The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2010-06-16 PRC PacketAGENDA CITY OF MAPLEWOOD PARK AND RECREATION COMMISSION MEETING Wednesday, June 16, 2010 7:00pm Council Chambers - Maplewood City Hall 1830 County Road B East 1. Call to Order 0 3. Approval of Agenda 4. Approval of Minutes a. May 19, 2010 5. Visitor Presentations a. MCC Update — Karen Guilfoile b. Proposal Presentations for Goodrich Master Plan c. Phalen -Keller Regional Park Master Plan — an Murphy d. Parks and Recreation Survey Results — John Helcl 6. Unfinished Business 7. New Business a. Troutbrook Trail Feasibility Proposal — Sanders Wacker Bergly, Inc. b. CI Discussion 8. Staff Presentations a. Wakefield Fishing Pier b. Wakefield Picnic Shelter •16"In1we 11111r.] 10. Adjourn — (9:30 p.m.) Next meeting — July, 2J CITY OF MAPLEWOOD PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION MEETING Meeting Minutes Wednesday, May 19, 2010 7:00 p.m. COUNCIL CHAMBERS — MAPLEWOOD CITY HALL 1830 COUNTY ROAD B EAST 1. CALL TO ORDER Chair Roman indicated there was a quorum and called the meeting to order. 2. ROLL CALL Commissioners Commissioner Craig Brannon, present Commissioner on Christianson, present Commissioner Peter Fischer, present Commissioner an Maas, present Commissioner Mary Mackey, present Commissioner Carolyn Peterson, present Chair Bruce Roman, present Commissioner Therese Sonnek, present Commissioner Kim Schmidt present • 3. APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA Commissioner Fisher made a motion to approve the agenda. Commissioner Roman seconded the motion. I 4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES a. April 21, 2010 Commissioner Fisher stated that on page 3 the commissioner names were not noted next to the "ayes" and "nays," and that it should be adjusted. 0 Commissioner Fisher made a motion to approve the minutes as amended. Commissioner Sonnek seconded the motion. NZESIM3=4 5. VISITER PRESENTATIONS a. Phalen -Keller Regional Park Master Plan — Bryan Murphy Mr. Murphy was absent; item was tabled until next meetinV•vote was taken. a. Community Meeting -Proposed Sherwood Dog Park Commissioner Roman provides a brief history of the process leading up to the pursuance of the dog park. He then opens up the discussion to the Sherwood Park community and explains how the discussion will proceed. ........ .... PW 0=1 411E KIN 1 1 111 1 'lill essed the commi�ion with questions regarding the Capstone 77�w__ --- - - - __ Co-Prdinator� add sed her concerns and provided �stone Project. ssed the commission with her concerns about the dog ed the 66mmission and expressed that she favored the dog 1111013re. park. Mr. an Vessey, 1644 Cope Ave, addressed the commission with his concerns about the dog park. Mrs. Lynette Vessey, 1644 Cope Ave, addressed the commission with her concerns about the do-oark. 9. The commission and staff�Asp6nded to some of the questions and concerns that had been brought up thus far. Community discussion then proceeded. Ms. Candace Markus, 1636 Cope Ave. E, addressed the commission with her concerns about the proposed dog park. Mr. Mike Steffen, 1587 Sandhurst Ave. E, addressed the commission with concerns regarding the dog park. Mr. Ben Hickman, 1613 Sandhurst Ave. E, addressed the commission with concerns about the proposed dog park. 0 Ms. Pat Kressin, 2209 Kennard St, addressed the commission with concerns about the proposed dog park. Mr. Richard Pruden, 1726 E. Laurie St, addressed the commission with concerns about the proposed dog park. Mr. Terry Nadler, 1706 E. Sandhurst Ave, addressed the commission with concerns regarding the dog park. Mrs. Jeannette Carle, 1627 E. Sandhurst Ave, addressed the commission with concerns about the proposed dog park. !' Ms. Gladys Sandstrom, 1694 E. Lark Ave, addressed the commission with concerns about the proposed dog park. Ms. Barb Tibaueau, 1575 Sandhurst Ave. E, addressed the commission with concerns about the proposed dog park. Mr. Joe Timmers, 16 Sandhurst Ave. E, addressed the commission with concern about the -pro-posed dog park. Mr. Michael Sandstrom, 1694 E. Lark Ave, addressed the commission with concerns regarding the dog park. Mr. You Yang, 16 Sandhurst Ave, addressed the commission with concerns about the proposed dog park. Ms. Kathy Steffen, 1587 Sandhurst Ave, addressed the commission with concerns about the proposed dog park. The commission responded to any lingering questions from the community discussion. Mr. Rick Rezeko, Animal ControlTice, addressed the commission and responded to the concerns o the co munity. The commissioner Roman closed the community discussion and opened discussion amongst each other. Commissioner Sonnek motioned that Sherwood Park be removed from consideration as a dog park, but that the commission continues to pursue a space in central northern Maplewood. Commissioner Fisher clarifies the central northern boundaries that would be pursued by the commission. Commissioner Maas seconded the motion. The commission briefly discussed the motion. Commissioner Fisher amended the motion to strike out the exclusion of Sherwood Park. Commissioner Schmidt seconds the motion. K The commission discussed the amendment. Commissioner Sonnek withdrew original motion. Commissioner Maas dropped his second. Commissioner Roman motioned that Sherwood Park be excluded from the process. Commissioner Maas seconded the motion. Ayes: Maas, Christianson, Brannon, Roman, Sonnek Nays: Fisher, Schmidt, Mackey Abstain: Peterson The motion passed. Commissioner Brannon motions to reevaluate dog park sites under the central northern Maplewood criteria that had been previously outlined by commissioner Fisher. Commissioner Christianson seconded the motioned. The motion passed. The meeting adjourned for a 5 minute break. b. Lions Park Mr. Taylor, Recreation Supervisor, briefly updated the commission on the Lions Park Master Plan. Mr. Ron Leaf, Sr. Water Resources Engineer, SHE, addressed the commission in regards tothis project. c. Frost Ave. Bridge Mr. Taylor, Recreation Supervisor, opened up discussion regarding Frost Avenue Bridge. The commission discussed the various concepts for the redevelopment of the bridge. 7. NEW BUSINESS a. Joy Park Gfinny Gaynor, Natural Resources Coordinator, updated the commission on the status of the Joy Park redevelopment. Ms. Gaynor requested a recommendation from the commission regarding phase 2 of the redevelopment of Joy Park. The commission discussed the future plans of Joy Park. Commissioner Fisher motioned for approval for phase 2 improvements for Joy Park. Commissioner Maas seconded the motion. Ayes: All The motion passed. b. Extreme Green Makeover Judges Ms. Gaynor requested that a member of the commission volunteer to be a judge on the Extreme Green Makeover panel. q 6111111J 0 -Mr. Taylor, Recreation Supervisor, provided some background information regarding the City's acquisition of Goodrich P. He requested a recommendation from the commission to approve th proposal for the Goodrich Park Master Plan. I The commission discussed the Master Plan. Commissioner motioned to table this item until the following meeting. Commissioner Christianson seconded the motion. Ayes: All The motion passed. 8. STAFF PRESENTATIONS a. Kennard Tunnel Lighting Ms. Robbins, Recreation Supervisor, updated the b. Oath of Office The Parks and Recreation commission members is: Peterson, Roman, Schmidt and Sonnek raised their i 9. COMMISSIONER COMMENTS Commissioner Fisher requested that three -hole punc Commissioner Sonnek ac and the missing sign. Sh they would look into it. Commfs�slbner Schmidt oldest p" Maplewood. I M informing heat staff was .unission on the status of the lighting. er, Brannon. Christianson, Maas, Mackey, ght hands and took the Oath of Office. "�put into future packets. crossing at McKnight with the trail at Gall Street, ;Aus of any mini dog parks. Staff informed her that ,oping that a plaque could be placed at Lookout Park because it is the nd, also if no -mow grass could be put into the park. Staff responded by .iffently looking into it the turf management of Maplewood parks. ike Legacy Sculpture Garden to be added to an agenda in the near future. that there were guided tours there. Commissioner Brannon moved to adjourn the meeting. Commissioner Maas seconded the motion. Chair Roman adjourned the meeting at p.m. 0 A - Goodrich Park Master Plar Maplewood, Minnesota SEH March 25 2010 March 2, 2010 RE: Maplewood, Minnesota Goodrich Park Master Plan SEH No. P -MAPLE 111160 Mr. James Taylor Recreation Program Supervisor City of Maplewood 1830 East County Road B Maplewood, MN 55119 Dear Mr. Taylor: Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc. (SEH') is pleased to have the opportunity to submit this proposal for professional services for the master planning of Goodrich Park. Having had the pleasure of meeting with you and Ms. Robbins on Tuesday, February 23, 2010, to listen to your vision for Goodrich Park, we left with a greater understanding of the challenges an4l. opportunities associated with master planning a site that serves both the community as an athletic complex and the neighborhood as a neighborhood park. Through our experience working with Maplewood on recreational and natural resource projects such as Lions Park, joy Park, and the Maplewood Nature Preserve Campus, we understand the City's deep commitment to providing innovative and sustainable recreational facilities to the community; we share in the excitement of transforming an under-utilized site into a park that will become one of the "signature" parks of Maplewood. Goodrich Park is a triangular site comprising 24 acres located along North St. Paul Road and Ripley Avenue. It is situated between a mature residential neighborhood and across from the Ramsey County owned Goodrich Golf Course. The park is classified as a Community Athletic Complex and Neighborhood Park. The park currently offers the following features and amenities: • Three adult softball fields (two with lighting) • On-site parking • Children's play area • Restrooms (one male and one female) • Natural area -open space Realizing the park's potential to attract both neighborhood residents and community members, the City is looking for professional assistance to prepare a master plan that will address issues and opportunities such as: While a highly visible recreational area along No. St. Paul Road, Goodrich Park is basically under- utilized; the City would like to see it become more than a park dedicated to softball with the intent Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc., Butler Square Building, Suite 710C, 100 North 6th Street, Minneapolis, MN 55403-1515 SEH is an equal opportunity employer I www.sehinc.com 1 612.758.6700 1 866.830.3388 1 612.758.6701 fax -Mr. James Taylor March 2, 2010 Page 2 of it becoming a "Signature" park for the City, incorporating many of the natural and sustainabl features recently created at other City facilities. i A significant deficit of on-site parking has resulted in an over abundance of parking on Ripley Avenue; a situation that has frustrated local residents. The City would like additional and expanded parking facilities within the park at roughly twice the current parking capacity. Opportunities to create porous pavement lots similar to Geranium Park and the public works building, -Would allow for increased parking while off -setting the overall storm water impacts. Although the three softball fields are to remain within the park and some of the existing ball field drainage issues will be addressed by City Engineering Staff, the City would like areas surrounding the ball fields to be enhanced by becoming more inviting for families and spectators, more accessible, and by providing a play area for smaller children. • While large open spaces within a park provide an opportunity for un -programmed recreation, it can also create an opportunity for uncontrolled use such as the case with the "pick-up" volleyball games where users bring their own nets. The City has responded to this need by including it as a program element in the master plan. • Varying degrees of topographic relief occur on the site, the higher elevations are west of the ball fields along North St. Paul Road while the lowest wet woodland occurs along Ripley Avenue; as with Lyons Park and the Maplewood Nature Preserve Campus, this also provides an opportunity for innovative on-site st® water management techniques. • Speaking much louder to summer recreational use rather than four -seasonal use, the site would benefit from simple aesthetic improvements such as creating a maple line trail that would allow walkers to enjoy vibrant fall color or providing a pleasure skating rink and warming house to increase winter use; the park also shows tracks of cross-country skiing; perhaps -establishing a ski course or small sliding hill might be explored. The SEH team will be led by Veronica Anderson, Park Planner with support from Danyelle Pierquet, Urban Designer and on Leaf, Water Resources Engineer. Bob Kost, Director of Urban Design will provide project review and quality control for the design team. This team brings a unique mix of sustainable design experience and functional design elements. These same staff members also know the City's park planning process and understand the overall vision for a sustainable Maplewood. Scope of"Work The proposed scope of work is based on our current understanding of this project, site visit, and our discussion with you. Primary tasks include the following: 4, - e -E 47114"110 In addition to lead Park Planner, Veronica Anderson will serve as Project Manager for this project. Project management and administration will include communication with the City staff and Maplewood Parks and Recreation Commission. Invoicing, progress reports, supplemental agreements, cost and schedule updates, billing preparation, and other non-technical work will be part of the project management throughout this project. T -Mr. James Taylor March 2, 2010 Page 3 Task I. Project IniVat's i ion I J Kick-off Meeting Members of the SEH team will attend a project kick-off'Meeting with the City staff. This meeting will provide an opportunity for SEH and City to review the workplan and schedule, and discuss any issues and/or concerns. It will also provide an opportunity to develop a detailed program and to receive direction for the master planning process. 1.2 Inventory of Existing Physical Conditions Visit the project site and document pertinent information regarding the physical environment topography, soils, site drainage patterns, existing landscaping, lighting; pavements, adjacent uses, utilities, signage and other special conditions. 1.3 Photo Survey Conduct a photo inventory of the existing project area's conditions and features. This will provide a critical tool for the analysis and design process. 1.4 Review Background Material Review and evaluate available background material related to the project area to identify any pertinent data that would inform the master planning process. 1 .5 Base Mapping Data will be provided by City and will include boundary data, such as parcel, utilities, and -LIDAR contours. SEH will review this data and determine if there are additional survey data needs necessary to complete the master plan. SEH will generate base -mapping from this data, to be used by the City and SEH as a point of departure and reference for the remainder of the project. (We assume that an electronic format survey base will be provided to us.) SEH Deliverables: Project Base Map Task 2. Meetings SEH will facilitate five meetings during the planning process: 1. Meet with neighborhood to introduce theproject and provide an opportunity to solicit input from them regarding the park. 2. Meeting with Parks and Recreation Commission topresent site analysis and neighborhood meeting comment results and to receive input from the Commission. 3. Meeting to present two master plan concepts to Parks and 'Recreation Commission 4. Neighborhood Open House to present Preferred Master Plan Concept 5. Meeting to present final Master Plan to Park and Recreation Commission Mr. James Taylor March 2, 2010 Page 4 Task 3. Site Analysis 3.1 Evaluate and Illustrate Evaluate field data to identify features that affect the 1 pr 'ect area, including such things as existing 0 topography, vegetation, pavements, utilities, signage, trail connections, etc. Prepare a site analysis graphically depicting the predominant issues. t-2 Project -Related Issues AnalysiL Review with City Staff and Parks and Recreation Commission the issues concerning proposed access, on-site parking creation and expansion, creative storm water management,, sustainable landscaping and site features (i.e., signage, trails, interpretive elements, infrastructure, lighting, landscaping, park and recreational elements). SEH Deliverables: 9 Site Analysis Plan Task 4. Master Park Plan Concepts SEH will prepare up to two park concepts for the Goodrich Park site. These concepts will be illustrative in nature showing the major site features and use relationships. Our philosophy of design is to create two different concepts for the project site; these are based on the site's natural conditions and program elements. The two concepts provide a look at sometimes competing goals and features which help towards developing the basis for the final master plan. SEH willpre-Pare a summary of options based on alternatives and analyses. SEH will meet with City staff, Parks and Recreation Commission and hold a public meeting to present and discuss options. City Deliverables: • Select preferred alternative concept or combination thereof • Approval for SEH to prepare the Final Park Master Plan (it's capped here but rarely anywhere else) SEH Deliverables: Two Alternative Park Concepts (24 x 36 boards in colored format) Task 5. Final Master Plan SEH will prepare a final master plan based on feedback received at meetings listed in Task 4. (Most often, the final master plan is a synthesis of the two concepts). SEH will prepare one full-sized color rendered master plan graphic (24 x 36 board). S. I Opinion of Probable Cost A final preliminary opinion of probable cost will be prepared that identifies the costs for theproposed improvements illustrated on the final, refined master plan. 5.2 Presentation of Master Plan Present final Master Plan to Park Board and City Council. Mr. James Taylor March 2, 2010 Page 5 City Deliverable: e Approve Final Master Plan. • Present Final Master Plan to Parks and Recreation Commission and City Council • Prepare final cost opinion that identifies the proposed improvements, by unit costs • All project graphics including Final Master Plan to be provided to the City on CD in PDF format. Schedule Our proposed schedule is to proceed with work upon authorization from the City and complete our work by August 31, 2010. Estimated Fees Compensation shall be on an hourly basis, based on actual hours worked for SEH personnel assigned to the project, plus reimbursable expenses. Our estimated fees for the main project tasks are summarized for the major project tasks. Our estimated fee for the scope of work described in this proposal is $14,500. Task 1. Project Initiation (Includes Data Collection and Base Map) $1,500 Task 2. Meetings $2,500 Task 3. Site Analysis $1"000 Task 4. Master Plan $7,500 Task 5. Final Master Plan $2,000 Respectfully Submitted, SHORT ELLIOTT HENKSON INC. Veronica A Anderson, ASLA, AICP Project Manager RonResources Sr. Water Engineer SEH MAPLEWOOD NATURE PRESERVE CAMPUS Locationent I Maplewood, Minnesot,*9. Features Creative on-site stormwater demonstration syste• m System includes the use of rain gardens, infiltration planters, channels, water feature and porous pavement •Natural stone amphitheatre • Crushed limestone trail system with footbridges Natural play area No -mow lawn areas SEH Services • Site Master Planning • Feature Detail Schematic Design • Site Drainage Analysis • Schematic Grading 0" Completed 12008 multidisciplined. single source. I www.sehinc.com LAND 212 SEH LIONS PARK MASTER PLAN Location/Client I Maplewood, Minnesot,-9: W Features • Environmental learning landscape • Edible gardens • Creek crawl natural play area • Biofiltration basins with birding walk and butterfly gardens SEH Services • Site survey and analysis of existing drainage problems • Alternative analysis of two distinct site design concepts: natural and conventional Public meeting presentations •Development and assessment of resident input surveys Final master plan and preliminary construction cost estimates Completed I September 2001 multidisciplined. single source. I www.sehinc.com LAND 23® 011 1111 111 IWIF �� Vre-TWTU The construction of a key segment of a planned regional trail system impacted wetland habitat within joy Park.The replacement plan included hydrologic and vegetation restoration of an existing wetland to further enhance the natural park setting.The enhanced wetland was partially drained and contained areas of remnant native vegetation making it an excellent candidate site for improvements. The restoration process includes construction of a small berm to enhance hydrology, herbicide treatment of exotic invasive vegetation, and installation of native wetland and upland seed mixes, live plants, and vegetated sod flats. Features •Hydrologic and vegetative restoration and enhancement of an existing degraded wetland Grading and planting plans •3 -year vegetative maintenance plan for wetland and upland buffer, including native prairie maintenance and non-native buckthorn removal in existing woodlands •Regulatory coordination and approvals SEH Services •Trail system and parking lot design • Shoreline restoration and rain garden design •Wetland delineation Wetland permitting and mitigation design Completed I July 2009 multidisciplined. single source. I www.sehinc.com ARES 0®2 Location/Owner I Brainerd, Minnesota Trailside Park located in the northwest corner ofBrai ' nerd has many wetland areas and the trail system highlights these areas and includes overlooks and a wildlife tower lookout. he 112 acre site provides a wide range of recreational opportunities. Features • Softball complex (pentagon) Soap Box DerbyTrack Natural Trail System Dog Park Park pavilions, restrooms Naturalized landscape areas Disc golf Boardwalk and overlooks •Open. space and picnic areas Disc golf • Entry road, parking Play areas SEH Services • Public Involvement • Site and park planning • GIS • Cost estimates Status Long Range Phased Master Plan multidisciplined. single source. U- ND www.sehinc.com U-N D 184 A SEH LAKE WASHINGTON COUNTY PARK MASTER PLAN 3r E 2 1P 11 ±N! Location/Owner'-' Le Sueur County, Minnesota The 150 -acre park provides a range of opportunities for passive and active recreation while serving as a destination for RV and tent campers on Lake Washington. Features •Camping - RV and tent Park pavillion, picnic areas/shelters • Swimming pond • Suspension swing bridge •Trail system and parking • Interpretive center Play areas 1,-Dy1111 111 iiiii� III M� zf�111111111 ��Iljfl, III? multidisciplined. single source. I www.sehinc.com LAND 141 SEH RIVER'S EDGE PARK PLAN Location/C lien City of Waite Park, Minnesoti�: Size 45 Acres Complete, Phasel and Phasell Complete 20 1 # Cost .'3.6 million Features • Splash pad and play area Lighted ballfields •Renovated and new of park buildings • Trails/regional trail connection • Court games Senior exercise course • Extensive landscaping SEH Services • Landscape architecture/park master planning • Site civil engineering Architecture Environmental Lighting/electrical engineering multiclisciplined. single source. I www.sehinc.com LAND 237 K o c h e s t e r Mi nne sot a Land Surveying Mr. DuWayne Konewko Community & Parks Development Director Mr. James Taylor Recreation Manager City of Maplewood 1830 County Road B East Maplewood, MN 55109 Re: Goodrich Park Master Plan MBI #9001/10068 Urban - Land Planning Dear Mr. Konewko and Mr. Taylor: Consulting - Civil Engineering McGhie & Betts, Inc. is pleased to present this proposal for professional services. This Geotechnical Engineering proposal will define our scope of work and provide you with an estimated cost for the project services requested. Thank you for considering McGhie & Betts and Fireflies. Construction Matefial Testing PROJECT UNDERSTANDING: Landscape Architecture From our previous meetings, we understand you are embarking on this planning process to create a master plan for the redevelopment of the Goodrich Park. We are excited to be working with you to explore these opportunities and to develop a consensus plan for accomplishing your goals. From our conversations, we understand the City of Maplewood has identified several issue with Goodrich Park's current conditions that need to be addressed. They are: 9 The community -wide popularity of the park causes conflicts with the nearby residential neighborhood. Parking, park access, and its use need to address neighbors' concerns. 9 The existing woodland is an asset to be preserved and enhanced. Additional native planting may be desirable. * The playground equipment needs maintenance. Its relocation and replacement needs to be considered. * Site drainage problems, especially in the ballfield spectator areas, limit the park's use needs. Stormwater management needs to be assess and redesigned. • The overall site condition and use needs to be evaluated and improvements proposed. Other issues may arise during the master planning process. The City intends to reconstruct portions of Goodrich Park in 2011 based on the results of the new master plan. Improvements to the ballfields are not included in the Master Plan. 1648 Third Avenue S.E. Rochester, MN 55904 Tel. 507.289.3919 Fax. 507.289.7333 e-mail. mbi@mcghiebetts.com Established 1946 • p 11 1!1111 @ McGhie & Betts, Inc. is a civil engineering and landscape architecture firm with expertise in park planning and natural systems planning. McGhie & Betts will address planning issues such as parking, drainage, and enhancement of natural systems, and will assist with community engagement. McGhie & Betts will be the lead consultant for the project. 9 Fireflies Play Environments is a landscape architecture firm specializing in creating engaging environments for children. Fireflies will plan the play environments in Goodrich Park and assist with community engagement. 9 Lunning Wende Associates is an architecture and community planning firm with expertise in community engagement and strategic planning. Lunning Wende will lead the community engagement process for Goodrich Park. McGhie and Betts' team's work style is highly collaborative, resulting in successful plans that integrate physical, cultural, and economic realities to create a unified whole. The plan for Goodrich Park will evolve through a participatory process with the stakeholders, neighbors and city staff. We build relationships with our clients and seek the elusive fine -line between a project's spirit and function to uncover: • Community values • Space needs and requirements • Social and cultural relationships • Environmental performance goals • Aesthetic preferences We believe the expertise necessary to create an enduring plan for Goodrich Park resides in the people who will use these facilities as well as the consultants who will plan and design them. Therefore, the success of the project depends upon the interaction of the users with the consultant team in a variety of venues that can assure opportunities for meaningful communication. We propose to lead the community through a process employing visually stimulating graphics, respectful and genuine listening, gentle prompting and humor to reach a solution. We make the process enjoyable and we learn the most, it seems, when participants are informed, excited, and engaged by the experience. We recommend client working groups be formed to participate in the master planning process: Management Team (3-4 members) will represent the City and key stakeholders to oversee the project and to make strategic, policy, and financial decisions. This group may be called upon to prioritize the project's budget, schedule, and goals to achieve the best possible project outcomes. Workshop Group, (20+ members) will be composed of park users and neighbors to participate in programming, planning, and design sessions to inform the design team on factors related to functionality, relationships, performance, as well as user satisfaction. We anticipate two workshops would be held followed by an open house to engage the broader community in evaluating the park master plan. The services will include the preparation of a master landscape plan and report for Goodrich Park designating land uses and activity areas. This plan will be detailed, but will not be intended for use as construction documents. Construction drawings, specifications or other construction document preparation, or preparation of a site model are not included in the basic Scope of Services. Further detail is provided below: In preparation for the community engagement process we would gather and review the following information: Review data provided by the City: • Site Survey of the existing park and its context • Computerized Drawings of the park • Available materials on the history of park development • Demographic data regarding park use and the surrounding neighborhood • Available data regarding site utilities • Review previous planning efforts related to programs and facilities. • Assemble existing site information and familiarize ourselves with the park. • Investigate other planning initiatives by the City and the surrounding neighborhood that may impact planning for the park. After compiling the information, we would then prepare an initial analysis of physical attributes of the park, "map" the information we have heard from the city, and develop a set of goals and program for the park. Following a review and refinement with the Management Team, we would be prepared for the first Workshop. Review information gathered. Listen to and record the concerns, ideas, perceived opportunities and constraints of the participants. Discuss the city's, stakeholders, and neighbors' goals for the park. Anticipated Outcomes: Review and agreement on the goals & program; identify scenarios for development. Following the first workshop, we would develop alternative plans, review them with the Management Team for selection of preferred plan. Following a review and refinement with the Management Team, we would be prepared for the second workshop. Review the alternative plans and present the preferred plan in relationship to goals for the par Receive comments and proposed refinements to the preferred plan. I III IIII vppi�!!11 11 Following the second workshop, we would meet with the Management Team to review and incorporate community comments in the preferred plan. We would also prepare the draft report .2ddressing all of the sections of the Final Report for review by the Management Team. Present the draft of the Master Plan and receive comments from the broader community. Following review of community comments and acceptance of the park master plan, we woul$ complete the Final Report for review with and approval of the Management Team. 11 •11 0111 ill 1�1� In addition to interpreting the Workshop and Community Open House outcomes and reviewing planning directions, the Management Team will direct the development and approve the Master Plan. Iiiiii�� 111liql1l I i il� liq 1 1111111 p 117111 i�111111�111111q�il, The purpose of the Management Team meetings, Workshops, and Open House is to assist us in gathering information and perspectives necessary to our recommendations to the City and to assist the City in reaching consensus on the Master Plan. We shall use this information and other investigations by our team to develop the documentation to be included in the Final Report for the Goodrich Park Master Plan. We anticipate the Final Report will include the following contents: • Master Plan for Goodrich Park • Narrative • Site Plan • Site infrastructure • Site Organization Diagram(s) • Image Sketches • Park Location Map • Program ming/Alternative Planning Scenarios • Narrative of Planning Process • Documentation of the Workshop and Open House Process • Project Cost Estimate and Schedule • Appendix As part of this agreement, McGhie and Betts, Inc. shall deliver five paper copies and ten CD- ROM copies of the Final Plan to the City. Other graphic and written materials developed for Open Houses and Workshops will also be provided for the City's future reference and use. I =_ Our fees for these services will be charged on an hourly, Not To Exceed basis. Our fees fo these services will be charged on an hourly basis. For the work outlined, we estimate th following fees: I Site Planning Services include: 2. Schematic Design: On-site visit, prepare analysis boards, preparation of a concept plan; Incorporating input from stakeholders; $43630.00 3. Concept Refinement: Meetings with client to review analysis, input, draft plan, final plan and preparation: $4,838.00 4. Reimburseable costs (mileage, printing): $ 360.00 Total Estimated Cost of Services: = 14,978.00 The above estimate represents an hourly estimate. You should be aware that actual fees will be charged in accordance with our current Schedule of Hourly Rates and Charges and that actual hours would be used for billing purposes. Should the scope of work change in nature or be expanded to include additional services, we reserve the right to renegotiate the fees with you. Invoicing will be monthly in accordance with our Schedule of Hourly Rates and Charges and payment for services shall be made every thirty (30) days as charges are incurred and billed. A finance charge at the rate of 1-1/2% per month on the unpaid balance shall be charged on all accounts over 30 days past the statement date. We anticipate the planning process will take three to months. The schedule can be adjusted to meet the needs of the City community for additional interaction and discussion necessary to reach decisions. The schedule will be developed with City staff for this planning process that takes into account the City meeting and budgeting calendars. McGhie & Betts is prepared to begin work on this project upon execution of this Agreement and complete the work in accordance with the proposed schedule. We are enthusiastic about the prospect of working with the City of Maplewood on this project! We commend you for engaging in this visioning process and look forward to creating with you a vision for the future development of Goodrich Park. Please indicate your acceptance of this proposal by endorsing a copy of this proposal and returning it to us. Please retain the original for your records. McGhie & Betts, Inc., appreciates the opportunity of being considered for this project and we look forward to providing our services to you. McGHIE & BETTS, INC. Z1,4 William E. Tointon, President Attachment Typed Name & Title ATTACHMENT No. MCGHIE & BETTS, INC. SCHEDULEOF HOURLY1 CHARGES EFFECTIVE JANUARY 1, 2010 REIMBURSABLE EXPENSES & OUTSIDE SERVICES DESCRIPTION PHOTOINIZATION DETECTOR (P.I.D.) P4 PRINCIPAL 139.00 P3 SENIOR ENGINEER / SENIOR PROJECT MANAGER / NUCLEAR DENSITY EQUIPMENT -PER HOUR CERTIFIED PROFESSIONAL GEOLOGIST / SUPERVISOR 123.00 -PER HOUR OF LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE/PLANNING P2 PROJECT MANAGER / ENGINEER / PLANNER / DRILL RIG MOBILIZATION & DECONTAMINATION -MINIMUM CHARGE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT / LAND SURVEYOR / 103.00 -EACH CERTIFIED PROFESSIONAL GEOLOGIST GLOBAL POSITIONING SYSTEM (GPS) Pi ENGINEER / PLANNER / LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT / IRON PIPE OR RODS -EACH 2.50 98.00 -PER MILE SENIOR TECHNICIAN / LAND SURVEYOR ASSISTANTS FACSIMILE (FAX) SERVICES / SUPERVISOR / GEOLOGIST / CERTIFIED OR LOCAL TRANSMITTAL 4 ST PAGE -PER PAGE REGISTERED SOIL SCIENTIST -ADDITIONAL PAGES T8 TECHNICAL AIDE VIII 86.00 T7 TECHNICAL AIDE VII 79.00 T6 TECHNICAL AIDE VI 71.00 T5 TECHNICAL AIDE V 65.00 T4 TECHNICAL AIDE IV 60.00 T3 TECHNICAL AIDE III 57.00 T2 TECHNICAL AIDE II 47.00 TI TECHNICAL AIDE I 41.00 C2 CLERICAL 11 43.00 CI CLERICAL I 39.00 REIMBURSABLE EXPENSES & OUTSIDE SERVICES HOURLY OR CHARGE RATE PHOTOINIZATION DETECTOR (P.I.D.) -PER HOUR 15.00 CONFINED SPACE MONITORING EQUIPMENT -PER HOUR 15.00 NUCLEAR DENSITY EQUIPMENT -PER HOUR 15.00 DRILL RIG -PER HOUR 50.00 PLUS OPERATOR DRILL RIG MOBILIZATION & DECONTAMINATION -MINIMUM CHARGE 50.00 POSTS -EACH 3.00 GLOBAL POSITIONING SYSTEM (GPS) -PER HOUR 35.00 IRON PIPE OR RODS -EACH 2.50 MILEAGE -PER MILE 0.50 FACSIMILE (FAX) SERVICES LOCAL TRANSMITTAL 4 ST PAGE -PER PAGE 1.00 -ADDITIONAL PAGES -PER PAGE 0.50 LONG DISTANCE TRANSMITTAL INSIDE USA 4 ST PAGE -PER PAGE 2.50 -ADDITIONAL PAGES -PER PAGE 0.50 LONG DISTANCE OUTSIDE USA @ COST IN HOUSE BLUEPRINTING -PER SQ.FT. 0.40 IN HOUSE 81/2 X 11 COPIES - Black copy -EACH 0.25 IN HOUSE 81/2 X 11 COPIES - Color copy -EACH 1.00 IN HOUSE 11X17 COPIES - Color copy -EACH 2.00 OUTSIDE PRINTING & MATERIALS COST PLUS 25% HANDLING OUTSIDE SERVICES @ COST NOTE: These rates expire 12/31/10. Revised rates will be submitted for consideration if project has not been completed. .711 Firm Information McGhie and Betts has *ffices in Rochester, MN, Northfield, MN and Bozeman Montana. Our Minnesota offices serve all of southern and eastern Minnesota. Firm Background McGhie and Betts, Inc. McGhie & Betts, Inc. is a multi -disciplinary firm that integrates environme tal services, landscape architecture, planning, engineering, surveying, and geotechnical and construction material testing services to solve complex issues and create the best solution for our clients. I With over 60 years of professional experience and a commitment to main- tain the integrity of the environment, we successfully complete projects that meet or exceed the expectations of our clients. IVIBI works with our clients to find environmentally -sound designs that minimize impacts to a site and its environs. IVIBI has LEED-accredited staff that have assisted in the achievement of LEED certification of projects. Our services include: 0 Environmental Services: Wetland delineation, permitting, mitiga- tion and restoration design, shoreline restoration, wetland banking, natural community inventories and assessments, invasive species management Landscape Architecture: Park and recreation planning, trail design, ecological /. •/ play environments, site design, streetscapes, site plan- ning, native plant community restoration, alternative stormwater manage- menVinfiltration/rain garden design and function 0 Urban/Land Planning: City/regional Comprehensive Planning, Zon- ing and subdivision codes, feasibility studies, master planning, residential community planning and design 0 Civil Engineering: Site grading and erosion control, municipal engineering, project management and inspections, alternative stormwater management/parking lots/infiltration, design of water distribution, sewer, and utility systems, drainage and hydraulic analysis 0 Land Surveying: ALTA/ACSIVI Land Title Surveys, as -built surveys, boundary surveys, construction surveys, construction surveys, preliminary engineering surveys, property and easement descriptions, construction staking Construction Material Testing: Construction inspection and observation, excavation observation, soil permeability, monitoring wells, special inspections, nuclear densities, concrete and gradation testing, struc- tural/reinforcing steel, geotechnical exploration and engineering Cascade Meadows/LourdesGrounds Rochester, MN. McGhie & Betts, Inc., McGhie and Betts is a primary consultant for the Cascade worked to create a quality Meadows Environmental Learning Center and Lourdes High School Campus and athletic fields. Cascade Mead - educational resource for ows is a state-of-the-art environmental learning facility fo- area students, families, cusing on wetland and savanna restoration, and alternativ( businesses while also energy production including geothermal production from providing both formal and an on-site lake. MBI is the lead consultant for Cascade non -formal educational Meadows site engineering, environmental, and landscape experiences. architectural site concerns, and engineering and planning for the High School grounds. Site-specc issues that hav( been addressed include: alternative stormwater manage- ment, wetland restoration, parking and circulation for a campus that include the learning center, large health club, Ir a high school, and r fields. Lake of the Isles Minneapolis, Minnesota LA" ar TIM Mrs McGhie & Betts staff worked with the Minneapolis Park and Recreation Board and Sanders Wacker Bergly to restore one of Minneapolis' most popular and historic parks. Lake of the Isles is part of the famed Minneapolis Chain of Lakes Regional Park. MBI staff worked as part of, and later with, Sanders Wacker Bergly since 1999 on a multi-year renovation of the park which completely encom- passes the 109 -acre lake. The project scope includes the renovation of the entire 3 -mile lakeshore, wetland mitigation, trail reconstruction, reconstruc- tion of park structures in compliance with Section 106 historical concerns, and parkland renovation and reforestation. An extensive public input process was utilized during the 12 -year project that promoted community involvement by staking proposed feature locations for review during a pub- lic field trip, and dozens of neighborhood presentations and open houses. MBI staff assisted with managment of design, construction managment, permitting, public input, and habitat management plan preparation. • •. �� I; PRINCIPAL AND FIREFLIESPLAY.COM FIREFLIES PLAY ENVIRONMENTS9 INC..q FOUNDED IN 19949 DESIGNS CHILDREN'S PLAY ENVIRONMENTS INSPIRED BY THE NATURAL WORLD. WE SEEK CREATIVE SOLUTIONS FOR CHALLENGING SITES INCORPORATING ENVIRONMENTAL SITE DESIGN AND9 OR PLAY, EQUIPMENT. WE RESPOND TO SITE-SPECIFIC ECOLOGY AND NATURAL AND CULTURAL HISTORY. PROJECTS FOR EXAMPLE.9 INCORPORATE STORM WATER EDUCATION AND RESTORATION OF NATIVE PLANT COMMUNITIES. SPECIFIC PROJECTS9 WILL INVOLVE LOCAL ARTISTS IN DESIGN OF ENVIRONMENTAL ART SPECIFIC TO THE SITE CONTEXT AND CHARACTER. FIREFLIES PLAY ENVIRONMENTS ALSO REPRESENTS BERLINER-SEILFABRIK.9 BIGToys, HENDERSON STEEL AND CUSTOM WOOD PLAY EQUIPMENT AND SENSORY AND WATER PLAY BY GORIC. WITH THE COMBINATION OF THESE OPTIONS IN PLAY EQUIPMENT,q WE DESIGN TO ACHIEVE COMPELLING9 CHALLENGING AND CREATIVE PLAY ENVIRONMENTS. OUR ULTIMATE GOAL IS TO CREATE PLAY ENVIRONMENTS THAT NOURISH AN INSPIRE SPIRITUAL -9 PHYSICAL AND COGNITIVE PLAY AND9 MAGICAL LIFELON MEMORIES. ALL FIREFLIES PLAY ENVIRONMENTS ARE ADA, CPSC, AND ASTM COMPLIANT, CANNON RIVER STEM SCHOOLq AIRRAULT, MN. CURRENT 20 10 CAMPUS MASTER PLAN, NATURAL PLAY ENVIRONMENT. HISTORIC""AQUA FOLLIES -9 -PLAY PLS PARK AND RECREATION BOARD, 2010. MINNESOTA FRIENDS SCHOOLq T. PAUL,, MN. 2006-2009 CAMPUS MASTER PLAN,, STORM WATER GRANT. MINNIAPPLE MONTESSOR1,9 ST. PAUL., MN. 2006 PRE-SCHOOL NATURAL PLAY ENVIRONMENT. EISENHOWER ELEMENTARY, HOPKINS,, MN. 2006-2009 "WE ARE WATER" ECOLOGY OF -• ■ STORM•GRANT. SECHLER PARK, CITY OF NORTHFIELD., 2006,, BERLINER NEPTUNE ANDFILOW-FLEX TERRANOS GATEWOOD ELEMENTARY, • 2004. ENVIRONMENTAL ART PRE-SCHOOL PLAY YARD. RESERVE BLOCK FORTY. MINNEAPOLIS PARK BOARD, MPLs. 200 CEDAR • • • • ■ BERLINER-CONLASTIC PLAYGROUND31 ;TEBBER PARK.-. PARK BOARDj, MPLS.,q00 - - - PRE-SCHOOL ■ SCHOOL AGE NEIGHBORHOOD ♦ ■ COMMUNITY DISCOVERY GARDEN RANGER TOWER9, CITY OF RAMSEY, 2005 HENDERSON CUSTOM• •D 2-12 INTEGRATED INTO GAMEBOARJ FOREST 1 TERRANOS CUSTOM PLAYG,I?OU,i 1 THE WALDORF SCHOOL.OF •TA,, MAPLEWOOD., MN. JUL Y 2002—CURRENT. DESIGN AND LAYOUT FOR 11 NETPLAY" BERLINER PLAY ENVIRONMEWT. THE BOULEVARD, LYNDALE AvE.,, MpLs,, MN. JULY 2002 -CURRENT. DESIGN FOR INTERIOR/EXTERIOR COURTYARD� PLAY ENVIRONMENT AND GARDEN. ST. PAUL PUBLIC HOUSING, DALE-MARsi-iALL SITE,, MN. APRIL 2002. DESIGN PLAY ENVIRONMENT FOR SUBSIDIZED FAMILY HOUSING. MINIAPPLE • • -I�, CUSTOM HENDERSON• • PLAY DESIGNED AS ATTACHMENT TO EXISITING DECK DUE TO SPACE SONSTRAINTS. SUBSIDIZED HOUSING.2005. LITTLE FLOWERS MONTESSORI.. ST. LOUIS PARK, MN. JULY 2002 -CURRENT. REMODEL OUT DOOR NATURAL PLAY AREA AND CUSTOM DESIGN PLAY EQUIPMENT. AARLEY HOPKINS -EARLY CHILDHOOD FAMILY EDUCATION, HOPKINS,, MN. JULY 2002. SECRET GARDEN DESIGN FOR PRE-SCHOOL PLAY AREA. PRE-DESIGNCHURCH OF THE OPEN DOOR, MAPLE GRovE,, MN. FEBRUARY 2002 -JUNE 2002. FOR ■ OUTDOOR cENVIRONMENT. MASTER PLAN PROPOSAL. r•• • . RIVERSIDE HISTORIC- • • I; • • • MN, JANUARY• • CUSTOM DESIGN AND LAYOUT FOR HISTORIC WOODEN PLAY BOAT. CENTRAL VILLAGE PARKo ST. PAUL., MN, MAY 2001- AUGUST 2002 1 DESIGN ♦ ■ LAYOUT FORLARGE" AMHERST-WILDER PLA YFOREST,MARINEON • • •' 1. DESIGN CONSULTANT FOR RESTORATION OF FOREST GLEN PLAY ENVIRONMENT FOR INNER CITY "AT -YOUTH.. ■ WACKER BERGLY, INC. UNIVERSITY OF 1 • INSTITUTE OF CHILD DEVELOPMENT LEAD DESIGN AND PROJECT M♦ ♦ FOR — • ♦ PLAY ♦ ■ AT — UPTOWN CHILDREN -9s ACADEMY, -MNl JUNE2000-JUNE 200 1. DESIGN OF OUTDOOR PLAY ENVIRONMENT• RISKq HOMELESSCHILDREN.• •ASSOCIATES, INC. DESIGNERLiTTL.E FLOWERS MONTESSORI, PLYMOUTH., MN, JAN. 2000 -OCTOBER 2001. AND PROJECT MANAGER• — EXTENSIVE PRE—SCHOOL ENVIR• c PLAY YARD. COMBINATION PARENT VOLUNTEER AND PROFESSIONAL INSTALLATION. THE LEARNING CENTER,, MPLS.., MN_, JUNE 1998 -JUNE 1999. DESIGN OF INDOOR AND OUTDOOR PLAY ENVIRONMENTS •ice CHILDREN OF HOMELES FAMILIES. PROJECT MANAGER5 CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS5 AND CONSTRUCTION ADMINISTRATION. HOKANSON/LUNNING/WENDE ASSOCIATES., INC. I McK.NiGHT INFANT -TODDLER PROJECT,, TWIN CITY HOUSING DEVELOPMENT CORP, INNER CITY INFANT -TODDLER OUTDOOR SENSORY PLAY AREA TO INCREASE SENSORY BASS LAKE TowmHomEs, PROJECT FOR PRIDE IN LIVING, NEw HOPE., MN, -2000. PLAY ENVIRONMENT DESIGN, CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS5 AND CONSTRUCTION ADMINISTRATION. HOKANSON/LUNNING/WENDE ASSOCIATES., INC. FF�ISENHOWZR ELEMENTARY ENVIRONMENTALEDUCATION COURTYARD, HOPKINS, MN. MAY 1997 -JUNE 2000. DESIGN TEAM FOR REMODELED COURTYARD • INCLUDE CURRICULUM. JEFFERSON LEENTARY PLAYGROUND RENOVATION, PLS.' MN, NRP, 1997-1998. DESIGN TEAM MEMBER FOR URBAN ELEMENTARY SCHOOL PLAYGROUND. ECOLOGIAL EDUCATION, ENVIRONMENTAL ART AND NATIVE AMERICAN DESIGN ELEMENTS HISTORY PROPOSED.CLOSE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE SEWARD I RE PLAYGROUND RENOVATION' PLS.' ' 1996-1977. LEAD DESIGNER AND PROJECT MANAGER FOR PRE-SCHOOL ENVIRONMENTAL PLAY YARD INSPIRED BY PROXIMITY THE MISSISSIPPI RIVER. CLOSE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE HISTORIC IL A KE'E AVE9 PLAYLOT RENOVATION,, PLS., MN, 1996-1997. EIGHBORHOOD PLAYGROUND RESTORED TO RECALL MILWAUKEE RAILROAD HISTORY. DESIGNER, PROJECT MANAGER, CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS, CONSTRUCTION ADMINISTRATION. CLOSE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE BANCROFT ELEMENTARYPLAYGROUND • . • - 1995-1996. INNER CITY ELEMENTARY SCHOOL PLAYGROUND RENOVATION, DESIGN EMPHASIZED RESTORATION OF HABITAT WITH NATIVE PLANT MATERIALS. TEAM DESIGNER, PROJECT MANAGER� CONSTRUCTION ADM INISTRATION-OBSERVATION. CLOSE LANDSCAPEARCHITECTURE COOPER ELEMENTARY PLAYGROUND RENOVATION, MPLs.,, MN, NRP, 1996t TEAM DESIGNER AND PROJECT MANAGER FOR NEIGHBORHOOD PLAYGROUND REVITALIZATION PROJECT. DESIGN INCLUDED AN OUTDOOR CLASSROOM FOR ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION. HOKANSON/LUNING/WENDE ASSOCIATES., INC. --hASTER PLAN JWIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA 11 q 1994-1995.y PROVIDED HISTORIC RESEARCH AND TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE AS DESIGN TEAM MEMBER. CLOSE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE PRINCIPAL AND CEO R 1 • HARVARD UNIVERSITY GRADUATE SCHOOL OF DESIGN, INSTITUTE FOR CHILD CARE DESIGN. OFFICE OF EXECUTIVE EDUCATION, JUNE 2002. PSI, CERTIFIED PLAYGROUND SAFETY INSPECTOR, MARCH 2008. ASTER OF SCIENCE IN LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE, DECEMBER 1993. UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA, COLLEGE OF ARCHITECTURE AND LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE BACHELOR OF LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE, .JUNE 1992. UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA, COLLEGE OF ARCHITECTURE AND LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE GRADUATED WITH DISTINCTION, MEMBER OF ASLA HONOR SOCIETY. BACHELOR OF ARTS, .TUNE 1975. ANTHROPOLOGY MAJOR AND ART MINOR. BOARD MEMBER YMCA CAMP WARREN, 2006 -CURRENT. FULL MEMBER OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY OF LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS, ASLA. MINNESOTA CHAPTER AMERICAN SOCIETY OF LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS, MASLA. ASLA. EXECUTIVE BOARD MEMBER, 1990-1993. INNESOTA DESIGN 'TEAM EXECUTIVE STEERING COMMITTEE MEMBER, 1988-1992. EMBER OF THE SOCIETY OF INDUSTRIAL ARCHEOLOGY, 1990-1992. PUBLISHED ARTICLES AVAILABLE FOR REVIEW. ------------ o 00 ou) 0 rri 9F% ON Pl > M r7l 3: OEM" rri m "U r'' > in u M rri M Z � � tin D O n �' rTl 1 1 0ou I Id O IrTI N 'C :C rrl rrl U rrl O Z t—N u U J > OOU 0 q > %IJ i9d 04 o 00 ou) 0 rri ME ge 16 a Cunning Wende Associates Firm Information Lunning Wende Associates Lunning Wende Associates is a Saint Paul based architecture, planning and urban design firm with a tradition of design excellence. We are committed to helping our clients accomplish their missions. Our designs grow from the culture of our clients — each project evolves as a distinct expression of our clients' values and of our interest in the human experience. Founded in 1983, our collaborative and participatory approach values the best ideas over the participatory ownership of ideas. Lunning Wende Associates has an extensive background and strong belief in community-based planning and a commitment to creating high performance, enduring environments. Our design and planning work has also been recognized with several design competitions and award programs. The firm's range of services include: e Strategic Planning • Programming and Research • Interior Design • Architecture • Master Planning • Urban Design • Community-based Planning • Project Management and Construction d-4 Neott Wende, AIA Principal Lunning Wende Associates, Inc. Scott has practiced as an Architect and Urban Designer for over 30 years. His experience with community and neighborhood planning provides a solid background for this project. In 1995, the Upper Mississippi River Corridor Plan, on which Scott worked with 12 of Minneapolis neighborhoods, won an AIA/Minnesota Honor Award for Urban Design. Scott has managed and designed complex projects ranging from mixed use developments to educational facilities. He has served as Chair of the Urball. Design Committee of the Minneapolis Chapter of AIA/Minnesota and also as President of the Standish -Ericsson Neighborhood Association. Professional Practice • Lunning Wende, Associates, Inc. December, 1997. Principal • Scott Wende Architects. March, 1990 -December, 1997. Principal • BRW, Inc. Minneapolis. February 1986 -February 1990. Project architect and project manager for commercial and institutional projects. Urban design planner for the Metropolitan Light Rail Transit; Hennepin, Anoka and Ramsey Counties • Various Offices 1971-1986. Design and management for housing, institutional and commercial projects. Education • University of Minnesota, Bachelor of Architecture, 1968-1973. • Registered Architect, Minnesota • Member, American Institute of Architects Urban Design - Community Planning Representative Projects • Comprehensive Plans and sub -regional planning for the City's of Hibbing & Chisholm, Minnesota. • Community Planning: Embarrass, Silver Bay, Red Lake Falls, Redwood Falls and Pine Island. Minnesota. Phillips neighborhood, Minneapolis. • Neighborhood Master Plans: Bottineau neighborhood and Elliot Park neighborhood. Minneapolis. • Minneapolis/Mississippi Upper River Corridor Planning. • Commercial Area Studies: Bloomington/Lake, Chicago/Lake, 27th/Lake and Field -Regina - Northrup neighborhoods, Minneapolis. Downtown park planning, Stillwater, Minnesota • Commercial Corridor Studies: Lake Street at the Crossroads, Chicago Avenue, Penn/Lowry, Minneapolis. Rice Street Revitalization, St. Paul. Downtown entries, Stillwater, Minnesota. Recognition • Architectural designs and planning projects published in Architecture Minnesota. • Competition entries recognized in three local and national design competitions. • Awards: AIA/Minnesota, Committee on the Urban Environment, Minnesota Preservation Alliance. V% nob Lunning Principal Lunning Wende Associates, Inc. Bob has 27 years of experience planning, programming and designing educational and institutional facilities, a variety of housing types, as well as neighborhood and urban scale plans. His completed projects have received awards from the Minnesota Preservation Alliance, the Committee on the Urban Environment, and'AIA/Minnesota, have been awarded in several local and national competitions, and have been published nationally. Bob's on-going involvement in community affairs currently focuses on public art education and support with FORECAST Public Artworks. Education • University of Iowa, Iowa City, B.G. S. 1972. Theatrical design and political history. • Boston Architectural Center, Boston, 1974-77. Architectural studies. • University of Minnesota, Minneapolis. M. Arch. (thesis pending) 1977-82. Professional Practice • Lunning Wende Associates, Inc. November 1997- Present, Principal • Hokanson/Lunning/Wende Associates, Inc. October, 1983- November, 1997, Principal • Miller Hanson Westerbeck Bell Architects. Minneapolis. February, 1979 -May, 1982. • Bastille-Neiley, Architects. Boston. September, 1974 -August, 1977. Teaching • Minneapolis College of Art and Design, Associate Professor. 1981-1993. • College of the Associated Arts, Visiting Lecturer. 1993, 1994. • University of Minnesota, Design, Housing and Apparel. Visiting Lecturer, 1994. Community Service • Saint Paul Planning Commission, Member. 1992-1994 Land Use Committee, Member; Urban Issues Committee Member; Mayors Foram Task Force, Chair; Bremer/RanView Small Area Plan Task Force, Co-chair. • Department of Public Works/Historic Preservation Commission Infrastructure Task Force, Co -Chair • Central River Valley Development Task Force, Member. • St. Paul Historic Preservation Commission, Member, 1994-1997. Chair, 1996-97. • FORECAST Public Artworks Board Member.1999-2009. Board Chair 2005-06. Representative Projects • Elliot Park Neighborhood Plan, Minneapolis, MN • East Lake Street, Minneapolis, MN • Fairview & University Conceptual Plan, Saint Paul, MN • MN Departments of Health, Human Services & Agriculture Master Plan, Saint Paul, NIN • Midway Centers Conceptual Plan, Saint Paul, MN • Hillcrest Shopping Center Conceptual Plan, Saint Paul, MN • White Bear Avenue Study, Saint Paul, MN • East Third Street, Saint Paul, MN • Sisters of St. Joseph Master Plan, Saint Paul, MN Recognition • Architectural designs published in Progressive Architecture, Architecture, Architectural Record, Inland Architecture, Landscape Architecture and other journals. • Competition entries recognized in six local and national design competitions. • Awards: AIA/Minnesota . Committee on the Urban Environment, Minneapolis Preservation Commission, Minnesota Preservation Alliance, University United Cunning Wende Project Experience Minneapolis,Elliot Park Neighborhood Muster Plan Elliot Park is uniquely situated as a traditional, geographically distinct downtown neighborhood with vast potential or being transformed into a model of new urban living. This Master Plan was defined by two primary objectives: • Prese.cve neighborhood heritage • Sustain a truly livable community Elliot Park has a rich cultural history, numerous regionally recognized landmarks and a variety of amenities. These features, in combination with close proximity to the river and downtown, create the unique character and wealth of opportunity for neighborhood enhancement and new development. The Master Plan rejects wholesale change and displacement in favor of careful in -fill and adaptive re -use with and emphasis on mixed-use, mixed -income and mixed -demographics as the foundation for redevelopment. r Inner city neighborhood Numerous historic properties Planning for growth and development Cunning Wende Project Experience Whittier Neighborhood Design Guidelines Minneapolis, MN The success of the Lyndale and Nicollet Avenues commercial corridors over the last fifteen to twenty years has served the Whittier neighborhood well. Knowing that change is both inevitable and good, but also valuing the character and eccentricities of the neighborhood, the Whittier Alliance took strategic steps to put into place controls that would both foster and preserve the unique character of the Whittier commercial corridors. The goal of this document is to give developers a sense of the neighborhood and to reinforce to current commercial property owners the value of thoughtful facade and building improvements. The challenge was to convey the soul of the neighborhood in a way that is not overly prescriptive, opens avenues of creativity and lays out the positive preferences of the neighborhood. The design standards are developed through the interconnected relationship of the pedestrian to the building, pedestrian to the street, and the building to the lot. "Green" and sustainable initiatives are also woven into the document. Develop vibrant commercial areas Express the community view Provide "green" and sustainable commercial initiatives 15 f" Or { fit ?4 a 1 .i.A t wt' / N"J w �lt•il Develop vibrant commercial areas Express the community view Provide "green" and sustainable commercial initiatives 15 Cunning Wende Project Experience Elliot b rd Design Guidelines Minneapolis, The Elliot Park Design Guidelines are focused around the "Centennial Commons" an eight block area occupying the geographic center of Elliot Park Neighborhood. Because the Centennial Commons sector features so many of the defining elements and qualities of the neighborhood the immediate hope is that these guidelines will help direct specific development initiatives that will begin to reclaim and revitalize .this "heart" of the Elliot Park Neighborhood. The guidelines are developed through the interconnected scales of building, block and district and are meant to highlight the primary characteristics that define the essential sense of place and the best examples of built form throughout all of Elliot Park Neighborhood. By applying some of the Centennial Commons Design Guidelines, a very different kind of neighborhood begins to emerge, one that interweaves a frayed neighborhood fabric of scattered sites into a whole fabric. The schematic drawing is an interpretation of how a combination of through -block connections, pedestrian realm improvements, streetwall continuity, exterior and interior courtyards, and infill development can reconnect elements of the neighborhood. current Elliot Park vision for an interconnected Elliot Park KEY Exterior eourfyurds Pedestrian Wulkways Interior Courtyurds Elliot Park Nei hborhood Design Guidelines MIMI,` Pedestrian Realm The spaces between the fagades of buildings and the edges of streets comprise a continuum of public and private realms. In these spaces the pedestrian is of primary importance. The physical elements used in these spaces—porches, planters, lawns, trees, street furnishings—and the relationship between them can convey a variety of messages about how people are intended to interact. In Elliot Park Neighborhood these elements are arranged in a variety of ways to create unique streets. New additions to the neighborhood should recognize and respond to the particular circumstances of each street by incorporating such elements as: e porches, porticos and stairways ® front and side yard lawns and gardens * window and balcony planter boxes * grass, trees and plantings along sidewalk boulevards @ pedestrian scale lighting e sidewalk furnishings, such as benches, kiosks, bike racks and attractive trash receptacles o aesthetic improvement to sidewalks, such as multi -patterned surfaces and public art pedestrian enhancements to street crossings, such as intersection bump -outs and crosswalk pavers 24 Attention to the human scale Urban infill development District scale sustainable initiatives Cunning Wende Project Experience M 1M Minneapolis, This prominent commercial area on Lake Street, one of south Minneapolis' busiest commercial corridors, had not seen commercial reinvestment for many years. The Cedar -Lake Commercial Club in conjunction with the Minneapolis Community Development Agency funded this commercial area study to address revitalization strategies. Phase One produced guidelines and criteria for area revitalization. Phase Two made recommendations for a commercial improvement plan. Implementation steps, strategies and potential projects were outlined to assist the Business Association in future decision-making. The Mercado Central project was defined as the first priority project. Subsequent storefront and retail improvements continue to this day. Next year will see street and streetscape improvements made possible through a cooperative effort by the City, County and State. Bloomington- Cedar loomington- Cedar Business Associationand the Lake Street Council Commercial area revitalization Public and private investment Mercado Central renovation (before) Cunning Wende Project Experience Midway Center Key Points Saint Paul, MN While Saint Paul's Midway shopping center is "under performing," its location is prime for 9 Commercial arevitalized regional center. Working with a consortium of neighborhood groups, we proposed revitalization: amixed use plan incorporating several of the existing retail tenants while creating a "lifestyle center" regional marketplace along with 800 new dwelling units. 0 Transit -oriented developement e Mix of uses and activities z. x. 0 Cunning Wende Project Experience East Side Neighborhood Revitalization Saint Paul, MN ,. • • • •® a • • ® • • �® • • • • • • • • •®, • Iw q �iiil Neighborhood Assets Map Neighborhood Center • Stabilize • residential blocks • Selective rehabilitation of existing ® •stock • Redevelopment of distressed housing • Strategic planning and developmentof the commercial • e• d W SandersWackerBerg - ly, I Inc. -P, I rs Mr. DuWayne Konewko, Director Community and Parks Development City of Maplewood IL830 County Road B East Maplewood, Minnesota 55109 RE: Proposal for Park Planning Services Goodrich Park Sanders Wacker Bergly, Inc., Landscape Architects and Planners, are very pleased to submit the following proposal for the Parking Planning Services for Goodrich Park in Maplewood. The SW13 Team is well qualified to provide the services requested. SW13 has been a leading park and recreation consulting firm for over 30 years, providing outstanding service and creative solutions for a wide range of projects. We recognize the City of Maplewood's strong commitment to sustainable projects and we will', approach the project focused on the City's goals and objectives discussed at our meeting. Thank you for taking the time to meet with me regarding Goodrich Park and the proposed extension t* Troutbrook Trail. I appreciated your input, as well as, the input from Jim Taylor and Audra Robbins. I you have questions or require additional information, please give me a call. am=, William D. Sanders FASLA President 36_15'Kellogg Boulevard East * Saint Paul, MN 55101-1411 Phone: (651) 221-0401 * Fax: (651) 297-6817 * www.swb*inc.com The following Scope of Services is based upon our discussion of the project and our familiarity with the site. As you review the proposal, they may be tasks that need to be modified or discussed in more detail. We are happy to make changes that will give you the best product and the most cost effective project. MASTER PLAN PHASE, wilm 1716• A. Project Start Up — Finalize the work program and approach, contract,, schedules, etc. T" Meet with the City staff and complete design team to reach complete agreement on the goals and objectives of the project. A. Assemble all information that is currently available on the site, including survey, soils, utilities and any other information that is relevant to the project. B. Notify the City if there is any additional information needed for the project. C. Visit the site and conduct a visual inventory of the property. Become familiar with tKE site conditions and document the issues and opportunities that are apparent. A. There should be an initial community/neighborhood meeting to establish the goals and objectives for the project discuss the work program and schedule and engage the residents in a discussion of the issues and opportunities. The initial public meeting may take place either after the Information Gathering Phase or after the Development of Concept Alternatives. If it is one early, then the residents can help to inform the concept alternatives. Sometimes, however, it is helpful to have some concepts that residents can react to rather than trying to discuss the project from a "clean" slate. Proposal — Goodrich Park Page - 2 February 19, 2010 ow. 5 05 arr Sx" We can discuss the timing of the first public meeting as we refine the work program and schedule. The public meeting is to review the Concept Alternatives is perhaps the most importanl part of the public process. The input of the public is crucial at this point in order to narrow the range of ideas and move the project in a preferred direction. C. A public meeting is also needed to review the Master Plan and make final refinements of the plan. TASK 4 DEVELOPMENT OF CONCEPT ALTERNATIVES A. Prepare three (3) concept alternatives of the approved program. B. Prepare preliminary cost estimates for each concept. C. Discuss the concept alternatives with the staff/design team. D. Participate in a public meeting. E. Present the Concepts to the Park and Recreation Commission. TASK 5 PRELIMINARY MASTER PLAN A. Based upon input received from the review of the concept alternatives., prepare a Preliminary Master Plan that provides' a clear, well-developed delineation of the project. B. Prepare written and graphic material to support and further explain the Master Plan. C. Prepare a preliminary cost estimate for the project. D. Discuss the preliminary master plan with staff/design team. E. Participate in a public meeting. F. Present the Preliminary Maser Plan to the Park and Recreation Commission. A. Based upon input received from the review of the preliminary master plan, prepare a final Master Plan that fully describes, in both written document form and illustrated drawings, the Master Plan for Goodrich Park. Proposal — Goodrich Park Page - 3 February 19, 2010 .r. Document the planning and public process as part of the Master Plan document. C. Prepare an implementation section of the Maser Plan, including cost estimates, phasing, anticipated funding and schedule. 1.111 Meet with staff/design team. liq 1111111111111 11111111111 i 1111i , � I I I Ili 11;i movemIrM M.�� I I NMI' I I 11[i Upon approval of funding for the project, the following standard design tasks will be provided, as described in AIA documents. The specc work program, schedule and fees will be negotiated at that time. Schematic Design Phase Design Development Phase Construction Document Phasc: Bid Phase Construction Phase TOTAL HOURLY RATES Principal Landscape Architect/Planner Project Landscape Architect/Planner Designer/Technician 11� fl� �� 1� 1 11 f1i 14M` I•I � � 1111 1 1 � 9 11 ffLoTeum miiii 'Iiii $ 85.00/hou $ 75-00/hou $ 65.00/hou Proposal — Goodrich Park Page - 4 February 19, 2010 Proposal — Goodrich Park Page - 5 February 19, 2010 • James Antonen, City Manager FROM: John E. Helcl, 11; Graduate Intern -City Manager's Office SUBJECT: City of Maplewood Citizens' Parks and Recreation Survey DATE: June 7, 2010 INTRODUCTION. A survey,to gauge public opinion of the City of Maplewood Parks and Recreation services has recently concluded after a two-month collection of data. Beginning • `• 1, 2010, 1 drafted a survey that was distributed and posted • for the purpose of gathering citizen and user input of Maplewood's parks, trails, and recreation services. Under your direction, the survey' s design was to capture a sense of public perception and satisfaction in brief, as a 'snapshot' of the community's opinion • recreation •••• within Maplewood. The survey was posted • and available in print from April 1 , to May 31, 2010. The survey -•' 173 countable returns, • a 0.4% share • the city's population • 36,087. Returns that were found non -useable by way of self -voiding (i.e. paradoxical responses or with no answers beyond the first five questions of the survey) have bee omitted • the final tabulation • results. I The opportunity was given to survey -takers to respond to some of the questions in expanded 'long -form' answers in order to gain subjective input regarding certain topics. The answers were • therefore not • in a • analysis, • have qualitative value in public input and have been included in an addendum to the statistical report of the survey. This survey and report are for informational purposes and require no action by the City Council. To: Mr. James • City Manger Fr: John E. Helcl, 11 Graduate Interr Re: Final Findings and Report of Citizens' Parks and Recreation Survey I Attached you will find a summary report of the findings of the recent City of Maplewood Parks and Recreation Citizens' Survey. The results should provide the isnapshot' you were looking for regarding public opinion on the subject of the City's parks and recreation offerings and facilities. With that said, the total number of useable returns was 173, or 0.4% of the City's population of 36,087. Returns that were found non -useable by way of self -voiding (i.e. paradoxical responses or with no answers beyond the first five questions of the survey) have been omitted for the final tabulation of results. Expanded 'long -form' answers will follow the statistics and charts within this report for your use. The answers were subjective, therefore not usable in a quantitative analysis, but have qualitative val de in public input. John E. Helcl, 11 fent Iivelreside outside :of apleo . 1p 6-G 40 WE Age of res pondent :9= 2E-34- L5-444- am 45 -54 - IM 515-611, Adults 1 4 ..- q 1 86 . . .... . .. ..4 ....... �n ci ou 5 4 Adults: under :65:( 8-64years).. . .. .... T27: 10:::: 7 , ...... . ... 4 4 4 4 4 i i years) i: Teenagers :22::+!:':i:':-':::::: Y:! 17 0 78: T 113-17 - w i i . . . . . . . . . . . . : 44 Children (12'!V66irs' and under). 22 0'T::::::-=: ..... 84 Adult-sover 65 :e Adults and : r,65 x`1.8-64- yews T een.-a-gavers (13-17 years) I Children (12 years and unde(i, MMMEM 40 S1- ;S-0 1 DO Um M 4 OM 5 or snore - o - • 1 -10 times o 020-49 • ,r Unsure ' -- 1 • 9 • /Dowtkn'oWoutoasth Reasonab'lellow eiier reasonable r�or unreasonable/aurege �lnreasonable/high`::�: 'Unmown/!Don't Use M e � - � • T `viaS . Unsure/ o opinion 419 P dating existing rails reatln'g amore trails 30' N either........ : .. . .. ... ... .. .... ... Uns re/ o opinion 0.7-MEHMIM Unsure/.Don't Know ,{ Satisfied : AT Ui o r° 71 ° Satisfied nordissatisfied either 9 °�o Dissatisfied _ of applicable/did; not par#ici of 396% ........ . .. .. g n up: for; recreation Fn the past 5 years,, where did memebrs of your household si a activftje:s-'?,. (check aU that aPplly) Maplewood Re-cfeati.o. n: Leagues Maplewood -. Co on m u pity Center Com:rnuniiity Education C hunch Club. jlTrag .-e[ tea: �ms or prix.-atehea-4-th ciubs Neighborhood PrDgrams Rams&j:County programs An Cher city"s programs D ill no t - s ig n, u. p f or- activitiec-11 Other (pl-r_-a-lqe speci ty) -30 1 ful 20. 4,-G 50. parks parks13 Have enough of both kinds of • e M-. a.. p I ew-a- ad Community Center T ra.-J"Is *1 n M.- -a p [,ewceac d-- Map[awood Nature Center Larger -co- mmunity parks in Map[avvaad Smaller neigh borhoad- pairks ire Maplswaod Comm u n ity. ba 1-. 1-f. ie I dis-,if -at h: I et i-ic f i -e [---dit- Maplewood R;acrea-tibn Pragrams,& Racrea-tion Lac-ig.u.-es N --. e i'g h .-- b o- r I i- o i ia- - d, Preserg tres/Niatures Center No 'v%ftHn thf--- last'33, n- elm- %��Althin.: the tast G m %-�Nrithi::n:- thm=- year am the Iast'2 SM 'vAiNna: the I ast 5 years an Ne�!:Per _0 MITI M. -MMT 6=0 4 ------------------ - - - IL " mm so 9 a EMISSION - ------------------------------ EMISSION: ----------------------------------------- so 411 • 0 I'M ------------------------------------------------------------- ltr.a -------------- - ------ - --- - -- INS ii 11 1 40 a so Sso 11 MEN MINIMUM ME M-. a.. p I ew-a- ad Community Center T ra.-J"Is *1 n M.- -a p [,ewceac d-- Map[awood Nature Center Larger -co- mmunity parks in Map[avvaad Smaller neigh borhoad- pairks ire Maplswaod Comm u n ity. ba 1-. 1-f. ie I dis-,if -at h: I et i-ic f i -e [---dit- Maplewood R;acrea-tibn Pragrams,& Racrea-tion Lac-ig.u.-es N --. e i'g h .-- b o- r I i- o i ia- - d, Preserg tres/Niatures Center No 'v%ftHn thf--- last'33, n- elm- %��Althin.: the tast G m %-�Nrithi::n:- thm=- year am the Iast'2 SM 'vAiNna: the I ast 5 years an Ne�!:Per _0 100. M, EN ct 0 Pl 4n� w it, . easeindoicamte nich facitiltes were used and howyou woutd rate tA,e maintenance of elach. 77l =7 aOn --- mm . rw rx CL rg I -M Excel ent ME: Good NO Fair PC -r Do • ---------- 100. M, EN ct 0 Pl 4n� w it, . easeindoicamte nich facitiltes were used and howyou woutd rate tA,e maintenance of elach. 77l =7 aOn --- mm . rw rx CL rg I -M Excel ent ME: Good NO Fair PC -r Do • M �� ................. ... ... ... .. :t ivel.,!.''::�:�:::::::::�:::::::::�:. :.Programs arej®o ,. expensive programs elsewhere :: 13: BOtter� recreation ..... .... .... . - .. ... .. ... . .. ............ ..... ob �crw: e o Pr:O:g''ra,mS..t d d If yo:u or membersof your ho-useh-oid donl: use City of Maplewood pa:rks,, traits.,, or: facill-bies; what- we t -he reasons'-?- Lack -of time: There. ave. no-ib-arriers t P:Bfticip.atj 'N t.- om Om-, -0. Lackof 'info.r.m, -atian about re---reation-.- c Inc.-a-mine.nient tinning of::.P..rQ,.g- r:ar'l.-l- Don't feel safe Programs arm tao, expensive. B-ett-eT recreatian prog.ra.-m-us. elsew h.er.e Prefer park,,min other co. m -s mnunlbe-s Not avvari_= of r-e`creation p-r-n-CIT.-Rms 5 2-G Ar"W'"Ell r. Mp I ---- - -------------------------- ERR M.. --------------------------• - ------------- I- HE ------------------------------------ - ---- ------------- - ---- ------ -- - ................. ... ... ... .. :t ivel.,!.''::�:�:::::::::�:::::::::�:. :.Programs arej®o ,. expensive programs elsewhere :: 13: BOtter� recreation ..... .... .... . - .. ... .. ... . .. ............ ..... ob �crw: e o Pr:O:g''ra,mS..t d d If yo:u or membersof your ho-useh-oid donl: use City of Maplewood pa:rks,, traits.,, or: facill-bies; what- we t -he reasons'-?- Lack -of time: There. ave. no-ib-arriers t P:Bfticip.atj 'N t.- om Om-, -0. Lackof 'info.r.m, -atian about re---reation-.- c Inc.-a-mine.nient tinning of::.P..rQ,.g- r:ar'l.-l- Don't feel safe Programs arm tao, expensive. B-ett-eT recreatian prog.ra.-m-us. elsew h.er.e Prefer park,,min other co. m -s mnunlbe-s Not avvari_= of r-e`creation p-r-n-CIT.-Rms 5 2-G 10 M AT a 9 *� 1, M,,,Tln 11 a � � � �- Mo W M 11 1 1 i � � � M �� I do not know. We use Hazelwood for my daughter's soccer team. Casey Hazelwood, Robin hood Maplewood Community center Wakefield name unknown- McKnight and beam Harvest PLEASANTVIEW PARK Gethsemane PLEASEANTVIEW PARK Lions The portion of the Community Center that butts up to the bike trail. Is that a park? Keller Maplecrest Park Nature center Wakefield Goodrich Playcrest park Maplecrest Hazelwood Sherwood Vista Hills Vista Hills Gethsemane Wakefield Hazelwood Park I think it is named Ferndale Park. Located on Geranium Ave between Ferndale and McKnight Rds Kohiman Hazelwood & Harvest Sherwood Park Vista Hills Pleasantview Park Edgerton Edgerton Heritage Square children's park, small park behind Maplewood Library, then Hazelwood Park Wakefield Keller Lake Regional Park(s) Edgerton Afton Playcrest Phalen park • Hazelwood Hazelwood• • Applewood and Pleasantview Keller• • Wakefield • Robin Holloway • Priory . • Plicheck ROBIN• Harvester • • pleasant view . • Playcrest • Goodrich • Joy Park • Harvest • Western ill Maplewood• Timber • i l I ball fields Hazelwood• • Vista ill Hazelwood• Edgerton • N 9. Are there any past recreation/s ports programs you would like to see •.iii again? • T -ball, basketball, fast pitch softball, baseball, tennis • We are using North St Paul recreation programs • Pilates - I think this has been reinstated, but I would like to see it continued as I permanent fitness program. • July 4th • Breast Stroke clinics at MCC pool. • Teen age programs i.e.: prom dress donation / drop off or fashion shows • Basketball league • Swim -lessons @ Mahtomedi Beach in Mahtomedi, MN • Is the Maplewood Community Center part of the Maplewood recreation and sports programs? If so, I would like more evening classes, specifically yoga, offered. It seems like the majority of the group classes are offered during weekdays. How about trying to make an effort to accommodate the schedules of working adults? • Horseback riding camp, girls volleyball • More offerings for senior high youth, such as tennis, bowling, HS dodgeball. Start a lacrosse program that includes junior high. Lose @ Win • The in-house basketball league is very good. • Several years ago, at Maplecrest Park, about once a month during the spring and summer months there would be a small block party where they would offer fun things to do for young children, free popcorn and things like that, and even sometimes inflatable play platforms which kids would. love. • keep offering water aerobics • My grandchildren love the Movies in the Park. • Safe on My Own Class for youth. • Archery hay bales set up. • PARKS USED TO HAVE HOTDOGS AND GAMES FOR THE KIDS ONCE A WEEK AND MORT THE AND THE PUPPET MOBILE • not sure if this is Maplewood or St. Paul, but sailing lessons at Phalen would be cool to offer again ... • Horseback riding/Courage riders, Biking clubs, Pilates 11. Are all age groups being represented in our programs/have program available? i • Seems there are few/no offerings from Maplewood for older children (12+) such as fast pitch softball, tennis, football, basketball leagues. All I am aware is baseball and I think that it's done as an athletic association apart from the city. • More for kids under the age of 5 • More programs for ages 3-5. • 'Do more outreach to diverse communities to engage them to meet there needs. Many of our formal recreation programs are filled with white children. I see very little involvement from any of the minority groups in our programmed recreational activities. Maybe bring back the night out in each neighborhood park that was done a few years ago. Held in a different park throughout Maplewood. • More senior citizen programs would be good. Growing age group in the next few years. • would like more 8 9 year old programs • It would be nice to see some exercise program(s) addressed to overweight teens/young adults. My daughter (17) wouldn't want to participate in water exercises with a bunch of older women, whether or not I participated. Maybe a geocache program that included walking and was local would get kids (and adults) out 1) walking and 2) seeing their community (St. Paul and/or Maplewood). I also would like more information about the walking/biking trail behind the Comm. Center - is it lit? Is it secure? Does it close like a park does? Is it kept clear in winter? Also, I think the orientation needs to be revamped - we've stopped and started membership a' couple of different times and were not informed that some classes are 1) free and 2) available on a first� come, first-served basis - maybe even the day or evening we are able to attend. • Lots of things for children, lots of things for seniors. What about the middle aged population, those whose children are grown, and do not use the facilities. What is provided for middle-aged folks, no groups, some community ed., but would like to see more. More field trips on Saturdays, not always during the day when we are working. I am not sure if people retire at 55, but it seems like there are activities for that age group, but during the day. • Offer more outdoor and adventure -type activities for older elementary children. My son was in the day camps during the summer last year, and he was easily bored with the pool all afternoon (which is also not healthy given the high chlorine count in there!) and the lack of fun activities during the day. The staff could also have done more to help integrate new and shy children into the program. As for your parks, they are full of garbage! I try to pick up items when I see them on the ground, but both the one on Beam and Fredrick, as well as the park on County Rd. C and McKnight are full of garbage on the ground, etc. • Hardly ANYTHING for teens. Also, no spinning classes for working adults (who •- • at 5 and • it's impossible to make the 5:30 class (7:00 would be nice), so I haven't been able to attend since I began a contract position. Help!!! Ditto • the • classes. Also, it would be great to be able to check the number of visits I've completed online since the customer service desk has limited hours. 9 We are currently in the K/1 Soccer Clinic at MCC, and most of the kids are Pre - K. We have not been happy with this class. 0 1 don't see anything offered in the 23-35 range other then exercise. 0 Senior high youth who are not in varsity sports don't have many offerings. Programs for adults with disabilities, such as those with developmental disabilities and separate programs targeted to adults dealing with a mental illness. Participated in Lose2Win once but it is now too expensive even though we are members. Allow • kids to practice at Hazelwood. Consider allowing • needing more field space, such as Blackhawks of St. Paul to rent time at Hazelwood. Coordination would need to • done with NESA • it would bring in income. Need • •• school - I know it's a harder group to •- • it's a •••• group. 0 Offer more programs for youths between 12 -17 years and adult tennis and racquetball • 0 Need better control of animals in part. Poop all over, even on walking surfaces. Enlist public in giving • citations • using volunteers. No cost to city and much better control. 0 1 do notice that you are mainly focusing on the young and the elders more. It would be appreciated it you could make more programs for the teenage and the young/medium old adults. 0 More for younger kids. I have a 3 year old who feels pretty left out when he sees his older brother doing all the fun stuff! 0 More activities for elderly folks -- e.g. nature programs. 0 more senior programs 0 Offer all activities for all age groups in the summer. 0 The only soccer program for older kids is NESA and it's REALLY expensive. 0 Keep doing what you are doing. 0 1 would like to see more • organized •• activities, especially where you can sign up as a single and • have to assemble a team to join (fall softball, kickball, co-ed golf league, tennis partnerpool, etc) 0 We need more middle age groups M N 16. In general, the existing parks and recreational facilities offered by the City -r ., jeets the needs of you and members of your household: We were members of the community center, but cancelled because the family changing rooms were always full of families with older kids (8+). On several occasions, my husband and I waited 20+ minutes for a shower with 2 •• .•-•' 2 and 3. On at least one occasion, we just dressed the kids and took them homi-,z • • We were doing swimming lessons at the community center, but with the pool open, it was too • We now use • Glenn -.• We were not happy when the family membership changed to not include childcare, and that drop in childcare is more expensive and not guaranteed. A. • 40 • 40 • • A& 'M • A" ar 'M 4P s•• 4V 9 40 &A .0 4V 0 0 0 •. • • P dP Ila W • IM& Ift A& Am • Ift Am 'M AV Ift A& 'M Is, 'M Am •'M 'M 'M •'M •- • Im • Im Im Im A& Im I'm Ift A& Im Ift Im Aft S Im 1� 4V Am 4V• • Im AV I" Ift Im Ift Ift Im Im 4V 'Ift Im Im Ift Im Im Im 0 1 1 Im I'm Im Im Ift Ift Im Ift Ift Ift AV W OF Im .40 Im Im 40 Im 40 Im 4407 40 go Im Ift Im Im 1� Ift 4V Ah Aft • • Ah Aft 40 Aft W • 4P ev 0 • •40 Ak Am dip dr •—•• Ah 410 Im 4.WP • Ah• • advantage at their hoop. a • More could be done, and I think offering more useful classes would be a start ... that focus on family -style outings, activities, etc. • Basketball courts!!!!!!!!! Other activities for teens; so very, very many activities are geared only towards young children in Maplewood. • There are no parks near our home where the kids can play soccer. Gloster has been allowed to deteriorate so it cannot be used. Wakefield is too small. Other parks are too far to safely walk or ride bike to. It would be nice to have even rustic trails in Gladstone Savanna to be able to enjoy it while preserving it. Additional space for baseball, lacrosse, indoor soccer, modern batting cages would be nice. Leasing Corner Kick? Just an idea. 0 More full size outdoor hockey rinks which can be used for rollerblade hockey in the summer, Try to keep Gethsemane from being developed into housing. An archery range. 0 Lions Park needs updating.Can't wait for it to start soon!! 0 Would love to see more indoor ice hockey options. 0 The parks I have been to, they haven't been that clean. Litter, dirty restrooms, play equipment in bad order. 0 More programs for elderly people (e.g. nature programs,). 0 We need picnic shelters. The parks are not inviting to families. 0 Could use more trails and maybe a larger park in South Maplewood 0 You need to put a shelter at Harvest Park. If there were severe weather in the area, there is no shelter to go to 0 Playground equipment at some of the parks in our area is very old and outdated. Hazelwood Park, near our home, has remained unchanged in the 12+ years we have lived here. Hazelwood Park is a heavily used park with its soccer fields, walking trails, and 4th of July activities. Outdated playground equipment reflects on the city. Families considering moving to the area may look at the playgrounds and be disappointed in what some of the neighborhood parks have to offer in the way of attractive, updated playgrounds. 0 Dog Park 0 1 want hay bales for archery. 0 We have participated in the sport recreation and while the fee is cheap, they are not good programs for children to understand the fundamentals. We have since moved on to pay a higher price in Roseville for the same programs because they practice and teach the basics to children. 0 Dog parks would be nice. Off leash, fenced in. 0 IT SEEMS THAT THERE IS A LOT OF BAD GOING ON AT THE PARKS LATELY AND I REALLY WANT TO KEEP THE TRAILS THE WAY THEY ARE AND NOT ADD LIGHT RAIL BAD IDEA SO CLOSE TO THE SCHOOLS AND PARKS. 0 1 can never get a spot for a picnic at any of the parks - they are always in use by the same groups of people over and over. I am not sure how early I would need to get there in order to reserve a table. Very Frustrating!! Ah Am all Ak AM dft Ab dip AM Alk w IM Ah 11h Am 'Amik 'Am Alb Ask 'Am Alk do 40 at AM • 40 W Alk w Alh 0 dp 40 • Ah •IV w •W W w• see • •• 9 all• dog do • w dr W dh S ev 4LV LP Am 40h Alk AN dy dr Ift d" Alk Alk am Am 0 w• 10, do ev Am all Am Alk Ak Al, Ah Alk w 9 1111111 0 m 0 1 9 1 18. Have you or • •' your household • • •in any City Parks and Recreation programs? • Baseball, t -ball, softball soccer, swimming basketball• Lots • Youth (in past) and baseball. Occasional nature center programs • baseball, swimming lessons • Extreme r Various fitness programsCommunity • t -ball, swimming, basketball, community center • Soccer, Softball,t-ball • Easter Hunt • softball =Soccer • Swim lessons, softball. • Community ter, Baseball. • Baseball and soccer years ago when our children. • day camps, l leagues,I Celebration, t -ball, after school programs, swimming,I trips, puppet wagon shows, Maplewood Community membership,Center iclasses,, Taste of Maplewood. • Volleyball • Maplewood iCenter--Swimming,i it , weight • II, Football, Swimming,, Tali Chi, Karate. • I. Basketball and programs at center Maplewood• Basketball • i . • Some programs(s) at the Dodge Nature Center. (I thinkname.) • Floor hockey, baseball, softball, swimming lessons. Have taken exercise classes at the MCC many times, but alwaysextra classesY, most r included in the membership. participate in the Communityi i exercise. also participatein some of the center related i iitheatre. make re use of some of the offeringsin the future. night• Tuesday II • Have participated in physical fitness classes and also taken the play (years ago), walk dailyin Wakefield, as II as walkingr I . • day camps, swimming Iasses, water aerobic classes • Beginning Tumbling don'ti Ilive (that I know of). • basketball leagues • volleyball • Ice rinks. Community Center • T -ball, nearball, soccer, floor hockey • My daughter was in the summer camp at the community center and now she is a camp counselor. • Soccer (son a player/father as coach) • In the past. Hard part a lot is offered in old neighborhood (south of 94), this is riot that easy. Maplewood has a long it township. We are now closer to the northern end. Didn't so summer program, as it didn't go all day for Middleschool - BB (only 1/2 day) Skyhawks. • swimming lessons, theater camps, etc. • Youth guitar lessons, trails and parks. • we are members of the community center and work out regularly • Basketball, Baseball for my sons. I also used to attend classes at MCC • When my four children were younger they participated in swimming lessons at the Community Ctr., T Ball, softball etc. • softball • In past years, son played baseball. Daughter played softball. • Swimming lessons. Attending outdoor festivals. • Way too many/ unsure of which ones. • Soccer, baseball, swimming • Our children were active in softball, soccer and hockey • Lots. • community center • soccer, baseball • Sports • Adult volleyball and softball • T - ball this summer. • Personal safety - Sgt. Scott Steffan • Softball • T -ball, softball, baseball, soccer, adult softball, also use the community center. • water aerobics • Youth baseball & softball • Adult Softball • sports • My children ages 8 and 6 have used soccer in the past and yearly use the community center for swimming lessons. I currently use Roseville Park and Rec. Their programs are substantially better than Maplewood as are there parks. The Roseville parks are kept much nicer are patrolled more often. I often find garbage in the Maplewood parks and people using foul language and loitering. • Maplewood Nature Center • Maplewood baseball • Baseball, Soccer, Floor Hockey, Swimming • kids sports • MAA Youth Baseball • tennis, t -ball, baseball, younger children activities • softball, tee ball, community center, taste of Maplewood, fireworks • My children and grand children now live in different parts of the Twin Cities. • fall soccer, MAA baseball • nature center events • kid dance, volleyball, soccer, adult softball and volleyball • Boys and Girls baseball, basketball, soccer, golf, skills training, adult swimming, and golf instruction. • softball, baseball and soccer • Softball- years ago. 20. The current mix of recreation programming meets the needs of my household: • Relative to the Community Center: I would like more group fitness classes in the evenings and weekends. Those who work 9 to 5 miss out on many of the great classes offered only during the day. • See earlier comment about programs for children aged 12+ Ift Am Aft • IM • 'Ift Ift owl 0 0 Ift Ah 0 Ift • Ift Am •w see Am • • 69 Ift 0 0 w 0 w Ift 0 0 IM 66 Ift w 0 0 IM Ift I M 0 'M A% 0 AM 0 1" • 0 IM 0 so 0 0.1 0 W 0 0 0 0 0 so 0 Ah• 0 0 A 0 ak Ah A% • 0 IM 0 0 0 0 Ah 0 Ah 0 0 Ak Ak Alk 0 div Ah 4ft AM 0 0 0 4 0 Ilk 0 Ak A&• Am — 0 0 • 0 Am 0 Aft M Ah •• •.• — — 0 4M •••• Aft 0 A& • Ak Ak 0 ---• V • Ak Ak • 0 Alk 6, 0 Ift A% AM 0 A Aafth Ift A�ft Aft, A% I -lip to] t'&�O) I OIN q 11M LO INtION I KTA I I B&qm;l — 1191 at I' park near us, we don't consider much. WE SWITCHED OUR KIDS TO NORTH ST. PAUL FOR BALL BECAUSE THE TEAMS WERE NOT EVEN AT ALL. There is a need for free trees. Easy for cities to get but somehow whenever offered they run out. About 4 years ago the Parks and Recreation Department decreased staff and programs. Since then both the number and quality of programs have been inadequate. They fail to attract the number of participants they previously had, and theydo not involve as many other communities in leagues, which makes the participants experience much less meaningful and • as a step in thei athletic development as a potential High School athlete. Many Maplewood youth participate in other communities programs because they believe they receive better training, mentoring, and competition. Not enough variety or times and the cost is high for residents. 21. In the past 5 years, where did members of your household sign up for recreational activities? (Check all that apply) • Maplewood Community Center • Maplewood Community Center • Maplewood Community Center • North Saint Paul Community Center • Maplewood Comm. Center • At the Maplewood Community Center • none • Maplewood Community Center • We participate in the Maplewood Community Center. • North St. Paul Softball League • Summer camp • School & North St. Paul Programs. Use to be St. Paul's (Conway & Battle Creek). • MCC • work, young professionals organization, alumni association • Courage center 22. If members of your household currently leave the city for park and recreation facilities or activities, what activities are they? (if none, enter "N/A") • Dog park, cross-country skiing, canoeing, hiking, picnics • Baseball, fast pitch softball, tennis, football • North St Paul parks, Lake Elmo parks • Exploring, fishing • Children leave for Archery and Karate • Biking, hiking • Frisbee Golf, golf lessons • disc golfing • Depending on the sport and availability, we will go between Maplewood and St. Paul programs. • Soccer • basketball • Again, Lake Phalen for walking/biking. • fitness center at community center • Hiking, Camping, Biking, Canoeing, Traveling • Basketball. Softball • language classes - softball team at another city's parks • Depends on what is available, etc.! • Skateboarding, Soo Bahk Do (karate), snowboarding, movies outside during the summer, home repair classes through St. Paul Commun.ity, Education, ice skating, better parks and playgrounds in other suburbs. Football and Softball Leagues, Gold's Gym • Affordable hockey league ($50 in Minneapolis, I'm not kidding). • T -ball, Pop-up baseball, soccer, gymnastics • Hiking, exploring, biking • it basketball, [ecfe], pre-school programs 0 • • Trails, Hiking • IW�� Aft 1W Ice-skating. Maplewood rinks hours are too short and open to late/close to early in the season. Phalen rec. center is better and is better supervised. Our neighborhood rink has even had drug dealing and physical fights with little intervention by staff. Soccer. There are no park and rec. offerings past elementary school and NESA is not structured to be a successful skill development and competitive program. There is no place to play indoors in the winter. Batting cages. There are no good options --the N. St. Paul one is antiquated. One family member deals with depression and participates in some activities in St. Paul. • basketball & baseball • Softball, Lacrosse • Basketball, Baseball • Picnic facilities, Harriet Alexander Nature Center activities • summer rollerblade hockey, winter outdoor skating and outdoor recreational hockey, softball, and archery • Tennis, schooling, competitive swimming, TOPS, Boy Scouting, sports programs, etc. • Arts/crafts, Karate, etc • golf • Picnic shelters. • softball with my church league - my church is not in Maplewood • Soccer (NESA) • Youth Baseball (Maplewood Athletic Association) • Baseball and basketball • Softball, Kickball, Golf League, Boating, Geocaching, Disc golf, Cross country skiing, Tennis • softball • Ice skating, gymnastics, soccer/ t - ball, tennis • Archery • Baseball and football Teen sports - baseball goIf T -ball soccer combination, theater • baby swimming lessons, because of the temperature of the pool. It needs to be higher for little swimmers. • State parks and regional parks for different geographies • Dog parks. • off leash dog park ... • Courage riders, bowling, archery, trap shooting, education classes • Are there new programs you would like to see offered? 0 Parent child activities during the weekend or evening for working parents. Mos things are offered during the work day it seems 0 Archery - 622 used to have this run out of John Glenn, but have now pulled oul • the program. They had •• 150 • involved, 75% from Maplewood. Besides learning about archery, they were involved in clean up of nature areas • learn •••• • 0 Senior programs, Frisbee golf, outings to theaters - day trips. 0 1 would like to see •• programs more neigh borhood-ized. 0 But not ready, at the moment, to offer suggestions other than the one about overweight teens/young adults having programs geared toward them. Maybe E Wii gym with tennis or other tournaments? Kids could "practice" at home, then be in a tournament at the facility. Some program of rewarding kids/overweight kids for weight loss, exercise time. 0 Again more programs for people over 55 on weekends for the working people. Bus trips, craft fairs, shopping excursions, casino trips. 0 Basketball. Little bias 9 At the nature center, it would be nice to have more family and/or age- appropriate programs and activities (again, for a 9 -year-old 1• I use to • doing the full -moon trail walks in Rochester, MN as a young • through the nature center there, and I think this would be something my son would like to do • 0 Spinning at 7:00 • working adults, ANYTHING for teens, karaoke (with songs that appeal across races/ge ne ration s/ge n res), homework help, activities for people with special needs (basketball). 9 MCC has the worst reputation for the "quality" of the programs (i.e. soccer/dance/basketball have •- VERY disappointing). Improve the • of the instructors or you will lose your few remaining customers. 0 1 would •• them if I knew any. 0 Options for those with disabilities. Create an • leash ••• •. Senior high programming in conjunction with North/district 622 0 Some • the conditions • the trails have lots of •..• Maybe an "Adopt a Park" program could be put together, similar to the "Adopt a Highway" program. 0 More youth programs between the ages of 12 - 17 years and adult tennis and racquetball lessons. 0 Something • seniors. 0 Community volunteer/involvement programs, official sport leagues, educational programs. • Community vegetable gardens • younger child activities (tumbling, t -ball, etc) • More programs for elderly people (e.g. nature programs,). • More for adults. 0 Ceramics or more arts and crafts things 0 running club 0 Local youth sports - that don't require fames to drive all over the east metro. Inter cultural games - teaching us the games from our countries of origins (Hmong, Korean, Mexico, etc.) I see people in the parks playing games that I'm unfamar with, and I'd like to learn. 0 More teen activities. 0 See previous answers 0 1 would like to see more park trails through Maplewood similar to Roseville area park trails. I would like to see tennis, gymnastics and ice skating 0 Short programs, perhaps 4 classes that could be multi recreational (for both kids or families or only adults) type activities (like different games weekly or something) Find out what is popular in other cities that is not offered here. Try different things... like building a great Frisbee golf course with classes for learning the game or starting leagues start something completely NEW. Games/leagues can be created or adopt something no one has ever heard of that seems fun. 0 Free programs to improve our yards. 0 Dog parks. 0 Courage riders, dancing, educational etc... 029PEIIZI�N 29. If you or members of your household don't use City of Maplewood parks, trails, or facilities; what are the reasons? so* •' Ift 1" 0 .1 • • •— 111h • •• • •• • • • • •• dew• all ••e • • AD, Ah, • Ift Ift • V • '111h IM • • ••• • 10, ••• • Am 0' so *so 0 Ift 0 ••• —• Ift 41 Ift •19& • • • lift • • .0• •• •am• ••• • • lift • • Aft 0 0 ••6• Ift • ••r go 0 • • • • 40 T , z W • •• • 40 40 tv• &V 4M 40 1� AM Im IM 40 A& • WVF .•- • •- ••• Im all Im Im A& 4W Ift I'm Im Am 40 IM 11h 12+ years we have lived here. Hazelwood Park is a heavily used park with its, soccer fields, walking trails, and 4th of July activities. Outdated playground equipment reflects on the city. Families considering moving to the area may look at the playgrounds and be disappointed in what some of the neighborhood parks have to offer in the way of attractive, updated playgrounds. 1 get to parks primarily on foot or bike. The roads and trails are not conducive to walking or biking. Much of this is due to lack of sidewalks, and poor maintenance of city and county roads. parks always in use by other groups - Asian and Hispanic cultures seem to dominate - very uncomfortable 30. Do • feel that Maplewood parks, recreation programming, and other resources are accessible to all people, groups, and cultures? Am Aft Aft Am Am An Am Am A& Am Aft 1W 10 Am ••• Ift Am Aft Am • go Aft Aft Aft •Am Aft •• 10 W • • •— • Am AM • • • • —t • • 0 •- •• • • Ift % Av • A& W • Am 0 Aft • •••• ••• of •• • 'Ift 0 10 • • • Am W 0- • Aft • • • Aft Ift A& Am Ift Aft • • •• Ift 0 ••• • • • • • A% Ov •10 •1W • • • W 1W .•• Aft - • A& • _• • • • •• Gov I&Wv 19 • 0:0ENIZEN 31. Please use the space below to add any other comments you may have about Maplewood's Park, Recreation, Natural Resource, and Open Space programs 2nd facilities. • Maplewood needs to have a better plan to fund our parks. As Maplewood enjoyed a residential construction boom, a lot of parks were built but with no strategic intent to fund these parks. Park funding should be a greater priority than many other things in the city budget. In addition, the community center was sold based on the premise it would be self -funding. In fact, it has been ,subsidized ever since. Those dollars can/should be used for parks rather than the community center. Make the community center self -funding or sell it. • Maplewood does a poor job of keeping the streets and parks clean. There is litter everywhere. Every time I take my young children to the park I spend time cleaning up litter. Bottles and cans should not be allowed to be left near children's play equipment. A map showing where all the Maplewood parks are would be helpful • Please make sure to have the 4th of July fireworks at Hazelwood Park. I hear that they have been canceled!! • Very proud of Maplewood Parks and Recreation Department and the strong history of excellent programming and program offerings that have been made to the residents and non-residents of Maplewood. • Need to continue the war on buckthorn. 0 1 think that repeat customers (annually renewing membership) of the Community Center should be offered a discount or a benefit to returning and continuing their business at your establishment. It seems there is a lack of appreciation for the amount of money that is spent every year for our membership. 0 While the community center is too far away to be of practical use, I do like the trade-off of having access to large tracts of open space. I would encourage the City to move forward with the purchase of the Schlomka/Co-Par property and the addonal conversion of a portion of the land to open space. 0 1 like the Maplewood program but the one thing that does not meet my standards is the girls' 3-4 grade softball program. Last year the shirts were too small would prefer just a t -shirt style and make the larger sizes for the girls to be accommodating. The boys program which is slightly higher but yet they receive all equipment and uniform. If the girls payed more would we get better options??? 0 Not sure what Open Space is. Perhaps a circulator bus in the summer for kids (13+) sng at home. It could go up and down White Bear Avenue and, for a small fee, take kids to and from MCC (with parent's approval/permission), with or without membership a time or two each day, for swimming, weight room, basketball, other organized sports, etc. In fact, if it ran in the afternoon, then parents could come and work out and take kids home from there. A staff liaison could check kids in, sort of monitor where they were, and know whenthe kid(s) leave - on circulator, with parents, etc. Maybe a chip on an ID bracelet could let staff know if a kid leaves the building • the • being removed/d ise ng aged. 0 1 think I have set enough. In summary Longer MCC hours, more programs for, 55 • over people, Game • Fun nights, Saturday actives, Things • people with • kids (grown kids - no around anymore). • you 0 Programs should have more • By • specific dates / times • ALL sessions • a course --> for ex.: if there is • be a session in which •;, class is scheduled, then that should be stated upfront in the program - description! 0 The playground at ••• Park is in really terrible shape. I think it should ,either be -• or torn down. I have a large community park very close to my house (Beam and White Bear Ave.). When the weather is nice, I am there almost daily with my dogs. It's a real selling point to my neighborhood for me. As a taxpayer, I'm happy to fund your continued efforts to maintain the space -- I don't take it for granted. Best wishes. sb Community Center is awesome - but if you live 3 miles away & not Maplewood (which a lot are) it's expensive. If you live in the southern part - too far to get to so not as utilized. ,.When signing up for sports - you never know if you are on a team - always having coach problems, so I changed leagues. Got frustrating. The community center staff are mainly nice, esp. the kids. But some of the older ones that work full-time, there can be very mean, where I have walked out the door. You also got rid of 2 courts, now not enough space for Volley Ball/basketball. Open one up that was to be a kid's play area - what happened. It's now a room used for classes. Could be better utilized as a gym. Bad move. 0 We need to invest more in our parks. 0 1 like the community center, the staff is well informed, polite. The facilities are kept as clean as one could expect given the high use rate. I also like the diversity and felling of family at the center. I have not gone beyond the gym or pool use of the center, but know of the many programs offered and appreciate the opportunities presented. 0 Too many deer in some of the open spaces, and some of the open spaces are over run with buckthorn. 0 What is being done to identify and maintain the parks boundaries? In our park people dump grass, etc. Also, there seems to be infringement into park by neighbori-ng residents. I've seen people digging up flowers and taking even though I told them we would all like to enjoy them and that they were stealing. Kids make trails through sumac and cause erosion down the hills. Weeds are not controlled. City drives trucks on trails when they shouldn't and causes trails to breakup especially in spring. Better effort could be made in park cleanup through articles in paper and getting neighbors to participate with no cost to city. 9 Please just try to make more advertisements for programs that people enjoy and try to fix up parks like Maplecrest (which is in serious need of repair). 0 1 love the trails at Applewood Park. 0 Stop using so much weed killer. You can actually smell •it for weeks after application. If I had kids I wouldn't want them exposing skin to the grassy areas with all these chemicals on them. We need better patrol of our neighborhood park (Vista Hills) after dark. In the last several years I've seen people parked in the lot after dark, there are beer and alcohol bottles left on the grounds. I've even seen used condoms in the boulevard area. That was very nice for National Night Out. The people using the basketball court are not from the neighborhood and • Alh 0 0 0 9 0 0 Aft dh Igh Aft 0 Alk Ah Alk A& AM ev or 0 40 0 Alk Ah • A&• 0 Ah Alk Am Alh r• AM Am Alh • Ah •dft 0 Aft —• Alb Aft Am Aft 4ft Ift Ah Ak dip Ah 40 Alk Alk go 'Afth 'Aftil AIN All op 49V dr so 4w Alk dr Alh Aft Aft Ah Ah Al. Ab Alk 40 Ah V 4w dF Ah Ak Aft Ah 40 • • • do dip dip • • w • w • dw alp 40 dr • 40 Odw®r 40 or 40 AVA Am Ah•Aft •Agh• A& A& Alk Alk• dmk Ab, Aft Am Alk Ak Alk • dft Am Igh Ak Am' Am Alk ov 41OF Alh dft 0 Alk do • w ••• or Ab, • 40 low dw dip W OF • do Alk Ah • •r Am ••• 40 Ah 40 40 •Ak All • ••• •• dip Alk Ah Ift mv • Ah A& Ah v v 'Amik Ask Ah dip dLv do 440000 do ev do All 40h Alk Alk Alk Ak dip Aft All 40 Ift 40 • — ••• • • 40 4p dip do Aft • Alh Aft Am Alk Ah mm 40 Alk 40 • walk in Battle Creek Park and Afton Park 1 have lived in Maplewood for 17 years have two small children and am ver. disappointed in the Maplewood Park and Rec. program/park trail system. I currently go to Roseville parks for numerous reasons: 1. they are safer 2. they are aesthetically more pleasing 3. very clean 4. 1 have been to Edgerton Park with my children and will not return as a result of, unsupervised children around and lots of cigarettes butts around '15. 1 have lived across from a proposed walk trail which has not moved forward for 6 years or so. This is the proposed [Toenjes] development pon( area. I would love to see an area for children to ride their bike around the pond and open area 6. Roseville has more to offer 7. 1 would like to see Maplewood tailor their parks after Roseville area 1 want hay bales for archery. see above comments 0 We could use a few off leash, fenced in dog parks around Maplewood. Really nice if they had a dog swimming pond too 0 South Maplewood doesn't feel much like a part of greater Maplewood; most people do their activities in Woodbury. Perhaps that would change, if we had a small but great rec. center/fields area, etc. that was focused at the southern tip. 0 We love Playcrest Park and the Parks department does a good job of mowing and keeping up the park. 0 1 work with the NESA soccer association. The city helps NESA out a lot. But keeping up the fields, is the biggest problem. The grass is mowed to short. Early spring it should be left 1-3/4" & in June, July, & august left at 2-1/2 . Bare spots should be seeded in the fall. Also, there are signs at Hazelwood Park that say field use by permit only. Yet we kick people off & the next night there back again. 0 Lack of law enforcement in the parks. 0 1 feel there is a huge lack of utilizing volunteers. When I moved to the city, I went to the city office asking to volunteer I got just about nowhere. Later I helped at the nature center but I worked on the preserves meeting no people and I wanted to work with people. I know there are some seasonal volunteer programs and a few slots to serve at the nature center building but I think much more could be offered to utilize kids and nature type people, seniors, singles, families working together, etc. I like the Maplewood monitor a lot. read every inch of it and look for free or volunteer things to do to help the community, maybe meet some people while doing, (get some free native plants would be nice) and I rarely find things other than a few weeks in spring. The nature center people might look at the huge volunteer programs the DNR has to see how vast and useful people can be. So sorry about my lazy typing, but thanks for all and this survey! • Trying Maplewood youth softball this year, so far poor communication/scheduling, almost 4 weeks since signup ended and haven't heard from a coach. Play is supposed to start in June with 2-3 weeks practice beforehand; there are 6 • left in May including Memorial Day and my daughter doesn't even know what team she is on. Youth volleyball has been much better in that area, other than occasional practice schedule problems with using gyms on school conference/election nights. • need off -leash ••• areas ... • We have a lot of very good parks in Maplewood. We do not need more. Any improvements to parks should be very limited and only when very necessary. It seems the government is too eager to spend too much money. 0:0091211M San U(Mrl I C P A 'I ''ve Set -0 dersWackerBergly, Inc. Landscape Architects and Planners (...'reat, I've Solutlion-c 365 Kellogg Boulevard East SalintPaul, Ml*nnesota 55101-1411 (651) 221-0401 April 6, 2010 Revised: June 3, 2010 Mr. DuWayne,,.Konewko, Director City of Maplewood Community and Parks Developmeni 1830 County Road B East Maplewood MN 55109 RE: Proposal for Trail Planning Services Troutbrook Trail Sanders Wacker Bergly, Inc. Landscape Architects and Planners are very pleased to submit the following proposal for Trail Planning Services for the extension of the Troutbrook Trail through Maplewood. Our office has been working with the City of Little Canada and the National Park Service on a preliminary study to evaluate the potential of a north -south trail through Maplewood and Little Canada that can become part of the regional trail system. This work has identified potential routes for the trail and issues that need to be addressed with more detailed study. The work to date has also involved major stakeholders in the preliminary discussions that have been held. The purpose of this proposal is to continue work on Troutbrook Trail, bring the trail plan to a greater level of detail and complete the feasibility study, including cost estimates for the preferred route and various options. The City of Maplewood will take an active role in the continued planning for the trail corridor. Thank you for inviting me to submit, this proposal. I look forward to working with the City of Maplewood tit, further develop the Troutbrook Trail Plan. If you have any questions, please give me a call. William D. Sanders FASL President I Inc. Attentive Servyr, Sande rsWackerDergiy, -'ive S(c)"utions Landscape Architects and Planners Crea I I BACKGROUND The Troutbrook Regional Trail and Greenway, which is a joint planning effort of Ramsey County and the City of Saint Paul., is currently planned to extend from the Mississippi River near the Bruce Vento Nature Sanctuary north to McCarrons Lake. In 2008, a trail advisory group, who was looking for a better north/south trail connection, suggested that a potential corridor should be studied that would extend the Troutbrook Regional Trail north from McCarrons Lake through Maplewood and Little Canada to Vadnais Regional Park. Both the City of Little Canada and the City of Maplewood incorporated the Troutbrook Trail concept into their comprehensive plans. The City of Little Canada took the lead in continuing the planning work for the corridor. With the support of the City of Maplewood, Ramsey County Parks and Ramsey County Active Living, they applied for planning assistance from 'the National Park Service. The assistance was approved and a series of meetings with key stakeholders has - been held, including the Roseville School District, the EMID School District, Waldorf School, Saint Jude Medical, Saint Paul Regional Water Services, Ramsey County Parks, Maplewood Parks and Recreation, Ramsey County Public Works, Ramsey -Washington Watershed District, Capitol Regional Watershed District, and MnDOT. Site Analysis and Concept Plans have also been prepared. The next step in the planning process is to complete a feasibility study, including cost estimates and analysis for each trail segment. The following Scope of Services is based upon the continuation of the work that has been accomplished in the past year. Alternative trail routes have been identified and preliminary meetings have been held with some of the stakeholders. There has been a substantial effort to inventory, photograph and evaluate the proposed trail corridor. The area to be studied will extend from where the existing trail ends near Lake McCarrons, north to County Road B, which is the extent of the trail in the City of Maplewood. The focus of this Scope of Services will be the completion of the feasibility study and the cost estimates for the project. 0 'J" 11 9 ; 0 ; A A. Project start up, including finalizing work program and approach, contract, schedules, etc. B. Meet with the City staff to review work -to -date and project goals and objectives. Proposal: City of Maplewood Troutbrook Trail Page -2 - April 6 2010 Revised: June 3, 2010 SandersWackerBergty, Inc. Attentive Selk '"Non's e a, t i v e S lo Landscape Architects and Planners I Uk' TASK 2. PREFERRED TRAIL ROUTE A. Prepare plans for a preferred trail route. These plans will be prepared with a greater level of detail than the previous preliminary study, which will allow decisions to be made about the location and design of the trail. B. Prepare cost estimates for the preferred trail route and various options. C. Meet with the City staff to review the plans. D. Meet with the effected property owners and public agencies to discuss the plans. E. Meet with the Maplewood Parks and Recreation Commission. TASK 3. IMPLEMENTATION PLAN A. Prepare a preliminary plan and strategy to implement the proposed Troutbrook Trail extension. Identify actions that need to be taken to implement the project. B. Meet with the City staff to review plan. C. Meet with the Maplewood Parks and Recreation Commission. Fees for work performed by Sanders Wacker Bergly, Inc., Landscape Architects and Planners, will b based on the following standard hourly rates: Principal Landscape Architect/Planner Project Landscape Architect/Planner Technician Direct expenses will be billed direct at their actual cost. Proposal: City of Maplewood Troutbrook Trail $ 85.00 per hour $ 75.00 per hour $ 65.00 per hour Page - 3 - April 6 2010 Revised: June 3, 2010 Project TASK DESCRIPTION Principal LA Technician TOTAL $85.00 $75.00 $65.00 TOTAL $14,990.00 Parks and Recreation Commission FROM: DuWayne Konewko, Community Development and Parks Director SUBJECT: eview of Draft 2011-2015 C1P Budget DATE.- June 9, 2010 INTRODUCTION At the June 7"' City Council meeting the draft form of the 2011-2015 CEP was presented. From there staff was directed to present it to the various commissions that are effected and obtain recommendations. DISCUSSION The attachments included with this report list the projects that have been deferred, declined, and accepted. RECOMMENDTION Staff is recommending the Parks and Recreation Commission provide their recommendations concerning the Draft 2011-2015 Parks C1P budget. Attachments: 2011 — 2015 Capital Improvement Plan Projects Grouped by Project Category 2. 2011 — 2015 Capital Improvement Plan Declined Projects by Department 3. 2011 — 2015 Capital Improvement Plan Projects Grouped by Funding Source Page 1 of 9 FIVE-YEAR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN PROJECTS GROUPED BY PROJECT CATEGORY Status." Accepted Agenda Item 713 Attachment 1 PROJECT PROJECT TOTAL PRIOR ALLOCATION OF COSTS BY YEAR NUMBER PROJECT TITLE CATEGORY COST YEARS 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 FD09.030 Fire Training Facility Building Maintena 3,700,000 30,000 570,000 3,100,000 0 0 0 MT10.030 MCC Exercise Equipment Building Maintena 59,000 0 0 0 0 59,000 0 MT08.040 MCC Exterior Metal Painting Building Maintena 120,000 0 0 0 60,000 60,000 0 3,879,000 30,000 570,000 3,100, 000 60,000 119,000 0 FD03.020 Replacement of Fire Truck Equipment 449,730 0 449,730 0 0 0 0 FD06.020 Replacement of Fire Truck Equipment 481,280 0 0 0 0 0 481,280 FD08.010 Ambulance Replacement Equipment 117,500 0 117,500 0 0 0 0 FD09.020 Ambulance Replacement Equipment 121,025 0 0 0 0 121,025 0 IT09.010 Phone System Equipment 120,000 0 0 0 120,000 0 0 IT09-020 Fiber Optics Equipment 300,800 0 0 0 0 300,800 0 PW11.010 Cab for Jacobsen Mower Equipment 18,000 0 0 18,000 0 0 0 PW11.020 Jetter Truck Equipment 185,000 0 0 185,000 0 0 0 PW 11.030 Parallelogram Lift Equipment 114,320 0 0 0 0 114,320 0 PW11.040 Single Axle Plow Truck Equipment 185,730 0 0 0 0 0 185,730 PW06.010 Two Toro Lawn Mowers and Two Trailers Equipment 86,200 0 0 0 86,200 0 0 PW06.060 One Tractor Loader and Three Wheel Truckster Equipment 82,500 0 0 0 82,500 0 0 PW06.070 One Snow Plow Truck Equipment 171,000 0 0 0 0 171,000 0 PW07.030 1 -Ton Truck Equipment 71,200 0 0 0 71,200 0 0 PW09.010 Jet/Vac Truck Equipment 325,000 0 325,000 0 0 0 0 PW09.020 Two Toro Mowers and One 4 -Wheel Truckster Equipment 98,300 0 0 0 0 0 98,300 PW09.030 One 1 ton One 11/2 ton and One 1/2 ton Trucks Equipment 161,600 0 0 100,800 60,800 0 0 3,089,185 0 892,230 303,800 420,700 707,145 765,310 PM10.010 Wetland Enhancement Program Parks 125,000 50,000 25,000 0 0 50,000 0 PM11.010 Fish Creek Open Space Parks 4,250,000 0 2,250,000 0 2,000,000 0 0 PM 11.020 Goodrich Park Improvements Parks 500,000 0 100,000 0 400,000 0 0 PM03.010 Lions Park Improvements Parks 350,000 300,000 50,000 0 0 0 0 PM03.060 Joy Park Improvements Parks 300,000 200,000 100,000 0 0 0 0 PM07.010 Community Field Upgrades Parks 160,000 35,000 25,000 25,000 25,000 25,000 25,000 PM08.040 Park Equipment, Fence and Court Replacement Parks 125,000 25,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 PM08.050 Gladstone Savanna Improvements Parks 1,700,000 0 1,200,000 0 250,000 0 250,000 7,510,000 610,000 3,770,000 45,000 2.695, 000 95,000 295,000 FIVE-YEAR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN PROJECTS GROUPED BY PROJECT CATEGORY StatU.S.*Accepted Agenda Item 7B Attachment 1 PROJECT PROJECT TOTAL PRIOR ALLOCATION OF COSTS BY YEAR NUMBER PROJECT TITLE CATEGORY COST YEARS 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 PW11.080 Signal System at Southlawn/Mall Entrance Public Works 250,000 0 0 250,000 0 0 0 PW03.210 Lift Station Upgrade Program Public Works 200,000 0 0 25,000 25,000 150,000 0 PW04,110 County Rd D Court, East of TH 61 to Hazelwood Public Works 1,007,500 0 0 0 0 0 1,007,500 PW05.080 Pond Avenue/Dorland Road Public Works 870,000 30,000 0 0 0 840,000 0 PW07.060 Western Hills/Larpenteur Area Streets Public Works 5,980,000 200,000 5,780,000 0 0 0 0 PW07.100 TH 36 - English Intersection Improvements Public Works 14,800,000 0 800,000 1,000,000 500,000 12,500,000 0 PW08.050 Lakewood/Sterling Area Streets Public Works 2,430,000 200,000 0 2,230,000 0 0 0 PW08.060 Crestview/Highwood Area Streets Public Works 4,779,700 0 0 200,000 4,579,700 0 0 PW08.070 Bartelmy Meyer Area Streets Public Works 1,440,000 0 0 0 100,000 1,340,000 0 PW08.080 Bartelmy Street, Minnehaha Ave. to Stillwater Rd. Public Works 1,170,000 0 0 0 150,000 1,020,000 0 PW08.100 Sterling Street,Londin Lane to Crestview Forest Dr Public Works 770,000 0 100,000 670,000 0 0 0 PW09.070 Ferndale/Ivy Area Street Improvements Public Works 2,120,000 0 0 0 0 0 1,948,400 35, 817, 200 430,000 6,680,000 4,375,000 5,354,700 15, 850, 000 2,955,900 CD04.010 Gladstone Area Streetscape- Phase I Redevelopment 5,300,000 0 5,300,000 0 0 0 0 CD09.020 Gladstone - Phase II Redevelopment 3,500,000 0 0 0 400,000 3,100,000 0 CD09.030 Gladstone - Phase III Redevelopment 5,750,000 0 0 0 0 0 3,750,000 141. 550, 000 0 5,300,000 0 400,000 3,100, 000 3,750,000 64, 845, 385 1,070,000 17, 212, 230 7,823,800 8,930,400 19.871,145 71,766,210 Agenda Item 713 Attachment 2 FIVE-YEAR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN PROJECTS GROUPED BY DEPARTMENT Status.0 Declined PROJECT TOTAL PRIOR ALLOCATION OF COSTS BY YEAR NUMBER PROJECT TITLE COST YEARS 2011 2072 2013 2014 2015 CD02.010 Housing Replacement Program 825,000 0 75,000 150,000 200,000 200,000 200,000 CD04.030 Hillcrest Area Roadway Improvements 1,500,000 0 0 0 0 1,500,000 0 CD04.040 Hillcrest Area Redevelopment 1,100,000 0 0 100,000 0 1,000,000 0 CD04.050 Hillcrest Area Streetscape 1,700,000 0 0 0 0 1,700,000 0 CD09.010 Commercial Property Redevelopment 1,000,000 0 200,000 200,000 200,000 200,000 200,000 6,125,000 0 275,000 450,000 400,000 4,600,000 400,000 FD10.010 Replacement of Fire Station 3,300,000 0 0 0 0 0 3,300,000 FD09.010 Ambulance Replacement 124,660 0 0 0 0 0 124,660 3,424,660 0 0 0 0 0 3,424,660 MT10.020 Maplewood Community Center Aquatic Lighting 42,600 0 0 0 0 0 42,600 MT08.010 City Facilities Security Systems Enhancement 180,000 60,000 0 0 40,000 40,000 40,000 MT08.090 MCC Gym Roof 215,350 0 0 0 0 0 215,350 MT08.110 MCC Lap/Leisure Pool Finish 195,000 0 108,000 0 0 0 87,000 MT08.120 MCC Boilers (3) 73,400 0 0 0 0 0 73,400 MT08.140 MCC Carpet 163,400 0 0 0 63,000 40,000 60,400 MT08.150 Police Department Expansion 10,400,000 0 0 0 0 0 10,400,000 MT08.160 City Hall Carpet 53,700 0 0 0 0 53,700 0 MT09.010 MCC Pool Sand Filter 141,100 0 0 0 0 82,400 58,700 11, 464, 550 60,000 108,000 0 103,000 216,100 10, 977, 450 PM10.040 Gethsemane Park 1,260,000 0 0 1,260,000 0 0 0 PM07.100 Parks - Trail Development 410,000 160,000 35,000 35,000 60,000 60,000 60,000 PM08.060 Open Space improvements 350,000 50,000 60,000 60,000 60,000 60,000 60,000 PM09.010 Neighborhood Parks 350,000 100,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 2,370,000 310,000 145,000 1, 405, 000 170,000 170,000 170,000 PW11.070 East Shore Drive Area Streets 4,000,000 0 0 0 0 200,000 3,800,000 PW02.120 City Landfill Closure 325,000 0 325,000 0 0 0 0 PW03.130 Beebe Road, Holloway - Larpenteur 850,000 0 0 0 0 100,000 741,000 PW03.160 City-wide Sidewalk Improvements 210,000 0 42,000 42,000 42,000 42,000 42,000 PW03.180 Sanitary Sewer Pipe Lining/Sealing Program 500,000 0 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 PW03.190 Sanitary Sewer Sump Pump Removal Program 300,000 0 100,000 100,000 100,000 0 0 PW06.100 Carver Crossings Area Improvements 2,600,000 0 0 2,600,000 0 0 0 PW06.130 Edgerton/Roselawn Drainage Improvements 1,240,000 0 0 0 0 0 1,240,000 PW08.030 Two 1/2 Ton Pickup Trucks 58,000 0 0 0 0 0 58,000 PW09.060 Gerten Pond Drainage Improvements 800,000 0 0 100,000 700,000 0 0 PW09.080 Farrell/Ferndale Area Street Improvements 3,860,000 0 0 0 0 0 3,744,200 PW09.100 Dennis/McClelland Area Street Improvements 4,440,000 0 0 0 0 200,000 4,106,800 19,183, 000 0 567,000 2,942,000 942,000 642,000 13, 832, 000 42, 567, 210 370.000 1,095,000 4,797,000 1,615,000 5,628! 100 28, 804,110 Agenda Item 7B Attachment 2 In the course of preparation of this Capital Improvement Plan, several noteworthy projects were proposed but deemed by staff to not be appropriate for inclusion at this time. These projects are discussed below and included for your review. Agenda Item 713 Attachment 2 Park Projects — The source of funding for expansion of the parks system has been diminishing and with the economic slow -down, has become minimal. A new source of funding for parks and park amenities needs to be identified. The following projects were deferred due to funding limitations: o Gethsemane Park — this proposal for improvements will not proceed until a development proposal is brought forward. An alternative plan for purchasing the property may be explored. o Trail Development — this program is being deferred due to lack of funding. The trail plan will be implemented with street improvement proj ects. o Neighborhood Parks — this program is being deferred due to lack of funding and funding priorities directed to major park improvements. o Goodrich Park — the proposed expansion and improvements to Goodrich Park needed to be reduced by approximately 50% due to limited available funding and priorities in existing projects. o Joy Park — the proposed continuation of improvements to Joy Park were reduced by 50% due to limited funding and priorities in existing projects. Various Street Improvements — The following street improvement projects are deferred to 2016 or beyond and will be considered in the normal street improvement plan due to limited funding and a desire to reduce the level of City debt: o East Shore Drive Area Streets o Montana/Nebraska Area Streets o Carver Crossings Area Improvements o County Rd C Area Streets, TH 61 to White Bear Avenue o Beebe Road, Holloway to Larpenteur o City-wide sidewalk improvements o Femdale/lvy Area Street Improvements, o Dennis/McClelland Area Street Improvements Edgerton — Roselawn Storm Sewer — Due to funding limitations for this large and expensive project, along with the controversial nature of the improvements, this project has been deferred out of the next 5 -year period. FIVE-YEAR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN PROJECTS GROUPED BY FUNDING SOURCE Status.- Accepted Agenda Item 7B Attachment 3 PROJECT TOTAL PRIOR ALLOCATION OF COSTS BY YEAR NUMBER PROJECT TITLE FUNDING SOURCE COST YEARS 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 FD08.010 Ambulance Replacement Ambulance Service Fund 117,500 0 117,500 0 0 0 0 FD09.020 Ambulance Replacement Ambulance Service Fund 121,025 0 0 0 0 121,025 0 238,525 0 117,500 0 0 121,025 0 PM11.010 Fish Creek Open Space Bonds-G.O. Improvement 350,000 0 350,000 0 0 0 0 PW04.110 County Rd D Court, East of TH 61 to Hazelwood Bonds-G.O. Improvement 317,400 0 0 0 0 0 317,400 PW05.080 Pond Avende/Dorland Road Bonds-G.O. Improvement 426,300 30,000 0 0 0 396,300 0 PW07.060 Western Hills/Larpenteur Area Streets Bonds-G.O. Improvement 2,383,000 200,000 2,183,000 0 0 0 0 PW08.050 Lakewood/Sterling Area Streets Bonds-G.O. Improvement 1,270,110 200,000 0 1,070,110 0 0 0 PW08.060 Crestview/Highwood Area Streets Bonds-G.O. Improvement 2,321,200 0 0 200,000 2,121,200 0 0 PW08.070 Bartelmy Meyer Area Streets Bonds-G.O. Improvement 702,600 0 0 0 100,000 602,600 0 PW09.070 Ferndale/Ivy Area Street Improvements Bonds-G.O. Improvement 1,032,800 0 0 0 0 0 1,032,800 8,803,410 430,000 2,533,000 1,270,110 2,221,200 998,900 1,350,200 CD09.020 Gladstone - Phase II Bonds-M.S.A. 350,000 0 0 0 0 350,000 0 PW11.080 Signal System at Southlawn/Mall Entrance Bonds-M.S.A. 125,000 0 0 125,000 0 0 0 PW07.100 TH 36 - English Intersection Improvements Bonds-M.S.A. 2,250,000 0 0 1,000,000 250,000 1,000,000 0 PW08.080 Bartelmy Street, Minnehaha Ave. to Stillwater Rd. Bonds-M.S.A. 689,800 0 0 0 150,000 539,800 0 PW08.100 Sterling Street,Londin Lane to Crestview Forest Dr Bonds-M.S.A. 461,000 0 100,000 361,000 0 0 0 3,875,800 0 100, 000 1,486,000 400,000 1,889,800 0 CD04.010 Gladstone Area Streetscape- Phase I Bonds -Special Assessment 800,000 0 8001000 0 0 0 0 CD09.020 Gladstone - Phase II Bonds -Special Assessment 1,500,000 0 0 0 0 1,500,000 0 CD09.030 Gladstone - Phase III Bonds -Special Assessment 2,000,000 0 0 0 0 0 2,000,000 PM11.010 Fish Creek Open Space Bonds -Special Assessment 750,000 0 750,000 0 0 0 0 PM08.050 Gladstone Savanna Improvements Bonds -Special Assessment 400,000 0 400,000 0 0 0 0 PW11.080 Signal System at Southlawn/Mall Entrance Bonds -Special Assessment 125,000 0 0 125,000 0 0 0 PW04.110 County Rd D Court, East of TH 61 to Hazelwood Bonds -Special Assessment 228,100 0 0 0 0 0 228,100 PW05.080 Pond Avenue/Dorland Road Bonds -Special Assessment 304,500 0 0 0 0 304,500 0 PW07.060 Western Hills/Larpenteur Area Streets Bonds -Special Assessment 2,096,000 0 2,096,000 0 0 0 0 PW07.100 TH 36 - English Intersection Improvements Bonds -Special Assessment 400,000 0 100,000 0 0 300,000 0 PW08.050 Lakewood/Sterling Area Streets Bonds -Special Assessment 854,000 0 0 854,000 0 0 0 PW08.060 Crestview/Highwood Area Streets Bonds -Special Assessment 1,680,000 0 0 0 1,680,000 0 0 PW08.070 Bartelmy Meyer Area Streets Bonds -Special Assessment 505,000 0 0 0 0 505,000 0 PW08.080 Bartelmy Street, Minnehaha Ave. to Stillwater Rd. Bonds -Special Assessment 351,000 0 0 0 0 351,000 0 PW08.100 Sterling Street,Londin Lane to Crestview Forest Dr Bonds -Special Assessment 270,000 0 0 270,000 0 0 0 PW09.070 Ferndale/Ivy Area Street Improvements Bonds -Special Assessment 744,000 0 0 0 0 0 744,000 13, 007, 600 0 4,146, 000 1,249,000 1,680,000 2,960,500 2,972,100 CD04.010 Gladstone Area Streetscape- Phase I Bonds -Tax Increment 700,000 0 700,000 0 0 0 0 CD09.030 Gladstone - Phase III Bonds -Tax Increment 2,000,000 0 0 0 0 0 2,000,000 21,700,000 0 700,000 0 0 0 2,000,000 FD09.030 Fire Training Facility C.I.P. Fund 125,000 15,000 60,000 50,000 0 0 0 PM07.010 Community Field Upgrades C.I.P. Fund 160,000 35,000 25,000 25,000 25,000 25,000 25,000 PM08.040 Park Equipment, Fence and Court Replacement C.I.P. Fund 125,000 25,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 410,000 75,000 105, 000 95,000 5,000 45,000 45,000 MT10.030 MCC Exercise Equipment Community Center Operations 59,000 0 0 0 0 59,000 0 MT08.040 MCC Exterior Metal Painting Community Center Operations 120,000 0 0 0 60,000 60,000 0 179,000 0 0 0 60.000 119,000 0 CD04.010 Gladstone Area Streetscape- Phase I Environmental Utility Fund 300,000 0 300,000 0 0 0 0 CD09.020 Gladstone - Phase II Environmental Utility Fund 150,000 0 0 0 150,000 0 0 FD09.030 Fire Training Facility Environmental Utility Fund 125,000 15,000 60,000 50,000 0 0 0 PM10.010 Wetland Enhancement Program Environmental Utility Fund 125,000 50,000 25,000 0 0 50,000 0 PM03.010 Lions Park improvements Environmental Utility Fund 25,000 25,000 0 0 0 0 0 PM08.050 Gladstone Savanna Improvements Environmental Utility Fund 200,000 0 200,000 0 0 0 0 PW05.080 Pond Avenue/Dorland Road Environmental Utility Fund 43,500 0 0 0 0 43,500 0 FIVE-YEAR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN PROJECTS GROUPED BY FUNDING SOURCE Status.- Accepted Agenda Item 713 Attachment 3 PROJECT TOTAL PRIOR ALLOCATION OF COSTS BY YEAR NUMBER PROJECT TITLE FUNDING SOURCE COST YEARS 201; 2012 2013 2014 2015 PW07.060 Western Hills/Larpenteur Area Streets Environmental Utility Fund 900,000 0 900,000 0 0 0 0 PW07.100 TH 36 - English Intersection Improvements Environmental Utility Fund 700,000 0 700,000 0 0 0 0 PW08.050 Lakewood/Sterling Area Streets Environmental Utility Fund 125,000 0 0 125,000 0 0 0 PW08.060 Crestview/Highwood Area Streets Environmental Utility Fund 246,000 0 0 0 246,000 0 0 PW08,070 Bartelmy Meyer Area Streets Environmental Utility Fund 73,000 0 0 0 0 73,000 0 PW09.070 Ferndale/Ivy Area Street Improvements Environmental Utility Fund 108,000 0 0 0 0 0 108,000 3,120, 500 90,000 2,185, 000 175,000 396,000 166,500 108,000 FD03.020 Replacement of Fire Truck Fire Truck Replacement Fund 449,730 0 449,730 0 0 0 0 FD06,020 Replacement of Fire Truck Fire Truck Replacement Fund 481,280 0 0 0 0 0 481,280 931,010 0 449,730 0 0 0 481,280 PW11.010 Cab for Jacobsen Mower Fleet Management Fund 18,000 0 0 18,000 0 0 0 PW11.020 Jetter Truck Fleet Management Fund 185,000 0 0 185,000 0 0 0 PW 11.030 Parallelogram Lift Fleet Management Fund 114,320 0 0 0 0 114,320 0 PW11.040 Single Axle Plow Truck Fleet Management Fund 185,730 0 0 0 0 0 185,730 PW06.010 Two Toro Lawn Mowers and Two Trailers Fleet Management Fund 86,200 0 0 0 86,200 0 0 PW06.060 One Tractor Loader and Three Wheel Truckster Fleet Management Fund 82,500 0 0 0 82,500 0 0 PW06.070 One Snow Plow Truck Fleet Management Fund 171,000 0 0 0 0 171,000 0 PW07.030 1 -Ton Truck Fleet Management Fund 71,200 0 0 0 71,200 0 0 PW09.010 Jet/Vac Truck Fleet Management Fund 325,000 0 325,000 0 0 0 0 PW09.020 Two Toro Mowers and One 4 -Wheel Truckster Fleet Management Fund 98,300 0 0 0 0 0 98,300 PW09.030 One 1 ton One 11/2 ton and One 1/2 ton Trucks Fleet Management Fund 161,600 0 0 100,800 60,800 0 0 1,498,850 0 325,000 303, 800 300,700 285,320 284,030 CD04.010 Gladstone Area Streetscape- Phase I Grants 1,200,000 0 1,200,000 0 0 0 0 CD09.020 Gladstone - Phase II Grants 1,250,000 0 0 0 0 1,250,000 0 CD09.030 Gladstone - Phase III Grants 1,500,000 0 0 0 0 0 1,500,000 FD09.030 Fire Training Facility Grants 3,000,000 0 0 3,000,000 0 0 0 PM11.010 Fish Creek Open Space Grants 2,000,000 0 0 0 2,000,000 0 0 PM11.010 Fish Creek Open Space Grants 150,000 0 150,000 0 0 0 0 PW07.100 TH 36 - English Intersection Improvements Grants 7,200,000 0 0 0 0 7,200,000 0 16,300, 000 0 1,350,000 3,000,000 2,000,000 8,450,000 1,500,000 IT09.010 Phone System Information Technology Fund 120,000 0 0 0 120,000 0 0 IT09-020 Fiber Optics Information Technology Fund 300,800 0 0 0 0 300,800 0 420,800 0 0 0 120,000 300,800 0 CD04.010 Gladstone Area Streetscape- Phase I Mn/DOT 1,600,000 0 1,600,000 0 0 0 0 PW07.100 TH 36 - English Intersection Improvements Mn/DOT 4,250,000 0 0 0 250,000 4,000,000 0 5,850,000 0 1,600,000 0 250,000 4,000,000 0 PM11.010 Fish Creek Open Space Park Development Fund 50,000 0 50,000 0 0 0 0 PM11.020 Goodrich Park Improvements Park Development Fund 500,000 0 100,000 0 400,000 0 0 PM03.010 Lions Park Improvements Park Development Fund 325,000 275,000 50,000 0 0 0 0 PM03.060 Joy Park Improvements Park Development Fund 300,000 200,000 100,000 0 0 0 0 PM08.050 Gladstone Savanna Improvements Park Development Fund 1,100,000 0 600,000 0 250,000 0 250,000 21,275,000 475,000 900,000 0 650,000 0 250,000 FD09.030 Fire Training Facility Ramsey County 450,000 0 450,000 0 0 0 0 PM11.010 Fish Creek Open Space Ramsey County 250,000 0 250,000 0 0 0 0 700,000 0 700,000 0 0 0 0 CD04.010 Gladstone Area Streetscape- Phase I Sanitary Sewer Fund 100,000 0 100,000 0 0 0 0 CD09.020 Gladstone - Phase II Sanitary Sewer Fund 250,000 0 0 0 250,000 0 0 CD09.030 Gladstone - Phase III Sanitary Sewer Fund 250,000 0 0 0 0 0 250,000 PM11.010 Fish Creek Open Space Sanitary Sewer Fund 700,000 0 700,000 0 0 0 0 PW03.210 Lift Station Upgrade Program Sanitary Sewer Fund 200,000 0 0 25,000 25,000 150,000 0 FIVE-YEAR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN PROJECTS GROUPED BY FUNDING SOURCE Status.- Accepted Agenda Item 713 Attachment 3 PROJECT Pond Avenue/Dorland Road PW07.060 TOTAL PRIOR Lakewood/Sterling Area Streets ALLOCATION OF COSTS BY YEAR Crestview/Highwood Area Streets NUMBER PROJECT TITLE FUNDING SOURCE COST YEARS 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 PW05.080 Pond Avenue/Dorland Road Sanitary Sewer Fund 43,500 0 0 0 0 43,500 0 PW07.060 Western Hills/Larpenteur Area Streets Sanitary Sewer Fund 302,000 0 302,000 0 0 0 0 PW08.050 Lakewood/Sterling Area Streets Sanitary Sewer Fund 125,000 0 0 125,000 0 0 0 PW08.060 Crestview/Highwood Area Streets Sanitary Sewer Fund 246,000 0 0 0 246,000 0 0 PW08.070 Bartelmy Meyer Area Streets Sanitary Sewer Fund 73,000 0 0 0 0 73,000 0 PW08.080 Bartelmy Street, Minnehaha Ave. to Stillwater Rd. Sanitary Sewer Fund 59,000 0 0 0 0 59,000 0 PW08.100 Sterling Street,Londin Lane to Crestview Forest Dr Sanitary Sewer Fund 39,000 0 0 39,000 0 0 0 PW09.070 Ferndale/Ivy Area Street Improvements Sanitary Sewer Fund 108,000 0 0 0 0 0 108,000 0 0 0 2,495,500 0 1,102, 000 189,000 521,000 325,500 358,000 PW05.080 Pond Avenue/Dorland Road PW07.060 Western Hills/Larpenteur Area Streets PW08.050 Lakewood/Sterling Area Streets PW08.060 Crestview/Highwood Area Streets PW08.070 Bartelmy Meyer Area Streets PW08.080 Bartelmy Street, Minnehaha Ave. to Stillwater Rd PW09.070 Ferndale/Ivy Area Street Improvements PW04.110 County Rd D Court, East of TH 61 to Hazelwood PW05.080 Pond Avenue/Dorland Road PW07.060 Western Hills/Larpenteur Area Streets PW08.050 Lakewood/Sterling Area Streets PW08,060 Crestview/Highwood Area Streets PW08.070 Bartelmy Meyer Area Streets PW08.080 Bartelmy Street, Minnehaha Ave. to Stillwater Rd PW09.070 Ferndale/Ivy Area Street Improvements CD04.010 Gladstone Area Streetscape- Phase I PW04.110 County Rd D Court, East of TH 61 to Hazelwood St. Paul W.A.C. Fund 26,100 0 0 0 0 26,100 0 St. Paul W.A.C. Fund 179,400 0 179,400 0 0 0 0 St. Paul W.A.C. Fund 7,290 0 0 7,290 0 0 0 St. Paul W.A.C. Fund 143,100 0 0 0 143,100 0 0 St. Paul W.A.C. Fund 43,200 0 0 0 0 43,200 0 St. Paul W.A.C. Fund 35,100 0 0 0 0 35,100 0 St. Paul W.A.C. Fund 63,600 0 0 0 0 0 63,600 497,790 0 179,400 7,290 143,100 104,400 63,600 St. Paul Water 262,000 0 0 0 0 0 262,000 St. Paul Water 26,100 0 0 0 0 26,100 0 St. Paul Water 119,600 0 119,600 0 0 0 0 St. Paul Water 48,600 0 0 48,600 0 0 0 St. Paul Water 143,400 0 0 0 143,400 0 0 St. Paul Water 43,200 0 0 0 0 43,200 0 St. Paul Water 35,100 0 0 0 0 35,100 0 St. Paul Water 63,600 0 0 0 0 0 63,600 741,600 0 119,600 48,600 143,400 104,400 325,600 Street Light Utility Fund 600,000 0 600,000 0 0 0 0 600,000 0 600,000 0 0 0 0 Vadnais Heights 200,000 0 0 0 0 0 200,000 200,000 0 0 0 0 0 200,000 64, 845, 385 1,070,000 17, 212, 230 7,823,800 8,930,400 19, 871,145 9,937,810