HomeMy WebLinkAboutPark and Recreation Advisory Commission Packet 12-08-1994Regular Meeting of the Park and Recreation Advisory Commission*
December 8, 1994, 7:00 p.m.
Public Safety Training Room, 2nd Floor
AGENDA
1. Call to Order
2. Approval of Minutes
3. Visitor Presentations
a. Athletic Associations
b. Staff
c. Others
4. Report on Past Council Action
a. Approved trail study
b. Accepted open space report
5. Unfinished Business
a. Proposal for private swimming pool update
b. Study of unique open spaces update
c. Accessible playground update
d. Seven Ponds neighborhood park update
e. West Medicine Lake City Park update
f. Playfield/highschool update
g. PRAC work plan for 1995 update (sent out last month)
h. Request for park in neighborhood #17
6. New Business
a. Name for Seven Ponds/Heather Run park
b.
C.
7. Commission Presentation
8. Staff Communication
9. Adjourn
Next Regular Meeting - January 12, 1995
Minutes of the Park and Recreation Advisory Commission Meeting
November 10, 1994
Page 35
Present: Chair Anderson, Commissioners Willegalle, Wahl, Fiemann, Johnson, Priebe; staff
Bisek, Blank and Pederson, Councilmember Edson; members of Classic Lake
Aquatics (CLA), and Mona Domaas.
Absent: Commissioner Bildsoe
1. CALL TO ORDER
Chair Anderson called the November meeting to order at 7 p.m. in the Public Safety
Training Room.
2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
A motion was made by Commissioner Willegalle and seconded by Commissioner Priebe to
approve the minutes of the October meeting as presented. The motion carried with all
ayes.
3. VISITOR PRESENTATIONS
a. Athletic Associations. None were present.
b. Staff. Mary Bisek stated that staff is working on a number of projects including the
recreation budget for 1995, Old Fashioned Christmas coming up on December 4, the
Fire and Ice Festival scheduled for February 4, hours of operation for warming houses
and ice rinks, the Plymouth Panthers Ski Club (a joint program with Plymouth Middle
School for Plymouth Middle School students), and the December issue of Plymouth
News. She announced that beginning in 1995, the recreation portion of the City
newsletter will be taking on a new look. For the first time in many years, we will be
adding photographs and line drawings to highlight the recreation programs. Staff
member Nancy Pederson will be doing the typing and layout.
c. Others. See item 5.a.
4. PAST COUNCIL ACTION
a. Trail system update. Council has tabled this item until their November 21 meeting.
5. UNFINISHED BUSINESS
a. Proposal for private swimming pool. A group known as Classic Lake Aquatics (CLA)
with the following members: Tom Franke, Terry Kent, Greg Ertz, Steve Schroeder,
Brett Hanson, Stuart Zook and Teri Erhardt, appeared before the Commission to present
a proposal for a private swimming pool to be located in Plymouth Creek Park. They
want the City to consider donating seven acres of land for this purpose at the
PRAC Minutes/November 1994
Page 36
intersection of 37th Avenue and Plymouth Boulevard. The pool would serve the west
metro area.
Tom Franke, 5040 Bryant Avenue N, Minneapolis, is the chairman of CLA, and has
coached swimming for 16 years. He feels that there are swimming needs that are not
being met in the west metro area, such as competitive swimming, recreational
swimming and lessons. The pools that are located in the schools cannot accommodate
everyone. In order to satisfy competitive swimmers, the temperature of the pool is kept
relatively cool, which is not comfortable for recreational swimmers or for those who
want to take lessons. The outdoor pools such as the ones located in New Hope and
Crystal are more for recreational, family -type activities and cannot meet the needs of the
serious competitors or those who like to lap swim for fitness purposes, not to mention
that they are available only three months out of the year.
Stuart Zook, 6170 Dallas Lane, Plymouth, then discussed the proposed design of the
project. The CLA is proposing to build two pools under one roof that would
accommodate all the swimming needs mentioned above. One would be a 50 meter,
eight lane competitive pool, which, when necessary, could be divided into two 25 -yard
pools, and the other would be a 25 yard recreational pool with a zero depth. The
50,000 square foot complex would also contain a concession area, meeting rooms,
weight and fitness rooms, locker rooms, and parking for 250 plus cars.
Teri Erhardt, 11505 48th Avenue, Plymouth, spoke about how CLA intends to raise the
money needed to build the facility and the revenue necessary to operate. The proposed
facility would cost approximately $4.5 million. CLA is projecting that 75 % of their
capital will come in the form of grants, corporate sponsorships, foundations, equipment
donations and individual contributions, 18% would be the donation of the land by the
City, and 7 % would come from government agencies. They project that 33 % of their
income for operational funding would come from swimming lessons, 33% from
recreational users, 10 % from special interest groups, 10 % miscellaneous, and 7 % each
from CLA members and other events.
Commissioner Priebe asked CLA if they had any funding at this time. They responded
that some large corporations, such as Carlson Companies, have indicated interest in their
project. They also intend to seek funds from the Amateur Sports Commission (ASC),
which has helped fund several athletic facilities around the metro area, including a $3
million diving well at the University of Minnesota. The CLA is optimistic that
corporations and groups like the ASC will help, because swimming is a sport where
women and young girls like to compete, which gets into the gender equity issue. This is
attracting a lot of attention lately and will continue to be an important influence on the
corporations and government agencies being asked for donations.
Commissioner Wahl stated that he would like to see more figures in reference to the
projected revenue. The CLA said that they have hired a professor from St. Thomas to
PRAC Minutes/November 1994
Page 37
do an economic feasibility study, and those results should be available next April or
May.
Commissioner Fiemann questioned why CLA came to the City with their proposal
before the economic feasibility study was completed. Mr. Franke stated they wanted to
be able to show that they had support for the project from the community and a
commitment for the land from the City. Mr. Fiemann was also curious about the future
expansion shown on their concept plan. Mr. Zook responded that the expansion is
proposed as space the City could use in the future.
Commissioner Wahl then asked Recreation Superintendent Mary Bisek about the City
sponsored swimming lesson program. She indicated that the City runs lessons at two
pools in the summer and that we have been able to meet the majority of the residents'
needs, although there is a very large demand for lessons for pre-schoolers, which are
somewhat more difficult to accommodate, because of the pools' temperature. Mr. Zook
remarked that he believed CLA and the City could work together to meet the needs of
the community without affecting the City's swimming lesson revenue.
Chair Anderson thanked the CLA for their presentation and praised the organization for
its hard work and commitment to the project. He stated that the Commission would like
to see more figures regarding the projected revenues and expenses.
b. Study of unique open spaces update. A draft copy of an open space interim report was
included in the PRAC packet and Director Blank stated that he would like this report to
be forwarded to the City Council for their study session on November 14 or their
regular meeting on November 21. Commissioner Johnson gave a brief update on the
status of the project at this point. Open space sites have been reduced from 30 to 15,
and those 15 have now been ranked in a priority order. No acquisition has been done at
this time, however, negotiations are underway with the owners of sites 4 & 5, which are
the Ponds at Bass Creek and the Mission Partnership property. The Open Space
Committee has not yet considered how open space acquisition should be funded. They
are seeking more guidance from PRAC and the City Council before moving in that
direction. Director Blank commented that in other cities, bond referendums to acquire
open space have successfully passed. He also stated that one of the next steps of the
Open Space Committee will be to research the value of the sites. Some owners have
already contacted the City indicating their willingness to sell. A MOTION WAS
MADE BY COMMISSIONER WAHL AND SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER
JOHNSON TO FORWARD THE OPEN SPACE INTERIM REPORT TO THE CITY
COUNCIL FOR THEIR REVIEW. THE MOTION CARRIED WITH ALL AYES.
c. Accessible playground update. The play structure is finished and according to Director
Blank, the kids are thrilled with it. A ribbon cutting ceremony will be planned for next
spring.
PRAC Minutes/November 1994
Page 38
d. Seven Ponds neighborhood park update. The rock surface for the trails has been
installed, and some asphalt may be laid before it gets too cold to do that. The play
equipment is also being installed. Efforts to complete this park will continue until the
weather gives out. The project will be finished next spring.
e. West Medicine Lake City Park update. Director Blank said that surveyors are in the
park doing their work now. The last of the houses on park property will be vacated in
December.
f. Plageld/highschool update. Director Blank announced that the Wayzata School
District referendum passed on November 8. The referendum extends for another ten
years the District's operating levy. The passage of the referendum was crucial for the
highschool/playfield project to continue. Director Blank then updated the Commission
on the status of the project. He stated that the wetlands delineation has been completed.
The architect is expected to have the schematic design of the building completed soon.
If the project stays on schedule, the outside plans will also be finalized soon. Next,
negotiations will take place on the number of acres the City will own and the number
the School District will own. After that has been determined and a site plan has been
agreed on, a joint powers agreement will be negotiated.
g. PRAC work plan for 1995 update. The draft copy of the PRAC work plan for 1995
was discussed. Commissioner Wahl wondered about item 2, and the reference to
funding analysis of each and every site." Director Blank responded that the intent of
that statement was that PRAC would only make suggestions for ways to fund selected
sites. The work plan is still open for corrections and additions, but Director Blank
would like to have a recommendation from PRAC at the December 8 Commission
meeting.
h. Neighborhood parks' playground replacement update. The final plans and specs are
being written now and will soon go out for bid. The play equipment will be installed
next spring and should be ready for use by May.
L Planning for northwest Pl, myth. Director Blank reviewed his report on Neighborhood
17, indicating that this area has an estimated population of 1,180 when fully
developed, according to the Comprehensive Park Plan. Based on current development
and what remains to be developed, he doesn't feel that this number is going to be
reached. He also explained that a concept plan submitted by Richard Blume, shows a
development at the intersection of Schmidt Lake Road and Vicksburg Lane. In this
concept plan, a water tower and possible park are shown in the northwest corner of that
intersection, although the actual siting of the water tower has not been decided. He
expalined that the City's trail plan does call for the trail on Vicksburg Lane to be
extended to Schmidt Lake Road, which now dead ends at Old 9.
Mona Domaas, 15910 46th Avenue, stated that she and her neighbors do not want to
cross Schmidt Lake Road to get to a park, and asked if the water tower and park could
PRAC Minutes/November 1994
Page 39
be sited on the south side of the road. Director Blank said this may be a possibility,
although siting it on the south side puts it inside the MUSA, whereas the north side of
Schmidt Lake Road is outside the MUSA, and this may make a difference to Mr.
Blume. Another option may be to ask Mr. Blume to dedicate some land for the
installation of a park, although Mr. Blume isn't prepared to do this. The
Comprehensive Park plan did not call for park in this area, so Mr. Blume wasn't asked
to dedicate any land for that purpose when he had his development plan drafted.
Director Blank suggested that maybe a compromise could be worked out with Mr.
Blume, whereby he would give up some property on the south side for a small park, if
the City would put the water tower on the north side of Schmidt Lake Road. This is all
still dependent on the alignment of Schmidt Lake Road, which should be decided by
next month. Recent traffic studies now show that Schmidt Lake Road will need to be
four lanes wide. Earlier studies suggested only two lanes. The Comprehensive Plan
does show a park west of Holly Lane and south of the railroad tracks. Mrs. Domaas
suggested that this park could be made accessible to the residents of Oxbow and the
other developments in this area if trails were installed, but her preference would be to
get a park in the development proposed by Mr. Blume. Mrs. Domaas stated that she
will continue to show her support for a park for her neighborhood by attending future
PRAC meetings, and if necessary, will ask the 178 residents living in neighborhood no.
17 to attend with her. Chair Anderson commented that the residents' input was
welcome, but no decision could be made until some other issues are resolved, such as
the siting of the water tower and the alignment of Schmidt Lake Road.
6. NEW BUSINESS
There was no new business to discuss.
7. COMMISSION PRESENTATION
None.
8. STAFF COMMUNICATION
Director Blank continued the discussion on the private pool proposal with the Commission.
He informed the Commission that the CLA is very optimistic about their proposal based on
the overwhelming success of swimming pools in other areas. Director Blank stated that he
had to remind the CLA that success in other cities may be due to the fact that there aren't
as many pools or lakes available there, as there are here. He also indicated his concern
over holding in limbo seven acres of land, valued at over $1 million, while waiting for
CLA to raise funds. Then there's the question of are there too many indoor 25 yard pools?
Perhaps some consideration should be given to an outdoor pool for this area. He also
mentioned that the Wayzata School District has offered us an option to cooperate on a pool
in the new high school or one in the old high school. Director Blank is concerned, too,
about getting involved in a private/public venture should something go wrong and the
pool's revenues drop off. Who would be responsible? Another thought to consider is
whether or not this is the best possible use for this land. Are there other recreational
facilities that might be better suited to this location? Some commissioners then brought up
the issue of a community center and how the very same facilities proposed for this private
PRAC Minutes/November 1994
Page 40
complex would likely be included in any community center design. The discussion
concluded with the Commission stating they wouldn't feel comfortable making any
decisions until they get more information from CLA on their financing and the results of
the economic feasibility study.
Director Blank informed PRAC that the Council had budgeted for another resident survey
sometime next February. There will be a section in the survey on park and recreation
facilities. Results of the survey should be available in April or May.
Director Blank stated that he would like to take PRAC members on a tour of the facilities
at Shoreview, Chanhassen and some of the other metro area community centers, for the
benefit of the newest commissioners. He also stated that a hockey/ice arena interest group
may attend the December PRAC meeting with a presentation of their own.
9. ADJOURNMENT
The meeting adjourned at 9:45 p.m.
City of Plymouth
Park & Recreation Advisory Commission
Eric Blank - Park & Recreation Department Director
3400 Plymouth Blvd.
Plymouth, MN 55447
Classic Lake Aquatics, Inc.
Thomas G. Franke - Chairperson
5040 Bryant Ave. No.
Minneapolis, MN 55430
612-521-0823
November 15, 1994
Dear Mr. Blank:
On behalf of Classic Lake Aquatics, Inc., I would like to thank you and the members
of the Plymouth Park & Recreation Advisory Commission for your time and
attention to our presentation on November 10, 1994. We all appreciated the length
of time which was given to our group on the agenda and the many thought-
provoking questions which the commission raised. Our group is very excited about
the possibility of constructing an aquatics center in the City of Plymouth. We are
hopeful that the project can proceed with the assistance of the Park and Recreation
Department and the Plymouth City Council.
As we await further direction from your commission, we would like to keep the
door of communication open for review of our proposal and suggestions as to how
our group can better serve the interests of the City of Plymouth. To do so, could
you please inform us of the next step which would be necessary in the ongoing
process of negotiation with your commission and the City of Plymouth.
Once again, thank you for your time, and we hope to be working with you in the
very near future.
Sincerely,
Thomas G. Franke
Chairperson - CLA, Inc.
cc: Don Anderson
DATE: December 6, 1994
TO: Eric Blank
FROM: Mona Domaas
SUBJECT: Neighborhood #17 - PARK REQUEST
Thank you for the copy of the November 10, 1994 Park and Recreation
Advisory Commission Meeting Minutes, I received today. I would
like to make an amendment to these minutes. When I indicated that
additional residents could attend to show more support, it was the
gentleman sitting to the left of you at this meeting, that stated
Even if you brought in all 178 households, there was little they
could do." It was this sardonic reply that motivated my departure
from that meeting, being as discussion had concluded on my topic.
In response to your memo to PRAC:
I understand from Dan Campbell, Plymouth City Hall,
that they have not yet decided on Schmitt Lake Road.
The suggestion is to go North of the railroad tracks.
They are going to do an environmental assessment on
this recommendation, as to how it will effect ponding
areas et cetera. This necessitates a change in the
Comprehensive Plan which means the Planning Commission
will hold a Public Hearing regarding these two alignments.
The date for this has not yet been established. This
will also need to go to the Metro. Council for approval.
Regarding your argument on our neighborhood's estimated
population. Consideration needs to be given to issues
other than this one that keeps being hammered on. Issues
such as:
a. Safety -- we are a neighborhood surrounded by
very fast, busy roads. With traffic only
forecasted to increase with the completion
of Schmitt Lake Road and the High School.
b. I would remind the Commission that there are
NO safe trails on Old County Road Nine, which
is another issue within our community.
C. I would also mention that there are NO trails
or sidewalks on Vicksburg.
3. Regarding the proposed park West of Holly Lane. If "proposed
park" is any indication of securing a park for your
neighborhood, I'd tell them to not hold their breath. I have
seen these dots be moved and REMOVED! Our neighborhood DID
HAVE A PROPOSED PARK DOT on a COMPREHENSIVE PLAN that kept
getting moved and then REMOVED! It is the reason I am
addressing this issue!! Comprehensive Plans are changed
and adjusted -- so now why can't they make some adjustments
for us??!
Also, a park West of Holly Lane MAY APPEAR good now, if in
fact it does materialize. But that road could be as busy
as all the other roads sandwiching our community, consider-
ing the addition of Schmitt Lake Road and the High School.
Regarding your listing of "options" available to PRAC:
1&2. I was under the understanding that the water tower site
HAD BEEN CHOSEN - North of Schmitt lake Road.
THAT WOULD NECESSITATE CHILDREN CROSSING A 4 LANE ROAD???
IS THIS REALLY AN OPTION?
3. Regarding the "disadvantage to using park dedication" to
acquire property of 1 to 1 1/2 acres along Autumn Hills.
Why is this a disadvantage? Because of cost?
I would remind the Commission that to date our "Walking
Neighborhood" has had $98,700 collected for Park Dedica-
tion Fees. This figure will grow in 1995 as the fee is
increasing and new housing is continuing! It would seem
only fair these funds should be used in the community
from where they came.
Also, I would remind the Commission that we do contribute
tax dollars. When the developers are gone, it is the
taxpayers that continue to support this community.
Our neighborhood is sandwiched between busy roads. Currently, to
reach a park children need to cross these roads at stop signs --
not even lights. I have been told parents are even uncomfortable
crossing these roads with their children. This is a safety issue.
It does not matter to me if a Park goes West of Holly Lane or in
Richard Bloom's development. However, a park West of Holly Lane
may never materialize, and Holly Lane could eventually become high
traffic with the addition of Schmitt Lake Road and the High School.
It sounds to me that the 1 to 1 1/2 acre property along Autumn
Hills is our neighborhood's best option. With perimeter trails
around our neighborhood, this then would be a very accessible safe
option, not necessitating crossing busy streets. We have empty
nesters that would like to be able to take safe walks, and joggers
that would appreciate not competing with traffic. There are many
positives to this alternative, not "disadvantages" as you state.
I would just like to see a safe accessible alternative for our
neighborhood!
See you at the meeting!
DATE: December 5, 1994
TO: PRAC
FROM: Eric J. Blank, Director, Parks and Recreation CiD
SUBJECT: NEIGHBORHOOD #17 - PARK REQUEST
I have attached some graphics to outline the options I see available for Neighborhood #17.
Graph 1 outlines the neighborhood, with perimeter roads on Holly Lane, County Road 9,
Vicksburg Lane and Schmidt Lake Road. On this graphic I have starred existing playgrounds
at Turtle Lake Park, lying east of Vicksburg Lane; Plymouth Creek School, lying south of
County Road 9; and Kimberly Lane School, also south of County Road 9.
With a star and a circle around it, I have shown a tentative location for a future neighborhood
park lying west of Holly Lane. In the northeast corner of Neighborhood #17, I have shown
two options for locating neighborhood park type facilities. On the second graph, I have shown
circles, indicating the half mile walking distance to neighborhood parks. The heavy black
lines are existing playgrounds, the dashed circular lines are the proposed locations of new
playground structures. The x with the circle around it corresponds to the water tower site,
which is at the northwest intersection of Schmidt Lake Road and Vicksburg Lane.
The next graph is an enlargement of a section of the new development going in north of
Autumn Hills. On this diagram, you see the five acres tentatively set aside for the water tower
site. This site will also accommodate neighborhood park facilities. At the bottom of this
proposed plat, I show lots 9, 10 and 11, which could be considered for neighborhood park
development. I have also attached a letter and a map of the Autumn Hills development, by
Lundgren Bros. They have indicated the possibility of extending a trail between Lots 7 and 8
on their plat to the new plat on the north, if a neighborhood park facility is constructed along
this border. Because they are in the situation of having to market these homes at this time,
they would like an answer from the City as quickly as possible.
The development north of Autumn Hills has also been submitted for preliminary plat approval
at this time, therefore, it is necessary that some decision be made with regards to this plan
now, or no later than your January meeting.
I think the following options are available to PRAC:
1. Take no action at this time, assuming that any water tower site chosen by
the City will be available at a future time for park facilities.
2. Recommend the City choose the water tower site as the preferred park site.
The disadvantage to this of course is the crossing of Schmidt Lake Road at
the Vicksburg intersection. The advantages are that it will serve the
property lying north of Schmidt Lake Road up to the railroad tracks, it will
be of large enough size to allow for some creative design with regard to a
park facility, and the land will be paid for by the water fund.
3. Choose to carve out 1 to 1 1/2 acres of property along the Autumn Hills
north property line. The advantage to this site is that a trail can be
connected to the Autumn Hills development, which will provide residential
road access to the rest of the residential area lying between the golf course
and Vicksburg The disadvantage is that we will have to use park dedication
to acquire the property, and it will be extremely small based on the current
platting. The site would be limited basically to a children's playground.
EB/np
Attachments
A)
November 15, 1994
Mr.John Keho
Associate Planner
3400 Plymouth Boulevard
Plymouth, Minnesota 55447
Dear Mr. Keho:
Thank you for talking with me briefly today. I am writing this
letter to apprise you and the Planning Committee on the efforts
our neighborhood has made to obtain a connectiveness.
I live in Walking Neighborhood Number 17, according to the
Comprehensive Plan. Currently, there are no trails, no
sidewalks, no parks and no through streets in our neighborhood.
I became involved in this issue for our neighborhood because each
time a Comprehensive Plan would come out, the proposed parks in
particular, changed. When I first came to live in Plymouth 7
years ago, I had a proposed park map showing a dot right behind
my development, which is Oxbow. Over the years I have seen these
proposed park" dots be moved and removed.
Our neighborhood is bordered by Old County Road 9 and Vicksburg
Lane. Two very fast roads with no sidewalks. There is a
shoulder on Vicksburg, but nothing remotely safe to walk on
County Road 9. In order for Golf View Estates and the rest of
the developments to be connected, there needs to be a trail
system through or sidewalks.
I am told our population does not meet with required Park
Department population numbers to qualify for a park. However, I
feel in order for our community to have a connectiveness, a
common bond, our isolated geographic location needs to be
considered. We are a neighborhood with the barriers of soon to
be Schmitt Lake Road, County Road 9 and Vicksburg. We have the
obstacle of Holydale Golf Course which dissects our community.
The already approved planning of our developments without some
connection, is one of the reasons the Park Commission is having
difficulty presenting our neighborhood with options for a park.
I have been in communication with Eric Blank since September, and
have been attending all Park Commission meetings to try and
facilitate a park and sense of connectiveness for our
neighborhood. I have been in contact with each and every
resident in Golf View Estates, Deer Run, Fawn Creek, Oxbow and
Autumn Hills. There is support for this issue!
To date, the only solution sought, is a park on the water tower
site on the North side of Schmitt Lake Road. This again, puts a
park out of our area and leaves us in the same position we
started with -- our children not having safe access to a play
area. It is my understanding from attending meetings that
Schmitt Lake Road is going to have high to very high traffic
levels. If I may, let me quote from the Comprehensive Plan the
definition of a walking neighborhood from page 7: "The focal
point of the walking neighborhood is often a park or playground
at a central site."
We realize the Park Department usually likes to have 5 acre
parks. It seems more reasonable to me to change this criteria,
than to deny us a park all together. Not only do we feel
connectiveness is beneficial, but we would like to see our tax
dollars that we have been contributing, and park dedication fees
paid by developments have a concreteness -- bringing some of
those dollars back within our reach -- a park in our walking
neighborhood!
We are respectfully asking the Planning Committee for serious
consideration on this issue. We understand Richard Bloom's
development proposal, going in North of Autumn Hills, is coming
up for approval. We would like to see an alternative solution
sought there!
Community connectiveness not only provides a positive common
bond, but helps promote communication within a community. This
helps to promote active participation in keeping the community
healthy -- finding solutions to problems, and watching out for
each other. It helps the police enforcement by having neighbors
that feel a need to watch out for each other. Plymouth can
promote a positive community by seeking alternatives and
solutions that provide neighborhoods with a geographic
connectiveness as well as a communal connectiveness.
As I stated, our isolated and
neighborhood) location should
looking to the City to help us
cc: Eric Blank
City Council
Park Planning Commission
our Neighborhood
dissected geographic (walking
necessitate a priority. We are
connect!
Thank you,
Mona Domaas
Walking Neighborhood #17
15910 46th Avenue North
Plymouth, MN 55446
557-0908
November 10, 1994
City Council Members
L1Yark Commission Members
I would like to respectfully present disappointments involved in my
efforts to help obtain a park for our neighborhood.
First of all, I got involved with this because every time a new
park map was printed for the next year, the "proposed park" dots
were moved or removed! Check your past park maps, you will see I
am right!
Secondly, because of poor planning, our neighborhood does not have
a trail system. This means that Golf View Estates, Fawn Creek,
Deer Run, Oxbow and Autumn Hills are not connected. This
oversight, is one of the reasons our consideration for a park is
not taken seriously. Because there is no way through these
neighborhoods to get to a park, there is no alternative to be
thought of. May I ask, who approves of the builder's plans? Why
do some neighborhoods have bike trails, sidewalks AND parks?
Because we are small (according to your numbers), and isolated,
there has been no alternatives for a park to satisfy our issue of
safety.
Thirdly, more consideration is given to developers than to the
actual citizens of Plymouth. Land has been purchased by builders
without any consideration given to the residents. I was given a
map at the meeting tonight of Richard Bloom's proposed development.
However, this land was sold, and his plan approved without any
consideration for a park or trail system. According to Eric Blank,
to go to the developer now and ask for land would not be an easy
issue. I was told that even if all 178 households came in to the
meeting, there was nothing they could do. We apparently don't have
enough citizens, worth the dollar cost to a builder, in order for
the Commission to request land.
I realize we are a small "walking" community within Plymouth. But
do our voices not deserve to be heard also? We contribute to the
community by volunteering, being good citizens, paying taxes.
Should our size, poor planning, oversights, and isolated geographic
location negate our request for a safe park?
I am disappointed at alternatives NOT sought for our issue.
Sincerely,
Plymouth Citizen oo
Mona Domaas
15910 46th Avenue North
Plymouth, MN 55446
cc: Our neighborhood
November 14, 1994
Eric Blank
Director Parks and Recreation
City of Plymouth
Plymouth City Building
Plymouth, Minnesota 55446
Dear Eric,
We live in the Oxbow neighborhood and have three children
We are writing to you concerning the need for a SAFE area for our
children to play' We desperately need an aooeasuble ( by trail)
park/playground for the children who live west of Yicksberq and
north of County Road 9 and south of Highway 47.
These three roads are very busy ones and are unsafe for children
to cross. The parks -Turtle Lake , Plymouth Creek, and Plymouth
playfields are all Parka that children must cross u very busy
road to get to..
The homes in our development carry a substantial tax base which
provides a good deal of money to Plymouth. We feel that our
children deserve to have a SAFE place to play..
We would appreciate your support in helping to obtain a park for
our children and all the other children in this area!
Thunk you..
Sincerely,
Concerned citizens
Lynn and Steve Jap,...: \\ u v
4570 Weston Lane
Plymouth, Mn 55446
r;b PLYMOUTH AGENDA CARD ®a
please print clearly)
Date zzzmw
Name of Speaker J
Address,7 nS y6 l7 t -C No
Agenda Item (List number and letter)
PGI 7/92
a PLYMOUTH AGENDA CARD J®a
please print clearly)
Date qL
Name of Speaker Amin
50 Yip
Address 16 110 yh
y 55 a wes%,q 1101r) e.
Agenda Item (List number and letter)
PGI 7/92
AGENDA CARD
please print)
z -
Name of Speaker
Address 41 0 C
Agenda Item (List number and letter)
PGI 7/72
AGENDA CARD
please print)
Date 0
Name of Speaker/ /) 0maas
Addres-n f C J
Agendaem (List number and letter)
PGI 7/72
1®a PLYMOUTH AGENDA CARD®a
please print clearly) !J
Date 2 r--eA '{,'mom1' g t A Q 4
Name of Speaker A t,-NCOL.,
Address sego 0'e" pv.A- 54 . vv..O f( -e PW --
vv""%.& pts, ;,, SS35tt
Agenda Item (List number and letter)
S K
O IRabe. t'.WIA 1,asa{ - t c.presw.ut d P.(.ep.R.
PGI 7/92
PLYMOUTH AGENDA CARD rpleaseprintclearly)
Name of Sppe_aker /
L , I y
Address /lUl:
267 T (I /V of ,
Agenda Item (List number and letter) u y m DaIY
PGI 7192
DATE: December 5, 1994
TO: PRAC
012
FROM: Eric J. Blank, Director, Parks and Recreation C- J
SUBJECT: PARK NAME - SEVEN PONDSMEATHER RUN
Staff recommends the Park Commission select the name Heather Ponds Park for the new park
at County Road 24 and Highway 101. It has been the policy of previous Councils not to name
parks after individuals.
If the Commission is not happy with any of the names submitted, staff is prepared to come
back at the January meeting with a fist of alternative names.
EB/np
Lun®GREn
BROS.
CONSTRUCTION December 2, 1994
INC. Mr. Eric Blank
City of Plymouth
3400 Plymouth Blvd.
Plymouth, MN 55447
Re: Proposed City Trail in Autumn Hills 2nd Addition
Should we proceed with the proposed trail, I have selected this location for several reasons. The
proposed trail is centrally located in Autumn Hills 2nd Addition, there is currently a 20' wide
sanitary easement (allowing plenty of room for landscaping, trail, ect.) in this location, the
topography would allow for this type of use without significant grading, and it is not located
directly across from a front door to a home under construction. Should we proceed from this
conceptual stage, additional information will be to be obtained, such as type of landscaping
proposed, type of park proposed and timelines of construction. We would need this information
for disclosure purposes for our homeowners and customers.
Should you need additional information from me, please do not hesitate to call
Sincerely,
LUNDGREN BROS. CONSTRUCTION, INC.
David A. Hinners
Enclosure
cc: Terry Forbord
Dear Eric:
935 E. Wayzata Blvd.
The City of Plymouth has contacted Lundgren Bros. Construction, Inc. to request that a public
Wayzata trail be constructed within the subdivision to connect Autumn Hills (and neighborhoods to the
Minnesota 55391 south of Autumn Hills) with a proposed neighborhood park being planned on property north of
and contiguous to Autumn Hills. Per our telephone conversation, please find the drawing I
612)473-1231 referred to showing my suggested location for the proposed trail in Autumn Hills 2nd Addition.
Please be aware that we are currently marketing homes in Autumn Hills 2nd Addition and there
has not previously been indications to either our homeowners or potential customers that a public
trail would be installed in this location. Our legal department will be contacted to "flesh out"
potential problems, if any. Although we are anxious and willing to accomodate the Parks
Department of the City of Plymouth in this endeavor, please also be aware that it may be most
difficult to do so.
Should we proceed with the proposed trail, I have selected this location for several reasons. The
proposed trail is centrally located in Autumn Hills 2nd Addition, there is currently a 20' wide
sanitary easement (allowing plenty of room for landscaping, trail, ect.) in this location, the
topography would allow for this type of use without significant grading, and it is not located
directly across from a front door to a home under construction. Should we proceed from this
conceptual stage, additional information will be to be obtained, such as type of landscaping
proposed, type of park proposed and timelines of construction. We would need this information
for disclosure purposes for our homeowners and customers.
Should you need additional information from me, please do not hesitate to call
Sincerely,
LUNDGREN BROS. CONSTRUCTION, INC.
David A. Hinners
Enclosure
cc: Terry Forbord
t 11T 0: VE
L—— v
a
L
URBA E N O INCTI,< 'C} m I
FSANDAL La A
V
O iNDYVIEWF' —_ EQD (D I TROY LANE
r?ANI
mf
RANIER LA.
VA L ii n
T'Lu LqW'
PEONY E
y
n I a
m
40
Im
A
00000,
CFEER LAWND
tyO D .
3Im ^
r..rc
m a
dEwE 2
O I
HOLLY LANE
a
UARLAND z n 1
N L4 5 O
dL N DUNK( LANE
f
r V DUNKIRK LANE
ro _ ®
z
m) om
I
V
X" 1'.
VICKSBURG LANE
z o r RpNvew 6+ aLaEvo •„ _,
im
Yl M31
i4
3
m ta[ m RO \i _c .T y
9 µ >; n Sry
uNtt•
LyH rrgflxrvifw
LN
i /^\
111
di
Dl
UP,
of
I n i
9O ODMTCD' Lq.'
UD
aAMo
da S
T L OHCXI
PiAggl
CIRCLE 1 a
n.°
AixE N pflq _
Lq Y MNESDTa
Lp.°
cam
me LANEW 00 Lau 6
1 NI. 2 JUNEAULA. E LA I o>
Xa
a
doenae
i I
a T ui
FERNBRO
1ANEm S A
n n I r
o
A
i
I r ANNA
C Z
O
IS XENIUMI LANE f
N' LgxE
DH iXf r
3
iORTNW A,
DRE sr'
coc QY m Z o0o
i y W w i v FIy AJRE
SyL.
phyE,
S)' Gf°D' t^flU
B H 9 PVE c rl flOSEWDOD u;
9Eyp
vl O
ac F 3N•H 1tlON PoN- a LANE wx,Ma 3°
o 0
2 LANEPINE
VIEW
10,
c, o O A—H xo
AR
F g z
IA 21
i
7", AIAL\! Coll
14
13
I I I I /95.Q0
11 1 I I 1 Ih I
I ' 10 I 9
i11 I I1 / /
12 AVGN.
48TH Ilk-
P,- LJj - )t 'c- qa ,3
22
8 to •q s y'y
o 14
I^ /
IS q' io20 I
J
t` %Gi4 -1
I
vp-aiP.9xvl o Iia _
IB t= 19
9 r/s
17 ;- 18 V P
y
Y
y next
Al
1 l ' / q ' \\\\,\\\r'a 4/
J
Q' '
Ids ''
F:. , l •.>
16
12 1
ill$ 10
Ll! nV`lll are dependent on seasonal precipitation and
N
AUTUMN HILLS
climatic cycles. The sizes and shapes depicted
are an artist's representation of ponding areas
under average conditions.
IIgY
Wayzata, MN 55391
612/473-1231
Builder Lia 40001413
8194
right to sell lots in this subdivision to other
builders and makes no representation that all
houses in this subdivision will be built by
Lundgren Bros.
122/94
2ND ADDITION LOTS j
AUTUMN HILLSD1STADDITIONLOTS
41 PUBLIC TRAIL
CORRIDOR & GOLF
COURSE Shown above are all drainage and utility ease -
1 I ments dedicated in the final plat. Not shown
f• I are easements which may have been created
by other instruments. Pond sizes and depthsLl! nV`lll are dependent on seasonal precipitation and
N
ONSTRUCTION
R INC
climatic cycles. The sizes and shapes depicted
are an artist's representation of ponding areas
under average conditions.
935 E. Wayzata Blvd. Lundgren Bros. Construction, Inc., reserves the
Wayzata, MN 55391
612/473-1231
Builder Lia 40001413
8194
right to sell lots in this subdivision to other
builders and makes no representation that all
houses in this subdivision will be built by
Lundgren Bros.
122/94
STREET MAP
s[ructing a beautiful new
multipurpose recreation
center is the dream of
many a parks and recm-
ation department. Unfortu-
nately, all too many
partments plunge forward
into a project with the expectation
that their new center will break even or better
yet, make money.
To be realistic, that's hardly ever the case.
Cities planning a new recreation facility need
to realize up front they'll likely be operating
with some type of deficit Except in extremely
rare cases, most recreation centers are unable
to recover 100 percent of their costs, especially
if they include several low- or no -revenue com-
ponents like meeting rooms, tennis courts,
theaters and teenrchild areas (see page 34).
location can also be an immediate negative
Chaska; Minn., aad Green
River, Wqo., are two facilities
on opposite ends of the
centers in rural areas are much less likely
to recoup costs than their urban counterparts.
Well-informed parks and recreation depart-
ments approach the planning process know-
ing they will carry a deficit, and plan for this
With the full support of their city council. By Su
Those that don't—and that end up expert-
encing a decline in revenue or need large
sums of money for capital improvements after only a few years of operation
are apt to incur serious scrutiny from their councils. To avoid this, it's
best to determine the potential cost -recovery rate from the beginning,
which in tum will help administrators and council members understand
the anticipated budgetary performance of the center.
eco vering 100 percent of your center'soperat ng
costs can be done, but it isn't done often. One city recre-
ation facility that planned to beat the odds from the
beginning — and has — is the Chaska (Minn.) Commu-
nity Center. Just the right combination of planning, size and
location has made the center, located in a rapidly growing community 18
miles southwest of Minneapolis& Paul, profitable. In fiscal year 1994,
says Tom Redman, director of the Chaska Parks, Recreation and Art
Department, expenses are budgeted at $1.1 million, with revenue projec-
cost-recoverq spectrum.
42
l?hLLI hit l:i;
tions at $1,166,000. The bulk of the revenue
t comes from three sources: admissions, antic-
s ipated to bring in $290,000; memberships,
358,000; and the ice arena, $145,000.
There are several reasons the center is
able to achieve a I00 -percent cast -recovery
rate, most important of which, Redman says,
is that the city, which has a population of
12,000, began with a clear philosophy of what
it was building.
1 think that if it's a city council you're
operating with and under, you have to start
out with a goal. It sounds kind of corny, but
you have to have a purpose as to whyyou're
building a community center," says Redman.
The reason this city built a centerwas to be
a family gathering place that's all-encompass-
ing. It's not a health club, it's not a racquetball
facility, it's not where the jocks come. It's sup-
posed to be everything to everyone."
To become even more family-oriented,
plans are underway to add an arts component
to the facility. The proposed $2.5 million
addition will include presentation space for
the arts, a cafe and as indoor playground. To
e Schmid
increase the area's revenue potential, plans
are being made to lease the basement area
out, perhaps for gymnastics or indoor golf.
The arts group will also contribute financially.
Although Chaska itself is small, the center draws heavily from the sur-
rounding area Redman estimates about one-third of memberships come
from non-residents, as does $240,000 of the $290,000 in daily admissions.
Fees are a bargain — Chaska youth and seniors pay $75 a year, adult resi-
dents pay $100 and families pay $175. For non-residents, the fees are $118,
156 and $275, respectively.
Redman feels the leisure pool is the center's biggest draw, followed by
the ice arena Other major components of the 97,094 -square -foot center
include a large amount of gymnasium space, weight -training and aerobics
areas, racquetball courts and a track
A second major reason for the center's success, Redman feels, is the
size of his staff.
That's where a considerable amount of dollars are spent in a community
center and we're somewhat lean," says Redman. "I know a lot of communi-
28 ATHLETIC BUSINESS October 1994 Reprinted by permission, copyright 1994, Athletic Business Magazine
ties are going in the other direction and saying
they need more staff, but we started out lean."
In addition, a corporate/civic organization
program, in which companies and groups that
sell a minimum of 10 memberships get a 10 per-
cent discount, has successfully brought in many
new members.
This program created a lot of discussion,"
says Redman. "Whatever group it was, they
talked among themselves, so it's a way of pro-
moting the building and having people talk
about it"
The center also has an agreement with the
school district (elementary, middle and high
schools are located adjacent to the center in a
campus -like setting), which uses the center for
girls' preseason softball practice, a gymnastics
program and hockey practices and games, as
well as for workshops and physical education
classes. The original agreement called for the
school to contribute 45 percent of any operating
deficit, or a $15,000 minimum if there is no
deficit The schools also pay for ice time.
46
eanwhile, across the country
in southwestern Wyoming, the
54,000 -square -foot Green
River Recreation Center's goal
is to meet 50 percent of its
ing costs. Although Green River (population
12,500) is close in size to Chaska, that's where the
similarity ends. While Chaska is located in a grow-
ing, affluent area, Green River's population base is
just 15,000 people —and that's drawing from as
far away as 30 miles in any direction. In addition,
there are two competing centers in Rock Springs,
which isjust 12 miles away.
Two years ago, when the center was recoup-
ing approximately 44 percent of its costs, the city
council felt offering classes and racquetball
courts free would bring more people into the
center, thus reducing the deficit
Instead, the cost -recovery rate dropped to 38
percent "We didn't attract any new people; we
had the same people using the center at a
cheaper cost," says Brenda Roosa, recreation
center supervisor.
Ealy iastyear, the council gave the center the
goal of bringing the cost -recovery rate up to 50
percent within the next three years. Besides rein-
sdtufing charges for racquetball courts and
classes, the center has added more programming
for families, brought vending operations in-house,
expanded sales of T-shirts and fitness gear, and
committed additional capital money to new
amenities, such as cardiovascular equipment and
small pool slides. As a result, the center so far has
brought the cost -recovery rate up to 46 percent
SELF -RECORDING SYSTEM
Now, it's easier than ever to create and present professional quality
videos for the widest range of business applications. The revolution-
ary Sharp Viewcam' is the first camcorder to use a large active matrix
color LCD view screen as its monitor. That, combined with the built-
in audio system, gives you instant playback anywhere - in full color
and sound. What's more, the 270' rotating lens and view screen lets
LCD
L C D V I E W C A M S a L C D
Continually upgrading equipment is obvi-
ously an important thing," says Roosa. "Every
time we get something new, it gets a big promo-
tion. Increasing the amenities and making it
more fun is always a plus."
hat percentage of cost -
recovery is achieved really
depends on your market and
philosophy. While Chaska and
Green River are on opposite ends
of the spectrum, the cost -recovery rates of most
centers fail somewhere in between. The key is to
establish ahead of time a rate your city is comfort-
able with, and then work to achieve that goal.
To determine cost -recovery rates at rec cen-
ters nationwide, .4B sent a survey to managers
of 50 parks and recreative: facilities. L•r dobrg
the initial survey, we found wide swings in
the information we received For example,
one city charges nothing for its residents to
use its center, while another took over the
operation ofan existingprivate facility, thus
starting outwith a built-in membership.
We'restillgathering information on cost
recovery as part ofan ongoing surveyffyou'd
like to supply information about your center,
call as at 800V2-8764 or far us at 608249-
7153 and weW promptly send a survey.
you shoot from a ny angle- even get yourself in the picture. Whether
you choose a 3-irich * or high-performance 4 - inch * view screen model
with Hiii, Hi-Fi Stereo and digital capabilities, you get a self-con-
tained video system in one lightweight portable unit. The incredible
Sharp Viewcam. Experience its extraordinary viewing and playback
capabilities and you won't be able to picture work without it.
P R 0 J E C T 1 0 N S Y S T E M S j L
all
I md IBM I
Revision Date: November 22. 1994
CREDITS
The Maple Grove Comprehensive Park System and Recreation Plan has been developed over the period
October 1993 to October 1994 and represents a coordinated effort between all involved groups.
BOARD
Timothy Phenow, Chair
Douglas Anderson, Board Member
Patricia Hoffman, Board Member
Dale Kopel, Board Member
William Lewis, Board Member
Terry Just, Director of Parks and Recreation
Joseph C. Byrne, Previous Chair
CITY COUNCIL
James P. Deane, Mayor
LeAnn Sargent, Council Member
Don Ramstad, Council Member
Irene Koski, Council Member
David Burtness, Council Member
CITY STAFF
Jon Elam, City Administrator
Gerald Butcher, Director of Public Works
Ken Ashfeld, City Engineer
Alan Madsen, Director of Community and Economic Development
Randall Graves, Principal Planner
SPECIAL CREDIT
Bob Waibel, City Planner
PLANNING CONSULTANT
Tim Erkkila, Project Mdnager
Anne Deuring, Landscape Architect
Westwood Professional Services, Inc.
14180 W. Trunk Highway 5
Eden Prairie, MN 55344
612)937-5150
APPROVAL PROCESS
Parks & Recreation Board: November 17, 1994
Planning Commission - Public Hearing & Approval: November 14, 1994
City Council - Approval: November 21, 1994
COMPREHENSIVE PARK SYSTEM AND RECREATION PLAN
MAPLE GROVE, MINNESOTA
TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE
INTRODUCTION.......................................................................................................................................1
INVENTORY.............................................................................................................................................. 2
CITYCHARACTERISTICS........................................................................................................................ 2
EXISTING FACILITIES INVENTORY......................................................................................................2
USERCHARACTERISTICS....................................................................................................................... 8
CLASSIFICATIONSYSTEM......................................................................................................................9
POPULATION AND RECREATION ANALYSIS...............................................................................11
DEMOGRAPHIC ANALYSIS - POPULATION TRENDS......................................................................11
DEMOGRAPHIC IMPACT ON PARKS AND RECREATION FACILITIES.........................................12
LOCAL RECREATION STANDARDS....................................................................................................14
STATE COMPREHENSIVE OUTDOOR RECREATION PLAN 15
POLICIES.................................................................................................................................................16
GENERAL OUTREACH POLICIES...............................................:.........................................................16
GENERAL FINANCIAL POLICIES.........................................................................................................17
GENERAL LAND ACQUISITION POLICIES 18
GENERAL PARK DEVELOPMENT POLICIES.....................................................................................18
GENERAL RECREATION PROGRAM POLICIES.................................................................................19
THEPLAN................................................................................................................................................20
PLANNINGISSUES..................................................................................................................................20
FUTURE GROWTH AREA PARKS..................................................:......................................................21
REVIEW OF EAST -SIDE NEIGHBORHOOD PARK SITES..................................................................30
ATHLETICFACILITIES........................................::................................................................................. 33
SPECIALUSE FACILITIES...................................................................................................................... 34
PARK TRAIL SYSTEM 37
NATURAL RESOURCE AREAS (CONSERVANCY AND LINEAR PARK SITES)............................43
THE COMPREHENSIVE PARK SYSTEM PLAN...................................................................................46
SHORT-TERM PRIORITIES.....................................................................................................................48
IMPLEMENTATION................................................................................................................................. 50
LIST OF EXHIBITS
EXHIBIT 1: EXISTING PARK SITES
PAGE
EXHIBIT 2: NORTHWEST QUADRANT PARK SITE LOCATIONS................................................................... 25
EXHIBIT 3: SOUTHWEST QUADRANT PARK SITE LOCATIONS...................................................................29
EXHIBIT 4: NEIGHBORHOOD PARKS AND PARK SERVICE AREAS.............................................................32
EXHIBIT5: PARK TP.AIL SYSTEM....................................................................................................................... 30
EXHIBIT 6: PARK TRAIL CROSSINGS OF MAJOR BARRIERS........................................................................42
EXHIBITT COMPREHENSIVE PARK SYSTEM.................................................................................................47
LIST OF TABLES AND CHARTS PAGE
MAPLE GROVE PARKS INVENTORY AND OPEN SPACE ANALYSIS.............................................3
PARKFACILITIES MATRIX.....................................................................................................................6
MAPLE_ GROVE POPULATION ANALYSIS..........................................................................................11
1990 MAPLE GROVE AND METRO AREA DEMOGRAPHIC PATTERNS........................................13
ATHLETIC FACILITIES NEEDED..........................................................................................................14
PROPOSED NORTHWEST QUADRANT PARKS.................................................................................22
PROPOSED SOUTHWEST QUADRANT PARKS..................................................................................26
EAST -SIDE NEIGHBORHOOD PARK RECOMMENDATIONS.......................................................... 30
PARK TRAIL CROSSINGS OF MAJOR BARRIERS.............................................................................40
COMPONENTS OF THE PROPOSED CENTRAL ELM CREEK BASIN NATURAL AREA..............44
COMPONENTS OF THE PROPOSED SOUTHERN ELM CREEK BASIN NATURAL AREA ........... 45
INTRODUCTION
The development of this, the 1994 Comprehensive Park System and Recreation Plan, represents the
ongoing effort to keep the direction and momentum of park development in Maple Grove in line with
current and projected recreational needs. This document updates the Comprehensive Park System and
Recreation Plans approved in 1980 and 1987. The 1987 plan set out goals and policies, basic planning
assumptions, definitions and standards which have been re-evaluated and revised as necessary. The 1994
plan comes at the end of a residential growth spurt in the City. Decisions on the urban service area
combined with a favorable residential development climate may require park and trail development in the
west portion of the City to keep ahead of another growth period.
It is expected the City will not be totally developed by 2000, at which time, the selection of additional
neighborhood park sites, trail development and a re -analysis of municipal needs will likely warrant
another park plan in order to position the City for what may be its last major growth period.
The general intent of a Comprehensive Park System and Recreation Plan is to provide an analysis and
decision making framework comprised of definitions, standards and policies. The application of these
planning tools is intended to provide a method of evaluating the existing system and predict future needs
which would result in the preservation of open space and the development of park and trail facilities and
recreation programs designed to meet the recreational leisure interests of the citizens of Maple Grove
today as well as in the future.
As a rapidly urbanizing community, Maple Grove has already made significant progress toward its goal
of providing a comprehensive park system and recreation program. Development over the years has
allowed the City to set aside very desirable parcels of land which function as strategically located
neighborhood park sites, play lots, preserved natural amenities, open space, linear parks and community
parks; all of which are accented due to their location characteristics: lake frontage, woods, ponds and
rolling hills.
With substantial future population increases expected in the western half of the City, the location and
ability of existing park sites to accommodate future demand for open space, park and recreational needs
is questionable. Therefore, it has become essential that unique natural features, open space and park land
in the urban and rural setting be actively pursued and preserved.
COMPREHENSIVE PARK SYSTEM AND RECREATION PLAN
INVENTORY
CITY CHARACTERISTICS
Maple Grove is a relatively young, third -ring suburban community. The City is very large, covering
nearly 36 square miles. Currently, the population exceeds 40,000 residents with nearly half of its
residents having moved into homes built in the last 10 years.
The major land uses are residential in the east and central, with agriculture in the west. Moderate to
above average priced residential development is occurring where land is available. Agriculture continues
outside the Metro Urban Service Area (MUSA) delineation imposed by the Metropolitan Council.
Industrial and commercial development is gaining momentum in interstate frontage areas which is slowly
replacing the existing sand and gravel industries.
The community is characterized by its rolling hills, seven lakes and an extensive wetland system. A city-
wide open space feeling is created by the remaining hardwood forests, several large wetlands, Elm and
Rush Creeks, an extensive gravel pit operation in the east -central portion of the City and three regional
parks (Elm Creek Park Reserve, Fish Lake Regional Park and Eagle Lake Regional Park).
EXISTING FACILITIES INVENTORY
Maple Grove has approximately 1,120 acres of park land at 51 sites (including school owned properties).
Paralleling the 25 percent increase in population between 1985 and 1990, the 58 percent increase in park
area is largely due to joint -use agreements with recently constructed schools. These sites are listed in the
table on the following page along with classification and total acreage.
The City has successfully incorporated regional trails into the park system for many years. Noteworthy
examples include the Hennepin County Park Trail links and Eagle Lake/Fish Lake Trails. Teal Lake
Neighborhood Park and Weaver Lake Elementary Playfield are also examples of parks and public use
facilities which have incorporated a trail system. These trails are intended for non -motorized uses, such
as bicycling, hiking/joggingtwalking, and cross-country skiing. The City will continue to expand this
valuable park resource in the future.
The existing park sites map (Exhibit 1) locates all active and passive park land. School sites, developed
and undeveloped, have also been recognized as locations for potential recreational facilities relative to
existing and proposed joint -use agreements between Maple Grove and Osseo School District #279.
2-
COMPREHENSIVE PARK SYSTEM AND RECREATION PLAN
Maple Grove Parks Inventory and Open Space Analysis
3-
Acreage
Park Name
Map
Key No. Classification Total
Open
S acel
Bayless 12 Pla lot 1.22 0.00
Basswood 44 Neighborhood Park 20.71 10.00
Basswood School 43 Community Pla field 34.39 5.00
Boundary Creek 1 Neighborhood Park 98.53 60.00
Cedar Island Lake Trails Linear Park 7.48 0.00
Cedar Island School 33 Community Mayfield 45.28 0.00
Cedar Island Shores 32 Special Use Park 2.96 0.00
Charest 15 Neighborhood Park 6.05 0.00
Crosswinds 40 Neighborhood Park 4.45 0.00
Donahue 48 Community Mayfield 24.70 5.00
Donahue South 47 Pla lot 5.25 0.00
Eagle Lake Marsh 28 Conservancy 11.15 11.50
Eagle Lake Trails 29 Linear Park 2.00 2.00
Eagle Lake Woods 30 Pla lot 12.80 0.00
Eagle Lake Trail/
Fish Lake Regional Trail
51 Linear Park 12.12 12.12
Eagle Nest 54 Pla lot 34 0.00
Elm Creek 7 Special Use Park 15.48 10.00
Elm Creek School 13 CommunityPla field 25.33 0.00
Fish Lake Trails East 36 Linear Park 11.64 11.64
Fish Lake Trails 38 Linear Park 18.38 18.38
Fish Lake Woods 37 Neighborhood Park 8.91 0.00
Forestview Pond 10 Neighborhood Park 7.53 1.00
Freedom Field 21 N/A NIA 0.00
Goldenrod Marsh 41 Park 14.55 10.00
Hemlock Ponds
Neighborhood
31 Pla lot 6.00 0.00
High Pointe Hills 45 Conservancy 37.52 37.52
Historical Site 2 Special Use Park. 20 0.00
Jonquil Meadow 16 Neighborhood Park 20.59 0.00
Kerber 19 Community Playfield 13.69 2.00
Lakeview Knolls 4 Neighborhood Park 12.08 1.00
Maple Grove Jr. High 27 Community Playfield 52.82 2.00
Maple Grove Sr. High 6 Community Playfield 119.31 25.00
Maple Meadow 50 Pla lot 14.11 11.00
Maple Tree 34 Pla lot 85 0.00
Maple Valley Trails 11 Linear Park 11.07 0.00
North Elm Creek Trails 8 Linear Park 16.03 16.03
Pilgrim 14 Pla lot 1.97 0.00
Polaris 42 Pla lot 56 0.00
Rice Lake School 20 Community Pla field 19.91 0.00
Rice Lake Trails 5 Linear Park 47.55 47.55
Rice Lake Woods 17 Conservancy 43.25 42.25
3-
COMPREHENSIVE PARK SYSTEM AND RECREATION PLAN
Maple Grove Parks Inventory and Open Space Analysis (Continued)
Open Space" is land which is undeveloped, and where any major future improvements are unlikely or
not practical (wetlands, ponds and conservancy sites)
4-
Acreage
Park Name
Map
KeE No. Classification Total
Open
Space
Rush Creek School 24 Neighborhood Park 40.59 5.00
Rush Creek Trails 3 Linear Park 1.95 1.45
Teal Lake 9 Neighborhood Park 17.38 12.00
Thoresen 53 Special Use Park 3.58 1.00
Tiller Site 18 Special Use Park 23.55 0.00
Timber Crest Forest 49 Conservancy 41.54 41.54
Trailways - misc. locations Linear Park 1.38 0.00
Ulster Green 46 Conservancy 20.82 20.82
Weaver Lake 26 Community Park 80.46 40.00
Weaver Lake School 22 Community Pla field 28.40 3.00
Weaver Lake Knolls Conservancy11.12 11.12
Weaver Lake Public Access Special Use Park 10.04 9.00
Wedgewood Pla lot 2.35 1.35
Woodcrest d39 Neighborhood Park 18.20 10.00
Worden Special Use Park 10.12 9.00
Totals I I 1,120.24 506.27
Open Space" is land which is undeveloped, and where any major future improvements are unlikely or
not practical (wetlands, ponds and conservancy sites)
4-
I
s'
I F.
rh:24
23I
l + 25
r
t 1
I
L 1
city of
I ple GrowIm
EXISTING
PARK SITES
LEGEND
LOCAL PARK LAND
REGIONAL PARK LAND
SCHOOL DISTRICT SITES
NOTE NUMBERS REFER TO PARK
NAMES ON MAP KEY
NORTH Y' ]000 n000' 1 YLE
on Woo T M y
ECm Ynhl Mn00tte 56344Wi
013/03,0100 I
PARK FACILITIES CHART
In
0
o mEo
v 5
Um
m wlaIeamgepEp U m
i T N ttl
Cv
y g Park Namesm> S a rn i n.
I 1 Boundary Creek Neighborhood Park 1 90 IL IL 2 2 1 IR 1 2 sm
I med.
4 2 Historical Site
5 3 Rush Creek Linear Park
9 4 Lakeview Knolls Neighborhood Park 130 1 2 2 IN I 1 Ig.
1 med.
9 5 Rice Lake Trails Linear Park
10 6 Maple Grove Sr. High and 2 700 1 8 3 1 IL 2R 2 2 1 med 8
Community Playfield I 4N
10 7 Elm Creek Special Use Public/Park Access 1 * 56
10 8 INorth Elm Creek Trails
70 9 Teal Lake Neighborhood Park 16 1 1 IN 1 med
11 10 Forestview Pond Neighborhood Park 16 1 2 1 IN I 1 I med
12n 1 I Maple Valley Trails Linear Park
12n 12 Bayless Playlet 1 1 med
12n 13 Elm Creek School & Community Playfield 1 150 1L 1L 2 2 1 IR 1 1 1 I Ig
12s 14 Pilgrim Playlot I 1 med
Its 15 Charest Neighborhood Park 1 16 1L I 1N 1 1med
74 16 Jonquil Meadow Neighborhood Park 16 1 2 I IN 1 med
14s 17 IRice Lake Woods Conservancy
14s 18 Tiller Site
15 19 Kerber Community Playfield 1 100 IL 2L 2 2 1 l Ig
15 20 Rice Lake School & Community Playfield 1 100 I 1 IPL I I 119
15 21 Freedom Feld 100 1
17 22 Weaver Lake School & Community Playfield 75 1 1 1 1R 119
17 23 Weaver Lake Knolls Conservancy
19 24 Rush Creek School Neighborhood Park 75 2 2 1N 1 1 med
19 25 Weaver Lake Public Access/Special Use Park 10
19 26 Weaver Lake Community Park 1 1 300 1L IL 4 3 IN 1 1 1 sm 1 10
2 med
25 27 Maple Grove Jr. High & CorranumityPark 1 300 1 41 1 1 41, 2PL I 1 I
25 28 Eagle Lake Marsh Conservancy
25 29 Eagle Lake Trails Linear Park
25 30 Eagle Lake Woods Playlot I 1 1 med o
26 31 Hendrick Ponds Playlot 1 1 1 sun
26 32 Cedar Island Shores Special Use Park p
26 33 Cedar Island School & Community Mayfield 1 150 lL 2L 2 2 1 1 IR I I I I
26 34 Maple Tree Playlot 1 sm
27 35 Wedgewood Playlot I med
27 36 Fish Lake Trail - East
27 37 Fish Lake Woods Neighborhood Park 16 1 2 1IN 1 I med
27 38 Fish Lake Trails Linear Park
27 39 Worden Special Use Park 10 I med
28 40 Crosswinds Neighborhood Park lu l 1 1 1 1 IN 1 med
In
PARK FACILITIES CHART
NOTES:
L Lighted Facility
R Regulation Athletic complex Facility
N Non -regulation (open space, practice only)
Trails, 8' Width Paved, Two -Directional; for Pedestrian
o Trails, Non -Paved; for Pedestrian Movement,
Bicycling and Cross -Country
bN
5 o a
va' rn u d
a ro v rn
v O U y
a m a O C m 0 a <
O U V p
v u c i U m o U U U
o
y Park Names x v c m> SE2iW a vii S a°
28 41 Goldenrod Marsh Neighborhood Park 1 1 1N I 1 med
28 42 Polaris Playlot I Ism
33 43 Basswood School & Community Playfield 75 1 1 1N I med
33 44 Basswood Neighborhood Park I I I I INI I 1 med
33 45 High Pointe Hills Conservancy I I Ir
33 46 Ulster Green Conservancy
33 47 Donahue (South) Playlot 1 I I 1 med
34 48 Donahue Community Playfield 1 100 ILI IL 2 I 1 IR 1 1med
34 49 Timber Crest Forest Conservancy Ir
35 50 Maple Meadow Playlot I I I medl I I o
35 51 Eagle Lake/Fish Lake Trail (Regional)
36 52 Woodcrest Neighborhood Park 16 1 1 1 1N 1 I med
36 53 Thoresen Special Use ParkI 18 IL 1 1 sm
Eagle Lake Community Bldg.)
36 54 Eagle Nest Playlot 1 sm
TOTALS 11 1 3 3 2551 13
11391
13 18 10 6 7R 19 5 3 8 sm 1 18
8L 4L 1L 17N 24 me
31L.71g
NOTES:
L Lighted Facility
R Regulation Athletic complex Facility
N Non -regulation (open space, practice only)
Trails, 8' Width Paved, Two -Directional; for Pedestrian
o Trails, Non -Paved; for Pedestrian Movement,
Bicycling and Cross -Country
COMPREHENSIVE PARK SYSTEM AND RECREATION PLAN
USER CHARACTERISTICS
The characteristics of the users of recreational park and school facilities in Maple Grove can best be
determined by studying participant registrations for programs offered by major providers of recreational
activities: The Maple Grove Parks & Recreation Board (the Board) and Maple Grove Athletic
Associations (the Athletic Associations).
The Board offers a year round comprehensive program of recreational activities designed to serve the
interest of the entire community. ihese activities utilize indoor and outdoor facilities at City parks and
local schools. The primary methods used in the promotion and public announcement of these activities
are the Osseo - Maple Grove Press, flyers, cable TV, and recreation program brochures for winter,
spring, summer and fall activities.
The Athletic Associations are volunteer organizations who offer a wide range of athletic programs to the
citizenry. The Board and Athletic Associations work together to offer quality, non -duplicative athletic
activities to all ages of the community where interests are demonstrated or identified. Programs offered
by the Athletic Associations also utilize indoor and outdoor facilities at City parks and local schools.
The Athletic Associations use the Osseo - Maple Grove Press, flyers and the Maple Grove Parks and
Recreation Board brochures for publicity and for advertising their programs.
City park facilities are scheduled by the Board for community use. In addition, the Board schedules
indoor and outdoor school facilities through the School District #279 Community Education and Services
for city planned recreation programs.
Relative to the Comprehensive Park System and Recreation Plan, it is important to analyze the number of
participants registered with the Board and Associations who utilize outdoor recreation facilities,
particularly athletic fields. This information reflects the adequacy of existing facilities.
In 1993, there were 802 teams, comprising 10,330 individuals, that were registered for outdoor athletic
games sponsored by the Board and Athletic Associations. The predominant users' age ranged from 5 to
18. A breakdown of participants using ballfields (based on age) is as follows:
Age Group No. of Partici ants
8 & under 1,412,
9-13 2,128
15-18 333
21 & over 2,500
Scheduled games are given top priority with remaining unscheduled ballfield hours being made available
for practices. Soccer/football field use has grown, however, recently added facilities continue to keep
pace with the demand. Indoor facilities for youth and adult sports continues to be used at full capacity.
In addition to programmed activities, Maple Grove residents are very involved in non -athletic park and
open space activities. The City's natural resources, and developed facilities, along with amenities
provided by the County provide numerous opportunities for hiking, picnicking, nature interpretation,
water oriented activities, winter activities, etc. These nature oriented uses are in addition to the basic
play lot facilities provided by the City in residential areas. Measurement of the quantity of participants
in non -athletic activities is difficult because of their non -organized and non -registered nature. The State
Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plan (SCORP) has suggested that the participation rate for these
facilities is higher than for programmed activities. Locally, the residents have repeatedly expressed their
approval of non -athletic park and open space activities at public hearings. On-site visual surveys confirm
this participation as well.
M
COMPREHENSIVE PARK SYSTEM AND RECREATION PLAN
CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM
Maple Grove has a park classification system which has been in use since 1976. Three general
categories are utilized: local parks, linear parks, and regional parks. All existing or proposed Maple
Grove parks within the City generally fit into one of these three general groups. The following
classification system is a modified restatement of the Metropolitan Council's System, adjusted to suit
Maple Grove's approach to parks.
LOCAL PARKS
Playlots: These sites usually have less than four acres of usable land and, therefore, only allow for play
equipment, a small ballfield, trails and a pleasure skating rink. Playlots are designed for informal
recreation due to their reduced size. They are developed in neighborhoods and are intended to fill voids
where neighborhood parks do not exist and cannot be provided for in the future.
Neighborhood Parks: These sites are usually four to fifteen acres of developable recreation area. Ten
acres is a better minimum standard since these parks should support a game field, play equipment,
basketball court, tennis court, trails, parking lot, and pleasure skating rinks. Typically, these parks are
not scheduled for adult competition; however, may be able to support practice by adults. The service
area has approximately one-half mile radius and should not extend beyond, major access barriers such as
major streets, creeks, lakes, etc. Usually, each park service area will receive one neighborhood park.
The neighborhood park is the most important and basic unit of the total park system and is expected to
serve Maple Grove's residential developments. Neighborhood parks may also exist as shared facilities
with school sites.
Community Plavfields: These sites are usually 25 to 50 acres of developable land for programmed,
intensive recreational use. They are designed to serve several neighborhoods simultaneously. As
primarily an athletic complex, each community playfield provides several regulation game fields, parking
lot, shelter building with public utility services, hockey and pleasure skating rinks, large play equipment,
trails, basketball courts, tennis courts, and playfield lighting as needed. Community playfields provide
decentralized athletic facilities for greater accessibility and use, and provide the opportunity to size sites
to target service areas. Community playfields may also serve a multiple park function by serving as
neighborhood parks. Many of the City's playfields exist as shared joint -use facilities with school sites.
Community Parks: These sites are 25 to 100 acres or more of land which provide active and passive
recreation and are typically oriented toward the site's natural amenities such as lakes, rivers/creeks, or
woods. They are also designed to provide appeal to the entire community population. Large numbers of
park users drive to these sites requiring parking improvements and shelter buildings with public utility
services. Community parks may, by design, also serve a multiple park function when community
playfields and/or neighborhood parks are insufficient to serve the area.
Special Use Parks: These land holdings are of variable size and are acquired and developed for specific
purposes such as arboretum, educational, boat access, wayside rest areas, fishing dock, indoor pool,
arena, golf course or historic site. They are intended to serve on a large scale community -wide basis.
Conservancy Parks: Generally these land holdings can be of any size and have no programmed use.
They are located where facilities are not presently intended. Wetlands, wildlife preserves, and relatively
undisturbed forests are examples of sites categorized as conservancies.
COMPREHENSIVE PARK SYSTEM AND RECREATION PLAN
LINEAR PARKS
Generally, linear parks are intended to provide non -motorized transportation corridors and may contain
geographic features such as streams or lake shore.
Local Linear Park: This type of park land provides a physical link, between two or more areas. The
width is variable, but generally exceeds 20 feet but more typically range from 30 feet to 75 feet wide.
The Local Linear Park may contain no transportation treadways or contain single or multiple
transportation trails. These trails may accommodate bicycling, hiking/jogging/ walking, and cross county
skiing. The width of the Local Linear Park is important because the amount of land included in the
corridor is intended to reflect a park -like atmosphere as well as a transportation corridor.
Regional Linear Park: Park land acquired for trail routings for Hennepin Park Reserve District areas are
designated as Regional Linear Parks. Their characteristics are deemed acceptable by Hennepin Parks.
Typically, Regional Trail Corridors accommodate single or multiple modes of recreational travel to link
components of the Regional Parks and Open Space System. To date, very few Regional Trails are
developed and they tend to be highly variable as to typical right-of-way widths and travel modes. In
addition to the previously stated local uses, regional trails may also accommodate horseback riding and
snowmobiling.
Trailways: Park access trailways are for the specific purpose of obtaining access between platted
properties and the width is enough to essentially accommodate the transportation mode. Trailways are
typically 30 feet wide and the treadway dominates the corridor rather than the open space as in Local
Linear Parks.
Hennepin Parks has responsibility for the planning, development and operation of "Regional' park and
recreation facilities in Maple Grove. This regional outreach serves a large portion of the greater
Minneapolis -St. Paul metropolitan region. Hennepin Park facilities in Maple Grove are not considered
local. Four regional facilities exist or are planned in Maple Grove. They are:
Elm Creek Park Reserve - existing
Fish Lake Regional Park - existing
Eagle Lake/Pike Lake Regional Park - planned
North Hennepin Regional Corridor Trail System - planned
10-
COMPREHENSIVE PARK SYSTEM AND RECREATION PLAN
POPULATION AND RECREATION ANALYSIS
DEMOGRAPHIC ANALYSIS -POPULATION TRENDS
Maple Grove continues to be among one of the fastest growing communities in the Twin Cities, although
growth rates have slowed in recent years due to a shortage of developable land within the MUSA
boundary. The City has been experiencing extensive residential development by large and small real
estate developers. New residential projects, with a wide spectrum of styles, are being accepted by home
buyers in Maple Grove. As these projects rapidly "sellout", new plats are being proposed and processed.
This growth trend, combined with the large amount of land available in Maple Grove just outside the
MUSA boundary, suggests that the community could achieve a large increase in population over a
relatively short period of time and that areas within newly expanded MUSA lines will likely develop very
rapidly. One of the possible "growth pains" associated with this trend would be the development of a
park system. For this reason, the demographics of the community are examined in this section.
Maple Grove appeals to a variety of home buyers, especially those who have relocated due to
employment, are attracted by the City's natural amenities and "move -up" home buyers. Most of the new
residents to the City are parents with children of elementary school age. The housing market in Maple
Grove is also attracting young, single, career individuals who are interested in investing in a home. The
balance of the City's population are long-term residents who are middle age with maturing children.
By comparing the 1985 and 1990 census figures, it is evident Maple Grove continues to grow, however,
there has been a slow down in the rate of growth. Populations have increased in each age bracket with
the most dramatic population increases occurring in the 25 to 44 year old bracket and the 0 to 15 year old
age groups. While citizens over 65 remain as a smaller percentage, their population has nearly doubled
since 1985.
The following table gives population estimates broken down by age group. The table shows actual
population counts for 1985 and 1990 to illustrate actual growth. The 1985 projection of the 1990
population figures to contrast the predictions to the actual results are also included.
Maple Grove Population Analysis
1985 Census 1990 Projected in `87 1990 Census
No. Percenta a No. Percentage No. Percentage
0-5 4,041 14.1 4,228 11.6 4,792 12.4
6-12 3,925 13.7 5,118 14.0 5,618 14.5
13-15 1,569 5.5 1,918 5.3 1,861 4.8
16-18 1,214 4.2 1,628 4.5 1,495 3.9
19-24 1,864 6.5 2,366 6.5 2,124 5.5
25-34 7,061 24.6 7,824 21.4 8,448 21.8
35-44 5,626 19.6 7,517 20.6 8,441 21.8
45-54 1,924 6.7 3,620 9.9 3,632 9.4
55-59 537 1.9 915 2.5 799 2
60-64 401 1.4 505 1.4 586 1.5
65-74 363 1.3 599 1.6 696 1.8
75+ 151 5 262 7 244 6
Totals 28,676 100% 36,500 100% 38,736 100%
COMPREHENSIVE PARK SYSTEM AND RECREATION PLAN
DEMOGRAPHIC IMPACT ON PARKS AND RECREATION FACILITIES
Maple Grove will likely be a growing community through the year. 2000 and to 2020. The pattern of
movement into Maple Grove by young home buyers will continue, but at a slower rate. Over the last
two decades this pattern caused a decrease in the median age of the Maple Grove resident from 33.2 in
1970 to 27.8 in 1985. However, as predicted in the 1985 study, the median age has begun to increase
slowly to 29.9 in 1990 and will likely continue to rise through the year 2000. With the inflow of new
home buyers, there will be a steady increase in the number of six to twelve year old children. The
specific impacts of these dernograpiiic trends on parks and recreational facilities can be identified. By
age groupings, the following impacts should be anticipated:
0-5 Year Old Age Group: Although the population of this age group has increased, as predicted, their
percent of the total population has decreased to 12.4%. The main recreational need of 0-5 year old$ is
small-scale play structures which are oriented to a neighborhood focus and easily accessible by walking.
For planning purposes, these play structures, often called "tot lots," are confined play areas that can be
located within playlots or neighborhood parks. Play apparatus should be scaled to this age group and
each "tot lot" should have seating areas for adult supervision.
It can be seen that the 0-5 and 6-12 age group represent approximately 10,400 people in the 1990 census
that will become 10,400 10 to 22 years olds (without adding births or move -ins) in the year 2000,
resulting in significant influence of life in the delivery of future athletics and recreation in Maple Grove.
6-15 Year Old Age Group: This group comprises 19.3% of the total population and is one of the few
groups whose rate of growth has increased since 1980. The 6-15 year olds are traditionally the heaviest
users of programmed active recreation in any municipality. There is an even greater demand on the
Board by this age group, because of additional youth from Osseo, Dayton and Plymouth who participate
in Maple Grove programs. This is especially true because all of these communities are part of
Independent School District #279. The resulting interaction/association of these youth through school
recreation will impact the Maple Grove community recreation programs.
16-24 Year Old Age Grouo: This age group has declined to 9.4% of Maple Grove's total current
population. Although not large in numbers, this age group will increase in size and will need recreation
opportunities. Although many migrate out of the community after high school graduation, a number
remain or will come back to use parks, trails and participate in recreation programs.
25-44 Year Old Age Group: This is the portion of the population responsible for Maple Grove's dramatic
increase in population. They comprise the primary owners of new housing, the majority being child -
family homeowners and the secondary group being single and childless. This group has recently demon-
strated an increasing participation in both programmed and non -programmed recreation. Participating in
recreation and the general "stay in shape" attitude has put an increased demand on multi -use competitive
ballfrelds, tennis courts and trails for jogging or cross-country skiing. Other more general recreational
demands are family-oriented recreational facilities such as picnic areas, nature areas, beaches, etc.
Nearly half of Maple Grove's total current population is comprised of 25-44 year olds, however, patterns
indicate this percentage will slowly decline in future demographic surveys.
45-64 Year Old Age Grou_R: As expected, this age group has grown at a dramatic rate over the past five
years and now comprises 12.9% of the current population. The growth rate, however, is stunted by a
large emigration of this age group. This group utilizes passive activities such as picnicking, trails, and
observation areas, as well as individualized active facilities, such as tennis, golf, jogging and cross-
country skiing. It is likely that by the year 2000, the individuals presently in their 30's will still be
participating in programmed team sports to some extent. As a result, team sports involving the 45-64
year old age group are anticipated. An unanswered question is whether or not residents in this age group
will remain in Maple Grove in the future or whether they will continue to move away.
12-
COMPREHENSIVE PARK SYSTEM AND RECREATION PLAN
65+ Year Old Age GrouR: This group has undergone the greatest percentage increase in population since
1985. Though still a minority at 2.4% of the total current population, the 65+ age group should be
expected to grow just as quickly in the future.
One cannot appreciate Maple Grove's unique demographic structure until it is contrasted to that of the
Metro Area. The following diagram contrasts these two patterns. Populations of the "Metro Area"
pattern are based on the 1990 census in proportion to Maple Grove's 1990 population. The interesting
characteristics of this diagram include the high populations of 25 to 45 year olds, under 5 to 15 year olds,
and the low population of individuals over the age of 45.
1990 Maple Grove And Metro Area Demographic Patterns
Maple Grove, 1990
Metro Area, 1990
9000
8000
P
07000
P 8000
u
5000-
a 4000
t
3000. 1
0 2000
n
1000
0
Lh
C N N M
Age Groups
13-
COMPREHENSIVE PARK SYSTEM AND RECREATION PLAN
LOCAL RECREATION STANDARDS
Several municipalities in the metropolitan area utilize a numerical.relationship between facilities and
population. The "standards" are an approximation of a "level of service". At the time of this plan those
standards" were found to be typical of growing metro communities.
Multi -use Youth Ballfields - less than 250' radius to outfield fence, or end of field, suitable
foryouth play............................................................................................................................. No Standard
Multi -use Mixed Ballfields - 275' radius to outfield fence, or end of field, but not typically
programmed for adult scheduled games..................................................................................... No Standard
Multi -use Competitive Ballfields - at least 275' radius to home plate to
outfieldfence................................................................................................................1 per 2,000 residents
Baseball Fields...............................................................................................................1 per 6,000 residents
90' base path, 310'+ radius home plate to outfield fence)
Soccer/Football Field.....................................................................................................1 per 4,000 residents
should be independent of ballfields, but may be same field if sized adequately)
TennisCourt .................................................................................................................1 per 2,000 residents
Hockey..........................................................................................................................1 per 5,000 residents
PleasureSkating..........................................................................................................................No Standard
provided at each neighborhood park)
These standards are consistent with the previous plans except for deletion of any standards for Little
League fields. The following chart illustrates the demand based on these standards for the projected
population of the year 2000.
Athletic Facilities Needed
Programmed
Playfields
No. of Existing
Facilities
Sr. High School and
New Elementary
Schools*
i
Total No. of
Facilities by 1996
Local
Standard
Total Facilities
Needed by 2000
Pop. 50,000)
Multi -use Competitive
softball fields) 16 7 23 1/2000 25
Baseball 6.5*** 3 9.5 1/6000 9
Soccer/Football 8 4 12 1/4000 13
Hocke 8 8 1/5000 10
Tennis** 25 1 10 35 1/2000 25
Senior High School, Rush Creek and Basswood Elementary Schools are combined in this column
May be provided in either playfields or neighborhood parks
2-1/2 are located in Osseo and Plymouth
The number of existing multi -use competitive fields is based on fields that were used for programmed
games during 1993 and do not include fields located in neighborhood parks even if they are of regulation
size; multi -use; mixed or multi -use. Youth fields are not counted in this table. This tabulation of need
reveals substantial improvements in athletic facilities since the 1987 plan and that when the new senior
high school facility (on Fembrook Lane) is complete, a substantial amount of the facilities needed by
2000 will have been provided.
14-
COMPREHENSIVE PARK SYSTEM AND RECREATION PLAN
STATE COMPREHENSIVE OUTDOOR RECREATION PLAN
The State Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plan (SCORP) produced by the Minnesota Department of
Natural Resources provides a general indication of the demand for outdoor recreational facilities of all
kinds on the metropolitan and state-wide scale. Municipalities often review their plans in the context of
this document. This often is the case when local park projects compete for state funding. Of particular
value is the documentation of demand for non -athletic recreational facilities. These uses are typically not
part of the local recreation program and are difficult to assess on the municipal basis.
The draft 1995 - 1999 SCORP outlines numerous statewide recreational goals and strategies. Examples
of high-priority issues include managing natural resources in a sustainable fashion, expanding
public/private partnerships, providing stable and reliable sources of funding, increasing land acquisition
in areas of heavy recreational demand, accelerating open space acquisition for preservation in rapidly
developing communities, and strengthening the long-range focus of park planning. The draft 1995
SCORP does not include new data on recreation "needs."
The 1995 - 1999 SCORP content is currently heavily oriented toward being a method to rank and
participate in Federal Land and Water Conservation Fund (L&WCF) cost -share funding.
Municipalities should be aware of the "issues" SCORP identified as "high" priority for local government
implementation. There are five objectives in three issue categories for L&WCF Funding priorities of
1995 - 1999 listed here. This information is clearly valuable when competing for funding but is also
referenced here as insight on how the State of Minnesota perceives what needs to be happening at the
local level of outdoor recreation planning and development.
Issue 1: Facilities Operations and Maintenance
Objective: "Repair and rehabilitate facilities that are most heavily used and in the greatest need for
repair."
Issue 2: Capital Investment in Recreation Facilities
Objective: "Develop year round, multi -use facilities that are both durable and flexible in use."
Objective: "Maximize access to recreation facilities by removing physical and other barriers and by
providing appropriate visitor information."
Issue 3: Not relevant to this document
Issue 4: Loss of Open Space
Objective: "Increase land acquisition in areas of heavy recreational demand (e.g., urban areas and
areas lacking recreation facilities)."
Objective: "Focus land acquisition in priority areas on critical habitat, unique natural and cultural
resources, recreational rivers, lakes and streams, scenic bluff lands, and other high
amenity areas."
In summary, the SCORP studies are a state level overview on outdoor recreation which municipal level
decision makers can consider when developing their local systems. Clearly, municipal level of park
development can find support in the SCORP plans over the last 5 years for trail development resources,
year round and broadly based facilities and natural resources oriented facilities. These concepts are
consistent with the elements of this plan.
15-
COMPREHENSIVE PARK SYSTEM AND RECREATION PLAN
POLICIES
Through the previous years, the Board has been well served by policy statements which summarize the
approach it takes to directing park and recreation development. These policies are provided here.
Unfortunately, the complexity of choices the City must make over any given issue may seem to position
certain policies against another or one decision against stated general policies. This does not invalidate
any given decision or policy.
GENERAL OUTREACH POLICIES
A. PARK AND RECREATION PROGRAMS
Provide comprehensive park and recreation programs and facilities for the broadest spectrum of
Maple Grove residents.
B. PARK AND RECREATION ADMINISTRATION
Implement park and recreation administration and operations based on Board and City Council
policies, procedures and ordinances.
C. SPECIAL INTEREST GROUPS
Recognize the conflict and mediate fairly in matters in which Maple Grove special interest groups
seek to achieve results which are in the best interests of the community.
D. PUBLIC AWARENESS
Encourage public awareness and input on all aspects of parks and recreation.
E. PLANNING COORDINATION
Coordinate planning with adjacent communities, school districts, county and state agencies to
produce the highest level of services and facilities and eliminate costly duplication.
F. MAINTENANCE
Maintain public facilities and services according to generally accepted standards of performance and
recognize that different levels of maintenance shall be provided depending on the intensity of use and
purpose of the site.
G. SPECIALIZED PROGRAMS
Identify and implement programs which meet community needs for nature interpretation, historical
preservation and cultural enrichment. Examples of current programs include, but are not limited to,
the following:
Music Program: Offerings in Private Piano Lessons, Music Mini Camps and Special Music group
lessons
Fitness Programs: Include Jazzercise, Aerobics and Tai Chi Chuan
Safety Programs: Basic Aid Training, Baby-sitting Workshops, Firearms Safety, and Snowmobile
Safety
General Programs: Art Classes, Dance Programs, Gymnastics, Swimming, Teen Dances, Ballroom
Dance for Adults, Western Dance for Adults
Miscellaneous: 55 Alive Driving Program for Seniors, Nursery School Program for 3, 4, and 5 year
olds, Ceramics for Young Children, Computer for Elementary Age Children
16-
COMPREHENSIVE PARK SYSTEM AND RECREATION PLAN
H. PARK USAGE
Govern usage of all public parks and recreation facilities to insure control and proper use so that all
residents may enjoy them for leisure time activities.
I. HUMAN RESOURCES
Utilize the talents and skills of volunteers, City staff and consultants, as needed, for the provision of
park and recreation services.
J. EQUAL ACCESS
Provide equal access to facilities and programs in accordance with the mandates and guidelines of
the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990. Provide recreational opportunities (facilities and
programs) for special populations (including the young, elderly, disabled and disadvantaged).
K. PARK REGULATIONS
Develop and enforce park regulations and ordinances to preserve the facilities, natural resources, and
health and safety of the citizens.
GENERAL FINANCIAL POLICIES
A. GRANT PROGRAMS
Monitor and apply for county, state and federal grant programs consistent with Board and City
Council policies.
B. PARK DEDICATIONS
Accept land and/or cash for park dedication pursuant to City Code, Section 350.27, Parks, Open
Space and Public Use. Utilize cash in lieu of land from park dedication requirements for acquisition
and development with special emphasis on neighborhood parks.
C. CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PROGRAM AND BUDGET
Prepare and maintain annually a long-range Capital Improvements Program and Budget.
D. FINANCIAL MECHANISMS
Use financial mechanisms available to the City for park system acquisition, development,
redevelopment and operations as authorized by the City Council:
E. ADMINISTRATIVE OPERATIONS
Endeavor to finance, in general, the administrative operations of parks and recreation through the
City General Fund.
F. FEES AND CHARQES
Assess fees and charges for specialized recreation programs when participants benefit directly.
G. RENTAL FEE
Assess rental fees to qualified groups who utilize community park facilities for leisure time activities
when these groups charge or collect admission fees for activities.
H. NON-RESIDENT FEE
Assess a general administrative non-resident fee to all non-residents each time they participate in
Maple Grove recreation programs excluding mutually sponsored events, general admission activities
and school-based swimming programs.
17-
COMPREHENSIVE PARK SYSTEM AND RECREATION PLAN
GENERAL LAND ACQUISITION POLICIES
Review and submit recommendations to the Planning Commission and City Council on all parks and
open space land acquisition matters relative to the City Code, Section 350.27, Parks, Open Space and
Public Use.
A. PARK LAND AND OPEN SPACE ACQUISITION
Acquire park land and open space where a specific park or recreational need is identified.
B. DONATIONS AND GIFTS
Accept donations and gifts for park land and open space to meet needs identified and determined by
the City Comprehensive Parks System and Recreation Plan.
C. LANDSCAPE AMENITIES
Seek acquisition of high amenity landscape as a priority in the development of the park system. Such
landscapes could include lake frontage, hardwood forests, native prairie, other unique vegetation
associations, or areas of rugged topography with quality views and vistas.
D. JOINT USE AGREEMENTS
Pursue and develop joint use agreements between the City and other governmental entities when
appropriate.
GENERAL PARK DEVELOPMENT POLICIES
A. PARK SYSTEM DESIGN
Provide a safe, functional and attractive park system designed to serve the wide -range of leisure time
needs and interests of the citizenry.
B. FACILITY DEVELOPMENT
Coordinate facility development with the needs of community residents and those related services as
provided by the Board, the Athletic Associations and civic groups and organizations.
C. PARK PLANNING AND CONSTRUCTION
Associate park planning and construction with the definitions of park classifications, regulation
dimensions and development standards.
D. TIMELY DEVELOPMENT
Reflect municipal population growth rates and location deficiencies for establishment of priorities
and timing of facilities development.
E. AMENITIES AND ATTRIBUTES
Attempt to preserve a sites inherent physical amenities and attributes when planning and developing
park facilities.
F. ADJACENT LAND USES
Reflect a sensitivity to adjacent land uses in facilities planning.
G. PLANTING
Plantings on park property proposed by neighbors must be reviewed and approved by the
Superintendent of Parks.
COMPREHENSIVE PARK SYSTEM AND RECREATION PLAN
H. MASTER PLAN
Adopt park master plans prior to any major development and hold public presentations, when
appropriate, for general information and public input.
I. PARK ACCESSIBILITY
Maximize park accessibility on a neighborhood basis by the park site design and planning.
J. PLAYLOTS
Avoid development of additional playlots due to high maintenance costs. Neighborhood parks with a
full compliment of facilities are preferred by residents and are much more efficient to maintain.
K. LONG TERM MAINTENANCE COST
Recognize the need to consider the long-term costs of maintenance and operation in facilities design
and development.
L. PARK UTILIZATION PREFERENCE
Provide resident preference on utilization of park facilities located in Maple Grove under municipal
management and operation.
M. GIFTS AND DONATIONS
Accept gifts and donations for park facilities and areas if they are free of obligations or impacts
which limit use (by a condition of the gift), offend other segments of the community, or which come
with a hidden or delayed price tag for development, operation, or maintenance which can't be
justified as being in the City's best interest.
GENERAL RECREATION PROGRAM POLICIES
A. PARTICIPATION
Provide and encourage participation in recreation programs designed to meet the leisure time needs
and interests of the citizenry.
B. RECREATION PROGRAMMWG
Coordinate recreation programming with the interests of community residents and those related
services as provided by the Board, the Athletic Associations and civic groups and organizations.
C. SPORTSMANSHIP POLICIES
Require all organizations and associations using parks and facilities for youth athletic programs to
train coaches and adhere to sportsmanship policies as adopted by the Board.
D. EQUAL ACCESS }
Provide equal access to all participants in accordance with the 1990 Americans with Disabilities Act.
E. RECREATIONAL UTILIZATION PREFERENCE
Provide resident preference for the utilization of recreational services and programs in Maple Grove
held at park facilities under municipal management and operation.
F. GIFTS AND DONATIONS
Accept gifts and donations for recreation programs and supplies if they are free of obligations or
impacts which limit later use (by a condition of the gift), offend other segments of the community, or
which come with a hidden or delayed price tag which can't be justified as being in the City's best
interest.
19-
COMPREHENSIVE PARK SYSTEM AND RECREATION PLAN
THE PLAN
PLANNING ISSUES
The preceding sections have described where the City is relative to park facilities and demographics and
begun to point out what the City could look like in the future. When the developed portion of the City
expands into the northwest and southwest parts of the community, the City will have to supply
recreational opportunities to a substantially larger population.
The following section of the Plan will address the following major issues:
1. Where will the future neighborhood park sites need to be located to accommodate growth?
2. What natural amenities should be integrated into parks and trails?
3. What recreational trail systems should be developed in the new growth areas?
4. What athletic facilities seem appropriate to match the city's demographics?
5. What special use facilities are needed?
This plan addresses both short term (5-7 year) acquisition and development needs as well as long term
beyond seven years and out into the 100 percent developed time frame) needs. This plan is an evolving
document and will be updated again in approximately 6-7 years or when development and social changes
warrant earlier updates.
It is important to recognize that perhaps the most important element in this plan is the identification of
natural resource facilities. Natural resource amenities, once lost to the subdivision and development
process, can never be reclaimed. Neighborhood parks are not necessarily natural resource facilities.
Throughout Maple Grove's history, only a few facilities have been acquired as part of a large-scale
natural resource facility, and include the following:
1. Weaver Lake Beach and Community Park
2. Elm Creek Special Use Park land along the west shore of Elm Creek
3. Lake shore trails along Rice and Fish Lakes
4. Rice Lake Woods Conservancy Site
5. Boundary Creek Neighborhood Park
The 1994 plan will put a greater emphasis and priority on this type of acquisition. In addition, attention
has been given to coordinating this plan with other plans, including the SCORP, Hennepin Parks System,
Regional Trail/Park System, and adjacent communities. This information was used to ensure that the
City's plan, while serving local needs, also addresses regional and statewide concerns.
20-
COMPREHENSIVE PARK SYSTEM AND RECREATION PLAN
FUTURE GROWTH AREA PARKS
As Maple Grove's population continues to expand, the demand for both developable land and
recreational opportunities increases proportionally. As noted in the draft 1995 SCORP, acquisition of
land for preservation or recreation purposes is a high priority in rapidly developing areas especially
where adequate recreational facilities are not available. In many instances, those areas that are
considered prime parkland or natural areas are also considered optimal home sites. In order to alleviate
potential conflicts between the demand for developable land and the demand for recreational
opportunities, growth patterns are monitored and park needs are planned accordingly.
PARK SERVICE AREA (PSA) PLANNING GOALS
As the northwest and southwest quadrants of the City develop, establishment of Neighborhood Park sites
in each PSA is extremely important. By planning well located, attractive, and adequately sized and
developed Neighborhood Park sites, Maple Grove can create residential areas with a meaningful sense of
community. These neighborhood communities will build a stable city.
The neighborhood parks PSA planning goals can be summarized by the four following objectives:
1. Obtain sites which are large enough (approximately 15 acres)
2. Acquire central locations for accessibility (1/2 mile radius)
3. Respect physical barriers to define areas. Minor arterial roads or greater in classification make
barriers
4. Procure and develop parks to match community growth patterns (3,000 people per PSA is typical)
Variable Parameters
The following conditions tend to reduce the effectiveness of achieving the PSA goals or prediction of
park needs within a PSA:
1. Wetland, Lakes and Creeks - create barriers to accessibility and displace development density.
2. Proposed Transportation Elements - development of collectors and arterial streets create barriers. In
rural areas, the final alignments are often unknown and consequently proposed plans are not reliable
for use in PSA planning.
3. Land Use Elements - being subject to change, areas planned to contain certain land uses and
population may actually be developed under a different land use and corresponding changes in
population.
SITE SELECTION
When delineating PSAs and selecting neighborhood park sites, there are four general rules that should be
followed.
21-
COMPREHENSIVE PARK SYSTEM AND RECREATION PLAN
Rule No. l: Attempt to service major residential areas as one entity (that is, do not worry about
residential fragments).
Rule No. 2: Pay attention to park spacing (1/2 mile radius. Service area is equivalent to 1 mile
between neighborhood parks).
Rule No. 3: Pay attention to future population potential.
Rule No. 4: Consider location of land forms, trees, etc. in "capturing" amenities.
NORTHWEST QUADRANT
Since the northwest quadrant (Exhibit 2) encompasses approximately 9 square miles, an equivalent to
nine neighborhood parks (less non-residential land) should be located in this area (on the basis of one
neighborhood park per square mile). Currently the quadrant has three park sites including Rush Creek
and Weaver Elementary Schools plus Lakeview Knolls. This plan suggests adding seven additional
sites; four of which can best be defined as "full" neighborhood parks, along with three smaller sites and
linear park land along Rush Creek. The four proposed "full" neighborhood parks include Rush Creek,
105th Avenue, Northwest, and 92nd Avenue. The remaining two smaller proposed sites are Ranchview
and West Rush Creek. Fembrook School may develop into a "full" neighborhood park and playfield if
development warrants.
Proposed Northwest Quadrant Parks
Name PSA Acres I Justification Acquisition Priori
Rush Creek 4 15 Neighborhood Park Low
Rush Creek Valley
West Rush Creek
Linear Park
4/6 Var. Unique natural resource and
location
Low
105th Avenue 5 15 Neighborhood Park Low
Ranchview 5 10 Unique natural resource and
location
Low
Northwest 6 20 Nei hborhood Park Low
West Rush Creek 6 10 Neighborhood Park Low
Fernbrook School 9 25 Pla field and Neighborhood Park) Low
92nd Avenue 18 15 Neighborhood Park High
Proposed New Park Sites
PSA 4 This area is approximately 1/2 square mile and will be difficult and possibly slow to
develop. It may develop at a lower density than predicted because of sewer issues. It has
a potential population of approximately 1,750 in perhaps 6 sub -neighborhoods. The
ravine which is located through the length of the PSA contains steep (40' high) heavily
wooded bluffs (with hardwoods) and has numerous convolutions of the meandering of
Rush Creek. These natural resources are noteworthy of preservation as a park site
Rush Creek Valley Linear Park'). This combination of resources is not duplicated
elsewhere in the City and is not developable under the current City ordinances.
22-
COMPREHENSIVE PARK SYSTEM AND RECREATION PLAN
The neighborhood park site for PSA 4 (separate from the Linear Park) should be
centrally located and provide basic services appropriate for an area which may need to
serve approximately 1,750 residents. In addition, this park site ("Rush Creek
Neighborhood Park") should be on the flatter highlands and should provide access to the
Linear Park. Further, development and location of the park should include trails and
bridges to link the fragmented sub -neighborhoods and to cross Rush Creek.
The level of urgency for acquisition of land is low since the development pressure is
probably many years away. The possibility of development within the ravine is remote.
The greatest threat would be if low density rural development occurred here and the lots
included the wooded ravine slopes and the creek.
PSA 5 This area is slightly larger than 1 square mile. It is mostly open land and will readily
convert to residential development once sewer availability occurs. This is particularly
true of the land south of 105th. The park service area is very linear east to west. It
features a large wetland in the middle. The proposed neighborhood park ("105th Avenue
Park) would occur in the west end, south of 105th, seeking a relatively flat site which
could provide a full size neighborhood park and be reasonably accessible to most of the
Park Service Area.
East of Ranchview Lane is a natural feature which could be included in the park system.
An open water pond, wetland, and a highly visible wooded knoll (of Sugar Maples and
Oak) could be worked into a partial or scaled down neighborhood park at this location.
The two parks would be 3/4 mile apart, collectively serve the approximately 2,000
residents expected in this PSA, and could be linked by a trail along, but upslope, of the
large (east -west) wetland in the middle of the park service area.
The current level of urgency for land acquisition here is relatively low because the sewer
extensions are perhaps 10 years away and the absence of noteworthy natural amenities.
PSA 6 This will be a relatively large Park Service Area containing more than 1 1/2 square miles.
It has a gently rolling, mostly open landscape. A centrally located medium to large
neighborhood park ("Northwest Neighborhood Park') just west of Troy Lane is
recommended. A location here would provide a good location for accessibility and
would capture a portion of a mixed Hardwoods/Maple Basswood forest. Due to its
remoteness from other existing playfields, community playfields would be incorporated
along with the neighborhood park. Because the site is so large, a secondary
neighborhood park south of 101st Avenue is suggested ("West Rush Creek'). A park
site here should capture some of the woods, Rush Creek and the open field area for
recreational purposes. The two park sites should be linked by the "West Rush Creek
Linear Park" Corridor which is proposed from County Road 30 north to the County ditch
near the north City limits at I-94. The West Rush Creek Linear Park Corridor is
recommended as a major open space corridor through this PSA. All residential
development should be connected by trailways to this resource.
The level of urgency on these two park sites is low except that rural development of a
home site in either or both of the proposed park sites would make future acquisition
substantially more difficult and costly.
23-
COMPREHENSIVE PARK SYSTEM AND RECREATION PLAN
PSA 9 (North) An additional 900 residents may be added to this area south of the proposed northtown-
crosstown in PSA 9. The existing 650 residents (north of County Road 30) are served by
Lakeview Knolls Neighborhood Park with Maple Grove Senior High School athletic
facilities under construction. Minimal city improvements in land and facilities would be
necessary. A future joint -use agreement at Fembrook School allowing better
maintenance and perhaps some additional facilities should be sufficient to meet area
needs as the area to the north develops.
The level of urgency here is relatively low especially since no land acquisition will likely
be involved. The development of this area will probably occur after the year 2000.
PSA 18 This area is somewhat different from other areas of the City in that it has rather little
topographic definition and has wetlands and floodplain interspersed throughout the
entire area. Extending from Highway 101 east to Dunkirk, the area is 1 1/2 miles wide
and includes almost 2 square miles. A proposed park site is near 92nd Avenue North,
west of Lawndale. This site ("92nd Avenue Neighborhood Park") could include part of
the mature oak knoll if a workable park/residence boundary could be established since a
residence currently occupies part of the woods. The proposed park should be at least 14
acres and include open land for field games. The potential residential population for this
Park Service area is 3,500 people. The subdivision design of the proposed residential
community should include a comprehensive trail and/or sidewalk system to link the
residential areas back to the proposed 92nd Avenue Park. An extensive trail system in
this development will be difficult because the wetlands and 100 -year flood plain takes up
extensive portions of the area. Additionally, their pattern does not facilitate a routing
along their edges. Trail routes across floodplains and between lots as well as on road or
in right-of-way routes must be requested at the development review stage to preserve
accessibility to the neighborhood park.
The level of urgency is high because a development concept has already been submitted
to the City. This area will likely develop within the next few years.
24-
City of
ivUple Grove
NORTHWEST
QUADRANT PARK
SITE LOCATIONS
NOTE: SOME PAW SITED NAVE DUAL CLADDFICATIMS.
IFJOXBORH000 PARKS MPI AND CCMVFMTY PLAMaDS
wq ARE COMMON DUAL LLA99FlCATIIX6, PARTICIA Y
AT SMOOI SITED.
NORTH V Im i000 mw
Eden W.,10, Minh NIyn5Y 6 VFAwhAW . MlnMnob 65344
SM/937/8160 I T
COMPREHENSIVE PARK SYSTEM AND RECREATION PLAN
SOUTHWEST QUADRANT
The southwest quadrant (Exhibit 3) of the City includes land on some of the highest elevations in the
City and has two distinctly different landscape types. The western portion, like the entire northwest
quadrant, is called "Corcoran Till Plain" by geologists and is characterized by loamy, wet and relatively
flat land. The eastern portion is termed "Fish Lake Highlands" and is characterized by loamy, well
drained and hilly land. They are both part of "morainic' glacial activities of the Grantsburg and Superior
Lobes.
Corcoran Till Plain landscapes are prime agricultural lands which were heavily farmed by early settlers.
While well suited for agriculture, these landscapes are often very flat lacking diversity or scenic interest
and can often have high groundwater tables.
True to its namesake, the Fish Lake Highlands are found on land at a higher elevation than the Corcoran
Till Plain. This landscape is characterized by rolling hills, topographical diversity and steep slopes.
These characteristics made the land less conducive to farming, which in turn left the Highlands with
more wooded slopes, large wet lowlands, scenic overlooks and vegetative diversity. The Fish Lake
Highlands landscape type has a triangular shape within Maple Grove. The area can be described as the I-
94 Rest Area (across I-94 from Rice Lake) as a north edge, i-94 and 1-494 as east edge, and Lawndale
Lane - Dunkirk Lane as west edge. This rugged landscape type is very attractive and is often sought out
in the metropolitan area for upscale or large lot single family residential development. The wooded hills
in Fish Lake Regional Park are probably the most obvious examples of this landscape.
The study area includes approximately 9 square miles; this would typically suggest the need for 9
neighborhood parks if all land becomes entirely residential. The area presently has four sites, including
Basswood Neighborhood Park, Basswood School, Crosswinds and Goldenrod Marsh Parks. The 1994
Comprehensive Park Plan proposes nine park areas, including four "full" neighborhood parks (PSAs 29,
30, 31 and 32), three small sites (PSA 29 east, PSA 32 trailhead, and PSA 32 overlook), and two major
Community Park/Conservancy Areas (Central Elm Creek Basin and Southern Elm Creek Basin, which
are discussed in more detail in the next section). Air photos of all of these proposed sites are enclosed in
the Appendix.
Proposed Southwest Quadrant Parks
Name PSA Acres Justification Acquisition Priori
PSA 29 East 29 10 Neighborhood Park High
Central Elm Creek Basin 29 Var. Unique Natural Area High
PSA 29 West 29 15 Neighborhood Park High
PSA 30 30 15 Neighborhood Park Low
PSA 31 31 30 Neighborhood Park
with Athletic Facilities
Low
Trailhead 1 32 Parking Low
Overlook 1 32 Unique Resource Low
Southern Elm Creek Basin 32 Var. Unique Natural Area Medium
PSA 32 32 15 Neighborhood Park Low
26-
COMPREHENSIVE PARK SYSTEM AND RECREATION PLAN
Proposed New Park Sites
PSA 29 This park service area has been reconfigured in the recent planning process to now
include nearly two square miles. The shape seems to resist re -subdivision to achieve a
one square mile park service area. Five and ten acre home sites can be found where
roads are available. This large park service area is both heavily forested and farmed. It is
bisected north to south by Elm Creek and contains a significant amount of land which
won't be developed due to wetlands, Hennepin Parks land, steep slopes and flood plains.
It's most readily usable land for residential development are the western two-thirds. For
that reason, a proposed full size (approximately 15 acres) neighborhood park (PSA 29 -
West) has been proposed for this area. The recommended location will be mostly open
land for field games but include portions of the wooded creek edges on two sides (the
west branch of Elm Creek and Elm Creek itself). The park development should
anticipate construction of access easterly across Elm Creek (via pedestrian bridge or
local streets if available) to make the park accessible to the upland area just to the east.
Because the proposed PSA 29 -West is nearly a mile wide and over very rugged terrain, a
secondary, smaller park of 10± acres, is proposed in the low, open meadow just west of
West Fish Lake Road near 74th Avenue. This smaller park, called PSA 29 -East should
include open space for field games and would be linked to the trail network within the
district. Another equally important justification for PSA 29 -East is that no neighborhood
parks exist in the south half of PSA 28.
The level of urgency on acquisition of both these sites is relatively high. Both park sites
were part of the land requested for inclusion within the MUSA delineation forwarded by
the City to the Metropolitan Council in the spring of 1994. This park service area could
have an ultimate population of approximately 4,700 people. This population projection
further suggests consideration of developing two park sites within the PSA.
PSA 30 This area is separated from PSA 29 by the Dunkirk-Lawndale Road extension. It was
previously attached to PSA 29 in the 1987 park plan. This area is heavily developed intc
5 acre land tracts for hobby farms and the corresponding rural life styles. Several
remnant farmsteads still exist but a transition from active farming has continued over the
last 10 years. The park service area is larger than one square mile (at 770 acres) but it
includes a 100 acre golf course west of Hwy. 101. When small lot development comes
to this area, the north and south portions will likely be the fust to develop since the
homeowners on the 5 acre lots occupy the middle area. The ultimate population of this
PSA will approximate 3,400 people. The north area is close to the Weaver Lake Park
playground and ballfields. The south area contains more wooded areas and abuts the
west branch of Elm Creek. For those reasons, PSA 30 Neighborhood Park is proposed
south of 74th Avenue along the wooded bank of West Elm Creek. This should be a full
size (15 acre) park to include ample space for field games as well as the natural
amenities found at this location. It is not likely small lot development will occur before
the City is ready to pursue acquisition.
PSA 31 The park service area in the far southwest corner of the City currently is almost entirely
in agricultural uses. It is gently rolling with a wooded area near its center. The PSA is
approximately 1 1/3 square miles in area and will readily develop with little loss of land
due to ponds, wetlands or steep slopes. The ultimate population of this PSA will
approximate 5,050 people. Due to the PSA's geographic location, ultimate population
27-
COMPREHENSIVE PARK SYSTEM AND RECREATION PLAN
and size, the proposed neighborhood park should include community playfield
designation and facilities to provide opportunities for scheduled activities. Furthermore,
since a school site including playfields is not currently proposed within this PSA,
improved competitive athletic facilities at this neighborhood park will provide
opportunities for scheduled activities and to assist in meeting the needs not satisfied by
neighborhood parks in the more ruggedly sloping lands in PSA 29 and PSA 32.
The far southwest comer of Maple Grove could be one of the last areas to be reached by
sanitary sewer service. Further, unless a large rural subdivision including streets is
proposed and approved, it is unlikely the proposed neighborhood park site will be
displaced until the area is within the MUSA boundaries.
PSA 32 PSA 32 is similar to PSA 29 in that it is heavily influenced by the Fish Lake Highland
landscape (typified by high, wooded and hilly land). Elm Creek flows nearly straight
north to south through the middle of this PSA. The land is nearly 50% wooded with
impressive Maple -Basswood stands, mixed hardwoods, and a substantial amount of
wetlands and bottomland hardwoods. The balance of the site is in active agriculture,
plus some 5 -acre to 10 -acre home sites (usually on wooded lots). It is a little difficult to
imagine the pattern that will direct future land development in this area since the mixture
of existing residences, steep slopes, wetlands and Elm Creek seem to leave nothing but
scattered fragments of land for future home site development. Clearly however, very
beautiful sites for parks or homes can be found here. This park service area is about one
and one-third square mile in area. The ultimate population is estimated to be 4,400
people.
One park which focuses on natural resources and some open space for play is proposed
to the west of Elm Creek approximately in the center of the PSA. A [railhead is
proposed just south of Bass Lake Road on the west side of Elm Creek in the open pasture
and abutting the north edge of the big hardwood forest in PSA 29 which extends
southward .8 of a mile to Elm Road. At the south, an overlook just north of Elm Road is
proposed in an open field to provide striking views to the northeast revealing a slope
which continues from the park dropping approximately 100 feet to a large wetland basin
of 80 acres then rising 50 feet upslope beyond the wetland to the wooded land form
where Basswood Neighborhood Park will be located, approximately 1/2 mile to the east.
Long range views to the west can also be found in this area. Locating the overlook close
to the top of the slope or with adequate park land in the foreground will be necessary to
preserve that view. This area has some of the highest land within the City.
This area, like PSA 31, is not under eminent threat of an urban subdivision. It is several
years away from sanitary sewer services. The land where parks are proposed are near to
existing roads that a rural subdivision to create a home site on the existing road could
displace the recommended park site. None of PSA 32 is within the proposed MUSA
expansion.
PSA 33 This area is currently undergoing the urbanization process. The eastern portion has been
converted to single family residences which are situated around a wetland system which
is relatively large and spread throughout the area. This area contains Edward Lake,
Basswood Neighborhood Park, and Basswood School (both under construction). The
PRA. is approximately 730 acres (slightly more than. one square mile). The ,ultmiate
population of PSA 33 is expected to be approximately 2,400 people.
W_ :
City of
Maple Grove
SOUTHWEST
QUADRANT PARK
SITE LOCATIONS
NOM SOME PAW BITE& HAVE DML CLASSFICATION&
tEIGH00W000 PAR(B (NPI AND COMMUNITY PLAYFIELDS
CPF) ARE COMMON WAL 4A"FICATION. PARTICULAPLY
AT SCHOOL BITES
NOHTN V iC9011000' 9000'
w 14180 W . r-..•. .,, E%RBIT
E. Wut TMIN Nota 65 BE. PNtl.. NlnnuetA 66J44 ]
etvBJvateD J
COMPREHENSIVE PARK SYSTEM AND RECREATION PLAN
REVIEW OF EAST -SIDE NEIGHBORHOOD PARK SITES
ASSUMPTIONS
The following review of neighborhood parks within the eastern portion of the city emphasizes park size.
It is assumed that the facilities presently on site are or will continue to be maintained and replaced (this is
not a detailed review of facility conditions). Further, it is also assumed that parks designated as
neighborhood park sites will have or could someday have the facilities appropriate for their
classification. Exhibit 4 presents the location and designation of Maple Grove's neighborhood parks.
EAST -SIDE NEIGHBORHOOD PARK RECOMMENDATIONS
PSA Designated Neighborhood Park Site Comments
1 Bound Creek NP Sufficient
IOE* Teal Lake NP Sufficient
low* Maple Grove Senior High School See Note 1
11N Forestview Pond NP Sufficient
11S* None See Note 2
12N Elm Creek School & Bayless Pla lot Sufficient
12S Charest NP & Pilgrim Pla lot Sufficient
14N Jonquil Meadows NP Sufficient
14S None See Note 3
15* Kerber and Rice Lake School Sufficient
25 Maple Grove Jr. High and Eagle Lake Woods Pla lot Sufficient
26 Oakview and Cedar Island School Site & Hemlock Ponds
Pla lot
Sufficient
27 Fish Lake Woods NP & Wedgewood Pla lot Sufficient
28* Crosswinds and Goldenrod Marsh Parks & Polaris Pla lot Sufficient
33 Donahue S. Pla lot See SW Area Plan
34 Donahue Sufficient
35 Maple Meadow Pla lot See Note 4
36 Woodcrest and Thoresen Sufficient
Denotes PSAs whose delineations have changed since 1987 plan
Notes
1. PSA 10 West - This area is within 1/2 mile of park facilities on the east (Teal Lake NP) and includes
the new Senior High School. Unfortunately, while geographically close enough to serve its residents,
all these facilities are separated from this area by Elm Creek Blvd. (minor arterial), Fembrook Lane
major collector) or Elm Creek (which has limited creek crossings). Addition of playlot facilities at
the new Senior High School site and trail systems with creek crossings would be appropriate after
Elm Creek Blvd. is connected to Co. Rd. 81 and crossing it actually becomes a problem.
2. PSA 11 South - The potential for 10-60 acres of multi -family housing exists in this area. The area
will be severed from PSA 11N with its developed Forestview Pond NP when Hwy. 610 is
constructed. The worst case scenario could be 360 dwelling units and 800 to 1,000 residents without
readily accessible neighborhood park facilities. If a residential component of more than 25 acres
30-
COMPREHENSIVE PARK SYSTEM AND RECREATION PLAN
and/or 400 residents, (especially residents with children) become a possibility, the City should
consider a playlot type facility of 4 to 6 acres of highly useable and efficiently shaped space to meet
the local needs.
3. PSA 14 South -A full sized neighborhood park is proposed in the gravel pit area centrally located in
the proposed residential area.
4. PSA 35 - While Maple Meadow playlot is felt to be a less than an optimally sized neighborhood
park, the area and park are totally developed and seem to adequately serve the area. No changes are
proposed at this time.
31-
118
i Ism r
i31
V
NO.
L ..
NOTE: SOME PARK BITER HAVE WAL CLA804'K'ATION6.
NEIOHWHH000 PAPNB (NPI AND COMMONTY PLAYMI
CPF) APE COMMON WAL CLASUKROATIONS, PARTICULARLY
AT SCHOOL SITES.
00INORTH 0'— — 1000' N00I MLE
Wub oOe
1`IA160WI"TIUN HlyewAY 6
Eaoeemo3716veleM
oMmn.
ycm 66544
C-
city of
Maple Grove
NEIGHBORHOOD
PARKS & PARK
SERVICE AREAS
LEGEND
C EXISTING NEIGHBORHOOD
PARK WITH ATHLETIC PROGRAMS
IFPROPOSED NEIGHBORHOOD
PARK WITH ATHLETIC PROGRAMS
IR EXISTING NEIGHBORHOOD
PARK
q
v
PROPOSED NEIGHBORHOOD
PARK
FI— EXISTING PLAYLOT
OR PROPOSED PLAYLOT
NOTE: SOME PARK BITER HAVE WAL CLA804'K'ATION6.
NEIOHWHH000 PAPNB (NPI AND COMMONTY PLAYMI
CPF) APE COMMON WAL CLASUKROATIONS, PARTICULARLY
AT SCHOOL SITES.
00INORTH 0'— — 1000' N00I MLE
Wub oOe
1`IA160WI"TIUN HlyewAY 6
Eaoe emo3716veleM
oMmn.
ycm 66544
C-
COMPREHENSIVE PARK SYSTEM AND RECREATION PLAN
ATHLETIC FACILITIES
Currently, the supply of ballfields within the City (this includes facilities under construction) appear to
be capable of meeting the demand. By developing fields at both park and school sites (with joint
agreements), the City has kept up fairly well with the surging population growth. According to inventory
data discussed earlier in this document, by the year 2000, the City will have an unmet demand for two
multi -use competitive ballfields, two hockey rinks, and a baseball field. Conversely, the City will have a
surplus of tennis courts and soccer fields. Unfortunately, none of the existing facilities are located in the
northwest or southwest corners of the City where the next surge of growth will take place.
In the past, the City had a policy stating that the development of scheduled athletic facilities should not
occur in neighborhood park sites but rather in community playfields. But, in fact, the development of
fields has not occurred in this way. There are several instances where a neighborhood park site has
included scheduled youth athletic facilities. In most cases, these neighborhood park sites are oversized
and can still accommodate the basic neighborhood park functions. Since this arrangement seems to be
operating effectively, the City should continue the practice of athletic facilities placed in oversized
neighborhood parks in future neighborhood parks in the northwest and southwest future growth areas.
While the demand for ballfields is generally being met in light of the current athletic recreation
standards, there is the concern that with the large number of youth projected for Maple Grove, there may
be an increase in demand for dedicated baseball fields in the 6-14 year old age group. If this occurs,
more land for ballfields will be needed. A common trend in other similar sized cities is the development
of ballfield complexes designed specifically for youth. These complexes may include several small (200'
250' radius) ballfields. If a youth athletic complex were to be built in Maple Grove, a highly accessible
central location such as the gravel pit area would be desirable.
Within the foreseeable future, it may be appropriate that the City and the School District enter into a joint
use agreement on Fembrook Elementary School playfields. If this occurs, athletic facilities on site are
additional to those currently planned for in this plan.
33-
COMPREHENSIVE PARK SYSTEM AND RECREATION PLAN
SPECIAL USE FACILITIES
Special use facilities satisfy a specific activity -oriented resource. There are no specific requirements for
these recreational facilities except that they are a community -wide resource. A sample of facility options
and recommended locations is outlined below.
FACILITY OPTIONS
CULTURAL
Art Museum/Theater - These facilities are indoor facilities requiring a structure. The structure could be
part of another community building such as a Community Center, City Hall, Historical Building, etc.
Amphitheater - A facility of this type requires 5-15 acres, should be centrally located and needs a sloping
area for outdoor seating. It is typically not built on its own, but is usually an auxiliary facility to a major
park or recreation complex. Uses include concerts, plays, and other live events.
Archeological Site Resource/Burial Site - Maple Grove has numerous aboriginal burial sites. These are
actually historic sites and certainly not recreational sites. The City could include such sites into its park
land ownership if the inclination was there to make these essential conservancy sites. The greatest level
of development would be trails (50' or more from burial sites) and an interpretive marker perhaps. These
sites should not be accepted as creditable park dedication requirements and only be accepted for City
ownership responsibility if they fit into a reasonable open space system which can be accessed by the
entire community and are respectful of their significance.
Community Center - As of November, 1994, the Maple Grove City Council, through a task force being
assembled, was seeking public input on the facilities of a Community Center. It is uncertain, at this time,
what this center will entail, however, it will probably contain a teen center, senior citizens center,
meeting rooms, and other family oriented facilities. The facility should be located in a centralized
location with ample parking.
Community Park (Active) - A community park is a large facility complex, between 15-100+ acres in size,
that accommodates large civic events. The characteristics of such a site can vary greatly, but potential
uses include horse/car/home shows, scout jamborees, concerts, ecumenical church services, or group
picnics. The location should be centralized and where there is adequate land with good access. A
community park should be adjacent to major indoor civic facility such as a Community Center, City Hall,
or Ice Arena. Facilities should include toilets, indoor food preparation facilities, parking (permanent and
overflow area), storage building, and electrical outlets.
Pet Training Grounds - As the City grows, vacant land will disappear. Residents may look to the parks to
train or exercise their pets. Since this activity is prohibited in parks by Board policy for safety reasons,
the City could establish special areas for this activity. Hennepin County presently provides these
facilities, however, should the City get involved in this, the proposed site should be away from heavily
used areas to avoid interaction between pets and other park users. For the immediate future, it is
recommended that City staff monitor the demand, inquire what specific facilities are being requested,
review how other cities respond and then perhaps initiate an action to create a pet training site. Another
option would be consideration of non -paved trails in lower use areas of existing or proposed sites which
could serve the training and exercise needs of the City's pets.
34-
COMPREHENSIVE PARK SYSTEM AND RECREATION PLAN
Historical Facility - In the near future, it is likely development of new areas and cultural interest in
preserving early history of the area will come together in identifying an old structure in need of a site.
Should the Board decide to assist in this activity by providing a site, an existing park of adequate size and
character is not readily apparent at this time. The site should have space for the structure, ample parking
to support the anticipated program for the building, and be located at a site which will not disrupt area
residents with this added use. Alternately, the City could accept a new site with a building, however, the
economy of shared parking and site maintenance at another location is lost. The use of historic buildings
could be as museums, meeting rooms, etc.
Meeting Rooms - Facilities for meetings are not adequately available at this time. Administratively,
these facilities are better managed at a small number of sites. This provides efficiencies in maintenance,
keys, security and control. A Community Center building would be an ideal vehicle to deliver these
rooms.
Picnic Facilities - The regional parks and existing park facilities within Maple Grove provide a sufficient
number of picnic facilities at this time.
Teen Center - This is a vague term referring to any complex which can be put together to provide
organized activities and informal meeting facilities for teens. Over the next 10 years, Maple Grove will
find itself doing all the things it can do to accommodate this burgeoning age group which is expected to
be 20% of the population. The school system will provide some activities. The City should consider
providing more evening, weekend and summer activities, programs, and facilities for teens.
SPORTS AND FITNESS
Archery - Many communities provide areas for archery. This is a recreational activity for leisure as well
as a practice facility for archery hunters. This use can be accommodated in a municipal system in a
place where sufficient area and security can be established to prevent accidents.
Cross Country Ski Trails - Most of the existing trails in parks are not plowed and can be used by cross
country skiers. The regional parks are currently offering groomed routes. No improvements at the
municipal level seem necessary at this time.
BMX/Mountain Bike Course - This is a non -motorized, youth oriented facility which may go over very
well with the junior high and elementary school age residents. They are relatively inexpensive to build
and are not permanent uses of sites. A central location is recommended. At this time, Hennepin County
is providing some facilities in this category of activity.
Golf Course - Municipal golf courses are developed by some communities. If a shortage of reasonably
priced, publicly oriented courses becomes a concern in Maple Grove, the City could consider this option.
With a new course soon to open, the need for a public course is not apparent at this time.
Health and Fitness Facilities - This special use activity uses indoor rooms which are famished with
equipment and/or instructors. If these are provided by the City, they may compete with similar services
offered by private enterprises. These facilities would be appropriate in a central location and could be
found in a Community Center.
35-
COMPREHENSIVE PARK SYSTEM AND RECREATION PLAN
Ice Arena - Whether pleasure skating or hockey oriented, this is a community scale facility. These
facilities may be attached to a community center, particularly if pleasure skating, as a family activity, is
being featured. If hockey, as a youth recreational, scheduled, activity is involved, it may relate more to
school locations.
indoor Games Courts - Same as Health & Fitness
Inline Skating - This activity requires smooth, paved trails with sufficient grass buffers to allow
beginning skaters to "bail out." Maple Grove's extensive trail system provides numerous opportunities
for this activity. Additionally, arenas or paved hockey rinks may be desirable to inline skaters.
Skateboard Ramps or "Bowls" - These are indoor or outdoor facilities and can be very popular with
teens. They are however, a more permanent and long term use facility since they are relatively expensive
to construct.
Swimming Pools - Family oriented water recreational facilities are very popular and like skating
facilities, very expensive. A central location and proximity to a Community Center are common and
desirable.
Toboggan/Sledding/Ski Hill - Outdoor winter sports (other than skating/hockey) are relatively rare in
Maple Grove. Identification of hills for tobogganing, sledding, and possibly beginning skiing would
probably be used immediately if available. The City has opportunity in the next growth areas to accept
land with 40'-80' of relief, which is excellent for such activities. Sites of this type can be found in PSA
10, 29, 32 and the gravel pit. Hennepin County is providing tobogganing and sledding at Elm Creek Park
Reserve.
Youth Athletic Complex - At this time, the athletic field needs appear to be met on park lands which exist
or are expected to be constructed. However, should the scale, character, or direction of youth athletics
change, the City may consider developing facilities to meet this need.. At this time, a facility could be
envisioned in a gravel pit location south of County Road 109. The future availability of land and future
recreational demand could occur in the same time frame. The gravel pit is a good central location and
has several characteristics which make it a good use there.
NATURAL
Fishing/Lake Shore Interaction - Presently, the public (in all age groups) fish in all places where public
land meets fishable water. This is true in the Elm Creek Special Use Park, at the north shore of Fish
Lake and the north shore of Lake Edward despite the fact the last two locations have absolutely no
improvements. The City, or Hennepin Parks, could, at no great expense, develop parking areas and/or .
shoreland improvements (mowed lawns, docks, etc.) at places where public fishing can be provided _
safely and compatibly. The north and east shore of Lake Edward could be improved resulting in more
recreational opportunities. Similarly, when and if large ponds or small lakes in the gravel pit are brought
into the development process, the deeper ponds could be stocked and improved for fishing opportunities.
Nature Preserve/Conservancy - See Natural Resource Areas. Also, since Hennepin County is providing
education and interpretive programs, the City may not feel the need to duplicate these programs.
However, unique natural resources, which exist only in Maple Grove, might be considered for protection.
36-
COMPREHENSIVE PARK SYSTEM AND RECREATION PLAN
PARK TRAIL SYSTEM
The City contains over 26 miles of trails (Exhibit 5) and continues, to make steady progress on the
recreation trail plan with several miles of trail constructed per year. The original concepts that have
guided the development of the trail system to date are still valid and timely. The original loop system is
over fifty percent completed. Trail access to park sites have been included in plans for all new
neighborhoods.
The City has recently developed a Pedestrian Transportation Plan which identifies routes and methods
for safe pedestrian travel in the public right-of-ways. The Pedestrian Transportation Plan is viewed as a
complement to the Park Trail System and not a substitute.
The rapid growth of the City has presented new challenges for the trail system. The development
pressure on the northwest, southwest and gravel pit areas are driving the need for new trail loops and trail
connections to park sites in those areas.
Increased vehicular traffic volume and the planned construction of the new T.H. 610 crosstown highway
has created greater barriers to pedestrian access to all facilities. An additional challenge the trail system
has been facing in recent years, has been the increase in wetland regulations. Any new routes must avoid
wetlands and the construction of trails on already acquired routes must not impact wetlands
37-
I 7 LINKAGE VIA
1 _ SIDEWALKS
I 1
I a •• -,ren
EAVE
LAKE
r••
AaROOP
Jl
uu1
1 LB ;
I
TFJ 1 9
RICE
u`
t KE
T\ 1
TRAIL l
HEAD
AU
Y } •e
L I
LITH
I' n LM
CREEK
LOOP
1
PISAXNG
t
vlCl
4 LL I_-ir 81 LL
n • • 4 • ../ _
ITOWNIE GRAVEL PITTIUNITVLOOP • _-%
e
ux lYr((r//I -•T 11
iii r R
LO
OLE
Ir =_ LAKE
IrrIl, ,t`,':6
f 3 wri -+OOPS^ t.
r
ICity of
lei
PARK TRAIL
SYSTEM
LEGEND
REGIONAL TRAIL
LINEAR PARK
CONNECTOR TRAIL
LOOP
CONNECTIONS FROM ADJACENT
CITIES (PROPOSED)
LOCAL PARK FACILITIES
PLAYLOT -
TRAIL HEAD/OVERLOOK
PEDESTRIAN TRANSPORTATION
ROUTE
ON `-o e.e
uif7o W x TfUM web•q 5
EamnMI t. 56341
OU10 37,6160 J
I
TRAIL AD r rr;
r.. -• if
cI•"
s'
Z"
zz
l
r
y'
vlCl
4 LL I_-ir 81 LL
n • • 4 • ../ _
ITOWNIE GRAVEL PITTIUNITVLOOP • _-%
e
ux lYr((r//I -•T 11
iii r R
LO
OLE
Ir =_ LAKE
IrrIl, ,t`,':6
f 3 wri -+OOPS^ t.
r
ICity of
lei
PARK TRAIL
SYSTEM
LEGEND
REGIONAL TRAIL
LINEAR PARK
CONNECTOR TRAIL
LOOP
CONNECTIONS FROM ADJACENT
CITIES (PROPOSED)
LOCAL PARK FACILITIES
PLAYLOT -
TRAIL HEAD/OVERLOOK
PEDESTRIAN TRANSPORTATION
ROUTE
ON `-o e.e
uif7o W x TfUM web•q 5
EamnMI t. 56341
OU10 37,6160 J
COMPREHENSIVE PARK SYSTEM AND RECREATION PLAN
GOALS
The goals of the park and recreation trail system (as distinguished from the transportation trail system)
are:
1. Preservation and continuation of identified loops - Weaver Lake, Rice Lake, North Central, Fish
Lake, Eagle Lake and Cedar Island.
2. Identification of new loop systems in later developing areas of the City.
3. Coordination with the Regional Trail Corridor
4. Identification and preservation of/and access to valuable natural resources - Rush Creek, Elm Creek,
wooded areas, scenic overlooks, etc., in the form of linear parks and natural resource areas.
5. Trail connections linking neighborhood parks with each other and to loops, regional trails, and linear
parks.
6. Acceptance of and coordination with the Pedestrian Transportation Plan.
7. Trail construction and maintenance conforming to the highest level of safety standards.
8. Provide facilities and trails that are accessible to disabled individuals (see Policy Section).
ROUTE SELECTION
The fust choice for park and recreational trails is non -right-of-way or off-road trails. On -road or in -the -
right -of -way trails will be included in the park and recreational trail system as needed but only where an
off-road route is not available.
LINK TO LINEAR PARKS AND NATURAL AREAS
The difference between the Parks and Recreation Trail System and trails within linear parks is often
semantic, but the distinction will be made in this plan. Trail systems within relatively large and mostly
undeveloped natural areas are addressed under the Natural Resource Areas/Linear Parks discussion. The
two main areas within the community termed Linear Parks are along Elm and Rush Creeks.
MAJOR BARRIER REDUCTION
Maple Grove is bisected by several major barriers to pedestrian movement - freeways and the major
County roads. New construction or upgrading of these will provide an opportunity to consider park trail
routes. Key crossings are identified in Exhibit 6 which would preserve the linkages across these barriers
and safe pedestrian/bike travel should be accommodated at these linkage points.
39-
COMPREHENSIVE PARK SYSTEM AND RECREATION PLAN
Park Trail Crossings of Major Barriers
Barrier Linkage Method Purpose
L I-494 Fish Lake Road Over 94 Link Eagle Lake Loop to Fish Lake Loo
2. 1-94 a) Hemlock Under 94 Link Eagle Lake Loop to the Gravel Pit Loo
b) Weaver Lake
Road
Over 94 Link downtown and Gravel Pit Loop to Fish Lake
Loa
c) Rice Lake S. of
Rest Area
Under 94 Link Rice Lake Loop with Fish Lake Loop
d) Regional Trail Under 94 Connect Regional Trail from one side to the other
e) Elm Creek Over 94 Bridge or 105th Ave. Connect Linear Park from one side to the other
3. 610 a) Nathan Lane Pedestrian Bridge
b) Revere Lane Over 610 via Bride Link NP on north side with NP on the south side
c) Zachary Lane Over 610 via Bridge
d) Hemlock Lane Over 610 via Bridge Link NP on north side to the Co. Rd. 30 link to the
North Elm Creek Loop and the Gravel Pit Loo
e) Regional
TraiVferritorial
Rd.
Over 610 via Bridge by
Hennepin County
Connect Regional Trail from one side to the other
f) Dunkirk Over 610 via Bride Link 3 NP on north side to NP on south side
4. Co.Rd.10 a) Elm Creek Under the Hwy. 10 Bride Connect Linear Park from one side to the other
b) Basswood Elem.
School
Future Decision Link Basswood School and NP to Fish Lake Loop
c) Re 'onal Trail Under the Hwy. 10 Bride Connect Regional Trail from one side to the other
5. Lawndale/
Dunkirk
a) Elm Road Crosswalk Link overlook to PSA 32 south NP
b) Between Elm
Road and Bass
Lake Road
Crosswalk Link Trail Head to PSA 31 NP
c) Rush Creek Crosswalk Link NP on west side to NP on east side
d) Weaver Lake
Road
Signal Link NP on west side to NP on east side
6. 97th Ave. Rush Creek Under 97th Ave. Bridge Link Linear Park and NP on north side to NP on
south side
7. Co. Rd. 30 a) Zachary Lane Signal Link Gravel Pit Loop to NE area
b) 93rd Ave. Signal Link North Elm Creek Loop to NE NP
c) Larch Lane Under Co. Rd. 30 Bridge Link North Elm Creek Loop from one side to the
other
d) Elm Creek Under Bride (Existing)
e) Regional Trail Signal Link Regional Trail from one side to the other
8. Weaver
Lake Road
a) 1/2 mile west of
Hemlock
generally)
Future Decision Connect Gravel Pit Loop from one side to the other
b) Pineview Lane Future Decision (Probably
Under Brid e)
Connect Gravel Pit Loop from one side to the other
c) Downtown Future Decision Link north and south sides of downtown
d) W. Fish Lake
Road
Future Decision Link Fish Lake Loop to Rice Lake Loop
9. Hemlock/
Zachary
a) 93rd Ave. Future Decision Connect Regional Trail from one side to the other
b) W. Eagle Lake
Drive
Future Decision Link Eagle Lake Loop to Cedar Island Loop
a
COMPREHENSIVE PARK SYSTEM AND RECREATION PLAN
Barrier Linka a Method Purpose
9. Hemlock/
Zachary
a) 77th Ave.
generally)
Future Decision (over or
under)
Connect Gravel Pit Loop from one side to the other
b) Weaver Lake
Road (generally)
Future Decision (over or
under)
Connect Gravel Pit Loop from one side to the other
10. Co. Rd. 81 a) Zachary Lane Signal Link Gravel Pit Loop to NE area
b) 93rd Ave. Signal Link North Elm Creek Loop to NE NP
c) Ranchview Lane Future Decision Link NP on north side to NPs on south side
d) Rush Creek Under the Co. Rd. 81 Bride Connect Linear Park from one side to the other
11. Elm Creek Sr. High School Bridge and/or trail over creek Link PSA 10 to High School
12. Ranchview a) Near 610 Future Decision Link Ranchview NP to Fernbrook Elementary
b) Rush Creek Future Decision Connect Linear Park to Elm Creek Park Reserve
13. Elm Creek
Boulevard
a) Weaver Lake
Road
Future Decision Connect Gravel Pit Loop to Fish Lake and Rice
Lake Loops
b) Rice Lake
Elementary
School
Future Decision Connect North Elm Creek Loop from one side to
the other
c) 96th Ave. Future Decision Connect North Elm Creek Loop from one side to
the other
14. Vicksburg a) North of Elm
Road
Future Decision Link Overlook Loop to South Elm Creek Loop
b) Basswood
Elementary
School
Future Decision Link Basswood School and NP to South Elm Creek
Loop
41-
pity of
l.ple Grove
PARD TRAIL
CROSSINGS OF
MAJOR BARRIERS
LEGEND
MAJOR BARRIER
F--> RECOMMENDED CROSSING
NOTE, BARRIER CROSSN" RELATE SPECIFICALLY TO PAW
TRALL ALIGNMENTS. BEE TRALL SYSTEAI SMPHIC. NUMBERS
RELATE TO CHART OF MAJOR BARRIERS.
NORTH 1. 4000
10V1U80 Wirt TrvM NIta gd 6Ee2OPnlrlyMlnnuoL6834{
61R/BB)/8160
COMPREHENSIVE PARK SYSTEM AND RECREATION PLAN
NATURAL RESOURCE AREAS (Conservancy and Linear Park Sites)
Attractive natural areas make the City one of the most appealing communities in the Twin Cities. Elm
Creek Park Reserve, Rice, Fish, Eagle, Weaver, and Cedar Island Lakes, Elm and Rush Creeks are all
notable natural features that enhance the City. While all of these features provide recreation
opportunities, two relatively undeveloped areas - the wooded Elm Creek basins in the southwest quadrant
and Rush Creek in the northwest portion of the City - provide unique preservation and park development
opportunities. These sites (or portions) if preserved as parks, could be classified as conservancy, linear
parks, or community park sites, or be privately owned and protected and used under easements.
ELM CREEK BASIN
The Fish Lake Highlands land form covers approximately 4.5 square miles in south central Maple Grove
and is possibly one of the most noteworthy natural features of the City. Perhaps only the interconnecting
lakes, ponds, shoreland, and hillsides around the Rice Lake and Fish Lake areas, in the area of the
interstate and Weaver Lake Road interchange, make as strong a visual impression of Maple Grove's
landscape character. The Fish Lake Highlands land form includes the Central and Southern Elm Creek
Basins between Weaver Lake Road, Bass Lake Road and to the south City limits (Exhibit 3). Much of
the Fish Lake Highland area is heavily wooded and includes the largest remaining hardwood forests in
the City. Maple Grove will soon complete an intensive inventory ("Evaluation and Ranking of Forest
Stands" by Westwood Professional Services, Inc. 1994) of forested areas within the community which
documents the unique character of forests in this area. The largest wetland basins are found here
between well defined wooded slopes. These land forms are very visible from adjacent subdivisions and
Weaver Lake Road, Bass Lake Road, and Lawndale Lane.
The proposed neighborhood park system, while serving a valued goal, does little to capture the scale and
character of the Fish Lake Highlands land forms. Since the aesthetic value of this land form is of
community -scale interest, this plan proposes two major park/conservancy districts, plus associated
railways be established to capture the essence of these landscape features. The two area have been
termed the Central and Southern Elm Creek Basins. In reality, the conservancy and linear park elements
which are included should contain a substantial amount of wooded upland around the basins as well as
the basins themselves. Collectively, PSA 29, 30, 31, 32, and 33 neighborhood parks, their
interconnections, trailways, major wetlands, and proposed conservancy sites will provide a unique park
feature within the City system which will be more integrated with the land development process than any
other part of the City. This seems appropriate considering the significance of the resource being
preserved for the future of the City. The acquisition of these areas is in sync with the SCORP priorities
such as critical habitat, unique cultural and natural resources, and other high amenity features.
43-
COMPREHENSIVE PARK SYSTEM AND RECREATION PLAN
Central Elm Creek Basin
The proposed parklopen space facility in PSA 29 south of Weaver Lake Road has been called the
Central" Elm Creek Basin. The purpose of putting the land into City park would be to capture the visual
character of the basin including portions of the unique upland Maple -Basswood forests, forested areas
which contain the basin, the isolated upland wooded "islands" in the basin, the wide floodplain in the
middle, and the wetland system. The proposed park/conservancy area includes many different land types
within the total park bounds, and may be made of the following component parts:
Components of the Proposed Central Elm Creek Basin Natural Area
Description Potential Component Size
Acres)
Conservancy Land (woods and steep slopes) 90 ±*
NP's (PSA 29 East and West) 30
Hennepin Parks Land (already owned) 110
Wetlands/Floodplain 215 +*
These areas may be protected by state/federal regulations, use easements, scenic easements or
local natural resource based ordinances. Park acquisition may not be involved.
The intent of the conservancy shown in Exhibit 3 (page 32) would be to preserve the visual character of
the Elm Creek Basin south of Weaver Lake Road including some of the most valuable forested areas and
the large flood plain area which is foreground to the forested slopes. It is proposed that this land will
also facilitate the regional trail routing through the area by completing missing linkages. In developing
areas that are not publicly owned, the City can work with landowners, developers and other stakeholders
to seek favorable positioning of housepads to preserve steep slopes, protect publicly viewed trees in the
basin perimeter, and conserve the forest edge above the floodplain and wetland boundary while allowing
amenity sensitive development of home sites in areas which benefit from the forested area's character. If
cooperative efforts are pursued, the basin's present unspoiled character could remain for future
generations to enjoy.
South Elm Creek Basin
An open space, neighborhood park, trail and conservancy system totaling 180 acres is proposed south of
Bass Lake Road. This complex is similar to the Central Elm Creek Basin, however, does not follow Elm
Creek its entire length through the area to the south City linuts.. The proposed South Elm Creek Basin
separates from the actual route of Elm Creek instead, following a large wetland basin south and east to
Vicksburg Lane and captures approximately 30-40 acres of very well stocked Maple -Basswood and
mixed hardwood forests. This area may take a revised shape to include some of the forest Maple -
Basswood forests in the City (as identified in the "Evaluation and Ranking of Forest Stands" report).
Land along Elm Creek was not chosen for parks or park trails because a half dozen single family
residences presently exist very close to the creek. These homes would degrade the park character or
require acquisition. The open space corridor chosen, however, captures attractive features including
numerous very steep, wooded slopes which are not suitable for development but which are conducive to
trailways and conservancy and are much less impacted by existing residential development. This area
includes the following elements:
MIZ
COMPREHENSIVE PARK SYSTEM AND RECREATION PLAN
Components of the Proposed Southern Elm Creek Basin Natural Area
Description Potential Component Size
Acres)
Conservancy Land (woods and steep slopes) 100 ±*
NP's (PSA 32) 25 ±
Wetland and floodplain 55 ±*
These areas may be protected by state/federal regulations, use easements, scenic easements or
local natural resource based ordinances. Park acquisition may not be involved.
This park element, shown in Exhibit 3 (page 32), would preserve the visual character of a large basin
which runs from Bass Lake Road down to what will be the Vicksburg Lane and Elm Road connection.
This land form will be very visible from Vicksburg and Lawndale Lanes. If acquired, as proposed, it
would provide the land bases for trail linkages through the area between the neighborhood parks (PSA 32
north and south) and protect most of the forested slopes on the basin sides. The intent would be that the
future residential development occur beyond the conservancy limits so that houses would not be readily
apparent when the trees are in full foliage, preserving the visual character of this two-thirds of a mile
long basin.
RUSH CREEK LINEAR PARK
In addition to the park areas proposed along Elm Creek, a natural resource oriented linear park that spans
approximately 4.5 miles is proposed to follow the alignment of Rush Creek through the north central and
northwest sections of the City (Exhibit 2 - page 28). The creek begins in Elm Creek Park Reserve and
meanders to the west through a deep wooded ravine. It will join the proposed Rush Creek neighborhood
park and continue west. It crosses into the City of Dayton at about the intersection of County Road 81,
where a crossing will be preserved. The creek then meanders south to approximately 105th Avenue and
connects the proposed Ranchview neighborhood park. The linear park will then cross beneath 1-94 and
continue along the creek alignment to the proposed west Rush Creek neighborhood and ending at County
Road 30. The linear park is not proposed to go south of County Road 30 because of floodplain and
wetland limitations.
The key to a successful linear park is to preserve the natural resources and obtain enough developable
land to be able to include trailways. This area is not within the MUSA and therefore is not under much
development pressure.
GATEWAYS
In the review of the northwest quadrant, it was noted that in three locations tree stands along each side of
I-94 act as visual "gateways" welcoming visitors heading east and escorting visitors heading west. These
stands are shown on Exhibit 7 (page 49) and are found at the northern municipal boundary, 105th
Avenue, and where the power lines cross the interstate. These sites could be preserved through scenic
easements or preservation as part of site planning of future developments. These wooded areas are not
proposed for actual park uses but could be incorporated as part of trail routes.
45-
COMPREHENSIVE PARK SYSTEM AND RECREATION PLAN
THE COMPREHENSIVE PARK SYSTEM PLAN
Preceding sections have covered park sites in the northwest and southwest quadrants of the City,
neighborhood parks in the east half of the City, athletic facility needs, special use facilities, trails, linear
parks, and natural resource areas. On Exhibit 7, these pieces are combined into a single plan graphic.
The graphic has its greatest value in showing the interrelationship of the various pieces of the park and
trait plan. However, for insights on the specifics of any single component, the appropriate section should
be reviewed. In the new growth areas, the Northwest and Southwest Ouadrant Park Site Locations
graphics (Exhibits 2 and 3) also show details of interrelationships of sites.
The summary of proposed "new" park land identified is as follows:
NEIGHBORHOOD PARKS/COMMUNITY PLAYFIELDS
PSA Acres
4 15
5 15 and 10
6 20 and 10
11 10
14(s) 15
18 15
29 10 and 15
30 15
31 30
32 15
195 Acres
SPECIAL USE FACILITIES
100 - 200 acres of trailheads, overlooks, and community park
CONSERVANCIES
Elm Creek Basin (Central and South)
Undetermined acres of upland wooded slopes
200± acres of wetland
Gateways
No estimated acreage
TRAILS/LINEAR PARKS
No estimated acreage
The Implementation Section (Page 50) discusses the interrelationship between park dedication and the
park lands identified here. Additionally, several other implementation methods are likely to be involved
and they are also discussed there as well.
46-
r.._
GATEWAY
Ruses cIMai
WEAVERLAKE
WEI ARVVAMI E 1
r,. 42ND A
I
T3THw AYE NO,
3I
1w
I o
13TX A6N0,
I
TRAIL F
3
J. J
I
O-vC.,
City Of
Maple Greve
COMPREHENSIVE
PARK SYSTEM
LEGEND
CPF COMMUNITY PLAYFIELD
NP ONEIGHBORHOOD PARK
WITH ATHLETIC PROGRAMS
NP 0 NEIGHBORHOOD PARK
COMMUNITY PARK
CONSERVANCY
PL PLAYLOT
SPECIAL USE PARK
REGIONAL TRAIL
LINEAR PARK
CONNECTOR TRAIL
0 • LOOP
TRAIL HEAD/OVERLOOK
NOTE: SOME PARK SITES HAYS DUAL CLA9BFlCAr10M1D.
IEIGHSORH000 PAWS (NP) AND COMM TY PLAYFEL08
CPF) ARE COMMON DUAL CLASSVRCATIGYS, PARTICULARLY
AT SCHOOL SITES.
INORTH 0' 2000 4000' 1 MILC
oleo w..< rrnwr ayr..r e
Ea.n Pultl., YlnnuoY l8e349
m2/P3nm¢o
I
City Of
Maple Greve
COMPREHENSIVE
PARK SYSTEM
LEGEND
CPF COMMUNITY PLAYFIELD
NP ONEIGHBORHOOD PARK
WITH ATHLETIC PROGRAMS
NP 0 NEIGHBORHOOD PARK
COMMUNITY PARK
CONSERVANCY
PL PLAYLOT
SPECIAL USE PARK
REGIONAL TRAIL
LINEAR PARK
CONNECTOR TRAIL
0 • LOOP
TRAIL HEAD/OVERLOOK
NOTE: SOME PARK SITES HAYS DUAL CLA9BFlCAr10M1D.
IEIGHSORH000 PAWS (NP) AND COMM TY PLAYFEL08
CPF) ARE COMMON DUAL CLASSVRCATIGYS, PARTICULARLY
AT SCHOOL SITES.
I NORTH 0' 2000 4000' 1 MILC
oleo w..< rrnwr ayr..r e
Ea.n Pultl., YlnnuoY l8e349
m2/P3nm¢o
COMPREHENSIVE PARK SYSTEM AND RECREATION PLAN
SHORT-TERM PRIORITIES
This plan has identified numerous park and trail lands for acquisition and development. To differentiate
between long range and short term (5-7 year) goals, the priority short-term aspects of the plan are
identified and ranked by priority of importance below. Factors that could change these priorities are also
identified in the event development is either slower or faster than projected in this plan. If factors evolve
that seem to challenge the validity of this plan, it is appropriate to initiate a plan update.
1. NEIGHBORHOOD PARKS
Historically, the Neighborhood Parks have been viewed as the "backbone" of the Maple Grove park
system. With nearly half of the City's geographic area yet to develop, this remains the highest priority in
the park system development.
An adequate neighborhood park system presently exists, new sites would only be needed if.
1. The MUSA delineation expands (bringing more land into the urbanization process).
2. The City changes land use and zoning on undeveloped land bringing in additional population.
The 1994 plan has anticipated all future neighborhood park sites in PSAs. PSA 18 and 29 are probably
the only new sites to be acquired and developed in the short-term time frame. The park site in PSA 9
north) is already acquired by the school district. Only joint use agreements and possibly facility
redevelopment would occur.
2. TRAILS AND NATURAL RESOURCE ORIENTED FACILITIES (Conservancies and Linear
Parks)
Trails and natural resource oriented facilities are ranked highly and in the short term priority group in
response to the development pressures which will likely require City action in the near future.
Acquisition and development in this category is also a long term priority.
Natural Resource based facilities are linear parks and conservancy sites since no natural resource based
community parks are planned. High quality wooded areas have been identified and ranked in the
Evaluation and Ranking of Forest Stands" (Westwood Professional Services, Inc., 1994). Many of these
highly ranked sites are expected to be included in development areas over the next five years.
Acquisition of sites from that list should occur as development occurs and when funds are available.
Linear parks can be handled the same way. At this time, it appears the neighborhood park sites,
conservancy and linear parks of PSA 29 will be within the MUSA boundary and therefore be eligible for
development in the next five years. This will require the City to decide on the character and use of these
sites during the development review process.
The trail system remains one of the most popular aspects of the municipal park system, appealing to all
age groups. Trail development is a continuous process with parts being acquired and often developed
with the subdivision process. Linear Parks are part of the trail system which combine natural resources
and trails. Each year the City has attempted to spend money on trail development to extend or fill in gaps
in the current system. This should continue. Additionally, the Rice, Fish, Eagle, Cedar Island and
Weaver Lake Trail Loops remain unfinished and have populations which undoubtedly would like to see
these loops completed in the next five years.
W=
COMPREHENSIVE PARK SYSTEM AND RECREATION PLAN
3. SPECIAL USE FACILITIES
The City has a multitude of special use facility options which would benefit the community over the next
5 years. The most apparent special use facilities for implementation appear to include meeting rooms,
seniors facilities, activities and facilities for teens, and water oriented facilities. These generalized needs
could be satisfied by:
1. A Community Center Building/Complex
2. Special recreational and athletic facilities to handle the 8,000 - 10,000 teens which may reside in the
City by the year 2000.
3. Improved lake shore facilities for fishing. Lakes such as Edward, Fish, and Rice could have
improved fishing areas and docks. Lake Edward and Fish Lake are heavily fished by the public on
land with no park improvements.
4. ATHLETIC FACILITIES
Since the last parks plan in 1987, there has been a significant increase in the total number of athletic
facilities available to Maple Grove residents. Hence, there are a sufficient number of athletic facilities.
As a result, the priority ranking has shifted from third (in 1987) to fourth priority in this plan. Based on
standard -based demands, the City will need relatively few new athletic facilities by the year 2000. As
new neighborhood park sites develop, some new athletic facilities will be constructed as incidental to
park improvements. This is especially true for youth or practice type facilities. The Board will continue
to monitor resident needs and future demographic shifts to ensure adequate facilities are supplied.
SUMMARY OF SHORT TERM
It is the intent of this plan that the City actively pursue implementation in all four categories. The
prioritization proposed here is provided based on data available at this time. Any clarification of
community goals or special implementation opportunities which could evolve should be pursued.
49-
COMPREHENSIVE PARK SYSTEM AND RECREATION PLAN
IMPLEMENTATION
A primary concern in developing a park and trail system plan is the implementation of the system. While
it is important that goals be set high enough to meet the needs of the future and to ensure that valuable
opportunities are not lost, it is also important that the goals be attainable. The intent of this section is to
undersand the resources or tools available for implementation and a strategy or prioritization of the goals
that will aid in decision-making in the future.
A. Park Dedication
The current park dedication ordinance in Maple Grove should accommodate the demand for
neighborhood park land in the foreseeable future, but not necessarily all facility and amenity
development.
In the future development areas, i.e., land outside the MUSA line, there is approximately 7,000 acres
of undeveloped land in the Southwest and Northwest quadrants, and approximately 1,500 (or more)
acres in the gravel pit. By state statutes and City dedication formula, the City is entitled to
7.5% to 10% of the land or a cash equivalent. In land, this is approximately 700 to 800 acres of
potential future park dedication. Because of undevelopable land and allowing for some "cash -in -
lieu -of -land", the full 800 acres is not realistically expected but even if half is dedicated as land, it
will meet the 380 acres needed for the 13 proposed neighborhood parks (195 acres) and 180 acres of
land for linear or community park purposes. This leaves the balance of the remaining half for linear
parks, trails, special natural amenities, or cash -in -lieu -of -land for development.
The park dedication will also cover some of the basic development of neighborhood parks but will
not be adequate to develop the additional facilities at the larger neighborhood parks or athletic
facilities in general.
B. Additional Ordinance Tools
The City Ordinance includes the following tools beyond park dedication that will help to preserve
land for conservancies, linear parks and other special natural resources:
1. Subdivision Ordinance, which restricts alteration of steep slopes
2. Floodplain Overlay District of the Zoning Ordinance
3. T -Zone Overlay, District (Tree Preservation) of the Zoning Ordinance
4. Shoreland Overlay District of the Zoning Ordinance
5. Wetland Overlay District of the Zoning Ordinance
C. Acquisition
Acquisition of property rights, through fee simple purchase agreements or easements, are often the
most effective and permanent implementation tool. The feasibility of acquisition must be assessed
on a case-by-case basis.
50-
COMPREHENSIVE PARK SYSTEM AND RECREATION PLAN
1. Fee Simple Purchase
The purchase process changes the ownership of affected land to the municipality. Once
acquired, the use of the land is determined by the municipality.
2. Easement
An easement transfers specific property rights to the municipality without changing property
ownership. The prescribed purpose of the easement for preservation or park purposes is legally
identified and generally prohibits certain activities from occurring on the property. Expanding
the use, such as adding a trail, may require renegotiating the easement with the owner.
D. Grants
1. Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF)
The LWCF is a federal program that provides matching grants (50150) to states and localities for
recreation planning and public land acquisition and the development of outdoor recreation
facilities. It is administered by the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) and Department of
Trade and Economic Development (DTED). The City must remember that the grant program
does not provide 100% of the project cost. The local share should be readily available as should
an amount equal to the grant which isn't actually paid to the City until project completion.
Application for grants are due in the fall and the results are known in late winter. The criteria
used to rank the applications change periodically.
2. Legislative Commission on Minnesota Resources (LCMR)
The LCMR is an organization that administers three state funds intended to assist (cost sharing)
with "innovative" projects that "preserve and enhance natural resources.-" Projects are funded on
a two-year basis and need to have a distinct beginning and ending. LCMR accepts proposals
biennially. Competition is quite high for these grants.
3. Community Development Block Grant (CDBG)
The CDBG program is a potential funding source for some types of planning and/or development
of projects specifically targeted for middle and lower income persons.
Maple Grove is an Entitlement City. Each year, communities in Hennepin County apply to the
County and indicate how they would like to utilize its allocated CDBG funding for that year.
Applications are typically late winter, early spring.
4. Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act (ISTEA)
The ISTEA of 1991 is federal legislation that will redirect federal highway funds to include
facilities for pedestrians and bicycles. The Metropolitan Council is administering ISTEA and is
currently soliciting projects for funding. Application forms are available from Metropolitan
Council/Transportation Advisory Board.
51-
COMPREHENSIVE PARK SYSTEM AND RECREATION PLAN
5. Tree Trust
The Tree Trust is a private, non-profit organization that administers job programs funded by
grants from the federal government. The youth employment program which runs through the
summer is a resource available to local governments or other non-profit agencies. The Tree
Trust provides labor and supervision and the client provides tools and material. Projects can
include tree planting, landscape maintenance, construction of retaining walls, pedestrian bridges,
etc. The type of project is limited only to those requiring a minimal use of power tools. Children
under 16 years of age are prohibited from using power tools. The slate of projects for a given
summer are typically determined by March of that year and work requests need to occur well in
advance. Requests for Tree Trust labor should be submitted to the President of Tree Trust.
E. Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (MnDNR)
The MnDNR administers grant programs that focus on forestry projects. Maple Grove has
successfully utilized these grants in the past.
F. Volunteers
The use of volunteers can be an effective method of maintaining a park and trail system and enhances
the sense of ownership of the system. The specific volunteer activities could include mowing and
trash pickup of park sites by neighbors, maintenance of an athletic field by an athletic association,
provision of play equipment by service organizations, and the maintenance of trails by user groups
such as bike or riding clubs.
G. General Obligation Bonds
This is an instrument used for the purpose of financing the construction of capital facilities expected
to have a long useful life. Debt redemption is paid through special assessments against property
receiving benefit from the newly constructed facility. Payment of interest and principal for general
obligation bonds are guaranteed by the "full faith and credit" or,"full taxing powers" of the
borrowing government. A referendum bond issue is a form of general obligation bonds by which
voters decide if they want to accept this financing technique.
The list of implementation sources is not complete. The City should be continually attentive to new
opportunities and changing programs for park and trail development. The City's natural resources are
particularly well suited to the broadest range of acquisition alternatives. It is believed many of these
resources are of high enough quality to compete well with other community projects. Further, public
sentiment toward these resources may provide some unique and creative acquisition methods.
52-