HomeMy WebLinkAbout2008 08-04 500 CMW and Joint Parks Commission Meeting
AGENDA
MAPLEWOOD CITY COUNCIL
COUNCIL MANAGER WORKSHOP
Joint Session with Parks Commission and
Comprehensive Plan Discussion
5:00 P.M. Monday, August 4, 2008
Council Chambers, City Hall
A. CALL TO ORDER
B. ROLL CALL
C. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
D. NEW BUSINESS
1. Joint Session with Parks Commission (5:00 p.m. - 6:30 p.m.)
2. Comprehensive Plan Discussion (6:30 p.m. ? 8:00 p.m.)
E. ADJOURNMENT
Agenda D1
2030 Comprehensive Plan City of Maplewood
MEMORANDUM
To: Acting City Manager
From: Jennifer Haskamp, MFRA
Subject: Comprehensive Plan
Date: July 28, 2008
INTRODUCTION
At the August 4 meeting, the City Council and Parks Commission will have the opportunity to discuss and review the
th
Parks, Trails and Open Space Draft chapter. The Parks Commission worked hard to prepare a chapter that reflects their
goals and objectives for the parks, trails and open space system in the City. The Parks Commission worked through the
chapter during five meetings devoting several hours to the preparation of the document. In conjunction, the Advisory
Panel held eight meetings that addressed the following topics: goals and objectives development, land use, issues in
south Maplewood, trails and transportation and final review of the draft chapter. The draft chapter presented to the City
Council is reflective of the recommendations and suggestions of the Advisory Panel and Parks Commission. The
Planning Commission will review the chapter at their meeting on July 29; MFRA will brief the City Council and Parks
Commission at the August 4 meeting on any changes the Planning Commission has recommended.
DISCUSSION
The City?s consultant McCombs Frank Roos and Associates (MFRA) has prepared the Parks, Trails and Open Space
chapter with the help of the Parks Commission and PTOS Advisory Panel. The chapter will be presented and discussed
at the joint meeting and significant changes highlighted for discussion at the meeting. Consultants and Staff will be
looking for the City Council to give its thoughts and comments based on the content of the chapter. If desired, the City
Council can give Staff and consultants typos and minor wording issues after the meeting in order to allow for more time
for discussion focused on larger and substantive policy issues.
MFRA will lead a discussion briefing the City Council on the process and the substantive changes made during this
review period. Because of this process, the Parks Commission has identified a couple key discussion items that they
would like to address to the council, staff will facilitate this discussion with the Council after presentation and discussion
of the chapter:
Capital Improvements Plan and overall level and sources of funding
Structure and resources allocated to the Parks Department.
RECOMMENDATION
Please review the Parks, Trails and Open Space chapter before the joint meeting on August 4, 2008. Be prepared to
share your thoughts and comments on the chapter. The Final Draft Comprehensive Plan will incorporate the feedback
received at the meeting. If you have any questions about the comprehensive planning process, please contact Tom
Ekstrand, Senior Planner, at 651-249-2302 or or DuWayne Konewko at 651-249-
2400 or .
Chapter 6: Parks, Trails and Open Space Chapter
Introduction
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
1,175 acres of county, state, and agency owned park land. The recent Statewide Comprehensive Outdoor
Recreation 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 a half-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
6-1
Comprehensive Plan. The Advisory Panel reviewed the system and made recommendations 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 those 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.
6-2
University of Minnesota ? 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 Ramsey 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.
6-3
Parks, Trails, and Open Space Goals and Objectives
General Parks, Open Space, and Trail System Plan Goals
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.
To prepare and implement a comprehensive park, open space, and trail system plan.
General Goal 1:
:
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.
To maintain and support the natural resources system as an integral part of the parks system.
General Goal 2:
:
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.
To maintain and support a professionally trained, highly motivated, staff to carry out the City of
General Goal 3:
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.
Promote and support a parks department staff that through successful communication and coordination can
maintain and manage the diverse parks, open space and trails system.
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.
6-4
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.
To establish effective communication and interactions with residents about parks, open space
Community Goal 1:
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.
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.
To maximize the recreational opportunities available to city residents through the development
Community Goal 2:
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 Plan.
To preserve and protect ecological systems and natural resources within the City.
Ecological Goal 1:
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.
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.
6-5
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.
Identify, prioritize and restore elements of the natural systems of Maplewood that have been degraded or
lost through development.
To maintain and enhance ecological systems and natural resources within the City.
Ecological Goal 2:
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 has 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 the system.
To maintain and enhance existing active parks and passive parks to provide a high quality of life
Park Land Goal 1:
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.
To adequately provide and maintain open spaces and natural areas to ensure each resident has
Park Land Goal 2:
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.
6-6
Maintain and connect active and passive parks with neighborhoods, community facilities and schools to
ensure accessibility.
Enhance and maintain environmental corridors, natural areas and open spaces to provide access and
educational opportunities to all residents.
Create and implement plans for the neighborhood preserves.
To acquire land for parks, natural areas and open spaces, that can be maintained and used by
Park Land Goal 3:
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.
Prioritize acquisition of land that supports the overall natural greenway corridors, natural resources,
recreation, park, education and trail objectives.
Promote and support design standards for the development of the parks system focusing on green design.
Trail Corridors/Right-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 trail system for recreational and transportation purposes
and are intended to support the overall system.
Acquire, develop and maintain an interconnected trail system for transportation, recreation and
Trails Goal 1:
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.)
6-7
Promote and encourage residents to be active through the development of an efficient and accessible
Trails Goal 2:
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.
Recreation and Education Programs
A critical component of the parks system is the ability to provide recreational, educational, and fine arts programs to
the residents. These facilities and programs help improve the quality of life for all residents and provide opportunities
to residents to participate in a more active lifestyle.
Provide the opportunity for all community residents to participate in recreation, education, and arts
Goal Statement:
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 to continue managing,
enhancing and supporting the system.
To secure the funding necessary to carry out the mission of the Maplewood Parks, Open Space
Goal Statement:
and Trail System.
Objectives:
Identify and define the funding options that are available for parks land acquisition and development.
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.
6-8
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 system.
6-9
Existing Conditions
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 Classifications 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
neighborhood level.
Neighborhood Park Active with Passive Neighborhood park remains the basic unit of Typically 5 acres or
Areasthe 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 passive 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
spaces.
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-
use functions.
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 complex and special use
Special Use Active/Passive Covers a broad range of parks and
Varies
recreation facilities. The facilities may be
oriented toward single-purpose use, such as
a nature center, historic sites, plazas or may
have a portion of a park or open space area
dedicated to a special use.
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
program, etc.)
6-10
Natural Area Passive A full description and analysis of the Natural Large patches of
Greenway 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
SpaceRamsey County. Some are appropriate for
park uses such as hiking. Some are used for
storm ponding or other functions.
Agency Open Passive Natural areas or open space owned by Varies
Spaceagencies.
County/Regional Passive Parks and recreational facilities owned by Varies
ParkRamsey County.
Table 6.2 Trail Classification
Classification General DescriptionDescription of Each Type
Park Trail Multipurpose trails or sidewalks located within Separate/single-purpose hard surfaced trails
parks and natural resource areas. Focus is on for pedestrians and bicyclists/in-line skaters.
recreational value and harmony with the
Multipurpose hard surfaced trails for
natural environment
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
Bikewaysthe 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 for the overall system.
6-11
Table 6.3 Summary Assessment of Park System
Issue Summary 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
Mixextensive 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 a long-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.
6-12
The general assessment in Table 6.3 describes the overall existing condition of facilities in the City. While
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 goals were followed:
All residents should be within a ½ 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 system 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 Edgerton 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 full 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 system, nature trails in the Priory Neighborhood Preserve have been developed to offer
another trail option to residents.
Significant 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
replanting 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.
6-13
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.
6-14
Parks, Trails and Open Space Plan
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 a city wide scale to
ensure the needs of all residents are met.
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 goals were used to develop Maplewood?s park
system:
All residents should be within a ½ 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.
6-15
Organize the park system geographically.
Ensure that the neighborhood park needs of all residents can be met within a reasonable distance from 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 a high-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 6.4 Existing and Future Parks/Open Space
Neighborhood/Park Classification Ownership Acreage Other - Notes
Western Hills
Mini/Neighborhood Park City 5.7
Western Hills
Neighborhood Preserve School District7.0 Located on map as a part of
Trout Brook
Trout Brook ? school site
Open Space St. Paul Board of 59.1 No public park/open space
Sandy Lake Area
Wateropportunities at this time
School Site School District 20.3
Trout Brook
Open Space City3.6
Open Space @
Adolphus
Parkside
Mini/Neighborhood ParkCity2.0
Maplecrest
Youth Athletic City18.3
Edgerton
Mini/Neighborhood Park City5.2 Consider reclassification -
Roselawn
Opportunity to better serve area
Mini/Neighborhood Park City 0.2
Kenwood Park
County Open Space County 121.6 Within multiple neighborhoods
Keller Lake
Open Space City0.9
Open Space @ Miss
Kohlman Lake
Mini/Neighborhood ParkCity6.1
Sunset Ridge
Mini/Neighborhood Park City 0.6
Lower Sunset Ridge
Mini/Neighborhood ParkCity4.8
Kohlman
Neighborhood Preserve City6.3
Hidden Marsh
Neighborhood Preserve City 17.4
Fisher?s Corner
Neighborhood Preserve City 27.6
Spoon Lake
6-16
Open Space County 24.5
Kohlman Marsh
Open Space
County Open Space County - Within multiple neighborhoods
Keller Lake
Hazlewood
Mini/Neighborhood ParkCity9.5
Four Seasons
Youth Athletic City48.1
Hazlewood
Community Athletic City30.1
Harvest
Complex
Mini/Neighborhood Park City 10.0
Legacy Village
Neighborhood Preserve City10.9
Kohlman Creek
Open Space City/County 70.9
Open Spaces ? East
of Hazlewood
Open Space City37.7
Open Space ? West
of Harvest
Open Space City/County 27.9
Open Space East of
61 @ City border
Maplewood Heights
Mini/Neighborhood ParkCity25.3
Maplewood Heights
Community Park City14.6
Joy Park
Neighborhood Preserve City35.9
Joy Park
Mini/Neighborhood Park City 13.7
Playcrest
Neighborhood City23.0 2.0 Acres leased to Maplewood
Prairie Farm
Preserve/ Special Use Historical Society
Park
Sherwood Glen
Mini/Neighborhood ParkCity0.5
Timber
Mini/Neighborhood ParkCity3.0
Gladstone
Mini/Neighborhood ParkCity12.0 Better Development
Sherwood
opportunities
Mini/Neighborhood ParkCity4.1
Robinhood
School Site School District 15.7 Public school with access to
John Glen
recreational facilities
School Site School District 11.3 Public school with access to
Weaver
recreational facilities
County Park County 150.0
Keller Golf Course
Gladstone
Mini/Neighborhood ParkCity3.3 Gladstone Master Planning
Gloster
6-17
Effort
Neighborhood Preserve City 23.4
Gladstone Savanna
Community Park City34.5
Wakefield
Youth Athletic City6.3
Flicek
Mini Park City0.3
Look Out Park
School Site School District 1.7
Park South of
Robinhood
County Within multiple neighborhoods
County Park North of
Phalen*
Mini/Neighborhood Park City 0.5-2.0 Opportunity for Historical
Historical Marker
Marker/Context
Hillside
Mini/Neighborhood ParkCity4.4
Nebraska
Mini/Neighborhood ParkCity9.8
Hillside
Community Athletic City20.5
Goodrich
Complex
Neighborhood Preserve City45.8
Priory
Mini/Neighborhood Park City 11.5 Mostly Open Space and
Sterling Oaks
Wetlands with a tot lot
County Park County 92.7
Goodrich Golf
Course
Open Space State of 19.1
Wetlands Complex
Minnesota Trust
@RR
Open Space City7.0
Wetlands Complex
@RR
Open Space County 37.8
Holloway Marsh
School Park School District 17.3
Maplewood Middle
School
Beaver Lake
Mini/Neighborhood ParkCity9.0
Geranium
Mini/Neighborhood ParkCity9.4 Will be replaced
Gethsemane
Mini/Neighborhood ParkCity3.4
Lions
Neighborhood Preserve City11.5 Total site area is 11.5 acres, or
Jim?s Prairie
(4.6)which 4.6 is the neighborhood
preserve. Remaining area is city
dump and open space.
Neighborhood Preserve City 9.1
Beaver Creek
Special Use Park/ City37.2
Nature Center
Neighborhood Preserve
6-18
School Site School District 10.2
Beaver Lake School
Open Space County 23.5
Beaver Lake County
Park
Open Space City 34.4
Wetland Area
@Maryland
Mini/Neighborhood ParkCity 4.0-6.0 To Replace Gethsemane if
Search Area
necessary
(Pipeline Properties)
Battle Creek
Youth Athletic City17.9
Afton Heights
School Site School District 9.6
Carver School
Regional Park County 292.2
Battle Creek
Vista Hills
Mini/Neighborhood ParkCity3.8
Crestview
Mini/Neighborhood ParkCity2.2
Mailand
Mini/Neighborhood ParkCity13.2
Vista Hills
Active Park County 181.5 Within multiple
The Ponds Golf Course
neighborhoods, includes
county work house
Highwood
Mini/Neighborhood ParkCity4.0
Applewood
Mini/Neighborhood ParkCity14.4
Pleasant View
Neighborhood Preserve City25.3
Applewood
Neighborhood Preserve City22.4
Carver
County Open Space Ramsey 24.7
Fish Creek Open Space
County
Open Space City 10.5
Open Space at
Lakewood
Open Space City 2.4
Open Space at Timber
Carver Ridge
County Open Space Ramsey 52.2
Fish Creek Open Space
County
Mini/Neighborhood ParkCity 4.0-6.0 New Active Park to be
Active Park Search Area
located in Mixed-Use Area
and determined as part of a
master plan.
6-19
The following table summarizes the information in Table 6.4. The table demonstrates that each neighborhood has
several acres of open space and parks that are accessible to the residents.
Table 6.5 Parks and Open Space Summary Table
Neighborhood Acreage
1. Western Hills 95.7
2. Parkside 148.2
3. Kohlman Lake 87.9
4. Hazlewood 245.1
5. Maplewood Heights 112.5
6. Sherwood Glen 196.6
7. Gladstone 70.5*
8. Hillside 265.9
9. Beaver Lake 152.7*
10. Battle Creek 319.7
11. Vista Hills 200.7
12. Highwood 103.7
13. Carver Ridge 57.7*
TOTAL 2,056.9
* Includes proposed acreage, not currently existing in the system.
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
6-20
Edgerton School
The city and local school districts have long-term relationships for jointly 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
of limited land resources within the city. This partnership will be of considerable importance to the city as it focuses
on reducing the extent to which its neighborhood parks are used for programmed athletic uses. The continued use of
the athletic fields provided at the various school sites is vital to 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
6-21
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 general park and open space needs,
where parks refers 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 key development or use
considerations identified through this planning process. Following this section, a short discussion and list of specific
parks and open space topics identified throughout this planning process are identified to ensure the thoughts and
recommendations of the Advisory Panel and Parks Commission are documented for future planning efforts. The city
understands that a thorough evaluation of each park and open space property will be necessary to develop detailed
future plans, and this effort will be identified as an implementation step in subsequent sections.
Parks (Active)
Mini and 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.?
6-22
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.
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
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
6-23
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.
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 two sites for community athletic complexes. Note
here too that the community athletic complexes 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 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.
6-24
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.
Key Developmental/Use Considerations
Clearly defining development, use, and maintenance of these facilities is important to ensure that all parties
understand their role and responsibility.
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:
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 leases
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.
Parks Commission members have identified an interest in developing a city-owned dog park.
Maplewood would like to have a permanent site for a Community Garden.
6-25
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 and passive recreational opportunities for local residents.
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.
There are currently 14 Neighborhood Preserve sites in the system totaling 308 acres. The City shall retain a
minimum of 308 acres in the system, resulting in a no-net loss policy. The following statements and implementation
tools support this policy and shall be further developed to ensure the Neighborhood Preserve acreages are upheld:
Maintain a minimum of 308 acres of Neighborhood Preserve lands. If a parcel is to be sold, another parcel
of equal or higher ecological quality shall be added to the Neighborhood Preserve system.
If new property is brought into the system, it should enhance or maintain contiguous lands and shall not
contribute to fragmentation of the system.
Maintain city or public ownership of all/any neighborhood preserves in the system.
Further develop and enhance ordinances that support the preservation, maintenance and management of
the Neighborhood Preserves. This shall include the creation of a zoning designation that specifically relates
to the activities allowed in Neighborhood Preserves.
6-26
All neighborhood preserves are designated as Open Space on the Land Use Plan. As required by state
statute, any and all changes to the land use shall require a 4/5 vote at the Council level and will result in a
th
Comprehensive Plan Amendment.
The use of conservation easements and other conservation tools shall be evaluated on a case-by-case
basis, and shall be evaluated for how the easements would contribute to and support the neighborhood
preserve system.
Regional Park/County 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. If these parcels are ever up for sale, or a use change is proposed, the City
should reevaluate the park needs in these two neighborhoods to ensure the City?s park standards are upheld.
6-27
Advisory Panel and Parks Commission Specific Discussion Items
The Advisory Panel and Parks Commission reviewed the existing parks plan in conjunctions with the future land use
plan that has been developed as a part of this planning process. During those discussions recommendations and
ideas were generated with respect to how the existing park system functions and how the system could better serve
specific neighborhoods. The following items were identified as suggestions to the parks commission for
consideration during implementation of this summary document. This list is not meant to be all inclusive in terms of
all needs affecting the system, but inclusion of this information provides documentation of key data and discussions
taking place in the city. The following discussion items are categorized by classification type and neighborhoods
where applicable.
Neighborhood/Mini Parks
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 Park could be better developed to meet the active park
Sherwood Glen Neighborhood
needs of the neighborhood. During this planning period a feasibility and use study should be completed to
fully evaluate the needs of the neighborhood.
In the , as the Gladstone master plan progresses the Gloster Park and Gladstone
Gladstone Neighborhood
Savanna area will need to be evaluated to ensure the active park needs of the neighborhood, including
future residents is met.
The is light on active park facilities. Hillside Park is currently predominantly used for
Hillside Neighborhood
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 , discussions regarding the future of Gethsemane Park were underway at
Beaver Lake Neighborhood
the time of developing this document. If agreement is not met for preservation of this park, an active park
replacement should be identified to adequately provide active park facilities to this neighborhood. If
Gethsemane is reduced or eliminated in the future, a suggested search for a replacement park is identified
on the future parks and open space planning map (Figure 6.2).
In the a minimum of a 4.0-6.0 acre active park should be located within the
Carver Ridge Neighborhood
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.
School Sites
The school sites are unique because they are predominantly controlled by the school district, but coordination and
further collaboration could be explored. 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.
6-28
Special Use Parks
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 , the ski jump site may have opportunities for special programming and uses
Highwood Neighborhood
in the community. This site should remain on the city?s radar as an opportunity site.
In the , at the John Glen site there may be opportunities to collaborate with
Sherwood Glen Neighborhood
the school on special programming needs related to archery and similar activities.
Passive Park Areas
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:
may have some opportunities to revert some active park land for a more
Maplewood Heights Neighborhood
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 a large amount of land is in the County?s open space
Highwood and Carver Ridge neighborhoods
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.
6-29
Trails Plan
In this Comprehensive Plan Update 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 more comprehensive and plans for a significant amount of trail development
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, concrete or bituminous)
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 Proposed Parks, Trails, and Open Space, 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, provides an inventory of the existing and future trails, the classification and general developmental
or use considerations. Following the table, a short analysis and key points identified by the Advisory Panel and
Parks Commission are provided for consideration as the plan is implemented.
6-30
Table 6.5 Existing and Future Trails
Trail Classification Length (mi)Key Developmental/Use Consideration
Gateway Trail
State Trail 3.5 The trail is a state trail corridor with extensive connections to
Segment of the the metro area and greater Minnesota. Connecting residents
Willard Munger to this system is a priority of the overall trail plan.
State Trail
BurlingtonRegional Trail 3.0 Regional trail corridor of over 13 miles in length with extensive
Northern Regional connections to other systems, including state trail systems
Trail Corridor
Highline Trail Park Trail 2.7 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 trail
system.
Developmental Challenges:
Obtaining trail easement rights
Varying topography, with some areas exhibiting
steep slopes
Traversing through developed areas
County Road C Connector Trail 2.5 The County Road C Trail is partially completed, and the
Trailproposed plan connects this corridor through the northern half
of the city to create an east-west connection. This trail will
connect to other major trail corridors to provide efficiency.
County Road D Connector Trail 3.5
County Road B Connector Trail 3.5 The intent of the County Road B Trail is to provide an
Trailadditional east-west lingkage in the City.
Roselawn Connector Trail 2.0
Gervais Trail Connector Trail 1.0
Beam Ave Trail Connector Trail 2.8
Frost Trail Connector Trail 1.5 The Frost Avenue Trail is proposed to create a connection
between the regional trails and the White Bear Avenue Trail.
Century Avenue Connector Trail 5.6 The Century Avenue Trail is projected to be completed as a
Trailpart 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
City.
Arcade Trail Connector Trail 1.0
White Bear Trail Connector Trail 3.2 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 region.
Larpenteur Trail Connector Trail 5.2 The Larpenteur Avenue Trail is undeveloped and is proposed
as an 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
through the city.
McKnight Trail Connector Trail 7.0 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 leg.
6-31
Stillwater Trail Connector Trail 1.2
Minnehaha Trail Connector Trail 1.0
Upper Afton Road Connector Trail 1.0 The Upper Afton Road Trail is completed and provides
Trailconnections to adjacent communities in the south leg.
Lower Afton Road Connector Trail 1.1 The Lower Afton Road Trail is completed and provides
Trailconnections to adjacent communities in the south leg.
Carver Trail Connector Trail 1.0 This trail connection would be made when Carver Road is
reconstructed.
Sterling Trail Connector Trail 3.0 Sterling Trail in south Maplewood would connect residents
with adjacent communities.
Henry Lane Trial Connector Trail 0.35 The Henry Lane Trail would connect residents in the
Highwood neighborhood to County Open Spaces.
Linwood Avenue Connector Trail 1.0
Joy Trail Park Trail 1.0 (+)
South Maplewood Park Trail 1.0 (+) This trail is proposed as a soft-surface, sustainably-designed,
(Area South of hiking trail to provide residents access to the natural areas in
Carver Ave.) South Maplewood and is focused on preservation of the creek
and other high quality 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.
The following table identifies the amount of existing and proposed trails and sidewalks identified on Figure 6.2. All
trails in table 6.5 are not identified, and therefore the following table reflects the comprehensive trail system.
Table 6.6 Trails Lengths
Trails Road Trails Sidewalks Total
49.5 3.6 28.0 81.1
Existing
3.8 32.4 7.7 43.9
Proposed
53.3 36.0 35.7 125.0
Total
6-32
Advisory Panel and Parks Commission Specific Trails Discussion Items
The future Trail Plan in the City was discussed at length with the Advisory Panel and Parks Commission. The focus
of the discussions was on development of a more comprehensive approach to the trail system in the City. That
discussion included reference to some specific trail types as well as trail locations. The following items were
discussed specifically by the Advisory Panel and Parks Commission. The following topics are not exhaustive, but
should be considered as the City moves towards creating a detailed implementation plan.
General Trail Discussion Recommendations
The Advisory Panel and Parks Commission reviewed the existing trails plan as a starting point for making their
recommendations about future trail planning in the city. Specific attention was paid to the desire to enhance and
create strong east-west and north-south connections that would provide an interconnected network throughout the
region. The following specific items were discussed; this list is purposely general and highlights some of the most
discussed topics:
The trails should provide opportunities for biking as an alternative mode of transportation, and major road
trails should consider a dedicated bike lane for commuters. Based on Figure 6.2, nearly 35 miles of Road
Trails is proposed as a part of this plan. Strong consideration of these trails should be paid for commuting
purposes rather than solely recreational uses.
The trail system should be developed in a manner that considers making connections between parkland,
open space, community facilities, and schools. Roadways or other areas that may be easily retrofitted and
provide key connections should be prioritized during planning and development of the system.
Signage of the overall trail system, both existing and future, should be a priority to make navigating through
the system easier and more accessible to residents.
At time of any major road construction project the trail plan should be referenced and the Parks Commission
should review opportunities to complete or enhance the trail system.
Nature trails, particularly in natural areas, should be carefully planned for and review and consideration by
the Parks Commission required ensuring the development of a trail system that protects the environment
but considers access to high quality natural areas without being a detriment to the area.
Specific Trail Corridors
The following specific trail corridors were identified during the trail discussions:
Frost 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. The Gladstone Master Plan area continues to evolve and was heavily
discussed during the land use and parks discussions. Trail opportunities should be capitalized at time of
redevelopment in the area.
6-33
Carver Trail
This connection would be critical at time of development in Highwood and Carver Ridge neighborhoods. This plan is
the first parks, trail and open space plan for the areas south of Carver Avenue and it is therefore critical to look at
opportunities to serve new residents in these neighborhoods. At the time of this plan, Carver Trail is proposed as the
only connection under 494 in the south leg of the community.
Sterling Trail
This trail will require a feasibility study as there are significant topographic challenges in the area. The opportunity to
connect residents with existing and future parks in this area, as well as to the regional system exists but should be
explored further at time of development in the south Maplewood area.
Henry Lane Trail
The trail would provide connections between existing neighborhoods and residents with County Open Spaces. This
connection would help complete the existing systems and provide greater access to residents.
Sout
h Maplewood (Nature Trails)
This trail is proposed as a sustainably-designed trail to provide residents access to the natural areas in South
Maplewood and is focused on preservation of the creek and other high quality natural areas.
6-34
Implementation
This section of the report focuses on establishing a framework and priorities for implementing the park, open space
and trail system plan. This includes:
Partnership approach to implementation
Cost analysis
Evaluation criteria for prioritizing park and trail development
Prioritization of park and trail initiatives
Implementation strategies by goal topic area
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.
The City understands that the CIP budgeted amount for the parks, open space and trail system is not adequate to
support the projected cost to implement the entire system outlined in this document. Identification of the shortfall
allows the City to look for additional funding sources and opportunities to partner with other agencies to accomplish
the goals and objectives identified in this plan. For example, this plan identifies a more comprehensive trail system in
the community. The plan identifies the largest quantity of those trails to be road trails where there may be
opportunities to develop the system at time of road reconstruction or through the help of other agencies. A summary
of the cost analysis table is as follows:
Table 6.6 Cost Summary for Park and Trail Development/Redevelopment (2008-2013)
ItemCost Summary (Dollars) Contingency (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*
$5,010,000
Total
*Figures were rounded up to reflect an estimated projected fee.
6-35
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 for 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 Plan Complete All Aspects of the System Plan
Implementation
Go Beyond basic needs to provide a
broader palette of recreational
.
opportunities for residents
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
6-36
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
As an implementation step of this plan, the City will inventory and evaluate the parks, trails and open space system in
detail. During that process, priorities will be set to ensure that the City?s park needs are met. Additionally, the City
acknowledges that the priorities may change depending on circumstances. For example a road reconstruction
project may yield opportunities to construct a trail, and the efficiencies of completing the trail as a part of that process
may increase its priority. Future prioritization should support and reference the goals and objective statements
identified in this Plan.
Implementation Strategies in Goal Topics (New Section as Recommended by Parks Commission)
The following information identifies preliminary implementation strategies for each of the goal topic areas. The
section is not all inclusive but highlights specific areas of discussion by the Parks Commission and Advisory Panel.
The following implementation steps will help support the goals and objectives identified through this planning
process.
General Parks, Open Space, and Trail System Plan Goals
The general parks, open space and trail system plan goals highlighted three topic areas including implementation of
the comprehensive plan, focus on the natural resource system and internal staffing. The following implementation
strategies support these areas:
Update, modify and create appropriate ordinances to support the goals and objectives identified in this plan.
The first step will be to ensure that the zoning ordinance is updated to reflect the appropriate land use and
classifications in this plan.
Create policy and ordinances to support the creation of the natural area greenways plan that also ensures
review by the Parks Commission for any development within the greenways. This will help ensure the
appropriate attention is paid to identifying park land or open space opportunities.
Evaluate the needs, benefit and advantages to reinstating a parks director level position to help lead the
parks, open space and trail planning and development efforts within the City.
Review the by-laws established for the Parks Commission to ensure the roles and responsibilities of the
commission support the goals and objectives identified in this document.
6-37
Community and Partnerships
The community and partnerships goals and objectives focus on maintaining open communication and collaboration
with other agencies and communities to ensure the most efficient services and system are available. The following
implementation strategies are identified to support this goal:
Staff and Commissioners should explore opportunities to work with adjacent cities, agencies, school districts
and other community groups. This will help identify potential opportunities for collaboration and efficiencies.
Work with regional organizations to help monitor regional systems and their potential affect on the City?s
parks, trails and open space system.
Ecological Resources, Restoration and Management
The ecological resources, restoration and management goals and objectives are focused on the relationship between
the natural resource system and the park system. The following implementation strategies will help reinforce the
relationship between the systems and future planning efforts.
Develop a review process for the Parks Commission for any property located within the natural area
greenway corridors identified in the natural resource chapter.
Inventory and analyze the existing active and passive park system to identify opportunities for restoration,
storm water management or other environmental benefits to the overall system.
Park Land Management, Acquisition and Development
The park land management, acquisition and development goals and objectives focus on the management or
improvement of the existing system as well as the need for future active and passive parks. The following
implementation strategies support the goals and objectives.
Perform a full analysis and inventory of the existing parks system to better assess future park needs with
respect to acquisition, redevelopment or improvements.
Perform a full feasibility analysis for developing areas in the community, specifically in south Maplewood
where development has not yet occurred. Accurate determination of size and type of park land in this area
should be assessed when unit type and number of residents are identified for this area.
Trail Corridors/Right-of-Way Acquisition and Development
The trail goals and objectives relate to a much more diverse and comprehensive trail system. The following
implementation strategies support the identified goals and objectives.
Create a review process that supports the Parks Commission review of all road improvement projects to
identify potential trail connections and opportunities to complete the system.
Prioritize all trail corridors and focus planning efforts and studies on key corridors.
Identify key areas where opportunities exist to add lining for bike and non-motorized traffic on roadways to
complete the system in a most efficient and cost-effective way.
6-38
Recreation and Education Programs
The recreation and education program goals are focused on maintaining the existing programs and supporting the
diversification and availability of programming in the City. The following implementation steps support the identified
goals and objectives.
Discuss and inventory the programming offered through the City to determine areas for improvement within
the City.
Work with program and education directors to identify areas for improvement within the system and create a
plan to improve programming availability and diversity within the City.
Encourage and provide education to support best practices and stewardship along park and open space
(neighborhood preserves) borders.
Funding
The funding goals and objectives identify ways to support the system financially. The following implementation
strategies are identified for support.
Perform a detailed inventory to prioritize projects that will require immediate funding.
Monitor the parks, trails and open space plan on a yearly basis to identify upcoming financial gap areas, and
to determine additional prioritization and planning needs.
Identify grant money available to support the development of the trail system. The trail budget is
significantly higher than the allocated CIP money, and identification of potential grant money will help fund
the gap.
6-39
MEMORANDUM
TO:
Charles Ahl, Acting City Manager
FROM:
DuWayne Konewko, Deputy Director of Public Works
Ginny Gaynor, Open Space Naturalist
DATE:
July 29, 2008
RE:
Land Protection for Neighborhood Preserves
Background
On September 24, 2007, the City Council requested that staff prepare a report and
presentation on land protection options for the Neighborhood Preserves, including
conservation easements. On October 22, 2007, Chuck Ahl presented that information
to the City Council. The City Council subsequently approved a proposal from
Minnesota Land Trust to begin work on conservation easements for up to five
Neighborhood Preserves. In addition, they directed staff to investigate other land
protection options for the preserves.
One of the options identified was to protect the preserves via the Comprehensive Plan.
The proposed Comprehensive Plan includes this protection.
Discussion
The staff presentation to the City Council regarding land protection for the preserves
included several options (see attached summary sheet). Staff recommends using a
combination of protective measures.
Minnesota Land Trust is currently developing conservation easements for two sites --
Priory Neighborhood Preserve and Jim?s Prairie. General terms of conservation
easements for these sites were presented to the Parks Commission on April 16, 2008
and the easements will be brought back to the Parks Commission in late summer for
review and discussion.
The Comprehensive Plan is one avenue to protect the Neighborhood Preserves from
being sold for development. Amendments to the Comprehensive Plan require a
supermajority council vote (4/5) with a public hearing. Thus, if we use the
Comprehensive Plan for protection, it would be difficult to develop a preserve in the
future, but not impossible. This is probably the strongest tool we have for protecting the
preserves from development, except for conservation easements.
The proposed Comprehensive Plan protects the Neighborhood Preserves in two ways:
1. Land Use Chapter. In the proposed land use chapter, the Neighborhood
Preserves are classified as Open Space. If the city wants to change a
preserve to another land use (ex: to residential or commercial), that would
require an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan and a supermajority (4/5)
vote from council.
2. Parks Chapter. In the proposed parks chapter the 14 preserves are classified
as Neighborhood Preserves, which distinguishes them from other types of
open space. Language is added that the city shall maintain a minimum of
308 acres of land in the neighborhood preserve system, resulting in a no-net
loss policy (see parks plan pages 6-26 and 6-27). Thus, if the city wanted to
develop a preserve in the future, another parcel of equal or higher ecological
quality would have to be brought into the Neighborhood Preserve system, and
council would have to approve it with a supermajority vote.
Parks Commissioners discussed this issue at their July 16, 2008 meeting and supported
protecting the neighborhood preserves in the Comprehensive Plan as discussed above
and as written in the park plan.
Recommendation
Staff requests that City Council members discuss providing protection for the
Neighborhood Preserves in the Comprehensive Plan.
Attachment: Summary of protection tools
AGENDA REPORT
TO:
Park Commission
FROM:
Charles Ahl, Acting City Manager
DuWayne Konekwo, Deputy Director of Public Works
SUBJECT: Continued Discussion of 2009 ? 2013 Capital Improvement Plan
DATE:
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 be additional PAC fees received during the remainer of 2008:
Future 2008 PAC Revenue $ 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:
Open Space Improvements: $ 50,000
Planned End of 2009 Fund Balance: $956,640
* - Discussion
The end of 2009 Fund Balance is predicted on over $600,000 of unknown revenue from development
assumptions that are not eminent. We cannot recommend that we commit funds to projects until we
know more about these revenues. We certainly have a $900,000 commitment to Gladstone that could
be scaled back; however, we believe that investment in Gladstone is necessary in order to facilitate
future development opportunities. In addition, the Gladstone Savanna has environmental
contamination that needs to be coordinated with the overall grading. The PAC fund is not paying for
the environmental work, but is coordinated to work together with that project.
Park Commission ? CIP Discussion
Page Three
* - Discussion
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 $ 350,000
2011 $ 900,000
2012 $ 400,000
2013 $ 200,000
TOTAL PROJECTS $1,850,000
Projected Fund balance at end of 2013 $ 915,140
* - Discussion
We fully understand that the Parks Commission has a full list of needs. At this point, we cannot
recommend that you program those projects until there is a new funding source. In our analysis, we
believed that the neighborhood parks commitment that was originally planned as undesignated at $350,000
has been prioritized by the Parks Commission to Joy Park.
Park Commission ? CIP Discussion
Page Four
RECOMMENDATION
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
Agenda D2
Chapter 4 ? Housing
Introduction
As a mature community, Maplewood has many challenges and opportunities to maintain and provide housing choice
and life-cycle housing for its residents. Maplewood considers its housing stock to be a critical building block of its
neighborhoods and community development efforts. The livability and appearance of neighborhoods and the housing
within them, is a quality of life indicator for the City. As a sustainable community, Maplewood will provide housing
opportunities for its workforce, young professionals, families, special needs and senior residents as well as its
business and corporate owners. Diverse housing supports economic development by keeping existing residents,
attracting new people from all social and economic classes and is essential for sustaining an ever changing and
developing population. Businesses need employees and employees need housing. The City has been a leader at
providing for workforce and affordable housing and will continue to provide opportunities for additional housing for all
segments of the population.
Housing is the most significant form of development in Maplewood. More than 90 percent of Maplewood?s 2030 land
use plan is devoted to residential land uses. The housing supply determines who lives in Maplewood. The character
of neighborhoods plays an important role in shaping the character and identity of the City. The purpose of the
Housing Chapter of the Comprehensive Plan is to identify housing needs and to provide a foundation for local
decision-making to guide residential development and redevelopment efforts in Maplewood.
State Law requires that the Comprehensive Plan contain a housing element that includes ?standards, plans and
programs for providing adequate housing opportunities to meet existing and projected local and regional housing
needs, including but not limited to the use of official controls and land use planning to promote the availability of land
for the development of low and moderate income housing? (Minnesota Statutes, Section 473.859, Subd. 2c). The
Comprehensive Plan must also include a housing implementation program that describes ?official controls to
implement the housing element of the land use plan, which will provide sufficient existing and new housing to meet
the local unit?s share of the metropolitan area need for low and moderate income housing? (Minnesota Statutes,
Section 473.859, Subd. 4). The Housing Chapter focuses on Maplewood?s housing goals and objectives, not on the
background information that shapes these plans. Information on housing in Maplewood can be found in several
places. The Community Profile chapter (Chapter 2) includes a summary of key community characteristics and recent
growth trends.
Purpose
The intent of the Housing Chapter is:
Describe the current housing stock.
Quantify the number of housing units by type.
Describe the services and amenities that affect the quality and desirability of neighborhoods.
Set goals for affordable housing and a mix of housing types to meet the life-cycle housing needs of
Maplewood residents.
Identify strategies for achieving those goals.
Housing 4-1
Goals and Objectives
The City of Maplewood has developed housing goals and objectives. The goals and objectives are the foundation of
this plan. The City?s housing plan is based on these goals and objectives. Further discussion in the chapter will
address how certain future decisions will achieve these goals and objectives.
The goals and objectives are listed below.
Goal 1: Develop and maintain the quality of housing in residential neighborhoods to meet the needs of
current and future residents.
Objectives:
1.Have a variety of housing types for ownership and rental for people in all stages of the life-cycle.
2.Have a balanced housing supply, with housing availability for people at all income levels.
3.Accommodate all racial and ethnic groups in the purchase, sale, rental and location of housing in the City.
4.Promote housing development that respects the natural environment of the City while striving to meet the
need for a variety of housing types and costs.
5.Develop sustainable housing that is energy efficient, utilizes green building techniques, and targeted funding
programs for housing rehabilitation.
6.Have single-family detached houses with an average density of at least 3 units per acre and multifamily
housing with an average density of at least 10 units per acre.
7.Promote the availability of a full-range of services and facilities for its residents, and the improvement of
access to and linkage between housing and employment.
Goal 2: Promote efforts to upgrade, enhance and maintain existing housing stock.
Objectives:
1.Promote organization of neighborhood groups to organize residents, identify and address issues and
advocate for neighborhood preservation, enhancement and assistance.
2.Partner with agencies and community groups to institute quality of life improvements
at distressed housing sites and encourage reinvestment in older properties to maintain
their appearance, functionality and value.
3.Update ordinances to maintain housing functionality, livability and to address new technologies, market
trends and resident needs.
Housing 4-2
Goal 3: Accomplish adopted Livable Communities Goals for affordable housing.
Objectives:
1.Maintain strong partnerships with the Metropolitan Council and other agencies/programs to
provide affordable housing, support programs and services, and for assistance with the
available financing programs.
2.Encourage future affordable housing units (funded by other agencies) as part of mixed-use projects
and/or as a component of new owner-occupied multiple-family.
Goal 4: Maintain city-wide housing goal of 75 percent owner-occupied units and 25 percent rental units.
Objectives:
1.Work with lenders and social service agencies to provide financial literacy and special programs
to encourage and increase homeownership.
2.Concentrate housing redevelopment efforts toward providing life-cycle housing in Maplewood.
Existing Housing Stock
The overall condition of the City?s housing units is good, although there are small, isolated areas that have homes
with the potential to deteriorate. However, as the housing stock in Maplewood continues to age, steps need to be
taken to ensure high quality housing. To ensure this, the City adopted a housing maintenance code that enables
officials to require owners to maintain and make basic repairs to their structures. The City also has a ?Truth-in-
Housing? ordinance that is intended to help potential buyers make a more-informed buying decision.
Construction during the 2000s
A total of 913 housing units were built between 1998 and 2007 in Maplewood. As of April 2006, there were 14,643
housing units in Maplewood. Table 4.1 shows that single-family detached units represent about 61 percent of the
City?s housing units.
Table 4.1
Housing Units by Type, 2000
Number of Units Percent
Single-Family8,58961.3%
Multi-Family4,63333.1%
Manufactured Housing7835.6%
14,005100.0%
Total
Source: US Census
Multi-family housing consists of 33.1 percent of the City?s housing stock and manufactured housing consists of 5.6
percent.
Housing 4-3
Housing Types and Trends
Table 4.2 data reveals that nearly 58 percent of the City?s housing stock has been built since 1970.
Table 4.2
Age of Housing Stock, 2000
Number of
Units
Percent
Built 1999 to March 2000 3812.7%
Built 1995 to 1998 1,0007.1%
1,410
Built 1990 to 1994 10.1%
Built 1980 to 1989 2,56518.3%
Built 1970 to 1979 2,74119.6%
Built 1960 to 1969 1,64211.7%
Built 1950 to 1959 2,69019.2%
Built 1940 to 1949 7075.0%
Built 1939 or earlier 8696.2%
14,005
100.0%
Total:
Source: US Census
Maplewood has traditionally had a higher than average percentage of owner-occupied housing units. The ratio of
owner-occupied to rental housing rose slightly over the last decade. According to Table 4.3, more than three-fourths
of the housing stock is owner occupied and one-quarter are rental units.
Table 4.3
Owner and Renter Occupied Units
19902000
PercentPercent
Owner
69% 76%
occupied
Renter
31% 24%
occupied
Source: US Census
There is a diversity of styles and price ranges in the homes in Maplewood. Older homes on smaller lots provide
opportunities for first-time buyers in the Western Hills, Parkside and Gladstone neighborhoods. Opportunities for
low- and moderate- income households are available in manufactured home parks and in a variety of types and
locations of multiple dwellings. The move-up housing market is strong with these choices available throughout the
City. Buyers can find more expensive housing in the Hillside, Vista Hills, Highwood and Kohlman Lake
neighborhoods.
Housing 4-4
According to Table 4.3, the median value of a home is roughly $14,000 lower than the rest of the Twin Cities.
Table 4.3
Median Home Value, 2000
Median value
$ 125,900
Maplewood
$ 139,200
Twin Cities
Source: US Census
Table 4.4 shows that median rent is slightly higher in Maplewood than the rest of the Twin Cities.
Table 4.4
Median Rent, 2000
Median Rent
$ 688
Maplewood
$ 641
Twin Cities
Source: US Census
Housing Assistance
Maplewood participates in several programs that assist households in the City. The Metropolitan Housing and
Redevelopment Authority manage the Rehabilitation Loan Program, the Section 8 and Section 236 Rental
Assistance Programs. In addition to the individual system of vouchers, there are four complexes providing
subsidized housing for families and the elderly: Maple Ponds, 1816 and 1854 Beebe Road; Maplewood Gardens,
410 South McKnight Road; Maple Knolls, 1880 Mesabi Road; and Concordia Arms, 2030 Lydia Avenue.
Maplewood participates in several loan programs funded by the Minnesota Housing Finance Agency and managed
by local lenders. These include the Great Minnesota Fix-Up Fund, the Home Energy Loan Program, the MHFA
Single-Family Mortgage Loan Program, the Home Ownership Assistance Fund, the Purchase Plus Program and the
Urban Indian Housing Program.
Development Ordinances
The Maplewood Zoning Ordinance includes seven districts which permit single-family detached housing. The
minimum lot areas range from 7,500 to 40,000 square feet. The R-2 district also allows two-family dwellings, and the
R-3 district permits multi-family developments ranging upwards from four units per acre. It should be noted that when
this Comprehensive Plan is adopted work will begin on updating the City?s residential Zoning Ordinances.
The City has also adopted many ordinances that affect development and housing. These include a Shoreland
Overlay District to protect shoreland areas, an Environmental Protection Ordinance to protect areas of significant
natural features (including wetlands and large trees), a Pipeline Setback Ordinance to protect buildings from pipeline
leaks, and a Housing Maintenance Code. The City also has a ?truth-in-housing? ordinance. Maplewood intends this
ordinance to help purchasers make an informed buying decision. The ordinance also may promote privately
negotiated housing repairs at the time of sale. The City requires sellers to have a housing disclosure report that
discloses information about the condition of the property, and highlight any potential repair needs or housing code
deficiencies.
Housing 4-5
Housing Needs and Trends
The demographic information contained in this chapter and Chapter 2 of the Comprehensive Plan suggests that
major changes in the composition of the populations will affect the City of Maplewood over the next 20 years. The
large group of baby boomers, born between 1946 and 1965, sharply boosted housing production during the 1970s
and 1980s as they formed new households. A generation has followed the baby boomers that are smaller in
numbers. As these two groups move through their life-cycles, they will change the housing market. Some changes
include:
There may be less demand for rental housing as the typical renter age group moves into owner-
occupied structures. However, the elderly may be looking to move from owner-occupied units to rental
units ? offsetting the decline.
Household composition has shifted. The US Census Bureau estimates that, between 1985 and 2000,
69 percent of the growth in new households will be in nontraditional households. Almost 14 percent will
be in female, single-parent families whose median income is less than half the regional median. Of
these, more than 30 percent will be living in poverty. This may not only affect the housing market, but
may also place a greater strain in the public to provide more affordable housing options.
There may be less subsidized housing. The changing household structure is occurring when the future
of much of the region?s subsidized housing is unclear. During the 1990s, more than 5,000 contracts for
subsidized housing units between the federal government and investment housing owners expired.
The federal government did not replace many of these contracts.
Rehabilitation needs may increase. As the housing stock continues to age, residential properties will
need more repairs and maintenance.
The need for elderly housing is increasing and may increase sharply as the baby boomers age.
Livable Communities Act
On November 13, 1995 the Maplewood City Council adopted a resolution to participate in the Metropolitan Livable
Communities Act. This act requires the participating communities to adopt housing agreements and to set an action
plan for housing activities.
A major focus of the Livable Communities Act is to promote the development and preservation of affordable and life-
cycle housing throughout the metropolitan area. The Metropolitan Council has set the goal of an additional 333
affordable units in Maplewood by 2020.
Housing Affordability
Housing costs continue to rise throughout the region for a variety of reasons. These include increasing land and
construction costs, utilities and taxes, declines in government aid programs and, indirectly, land use regulations.
These cost increases greatly affect low- and moderate-incomes households. Changes in mortgage interest rates
also affect the affordability of housing.
Housing 4-6
Financing
The City, through its Housing and Redevelopment Authority (HRA), will explore all avenues for financing affordable
housing, including:
Use of tax-exempt and tax-increment financing
Programs; including grants, loans and federal tax credits, for housing assistance, development and
rehabilitation. The Minnesota Housing Finance Agency has the following programs:
Minnesota Mortgage Program
o
Homeownership Assistance Fund
o
Purchase Plus Program
o
Partnership for Affordable Housing
o
Entry Cost Homeownership Program (ECHO)
o
Low Income Housing Tax Credit Program
o
New Construction Tax Credit Mortgage/Builders Loans
o
Low and Moderate Income Rental Program
o
Deferred Loan Program
o
Revolving Loan Program
o
Great Minnesota Fix-Up Fund
o
Mortgage Revenue Bonds
o
Mortgage Credit Certificates
o
Programs available through the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. These
programs include:
Section 8 Rental Vouchers and Certificates
o
Home Investment Partnership Program
o
Section 202 ? Elderly
o
Section 811 ? Handicapped
o
Programs and funds available through the Metropolitan Housing and Redevelopment Authority and
through the Metropolitan Council?s Livable Communities Act.
Community Development Block Grants and other programs through Ramsey County.
Maplewood already participates in several of the above-listed programs, with other government agencies and with
developers.
Rental Assistance
The City, through the HRA, will continue to participate in rental assistance programs, including those available
through the Metropolitan HRA and the federal government.
Housing 4-7
Energy Efficiency
The City will promote energy efficient improvements in all types of housing units to help keep them affordable.
Maplewood will provide information and, when available, financial help for both owner-occupied and rental units.
Housing Diversity
Most of Maplewood?s housing is single-family homes. The Metropolitan Council has a goal calling for each
community to provide housing types other than single-family homes. The City will continue to work toward this goal
through its land use plan and zoning ordinances. The City will make efforts to provide for the housing and service
needs of the elderly and disabled. The City will also encourage development of housing and services which meet the
needs of nontraditional households.
Neighborhood Quality
It is important to assure that the efforts to provide life-cycle housing are accomplished so that it is compatible with the
character of existing neighborhoods and with respect to the environment. It is also important to prevent housing in
older neighborhoods from deteriorating. Much of this housing was built before Maplewood became a village, when
building codes were not in place. There are deteriorating housing units scattered throughout the City. In the future,
these units may become less attractive to home buyers, thereby depreciating housing vales.
To address these concerns, the City adopts the following policies:
1.Plan and design new housing to:
a.Protect existing housing, natural features, and neighborhood identity and quality.
b.Assure there are adequate utilities, community facilities and convenient shopping.
2.Maintain or strengthen the character or neighborhoods and assure that all housing units are safe, sanitary,
secure, and free from blight.
The City also adopts the following neighborhood quality policies:
1.The City will work to protect the integrity and long-term viability of residential neighborhoods and reduce
potential negative effects of commercial or industrial land uses through zoning, site plan review and code
enforcement.
2.Maplewood will require and enforce high design and maintenance standards for multi-family residential
development. Design standards will include provisions about building massing, architectural design, off-
street parking ratios and location, access, traffic impacts, landscaping, fencing or screening, and trash
handling.
3.The City will allow affordable housing in any location suitable for residential uses.
4.The City will assure that new development respects the natural environment to the maximum practical
extent.
Housing 4-8
5.Maplewood will continue to use its Shoreland, Floodplain and Environmental Protection Ordinances to
assure protection of lakes, streams, ponds, wetlands, steep slopes and woodlots.
6.The City will continue to encourage the maintenance of its housing through its housing maintenance codes.
The City?s truth-in-housing program also should encourage housing maintenance.
7.The City, through its HRA, will participate in programs to help property owners with home maintenance and
improvements through loans and, if available, grants.
Housing Action Plan
The next two pages lists activities that the City should undertake to carry out the Housing Plan.
Housing 4-9
Chapter 8 ? Transportation Draft ? 07/29/08
Introduction
The purpose of the Transportation Plan is to plan for adequate road, transit, pedestrian and bicycle facilities. The City
is planning these facilities to complement and support the other Comprehensive Plan elements. This is to ensure that
the transportation system works so that citizens may enjoy reasonable mobility, access, and safety. The plan also is
to ensure that the transportation system protects and enhances neighborhoods while being integral, but not intrusive
to residents. In addition, the transportation system should work for individuals so that various types of travel can
coexist and accommodate individual choices.
Transportation Issues
Maplewood's transportation system is well established. The City will, however, need to focus on several
transportation issues including the following:
What should the City do about continued traffic growth in Maplewood? The automobile is expected to stay
as the dominant mode of travel in Maplewood and in the region for the foreseeable future. Although recent
increases in gas prices and current economic trends have resulted in increases in transit ridership, an
increase in carpooling, and a decrease in the vehicle miles traveled. The experts do not know if this will be
a long term trend although with increases in research in alternative fuels and hybrid vehicles the single
occupancy vehicle may remain dominant even with high gas prices. In this region, continued support of
auto-dependent development patterns further strengthens the cars dominance as the mode of choice. This
growth in car use is driven by several factors including:
-More households have more than one wage earner
-More households are using larger numbers of vehicles
-Vehicle occupancy is low
As a result, traffic volumes have increased and now exceed the intended street capacity in parts of the City,
especially near Maplewood Mall. While the City is continuing to address the congestion issues it has control
over, the City of Maplewood, like other cities, has a limited ability to change regional transportation patterns
and car use.
Reducing traffic congestion near Maplewood Mall. Growth in the area of the Mall along with development
west of the Mall site continues to generate increased vehicle traffic. Both the arterial and the collector
streets in the area are operating at high levels of congestion which continued growth will only make worse.
A comprehensive traffic study has been completed to analyze traffic operations and congestion in the area
surrounding the Maplewood Mall (URS, November 2001). The traffic study included the identification of
numerous transportation improvements that are necessary to reduce congestion in this area of the City.
The City is currently in the process of implementing these improvements, and many have already been
completed.
What are the implications of LRT service or the addition of a busway or passenger rail service in
Maplewood? How can the City maximize the potential for economic development while also minimizing
impacts on residential areas? How should LRT or passenger rail service be extended to the Maplewood
Mall? How can the number of at-grade crossings with the rail corridor be minimized?
Transportation1
How much the City should be involved with Mn/DOT in the development of plans for improving or expanding
the highways and freeways in Maplewood? Many of the existing highways and freeways in and near the City
have capacity deficiencies as identified by Mn/DOT in their current Transportation System Plan. As traffic
volumes continue to increase, deficiencies in traffic capacity on the regional road system, including the
Maplewood area, will get worse.
As transportation system needs continue to grow, how can the City pay for the necessary improvements
when City budgets limit capital solutions? The City (and other agencies) cannot continue to address traffic
congestion and access problems by simply increasing the physical capacity of the transportation system.
The financial and political costs are too high and the potential for community disruption is too great.
What should be the City's policies about the development of sidewalks and trails? If such facilities are to be
developed, where should they be located? How can the City's plans and policies better serve bicycles and
pedestrians? How should the Parks and Recreation Department be involved with the planning, installation
and maintenance of trails and sidewalks?
Major Street System
illustrates the existing and planned system of major roads and their functional classification.
Figure 8.1
Street Classification System
Maplewood adopted its street classification system from the Twin Cities Metropolitan Council's "Transportation
Development Guide/Policy Plan." The roadway functional classifications are described as follows:
- roadways designed to carry the highest volume of traffic (15,000+ ADT), allow the
Principal Arterials
highest speeds (40-55 mph), handle the longest trips and provide subregional, regional, and intercommunity
access. These roadways do not provide direct access to abutting properties. The Minnesota Department of
Transportation (Mn/DOT) and Ramsey County set the spacing standards for principal arterials. This
roadway type connects with other principal arterials, minor arterial, and collector streets.
- roadways that connect subregions. These are roads which are the closest routes running
Minor Arterials
parallel to the principal arterial system. Minor arterials supplement and provide relief for traffic to the
principal arterial system. These roadways also may provide direct access to abutting properties as
determined in the Maplewood City Code, Chapter 32, Article IV, Driveways. Spacing of minor arterials is
determined by Mn/DOT and Ramsey County standards, with site specific exceptions. This roadway type
serves inter- and intra-community needs for trips, carries high traffic volumes (5,000+ ADT), and allows
moderate-to-high travel speeds (35-45 mph). These roads also serve medium to long distance suburb to
suburb trips, connect major trip generators, funnel traffic between collectors and restricted access arterials,
and contain at least two drive lanes in each direction.
- roadways designed to carry traffic between the arterial system and the local roadway
Collector Streets
system. These convey intra-community traffic between neighborhoods, business centers, industries, parks
and the like, and provide direct access to abutting properties. This type of roadway carries moderate traffic
volumes (1,000 -15,000 ADT), allows moderate-to-high speeds (30-40 mph), satisfies local trip needs (one
to four miles) and connects local streets with arterials. Spacing of these roads typically places them about
one-half mile apart.
- roadways primarily designed to serve short trips at low speeds. Local streets connect
Local Streets
blocks, provide direct access to properties and convey traffic to and from higher level roadways. This type of
Transportation2
roadway carries the lowest traffic volumes (generally less than 1,000 ADT), allows low speeds (maximum 30
mph) and the horizontal curves need not accommodate 30 mph travel speeds. Spacing of local streets is
one block or as needed.
illustrates the typical street sections for a variety of road types. These street sections may vary based on
Figure 8.2
the particular constraints of a project. The various watershed districts in the City of Maplewood have stringent
stormwater capture and treatment requirements which cause significant impacts on the storm water treatment
methods that are required on most projects within the City. Reducing the area of impervious surfaces, including
roadways, is one method that will be used by the City, particularly in residential areas, to reduce the impacts and
costs of the required stormwater treatment facilities (NURP ponds, stormwater detentions ponds, etc.). Street
sections are considered on an individual basis to determine if additional width is justified to accommodate
unrestricted parking or bike lanes during the planning of each project.
Access Management is the practice of controlling the spacing and design of roadway intersections for the purpose of
maintaining the functionality of a given roadway. Mn/DOT and counties control the number and frequency of access
points that are added to roadways under their jurisdiction. Higher functional class roadways will typically have
greater spacing between access points and the turning movements allowed at the access points may be restricted to
help maintain a higher roadway speed and improve safety. Local roadways will have more densely spaced access
points in order to improve mobility.
Mn/DOT access management policy is documented in the. This manual
Mn/DOT Access Management Manual
provides recommended intersection spacing and vehicular movements allowed for roadway intersections and private
drives based on each roadways assigned category and subcategory. Ramsey County?s Public Works Department
provides input on access management requirements during the planning process. The City of Maplewood will work
with the appropriate agencies to determine the required access requirements during the planning and design phases
of a City led project.
illustrates the number of vehicle travel lanes on the arterials streets and roads in Maplewood.
Figure 8.3
Traffic Analysis Zones
The Metropolitan Council has divided Maplewood into 28 traffic analysis zones (TAZs). illustrates the
Figure 8.4
TAZs in Maplewood. These zones, corresponding to data collected via census, are used to forecast population,
households, and employment demographics throughout the metropolitan area. Actual 2000 census data along with
forecasts for each TAZ in Maplewood for the years 2010, 2020, and 2030 are included in.
Table 8.1
2006 Average Daily Traffic (ADT) data on key roads in the City of Maplewood (obtained from Mn/DOT) and the
projected 2030 ADT for the same road segments are detailed in. 2030 ADT forecasts were created using
Figure 8.5
a trend analysis of Mn/DOT ADT data from 1992-2006 since Maplewood is a developed community.
Transportation Plan Goals
A major goal of the City of Maplewood is having safe, enjoyable neighborhoods. The Comprehensive Plan shows 13
neighborhood areas within the City, where neighborhood integrity is respected and people feel secure and satisfied
where they live, work, shop and play.
A second major goal for the City of Maplewood is providing residents with reasonable mobility. The City's residents
often depend on and enjoy relatively relaxed pace and ease of travel. This plan recognizes the desire and need for
Transportation3
good mobility in every aspect of their lives. A major part of meeting this goal means that the City must provide good
access between businesses and their customers, materials and workers.
Maplewood's transportation system must fit into the county and regional system. The plan envisions a City that has
its own unique identity, but also contributes to, and benefits from, the strength of the whole region.
Street System Policies
The City will continue to design and maintain its roads and review site plans according to the functional classification
system of roads illustrated by, and the design standards illustrated in. These standards will
Figure 8.1Figure 8.2
ensure that streets serve Maplewood's needs and enhance regional efforts to reduce traffic congestion.
The City will do what it can to help implement improvements to the metropolitan highway system planned through
2030, although locations for those improvements will frequently occur on state or county rights-of-way.
Maplewood should continue to participate in county and regional planning efforts to improve the City's connection
with the region?s street and road system. Below are two planning efforts that are currently underway that City staff is
involved with at this time:
Preliminary meetings regarding the addition of transit on I-94 and TH 36. This planning effort is being lead
by Washington County.
The TH 36 and TH 49 Interchange project is being lead by Ramsey County.
Travel Demand Management Policies
Travel Demand Management (TDM) is designed to increase the efficiency and utilization of the existing roadway
system by leveling peak demand periods using number of management strategies. The goal is to increase the
number of people who share rides, utilize transit and reduce single occupancy vehicle trips during peak rush hours.
TDM combined with thorough transit planning has proven to be a more cost effective way to address transportation
growth than by simply building more highway lanes. The City will encourage companies to implement a TDM Plan
when justified.
The 3M Company, Maplewood's major employer with over 7,000 employees, is also one of the region?s leaders in
developing ridesharing programs. The company maintains 24 employee-operated vans providing service to 142
employees. 3M had been supporting ridesharing for over 25 years and its Rideshare Services Department also
coordinates commuter van services for other 3M facilities across the United States.
Maplewood?s location and strong mixture of housing and commercial areas may help to reduce travel on the
metropolitan highway system by allowing people to live near their place of work. The Land Use Plan supports the
growing number of people who want to live in an ?inner ring? suburb like Maplewood as a way to minimize travel
times to work, shopping and recreation.
The City continues to guide land use development in ways that reduce vehicle trips and promote the use of
alternative modes of travel. The City should work with other agencies to promote an infrastructure and system
management that supports transit, carpooling, bicycling and walking as viable mode options in the full transportation
spectrum.
The City urges the Minnesota Department of Transportation and the Metropolitan Council to continue educational
programs which encourage ride sharing, staggered work hours and off-peak travel. Such campaigns are most
effectively mounted at the regional level.
Transportation4
Transit Policies
Effective use of transit can make a significant difference in the level of congestion in certain corridors. Maplewood is
currently served by 14 Metro Transit regular bus routes. A general purpose dial-a-ride service called Northeast
Suburban Transit (NEST) is available to residents of Maplewood. First Transit is the service provider that provides
ADA paratransit services for the Metro Mobility program within the City.
shows the existing transit routes, existing transit facilities, and planned transit corridors. Maplewood now
Figure 8.6
has four park-and-ride lots with a total capacity of over 800 parking spaces. City residents and businesses
participate in the Metro Commuter Services programs.
The City of Maplewood is located primarily within the Market II Transit Service Area. This area is characterized by a
moderate concentration of jobs, housing, and activities. This area is generally serviced by regular-route locals and
all-day expresses depending on land use patterns, and experiences service frequencies of 15-30 minutes or 30-60
minutes 7 days per week. Some sections of the City south of I-94 and west of TH 61 are classified as being within
the Market III Transit Service Area. This area is characterized by a lower concentration of jobs, housing, and
activities. Service is typically provided for peak-only express routes, midday circulators, and small vehicle dial-a-ride.
Service for this area will generally be limited to 1-2 hour midday frequencies for 10-14 hours per day on weekdays
and will have limited service on weekends. The City will work with the regional transit agencies to develop future
transit services consistent with the City?s market areas.
Maplewood will work with regional transit agencies to help secure transit service that better serves the needs of the
residents of the City.
The City supports the expansion of the Metro Transit Rideshare carpool/vanpool rider matching and supports Metro
Transit's Guaranteed Ride Home Program for transit riders.
Maplewood supports Metro Transit's construction of new or improved bus stops and shelters.
The City supports efforts by Metro Transit to focus service on the Maplewood Mall transit hub, improve off-peak
service and improve express service to St. Paul and Minneapolis.
Maplewood supports efforts by other agencies to improve transit service in the City by the addition of transitways on
the arterial roadways. When transitways are added to arterials, the City will encourage higher-density economic
development and redevelopment near such corridors.
The City will review major new developments for inclusion of shelters and pull-outs, if such sites are along Metro
Transit bus routes.
The City should coordinate its sidewalk and trails plan to encourage walking, biking, and bus usage.
Light Rail Transit/Busway
The Ramsey County Regional Railroad Authority (RCRRA) has identified the Rush Line Corridor as being a
candidate for transit. The RCRRA is currently completing an Alternatives Analysis Study for the Rush Line that
studying the feasibility of commuter rail, light rail, and BRT (bus rapid transit) on the Vento Trail alignment, 35E, or
TH 61. At this point the RCRRA is anticipating that the Vento Trail Corridor will be some type of transit corridor. This
Alternatives Analysis Study will be completed in 2009 and construction of the Rush Line is included in the long range
plan which is currently planned to be completed by 2030.
The City will continue to actively participate in the planning for light rail transit and bus systems in the City.
Maplewood will work closely with RCRRA officials in the siting and design of potential LRT or busway station
Transportation5
locations, including park-and-ride facilities. These stations should maximize access for residents and complement the
City's land use plan. The RCRRA should provide a transit link to the medical campus (Saint John's Hospital area)
and to Maplewood Mall. The RCRRA should place a high priority on providing as many grade separated roadway
crossings as possible along LRT and busway lines.
Safety
The 2006 crash toolkit was obtained from Mn/DOT that includes accident data summarized for all intersections on the
state highway system. The intersection in Maplewood that are on the top 1000 cost ratings are summarized below:
IntersectionCost RankRemarks
Highway 61 & Beam Avenue 93Reconstructed in 2007 ? Monitor Crash Data
Stillwater Road & McKnight 133Cooperative agreement funding was not approved in 2006
Road & Minnehaha Avenue
Highway 36 & English Street 148Intersection to be reconstructed
Stillwater Avenue & Stillwater Road 511
& Lakewood Drive
Highway 61 & Larpenteur Avenue 752
Highway 36 & Hazelwood Avenue 770Access to be removed
Highway 61 & County Road C 870
Several of the identified intersection have or are programmed to be modified. The City should continue to identify
where opportunities for improvements at these locations can be implemented that will improve the safety at these
intersections.
Street Capacity Management Policies
Maplewood should use traffic controls, enforcement, design practices and land use policies to maintain the current
function of streets as designated in this plan. Specifically, the City should ensure that arterials are used for longest
trips, collectors for intermediate and local trips and local streets for local access.
The City should ensure that traffic management policies discourage increased volumes and speeds and protect
pedestrians and neighborhoods.
The City will follow Urban State Aid design standards for appropriate parts of the system to better accommodate
pedestrians and to help calm traffic.
The City will work with county, state and federal agencies to implement capital improvements which mitigate traffic
congestion where operational capacity improvement cannot adequately address the needs.
Maplewood should design streetscapes and operations in ways that alleviate the negative impact of major streets on
their surroundings and to protect and improve pedestrian safety.
The City should continue to work closely with Ramsey County and Mn/DOT to ensure compatibility with county, state
and federal standards.
Transportation6
Neighborhood Protection and Enhancement Policies
The City should use a neighborhood traffic management process to address neighborhood requests to calm or divert
traffic while maintaining access. The City should work with neighborhoods to promote this process and commit City
staff to work closely with the neighborhood during any project design.
Maplewood should explore a variety of traffic-calming street design options with interested neighborhoods when local
street construction or reconstruction is being planned. Realizing that a variety of traffic calming strategies exist and
each must be tailored to individual project needs, the City supports implementation of traffic calming as a principal
but will determine the specifics on a case by case basis.
Maplewood supports the consideration of roundabouts as an alternative to traditional intersection control methods
such as the all-way stopped control or signalized intersection. A roundabout can significantly improve the safety of an
intersection because there are less conflict points when compared to a traditional full-movement intersection and
lower travel speeds. Roundabouts typically have less maintenance when compared to a traffic signal but the right-of-
way requirements can be significant. Roundabout installations have also been used as a form of traffic calming.
Mn/DOT now requires that an Intersection Control Evaluation (ICE) be completed on the Trunk Highway System
instead of a Signal Justification Report (SJR) which requires that a roundabout be considered as a design alternative.
Ramsey County and Mn/DOT State Aid do not require ICE reports at this point although where a roundabout has
merit an ICE report should be considered by the City.
The City should continue its current policy concerning the installation of neighborhood stop signs on local streets.
This policy requires all neighborhood stop sign installations and removals to be supported by a neighborhood petition
and approved by City Council.
Maplewood supports the use of smaller buses for neighborhood circulators as part of the redesign of the transit
system.
The City should try to limit the negative impacts on residential properties caused by parking spillovers from
commercial areas by regulating land uses.
Maplewood staff shall work with developers to plan access points and parking facilities for commercial uses when
near residential land uses.
The City should incorporate streetscape guidelines that emphasize the enhancement of the neighborhood
environment. Such improvements shall maintain and improve pedestrian quality and the feeling of personal safety
among users.
Maplewood should require parking lots to have strong landscaped edges and encourage the use of pervious surfaces
and landscaping in parking lots. The City should encourage or require improvements in existing parking lots and in
newly constructed parking lots.
The City should continue its residential street reconstruction program, setting construction priorities based on cost
effectiveness, neighborhood support, community development goals and public safety goals.
The City should use its land use and regulatory powers to reinforce or create major transit destinations and transfer
station locations. If transitways (busways or LRT) are built, the City should work with planning and implementing
agencies to ensure they are designed to support pedestrian activity by including features such as public art,
wayfinding signing, architectural features, and pedestrian scale lighting. These facilities should be designed so that
they blend in with the character of surrounding neighborhoods.
Transportation7
The City and other agencies should continue the practice of using neighborhood or community-inclusive design
processes for transportation projects.
Bicyclist, Pedestrian, and Accessibility Policies
A coordinated sidewalk and trails system plan is outlined in the Parks and Recreation part of this plan.
Figure 8.7
illustrates the existing sidewalks and trails.
Maplewood should consider both on and off-road trail options when designing road improvement and construction
projects.
The City will consider the following goals when designing sidewalks and trails:
Emphasize harmony with the environment.
Protect users from vehicular traffic.
Create a network of relatively uninterrupted trails.
Tie parks together into a comprehensive park and trail system.
Tie the City trail system with those of adjacent cities and counties.
Are coordinated with school district busing policies.
Provide safe and convenient access to parks, community facilities, work, shopping and schools.
Encourage transit usage.
Support county and regional trail systems.
Tie neighborhoods together.
The current policy of the City is to install sidewalks or trails on both sides of arterials and on one side of collectors.
Trails can be substituted for sidewalks. Maplewood should install new sidewalks or trails where pedestrian safety is
at risk and where they would provide access to popular pedestrian destinations.
The City should use its development policies and design standards to improve pedestrian facilities in Maplewood.
The City should not remove sidewalks unless there is a compelling reason to do so.
The City should work with other agencies to ensure that the requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act
(ADA) are met with transportation facilities and in new construction or development sites.
The City should identify potential easements during the development/redevelopment process when land acquisition is
not possible.
The trail system will be available to promote and encourage residents to be active through the development of an
efficient and accessible trail system.
Maplewood supports transit service that is accessible, convenient and affordable for persons with disabilities, as well
as being cost-effective for the system.
Transportation Action Plan
identifies significant roadway projects that are anticipated by 2030. The majority of these projects are
Figure 8.8
located on Mn/DOT or county roadways. lists activities that Maplewood should undertake in the coming
Table 8.2
Transportation8
years to implement the Transportation Plan. This table also shows the responsibility, timing, funding and coordination
for each activity. The City will periodically review and update this table.
In addition to City and county projects, Mn/DOT is planning several large projects near and through Maplewood for
the years 2001-2030. A summary of the projects identified in Figure 8.8 is included below:
A.Improvements to the I-94 interchanges at Century Avenue and McKnight Road including revised access to
3M. Since much of the land to the south is a regional park and 3M has developed the land to the north,
these changes should not affect the land use plan. The City will work with the Mn/DOT and 3M in the
planning of these changes to coordinate any necessary City transportation changes. Mn/DOT committed to
improve both interchanges by 2018 as a condition of municipal consent given by the City as a part of prior
improvements by Mn/DOT in this area. At this point no funding has been identified to construct these
interchanges by 2030 although the City should continue to work with Mn/DOT to make sure these
improvements move forward.
B.The improvement and expansion of Highway 36 from I-35W in Roseville to I-694 in Oakdale. This project
could include adding a HOV or a transitway lane, metered ramps and HOV by-pass lanes at ramp meter
locations. This work will eliminate signalized intersections and close several accesses to Highway 36. This
will be a joint effort between Maplewood and the Cities of Roseville, Little Canada, North St. Paul, and
Oakdale.
C.Complete a study of alternatives to improve safety around the 3M site on Century Ave between I-94 and
Conway Avenue in partnership with Mn/DOT and Oakdale.
D.The expansion of I-35E from I-94 in downtown Saint Paul to I-694 in Little Canada. This project may include
HOV lanes, a thru-Iane for transit service or be designed to accommodate a LRT line in the future. Due to
FHWA interchange spacing standards this project may result in the removal of the I-35E Interchange at
Roselawn Avenue. The City will stay involved in the planning process to help ensure the appropriate
mitigation measures to City roadways are made to accommodate the proposed I-35E changes that impact
the local roadway system.
E.Complete a transportation plan and program improvements for White Bear Avenue between Larpenteur
Avenue and Radatz Avenue. This will require close coordination with Ramsey County since White Bear
Avenue is under the jurisdiction of the county.
F.Improvements to I-694 from I-35E in Little Canada to Highway 36 in Oakdale. Such improvements would
optimize safety and add capacity to the highway where there are existing bottlenecks. Examples of possible
improvements include interchange reconstruction, bridge replacement, the addition of HOV or transitway
lanes and safety management improvements. Previous plans had considered an additional interchange at I-
694 and McKnight Road. Due to access spacing requirements this interchange will no longer be pursued
which puts additional importance on the high capacity improvements being planned at the I-694 and White
Bear Avenue interchange. The White Bear Avenue interchange improvements will require coordination with
Mn/DOT, Ramsey County, and City of White Bear.
G.Continued implementation of the Maplewood Mall Area Transportation Improvements (MMATI) Program.
This comprehensive transportation improvements package addresses key transportation infrastructure
needs surrounding the Maplewood Mall area and supports redevelopment of large parcels located west of
the Mall area. The key elements of this program that remain include:
Reconstruction of the White Bear Avenue/I-694 interchange.
Transportation9
Reconstruction and widening of White Bear Avenue between Radatz Avenue and County Road D to a
6-lane roadway.
Reconstruction of County Road D between Kennard Street and White Bear Avenue.
Other signal and access management improvements in the area to increase safety and better
manage access in this high traffic volume area.
Mn/DOT is planning on turning back TH 61 to Ramsey County. A turn back project will occur prior to the
H.
maintaining agencies changing that should result in improvements along the entire length of TH 61 within
the City. The City will stay involved in planning efforts to make sure that the impacts of proposed changes
are properly mitigated.
I.Study the feasibility of a roadway connection north of Highway 36 between Hazelwood Street and Gervais
Avenue. This will connect English Street to Hazelwood Street and County Road C and provide an additional
connection across Highway 36 for the traveling public and fire department access. This access is important
based on the proposed modifications to Highway 36 between Highway 61 and White Bear Avenue where
access is being modified. As an alternative to the proposed connection an overpass at TH 36 and
Hazelwood Street will be considered by the City.
J.Study the feasibility of extending Century Avenue to Bailey Road. The need for this roadway would likely be
driven by anticipated development in the area that is allowed by the land use plan.
K.Study the feasibility of a roadway connection from Hazelwood Street to County Road D. This roadway
would provide access between Hazelwood Street and TH 61.
L.Mn/DOT is working on planning efforts for improvements to Stillwater Road (TH 5). No funding has been
dedicated at this time and the planning is preliminary in nature. At this point improvements being considered
are pedestrian facilities on the south side of the roadway and drainage improvements. This project will be a
turn back project to Ramsey County and both the City and County have participated in recent planning
meetings.
M.Ramsey County is involved with studying interchange improvements at I-694 and TH 49. This interchange
is located just outside of the City of Maplewood but this interchange impact traffic operations on TH 49
within the City of Maplewood and many that travel to and from the City.
Transportation10
City of Maplewood
Table 8.2
Transportation Action Plan
Comprehensive Transportation Plan - July 29 2008
ActionsResponsibilityTimingFundingCoordination With
Maintain local streetsEngineerOngoingCityUtility Projects
Minimize excessive non-local traffic
Engineer
on residential streetsOngoingCityLand Use Plan
Director of CD
Review major site plans to
Planning Comm
encourage transit useOngoing CitySite Plan Review
Director of CD
Planning Comm
Continue mixture of land usesOngoingCityLand Use Plan
Director of CD
Planning Comm
City Council
Promote use of transitOngoingNoneMetro Transit
Director of CD
Planning Comm
City Council
Participate in LRT/Busway planningOngoingNoneRCRRA
Director of CD
Promote new public and private bus
Engineer
sheltersOngoingNoneMetro Transit
Director of CD
Promote improved bus and transit
Planning Comm
serviceOngoingNoneMetro Transit
City Council
Provide sidewalks and trails along
arterials and collector streetsEngineerOngoingCitySite Plan Review
Planning Comm
Coordinate sidewalks and trails with
Engineer
schools, parks, transit, county and
Director of CD
regional plansOngoingCitySite Plan Review
Parks & Rec
Implement traffic calming measures
Engineer Site Plan Review
as appropriate in street
Director of CDLand Use Plan
reconstruction program and new
Utility Projects
development
OngoingCity
Abbreviations
Comm - Commission
CD - Community Development
REC - Recreation
RCRRA - Ramsey County Regional Railroad Authority
Chapter 9 ? Historical Resources
Introduction
Maplewood was incorporated in 1957. Before that, it was the Township of New Canada, which was founded 99
years earlier in 1858 when the Minnesota Territory became a state. Historical Resources are defined as properties
and structures of historical significance and importance as well as archeological sites and elements of cultural and
traditional importance. These resources contribute to the City by providing information about its past. They provide
evidence of the way Maplewood was settled and people?s contributions made to our society. They also provide
insight into the values that formed Maplewood.
Preserving historic sites and resources benefits the City, both economically and socially. Historic preservation goes
beyond the primary concern of understanding the significance of historic and cultural resources. It also focuses on
integrating historic preservation into the broader planning and decision-making arena, so it can be relevant to social
and economic concerns.
The Maplewood Comprehensive Plan will, among other things:
Guide future growth and development in an orderly manner.
Define the proper functional relationships between different types of land uses.
Help to coordinate public and private sector decisions.
Establish a framework to guide and involve citizen participation in City government.
Provide for a sense of community and neighborhood identity.
These goals can be supported by an effective Historical Resources Plan. The plan can also be supported by citizens
and decision-makers who use the guidance of this chapter to preserve historic, cultural, and archeological resources
in Maplewood.
Purpose
This Historical Resources Plan supports and interrelates with all elements, goals, and objectives of the
comprehensive plan. The purpose of the Historical Resources Plan is to:
Guide the City in a comprehensive program of historic preservation and historic resource management.
Describe the existing historic resources and historic preservation activities in Maplewood.
Evaluate the historic preservation and historic resources needs of Maplewood?s residents, as may be
determined by the Historical Preservation Commission, and to set standards for measuring the meeting
of those needs.
Promote the use and conservation of historic properties in Maplewood for the education, inspiration,
pleasure, and enrichment of area citizens.
Plan for adequate support and understanding of the historic resources in Maplewood.
Designate the goals, objectives and actions that Maplewood will use to help preserve the historic
resources in the city.
Historical Resources 9-1
Discussion, Challenges and Issues
Maplewood began to be settled by European descents more than 100 years ago. The City is interested in identifying
its historic resources. The Historic Preservation Commission will be challenged in this task because of:
The aging of our citizens who have knowledge of historic places.
The limits in public funding to support historic preservation programs.
The development or redevelopment of sites that might have historic resources.
The current lack of a program which encourages historical interest and private owner acceptance of
properties that have historic resources.
There are opportunities available, however. Maplewood could build on these opportunities to develop a program to
help preserve the City?s heritage. These opportunities include:
Completing an inventory of historic resources in Maplewood and setting priorities of importance.
Working with knowledgeable preservation-oriented organizations. Working with county, state, and
federal agencies that have knowledge of historic resources and programs.
The Metropolitan Council?s ?Local Planning Handbook? has several suggested guidelines for an historic preservation
plan. These include standards for establishing a Heritage Preservation Commission and practices to follow. The
Handbook also recommends following the Secretary of Interior?s Standards and Guidelines for Archeology and
Historic Preservation which include standards for preservation planning and guidelines and activities for a
preservation-planning program.
Standards for Preservation Planning
Historic Contexts
o
1.Decisions about historic properties are most reliably made when the relationship of
individual properties to other similar properties is understood. Information about historic
properties which represent aspects of history, architecture, archeology, engineering, and
culture must be collected and organized to define these relationships. This organizational
framework is called a ?? The historic context organizes information
historic context.
based on a cultural theme and its geographical and chronological limits. Contexts
describe the significant broad patterns of development in an area that may be represented
by historic properties. The development of historic contexts is the foundation for decisions
about identification, evaluation, registration, and treatment of historic properties.
2.Develop goals, objectives, and priorities for the identification, registration, and treatment
of historic properties. This task should be pursued by the City, the Historical Preservation
Commission, and the Maplewood Area Historical Society after the City Council adopts this
plan.
Historical Resources 9-2
Guidelines and Activities for a Preservation Planning Program
These guidelines are to include a development of Historic Contexts. A comprehensive summary of
o
Maplewood?s history can be created by developing a set of historic contexts that will include all
significant historic and cultural properties and sites in the City. Maplewood should coordinate any
efforts with the State Historic Preservation Office since it generally has the most complete
information and is usually in the best position to advise and assist the City in matters of historical
importance.
Once the City and the Historical Preservation Commission or the Maplewood Area Historical
o
Society has finished the inventory of Heritage Resources, they should be organized into historic
contexts. This organization should be based on a cultural theme, geography and chronology.
The designation of Maplewood Heritage Landmarks should be given to those historically or
o
culturally significant objects, structure, buildings, sites and districts in the City. To be designated a
heritage landmark; a property must meet specific criteria for determining historical significance.
Besides local registration, certain properties may qualify for nomination to the National Register of
Historic Places. Properties on the National Register are recognized for their historical significance.
The creation of a register for significant historical properties is a critical step in planning historic
preservation. Conflicts between Maplewood?s requirements and standards for historic preservation
and those of the state or federal government shall be decided by the City Council.
Maplewood is eligible to apply to the State Historical Preservation Office to be a Certified Local
o
Government (CLG). After joining, Maplewood would be able to participate in the CLG preservation
partnership that the National Historic Preservation Act established. Federal funding is available
through a grants-in-aid-program to finance activities such as the local inventory of historic
resources, historic preservation planning and education.
Historical Resources 9-3
Historic Preservation Goals
1.Support the protection of the City?s heritage by preserving, protecting, conserving, and wisely using the
significant historical, cultural, architectural, or archeological objects, structures, buildings, sites,
resources and districts in the City.
2.Encourage community identity and civic pride by preserving and protecting historic properties,
structures, sites and resources in Maplewood.
3.Develop a historic preservation program and will integrate the program with other planning programs in
the City.
4.Establish a comprehensive framework for all decisions and actions related to historic preservation.
5.Encourage broad citizen participation in historic preservation, in order to obtain the knowledge, insights,
and support of City residents.
Historic Preservation Objectives
1.The Historical Preservation Commission will advise, assist and make recommendations to the City Council,
about historic preservation and resource matters.
2.Maplewood will implement the historic preservation goals and objectives by linking and integrating with other
City programs and activities. This includes, but is not limited to, planning, zoning, code enforcement,
housing, economic development and public works as appropriate.
3.Maplewood will work with county, state and federal agencies and other organizations, including the State
Historic Preservation Office of the Minnesota Historical Society.
4.Maplewood will work with the Historical Preservation Commission to identity, document, and evaluate the
historical significance of objects, structures, buildings, sites and resources.
5.Maplewood will protect, preserve, and enhance significant heritage resources in the City by designating
them as Maplewood Heritage Landmarks. The City will also nominate appropriate sites to the National
Register of Historic Places.
6.Maplewood will have the Historical Preservation Commission, with assistance from City Staff, prepare and
maintain the Maplewood Heritage Resources Inventory.
7.In cooperation with City Staff and the Maplewood Planning Commission, the Historical Preservation
Commission may comment on all development proposals that would affect properties on the historic
properties list.
8.Maplewood may issue permits or approve development plans that include conditions for historic
preservation, based upon the recommendations of the Historical Preservation Commission.
9.Maplewood supports research, community awareness and public education on the value and importance of
preservation, protection, and the use of heritage resources in the City.
10.Maplewood encourages the establishment of an accessible location where historic documents and artifacts
can be stored and protected.
Historical Resources 9-4
11.Maplewood supports the use of all financial sources and opportunities to support further historic
preservation efforts.
12.Maplewood supports the incorporation of local history into present development by using historic names for
streets, parks and geographical features.
Historic Preservation Action Plan
The following is a list of activities that the City should follow in the coming years to carry out the goals and objectives
of the Historic Resources Plan. The City will periodically review and update this list.
1.Adopt and implement a historic resources management plan. (To be done by the City.)
2.Advise, assist, and make recommendations about historic preservation and resources issues. (To be done
by the Historical Preservation Commission)
3.Identify, document, evaluate and maintain an inventory of historically significant objects, structures,
buildings, sites, resources and districts in Maplewood. (To be done by the Historical Preservation
Commission.)
4.Complete a preservation planning report before the City Council designates a property as a Maplewood
Heritage Landmark. (To be done by the Historical Preservation Commission.)
5.Issue a finding of significance for individual objects, structures, buildings, sites, resources and districts to
determine whether they are eligible for designation as Maplewood Heritage Landmarks. (To be done by the
Historical Preservation Commission.)
6.Designate significant historic or cultural properties or resources as Maplewood Heritage Landmarks and
nominate appropriate properties or resources for listing on the National Register of Historic Places. (To be
done by the City and the Historical Preservation Commission.)
7.Place properties designated as Maplewood Heritage Landmarks on the official Maplewood Zoning Map, or
on another map specifically created for this purpose. (To be done by City Staff.)
8.Use and follow the Secretary of Interior?s standards and guidelines:
a.When advising the owners of historic properties about maintenance and restoration work. (To be
done by the City and the Historical Preservation Commission.)
b.For design review decisions about Heritage Landmarks and Historically Significant Structures and
for archeology and historic preservation. (To be done by the City.)
9.Review City ordinances and amend them as needed to reflect the goals and objectives for historic
preservation. (To be done by the Historical Preservation Commission.)
10.Establish a program for the placement of local historical markers and plaques that identifies and informs the
public about historic sites. (To be done by the City and the Historical Preservation Commission.)
11.Provide information and education about historic preservation and properties, sites or resources that are
historically or culturally significant to property owners and the general public. (To be done by the City and
the Historical Preservation Commission.)
Historical Resources 9-5
12.Participate in education and communication programs to increase the visibility and understanding of the
City?s historic resources. (To be done by the Historical Preservation Commission.)
13.Advise schools and teachers in the development of curricula and teaching aids about history and historic
preservation in Maplewood. (To be done by the Historical Preservation Commission.)
14.Incorporate local history into present development by using historic names for streets, parks and
geographical features. (To be done by the City.)
15.Comment on all development proposals that would affect properties of the historic properties list. (To be
done by the Historical Preservation Commission, in cooperation with City Staff and the Maplewood Planning
Commission.)
16.Review all applications or permits for the demolition, moving, or remodeling of Heritage Landmarks or
Historically Significant Structures in Maplewood to determine the possible impacts on significant heritage
resources. (To be done by the Historical Preservation Commission.)
17.Work with and encourage property owners to help preserve the heritage resource value and historical
integrity of significant historical or cultural resources. (To be done by the City and the Historical Preservation
Commission.)
18.Encourage property owners to meet historic preservation standards and guidelines when working on historic
properties. (To be done by the City.)
19.Work with the Historical Preservation Commission to apply to the State Historical Preservation Office for
certification as a Certified Local Government (CLG). (To be done by the City.)
20.Seek outside funding sources and participate where feasible on historic preservation projects. (To be done
by the City and the Historical Preservation Commission.)
21.Work with County, the State Historic Preservation Office of the Minnesota Historical Society and Federal
agencies when implementing this plan. (To be done by the City.)
Historical Resources 9-6