Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2006-07-17 Parks PacketMAPLEWOOD PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION . MONDAY, JULY 17, 2006 MAPLEWOOD CITY HALL MAPLEWOOD ROOM 7 P.M. AGENDA 7:00 pm 1. Call to Order *7:01 pm 2. Approval of Agenda *7:03 pm 3. Approval of Minutes a. May 15, 2006 *7:05 p.m. 4. CoPar Development *7:30 pm 5. City Council Tour Discussion -June 19 a. Tour Sites b. Discussion Points 8:15 pm 6. Commissioners' Comments 8:25 pm 7. Director's Comments 8:30 pm 8. Adjournment * Items that need formal commission action 0 MAPLEWOOD PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION MONDAY, MAY 15, 2006 MAPLEWOOD CITY HALL Prior to the meeting staff conducted a 6:30 p.m. tour for the commission. The purpose of the tour was to visit the Copar proposed development site in southern Maplewood. The tour was completed by 7:30 p.m. MINUTES CALL TO ORDER Chairperson Fischer called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. Commissioners Present: Commissioners Craig Brannon, Don Christianson, Peter Fischer, Peter Frank, Carolyn Peterson, Bruce Roman Commissioners Absent: Commissioners Geskermann, Gran, Yang Staff: Bruce Anderson, Parks and Recreation Director 2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA A motion was made by Commissioner Peterson, seconded by Commissioner Frank, to approve the agenda as submitted. The motion passed unanimously, 5 ayes, 0 nays. 3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES A motion was made by Commissioner Christianson, seconded by Commissioner Roman, to approve the April 17, 2006 meeting minutes as presented. The motion passed, 5 ayes, 0 nays. 4. VISITOR PRESENTATION There were no visitors present. 5. COPAR DEVELOPMENT Director Anderson indicated that Copar Companies has proposed a 300 -unit senior housing project located in southern Maplewood north of Carver Avenue. Prior to the commission meeting, staff conducted a tour for commissions to observe the site firsthand. Director Anderson outlined five conditions that he felt the commission should consider regarding the Copar development: a. A tot lot should be constructed as part of the developer's expense. b. The trailway system should be public. c. One and possibly two areas should be set aside as a viewing place, to be constructed and developed at the city's expense at a future date. d. Trail access should be considered to the Fish Creek Regional open space area for city residents. e. A percentage of the P.A.C. fees should be dedicated to southern Maplewood. Following the staff report, the commissioners each had a variety of comments regarding the proposed project: L 7. ■ Commissioner Christianson said that he felt it would be appropriate for up to 50% of the P.A.C. monies be dedicated to southern Maplewood and that an observation tower be considered on part of the land to be set aside as a vista viewing point. ■ Commissioner Peterson indicated her strong position that there needs to be a trail connection into the Ramsey County open space land and that this site has great significance not only at a regional level, but at a state and potentially national level. She also said that there are potentially three dumps on the site that need to be resolved by the developer. Following a general discussion, a motion was made by Commissioner Fischer, seconded by Commissioner Peterson, that: ■ the city pursue acquisition of a minimum of one major outlook/vista with the city being responsible for the costs of any structure for viewing in the northwest corner of the site. ■ the city council dedicate a minimum of $200,000 of the park dedication fee to southern Maplewood identified as city property and located south of Larpenteur Avenue. ■ the vista areas would be handicapped accessible. ■ the city council require the developer to provide a tot lot at the developer's expense. ■ the trail remain public and trail access be established to Fish Creek open space area. ■ the city be responsible for construction of any observation towers/overlook structures. The motion passed 5 ayes, 0 nays, with one abstention. CITY TOUR Chairperson Fischer entertained a conversation from the commission regarding the goals and objectives of the June 19 tour. He distributed a copy of the questions that went to the council. The consensus of the commission was to clarify the role of the commission in relation to the council and educate the council on the priorities of the commission. Consensus of the timeframe was to have a bus tour from 6-7 p.m. with lunch at the nature center to discuss open space and then review athletic fields if possible. COMMISSIONERS' COMMENTS Commissioner Frank updated the commission on soccer program in the community. Commissioner Christianson had no comments. Commissioner Roman said that there are issues at Edgerton Park that need to be addressed by the police department. Commissioner Brannon said that the Hazelwood Park's soccer fields are in poor condition. Commissioner Frank indicated the basketball program was a huge success. 8. ADJOURNMENT meeting was Ily Director of Parks kph /0515.06. m i n. co m m on by consens s at 9:25 p.m. • • • MEMORANDUM • TO: Parks and Recreation Commission FROM: Bruce Anderson, Parks and Recreation Director DATE: July 13, 2006 for the July 17 Parks and Recreation Commission Meeting SUBJECT: Copar Development INTRODUCTION Copar Development initially proposed a 300 -unit seniors project in southern Maplewood, north of Carver Avenue. The Parks and Recreation Commission addressed this issue at your May meeting and made specific recommendations to consider the acquisition of one major outlot for a vista and utilizing $200,000 of the park development funds in southern Maplewood. The motion passed 5 ayes, 0 nays with one abstention. Since that time Copar Development has reevaluated their proposal on a number of fronts and a great deal of discussion has continued. BACKGROUND The city council voted three to two on Monday, July 10 to not pursue an environmental impact statement. The vote did not preclude the city pursuing acquisition of additional land for public park . purposes. During the past two weeks discussions have taken place with Ramsey County to pursue and identify acquisition of sensitive slope and erosion areas. Mr. Ron Cockriel, who has no official role with the city, took the opportunity to meet along with Commissioner Carolyn Peterson, chairperson Victoria Reinhardt and Ramsey County staff to review their comments and/or position on the Copar development. It should be noted that Ramsey County has gone on official record that they are not interested in pursuing additional acquisition of properties within the Copar development and that the initial development as proposed by Copar (minimally) met their requirements and addressed their concerns of erosion and water runoff into Fish Creek. The enclosed map shows two identified parcels (3.9 acres and 4.3 acres) which the county has indicated would be prime areas for acquisition and/or at minimum, conservation easements to assure that the property is not disturbed. In addition I have included a letter dated July 7 from Copar Companies that outlines their position, which is as follows: "Copar Companies feels strongly that the Carver Crossing development plan fulfils or meets the Maplewood Comprehensive Plan for single-family development. It furthermore exceeds the Mississippi River critical area, Fish Creek shoreline designation and the E.A.W. requirements. The P.U.D. revisions are based on the planning commission's and neighbors' comments at the public hearing which resulted in the removal of all attached and condominium style housing. The revised is a single-family housing plan that incorporates stormwater treatment in excess of city and MRCA standards. The revised development also increases setbacks and protection to Fish Creek, corrects soil contamination concerns associated with historical use of the property as well. It furthermore results in 37% of the site designated as open space." • Staff is meeting with representatives of Copar on Friday, July 14 to review an updated proposal. I continue to support my initial position and recommendation, which I have included a copy for your edification. I believe it is imperative that the commission make it clear to the city council the important role that P.A.C. monies play in the development of our city's park system. I believe that should the council determine that additional lands be acquired with city P.A.C. monies, that the city would either match the lost P.A.C. monies with other public sources and/or identify another owner for the property. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the commission review their adopted May 15 position statement and consider expanding their position to include the importance that P.A.C. monies play within the development, restoration and acquisition of city park lands and/or open spaces. kph\carver crossing2.mem Enclosure K, C7 0 July 7, 2006 COPA R • Ron Cockriel companies 943 Century Avenue N Development x Finance • Investment Maplewood, MN 55119 RE: CoPar Development Property / Carver Crossing of Maplewood Dear Ron, Thank you for meeting with Tom and me last week. As discussed, we feel there are a number of positive aspects to the Carver Crossing development plans. The site is challenging and your recognition of our ability to approach the development of unique and challenging properties in a sensitive manner is appreciated. "Vi °feel 'strbnbly that our Car4i Crossing development plan firlfifts'the Maplewood Co' mpre iettsive Plai directive for single family development and meets or exceeds the Mississippi River Critical Area (MRCA), Fish Creek shorcland designation, and EAW requirements. The Planned Unit Development (PUD) revisions we have initiated are based on comments from the Planning Commission and neighbors at the public hearing and have resulted in the removal of all attached and condominium style homes. The revised PUD offers a single family home development plan that continues to incorporate stormwater treatment in excess of City and MRCA standards; offers increased setbacks and protection to Fish Creek; corrects soil contamination concerns associated with the historical use of the property; and results in 37% of the site designated as open space. It is our intent to proceed with the completion of the development entitlement process yet this summer and develop this site as it is guided by the Comprehensive Plan of the city. We firmly believe that the revisions to our PUD submittal are well within the limits of the Maplewood Comprehensive Plan Land Use Plan and that the features of the site have been appropriately considered from the concept stage of 5.5 homes per acre to the final revisions of 2.7 homes per acre. As we proceed with project approval we are willing, however, to consider the alternative of selling the site to you and/or the various entities you work with. Timeliness of those efforts will impact the costs and ultimately the decision. If you desire, CoPar will make reasonable efforts to negotiate a purchase agreement and accommodate your desire to acquire the property. Please feel free to contact Tom Hansen or myself at your convenience should you wish to discuss the development plan or other site options. Sinceret fi Ku 91ch eider CoPar Development, LLC Cc: Greg Copeland, Interim City Manager Chuck Ahl, City Engineer Ken Roberts, Planner 8677 Eagle Point Blvd Lake Elmo, MN 55042 651-379-0500 651-379-0412 (Fax) • www.CoparCompanies.com Real Estate Development, Finance & Investment 0 Attachment 23 MEMORANDUM TO: Ken Roberts, Planner FROM: Bruce K. Anderson, Parks and Recreation Director DATE: May 4, 2006 SUBJECT: Copar Development—Carver Crossing I have had the opportunity to walk, drive and literally smell the land proposed to be developed by Copar as Carver Crossing on at least six occasions. In addition, I had the opportunity to visit the Schlomka property a number of years ago in the mid 1990s as part of the city's open space process. First off, the property indeed offers spectacular views and a wide range of topography, vegetation and abundant wildlife. I would like to go on record with the following statements regarding the park position: 1. It is my understanding that the Copar development is focused on an over 55 year-old and/or senior development as the primary focus. I further understand that it will be a combination of housing from high-rise senior housing to single detached, townhouse and a variety of housing structures. 2. The site is surrounded by Fish Creek Regional Park (130 acres), located both east and west of 1-494. 3. In addition to the Fish Creek Regional Park, the area is served with Carver Crossing (a 27 - acre open space site) located at the corner of Carver Avenue and Sterling Street. 4. In addition to the city -owned open space, private open space is owned by a private, nonprofit corporation for the ski jump property located directly east of Pleasantview Park. 5. The neighborhood is served by Pleasantview Park, a fully developed 14 -acre neighborhood park at 1100 Marnie Street. Pleasantview Park includes play fields, basketball courts, picnic grills, playground area, extensive trail system, and a portion of undeveloped and seating areas that provide great vistas of downtown St. Paul 6. The total estimated park development fee that the city would collect from this project (at $3,000 per unit) is approximately $750,000 to $800,000. 7. The area is further served by Carver Lake Park, which is a former Campfire camp owned and managed by Woodbury Parks and Recreation Department. Carver Lake Park boasts a public swimming beach on Carver Lake and provides active recreation with an expansive trail system, picnic facilities and trail system. In conclusion, it is my recommendation that the city not pursue additional land or acreage in lieu of park dedication fees. Given the fact that the proposed development is senior -oriented and is surrounded by county open space, public-private land, Pleasantview Park, city -owned open space and Carver Lake Park owned by the city of Woodbury, additional public park land is not needed. • My recommendation is that the city pursue park dedication fees. The developer is further requested to • meet the following conditions: 1. A tot lot would be constructed for grandchildren and/or visiting children that would be a public tot lot to serve the surrounding property owners. 2. The sidewalk trail system be public and made available to the public. 3. Two areas be set aside as vista viewing points to be constructed and developed at the city's expense at a future date. 4. Trail access be afforded to Fish Creek Regional Park for the residents within the proposed development. In addition, it will be my recommendation to the Parks and Recreation Commission that a minimum of one-third of the park dedication fees collected be allocated south of Mailand Road in southern Maplewood. Should you have any questions regarding this request or position statement, feel free to contact me directly at ext. 2102. Mcarver crossing -mem • 67 COPAR Property - Fish Creek 0 0 :ii = F oI LO MEMORANDUM • TO: Parks and Recreation Commission FROM: Bruce Anderson, Parks and Recreatlorent DATE: July 13, 2006 for the July 17 Parks and ation Commission Meeting SUBJECT: Peter Fischer's Recap Meeting with the City Council Chairperson Fischer will be coordinating a general conve s some oon f his brief comments he will be ow up to the council/commission tour held in June. Attached is a copy discussing. study questions that were forwarded to the council to use as a reference I have included a copy of the for your discussion. g this item, please contact chairperson Peter Fischer directly. Should you have any questions regardin kph\fischer cc meeting.mem.comm Enclosure • 0 Recap of Parks meeting with City Council 0 The commission discussed the four questions with the City Council. The commission heard that at this time the City Council is open to all possible options when trying to address problems. Not only the ideas listed but any other ideas that arise. The City Council requests that as we do several things when addressing funding issues. We should always include a comparison to some other comparable communities, like ours, and how they are addressing similar situations. We should list our recommendations with how much is needed, what is needed now, what are the options along with our recommendations of what should be tried first. The commission discussed the on going capital needs of the Community Center. We should have been more active over the years on advocating some kind of fund being set aside each year to address capital items as they wore out. It seems now is the time to start addressing this. To address long-term parks needs we acknowledge that our funding source was originally set up for park acquisition and development. Since that time we now must address the missions that parks have evolved into; community centers, trails, open space and park redevelopment. We need to review our parks comprehensive plan modifying it for projects that are finished, what is left to be done, new things that need to be added and what current priorities should be. The commission should reevaluate this plan every three to five years. As part of the process we need to acknowledge what we have finished and what we have not. This process should list what needs to be done to keep us just at redeveloping parks, add what is needed for community centers, the amount for trails and then the amount for open spaces. Then we need to recommend funding levels and options. • TO: Parks and Recreation C Greg Copeland, Interim FROM: Bruce K. Anderson, Parl DATE: July 13, 2006 for the Jul MEMORANDUM SUBJECT: Monthly Update—June 2006 emission Meeting The following items are provided to the Interim City Manager and Parks and Recreation Commission to provide an overview of our day-to-day operations. The items are informational and not intended for formal City Council or Parks and Recreation Commission action. 1. July 4th Celebration The July 4th celebration was held as scheduled at Hazelwood Park. We retained a new fireworks display firm and received mixed response. The city currently pays $10,000 for fireworks and in the scheme of fireworks displays, we have found that it is currently buying us an average to good production. The evening's events remain the same as in previous years, with a band, food concessions, soccer activities, kite flying, petting zoo, watermelon eating contest, family games followed by the evening's fireworks display. Given the fact that the event was scheduled on Tuesday evening, we probably had one of the largest crowds that we have ever experienced, as people returned from cabins and it worked out better with the public's schedule. 2. Playground Selection Staff utilized the state bid laws through U. S. Communities to request playground equipment for both Applewood and Sterling Oaks Parks. Enclosed are two-dimensional drawings of the proposed play systems that were approved by the city council on Monday, July 10. Staff has ordered the two systems and Applewood should be installed by mid August and Sterling Oaks by September 1. I have received numerous phone calls from residents who are waiting for this equipment and I know that they will be pleased with the end result. The equipment at Applewood Park will be "state-of-the- art" with the new mobius climber and expanded roof design. The structure at Sterling Oaks will include a new major climber, which will be a first in the city's park system as well. 3. Applewood Park We are currently "fighting" if you will with the contractor to complete the final punch list items. Applewood Park has been a very successful project, but unfortunately has required staff to really make strong, consistent demands on the contractor to replace, repair and redo numerous items including concrete replacement, regrading, new plant materials and reseeding. I believe the end product is satisfactory, but has caused a few sleepless nights for not only staff but the architect and contractor as well. 4. Walter Street Trail Corridor Enclosed are the final designs for the Walter Street trail corridor connection that will ultimately connect • the city from Rice Street and Roseville on the west all the way to the east to Century Avenue. I am currently working with Xcel Energy to address their concerns regarding the power poles. In addition, I am drafting final documents for the two abutting property owners to place the trail within their public easement. It is hoped that this trail connection will be completed by mid September. 5. Communitas Classical Academy The city was approached by a private school to rent space at Maplewood Community Center in May of this year. We are currently working with representatives from Communitas Academy to develop a lease agreement. The proposal is to utilize the craft room and the room overlooking the pool, as well as the coatroom. At this point we staff has prepared a preliminary lease agreement and the city attorney is reviewing it. Should the school become successful and reach their minimum enrollment of 40 students, there would be a $40,000 to $50,000 rental rate for the use of the Community Center, which would be positive. 6. Caterer Selection Staff has narrowed the catering firms to five for more extensive review. An R.F.P. was developed in April and the current caterer, Suzanne's Cuisine, did not submit a proposal. Staff is hoping to select three of the five caterers to provide additional options for our customers. In the past two weeks, staff has been going to facilities around the metropolitan area sampling food and observing the food preparation of the final caterers. 7. Bruentrup Farm The city has received a $100,000 allocation as part of the state bonding bill for 2007. The grant application was prepared by our department and "lobbied" by the Maplewood Historical Society. The first objective will be to make the entire grounds not only handicapped accessible, but also meet all zoning and code requirements. One of the major items is to develop a sprinkler system for the facility. Staff has had one meeting with the historical society members and we will be meeting in July to firm up the selection of an architect who will assist staff and the historical society in coordinating the process. 8. Hill Murray Proposal Staff has been meeting on a regular basis with representatives from Hill Murray and the cities of Oakdale and North St. Paul regarding the feasibility of the developing an athletic complex behind the Prior and Hill Murray sites where Hwy. 120 and Century Avenue meet. Staff (make that me) has indicated to the city council that we do not need additional athletic fields and that I would not support utilization of P.A.C. monies for this project. Having said that, as part of the "environmental park" proposed by the Oakdale/North St. Paul/Hill Murray consortium, I believe there is some merit to pursuing the concept of a trail and/or environmental connection between the Priory property, Hill Murray property and the Oakdale open space located to the east of Century Avenue. 9. Gladstone Redevelopment The city council has held three public meetings regarding the status of Gladstone. Although there is not unanimous consensus on all issues, it appears that the city council is working towards adoption of the final master plan. The council directed staff to submit a Livable Communities Grant based on the Gladstone proposal at Wednesday's council meeting on July 12 of which staff is currently in the process of completing. 2 MAPLEWOOD PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION 1830 COUNTY ROAD B EAST • MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109 651-249-2102 COUNCIL/COMMISSIONS QUESTIONNAIRE p y's park Funding for ark redevelopment and acquisition is a challenge. The nciitn es for Y s stem has been funded almost entirely through thefullyuse developed, the. the past 50 years. Given the city is minessgmore and less. Which of the following opportunity for P.A.C. fees has become funding sources would you favor for future park projects: Parks and Recreation referendum General tax levy Permanent sales tax for Maplewood residents with a portion dedicated to parks, open space and trails 40 Increase of current P.A.C. fees Other Recreation program fees have increased over 40% in the last thane inyears. City 2. Rec ation staff hears on a regular basis from residentsother important octant f'e'essentials. Do programs because of the high costs given es need to be increased in the future as a budget you believe that recreation fees No balancing concept? Yes What alternatives might you consider: Establishment of a tax levy allocation for a city recreation scholarship fund based on the school hot lunch program qualifications Freezing or a reduction of program fees in the future _ Have staff identify a core number of recreation programs (possibly two per season?) that would be kept at a minimal cost so residents couldparticipate artici ate Reduced fees for multiple registrations in a family opment was never 3. A permanent funding source for open space en s I ace referendum All current established following the successful 1993 op p •. maintenance and capital improvements for open space are provided thrfunding of the city P.A.C. fund. Which of the following would you support for future open space programs? City tax levy Open space referendum Dedication of existing franchise fees such as cable t.v-and cell that phone antenna fees, a portion of the electric franchise fee or of hersmight be legally acceptable Other 4. Selling, land swaps and/or modification of city park and open pace iss on ndaries have been a contentious issue. The Parks andRecreation an'd open space. Do you supports the concept of no net loss of city p in and/or support this concept and what are your thoughts about selling, swapping trading "excess" city parklands? Other things you always wanted to know about Maplewood Parks and Recreation, but were afraid to ask: Thanks—Maplewood Parks and Recreation Commission 0 m b£ - I m 0. MD VZ M � m m mzZ y P 2 al O? ae>` \ / Jill \1 gs 1 I i �\ \ f / ---moi Z n rL D M c NDp II[]M10 mo 0�00D 00A =mo►o� 2 � mo v oo�rn jAj M aZ ID RiAO 0 o Enny= > C—) _tom ra�z�0>z i o ao> D DI--1Zm(A 1 // —j cn v -1 r �- 11 3 0 (-) CO J,z 0 r- II rn�� it O r a a D iit O Gi a z mN 4 c \ N w >, wFn- m e u of y r�D D r D y � yyZ9 y� 5A Zi7 i7 C m \ M y- DCOD 1ym N 0 \ 8 r r N u Ln p21 .yNA Iml C 56 -N'N I o- m Cl � A R1 m I S'.- 0 O I C - \7 111 T A T o> pmmn-n r�+1 f m C m u (4 O m-0 m� Np z // �Z I I Mju tync� acyyffiD N / mmmu pz� J 3 V I_r ZOVImO O / �rZ mmw NZ-4 ��O W r, O �� .� / cDm yC7N ZN -4 N of p ,� oma �rn� ® / w m S v, m 3 0 + nZ mr (71 J.OD p pz� r��-no n u 4 �wZ m; :3gz zul .o C p A m Az m I CO+ G� =i O ( p Z D " D 8 w I 0L)-, N W: o C n N {I I Z %m zzzzz �+ Z MEV)� Mvvvv m .Zml� A HERR z� i i o V f?OCD OD m m mmzz y mmmm A TC OA00 v ' m 3 �� dodo O1 Mm wwoa Nv 'O Fn \ E) m u o C \\ mm N ° O a) cc) 3 <0 3 H ov m M w w o 7i' o .4. 0 00 - N • • • • IBM ®PRICE• k `117�-s�":d»,a''' ':�'uaev�i'P`� silt nce ® 111 111 Rough grading be $3.00 210 Fine grading sy $0.75 425 $319 TOTAL $949 Boardwalk sf $40.00 1515 ~ $60,600 TOTAL $60,600 Bituminous path incl. base If $15.00 480 $7,200 TOTAL $7,200 Wetland Seed Mix s $2.50 10 $25 Mesic Seed Mix s $2.50 425 $1,063 Overstory trees ea $400.00 3 $1,200 TOTAL $2,288 Subtotal $77,816 10% Contingency $7,782 TOTAL $85,598 Page 1 of 1 • • • N 1 , Wetland 1 r,u"L W Ett, iA0 OP 300 0 300 600 Feet ' I N A-nnAPLEoso2.00 2005 WETLAND D EL EATION DIAGRAM 4 _ (BASE AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH DATED 2003) SEH Figure 5 TRAIL SYSTEM STATE AND REGIONAL TRAILS FUTURE STATE AND REGIONAL TRAILS ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ " � fir°-'=m-_-� 'r \.• F e MOUNDSVIEW,' NORTH OAKS �; B.EOo ei/■ r1 fY �6 +Ih �° 91 e I ■ ARDEN �f '� �^I VV �'___i ° � ;-I iii• HILLS HOREVIEW 8;; ♦ i a ■ e • °Pry � r VADNAIS^°` if • g J HE �.s rF 4, V NEWy g ■ Y �. p GEM r' P BRIGHTON ■ ° CS e f �� i 4, s¢6®.. ° O t. q WHITE HEAR Q n r g D e % ' A p Ywo iST. r ANTHONY 3■ °r.. ■ i - ■ ■ - -. � _. � c cf' i lJ € ' I MAPLEWOOD, 0000 Sol +' e' m OSEVILLE Ao 'k— NORTH 0.-1 ' FALCON J ■ _ _ " ° "�i im0uAPoue h i' � • • ■ - r e' mST g , a pp g f �il� � � e "°"`""a+«� ■ __ � •* � � ; ■ ■ • S PAUL ST. PAUL °a e.RSITY AVE = -..■ i ' f • INTERSTATE"AND STATE spa! _. ap x, �■••'T- HIGHWAY DATA PROVIDED Z ..�.. -• y �k ' B�eTJL' p• At , BY MODOT 0) A • OWNTY ROAD DATA WNHIN •"�^' •< , THE CITY OF 5T. PAUL W PROVIDED BY THE GTY O g 04 ♦ q SAINT PAM I6ID°If 61W�Z B■V■ F• • RAMSEY COUNTY MAP x` F. ,.".�"�\ ! ...: / / p �� PB�Y (OORIP ORlill■Il K POMC PO0 ` a LISGHND f , WALE IN VffiICIE A.D.T.