Works staff held a neighborhood meeting on the proposed plans fora 10-foot wide trail that will be built along the southern portion of the Highway 36 right-of-way. The new trail construction is proposed to extend from Hazelwood Street to the Bruce Vento Regional Trail along Highway 36. At the meeting, we showed a plan of the proposed trail alignment and placement of the trail within the Highway 36 right-of-way. Seventeen (17) property owners, predominately along Sherren Avenue, were notified of the meeting. Of the 17 property owners, four (4) responded by phone with comments and one (1) attended the meeting. Based on the comments received, city staff does not feel that property owners in this area are squarely opposed to the trail construction, but have concerns that they would like to be addressed with the trail construction and maintenance as follows: o Mowing and maintenance. Will the grass and weeds in the area be regularly mowed and maintained? o Privacy. Several residents do not have screening from Highway 36. A privacy fence along certain lengths of the trail was brought up. o Proximity of the trail edge to the back yard property lines. The edge of the trail will be constructed a minimum of 5 feet from the back yard property lines along Highway 36. Grading and trail construction will not encroach on private property and will be contained within the Highway 36 right-of-way. City staff will take these comments into consideration as we move forward with design. With the comments received, the City Council will be asked to consider the construction of this trail on June 23rd, 2008 (the regular Monday council meeting). If you would like to make further comment regarding the trail construction or have any other questions or concerns please attend the council meeting at City Hall on June 23rd, or contact Steve Kummer at (651) 249-2418 prior to the meeting. Sincerely, ~° ~ ~ ~I~wood Public Works uWayne I~onewko ®eputy Public Works C~irectar a Steve FCummer ~ Civil Engineer II U J T: azelwoo treat Imrovemen ity rojec akefieltl Lake Storm star Treatment DAT June 11, 2008 INTRODUCTION On May 12, 2008, the Maplewood City Council awarded the contract for the reconstruction of Hazelwood Street from Highway 36 to Frost Avenue to Tower Asphalt, Inc. The contractor's operations started the week of June 2nd, 2008. The newly constructed Hazelwood Street will be a base width of 28 feet from face-to- face of curb widening to 34-feet at areas of proposed on-street parking stalls. Along the east side of the street extending from Highway 36 down to Frost Avenue will be a 6-foot wide concrete sidewalk that will generally follow the east curb line of the street. As part of the Hazelwood Street construction contract, city staff is proposing the construction of a storm water infiltration basin in Wakefield Park near the southeast corner of the intersection of Frost Avenue and Hazelwood Street. BACKGROUND Hazelwood Street in its existing condition does not have concrete curb and gutter. The proposed reconstruction of Hazelwood Street will add concrete curb and gutter as well as a more developed storm sewer system. PROPOSAL The drainage from a section of storm sewer to be installed in Hazelwood Street from Frost Avenue to about 800 feet north of Frost Avenue will be diverted into a constructed rain garden basin near the southeast corner of the intersection at Frost Avenue and Hazelwood Street in Wakefield Park. The purpose of this garden is to provide storm water treatment for runoff from a portion of Hazelwood Street. The treated storm water runoff eventually drains into Wakefield Lake. The garden will be designed to infiltrate the first one inch of runoff from the Hazelwood street drainage system. City staff will be working to plant the garden with native, water tolerant plant species. City staff believes this is an excellent opportunity to further implement storm water treatment measures to improve the water quality in Wakefield L . e. Attachment: 1) Infiltration Pond Exhibit -Wakefield Park ~ o ~ , ~~ ~ ~ I I ~ i -~ ~ ~ j ~ ~` ~ . ~ i ~ ~, / ,~ „ ,^ / / // / ~~ '1 ~ / ~1 ~ 1 ~ ~~ ~~ i i I ~ ~ i i i \ I ~ i~ ` i ~ \ / \ 1 i i / T ~ m ~ I ~ -, ,- ~- ~_ ~_ -'- j°%;- ~ ~ ~ ~ -~ `~~~'. \ ~\ \ / // ~-~.\Y ~ i .\ ~ ~ ~ ~. i ~ ~' .~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ \ • , / ~, ,- i i ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~.~~ / ~ l ~~ i / / ` i ~ ~ f / / o ~ i ~ ~__ -._~~ i m ~ ~ i ~ (~~`~ ~ +b ~ i i ' i ~r ~ i~ ' /l l ~ ~ i \y x/ ~; /// J ~ / / ~ / I 'v ~! / l l ~ /' ~ ~ lj~ / ~ !/ / ~ / ~ f / ' ~ V1 ~ ~°~/I i / ` fi %i / I _ I ~/ I ~ i l ~ i r ~ ~ ~~ a i ~~ l ~ i ~ i III it ~` i' / ~ i ~~ i f ~ ~i ~qj°j ~-~ i / ~ r rl i cD -- ~ ~ ~~ r ~ ~ l jl I I' ~ I % ~ ~ f --__---_,_~~ I ~ >1 ~ l I I I 1 ~ o ~ { ~ / m I ' l l l j °. l I i f I { I ~ I ~ /J ~ ~ I ~1 ~ 1 i ' / I r II ~ I i I ~ ~ l ~ ;~ I~ ~ i~ _ r /~ I ~~ .~~~ f r 1 r I I ~~ I I i ( I f I ' I II ~ I ~ ' II r' II I I I ~ ' V I Z o ^I` ~ 'I , i II ~ I r- ` \ 9 Q, 1 1 ~ ~ ~ , , ~ ~ ~, ~ 1 ~ X \ \W ~ \ ' ,` ` \ 1 \ ~ .~ }' ~ \ ~ ~ / 1 \ \ \ ~ ~ ~ \ \ ~~~ \ 1 I ~_.._ ~I \\ \~ \ \ \ \ 1 ~~ ~ ~,~ `~ .i \\ CGS- \\ \ \ ~. U ~ \ \ \ i~ \ ~~ ~~ U ~ = W N W Z ~ O U ~ i ,\ i a Q /' i. ~~~ I // / /.: ~~ ~¢ /~3 >~ o `1. ~\ ~~ '~' C3 [~ ~I ~ I~? •?_ LJ .- v ~ N ~ I N~ ~ r w N U M w ~~ oa a ? c ~ o N ~ O~ 3x W~~ ~~ a~,N °~ ~w° ~F ~~~ oq ~~ V J ni G? o ass `~ o~q G > .u i~G a u ~~ _ I, -~€w_ n~co€ _os~~ I A~ jai ~- me ~ ~ a _ ~ ~~ a~i d ~~ ~[ ~ , ~a ~n Y ~ ~ ~ v i ¢ °~ ~~ ~ A I A 1 A 4 1 l _~ i ~ , i ~ /~~ r I n l ~. ~ i I~ J ( ~ J~ ~ i d ~ 1 ~ ~~ ~ ~ I ~ ~ 1 _~~~ . . I i ~ ~ - ~ ~ ~~~~ -~ t~ m ~~ 1° I ~ - ie~ .- - 3 ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ i _ z a~ a ~. C>,O ~'. ~~ \ ~K V C i w I ~ O y I ~ I `~ ~ ~ ~`` I ~ ~ U -- - =~-- ~_ ~~ ___ N _ ,~ w ,i~Y, ~ ~ - ~ ~ ,.~_ i; ~ p ~'~__~w ~I ~ ~~ ~_ ~~ ~ ,; _, ~- --- ~Yo I Y 1:~~ -- __ ~ ~ ; - ~. a ~ ~ ~ , ~. ~, ~ i! i y ~' ry i cy 9 \ o N ~ ~~ If` l I ~ I: I w pz T v ~ ` ~ ~ . ,. ' ~ 5 i 1.1 - I ~~ ~~ ~ I~ dm -- ~~ ~~~~ , ~~ I ~~ ~ ~i ~` II!~! ~,. , ~, 11`L a ~ ~~ __ ~~ ~ ~ ~~ _.~ .~ _~ - - _ ---=--~~a_ _ ;, __~ ___. - - ,v - - i33Z11S ~IOOMT3ZHfi"=""" - , f A~ ~ _ ~ 'm ~+~ ~ ~J > 0 ~~~ - -- L ~ 1 E: r ~ i ` ~ S9~Z 7 ;x z T ~~ I i e _--I Q ~f ~ -~ _~ _ s~ ,.w __. ___ .._. - ___ ._ Y -.-. __-_-_ ~ 1 ~ ~ - I J I I- ~ j~ I i-- ~- , P ~ ~ ~ ~I ~-- ~ 1 ', ' I ~_~ N ~~ °o ~F V ~Oy O Q d Q )- a a~ > z oo U a Nam OWNER: CITY OF MAPLEWOOD PROJECT: BRUCE VENTO TRAIL CONNECTION En ineer's Estimate item No. Mn/DOT No. Item Descri tion Unit Contract Quantit Unit Price Amount 1 2101.501 CLEARING ACRE 0.85 $ 1,500.00 $ 1,275.06 2 2101.502 CLEARING TREE 5 $ 100.00 $ 500.00 3 2101.506 GRUBBING ACRE 0.85 $ 1,50D.D6 $ 1,275.OD 4 2101.507 GRUBBING TREE 5 $ 75.00 $ 375.00 5 2105.501 COMMON EXCAVATION P CY 476 $ 7.00 $ 3,332.00 6 2105.523 COMMON BORROW P GV CY 247 $ 8.25 $ 2,037.75 7 2105.526 SELECT TOPSOIL BORROW L CY 1 DO $ 12.00 $ 1,200.00 8 2350.618 CONSTRUCT BITUMINOUS TRAIL -BRUCE VENTO CONNECTION SF 18,000 $ 1.75 $ 31,500.00 9 2506.522 ADJUST FRAME AND RING CASTING SANITAR EA 3 $ 225.00 $ fi75.00 10 2506.602 CASTING ASSEMBLY R-1678-A FOR EXISTING SANITARY STRUCTURE. EA 3 $ 350.00 $ 1,050.00 11 2531.501 CONCRETE CURB AND GUTTER, DESIGN 8618 LF 40 $ 9.00 $ 360.00 12 2531.602 PEDESTRIAN CURB RAMP EA 2 $ 356.00 $ 7D0.00 13 2557.603 CHAIN LINK FENCE LF 1,900 $ 14.00 $ 26,606.00 14 2563.601 TRAFFIC CONTROL LS 1 $ 1,000.00 $ 1,000AD 15 2573.502 SILT FENCE, TYPE MACHINE SLICED LF 2,D00 $ 2.00 $ 4,006.00 16 2575.523 EROS[ON CONTROL BLANKET, CATEGORY 3 SY 706 $ 2.00 $ 1,400,00 17 2575.605 SEEDING, SEED MIXTURE 250 GR ACRE 2 $ 1,500.00 $ 3,000.00 Total: $ 80,279.75 1 d "" $ ~ ~ T T a Park Commission F e Charles Ahl, Acting City Manager DuWayne Konekwo, Deputy Director of Public Works SUBJECT: Continued ®iscussion of 2009 ®2013 Capital Improvement Plan ®ATE: June 12, 2008 INTRODUCTION At the June 9, 2008 City Council meeting, the Park Commission represented that they did not understand the changes in funding for the currently proposal Capital Improvement Plan. We would like for the Commission to have an understanding on the decisions and recommendations that has been used for the basis of the current plan. Following is a summary of the information used in the decision process. Background -Financial Plan Let's first examine the balance of funds available in the Park Development Fund over the past few years: 2005 End of Year Balance $ 592,878 2006 End of Year Balance $ 884,950 2007 End of Year Balance $1,236,752 2008 PAC Funding To date $ 481,536 Current Fund Balance $1,735,039 The Maplewood accounting process requires that funds be transferred out of the various funds into a project fund. These transfers have not occurred but are anticipated to occur in the next few months for projects that have been approved over the past 6 - 12 months or will likely occur during the second half of 2008: Lions Park $ 25,000 Joy Park $ 200,000 Trail Improvements $ 100,000 Gladstone Savanna - Phase I $ 900,000 Walter St and N. Beaver Lake Trails $ 100,000 Comprehensive Plan 20 000 Total 2008 Project Transfers $1,345,000 Effective Fund Balance $ 390,039 The plan anticipates that there will b~ E Eve Eal PAC fees received during the remainer of 2008: Future 2008 PAC Pevenue $ 156,381 Plan for 2008 End of Year Balance $ 546,420 Park Commission ®CIP Discussion Page Two -Discussion: While it appears that we have a high fund balance currently [$1,735,039], the Commission and Council have committed funds to numerous initiatives. There are numerous unknowns regarding Gethsemane and Carver Crossing developments that may require additional funding from the PAC Development Fund, so it is not recommended that the fund be reduced or projects committed at this time. We are planning for an additional $150,000+ during the remainder of 2008, which may not be received. A conservative approach for financial planning has been suggested. * -Gladstone Discussion: The first phase of Gladstone will likely begin later in 2008. The first development has been delayed, so we do not know when we will receive the PAC fees from that development. Again, a conservative approach has been presented. It also should be reviewed on the status of the current Gladstone plan as it relates to Park Development Funding: • It is true that at one point, it was assumed that the City would receive $2,400,000 of PAC fees from the development. However, that was based on the following: 800 new units @ $3,000 per unit = $2,400,000 • The development plan has been revised to a new range of 650 - 690 new units. In addition, there was discussion that some of these units will be reduced space, such as senior housing that do not pay full PAC fees. The current plan for PAC revenue is: 665 new units @ $2,250 per unit = $1,496,250 • The recommendation on revenue could be conservative; however, our recommendation is to not plan for improvements until funding is received. • We have identified improvements of $1,500,000 that is shown within the plan. Background: 2009 Capital Improvement Plan Beginning of year Fund Balance in 2009: $546,420 New PAC Fees planned in 2009: $450,000 Between Gladstone - Phase I and Carver Crossing, we are not aware of any major new developments or initiatives that will result in significant new PAC fees. We are concerned that this number is too high. Thus, we did not plan any major improvements for 2009. Planned Project for 2009: Cpen Cpace Improvements: $ 50,000 Planned End of 2009 Fund Balance: $956,640 Park Commission - CiP Discussion Page Three ~' ® iscussion There is currently no general tax dollars dedicated for a transfer into the Park Development Fund. The 2006 - 2010 CIP identified the possibility that general fund levy money would be transferred into the fund beginning in 2007. This did not occur. The CIP is a planning document, not an official budgeting allocation. In April 2005, when the 2006 - 2010 CIP was prepared, it was assumed that taxes may become available beginning in 2007 in the amount of $393,330, and increase by $300,000 in 2008 and another $300,000 in 2009, so that the 2009 allocation was $939,080. The 2007 and 2008 approved City budget did not include any allocations, and it is highly unlikely that $939,080 will be available for 2009. A CIP for the years 2007 - 2011 was not adopted by the Council. There was no tax dollars dedicated to the Park Development Fund in the 2008 - 2012 CIP. It should be noted that the 2009 - 2013 CIP proposes to start a small levy dedication for park replacements of $60,000. We recognize that there is an annual need of $200,000 - $300,000 for park equipment replacements and community field upgrades; however, these improvements cannot be funded from the Park Development Fund and PAC fees due to the legal requirements for use of PAC fees. The only other current source of funds is property taxes, which will likely be very limited in 2009. It will not be easy to begin this dedication of tax dollars; however, we are recommending that $265,000 of general levy dollars be dedicated to this purpose during the 2009 - 2013 period. Background: 2010 - 2013 Capital Improvement Plan The assumptions for future years include some less conservative assumptions on PAC fees but also a conservative approach on Fund Balance. The intent is to be planning for projects that may occur in future years, while also maintaining an appropriate fund balance. Following are the assumptions: Park Charges by Year • 2010 $ 400,000 • 2011 $ 400,000 • 2012 $ 450,000 • 2013 $ 500,000 • TOTAL PAC Charges $1,750,000 Projects Planned by Year: • 2010 $ 35o,oa0 • 2011 $ 900,000 • 2012 $ 4oa,0o0 • 2013 $ .200.000 • TOTAL PI~OJFCTB $1,850,000 Projec~~~ Fund balance at end of 2013 $ 915,140 U a L ~ ~ . full list A:: ~ ~~ ~t, W ~r r€ _...... .~ _ , _ n ., a .` ~ new f _ ~urce. €n , ~r believed that the neighbarhood parks commitr~-gent that was originally planned as undesignated at $350,000 has b.en prioritized by the Parks Commission to Jay Park. Park Commission ~ CIP C~iscussion Page Four E E °f9 It is recommended that the Park Commission continue the discussion of the items listed above. We fully understand that previous plans have programmed as much as $4,000,000+ in park improvements. Given the current development scenarios and economic times, we do not see that this type of plan can be supported. We understand that the Commission has recommended to the City Council that we program back into the CIP the amount of $50,000 per year beginning in 2010 for neighborhood parks. As staff, we are okay with that recommendation if the Commission understands the parameters that this is for new park improvements, when we are having difficulty funding the replacement of the current park amenities. Those amenities cannot be funded with PAC dollars for replacement. The Commission should discuss whether we can afford to continue the expansion of our park system. Attachment: 1. CIP -Park Development Fund (403) Statement of Revenues 2. Packet of information presented to City Council on June 3, 2008 C` , . i~:i(1 °"~(~'iius``, EVffR(PtI~S~'" ~~1<#, t7~°t'~L#3F~hh~E~"~ Etl~ll~ (~i03j __ STAT~M~h1T OF EZEVEt~iJES, ~XPF~tDITURF.S,,~~jC? CKAi~G~S tE~E F(Ji~![? E3,+~I.~h1GE ACCT. NO. 2009 2090 20'i1 2012 201'3 Property Taxes: 3#}11 Current ~ $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 3012 Qetinquent 0 0 0 0 0 3017 Interest 0 0 0 0 0 trtte~gpyernmental Revenue: 3523 State homestead market. value credit 0 0 0 0 0 3530 Mise. state aid/grants 4 4 0 0 0 3534 County -Other Grants/Aid (t 0 0 {i 0 3544 Other Gov't - Misc-Crants 0 0 0 0 0 -Miscellaneous Revenue: 3809 Investment earnings 10,330 19,130 20,490 10,870 12,080 3804 Sale of property 0 0 0 0 0 3809 Miscellaneous income 0 0 0 0 0 3851 Park aval{aE?ility charges -residential. 35{1,000 300,000 200,000 300,000 354,000 3852' Park availa6il[ty charges -non-residential 100,000 100,000 200,000 950,000 150,000 Total revenues 460,930 419,130 420,490 460 870 512 080 Expenditures; 4490 Consulting: 0 4 0 0 0 4660 Construction. -building 0 4 0 f1 0 4714 [_and purchase 0' 0 0 0 0 4720 Park.. development projects 50,000 350,Q00 900,000 400,000 200.000 4730 Building impravernent 0 0 0 0 0 4820 Interest payments 0 0 0 0 0 4920 Interest on interfund loans 0 0 0 0 0 4930 Investment management fees 710 1,240 1 330 710 790 - Tatatexpenditures 511,710 351,240 90.1,330 400,710 200,790 - Excess (defscif} of revenue _ aver expenditures 410,220 67,894 {480,840) 60,160 311,290 Other financing uses: Transfers in (out} Frcr~ ~'urlic lr ~r ~rrtc ` Project ~s~nd 0 0 0 0 0 - "(n (ai hllr iR'arae ,~;,_~,.: PrLSjeF:t ~k:€nd ~} ~1 t1 ~} l1 ~ _ f - Rd~ t1 0 t1 E1 t1 iVet .,; reg. _e (decrease] in €und l~rlance 410,220 67,890 (480,840} 60,1.60 311,29{1 ~.._ . , ®.__.....~. 1 ~.r .. ,, 9x6,640 1,024 ~~n ~,~.~ ~~,~ AGO Fun't ~'.:.t , ..-"E-' - ( ember 31 ~ i j.~A{"~ 4~ ~?/~ ~`~~ Qi(I2 f,-:~ ~ ~-~ ;''lti ~, '~1 ~ '~40 173 ~' ~ I ~- ~ CJ / r': G ~ .~ "CJ~ O ~ I F g € .F+ VJ ~ p ~ :O ~ O :~+ I c_, I _~ i (t~ } Il: i rJ it ~. i o , Cpl nt ~i` O 'E~ '~" I 4t3 t^€7 ~ O N ~ ~ ~ E ~ ~ ~ Ckf ~ N tS ! t ~ ~~ j; , i`') i~ O G07 O ~ O ~ 0 ~~ ~ Q c- ~~ [ o € t7 G7 o c7 o iO o f o t { O O O Q C] O 4 ~ O C3 } r tE> C'! N O N ~L> E~ cn ~ G N ~ 1 ~ ~ # N N O C7 i 0 O O O O _ ~ ~ ~ Q 03 kk 0 ' O ~ O ' f~7 ~ °o ~ [c°n o II s°n o a ° ~ "" , N s C N 6}. . ~e-- u ~ ~y }~y~ ... : ~ -(,~ CV ° Ca O ti] p p 4 O tip N ~ 4 O Q O O O Ct O O O O FJ O O O :O Ca O O d O O O ~ O O O C? O p ti O ~ ~ t ' T f : O i O O ~ ® ~ . U a € co tif = }` r€7 P- cs 'm ' w ~ .. C3 ~ Q c~ O O ' C7 O ' t7 O O v O €.n Q c~ O. ~n ~ O ~ ~ : O cn ~ N 0 ~ O IJ.. C3 M ._ p ~N ~- €I? . N f3~ :r t"? ~ [V CSS _ .0 Q N '~ ~ N 4 ~ r 4 t M ~ ~ ' ~ - - -- ~ ~ .C t ! ~ tC Q ~ O 'O O O O © ' O ~7 '. O O :Q 'p © O Ot O' O O O O O O ~t O ~ @ . '~ O ~ ~: ~ ~ ~ O O O O' O O Q Q O tJ C1 CI 0 O 0 O 0 O 0. Q 0 O 0 O ~ G ti to } ~ ~` ~ ~ ~ O N O~ NI O f . . O ~' . ~ ... tf~ ~ .© M GOII ~ C~7 ~ ~ ~ + y C,,, G .' i ~ . ' , . U N *3 ~ ~ ~ N ~ t ,t q~ ~ txf ~ t4 L !1f r ~ O ° o ° , o ° . a ° o O ru w ,~ s ~ ~ ;®, vi oi ~ ~ o ~ v c Q , ~ , ° cc ~ ®~ v~ o o O O ~ cs O ~ o a o ~ c~ ~ W ~ C'} ,~ , o o ~ ~ ~ ~ l ,r w ~ ry = ay e o ~ ~ ~ ~ a r ii VII tf t~ g 'LS ~ 'Q' ~ ,~ ni I d O d O O O I~ ~ ~• ++ ~ `~ • Q ~ O O O d ~ N ~ ~ ~ C0 ~ ~F i '~ i © c~ ~ ~ a ch •CF m M c~~ ~' t ~ ~ t 7 w F~ . ~ ~ lt ~ -_ O O O d d d O d O 4S > ~ ~ T ~ t O Cl O ~ C}. K=S O C7 Q O : fl7 (J tSS ~ { ' r g ~ d d O O O O O ® Q T'1 ~' ~ ~-: ; ~ , „ gi :. a ~.,, . ~ r.1S [ E t 0 C'i 0 O d O . O~ O( d d" ` B~ tC1 d O d O E O Q lE€ ~ I ~ Rt ~-- p ~ f ~ 4 ~ E CwS N '~ ( "~" f ~ c- 6E? !LS ! O ~ ° _ _ _ t ~ tiF ~ ~ trS ' Ci _^ C3 O O G ~ O O C7 C3 O G ~ C3 CF C3 ~ ~ - Q ~ ~.,. ~~ r ~ ~~ ~ > ~~ ~ c~ - ' O ~T3 t 7 ~ ~ C1 O O a~'C^t~e7 O ~~r'> O ~ O ~ Ct[[ i O :~ ? Cy~ O C O ! d ~ ~ . ~ ~4lS~ (dal ~I ~ ~ ~ O t ~ ~, .t C ~ f ~~ C Oj 3 I [ E O J c ' v n ~~ } ~~ ~ I ,- I f ~ ~ I ~ 1..l I ~i ~~ t i ~~ ~ c i ~ ~ tR ~ ~ L i i.+ ~ s... ~ ~ ~:. (:l ~ ' QI t T CSS ~ ~-a ~ L - ~' ~ i j v uO ...C2 ~ ~ tt ~ ~ ~... ~ `~ ~. C ~ L c E ~; ~ a. .~ ~ as a. a u~ ~ ~ . fL`~. e ta [7 ~ ~'~~~zu~C'1z~ ~ t~ ~ u3~ ~.~ C? ~~ CS h z° c d ~ L. l;und Balance 12/31/06 884,95(3 2007 Year-to-date Residential PAC fees 170,23{3 2007 Year-to-date iVon-residential PAG fees 200,313 Qtf7er 2007 PAC Revenue 3012. Delinquent Property Taxes 65 30171nterest 7 380fi investment Earnings 32.484 Total 2007 Revenue 403.099 Subfotat 1,288, 049 Less 2007 Expenditures 472(3 Park Development Projects 48,322. 4930 investment Management Fees 2975 Total Expenditures. 51,297 Fund Balance 20Q7 Year End 1,236,752 2D08 Year-to-date f~esidentlal F'AG fees 16,751 2008 Year-to-date {~lon-residential PAG fees 481,536 Other 2008 PAC Revenue 3412 Qeiirquerlt PrapertyTaxes 0 313'[7 interest 0 38(31 investment Earnings t? Total 2008. Revenue. 498,287' Subtotal 1,735,039 k.ess 20(78 Expenditures 4'480 Fees fgr Service 2,500 4~k90 Fees Gonsuiting 24,585 4720 Park Development Pre~jects 3,252 4}30 (nvestment Management Fees 4 Total Expenditures 3.0337. Fund Balar~~e l~r~l February, 20f38 1,7(}4,792. F. ~/ ~ ~ , ~ I ~`t~E~~I~a~T_~.'NIC7QC},.kU~(~NE:SC~i;"t I' ;=~{ ~`- a'-. ~'t4FtkC t3EVE1.QR{4'i~NT ~UtdD {&ti."~} [ ~ s =~ '' d~ ST,I~~iE%tiEtiT tat= E~EVENUES, E?CPE~LIfFl4RES, AND ~i-IEk~FGES fN FUNG ; ',I~NCF ~~ Y. geCT. gip. ~ 2005 2007 2008 2009 2010 Prope~fir Taxes:. 3011. i~rrent $0 $393,330 $539,170 $933,080 $0 3O'l2 E7elinquent 0 0 0 £7 p 30'17 Interest ~ 0 0 0 0 0 Interaovernmentat Eteuenue: 3523 State hcsmestead market value credit - 4 0 0 0 0 3530 Misc. state aidfgrants 0 0 0 0 0 3534 Gaurtfy - Ether GrantstAid 0 0 0 0 0 3544 • ~thar t;ov`t - Misc Grants 0 0 0 0 0 Miscetianeaus Revenue: 3801 inuesfrnent earning. 0 120 ~ 50 50 60 3804 Sateafproperiy 0 0 0 0 0 3809 Miscetlaneous income 0 0 0 0 0 3851 Park avaitatyttity charges - residential 305,000. 153,000 61,200 61,200 &1,200 3852 Park ~vatlabttity charges -non-residential ~.~ ~~000 0 0 {} `! 0 Totai revenue: 456 000 S46 4SO 700,420...... 1,0Ot7,34O' 61,280 Expenditures: 4490 Gonsutting 4650 Construction - buileiing 4.710 Land purchase 4720 Park development prpjecfs 4730 Building m{arovernenf 4820 (Merest payments 4920 Interest an isrterfund loans 4930 Investment management fees. Totat expenditures Fxcess (deficit) of reuenue over expenditun3s €}thar financing uses: Transfers in {out) F[nm Public Emprevement Project l=and Frcr-~ ~edevetopmeret P~and ~'~ 3er}F~ral Fu€rd Tc ,c,,,rn~urify errter€J!per ~,~:,fi ``,,.<<-` t rii;;i~nproveentPt~ate~ +,;,~:1 Prcce-~J:~ ~ srrt tax afaatement kacrncis ~ • ~ rider ) in fund balances 'anccerv 1 ~-~~~ _ i~- ~.a 0 0 0 0 0 a 0 0 Q "{3 0 0 0 0 0 450,000 550,000 700,000 1,000,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 fl 0 0 0` 0 0 0 1'0 0 0 4 450',UO{} 550,010 700,000 1,000,000 0 6,000' {3,566} 420 340 51,280 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ti 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 0 {} 0 0 Ci tl 0 t3 0 0 0 s~o ~~,~~o} 420 340 61,260 t1t31j S,8J9 2-~~3 2,759 3,(399 ... x ~~ --- -- rytl~i,i [44:C"i~ .. s'k~S.:. J+L~ii~ :j ~ _, ti,~ ` ~ °~- at +e~r~ .l j~~fa3 yLtL13 YMW1S°~24i ~~ ~f- ~`ieis(r~aci'"-'{sLrL eta xt ` s~ 4t €~~~# t ~ ~lr~rr~E~a~t ~~ ~r~.~ ~~~.,~- [~te~`~ia~r~'ts ~~~ ~l~ z~ ~ ~~ -~ {°~~ ~:. 4'~ YYZ Yv V ~ SE x.. ES ~I ~ ~ .. ~- - ~ tl t -p ~ ~ ~ -~ ff ,~ ~ ~ ~ .~ ~ t,~~ .1~ ~ iii ify~ ~s~~~~il ~yitS~F _. ~f313ifE 'i }'r1....`~ _ V~ ~ ~ ~ Sf ~ Y ~. t ~"3 "1#D t3 €~ ~ ~ "t#: `~ 1 '~7t3 ~._ ~ ~ ~- ~ ~ 2 ~r~~~~ i~+ a~r s~~~ ~~s~ ~ ~~ -~'` f - ~ ~a ~ ~ ~.~ -E a ;fig- ~ ^ :, ~ ~.".~~~." ~,~~6at -__ '€?~ ~~ f~~r~rT. ~~}.. 2{143 by#~ ~u~1~ b4#b ~}~~~ ~Fi3 Tr~'A~P.S; ~'~1 ~ ~ ftT€PFl~ v~3~ ~ ~~# ~~ ~~ ~~ '~~'~~~ - interim ~ 4 ' ~ ~ ~ ~ Q intergeuernrner~i~l~ Revel ~s. - w5?~ Stye homestead tnvrket value cxecfilt 0 Q Lt (~ q 35319 ~aFsy, st~~~ ~l~#t3rS E? E) Q t) 4 3~3~# rauniy- i:7~,p~ Gr°~z~t§tt~5i~ 0. t~ 4 CF. c1 3544 4liaer Gov'9 ~ wise ~rant~ Q Q ~ 4 4 ~rliscetinrreflus i2EVenue: •~~}-~, i~rsrac#,~it oa~iip'~ ~4 ~atv of {x'oPertY 3 - i~tt~el~~ei~~~ l,~e ~~ ~~rx a~illny ~ - ~: esr~er~t~# ~2 i'ari~ assraaa't~7~ rf~ar~s-non-residerattat Total revem~es t~endifures 44~ t;onsulging 4 `Gc~n~ruct;nn - tn~iii9ing . ~~#~ t~'ttl pu€chase 472b -Parled~rreioptaien€~p€ccr~ec#s 4734 B~tiiirs0 irn~iravesrs~t 4814 Intsrest- g~ayrnents 492ff ~Ytttetestoninferfund~l~txs 4934 I€€~v~strnent management ~88s Tat~;l ~xpe~iu€~s 1=~; (d~€c~t~ gF revet~~e Otf~''Ent~tLiF~ - Tt~n3fErS in ~6ttt~ F€cxn F'tst}iic improvement P€o•{ect Fund E fF t~~i3ifC t~S€t3(~~rrlffliC F'T{}J£~" ~#Srli~ l='r~seeeds frnm tax abatezrterat band ~1~;i~~ 1'9,'f3[t -~7td§~t 10~~4 #`2iC -4 ~ ~ ~ ~~ #till tll3t3 #~;t360 •2Ditd3ilil i~;ili3(3 15[t;~iD~ 46D,9'3tJ ~#'3,#313 424,49!9 4al3,$74 5#2,4813 4 ~ 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 t3 ~ [9 D [? 54,Dt90 354,#11!4 9i3a;#9~ 4{10;{104 24p;g0 0 a 4 4 4 19 4 4 4 t4 4i 6 p 4 714 f,2~111 ~ #,334 7#4 794 54,7#4 v5.,24i3 94'1 a34 400,7#Q 2t7D,7€4 ~#11;4 ~Fs7;99f1 {4~;~t~} ~60,•#fitl 39.1;94 f} Q 1l 4 4 ~~~}BBq~~ryj4q~ t~i'rs',~L`.S3 ~gcf,1,}.70.F 4~JV,6t`fiJ ~'E~VftiB~ 5,i3G4,JJ6P iafi,'i60 aJ"[tSai3~~ J#~lyG~&3 ~ ~Vti~43'~7~3 ~~~ PR(?SECT NUMBER. PROJECT TITLE TOTAL. COST PRIOR YEARS 2006 ALLOGA1lflN OF GOSTS BY YEAR 21747 2008' 2009 2010 (002.410 HOUSING REPLACEMENT PROGFGIM 850,040 254,44D 150,0011 156,000 154,400 150,040 CD04A1# GLADS70NEAREASTREE7SCAPE 254,040 0 254,004 0 4 0 0 CDO4.4#2 GLA0.5TONc AREA STREE75GAPE 600,40D ' 9 840,004 0 4 0 0 GD44:43 GLADSTONEAREASTREETSCAPE 9.40,4011 4 94o,00d d. 0 0: 4 CDQd:414 GLADSTONE AREA STREET5GAPE 725,440 4 725,000 0 0 4 0 CEID4.o2# GLADSTONE AREA REDEVELOPMENT 5oA04 5D,t140 0 0 0 0 0 •(044.022 GLADSTONE AREA REDEVELOPMENT 750,404 0 750,000 4 0 0 D CD44.023 GLAOSTONE AREA REDEVELOPMENT 250,440 0 25D,040 D 4 0 0 - CD44.424 GLAOSTONE AREA REDEVELOPMENT 2,350,444. 4 #,640,040 750,000 0 0 0 CD0d.031 HIiLCRESTAREAROAUWAYIMPROVEMENT 390,000 0 4 0 d a 3~,a40 GDd4:D32 HILiCRESTAREARCIADWAYIP,~ROVEAdENT i,210,£Mk0 0 D 0 0 0 7,21U,000 CD04.433 HILLCRESTAREAROADWAYIMPROVEMENT 144,440 o D 0 0 4 144,444 CDa4:a34 HiLiCREES'1'AitEARDADWAYIMPROVEMENT 600,QD0 0 4 a d 4 dagoo4 GD0d.041 HILLGRESTARFJIREDEVELOPMENT 540,fl64 4 D 0 0 4 544,400 CDa4.642 HII_LCRESTAREAREDEVELOPMENT 125,40+1 D D 0 0 0 1z5,4a0 CD44.443 HILLCREST AREA REDEVELOPMENT #25,44D 0 0 ~ 0 6 0 125,000 CD04_o5t HILLCRESTAREASTREETSCAPE ~ 3411,400 4 ~ 0 4 0 56,004 260,000 GDD4:052 HtLLGRESTAREA5TREETSCAPE 21%1,1100 0 0 0 0 7A4,400 0 (004.053 tiiLLCRE5TARF.ASTREETSGAPE 350,000 4 4 4 4 0 380,000 CDn4_n54 YIiLLCRESTAREASTREE7SCAPE 1,294,64D a D 0 4 _ 1,290,000 4 COMMUNITY DEVELgPMENTTU7AL 12,404 30000 6,115,fl00: 8D4,40D 1S0 tl00 '9,fi80,0DD' 3,650,400 ED01.614 _ REf'IACEMENtOF FIRETRUGK 284,000 4 286;6 D o 0 0 PU 62.01 D 0VEI2LAY S7A730N PARKING LUIS 92,300 4 .0 92,304 0 0 0 FI]0a.026 REPLACEMENT OF FlRE TRUCK 372,744 4 0 0 372,744 D 4 FD64.014 SC$AGOMPRESSORS 55,354' 4 0 ' 58,354 0 4 F005:4#0 AMBUIJkNCE REPLACEMENT 114,004 4 0 0 0 t14-,040 D ,. FD4E1;.Ot0 STA7iON REMODEL AND SL£EPiNG 4UARTERS 65,D00'.. 4 - -05,000 Q D _ 0 0 FD06.026 REPLACEMENT OF FIRE TRUCK 39S 700 0 D • 4 4 4 395740 FIRE DEPARTMENTTOTAL ~ 1,375,456 0 345,604. 92,300 431,054 i#4,600 3957Et4 1706.4#6 COUNCIL CHAM1dBERS AUD{ONISUAL UPDATE 53,404 4 53.464 ' • 6 0 4 4 tNFORMATIflNTECHNOLOGYTOTAL 53,D00 0 ~ 000 0 _,_,0 ., ..,.6. _ ~ 0 PR01.4#0 WALTER STREETTRAIL CORRIDOR ~( ta0,oaa=~ 4 64,tttkl Sa,0D4 a ~ 4 ~ 4 PR42050 , HARVEST PARK IMPROVEMENTS ,;., , -IS0,4D0 0 15o,4e>a D~ 4 4 D PR43.0i4 LIONS PARK IMPROVEMENTS 244,044 I o D 240,004 6 0 0` PR43.060 .IOYPARKIMPROV>;MENTS ~ ~ 204,aoD1 4 6 2134,666 ~ o d 4 PRO3.080 NORTH BEAVER LAI(E TAAIL CORRIDOR'"~ 100,000-,` 4 D . 140,500 4 0 0 Pit04.02o E31P/iNS10N OF NATURE CENTER SITE ,' •y 20A;D00~~~ 8 0 + `0 ~ 0 0 200,000 PRO4.45o GLA~$TOAIESAVANNAIMPROVEMENTS ' _ "'"'• '(da4;46a~ 4 0 ~ 0 4do,4aa 4 o PR45.G10 HAZELWgQOPARKTRAlLCOORIDOR -f' "#40,060.1.. 0 D 0 144,004 0' 0 PR65.U30 JOY PARKREUEVELOPMENT ! 1,184,400 6 0 D 160,000 I,00D,6oD D ~p:~~.~t~-~ M~iG ~[TNES.CY Ee~PANJ'~IgN `~ 2Jf4,444 4 ~5444D 4 D Q D PARKS AND REGREATTgN TOTAL 2 860,t~64 4 450 044 55D 000 700 404 1,000' 606 244 400 PW38.081 kIAZELW00£7STREET,FROSTA~NUE-COFEAVENUE 9,568,000 o D 4 254;0(10 1,31&,€EO€# o PW8B.082 HAZELWOODS'TREET,FROSTAVENUE-COFEAVENUE 560,004 0 4` 4 0 5F~0;o00 0 .U , ;.053 tiAZELWUOD STREET, FR057AVENUE-CgPEAVENUE 89,600 4 0 0 0 89,fi~1 0 PU:. ,.~ .$ FIAZELWUgASTREEI',FROSTAVENUE-GOPEAVEN[)E 22.400 4 0 0 0 22,4D0 4 STREET SWEEPER 131,044. D 6 131 0 4 4 0 8 AVEifUE,WHf7EBE -BELLt'tfRE 384,044 4 0 266,440 0 0 • Pt ; ;:< ; 9P,Atv1 AVENUE, WHTTE 1 - BELLAIRE 244,004 4 6 0 244,6(10 4 0 AVENUE, Wktil • ~ ~AtRE 17. 4 ® ® 175,000 ~1 p UE, WHTi ~3R~ 4 0 4 26,404 D a ISAVENUE,i r -fE-CY ~E ; ii 2,20, 0 0 4 o ,VENUE ', ° - GY 2fl0, 0 6 4 4 - :,IS AVENUE, MAP.. DRIVE-CYPRESS- 27,540 4 27,564 6 0 6 6 ....•IF IS AVENUE, MAE -.- ~GY ~ -.. 5 4 6, 0 0 D 4 ='~+' ' ' ':0 Ci i a LANOPILL CLOSURE 125,060 25,000 404,044 4 0 0 0 PWO2.i31 KENWOODAREASTREEi"S 2,006,400 26g4E14 1,805,460 6 0 11 0 i„+`i ":~ F.132 KENWOOD AREA STREETS 1,475.540 4 1,475,600 0 6 0 D P4V02.133 KENWOgD AREA STREETS 242,504 4 242,600 0 0 0 6 PVJO2.i34 KENWOgDAREAS7REETS 233,t0D 4 133,100 4 0, 0 0 ' PW02.135 KENWOOD AREA STREETS 34,000 0 30,044 0 0 0 0 • PW0z,130 KENWQOO AREA STRF_Et'S ~ 263,500 0 203,504 4 0 6 0 PW62,154 ONETRUCK WITH ATTACHMENTS 110,460 4 110,060 D 0 0 D PW63.6Z GUUN'tYROADD,McKNIGHC-LYDIA 1,592,600 fl 0 D 0 150,460 1,442,600 PW03,022 COUN7YROADD,Mr.1MIGHT-LYDIA 182,040 0 0 D 0 4 192,044 °~t s~'n~'€i---- s~s~~ ~~e~~: ~nu~ar~:Sn~~ YF~,~~~ 1 tM 17 '~'7.nr "~,~v~l,~'~~' ~~'~,41~~ ~'.~.`~,$~~ ~,~~~,7~~ .. Vo~i,#.C~i~ /~~X~ii Y~3 iVi~i•I LV LY~a QJ yvW~Ft,~e 1 ~Gl~l~. (LRl i~ ~{~l~ i~/4~i 0 i r~l.ttii~~OiVify. r .. ifi V Fe rt~ .rii.:~uv ~f1L a;i~"~. °'V /? ~ }f iaV'77~. „ / ~ ~/~ a3~+j~ ~~.e'iliw~liiL: ~~`iU;illllk ;~eav~s ia~~':"ra€I 90b,~i:t3 1GJ,C}CJ ~L~3'if31]° 1~.7 i L ~ ~ t -'~.~~t fFlf~3;t3iTU j 7~ y r ~ f IG[G~.14YVUL~[ T~II ~i ( ~ry y ' ~ ~~ V ;ilVV 1TV~L L V va: ~ v '~~ ~ ! ~ }~~ ~~}'; inli:~vi~ ~,~aivvSi~7}'v' ! ~ ~, f~I~};~L:J ~'+ ^ ~ ~ } ~ V [1ttUt ~Lf t ~?~. ~~n ~LRtftJit V J V~~ V V V v v9 ~Y`ii~ui~$ Y~i£ ~ ~t~~.~~~ ~ i7~U1~~~~1.1~ F~~ ~~Q J ~ ~~~ nnr~ .~ Q~ nrJn ;VV v v ~F~ nnn J..! pvVV ,~cn nnn tiJV~vVV n v ~ nnn nnr~ J;vvvaVv uiai ncs',ini~i~2i~u~uvsc ivi ~~v°v -~~r'~`s' {,~, C } -~7 ~~~~`~'t ~ c I ~ $ ~/~ ~l1G2 ~~ yy 1j r r}} it F ~~.Q ~ `~ ~r~iff3 Sci,k'i~"ir ` ~ ,~c~ '~~ } ~ :~f ~ gg # - L"~IGtUalt~.~V~ ~~~dpk-+b V }y ~} n ~'+~ t14{lt~~fl ~ { { y{ ~ ~V4~'~~lJ!! GGac~flf~aFte o~~i iOC~,~~1€3 iu~3,~v ~#7t}, ~ ~ ?# l R~t . ~i~~ ~ /~ ~ ~. ~ ~ g~y~ ~~~lltdid aq ;y_ t~~tltL~~ ~ l t V r ~ ~ ~ ~ y q ~ ~ ~ t`.~l a l f p 7~ ,~ s p T E Ci~ 9F C7G~.4R.G' 1.~t l ~} t+n Gi~dt~y~UsJ . 7 tr ~t t ~r ~ ~ ~ 6vC7, ~JVV ^ t~ ry ~t f ~ Gl/V..~Vti ~diE~ 4i9~~~~ ~'a~C~I~ ~ ,i1~J 3~ ~ 3[ :~~r:J f 3 t4 t~ s ~ [ ~~ ( 3 ~ ~ _ 1 F~I€ 4 ~gi~LI C .f~ ~+ ~ ~ r~~ ~ a ~ ,7~lJyVV~' y~ [ tt ~,.+~JV:~C}{~ ~J~tF,~VV / ~ny f a~}4t1 ~:VV4} ~~ n} fn , t{a ~ I n t "FVV~vVV {{ t(~~ ~~f ~ ~~Ve~VV n l^ F ~ ~,. IJV,{t41aJ ~~ ! ~ ~, ~ny (^ sT, ~'1i/~VV~. r~~~~ IIF.?~E?;. ~lf[Ut•• y~d[F ~~.ill"BDa ~IFt3 ~~~ f:FJ~~1C~'i!' ~ 311.E iit~7Yf:` ~f3~dIS' i3L"'v y~~~ ~~t'r1Eig ~~ ~, __~, ~_~~- t ~:~~ r _•_~,_ _ ~ ~~ s~"S' __ ,~ r ,2«;'--j --E,~ ~a~~~i•^_•,1ti-~ ate= f ['s`~, Ili ~~,~.~~~ Re ~a Gr t!, f~il~~'$ 3€}i1,t'~t`34J .a.,.i.. ..~.. "rc,-,: E`~i.FSd56 l1~2? ~`i6lRX,k+tit~ ~Ea~i~~ ~i~i~ii 1~€ a e~c:c~~'rl~fl~ldc~~i~f~ 2 # ~ ~ v~~ ~__.. ~.,-,.: ~_ ~~ ~ yr ~~f~ v ~~a'~s~ € aa i+i`it~$ ~ pp ~++ ,,~~ryry ~~~ !~. eFiyl _ [ ~ Fs4 pq [ g ~ y ~l ~_ l= ~ ~ L y1 ~ ` # l~ l j °} ~} ~ ° ~ j $ ; y,p ~ { s L [ ~ @~f~s'~}}~1~ t'F'ia~`xv a"v`a ei y%ik Yf 8}~Y ~{~'f ~~~ Etitf~iftif'`.T s t~l~t~~~[}11E: ~U4);~IUL~ ~~3.]~7€~} ~t~t~_EJUt! U~.~1t3t~ ;4~{};fjC~~3 ~,~#~~;~~E~ X A L`- eW s ~ E„s ~~~~5.~~ ., i-.~ . ie a~,_ e t ~~ r §§ ~~yy p d p (~i FfV~-YE GAFtTAL fMPRG}tfM;~NT P J~r;1'S ..2 4 'v~G'_ __. .a-s-.-.-~.._- __~eaa... ~~#~~; AGCepted AROJECi NUMHlR PRO.~C77tTtE F1fi10lNGSOURCE 7i?ZAt. COST pRJQij YE4RS 21100 ALLIICATION OF CCISTSBYYERR 2008 2010 20Ji 2012 PW08.060 One t-Ton Truck and Tw^ 112 Ton Plckupa Eteet P.tanagemsnt Ftmd 1t~,73Q 0 0 0 0 106,730 0 PWOS_060 OneTractarLaaderandOneTrelJer FieatPotartage;nentFund 65,390 0 0 0 0 65,390 0 FW08.070 OnsSn^w Plow Tntek Ftaet FAanagemenl Fttnd 442,460 0 0 0 142,460 0 0 PW08.080 One Jeaobsen Lawn FAawer Fleet FAa^agement FLnd 54,900 0 0 0 81,900 0 0 P4V07.620 One 4W41 Truckster,l. CraekfiRer, 4. Trailer Ftaet 0.9anagemen! Fund 79,490 0 0 0 0 0 79;490 PW47_[Y30 Thrne 5-Tan Tracks FG3ot Hhnag¢mard Fund 178,380 0 0 0 0 0 479:.369 PbV08.010 One SJn9~Axle PtowTrvck Fleet Managamant Fund t37,300 0 0 937,300 0 0 0 PWOB_040 Flve 112 Ton Piokup Trucks Fleet F.4anagement Fund 428,650 0 D 0 128,650 0 0 1,223,472 0 0 253,380 549.640 f82,i20 258;85tt CII04.010 GtadstorreAroa SBaetscape PWO6.'12C Kohlmaa Lane Area Streets, Water 8 Sewer Granfs 3;8fk},000 0 1.BOO,t1W 500.000 1,000,000 500,000 0 3,.800,000 0 1,840.000 600,000 f,00g040 5iM,000 0. Litlle Canada Ct704.010 Gladstone AreaStreetscape Mn4IIt}T PLVQS.140 4Vt>ile Bear Avenue, Radatz - Buerrxte MnlBOT FW03,220 ElimJnafeTF4~PedashlanCtns~ngaFHs2Nwoad: kkd0tlT PW07.100 TEt38-E.n~Jsbintersec0untntprovsments Mni4oT P4V02.Ot10 BeamAvenue, WhNeBear-BP.Ilatre NorJft St. Paui PW03.020 County Road D, FAcKak,}tst-Lydia NtMttSLPmtt TNti6:140 H^0^aray Avenue, N. SL. Pant R^ad to McKnight NevOs St_ Paul 157,500 0 0 t57,500 0 0 0 157,600 0 0 167,600 0 0 0 469,000 0 160.000 0. 0 0 b. 164,IX10 75,000 0. D 0 75;000 0 zsD.iroa 4 o D 9 252;404 9 200,000 4 60,000 60,004 4 100,0 0 7so,aa4 7saon 2no,4oo sagati o 42sd2o a 200p00 0 0 D 0' ~ 0 200,000 70.x04 0 0 0 0 70,0. tY. 39fr,000 0 b 0 395:004 0 0 665,.000 0 0 0 396;004 TU 000 Zt7Q;Ofif1 PWt}2.1380 BeamAvanue,4VhtteF3ear-HeJla&e NorOtSti.FauIWA.C.Fund 34,600 0 0 4 0 0' 3+1,500 PW03.020 County Road t), McKNght-Lydia North St.. Paul'N.AC. Fund. SOA00 4 0 0 0 50,000 ~ 0 if4,600 ~'0 0 0 0 80;000 34,500 PM03.080 NOrBr Beaver ~t~te"~`raal f'.ordd3t - Part~Aevel^pm¢^t Fumi 900,000 50.0(10 60,000 0 0 0 0 PM05:Of0 ttazehv^ad Aark TraQ CorJidor Park Oevel^pment Fratd 140,000 0 0 140,000 0 0 0 PM07:410 G^odricEe Pant Adutt Seflhal[ FJalds Parkt}evei^Jxneat Fund 300A00 0 0 0 ZOfl,000 100,000' 0 P6tOS.090 GaoddatsPNakefield Backstops 8; Sideline Ponces ParkRevel^pment F^nd 109,000 0 149.000 4 0 0 0 Pkt08.020 Map[aw^^d Parks Tennis and 8askethall Couris Partt Qavalapment Fund 200,000 0 2110,000 0 0 0 0 f,74g000 50,000 1,280,000 140,000 200,000 100,000 0 Ct)04.090 Gladslane Area Str¢atsmpe Ramsay County 950,000 0 164,000 4 0 0 0 PW03.940 Whlt¢Beav Avenue, Radatc-HUarkla Jiarns¢y County 2,760,0 76,00@ 2,364,DOD 200,000 60;.000 75,000 0 PW05.140 Signai System ai latt~xaod andFAarytand Ramsey County 150,1190 0 160,000 9 0 0 0 PWOS.910 HatCowaY Avanne, N. S!. Faut Road to ;t€ntght Ramsey County 66.000 0 fl 0 68,000 0 ~. D .. 3,108000 7.5,1100 2;659,000 200.000 906.0 F 0 PW02.060 Beam Av¢twe, Nthtta Bear-Bellaire SaNtaty Sow~Frmd 67,60fl 0 D 0 0 0 57,500 PNd03.020 County Road 6, McKnJgtrt-Lydia Sarritary Sewer Fund 154,000 0 0 0 0 954.000 D PW03.940 FemdateShaet,FAatyfand-StJltwafarRoad SanitarySswerFund id,4D0 0 94,dOD D 0 0 0 PW^'~.+20 Caun~ Rnad f5, Southtavm °4'lh'sta Bear A~renne Sartitaty Sewer Fund 280,OD0 0 0 280,900 0 0 0 P ~ Q4.130 Beet r Road, 6tx+JJ^way- Larpentaur Sanitary Sewer Fund 8,044 0 0 0 0 S, 41 0 F 180 Sa:_" ....,r ^~a LhtfngfSaatirm,J Program Sar&tary Sayer Fund 360,000 t00,Q00 SO,OOU 50.00 50,000 x30,1 t0 pi rd e lurs~.€ Fump Rarnovat pr^Drarn Sanitary Se'xeF Fund 600,060 240,000 920x000 420,f'AO 120,0 9 F !10 5 t.tpgrada t>roc a Sanitary Sewer Futut 750,440 0 150,000 964,000 459,0. r,€ i D PW04.t i F¢mdatetG¢rarilum Area Strew Sanitary Sower Fu~1 48,400 0 d6,40D 0 0 0 0 P'1 ~"4D Century Avenue, Rid 4o I F n Sardtary :tavrar Fund 65,0{38 0 85,000 D 0 0 0 P'N05A00 LarklProsperttylBurka Area Slreets Sanitary Sewer Fund 512.000 0 f 12,800 0 0 0 t) PW66.070 FIIyrtlet5tadinglfdatro Streets Sanitary Sewer Fund 60A00 0 59,000 D 0 0 D PYJ05.DII0 Pond AVenusltlorland t2oad Sanitary Sewer Fund 96,OOD 0 90,040 0 0 0 6 153 (~~ .~.~ _.rrc~s7rr~a'`ry.: ar:`~ ~'ija~x r.:uxF~ 1Sti.~Ch77471~ OF ~b.``ifS EtYY~tf t +di.•.•f.«=F F+Fll FSY:P lfSFJ: L?~R'~'[ ~~ ~'fiStSi ~..-ai{ ~[j'~./. ~. TQ6?fl'ill 73fa~6taie ~Ade. a'~7~'ee38~pa ~7;~T,OQ6 4 ~~3I,~ 'f`,~ Y7#lLi~ik 4Yy7ippQ AC7QOia? e~~{~ vow s~ 7~~~i~"v .r~v~ ~Ry 4~ w.,9:p i ~3'7t~i~:.~l-.~'-=~_~-~ 8$~'JE~ 0 .~.~•."v"•••3 [3 na i3 0 'FBDP:A7D 'Mah~ia~~tpkai-~£dtxlnni~+ 57~It3kt '4 57~F •Q 'iJ Q 5 ~wtk~ `~~'® ."istsEc~Ti'a;,f ~~j}' S g i u fl A FF}4Hl)10 F_^i?~'~L~°l~sk g5.F5f! U fl d ~. 8:i.~aF! 0 kT..15&4~4 ~taW}eTi~ita73Snnvdtaiiriltms raf,~F 5 67,BOa $ 5 6 ry ,~,~.. tt 5Q,tr'~ ~ 0 G K - R ~3.GK5.. ~ .,. -_ ___ Q l~.Ti~4.lYls7. 3~-Ealle-~ ~~C~3 $ C' ~~FkI- n Q £!. . ifl"i~io ~a'^,i. iiu3a'i~`mba°~ tia_.5~ Ct G G'7. ,.'°"». ~:1~€ ~` w`Cyf£{Y 4i •fA-i~13.~1•S 3>~ti Faoiiwea © ~~ $ 7FA~ $ 6 Fi 0 RgTdlA'.4e6' ~~~i'i~nd~~'3teFt~am*®~' At;E~ tk 18:5.' z+~~. ~3.F+~ ~~ fl ~ FA'T~3G.iR$ nriv~G~ow~w~i+atf%Lxt 'W",siy~'• i# $ :Srta# P C Fi _ -{}4 F:a~a1t'-v~teuta~~Pwl-Fulisf7. '~23.~. 'O 'h '~6~! '61~tiPA .D. .$ F.~ F3attSadetnT i~~ a a fl a a P.#Ft3$.24!# w"~"G rs~ »+i[~3 0 D Q 95;QtA dRl~ SQkCfO .ph~~r ff ~~'~ SOff,'F~f ?"~" yat,'2tKt 5~4tXR pL106SFifl ?~- '~-~~+i]4i U Ei` '#~'~9' $- 4F' fl PE}OB,03J1 `a'9`,au3tatL~2~..F~P~ n. fl ~ 0. ' S 6 p fl _ - ( ~ }u± ~ - ___ _ _ __ ~ ~y;may . ~ „~g'S<KTiua. ~ ;d1tif'n'fW $ 6 r3 S EAfl84 .t~eaver.;rstt?aor i~t~7 .~~~3 -5 ~ - -fl •~` ~ PR~f7A'~a ~-~=:=~~n,!t~+._1 '-fli'p' ~. 7 a. - ~. ~~. -MV_`~- FYStiT.#Gb :mk+,.'~re~Faeve~pc~c 9~>m$ ~;~ imtt35a ~ zan,~nn ~t~rn ~~ -amo APFa55FVA'C(T~~i~'95~A ~t~ -a •so;~an -tl •~ ~v `~ P.fl56 a~+~14MBaVetstta:~ 7rit#t,~ [S 9QD,OtlD 4 1fl4~ 6tl6~7pfl ii 's~z~ss ~~~ -rwa ~a~rn i?~ ~ .. 'pt~ '$aeSiAv~amxe'1Aftile~ait'~H91k~Pa '~;t5C~t1D9 `1~14~ 1;~~D '6 it 3t 'fl }'"a~r-~-'s ~i f~3•a'a$NkC1a851Lt! ~9~'* ~ (i [k~ 2Y5~',.706 iL t4 PYt~I3.~ isa7ltg FtaRd Lt~ l~te~5~tyt-a' ~}~ ~.:os}0 {! t} (i :r~4,~9 2~4SiS,~ 6 Eisa'~g38.3~:.A '~~:'.,:rS=.Fe.;2fit'4~..-.~? a~.'~.,t~i ,nrn 5 LS '~. ~,' ~% .~'+Wi3,i~5 7sAsa[t~Y~e~~,F2st3- ~.7tii'4 ,3llY3 s,eatl,€ fl"tu'at1G~ 4&D,flC~€3 i7st7pt7 fl ` F'~t6G' ~-~3- ~-_.- ~t€~ P#- t.~t& 3~tr its ~. ~ ~4uc ~C~~ Py~i3;#8tt ~asr;~sYtt'F'K~FS'~'#t9 5~ 49tF, SE; ~~~ l0 S~ €i~3,6'~ 9 0 Vst D 3- # P ar:,~r.YF°sien~tr~uaF ~ -Sams€Y'°~n+ -~E~si'~! •,i~1 ~ f~st~ 92 ~A~t} ~[,frtlti ~i~ . ~l s~t v xn ~ s l M B °~.s-FF)- ~ y 1~15amFex ^'Y~'~G 'aiT FE6, E5 ~ y #`^.4LtC,G 'EE~!I60t1 i~Y^3l3 Fa'"fi,~fY. <Y~ listta,^"' 3"7t4f~.'~!7 fr1"s~{r~Ia?1-1:~i'e-.?asifii~z.Gm~~H*-~f~d. F~ {~ 9 U 25,iN1b ~7t~t~ftJ ~ F4.'k7fl ~E°,.s~'~~g'{ - .-.. _..°'°-fI~a~i ~'...si3~ 4 i6 C5 Fk ~ t9 cryrrses ~' ~_F a'~. '.~ ts- ee vs f1 X59 ~~ ;~ y ~~ ~ fl ~ ~ . S~i~f1A ~.. "a ""Y1 ~ E C ,~" G ~ g ' ° Pir, tD'$ ~4:ti7au.t ~-..-.-- ~if€seFa 'F* , i 2 '3 ~I#, 6 Y3 i# ~3 iE ~>:,~T}~k~}T,€~,`.l'T:~~Ai:~:RF4:.~1~t;C~.f~~ZSEL: [~ ~5~k.€!~ i3 3 `~ 5 4g ~' ~SS!Ufl5.'f-'i'3 Stfl~ei~Ys~'es~L~r;~,!~^-~.~crrni~yt~ ?t)~;OS~3 4 2~Av'YN'- 4s fl ~ ~ PL~Yd~+:ff'6~ ;x~' +;s'~~_~:..~!'ewFe: a''raF°'F.~..'°• :$G~ fl- ~- 6- ;46''= $. ~ ~~ ~. ~sS.~iau vi ~41L..~6~ ¢'~'I~SYtiis=.A 1 1 i7,ivACE.~ i i 3 _ ~. 1~~-~'i`is';"~SLI.~~~£~ i3oha,~~aLl.~t: ~~~^:,~°_ _~ ~ ~yi ]c.i~. -fir ~y~ l~}yv~V ! {-E~lf~sY l E 1 a~ ~~'.`~f.4i ~ ffi~~3ia ~~Yit~.'i%1~ y°.LX31i]S ii J }} ~~ ((yy s"LiCtt.M9"6'L~•. '~,,} ~+ ~ 'y V.~r~`._ 4 GPtui'I~ -iiii~ii~3'" in ~ ~ t~x_~~Sl. $~ ~ ~- . ' ~ ~ ~Lii +~ y 1. p k. ,~ kzPi=`~. ~~I~'Ir ~tLt~.~..~..~.~'~~.il~~ ~~o-~. ~( ( { ~ ~ U V ~G -S • iytiCC~itt~'1~.~'" ~~~.~~s ~ } ~ ~ y i~.~e"vsl i 7i ~~.J~:' ~ '~-~~{~a?~~.T~f:t ~i{P~`tb.°i`...v°SYf.$.Y'~ ~~'~+iT1£~i~ ~ !~ ~5~~ ~~~- ~t~F?[e3=~i~~~14~3"~lLY'.ta".rtttt~r ~'yilTr~~~'is ~ 'T. ~~~ ~.~~~ ~1C~1,9 ~ ~I~'YEs11~ ~~f~S ~i~n+crt^vv' .66~~~C:~ .~iy'v~J31tc`n~' ~.~' '~~-~+f~' ~. ~' ~~~ ~~'? 3~1'.'a.~ ~LIt1~~ F4'~~ _ ~'f 3 ?' . ~ Se~!'F~~~nt:e + € ~ ~ ~ #~S ~ ~~ ~T~g Pfi~ W f 'f.4~t n} ~ , !'FRCi++-~ y~~ ~a ~ , ~ ~ p ~p YVT~Db'i~.'fTat~Y~4f [Ri~~S7~~ ~.+ t_},... {. ~.4~fi'>CS~i:iK~ q~y ~Tr~.i:L'SS p~~-~3_~6ff ~v~t Ss~~~I~ Inrgr~~e;:'~s 1~tt~~.~It'~3 13Cii3 k3+~" E~i` 'lt~y' st~'.! ~~~ ~,"^.~~E? ~~~' ~ ~~l E~ .,: .. n ~ T~~ sv ii ~ { . { [ l7 7.. t~ S F~ y ~ p ~1 y , ~~ •-v ~f~ ~1~~ FS~ S' ~ 7]'S.5~ ~ y ~, g,~ 5 ~.~ 7t{i 7 ~ i ~ y y ~ ] ~y y {V ii ilyi ~ fL g ~ ~}ii V ~c~.~iv ~ t u~~ "~+jasJ'~'sca~ ~ia~~ ~r ~ , x , rV4~:. YYiJfLi:T ~~ ~ ra y ~ i:TYaiJYIU Pl+4lQ~~ E3 ~9~~ ~Zi3~'~ E?. ~F~4 of i rs ~'3 ~ ~-ibuF3~3~ ~,~+ ~-~3~ !'~`. e~[F ,~c6initl~nYCi6[iG s~~CS f~£3t~i't"v~il ~~~~ 3t~C~iCS ~'t~6~I~ .'~ ~s+'~'-~'Yd~.#~-~T~H[?~-~..£I~~~S'~-3S7~S7~-~i3~Fs'~T~~~f~ -~k3i}~~~15/flt~a ~{~; ~,.~'!'~3 ~~fit~~~7[~l~~[~~t3t?~?~ ~L3~'~.C.~ViA~.s 9,'~3{J,t~lt? .¢j, -P-flf3d-~'4Y~f1Ei~{~451~FSEI-~''rl,'~E~ '~lt~tG'~i~Cfi ~.'~~~ ~'~.~ ~~ ~~,'~C{'_7?t ~ ~#l~,.~1~:.~' ;':: u~ ~v'151~ .~i ~ ~n~°`t'~'y~~"ais ~Q~.i ~$ ~ ~~ ~3-' ~~ 1ff 3f C ~S~~sdi't~ !1 3 s~'i~#~l'd~~~ +~ T ~ G" ~~ i$ '~ ~~ , q ~( ~ ~ n g ~~y ,~t~t't-Y~+;a s ~ .~ . t , ~y ,S ,,. c •'w-~~.rim'ii4Gns`°ub`+~3E+.GG ~p r¢gT,L#~$VFEti ~ y ~.',~+ B~aNJtIS. Y~l~lli~ y ~..?t~`t,~i ~'Q~-'~; 7 31fS'~C33~.F9~# 'c{~{iit~~~~~111~~3c ~r~#'f[~~~#ti ry)~' ~~~1#~ ~`,~~J~ ~ ~ a ~ is ~TSFGLE ~ A ~ L ~#'C~F s7E~€~6~t~~.! t3°6~" { C4 T~IF5iI~ £"t ~/ '~""€ ~'7~~~ ~~'~~a __ > P~Ifl7:t354 e~~tc~is~s~a'~3tt~'a~=it~~i~~ ~~'ti's~l't~`~~ ~ ~.# }~pC~t~t~~ai~u~ c~~ ~~~3't~d$u~t~ ~~ 3~ttt3tTc Efl;€T€3~k ®~......,,z. ~~_.._._ - s'°ras..se.3 ~ - .f ....... .N.» yfasrrr.... Sr F-6SS7#75,B~1a+a~`. ~Y _.~.. . . = - ~ :« ~ ( ~ ~. .. g C ~t Y ~ €5~*' . ^~ ~ _ }i Sa C .. . . ~~ .. .... _.I....._ 1.. -..~.... w.. ~ p g ~ ~y~ 4"69 T~eFm VnEIE b.~ p {~q~g s~ Y jp q ry dsS3i1Vti3Utd .. __. I.S x.„.,,Yr~ r'~=~ .... ~..:.M'" . . - ~. ~r~r~=~~a~ ~.~P,+rat r~tPRav~~r~n~r Pc~in- Pr~a;~~crs GROUPED BY fJEPARTMEtilr ALLOCATION OP C03T38YYEAR. PRQJfCT TQTAL PR1C}R PRfORYiY NUMBER PROJECT TIT?.E. COST YEARS 2GQ9 20'10 ~ 2011 2812 2D13 PM03.010 Ltaers Parklmprovamenis 554,000 50x004 50,000' ~~;50,000 0 4 0 PM03.064 Joy Park Impmvaments 556,000 200,000 100,060 50,000 iGG;-0~ 100,G00 b PMO7-010 Comnwnly Pla?d. Flpas 300,OOC._ 6 60:000 BO,C00 60,0} 60,606 60,000 Pkt07.i00 Parks.-TraiiGeve?oprnerl 1,10D;000 100,000 200,000 2IX},000 260;600 200i00b 200,000 .PM08.030-'- -App?awoodPreserreTtays&Rastaragon .!~ -- 100,000. 50,0.. 50,000... 0 0 0 0 PMG8:040 Para[ Equipment, Ponca and Court Replacamerri 200.000 0 60,OC0 60,004 80,000 0 0 PMG8.650 Giaistone Savarma Impravemenls 1.SD4;404 9t~}cmb 0 1bb,ca6 SO6,C40 0 0 PMOB.O60 peen Space lmpcovemerils 250,000 0 54,1m0 50,040 50,GD0 50,W0 50,000 FM03;G7G Neighbor$taad Pe: ks. 55D,.006 0 50,OC0 t00,CC0 160,000 100,000 200,C66 4,700,OD0 i,3Q0~G00' fi20;0a(? 670,ODD 1,090,0~A 516,G1m 5'fd,000 ' t~ - ~1 ~~~3~~ ~~ ~ ~ ~°~~ ~~~~ ~,' ~ ~f ~~ ~' ~~d~~~~ ~~~~~~ `~ L ~~ ~.~. ,~' ~,°' F~~E-~~R e~tt~«ac, tn~r~~ov~,u~rvr~c~r~ ~~Q>f~'crs GROUPED BY DEPARTtGfEP17` Status. AeceptecE ALLOCRTiON pF COSTS BY YEAR AROJEC7' TOTAt_ PR#3JR - NUMBER PROD€CT777t..E COST Yt'RRS 2009 2070 2011 2012 2043 CU42.014 tiaus#nO Replacement Program tOD,000 D 0 0 4 50,OOU 50,000 pp04.Di4 GladstcneAraa Sheetscape-Phases 5,400,000 2,500,ODO 2,904,000 4 0 0 0 CD09.020 Gladstone-Phase 11 3,500,000 n 0 0 3,50tl,000 0 0 CD09A34 Gladstone- Phase 111 6.750,000 0 0. D 0 0 5,760A60 Fp03A20 Replacement of Fire Truck FpOS.020 Replaaement of Fire Tuck F067.020 Ambulance Replacement Fp08,Ot6 Rmhulanr-e Rap{aaement Fp09.0iD Ambulance ReplaaemaM IT9,010 PhoneSystem IT9-620 Fihecdplics MT48.D14 City Facriitias Secudty Systems Enhancement MY06.020 City Hai[ Bollee#2 M'N8-Q46 MCC Exterior Mafat Panting A{FO6.050 MCC Poai Area DehumidNicai~n8iea0ng MTOS.O80 MCC R#r Handler snit Replacement tdT06.090 A4CG Gym. Roof MT08,1t0 MCC LapRe#sure Pont Finish (dT06.120 City HaltDai[ar#1 MT06.140 MCC Carpet MT08.16D CityHalt Catpet (4T09,0t0 MCC Pant Sand Fllier P608.610 Itt-Car Vk#re Sysiem PM03,41 D PM03,660 PM07.010 PM07.t00 PM06.044 PM08.050 PMO&.458 P`N02.i20 PW 03.020 PWD3.t36 PW 03.140 PW 03.160 PYd03.106 PbY03.490 PV'd04.680 PYd04.096 PW04.146 PY40 x.050 PVY05,070 PWD5.084 pW05,090 PW60.410 PW06.024 P W 00,080 P W 06.040 PW 06.050 PW OB.OS6 Lions Fark impravemen~ ,~ Joy Palk hnpmvements Community FeEd Upgrades ,~ Parks -Trail perelapment Park EgOtpmenf.. Fanca and Coud Raptacemant~°" Gladsfona Savanna Impravemenis pgen 5paee krtpravamoit3s ~-- City Eandli0 Ciosu.e Cavttty Raad D, SicKn~FzF -Lydia 0eey9 Road,: Eid".ioway - Lerpen[eur Write BearAvanua, Radalz - EStlarkfe CSty-wide Stdewaik irnprouemaats Santbry Sewer ptpcs. t.tnir:glSeaVing F*rogram Sanitary Serer Sump Pump Remava# ProDmm ~6ta 1-Tcn T mck SUea2 Stireeper Fxis'"- ; County Rd p, Easi c€lYt 6i to HazeEwood Cne Taedem Rxia Snal'r Piave 7n1ek Stec _ me+~ Pond rRVenuelpcrfand Rued S#gnai System et Sauihlawn and County Read p Two Toro Lean Mowere and Two Trailers Siat(Cars Mower, Tmckster, Crack Router a£ Trniier Two t-Ton Tntcks One t1I2-Ton Tmck and 1Wc 112-Ton Pickups One Traciar Loader and Three YJ heel Tmckster 44,750;000 2,500,040 2,.900,000 0 3,600,000 50,000 5,800,000 415,840 0 0 415,840 D 6 0. 440,710 0 4 0 0 4 440,716 95,580 4 95,556 D D 0 0 100,250 0 0 0 106,250 0 D 105,120 6 6 0 0 0 465,120 4, 45T,50D 0 95.580 4f5,840 100,256 0 545,830 150,000 0 0 D D 0 15Q000 140,50D 0 D 22,500 35,606 83,0110 0 200;508 0 0 22,600 35,000 83,000 150,006 123.040 D 0 0 4 83,400 60,000 73,400 0 4 0 Q 73,400 0 124,000 D 6 D 80,040 80,000 0 74,DW D 0 T6;640 0 0 0 61,600 13,500 27,2310 13,600 27,244 0 D 170,000 0 D 0 0 D 170A06 255,000 6 4 168,000 d7.ODS1 0 0 73,444 0 0 6 D 0 73446 163,400 0 D 0 63,400 40,000 64,400 53,700 6 0 4 53,1On n D 141.,1031 0 0 D 0 82,400 58,704 1,324,804 13,600 27,200 251,600 290,900 318,800 422,500 126,278 D 120,278 0 0 0 D 126,278 0 126;270 0 0 4 0 150,000 Sn,DD0 4 t1 100,000 0 0 550.406 2tI0,000 0 50.444 100.044 200A40 0 175,000 D 35,000 35,600 33,440 35,000 36:fl00 740,040 100,000 D 150,000 150,000 150,000 160,000 40,000 0 25,OD0 25,OOD 40,DOD 0 4 1,500,000 900,400 4 400.000 540,000 0 0 250,000 4 50,000 50,406 60,004 60,04v 50,000 3,4t5,ROD f,250,000 ~1t0,004 410;000 975,000 435,OOt1 235,000 325,004 v^ 0 4 325,004 _. 0 0 0 3,064,004 0 0 4 250,000 2,814,000 0 814,000 0 0 0 100,046 714,006 4 3,250,000 0 240,404 2,800,000 250A00 0 240,040 380,D00 134.060 ,ODO 50AD0 60,OD0 SO,OOD 50,040 659,408 556,064 140,000 `:00.040 144.400 9D0,604 800A06 326,400 120.400 124,000 424,000 i20,C44 0 68,90.9 4 613.' 4 4 0 4 4 160,400 6 0 1`00,040 4 0 4 °r24,000 0 ~) 720,000 0 0 4 184.000 1A~:,000 5 0 0 0 0 1,014,440 0 0 0 D 200.004 814,406 973,400 30,000 7 6 80,OOD 883,000 0 3n0,OW 0 309,000 0 0 0 0 90,400 0 n D 4 90,000 q 76,000 0 4 70,000 0 0 0 78,630 0 D 0 76,030 0 4 11 B,6n0 0 119,000 0 4 0 0 114,180 0 0 0 0 0 U4,1$0 64,710 0 4 0 D 0 69,714