HomeMy WebLinkAboutPark and Recreation Advisory Commission Packet 08-12-1999Regular Meeting of the Park and Recreation Advisory Commission
August 12, 1999, 7 p.m.
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
S. Unfinished Business
a. Comprehensive plan study session
b. Plymouth Creek Center update
C.
6. New Business
a. Ferndale North open space
b. Survey and recommendation on ballroom rental pricing
C.
7. Commission Presentation
S. Staff Communication
9. Adjourn
Next regular meeting - September 9
n\parks\staff\eric\prac\agendas\aug.doc
MINUTES OF THE PARK AND RECREATION ADVISORY COMMISSION MEETING
July 8, 1999
Page 27
Present: Chair Anderson, Commissioners Willegalle, Fiemann, Musliner, Thompson; staff
Bisek, Blank, Jensen and Pederson; Planning Commissioner Stein; Barry Warner and
Adam Arvidson from SRF
Absent: Commissioners Priebe and Wahl
CALL TO ORDER
The meeting was called to order at 7 p.m. in the Medicine Lake Room.
2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
A motion was made by Commissioner Musliner, seconded by Commissioner Willegalle to
approve the minutes of the June meeting. The motion carried with all ayes.
3. VISITOR PRESENTATIONS
a. Athletic Associations. None were present at this meeting.
b. Staff. Mary mentioned the new formatting for the recreation brochure and that it will
be out in August. It will be called Plymouth Leisure Times. She distributed flyers for
the History Fest which is set for August 14 at Parkers Lake Park. Many activities are
planned. Mary mentioned that there are lifeguard shortages all over the country.
Willegalle asked about our program to train lifeguards. Mary explained that we
reimburse them for their training if they take a job with us. Out East they're paying
lifeguards $14 per hour in order to attract them. We have lots of competition for our
guards. East beach is unguarded this summer due to a shortage of staff. We may have
to go to more unguarded beaches in the future if the shortage continues. There has been
some discussion on whether we should discontinue providing lifeguards at the Wayzata
beach in order to adequately staff our beaches, but no decision has been made to do this.
Staffing will continue to be an issue for us. We may have to offer some sort of
guaranteed hours to attract people. Commissioner Fiemann asked what we pay
lifeguards. Matt Jensen said it's $7.55 an hour, which is the same as McDonald's.
High school kids are turning down $10 an hour jobs, because they can get $12 an hour
elsewhere. Minnesota has the lowest unemployment rate in the country. Job
opportunities are good here. We have challenges ahead in providing staff at the new
fieldhouse and activity center, said Mary. Musliner commented on the program Kids
Games and how much her child enjoyed it.
4. PAST COUNCIL ACTION
The Council approved the freldhouse rates at $210 per hour for primetime and $180 per
hour for non primetime.
PRAC Minutes/July 8, 1999
Page 28
5. UNFINISHED BUSINESS
a. Comprehensive Plan Study Session - BM Warner. Revised drafts of the vision
statements and issues and needs were distributed. Barry said that these provide the
framework for future decision making. There are eight specific vision statements.
Director Blank explained who was involved in developing these statements. Musliner
asked about # 10 under the issues and needs list. Barry explained that the Metropolitan
Council's comprehensive plan guidelines suggest that they make comments on whether
an individual city's comprehensive plan is going to have an impact on regional systems.
Hennepin Parks is our regional provider. Director Blank asked PRAC to look at this
document and determine if the general resident would understand it. Fiemann
suggested that item #10 under issues and needs should be changed to say "assess impact
on regional park and recreation facilities." Under the Goals and Policies list, it was
recommended that the words pedestrians and bicycles be omitted from item 2c and
make it "non -motorized users," so that it covers in-line skaters, as well. Musliner asked
for a clarification on traffic volumes under item 2d. Director Blank explained that this
refers to roadways with 20,000 cars or more per day. There was a suggestion that item
2e be changed to say designated trails. Chair Anderson asked about item 2f - functional
hierarchy. Director Blank explained that winter trail maintenance will be brought to
PRAC in November for an official policy. He further said there is a guideline for the
construction of trails. We either put them immediately behind the curb, because they
can be maintained by a wing plow, or we put them 8 to 10 feet behind. This way the
snow can be dumped behind the trail. Musliner asked about item 3a. Director Blank
said that LifeTime is an example of this, as well as Four Downs Skate Park. Director
Blank said where appropriate we will look for partnerships to provide recreation
opportunities. Fiemann felt that we don't address cost effective or well used in the
main sentence of item 3. The statements that follow do not seem to address the well
used issue. Mary said the words "well used" are appropriate. The issue is how do you
frame a supporting statement to go with it? Bang suggested that it should read
monitor recreation trends and user patterns and respond with appropriate programs and
facilities." It was then suggested to change the main statement to read "recreation
programs and facilities." Thompson recommended adding "when appropriate" to the
beginning of item 3a and to also add "new" to recreational facilities. Barry said the
steering committee will get these comments and can work some more with this draft,
prior to the next meeting.
Adam reviewed the open space and natural resources inventory. He discussed the
bulleted items on pg. 3-2 and stated that the City of Plymouth has ordinances in place
that protect its wetlands. Page 3-3 explains what a good open space plan covers:
diversity, proximity, connectivity, and quality. Management practices of open space
were also discussed. There are several ways to manage open space: preservation,
protection, enhancement (needing augmentation), and restoration. He explained that
Plymouth has taken steps to protect its natural resources but is somewhat lacking in its
protection of trees. There are two main methods for protecting natural resources:
acquisition, which is buying the land in order to gain control of the use of a particular
parcel, or legislation, which is passing ordinances that protect natural resources on
PRAC Minutes/July 8, 1999
Page 29
privately owned land. This method can cause some opposition as private landowners
could view this as infringing on their rights. Director Blank stated that Councilmember
Bildsoe wants PRAC to consider another referendum for purchasing open space. The
city's former comprehensive plan did not have a chapter on open space, and this is why
we are putting it in this comprehensive plan update, stated Director Blank. In the
citizens survey going out in the next few weeks, questions on open space have been
included. Hopefully data from the survey will be available before this comprehensive
plan process is completed. There was discussion then on the possibility of establishing
a greenway in Plymouth. Barry explained that there is a wetland complex that is very
significant in northwest Plymouth. One way to construct the greenway is to have it
interconnect with Maple Grove, following the west side of the wetland complex and
then tying into the trail system. Another way would be to do a loop connecting with the
regional park trail system. A third variation is to go around the wetland only and cross
over on a boardwalk. The Commission liked all of these scenarios and wanted staff to
look into them further.
The final item for discussion was golf courses. Plymouth has three 18 -hole golf courses
within its boundaries: Elm Creek, Hampton Hills, and Hollydale. The City should
strive to preserve a public golf facility within Plymouth because of its open space value,
the quality of life it provides and because it's a desired activity in a community with
diverse needs. The four private golf courses in Plymouth represent approximately 400
acres of open space. If the City ever pursues the purchase of a golf course (should the
private ones become residential developments), a golf feasibility study would have to be
done. Based on information provided by SRF, Plymouth falls slightly short in the
number of 18 -hole golf courses needed to satisfy the current population, if you consider
only those courses actually located in Plymouth. However, if you consider courses
located outside Plymouth, but within a driving distance of 20-25 miles, which is
considered the Plymouth golf use area, then we have no shortage. SRF's report on golf
courses recommends that Plymouth continue to monitor the development of golf course
facilities at Begin Oaks and Eagle Lake, establish Plymouth residents' participation in
golf through surveys and trend analysis, ensure that a minimum of one 18 -hole course
remains accessible within city limits, pursue opportunities to purchase an existing
course if it is threatened by development, and monitor the development status of each
course within the City of Plymouth.
b. Plymouth Creek Center update. Director Blank did not report on this item.
6. NEW BUSINESS
a. Ferndale North issue. At the August meeting, there may be a large audience in
attendance to discuss the Ferndale North park. This may take up much of the evening.
Director Blank pointed out the location of the Ferndale North area on a map. This was
a Lundgren Bros. plat in 1976, and at the time it was platted, one of the conditions was
that Outlot A would be deeded to the City as natural open space and not a neighborhood
park. Director Blank said he told the residents that this issue could be presented to the
Park Commission if it could be proven that there was significant neighborhood demand
PRAC Minutes/July 8, 1999
Page 30
for it. A petition was circulated among the residents, and 77% of those polled said they
want a playground. This parcel is in the comprehensive plan as open space.
Commissioners wanted to know the proper way to handle this issue. Director Blank
said it will entail an amendment to the comprehensive plan. Director Blank said the
game plan is the residents will come to the August 12 PRAC meeting. PRAC will get a
full report on the issue with video tapes, slides, etc. It will be a discussion item.
Director Blank said that only the owner of a piece of property can request an
amendment to the comprehensive plan, and the City is the owner in this case. Director
Blank said that PRAC's options are to table it for further study or to make a
recommendation that the comprehensive plan be changed, or not be changed. Then it
will go to the Planning Commisson. If they initiate a change, they will have to hold a
public hearing on it. If the Planning Commission says no, then it goes to the Council.
If they say yes, then the Planning Commission has to hold a public hearing. This could,
at a minimum, take four or five meetings. Then funding would have to be planned for
in a future CII', if it's approved for park. For playground use, these folks now have to
go to Oakwood, Queensland, or go into Wayzata. There is no access to this site except
via trail.
7. COMMISSION PRESENTATION
None.
8. STAFF COMMUNICATION
Luce Line trail construction will begin next week from Vicksburg east to West Medicine
Lake Drive. The Highway 55 bridge is under construction. This should be wrapped up by
October. The Xenium trail around the railroad tracks is missing a segment.
Barry said SRF is committed to having a draft report ready by sometime in August,
dictating that a second meeting be held in July. Some possible dates were discussed, and
the 28th was tentatively selected. Commissioner Thompson cannot come to that meeting.
The last chance to look at the comprehensive plan will be September 9, before it goes to the
Planning Commission. There wouldn't be a need for a second meeting in August then.
The next PRAC meetings are as follows: July 28, August 12, September 9.
Willegalle asked about a piece of property on 10th and Kingsview. Director Blank said the
City bought it and it's now park property and will be a water quality pond for Parkers Lake.
9. ADJOURN
The meeting adjourned at 9:25 p.m.
DATE: August 10, 1999
TO: PRAC
FROM: Eric J. Blank, Director, Parks and Recreation
SUBJECT: Recreation Portion of the Comprehensive Park Plan
The attached document was inadvertantly left out of your packet. Please review for discussion
Thursday night as part of item 5a.
I apologize for the oversight.
EB/np
9.
Recreation Programs
9. RECREATION
DRAFT — 8/5/99
Adding Quality tO Life"
INTRODUCTION
About four out of five North Americans use their local government recreation and park systems. This is
probably a higher percentage of use than almost any other local government service.' 1
MISSON STATEMENT
The put -pose of Plymouth Park and Recreation is to: assist individual and community development,
improve physical and mental health, enhance social functioning, and improve the quality of life for all
residents.
The level of benefits that the public reports from use of local government recreation and park services is
very high. In North America, nine out of 10 persons report significant benefit to themselves, their
household, and their community. In fact, even among non-users, 80 percent report that many benefits
result form recreation and park services.
PUBLIC RECREATION
PLYMOUTH PARK AND RECREATION
Plymouth Park and Recreation provides a broad range of recreational experiences for youth through
adults. Our emphasis is on enhanced self-esteem, rather than on perfecting performance. The desired
outcome is for the participant to feel good about themselves, their relationship with the other participants
and instructor(s), and to have gained an appreciation for the skill or activity engaged in. These
opportunities allow individuals to pursue personal interests, maintain physical and mental fitness, meet
and socialize with neighbors, and build a greater sense of community.
Table 9-1 is a listing of the Recreation offerings from the February 1998 issue of the Plymouth News
through August 1999.
ADAPTIVE — Plymouth is part of an eight -community consortium that contracts with West Hennepin
Community Services for programming for residents with special needs. Plymouth has one of the highest
rates of participation in these programs for youth through adult. During the summer, an Integration
Specialist is hired to facilitate the inclusion of special needs participants in general program offerings.
Summer is our highest demand season. Requests for integration during the rest of the year are handled by
full time staff, or on a consultation basis.
ARTS - The arts in Plymouth are presented to the community through a variety of venues including
classes and workshops for all ages, public art exhibits and fairs, community theater productions and
musical performances. As a member of the Music For Everyone consortium, Plymouth offers private and
group music instruction to residents with opportunities for public recitals.
Page 78, Just the Facts: Answering the Critics of Local Government Park and Recreation Services, by Jack
Harper, Geoffrey Godbey and Stephen Foreman from the August 1998 issue of Parks and Recreation Magazine.
z Page 80, Just the Facts: Answering the Critics of Local Government Park and Recreation Services, by Jack
Harper, Geoffrey Godbey and Stephen Foreman from the August 1998 issue of Parks and Recreation Magazine.
PLYMOUTH RECREATION PROGRAMS
9. RECREATION
DRAFT — 8/5/99
ThePlymouthFine Arts Council (PFAC) is a non-profit organization that affiliates with the Plymouth
Parks and Recreation Dept. Its mission is to promote awareness and appreciation of visual, musical and
theater arts. To achieve this mission, its goals are to develop and promote artistic learning experiences;
support local artists in their creative endeavors; provide creative and artistic viewing opportunities; and to
encourage participation by individuals, families and businesses in arts programs within our community.
PFAC incorporated as a non-profit organization in 1997 and receives funding from the City of Plymouth.
There are currently eight board members on the council. They oversee dispersal of funds to community
art organizations and special projects. For the past three years, PFAC has directed the Primavera
Springtime Celebration of the Arts. Their ongoing art exhibits in the main corridor of City Hall feature a
different artist each month. They also judge and present an award to the winning artist at the city's annual
Autumn Arts Fair. The Arts Information Line provides updated information on PFAC and local arts
programs and events.
Arts organizations that cooperate with PFAC to serve our community are the Plymouth Community
Concert Band, the Plymouth Westside Players (Community Theater) and the Women of the West
Quilters. Development grants from the State Arts Board have enriched the efforts of these organizations.
Community residents can be involved with Arts in Plymouth by becoming a "Friend of the Arts" with a
pledge to PFAC.
From this strong base of opportunity and support for the arts in Plymouth, community interest will
continue to grow. The community band and theater are less than two years old and have projected
increased participation and production schedules. With the addition of the Plymouth Creek Activity
Center, there will be more space for scheduling art classes, rehearsal and performance space for musical
groups, and additional visual art exhibits. An initiative to plan and commission more art in Plymouth's
public spaces is now under development. PFAC will continue to focus on fulfilling its mission by
collaborating with the city and community businesses and agencies. ,More funding and designated
recreation support staff will be necessary to keep pace with this growth.
EDUCATIONAL — While an effort is made not to duplicate educational programs being offered by the
Community Education Departments, many programs seem to best fit in this category. Many of them are
of a recreational nature and are not offered elsewhere in the community. Our award winning youth
environmental day camp, offered in cooperation with Hennepin Parks Naturalist staff is an example of
programs in this area.
SPECIAL EVENTS - According to a city wide survey conducted in the spring of 1999, as part of a
staff person's master's thesis; Plymouth residents have a greater than average satisfaction with special
events. There was an overall agreement that special events contribute to the highly rated quality of life in
Plymouth.
Currently, the Plymouth Parks and Recreation Department sponsors or co-sponsors eight annual special
events for its residents. They provide a common ground for celebration, and develop community pride.
Half of these events wtxp developed within the last six years. The events include:
PLYMOUTH RECREATION PROGRAMS
9. RECREATION
DRAFT — 8/5/99
S ecial Events Ezisteace & Attendance
Special Event Rate of Resident Attendance Years of Existence
Music In Plymouth 76% 26
Concerts at Parkers Lake Park 53% 7
Fire & Ice Festival 45% 10
Autumn Arts Fair 29% 6—
Plymouth on Parade
Old Fashioned Christmas
20%
14%
1
12
Plymouth History Fest
Primavera Arts Celebration
13%
11%
5
2
All of these events are free to the public. The city allocates a yearly budgeted amount to cover most of
these events' expenses. However, our special events would not be possible without the support of the
many civic organizations, businesses, and of volunteers; who give of their time and sponsorship money to
support these events.
Additional staff and resources will be required to manage current special events and add new activities as
the city develops and grows in population. The addition of the Plymouth Creek Activity Center toPlymouthCreekParkwillserveasagatheringplaceforresidentstoparticipateinspecialeventsand
celebrate community. Current practices of event promotion and collaboration in sponsorship will need to
expand to accommodate growth and maintain resident satisfaction. Public Relations and Promotion will
be a growing concern, resources will need to be allocated to create a unified plan for staying in touch with
our community.
SPORTS — This is our largest program area. A wide variety of opportunities are available across all age
ranges.
Adult Sports Leagues are an area where Plymouth has long been an innovator. We offer the traditional
officiated sports (softball, basketball, and volleyball) and touch football. We also have a comparable
choice of unofficiated sports (4 -Man Hockey, 3 -Man Basketball, 5 -Man basketball, 4 -Man Football,
Indoor Volleyball, Sand Volleyball, and Broomball). Our officiated and unoffrciated programs each
attract over 200 teams per year. The success of these leagues lies in the fact that we have been able to
maximize the use of available facilities and minimize the cost to our participants.
Aquatics programs are very popular. Plymouth operates three beaches. Medicine East was piloted as an
unguarded beach in 1999. Our Junior Lifeguard and Guard Start programs have been very helpful in
training young people and preparing them for jobs within our system.
The swimming lesson program has become year around, with the addition of school year lessons atWEMS. The demand for school year lessons is high and exceeds our ability to provide classes. We have
been able to answer the need for lessons during the summer months.
A shortage of trained aquatic staff has had a major impact in these areas. In the future, we may need to
expand unguarded beach days and hours. Staff recruitment and incentives will be a continuing priority
for the school year program. The LifeTime aquatic program has had an impact on our summer lessons
and the availability of staff.
PLYMOUTH RECREATION PROGRAMS 4
9. RECREATION
DRAFT — 8/5/99
Individual Sports Instruction is an area where demand is high. We offer both indoor and outdoor golf
lessons in cooperation with other facilities. Over 400 residents annually take golf lessons. A wide variety
of summer outdoor tennis lessons and leagues are available for all ages. Nearly 500 residents per year are
involved in our tennis programs.
Soccer is a very popular sport that consistently grows in participation. The City offers a fall
developmental program, using volunteer coaches. Participation rates by girls have continued to grow, and
with the publicity given the US Women's World Cup Team that growth will expand. The completion of
the sports' dome will expand opportunities for growth in this area.
MISCELLANEOUS — This category contains those programs that do not fit neatly anywhere else.
Specifically there are several social and outreach programs listed here.
AGE GROUPS — Plymouth Park and Recreation provides numerous programs for all ages groups from
pre-school through senior citizens. Two of these groups deserve special attention.
Teens are an age group that is difficult to program for. There are several programs open to this age
group. But as a general rule, they can be viewed as underserved. Several factors contribute to this
situation, including transportation, conflicting demands on time and lack of facilities that appeal to this
age group.
One program specifically for teens is the Ski Club program at the four middle schools in Plymouth.
Another is the U -Lead training for summer teen volunteers.
As an employer, the department, provides many youngsters with their first work experience, either as a
volunteer or a paid employee. In many ways, it is our largest teen program. Many hours of training,
development and supervision are devoted to these young employees.
Seniors are another age group deserving special attention. Plymouth has had a part time Senior
Coordinator for over 25 years. The 1980 Plymouth census reported that 9.5% (2,828 individuals) of
residents were over the age of 55. The 1990 census reported that 11.5% (5,874 individuals) of the
population was over the age of 55. This represents a 107% increase in the size of the senior population.
Younger more active seniors from 55 to 74 years olds make up the bulk of the senior population. There
are 5,117 senior in the 55 to 74 age ranges, and 757 over the age of 75.
While 11.5% is a relatively small portion of the population, there are a wide variety of programs available
for seniors. The program provides an array of classes, volunteer opportunities and events to connect,
involve and support older people. Services include dial -a -ride and transportation provided by volunteer
drivers, intergenerational programs, physical exercise classes, adult education, health screenings and
senior outreach.
Plymouth's percentage of senior population in 1990 was smaller than the metro area as a whole
Plymouth 11.5% vs. Metro area 17%). In spite of the difference, Plymouth's rates of growth have been
tracking consistently Vith the region. If Plymouth's senior population continues to grow at the rate
projected for the Metro 'Area in 2020, the number of seniors in Plymouth will expand to 18.5% of the
population by the year 2020.
With the addition of the Activity Center, there will be an attractive and available day time space in which
to expand senior program offerings. The social aspect of the activities will continue to be paramount in
PLYMOUTH RECREATION PROGRAMS
9. RECREATION
DRAFT — 8/5/99
all offerings. Areas where expansion is expected are: arts and crafts, intergenerational activities, sports
and other active recreation, volunteer opportunities, service projects and outreach.
NEW FACILITIES
The Plymouth Ice Center opened the June of 1997. There are two ice sheets: an Olympic and a
professional sheet. The center also has two meeting rooms:
The Center Ice Room -- with seating for up to 175 people
The Blue Line Room --with seating for up to 39 people.
Support facilities include ten locker rooms, one figure skating room with mirrored walls and ballet bars,
and two officials' rooms. There are upper and lower level lobbies. Concessions are located upstairs with
vending machines and restrooms on both levels. There are also arena offices on both levels.
The Plymouth Ice Center offers learn to skate classes and specialty classes, as well as public open skating,
parent and tots skating, and adult open hockey.
The Wayzata and Armstrong High School Hockey teams use the Plymouth Ice Center, as well as Wayzata
Youth Hockey, Armstrong Youth Hockey, Osseo/Maple Grove Youth Hockey and many other individual
groups.
The Ice Center is a free standing enterprise facility. Its revenues have exceeded expectations in the first
two years of operation.
The Plymouth LifeTime Recreation Center is a three-way joint venture among the City of Plymouth,
LifeTime Fitness and the Wayzata School District. The Center is attached to the Plymouth Ice Center and
is adjacent to Plymouth City Hall. LifeTime is a for profit private fitness company. The facility offers a
broad range of weight and fitness training equipment, aerobic classes, sports programs, youth program
areas, and indoor and outdoor aquatic facilities.
Fieldhouse and Activity Center construction began in the spring of 1999. The freldhouse will have a
fabric roof from mid October to mid April and contain a "state-of-the-art" artificial turf field (the closest
thing to grass available). Soccer is by far the fastest growing sport in Plymouth and throughout the state. Over 5000 Plymouth residents participate, and many drive long distances in the winter to play indoors.
Our freldhouse will keep them close to home and also free up gym time currently being used for soccer.
Among other sports available are: golf, softball, baseball, football, and tennis. The field will be bordered
by a walking/running track, which will fill another big winter need in our city. The fieldhouse will open
in late fall of 1999.
Plymouth Creek Center will be highlighted by a 350 seat social hall, which will be encased by large
windows overlooking a fountain and garden area. This will give us a spot for many social gatherings
from wedding receptions to musical performances. Our seniors population will have a home for their
many activities, including a large lounge area complete with fireplace. The meeting and craft rooms will
fill another big need for Plymouth groups. This facility will open in the spring of 2000.
PLYMOUTH RECREATION PROGRAMS b
9. RECREATION
DRAFT — 8/5/99
VOLUNTEERS
In 1993 the City of Plymouth initiated a formal volunteer program. By hiring a Coordinator of
Volunteers, the City has been able to dramatically increase its volunteer usage and build on past
successes. It has also allowed for more consistency in record keeping, recognition of volunteers,
recruitment and placement of volunteers. The Coordinator has established a database of potential,
current, and past volunteers and their interests; allowing greater usage of volunteers.
Plymouth's volunteer program is somewhat unusual, for a city, in that volunteers are used in all
departments. Many staff have creatively become involved in the volunteer program, but parks and
recreation department has consistently been the largest user of volunteers.
There has been steady growth in the park and recreation department's usage of volunteers. In 1993, the
total number of volunteers for the City was 482 (16% of those in P & R). These individuals contributed
2,095 hours. In 1998 there were a total of 924 volunteers who contributed 12,196 hours (87% of those in
P & R). By multiplying the total number of hours volunteered by $13.73 (the per hour dollar value of
volunteering, per the MN Office on Citizenship and Volunteer Services), we arrive at the value added to
the City. This is a significant way for volunteers to help stretch taxpayer dollars. In 1998, the total value
added was $167,451 with Park and Recreation accounting for $144,069 of that total.
The volunteer program has experienced a steady growth in the past six years. It is now starting to level
off. It is anticipated that the figures for future years will stabilize and be somewhat similar to figures for
1998. Future goals for the volunteer program include: increasing the training for the summer teen
volunteer program, developing better written materials to send to special event volunteers, and working to
ensure that the matches between volunteers and staff are the best fit.
COLLABORATION
Plymouth Park and Recreation places a high value on cooperative efforts. Collaboration gives a
synergistic energy to public recreation, with the outcome being greater than the sum of its parts. We
partner with a wide range of agencies, organizations and businesses in a variety of ways; in order to
leverage our resources to present a wider variety of quality programs than we would be able to provide
alone. Our collaborative partners are listed in Table 2.
TECHNOLOGY/CUSTOMER SERVICE
The City of Plymouth has been aggressive in its use of technology to solve business problems and toprovidegreatercustomerservicetoitsresidents. Credit card payment for program registration has been
accepted for a number of years. The use of credit cards opens the way for one of the first installations of
touch-tone phone registration (TTR) in the country. TIR has been very popular with residents. It allows
for 24 -hr. registration 365 days per year, a major break through in customer service. It also has freed up
clerical staff time to devote to other expanding needs.
The City's web site is also used for information regarding Recreation programs. Department staff is
working with a software vendor on a product that would allow on-line availability of information on all
Recreation programs and facilities. This technology would eventually lead to on-line registration and
reservation of facilities,,
The days of standing in line to register for popular Recreation programs are over. A random mail in
registration system has streamlined registration for swimming, eliminating in person mass registration.
The vast majority of customers are very pleased. In order to maintain our standing with our customers,
PLYMOUTH RECREATION PROGRAMS 7
9. RECREATION
DRAFT — 8/5/99
we will need to continue to find more and better ways to deliver our services and to respond to the
customers changing needs.
RECREATION IN SCHOOL DISTRICTS
Plymouth is served by four school districts. All of the districts, serving Plymouth residents, provide a
variety of services through their Community Education Departments. Typically their programs include: Adult Basic Education, Adult Enrichment Classes, Family Education, Facility Scheduling, Youth
Development, and Childcare.
Most of Plymouth's indoor recreation programs take place in area school facilities. The Districts also
house many of the Youth Athletic Association's activities. While there are cases of competition and
overlap in some program areas, in the main the relationship with the schools is cooperative and
supportive.
District 284 — Wayzata serves 57% of City residents. Wayzata School District has seven elementary
schools, two middle schools and one high school within City boundaries. All of these facilities have
housed City Recreation programs at one time or another. In addition, the middle school located in theCityofWayzatahasbeenusedforRecreationactivities. During the summer, the Athletic Coordinator fortheCityschedulesuseoftheDistrict's outdoor sports facilities. City Recreation use has priority for
scheduling indoor school facilities after School District events and Youth Athletic Associations.
The City of Plymouth paid for adding School/Park complexes are shared with District 284. The DistrictcontributedfundstowardtheconstructionoftheCityIceCenterandLifeTimeFitnessinexchangefor
priority use of those facilities. Several Wayzata sports team rely heavily on the use of Park facilities forpracticesandgames. The City has worked with the District to upgrade outdoor sports facility at a number
of school facilities.
The Wayzata District sponsors the Communities in Collaboration Council and is a member of the
CONECT Collaborative. Plymouth also participates with these two organizations.
District 281 — Robbinsdale serves 30% of Plymouth residents. Robbinsdale School District has two
elementary schools, one middle school and one high school within City boundaries. All of these facilitieshavehousedCityRecreationprogramsatonetimeoranother. During the summer, the Athletic
Coordinator for the City schedules use of the District's outdoor sports facilities. City Recreation use has
priority for scheduling indoor school facilities after School District events.
The City of Plymouth paid for adding a gymnasium at Armstrong High School for community use. TheCityAthleticCoordinatorschedulesthisgymafter6p.m. One joint School/Park complex is shared withDistrict281. Several Armstrong sports team rely heavily on the use of Park facilities for practices and
games. The City has worked with the District to upgrade outdoor sports facility at a number of school
facilities.
The City participates with the Robbinsdale Community Education Department and other cities within the
District in offering summer school programs and school release day activities through Just For Kids.
District 279 — Osseo and District 270 — Hopkins serve 10% and 3% of Plymouth residents respectively.
Neither District has any school facilities within City boundaries. The amount of interaction with these
Districts is minimal. Youth Athletic Associations serving Osseo residents use Bass Lake Playfield and
the Plymouth Ice Center.
PLYMOUTH RECREATION PROGRAMS
9. RECREATION
DRAFT — 8/5/99
OTHER PUBLIC FACILITIES
There are a number of other public facilities that are available for Recreation use on a cooperative or
limited basis.
Golf Courses — See Chapter 6
Hennepin County Library — the library is a valuable resource for reference and multi -media materials.
The Plymouth Library offers a variety of programs centered on reading for all ages. They provide a
limited number of computers for public access to the Internet. Their Read Mobile is housed in Plymouth
and makes scheduled stops throughout the community. They have two meeting rooms available for
community use.
Hennepin Parks — French Park is located in Plymouth. It provides a variety of recreational resources
including: boat launch, children's play area, swimming beach, large group picnic sites, naturalist lead
activities, and two meeting rooms available for community use. Pike Lake Park is on the northern
boundary between Plymouth and Maple Grove. It is scheduled for development in the near future. An
instructional nine -hole golf course will be a feature of that park.
Historic Sites — Plymouth's "Old Town Hall" has been moved to Plymouth Creek Park. It houses the
Plymouth Historical Society. It is open to the public once a month, or by appointment. It is used as the
main location for the Old Fashioned Christmas in Plymouth special event. The Gilfillan Log Cabin
Replica is located in Parkers Lake Park. Since its dedication in February of 1998 at the Fire and Ice
Festival, it has been used mostly for special events.
Park and Recreation Departments — The neighboring cities of Maple Grove, Brooklyn Park, New
Hope, Golden Valley, St. Louis Park and Minnetonka all have Park and Recreation Departments. They
have a wide variety of facilities and program offerings. Plymouth has participated in a range of
collaborative programs from Adaptive Recreation to youth and adult athletics.
Parkers Lake Golf Center - is owned and operated by the Hennepin County Correction Facility. It is
home to all of our outdoor lessons.
Plymouth City Hall — The meeting spaces at City Hall have been used for a variety of meetings, classes,
art displays and the Prima Vera arts special event.
Plymouth Fire Stations — Fire Stations II and III have both provided program space on a limited basis.
Plymouth Towne Square Seniors' Apartments — The social areas of this building have been used
occasionally for Senior programs.
Wayzata Beach and Summer Swim Program — Plymouth has contracted with the City of Wayzata to
provide summer aquatics programs at their municipal beach and at Wayzata West Middle School.
PRIVATE SECTOR` RECREATION
PLYMOUTH RECREATION PROGRAMS 9
9. RECREATION
DRAFT — 8/5/99
QUASi-PUBLIC INSTITUTIONS
Plymouth Westside Players Community Theater — Plymouth Fine Arts Council affiliate
Plymouth Community Concert Band - Plymouth Fine Arts Council affiliate
Women of the West Quilters - Plymouth Fine Arts Council affiliate
Plymouth Historical Society — Co-sponsors Old Fashioned Christmas in Plymouth and History Fest
YMCA — Northwest and Ridgedale — The Ridgedale YMCA participates with CONECT
Youth Athletic Associations — Plymouth contains residents of four school districts, and our relationship
with the youth athletic associations varies in each. The Wayzata district associations contain 70-80%
Plymouth residents. In the Robbinsdale district, the Armstrong/Cooper youth associations have 50%
Plymouth residents. About 10% of north Plymouth is in the Osseo school district, and the remaining 5%
of southeast Plymouth is in the Hopkins school district.
For the Wayzata and Robbinsdale districts, we supply outdoor and ice arena facilities based on their
percentage of Plymouth residents in each program. We maintain soccer/football and baseball/softball
fields with mowing, painting of lines, and dragging of infields. We also supply extensive field lighting.
We have one Playfield located in the Osseo district, which is used by those residents. Population in the
Hopkins district is minimal, as has been our involvement with their athletic associations. In addition to
field maintenance, we offer associations assistance in training coaches and scheduling their games and
practices.
The fragmenting of the community by having four school districts presents many challenges to our
department, but the dedicated efforts of the countless volunteers in each of their athletic associations has
given all Plymouth youth a wide array of quality sports programs.
PRIVATE/COMMERCIAL FACILITIES
Beacon Height's Gym — privately owned rental gym space
Blue Waters Sailing School — sailing lessons on Medicine Lake
Bunker Simulated Golf Center — site for our youth indoor lessons
Dance —Nine schools
Gymnastics Schools — Six schools/clubs
Hardy's Boats — boat rental, docking and supplies
LifeTime Fitness — fitness club developed in cooperation with the City of Plymouth, resident daily passes
Long Lake Golf Dome — site for our adult indoor golf lessons
Martial Arts — six schools
Medina Ballroom — bowling and dancing
Nursery Schools - nine
Schmitt Music
The Gym — weight lifting and fitness
The Marsh — fitness club
The Reserve — banquet and meeting facility
West Medicine Lake Community Club — social club
OTHER NON-PUBLIC PROVIDERS
Plymouth Park and Recreation utilizes the facilities of many churches and several private schools. Some
of these facilities made available as a community service, others require rental fees. We have also been
fortunate to make use of several meeting rooms at apartments, banks and real estate companies over the
years.
PLYMOUTH RECREATION PROGRAMS 10
9. RECREATION
DRAFT — 8/5/99
With ever -greater competition for public resources and increasing demands and expectations for service;
it will be more important than ever to forge alliances with other community agencies, businesses and
organizations in order to leverage resources to meet the needs of our community.
NATIONAL TRENDS
AGING POPULATION — Plymouth's is projected to have 18.5% of its population over the age of 55 by
the year 2020. As the population continues to age increasing demands will be placed on health and social
service agencies. Leisure service agencies are uniquely positioned to respond with health maintenance
activities and programs. The social and service programs offered can and will make a difference in the
quality of life for seniors and the length of time that they are able to maintain their independence. Lest
we forget, these programs will also add to the quality of life for all those who are enriched by these
community -building activities of the seniors.
DIVERSITY — As the ethnic makeup of our community becomes more diverse, Park and Recreation
activities provide a positive avenue for engagement and integration into community life. Integrated and
accessible leisure services are also critical to the quality of life for people with a disability and
disadvantaged individuals.
ENVIRONMENTAL EMPHASIS — In 1995, 85% of participating Plymouth voters approved a
referendum on Open Space and Trails. If this high level of local interest follows predicted national
trends, this interest in preserving a healthy environment will go beyond the parks and open space to the
activities and programs that are available. As people become more enveloped by technology, they have a
real need to reconnect with the natural world around them. Recreation has the opportunity to provide not
just wholesome nature based facilities, but also programs that can provide a philosophical basis for living
in harmony with our world.
WELLNESS — As the cost of health care continues to rise, there is mounting interest in the health
maintaining attributes of a healthy leisure lifestyle. Regular physical activity is one of the very best
methods of "health insurance" for individuals. A strong commitment to active, creative recreation can
pay big dividends by building a healthier community.
PREVENTION — Positive programs, with connections to good role models, make a difference in the
lives of not just youth, but all age groups. Leisure opportunities for youth provide positive lifestyle
choices and alternatives to self-destructive behavior. In a world, where many are tuning out by tuning in
to headsets and PC's that isolate individuals; healthy social interaction promoted by positive recreation
programs is one of the cheaper prescriptions for mental and social health.
WORLD MARKET ECONOMY — Competition is not just next door, but around the globe. New ideas
and activities will travel at the speed of light. Those who are inflexible or who cannot change quickly
enough will be outmoded and left in the dust.
THE SEARCH FOR MEANING — Individuals are looking for more than just a pleasant diversion.
Purposeful and fulfilling leisure activities will appeal to a population interested in personal growth and
development. Meaningful leisure activity is an essential source of self-esteem and positive self-image.
FLEXIBILITY — More than ever time is money. People are moving away from the highly structured,
time-consuming team activities. Many are looking for the convenience and flexibility offered by more
individualized, self-directed activities.
PLYMOUTH RECREATION PROGRAMS 11
9. RECREATION
DRAFT — 8/5/99
RECOMMENDATIONS
Plymouth Park and Recreation cannot be all things to all people. In order to leverage our limited
resources, we will need to partner with as many community groups as possible, in order to facilitate
an array of programs that would never be possible on our own. Specifically resources will need to be
leveraged for Plymouth at risk families. _
We will need to remain flexible and open to change. The influx of new ideas and activities will be
arriving at an ever -greater speed. We need a solid foundation of philosophy and policy, in order to
keep the changes positive for our customers.
Technology will help us serve our customers well and remain abreast of trends. We will need to keep
current without getting ahead of the curve.
The Arts do much to add to the heart of a community. We will need to continue to nurture and
support the arts in a way that promotes self-sufficiency.
Senior programs will become a more significant part of our programming as that population continues
to grow. We will need to remain abreast of the needs and wants of this age group; as the baby
boomers come of age with more active lifestyles and enhanced expectations.
Teenagers are the future of our community and country. We need to find ways to engage them in the
planning for activities that will meet their interests and further their positive development.
Visits to Historic Places are among the fastest growing outdoor recreation activities according to
Outdoor Recreation in American Life: A National Assessment of Demand and Supply Trends"
Cordell, 1999). The City may want to identify its historic landmarks and work with the Historical
Society to preserve and promote them.
Staffing will continue to be a concern in the future. The number of qualified candidates for seasonal
and part-time recreation positions has been dwindling. In the face of staffing shortages, decisions will
need to be made concerning programming priorities. We will also need to be creative in our search
for staffing candidates, staff development and retention.
PLYMOUTH RECREATION PROGRAMS 12
BANQUET ROOM SURVEY
City Capacity Non -Prime Days Prime Days Time
Maplewood 350 475 NR (3-5 hrs.) 500 NR Sa/Su Add $90/hr. over
18 months 427.50 R 450 R 5 hrs.
Minnetonka 250 175 NR M -Th 450 NR F/Sa Up to 9 hrs.
12, 18 Months 150 R 375 R
Golden Valley 215 NA 540 NR M -Su Up to 12 hrs.
18 Months 460 R then $25/hr.
Burnsville 280 NA 610 NR M -Su Per day or
550 R 105 or $92/hr.
Brooklyn Park 250 475 NR F, Su 575 NR Sat All Day
12 Months 425 R 525 R Noon set-up
New Brighton 300 200 NR Su -Th 600 NR F/Sat All Day
24 months 150 R 500 R as needed
Chaska 250 390 NR M -Th 510 NR F -Su 6 hrs. +
12 months 210 R 420 R 85 or $70/hr.
Maple Grove 290 300 NR Su -Th 700 NR F/Sat All Day
18 months 250 R 650 R as needed
Shoreview 250 200 NR Su -Th 575 NR F/Sat All Day
6 months 150 R 475 R as needed
Chanhassen 220 420 NR 6 hrs. +
18 months 300 R 70 or $50/hr.
Medina* 300 200 F 750 Sat
100 Su
Reserve* 250 1000 Sat 100 security
800 F guard charge
Private Facilities R = Resident
NR = Non -Resident
Recommendations
Within the 12 banquet rooms comparable to our size (250-350 capacity), I found a wide
range of rental rates, hours and policies. In order to get our program off the ground with
understandable, reasonable and cost effective pricing and policies, I propose the
following:
1. Most surveyed schedule up to 18 months in advance. I would agree with that and
start as soon as possible.
2. Saturday is the biggest rental day and demands the highest rental rates. Friday is
close behind and is grouped with Saturday on most rate charts. Sunday was
included with Saturday rates only on Maplewood. Golden Valley and Burnsville
have the same rates all week. I'd propose a Friday/Saturday rate with lower Sunday
and Monday -Thursday rates.
3. Most require police attendant from 2-4 hours, when alcohol is served. We should
require an officer a minimum of 4 hours prior to closing at $25/hour.
4. In house caterer will solve many problems provided we can get one of the best
available.
BANQUET ROOM RENTAL: 6 hrs. + $50 Res./additional hour
75 NR/additional hour
Friday/Saturday Sunday Monday -Thursday
Resident $650 $400 $250
Non -Resident $750 $500 $350
Residents may reserve time up to 18 months before their event. Non -Residents
up to 12 months.
PLYMOUTH CREEK CENTER
RENTAL CONTRACT
We are prepared to do whatever it takes to make your event a success. To aid in this and to clearly
communicate policy, we ask that the contact person for your event read this contract and abide by it.
If at any time you have questions, please contact us immediately.
RENTAL PROCEDURES:
1. A reservation is not guaranteed until a deposit equal to 50% of the rental cost is received.
Reservations will not be accepted without the required deposit. Residents may reserve time up to
18 months in advance of the event. Non-residents may reserve up to 12 months.
2. Balance of rental is due no less that fourteen (14) days prior to the event.
3. A damage deposit of $300 is due no later than fourteen (14) days prior to the event date. Pending
a post event facility review by PCC staff, the deposit will be refunded within ten (10) days after the
event date, or applied to any outstanding balance due. In some cases the damage deposit may
be waived by PCC staff.
4. A single (one) contact person should be designated to oversee all arrangements with the PCC.
This will help to eliminate problems with communication and ensure a quality event for the renter.
This person is responsible for making an on-site appointment with the PCC banquet
representative to finalize arrangements a minimum of two (2) weeks prior to the event. The PCC
and its employees are not responsible for any problems that occur with any event that has not had
an on-site meeting with PCC staff previous to the event.
5. The renter may cancel a reservation by giving written notice to the PCC. If a written notice is
received thirty (30) days or more prior to the date of the event, 50% of the deposit will be
refunded.
6. The facility may not be sublet by the renter, nor may the application be transferred or assigned.
7. The kitchen is off limits to anyone other that the food and beverage provider and PAC employees.
8. If certain conditions exist, PCC staff may be forced to cancel a lease agreement prior to the event.
Possible reasons for cancellation include, but are not limited to: a declared state of emergency,
unsafe environmental or health conditions, or if utility services are interrupted. In such an event,
the renter agrees that the City of Plymouth shall have nor responsibility for anything the renter
may suffer or incur due to such a cancellation. The City will attempt to notify the renter as soon as
possible if such cancellation occurs. All fees paid to the City by the renter shall be refunded to the
renter if the reservation is cancelled by the PCC for any of the above reasons.
9. Permit holders may not charge admission for their event unless approved by the PCC manager.
SET-UP/DECORATIONS:
1. Rental fees include the set-up tables, chairs, PA system and portable bars by staff the day of the
event.
2. Affixing anything to the walls, floor or ceilings or in public areas is not permitted unless prior
approval is received from PCC staff. Candles used for decoration must have flames contained.
3. All decorations must be removed from the PCC or put in trash bags following the event.
4. Deliveries may be made after NOON on the day of the event unless prior arrangements have
been made.
LIABILITY/INSURANCE:
1. The renter assumes full responsibility for its group's conduct and for any loss, breakage, or
damage to the rooms, equipment or other PCC property.
2. The Plymouth Creek Center is not liable for any loss, damage, injury, or illness by the users of the
facilities in the PCC. Neither the City of Plymouth nor its employees can held responsible for any
items that are left at the facility by the renter or contracted service provider. The renter using the
facilities, equipment other items owned by the City, and further assumes all liability for any
personal injuries, including death, caused by participants at the scheduled event.
SECURITY/CONDUCT:
1. Smoking is prohibited in all interior areas of the building. Smoking is allowed on the outdoor deck
located at the north side of the building.
2. The renter is required to contract with the Plymouth Police Department for security when alcohol is
served during the event. The Plymouth Creek Center staff will arrange this service. The fee for
the police officer is $25 per hour with a four (4) hour minimum. The renter is otherwise required to
supervise conduct of their group.
3. Persons attending events must confine themselves to the rooms and corridors assigned to their
use. No alcoholic beverages will be allowed outside the banquet room without previous clearance
from the PCC staff.
4. Sound levels for bands and audio equipment are required to be controlled and maintained at a
level set by building management. All music will cease at midnight to comply with scheduled
closing times.
5. All individuals attending an event at the Plymouth Creek Center must vacate the building no later
than 12:30 a.m.
6. All persons attending any event on PCC property shall abide by the policies of the Plymouth Creek
Center. At their discretion, PCC staff, his/her authorized representative or a peace officer may:
a. Order the removal of any offender.
b. Order immediate removal of all intoxicating liquor from premises if applicable.
c. Revoke the permit immediately and order all persons from the premises.
7. Confetti, bird seed, rice and other like items to be thrown in celebration are strictly prohibited.
FOOD AND BEVERAGE:
To ensure high quality and consistent service, the City of Plymouth has contracted as
the sole food and beverage provided for events at the PCC that have those needs. Information on
menus and costs are available upon request from the PCC Manager. Anyone wishing to serve food
or beverages at an event in the PCC is required to use
INTOXICATING BEVERAGES:
1. All beverage service is provided by the Plymouth Creek Center's contracted beverage provider.
Under no circumstances will anyone other than the contracted beverage provider be allowed to
serve intoxicating beverages within the PCC.
2. Consumption of intoxicating beverages is allowed only in the banquet room unless prior
arrangements are made with PCC staff.
3. Final service of intoxicating beverages (last call) shall be thirty (30) minutes before consumption
must cease. Consumption of intoxicating beverages must cease at the conclusion of the event or
at 11:30 p.m. whichever occurs first.
4. Under no circumstances will the renter or anyone in their party be allowed to bring any beverages
including liquor, beer and pop into the Plymouth Creek Center.
5. The renter is required to contract with the Plymouth Police Department for security when serving
alcohol at any event. Arrangements for the Police Officer are made through the PCC Manager.
Rental Contract Person Date
Plymouth Creek Center Representative Date
DATE: August 9, 1999
TO: Park & Recreation Advisory Commission
FROM: Eric Blank, Director of Parks and Recreation C
SUBJECT: REQUEST TO CHANGE STATUS OF FERNDALE NORTH OPEN SPACE
1. ACTION REQUESTED: The City has received petitions requesting that the current
Ferndale North Open Space be changed in the Comprehensive Plan from open space to
neighborhood park. Further, the petition requests that the City install a children's playground
within this Ferndale North park area. There are approximately 174 homes in the Ferndale
North subdivision. The petitioners submitted 108 petitions. Of this number, 82 were in favor
of adding a children's playground, and 26 were opposed. Since the original petition was
received, two residents have requested that their yes petition be changed to no.
On Friday, August 6, we received a new set of petitions. The new petitions indicate that the
vote is now 78 homes opposed to the proposed playground, 56 homes in favor and 6 homes
undecided. Please see attached letter.
4. PAST CITY ACTION:
On March 4, 1977, the Park & Recreation Advisory Commission recommended to the
City Council that this property be set aside as an open space preserve and not as a
neighborhood park. See attachment.
On March 7, 1977, the City Council by resolution attached the following condition to the
plat approval: completion of plans and specifications for Outlot A as a natural park
preserve as specified in Item 13.1 of the development contract prior to development
contract execution. See attachment.
On June 20, 1977, the final contract between the City and Lundgren Brothers was
approved. Item 13.1 of the contract stipulates that said Outlot A shall be deeded to the
City as a natural preserve upon completion of the entire Femdale North development
improvements or three years from the date of this contract, whichever occurs earlier. The
contract further states the developer and City agree to represent Outlot A specifically and
only as a nature preserve area with no other park improvements or periodic City
maintenance implied or intended. See attachment.
5. CURRENT STATUS OF SITE: The Ferndale North Open Space is approximately a 7 -
acre, irregularly shaped piece of property, generally located west of Brockton Lane, north of
4"' Avenue, and south of 9'h Avenue. Our existing comprehensive plan shows this property as
open space. The property is sloping, with the north side high, and the south side lower. The
site is primarily covered with weeds and sporadic tree growth and sumac growing throughout
the site. There is one drainage pond on the park property in the northeast quadrant
approximately two acres in size. The park is entirely surrounded by residential single family
homes. There are three locations where the park property abuts a public street. One of these
locations on the north reaches out to 9'h Avenue, the easterly finger reaches out to Brockton
Lane, and the southerly finger reaches out to 40' Avenue. Please refer to attached map. The
closest public facilities to this neighborhood are Oakwood Playfreld, Imperial Hills Park,
Wayzata West Middle School, and Klaprich Park in Wayzata. The City is currently
upgrading Ferndale Road with an off-road trail running north and south, connecting to
County Road 6 on the north and the City of Wayzata on the south.
Staffs review of the site indicates that it would be possible to build a playground on two or
three areas within the park. A public trail system would have to be built connecting to the
playground in order to allow public ease of access to the site and Park Maintenance vehicles
to maintain the site. A review of the drainage situation indicates that a playground would not
interfere with existing above -ground drainage patterns in the City's overall drainage plan.
There would have to be some tree removal and underbrush removal for both trail installation
and the playground. The issue of safety has been raised regarding this proposal. We
currently plan our playground locations in highly visible locations for safety reasons. In this
particular area, it would be possible to place it in a secluded area where it cannot be seen
from residential homes or in a more highly visible area. The more highly visible area would
be deemed more appropriate but may have some impact on adjoining properties. On street
parking has also been raised as an issue. The low number of people who drive to our
neighborhood parks has not proven to be a problem in other parks throughout the community.
Currently, over half of the City's neighborhood parks do not have offstreet parking available.
The issue of noise and nuisances from park visitors has also been raised. While from time to
time we do have reports of loud noise such as firecrackers near the 0 of July week, we have
had few issues of nuisance behavior in our neighborhood parks.
6. REVIEW PROCESS: Only the land owner of property (the City of Plymouth in this case),
the City Council or the Planning Commission can initiate a request for a change to the
Comprehensive Plan. The following steps will be necessary to review this issue and come to
a final determination.
a. On August 12, the Park and Recreation Advisory Commission will consider whether or
not to recommend to the Planning Commission that they conduct a public hearing to
consider an amendment to the Comprehensive Park Plan to change the current open space
designation to neighborhood park.
b. Once the Park Commission has made their recommendation, it will be forwarded to the
Planning Commission. At that time, it is up to the Planning Commission to determine if
they wish to set a public hearing to consider whether or not this property should be
changed in the Comprehensive Plan from open space to neighborhood park. If the
Commission's answer is yes, they will formally set a public hearing date for a future
Planning Commission agenda and conduct a public hearing on this subject. If a public
hearing is held, at its conclusion the Commission would then have the option of
recommending to the City Council that the designation of open space remain or that a
new designation for neighborhood park be adopted.
c. However, if the Commission initially decides not to hold a public hearing, this issue will
go directly to the City Council for their direction. The City Council then has the option of
directing the Planning Commission to hold a public hearing to review this situation, or
the Council can say that the current designation of open space will stay, and no further
action would be taken by the City to initiate a plan amendment.
7. PARK & RECREATION ADVISORY COMMISSION OPTIONS: The Park &
Recreation Advisory Commission has three options available at this meeting:
a. Take no action; table for further study.
b. Pass to the Planning Commission with a motion to leave the designation as permanent
open space.
c. Pass to the Planning Commission with a motion to hold a public hearing to amend the
Comprehensive Plan to change this property from open space to neighborhood park.
8. REVIEW: Our current update of the Comprehensive Park Plan has indicated that there is a
shortage of active recreation facilities in service area #48. The 2020 population is expected
to decrease slightly in this service area. This area would be given a rating of moderate park
service. This is because this area does not have an active park within it, and most of the area
is not within 1/2 mile of a developed park.
Staff thinks that a playground approximately 120' by 120' square could be built in this seven
acre site. The exact location would have to be known in order to comment on how much
disruption to the site would take place.
Based on our review of the two sets of petitions received, letters submitted and many phone
calls, the neighborhood support for this change is mixed.
9. RECOMMENDATION: After reviewing all of the information submitted by residents,
reviewing our own data and visiting the site, staff is recommending that this area remain open
space. While the proponents have built a strong case for making a change, we think there is
one over riding issue to be weighed. The Open Space Committee and Park Commission have
recently discussed how the City can assure residents that property purchased for open space
will remain permanent open space. In our minds, this is an issue of credibility between the
City and our residents. Unless there are very unusual circumstances, the City must keep its
promise. Therefore, I'm recommending that the status remain unchanged on the Ferndale
North open space. I also recommend that the City look at an alternative site that may work as
an active park for this neighborhood. At this time, we have not found an alternative site.
EB/ds
attachment
JE
PJB
o c
9TB
a
O
Vw
Imperial HillsPark_
6
G0-"
J (
14TH lol
I 4
I
i 93 H AVE5
QUEM_ EN=
I
2,
Messiah t
Mmmiah
United
Methodist
iCK--V0 QO AVE 4
ZN A
3R AVE
cu QUEENSLAND
CY
00 OD 00
O c0 Oo --,IO (.n W N
00 00
O O O O O O O O O O O OOOOOCO:) O O O O O O O
D N m D> D x x_ O D n Z G7 O D Z R
0 0= z W Z -< o Fn
Z c cA
0 0 w
WO
6TH
z3
g • o
3 2,
zw
LL 12TH AVE
JE
PJB
o c
9TB
a
O
Vw
Imperial HillsPark_
6
G0-"
J (
14TH lol
I 4
I
i 93 H AVE5
QUEM_ EN=
I
2,
Messiah t
Mmmiah
United
Methodist
iCK--V0 QO AVE 4
ZN A
3R AVE
cu QUEENSLAND
CY
00 OD 00
O c0 Oo --,IO (.n W N
00 00
O O O O O O O O O O O OOOOOCO:) O O O O O O O
D N m D> D x x_ O D n Z G7 O D Z R
0 0= z W Z -< o Fn
Z c cA
0 0 w
WO
6TH
JUIN -22-1999 11:59 PLYMOUTH PRRKS 8: REC 612 509 5207 P.04i05
CITY OF PLYMOUTH 77-25
3025 HARBOR LANE, PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55441
TELEPHONE (612) 555.2800
MEMO
ATE: March 4, 1977
D: Jim Willis, City Manager
ROM: Jon Born, Director of Parks and Recreation
JBJECT: Ferndale North Plan - Lundgren Brothers Construction, Inc.
On March 3. 1977, Peter Pflaum of Lundgren Brothers Construction, Inc.
presented a park plan for Ferndale North Subdivision to the Park and
Recreation Advisory Commission.
The following is the Park and Recreation Advisory Commission's
recommendation relative to said Ferndale North park plan..
Comm' ssioner Brass moved and Commiss'iner Kerschke seconded a motion
ccept the staff's recommendations to designate said land as an
space preserve and not a neighborhood park. Motion carried."
1 ,/I q
3 /
L
N-22-1999 11:58 PLYMOUTH PARKS & REC 612 509 5207 P.02i05
10 CITY Oi: PL;7n!f11
suantto dun call and notice t*;r;rq,+f, a (r.r•.lar ra•eting'af
le City COlInCil of the Cit;: Of 1'11n:rauth,hl:nnrsn.a a' rciuor the
zth_ dz}• of march ___
4,
1:r'!'/ . '1110 following mulmbers acrepresent: ju" r d _CL10.;'I. C 1 I, S(:Ihnld And Sf?eth /1rhofollowingr.cm ers Near :r>sc'tit : ( une J
Councilman Hunt introduced the following Resolution and (ury
Its adoption:
RESOLUTION 177- 12S
SETTING CONDIT1014S PRIOR TO APPROVAL of FINAL PLAT FOR "FERNDALE.NORTH 2nd ADDITIUN"
FOR LUNDGREN BROS. CONSTRUCTION, INC. (A-615)
WHEREAS, the City Council has approved the final plat and development contract for
Ferndale North 2nd Addition" as requested by Lundgren Bros, Construction, Inc,;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PLYMOUTH,
KINNESOTA, that it should and hereby does direct the following prior to recording
of said plat:
1. Compliance with the provisions of the City Engineer's memorandum of i'ebruary 10,
1977 regarding this project.
2. Completion of plans and specifications for outlot A as a natural part: pre"rve
as specified in Item 13.1 of the Development Contract prior to Development
Contract execution.
3. The Development Contract shall provide for maintenance of Outlot A. i.e.
Watering of park improvements, to a reasonable level until such time that
the continuous areas are accepted for completic•i of the development require-
ments under the development contract or three growing seasons, whichever is
completed earlier.
The notion for the adoption of the foregoing Resolution was duly secondedbyCouncilmanNeilsanduponvotebeingtakenthereon, the
fol awing vatc In avor t ereor' Mayor Hilda, CounLilmen Hu?t, Neils and
Seibold —
nc O OIJInI, +(C},, x({;y,'L;Ej},krirX"kI' a sta.ne : Cr+incilinan Seaeth "
1F11r;reupon the Resolution was declared duly pa;;cd sncTa7;o`ptec'
h**
SUN -22-1999 11:59 PLYMOUTH PRRKS REC 612 509 5207 P.03i05
GGOutlot
t
shall be constructed in otal by the developer consistent
i2. Plat Approval*
P11"2 7 attached
12.1 Preliminary Plat was approved by Resolution No, 76-7 by the City
before August 15. 1977. Said Outlot
Council on .January S. 1976 subject to R_(_h 1 conditions.
12.2 Final Plat and Development Contre,t were approved by Resolution No.
rovements or
by the City Council on
date of this contract
whieVMT
occurs
13. Land Dedicated for Public Use, Parks and Private Recreation Areas
GGOutlot A hereof shall be constructed in otal by the developer consistentwithplansandspecificationsdatedP11"2 7 attachedheretoandmadeaparthereof. Said constructian Shall be compTeted on orbeforeAugust15. 1977. Said Outlot A shall be deeded to the City as aNaturePreservecooncomerePrnaaoreveam
rovements or three years from the date of this contract
whieVMT
occurs
3.2 The Developer shall be responsible for the care and watering of plantmaterialimprovementstoOutlotAuntilacceptancebytheCityper13.1. Developer shall replace all plant materials that die during the subjectperiod. It is the intent of this clause that the City accept ownershipofOutlotAonlyafterdeveloperhasestablishedsameasastabilized
nature preserve.area cansistent with approved plans. ,
Developer and City agree to represent Outlot A specfically and only as a
nature preserve area with no other park improvements or periodic Citymaintenanceimpliedorintended.
aK o.J..b &-& fW*ef a mOn :
Foto -V. ceew &&4 kk fA
Avv ca A a[ot m .
rdte A -rots
to -zo- 77
0
DAVID C PRIEBE
3825 FORESTVIEW LANE
PLYMOUTH, MN 55441
612-559-0706
August 4, 1999
Mr. Eric Blank
Director of Parks and Recreation
3400 Plymouth Boulevard
Plymouth, MN 55447
Re: Park and Recreation Advisory Commission — Ferndale North Park Issue
Dear Eric:
I regret that I will not be able to attend the meeting of the Commission scheduled to be held on the 12'x' of
August.
Several residents have contacted me regarding the matter of the request for installation of a playground in
the Ferndale North area. I have been contacted in writing by Daniel and Mary O'Shea and Ruth and John
Scheef and was contacted by telephone by Mary Waldrop. Further, I personally viewed the property in
question.
The opinion expressed below is made with the recognition that I do not have the benefit of any comments,
discussion and information that may be brought to the Commission's attention during the meeting.
I understand that the parcel in question has, since the initial development of the area, been designated as
property, which is not to be improved. I assume that the City has made no assurances of park development
to anyone purchasing homes in that area. If these are the circumstances in this instance, it appears that all
persons that purchased homes near and adjacent to the property knew or should have known that the parcel
would remain undeveloped. I further understand that the majority of current property owners in the
immediate area do not favor the park development.
In my opinion, and given these facts, the property should not be developed for park or any other purpose
unless the neighborhood is in overwhelmingly support.
In the past few years many of us in Plymouth have become acutely aware of the need for the City to
preserve natural open spaces free from development. This parcel seems to be an example of such an area.
Please feel free to stare this letter with the Commission at the meeting. My apologies to all for my absence
at a time when a m er of this import is under consideration.
S' e ely;
David Prie e
Commissioner— Park and Recreation Advisory Committee
Waldrop188458 Avenue North
Plymouth, MN 55447
August 6, 1999
Mr. Eric Blank
City of Plymouth
Parks and Recreation Department
3400 Plymouth Blvd.
Plymouth, MN 55447
RE: Ferndale North Nature Preserve
Dear Mr. Blank:
Thank you for taking your time to discuss some of my questions regarding a proposed
park/playground in the Ferndale North Neighborhood.
As you know, the first questionnaire distributed to a portion of our neighborhood asked for a
vote for or against the development of an activity park/playground area in the wooded area
centered in our neighborhood.
The questionnaire contained false and misleading information regarding the potential for
development of this site. There was no opportunity for questions to be asked or explanations to
be given. (Copy of this document is attached as Exhibit A for your information.)
By accident I discovered the questionnaire had been forwarded to you in the form of a Petition
without communication to the neighborhood or response to the concerns presented. As a resident
of the neighborhood whose home adjoins the proposed development area, I feel that my concerns
and those of my neighbors have been completely disregarded and misrepresented.
At the urging of the Homeowner's Association a flyer was placed in a portion of the resident's
mailboxes to communicate that the questionnaire had been submitted to the City. It is important
for you to understand that not all residents received this communication. (Exhibit B).
Several of the residents opposed to the development of the nature preserve came together to try
to gather as much factual information as possible regarding the origin of the open area, the
original intent of its use and the process for change. After many hours of research and discussion
we elected to distribute (via United States Mail) this information to our neighbors and to provide
them with the facts that we had discovered as well as an opportunity to voice their opinion
regarding any potential change in the use of the site. (Exhibit Q. The results of this survey will
be forthcoming.
Immediately after distributing this information the individuals favoring the development of a
park/playground (who still to this date have not identified themselves) hand distributed two
letters to mail boxes of the residents of Ferndale North. It is quite obvious that the letters to
individuals who had previously voted yes were different than those distributed to residents who
had voted no. (Exhibit D & E.)
I take the time to memorialize the above because I feel it is extremely important for everyone to
understand the methods and approach that was utilized to try to push the proposed
park/playground through the system. Without full and complete disclosure and consideration of
all the facts and the impact of the proposed change residents were asked to make an uninformed
decision.
On March 4, 1977 the City of Plymouth records indicate that the Park and Recreation Advisory
Commission recommended no improvement to this open area. Further the City records state:
Commissioner Brass moved and Commissioner Kerschke seconded a motion to accept the staff's
recommendations to designate said land as an open space preserve and not a neighborhood park.
Motion carried."
The Development Contract between Lundgren Brothers and the City executed June 20, 1977
states in paragraph 13.3:
Developer and City agree to represent Outlot A specifically and only as a nature preserve area with
no other park improvements or periodic City maintenance implied or intended."
Many of the residents of Ferndale North made a conscious decision to purchase their homes
based upon the above understanding. These individuals, myself included have a desire to be on
an open area where nature and wildlife abound. In some instances the home purchase price was
actually increased because the home adjoined this area.
The reality is the area currently designated as a nature preserve functions as both a nature
preserve and an open area that is available to all. It is currently a park — a natural park. The area
is utilized by many of the children in the neighborhood as a place to unleash their imagination;
characters of their imagination come to life in the trees and grass that grow as God intended. For
anyone to make a statement that the area is not available to all and to represent the residents that
surround the area are trying to keep the area to themselves is not only incorrect, it is an insult.
Obviously these individuals have not taken the time to explore this area and are unaware of the
kindness extended by those who have offered their homes to the children sledding in the winter
to "warm up", or the drinks of cold water that have been extended to a thirsty child. Not to
mention the good neighbor relationships that have been established and enjoyed by the residents
who have taken advantage of this natural open area.
I do not understand why; it is the opinion of some that every inch of available ground needs to be
developed. We owe it to the generations to come to leave a piece of virgin ground where they
and the future generations can enjoy the beauty of a song bird, the mating call of a pheasant, the
2
calls of an owl in the morning and evening and the wonders of spring, summer, winter and fall as
they unfold.
The City of Plymouth has wonderful parks, many within a short walking or biking distance from
Ferndale North. With the improvements to Ferndale Road and the addition of a bike trail the
access to these parks and those of the adjoining cities of Wayzata and Orono is within minutes.
I ask you to consider what the access to other undeveloped nature areas. It is my understanding
that this is one of the last, if not the last, undeveloped nature preserve in the City of Plymouth. If
you asphalt it, if you cut the trees down, you have forever changed it and you cannot restore it.
It is my further understanding that the City has developed a program to acquire "open space"
with the intent that it will never be developed. It is my understanding that funds have been spent
to acquire additional land for the City of Plymouth. Isn't the proposed modification of this asset
a direct conflict with your current plan and goal to acquire open space and to maintain it as open
space — undeveloped.
Other issues that need to be considered are the cost of development, the upkeep, the security and
crime issues, traffic impact. Where will visitors to the park from outside of the neighborhood
park? What about pet traffic and restrictions? How often will the park be cleaned up and how
would access be provided to anyone changed with this responsibility? Will our taxes be
increased?
What about the damage to the wetland area? It is my understanding that the City of Plymouth
feels so strongly about the preservation of wetlands that they have adopted ordinances to protect
them. This site contains a pond of approximately 2.5 acres. Modification to the pond and its
buffer area will surely have negative impact on the health of the wetland.
I hope that you will consider my thoughts and concerns as you make your recommendation to the
City Council. More than anything I hope that you will consider maintaining this area as it is for
our future generations. Don't we have a responsibility to leave one small area as it was intended
for our children and grandchildren to enjoy? We have excellent parks; the City of Plymouth is to
be commended for all of the beautiful parks. I just do not feel we need one in Ferndale North.
Your review and consideration of these items is sincerely appreciated.
Sincerely, /
o
Mary Waldrop
612)476-4916
Enclosure:
3
T -'A k
PROPOSED PARKIPLAYGROUND PETITION
Please respond b% June 401
Hello Neighbor,
We would like to know if you would like to have a small inner portion of the 7.5 acres of
wooded area, centered in our neighborhood, turned into an activity park/playground area?
Originally, our neighborhood was developed with the intent of having a park/playground
area in the wooded area. We are still waiting! For the first time in many years, the City
of Plymouth has allotted a large sum of money to update its entire Comprehensive Park
Plan. The Park and Trail Development Plan is currently under review and will be
expanded. This means that it is prime time to petition the City to develop and entirely
fund a portion of our neighborhood's wooded area into a park/playground, with a few
benches, so we could have a neighborhood gathering area. The fact that the City
currently has a comprehensive plan to develop parks and playgrounds is a great
opportunity for us to get this passed. Such a favorable climate has not been in existence
for many years, and such a budget may not come up again for a long time.
For the 13 or so homes that adjoin the wooded area, the proposal would be for the
park/playground to be nestled in the middle of the woods. Efforts would be made not to
interfere with anyone's current view or privacy. Some of you may worry that a
park/playground area may attract kids participating in inappropriate behavior. However,
the completely uninterrupted, dark, secluded woods we now have can be a magnet for the
same inappropriate behavior as well.
None of us in Ferndale North would want to detract from the esthetic views we all have
of our wooded areas. Nor would we want to diminish the view or privacy of the houses
that adjoin the wooded area. It does -lot have to be an "either-or" situation. It could be a
win-win" situation with the site nestled in the center of the woods.
Neighborhood parks, such as these, increase property and resale values. Likewise, parks
increase our personal enjoyment of the area, our sense of community and help us get to
know each other. All of that will help make Ferndale North a more pleasant and
enjoyable place for all of us to live.
Yes Signature
No Address
Please fold, stapme and mail by June 4th
ZX1-116/-r "'3 '4
Park/PlaygroundPetitiop Update
Thanks to everyone who responded to the petition concerning aneighborhoodplayground. After a couple of mailings, the resultsshowastronginterestforthepark/playground area. There was anoverwhelmingresponsefrom60% of our homeowners. 83respondedyesand23respondedno. The city found thisimpressiveenoughtoputtherequestontheCityCouncil dockets
What happens next? There will be a public hearing sometimebetweenJulyandSeptember. You will receive a letter from thecitystatingthedateand. time. The city will continue to keep usinformedoftheongoingprocess. Should you have any questionsYoumaycontactthePlymouthPark509-5200. and Recreation Department at
ZX41ByT C
Save Our Nature Preserve!
Dear Neighbor,
A month ago you were asked to respond to a petition to place a playground in the inner portion of the 7.5 acres of wooded area
in the center of our neighborhood, in the "outlot". The petition was well intended , but we believe that it was written portraying
only the positives of building a park/playground. The negative aspects of a park, and the positives of retaining our current
nature preserve were not described. Please consider the following points about our current nature preserve, about the experience
of other homeowners who live next to parks, and then please take a walk in our nature preserve. Our neighborhood -has -resisted
the urge to cut down trees in this area for 22 years, and we are hopeful that after consideration you will agree with their decision.
The original plan to the city for our subdivision asked for permission to fill wetlands behind 5th Avenue for ballfields, and for a
park in the outlet. The final proposal had neither, because the developers' financers did not want recreational space due to
previous bad experiences. /n the subdivision development contract, the outlot was deeded to the city as a 'Mature preserve
area with no other park improvements". All of us purchased our homes with the understanding that this was a nature
preserve and not a prospective park. Ferndale North is the only subdivision in town to have this type of asset. Building a
playground would deprive us of this asset. We will also soon enjoy greatly enhanced accessibility to the many existing
park/playground facilities nearby via the new bike path being built along Femdale Road.
The outlot is full of wildlife, including deer, owls, and lots of small furry creatures. Many families currently enjoy this space,
discovering what grows and lives in an area left wild. Neighbors who grew up here have described how much ;on it was to have
undeveloped space to explore right in their neighborhood! We must remember that many find this area to be extremely
valuable and unique as it now is!
The previous petition supported placing a public ciV park in the middle of the woods, with "every effort made not to interfere
with anyone's current view or privacy". The petition did not consider problems with public parking, drainage, the attraction
ofpeople from outside our subdivision, or the fact that a pond covers about a third of the 01,1104 and forces any development
to be in a small piece of the 7.5 acres. There is no way to put anything "in the middle of the woods". People's privacy and
views would indeed be compromised. Even if it could be done, it would be undesirable to have such a gathering place for kids
where they could not be seen and supervised by the neighbors. According to the City, they would expect to spend about
100,000.00 to develop a playground - money which would not become available for 3 to 5 years, by which time children
currently of "playground age" would be past that stage. It is also important to note that, ultimately, the type and extent of park
development would be decided by the City Council, not the neighborhood.
From neighborhoods that have parks, we have heard one person in Fox Run describe that she does not have to buy beer all
summer because of the amount she confiscates from underage kids drinking in the park. Another in Imperial Hills lamented the
foot, bike and car traffic which enters the neighborhood and the yards adjoining the play area. We've also been informed that on
more than one occasion, the city has been asked to take over and remove neighborhood playgrounds due to lack of use.
The city of Orono surveyed their families to find out how they would want any open areas developed. The clear answer to the
survey was that people wanted the parcels to remain undeveloped. Please take a look at the current nature preserve and see if
you don't agree with your friends in the adjoining town that a nature preserve is the best use for the land!! Please sign, fold and
return this petition to Sue Shuler by July 20. Your responses will be tabulated and all farms returned will be forwarded to the
City of Plymouth. Thanks for your time and attention. Signed,
Steve & Mary Belden Jeff & Jennifer Summers
Mary & Jan Eickhoff Alan & Sue Shuler
Eric & Astrid Berg Mark Poppitz & Betty Good
Dick & Mike Wilson Trevor Walford & Lynne Bames
Doug & Nora Carey Bill & Lillian Fraley
Uwe want to save our nature preserve.
Uwe want a city park developed to replace the nature preserve
Uwe are undecided.
Comments:
Dan & Mary Waldrop
Orlan & Corella Thorbeck
Dave & Jackie Hogshire
Dan & Mary O'Shea
Name
Gy -/4.,6/7 ZD
PARKIPLAYGROUND UPDATE
The City has scheduled the first public meeting with the Park and Recreation Board on
Thursday, August 12,1999 at 7:00 p.m. at Plymouth City Hall, 509-5200.
What will the meeting be about? You will have an opportunity to ask questions and share your
views on how meaningful a small neighborhood parkiplayground would be to you and your
family. Remember we have 7.5 acres to explore. Be prepared to express your opinions on the
type of park features you would like. For example a play structure, a basketball hoop, a few
benches, walking paths, more flowers, hardwood trees, etc.
Twenty years ago, this entire neighborhood was a turkey farm. These 7.5 acres are not old
growth forests. It is mostly scruffy impenetrable undergrowth dotted with a few mature trees.
These are certainly an asset, and everyone including the park board wants to maintain as much
of it as possible. Currently, it is a "neighborhood park". Look for yourself in the City of
Plymouth's park and trail map. We are "Neighborhood Park #28-Femdale North at 6"' and
Brockton as undeveloped". You received this map when you purchased your home or can get a
free copy by calling the Park and Recreation Department at 509-5200. We are currently being
taxed for a park, therefore, our taxes will not change. With your support, what will change is
that more than just a few of us will finally get to enjoy it.
This neighborhood is a vibrant community with many wonderful amenities, except a park within
walking distance. The new bike path will increase access to the Luce Line, but accessible parks
are still at least 2 miles away or require travel along busy major roads. A neighborhood park is
an important feature at resale and one that most of the other major developments and certainly
the newer communities include.
At least 83 families have indicated an interest in proceeding with the City Park and Recreation
Board to try to develop a neighborhood playground area. There are currently about 150
children in this neighborhood under the age of 14. We also have new young families moving
here all the time. Currently these children do not even have a sidewalk or a patch of grass to
congregate on. The safety factor alone would increase substantially if they had a safe place to
play.
PARKIPL-AYGROUND UPDATrz
Thank you for your continued support regarding the proposed Femdale North paNplayground. The City has scheduled the first public meeting with the Park and Recreation Board onThursday, August 12, 9999 at 7:00 p.m_ at Plymouth City Hall, 509.5200. Please try toattend!
COEdn—uet0sul2POttthePQrk. Respond to other surveys and inquiries with a "yes' to continueexploringtheparteidea, so that We may have a usable space for all those in the neighborhood.
What Can you do to hely? Attend the Meeting to be seen and heard. This is the best and properplacetomakeyouropinionsheard. We all know that City Government responds to the
squeaky wheel.' Call Sue Siegel 473-5011 If you need help with babysitting.
ll the meeting be about? You will have an opportunity to ask questions and share your
views on how meaningful a small neighborhood park/playground would be to you and your
family. Remember we have 7.5 acres to explore. Be prepared to express your opinions on the
type of park features you would like. For example a play stnicture, a basketball hoop, a fewbenches, walking paths, more flowers, hardwood trees, etc.
If you can not attend? Please make your voice heard. Cali or write the City, City Council and
Me Park Board. Give your positive comments or questions to Maureen English Carroll to read
on your behalf (449-4848).
Twenty years ago, this entire neighborhood was a turkey farm. These 7.5 acres are not oW
growth forests. It is mostly scruffy impenetrable undergrowth dotted with a few mature trees.
These are certainty an asset, and everyone including the park board wants to maintain as much
of it as possible. Currently, it is a "neighborhood park". Look for yourself in the City of
Plymouthla park and trail map. We are'Neighborhood Park #2&Femdate North at a and
Brockton as undeveloped". You received this map when you purchased your home or can get a
free copy by calling the Park and Recreation Department at 50"200, We are currently being
taxed for a park, therefore, our taxes will not change. With your support, what will change is
that more than just a few of us will finally get to enjoy !L
This neighborhood is a vibrant community with many wonderful amenities, except a park within
Walking distance. The new bike path will increase access to the Luce line, but accessible parks
are stili at least 2 miles away or require travel along busy major roads_ A neighborhood park is
an important feature at resale and one that most of the other major developments and certainly
the newer communities include.
At least 83 families have indicated an interest in proceeding with the City Park and Recreation
Board to try to develop a neighborhood playground area. There are currently about 150
children in this neighborhood under the age of 14. We also have new young families moving
here all the time. Currently these children do not even have a sidewalk or a patch of grass to
congregate on. The safety factor alone would increase substantially if they had a safe place to
play.
If you have any questions, please call Sue Siegel 473-5011 or Maureen English Carroll 449-
4848.
Thank you your cordinued sunoortli
Summary of Two Neiqhborhood Su
Yes = Build Park/Playground No = Retain the Preserve as it is
Yes No Undecided
Survey 1 81* 24 (Not an option)
Original Survey - Written to Secure Support For a Playground
Return date: June 4
The tally submitted with these surveys said there were 83 "yes" responses, but the City only gave us 81 when
we asked for copies. Two may be lost, or a counting error may have been made.
Yes No Undecided
Survey 2 11 77 6
Second Survey
Written to Secure Support For Retention of the Nature Preserve
Return date: July 20
What Happened?
The first survey was inaccurate, but very persuasive. When provided with additional
information, many homeowners changed their position.
2 Households changed their response from "Y" to "N" after the first survey was
submitted to the City, before the second survey was distributed.
19 Households changed their response from "Y" to "N" when re -surveyed.
4 Households changed their response from "Y" to "U" when re -surveyed.
Only 11 Households who had voted "Y" on the original survey voted "Y" again,
in spite of a letter which was mailed to them encouraging them to do so.
Of the 24 Households who voted "N" on the first survey, 23 voted "N" again when re-
surveyed. Only 1 failed to return the second survey. None of those originally
opposed to development changed their response on the second survey.
48 Households responded to the first survey and not the second.
37 Households responded to the second survey but not the first - all opposed to
development.
In total, 142 of 176 Households have expressed an opinion on one or both surveys.
34 Households have not returned either survey.
In summary, at least 78 households are opposed to development, and at most 56
households may be in favor. ("At most" because of the many respondents
originally in favor who have changed their position to date.)
Clearly, the neighborhood does not support this change.
PRESERVE THE PRESERVE
August 6, 1999
Mr. Eric Blank
City of Plymouth
Parks and Recreation Department
3400 Plymouth Blvd.
Plymouth, MN 55447
RE: Ferndale North Nature Preserve
Dear Mr. Blank:
As you know, many of the residents who feel the nature preserve at Ferndale North should be left
as originally intended and represented by the City of Plymouth have come together to respond to
the proposal previously submitted to your office. It is our understanding that the petition
submitted to the City originally suggested 77% of the neighborhood was in favor of adding a
playground to the nature preserve.
The original petition did not properly disclose the facts and issues surrounding the nature
preserve. In response a second survey explaining more accurately the facts, history and original
intent of the site was circulated. Quite simply, once the residents of Ferndale North understood
the facts their response changed as is demonstrated on the enclosed summaries.
When both surveys are compiled the results show that 142 of the 176 households in Ferndale
North have responded to one or both surveys. Currently at least 78 households are opposed to
development (54.9% of respondents) and at most 56 households may be in favor (39.4%).
Original copies of the second survey, a color -coded map, as well as a detailed breakdown of the
results and comments are enclosed for your information.
Clearly the intent of the City of Plymouth and Lundgren Brothers in 1977 was to leave this site
as a nature preserve. I am enclosing copies of the documents that you provided to me stating;
Section 13.3 of the Development Contract dated 6/20/1977:
Developer and City agree to represent Outlot A specifically and only as a
nature preserve area with no other park improvements or periodic
City maintenance implied or intended."
We believe that the contract says it all. The contract is a binding document. Why is this even
being considered?
This issue has become very emotional and difficult for the neighborhood to address. However,
we believe the contract was intended to be the guiding force for this parcel commencing in 1977.
The City has represented (as they should) that the parcel is a nature preserve without park
improvements and that is the way it should continue.
There are many other inaccurate statements that have been made by those favoring a playground.
We look forward to presenting the facts that will dispute these statements at the Park &
Recreation Advisory Commission meeting on August 12th and we thank you in advance for the
opportunity to present our findings.
Sincerely,
Steve and Mary Belden
Main & Jan Eickhoff
Mark Poppitz & Betty Good
Doug & Nora Carey
Rich & Diane Grutzmacher
Lynne Barnes
Jeff & Jennifer Summers
Orland & Corella Thorbeck
Dave & Jackie Hogshire
Bill & Lilian Fraley
Dick & Mike Wilson
2
Dan & Mary Waldrop
Alan & Sue Shuler
Eric & Astrid Berg
Dan & Mary O'Shea
Trevor Walford
Dear City Council and
Park and Recreation Advisory Commission,
I am writing to ask that you please recommend development of a
neighborhood park in the Ferndale North Subdivision. Our
neighborhood has summer weekly playgroups and we currently
have no where to meet. We have many children in our
neighborhood that are driven to other neighborhood or city parks
on a daily basis. Building a park in our neighborhood would not
only cut down our traffic, therefore increase traffic safety, but also
would provide a safe place for the kids to play. We constantly
guard them from the traffic while playing in our yards or sloping
driveways. It would be relieving to be able to stroll them to a safe
place to play and exercise. We may be close to the Luce Line,
however, young children do not have the stamina to bike to the
next nearest park. We need a place to gather for the children as
well as the parents here in our neighborhood.
Please make this a priority to see that this neighborhood park
becomes a reality. We are asking for your support. Thank you
very much.
Sincerely,
Patti Keeney
900 Brockton Lane North
Plymouth, IVIN 55447
745-0060
Dear City Council and Park and Recreation Advisory Commission,
Our neighborhood of Ferndale North is sorely in need of a neighborhood
park/playground. I am asking you to do all you can to help us get one as
expeditiously as possible. We have 174 families living, in our neighborhood with
150 children aged 14 and younger. We are surrounded by Ferndale Road on the
west, a big swamp on the south and Hadley Lake on the northeast. We have no
sidewalks or even a patch of grass for our children to play on. Our cul de sacs
and streets are the only place for them to congregate. Our 22 year old
neighborhood is turning over to younger families at a rapid rate. In the last two
years, about 15 homes sold with 13 of them now owned by families with small
children.
We moved to Ferndale North two years ago from our home in Golden Valley
where we lived for 9 years. Our Golden Valley home was on a neighborhood
park called Stockman Park. We know first hand that a small neighborhood park,
such as the one we would like in Ferndale North provides much more than just a
place for small children_ It is also the "anchor' for the entire neighborhood. It is a
place where the men go after supper to shoot hoops together. Families bring
relatives and visitors for a walk after dinner. Grandparents bring visiting grand
children to play and socialize. People stop by as they stroll or walk through the
neighborhood_ Neighbors gather to visit and discuss daily events. Celebrations
of all kinds are held such as block parties, birthdays and holidays such as Fourth
of July,_ Fall Harvest and egg hunts.
Please do everything in your power to bring a park to our neighborhood for the
good of the people here in the City of Plymouth and our neighborhood. We are
counting on your positive supporta Thank you foryour time and consideration.
Sincerely,
Susan Siege
18520 5t' Avenue
Ferndale North Subdivision
Mr. Alan Brass
18330 - 5th Ave. N.
Plymouth, MN 55447
July 28, 1999
Dear Ms. Belden,
I'm writing to share with you what I recall regarding the Plymouth Parks Commission activity surrounding the
Ferndale North 7.5 acre "outlot" in 1978-79.
I was a member of the Plymouth Parks Commission from 1976 until 1981. The land in question has never been
designated a "park". It is, and remains, open space and storm water drainage. Sometime in 1978-79, the Parks
Commission was approached about developing the open space into a playground. We made every effort to find a
suitable parcel to develop to provide playground equipment for the subdivision. The parcel in question was
deemed unsuitable for development according to at least three criteria required by the City Trail and Park Plan:
1. The parcel is too small. Neighborhood parks have acreage criteria for tot play area, ballfield, and a picnic
area.
2. Access is insufficient for maintenance, police and fire protection.
3. Too few homes would be served by any development. The Park and Trail Plan specified a minimum number
of homes per neighborhood park.
Therefore, development of the space was impossible under the City's own rules. In addition to these problems,
the parcel was also deemed unsatisfactory for development due to its geography. As I recall, a pond takes up
nearly a third of the space, with a steep slope and flatter space that tends to be wet making up the remainder.
When I received the initial petition regarding the current proposal to develop this parcel, I wrote to the woman to
whom it was to be returned, informing her that nothing in the petition was accurate. I received no response and
was not contacted for any further information until your phone call.
I recommend that you search the records of the Park Board for the time frame I've cited to find all the details of
the Board's exploration of this issue. I will be unable to attend the Parks Commission meeting on August 12, so
have written this letter to provide you with my comments which you are welcome to read at the meeting on my
behalf.
Yours truly,
Alan Brass
cc: Eric Blank
Eric Blank
Diirector, Parks & Recreation
City Hall/Public Safety Complex
3400 Plymouth Blvd.
Plymouth, MN 55446
August 2, 1999
Dear Eric Blank,
My husband and I are Ferndale North residents of sixteen years. We live at 500
Zircon Lane, which is a corner lot with a cul de sac and backs up to the nature preserve area.
We are very concerned and want to take a clear stance that we do not favor this natural
preserve area to be changed Into a park.
When we were considering this lot in 1983, we specifically asked our reactor about
the undeveloped land behind the property and he stated that this land was not able to be
developed because of its geography and it would stay as land owned by Plymouth, but
not to be developed.
Our children were 3 and 5 years old when we moved here from Chicago and we
specifically knew there were no sidewalks and parks within the neighborhood but chose
instead the cul de sac, the big yard and the wooded lot behind for "the woods" to explore.
With so much current land being developed, we are very pleased that this area remains a
natural area. With the ponds located within the subdivision, the large lots, the Luce Line
nearby, the cul de sacs and the Widsten school playground nearby, it is not necessary to
destroy a natural area when it is not conducive to development anyway. It is an awkward
shape with a pond, hills and poor access points with no parking.
Please let us know if there is anything further we can do to better represent our
position.Thank you for your time and consideration on this very important issue to us and
many other residents of Ferndale North.
Sincerely,
RutJohfO
500 Zircon Lane
Plymouth, MN 55447
Home phone: 475-3924
Work phone: 973-0024
Avery and Charlotte Robbins
Homeowners at:
525 Alvarado Lane
Plymouth, MN 55447
449-0202
June 23, 1999
Mr. Erik Blank
Director of Plymouth Parks & Recreation
3400 Plymouth Blvd.
Plymouth, MN 55447
Dear Mr. Blank,
I am writing to express my opposition to a proposed park development in the Ferndale
North subdivision. We have been trading messages on the phone and I believe putting
my opposition in a letter is the most effective way to have an impact in this matter. I did
not respond to the original petition that was passed around our neighborhood because I
opposed it, but was later informed that I did need to respond to your office in order to be
counted as a "No Vote".
I have many concerns with this issue. Any neighborhood park here would bring
additional traffic to my street. Also as a City of Plymouth park, this would be open to
people outside of the neighborhood, bringing additional people, cars, and a potential for
crime. I know many homeowners who live right on this natural land and feel they would
be very negatively impacted by this. It hardly seems fair to "alter the land" with such a
large impact at this juncture, twenty years after this subdivision was built. This is
currently a beautiful open natural area with a great deal of wildlife. I would hate to see
that changed into a park when Plymouth and the surrounding areas have so many
beautiful parks as it is. I don't feel another one is needed right here where so many
people and so much wildlife would be so negatively impacted.
Lastly, there is a large pond back there and I wouldn't feel comfortable having my young
kids back there in a park, constantly wanting to be near the water's edge. I don't feel it is
safe, especially in light of the talk of it being a "secluded and well hidden" park,
unattended with a sizable body of water.
Please keep up informed as to any developments and/or upcoming meetings as we would
very much like to have a say in this matter. Thank you.
Sincerely,
V
Avery and Charlotte Robbins
Steve and Mary Belden
18725 - 4th PI. N.
Plymouth, MN 55447
July 4, 1999
Dear Mr. Blank,
We are writing to express our ardent opposition to the proposal to construct a
park/playground in the current wooded nature preserve in the Ferndale North
subdivision.
We have young children, and are very concerned with the needs of young children in our
community. We believe that "woods" to explore, examine, run through or just sit quietly in,
are of much more value to children than playground equipment, and that a playground and a
nature preserve cannot coexist in the small 7.3 acre space under discussion. Children are
enjoying this space as it is. Neighbors' children, now young adults, have recounted for us
fond memories of hiking, discovering and camping in the preserve, expressing gratitude for
what they value as a wonderful resource. Playgrounds, unless they are large and involved,
hold appeal only for children between the ages of about 2 and 7. "Woods" with trees,
animals, a pond, and the feeling of adventure and exploration that that kind of space
provides, appeal to children from 2 (when they explore with their parents) through adulthood!
We feel it would be extremely foolish to trade one for the other. Since the preserve has
remained in its original state for more than 20 years, we can assume that prior residents and
city officials thought so, too!
By a rough count, nearly 100 of the 176 homes in Ferndale North back up to ponds, marsh,
lake or woods. We feel that this is a large reason for the high home values we enjoy here.
Homes are not failing to sell, or dropping in value due to there being no playground in the
subdivision. On the contrary, it is feasible that the lack of a playground is one reason for the
fast sales and high values here, since it is a fact that makes our subdivision different from
many in Plymouth.
The vast majority of homes in this subdivision also have play equipment in their yards. Most
of the few with back yards less conducive to play equipment back onto Hadley Lake or the
marsh, a trade-off they chose to make when they purchased their properties. We don't
need a playground.
We also are greatly offended by the method by which this issue was raised with your office.
The "petition" we received was erroneous and biased, and included no mention of the writer's
intention to submit the returned responses directly to the city. Thus, those who are ignorant
of the facts regarding this area, its value and its history, were misled by the petition into
responding in the affirmative. We have spoken with several neighbors who were very
surprised to learn that their responses were forwarded to you without their knowledge.
Several have also expressed great surprise that what they signed was used to support the
notion of a city park, since those words were never used in the petition. We've also spoken
with one neighbor whose strong "no" vote was evidently never turned in to you. All of this,
plus the fact that the "petitions" were collected and tabulated by a far -from -disinterested
party, gives us little confidence in the validity of the results.
Our other objections to the development of the nature preserve are of a more strictly practical
nature:
1. All owners of property abutting this land were assured by the city that the parcel was a
nature preserve and not to be developed. Many, ourselves included, bought their properties
largely because of this assurance. Surely, the City of Plymouth will stand by their own
statements in this regard.
2. Our cul de sac and at least one other lie downhill from the nature preserve. Our sump
pumps run to keep our homes livable now. What happens if topography is changed, and /or
vegetation is removed from the preserve?
3. If the preserve were to be developed into a city park, where would users of the playground
park their cars? We have many young children here who are currently quite safe riding their
bikes around the neighborhood, largely because of the noticeable lack of cars parked on the
street.
4. We have talked to people who own property adjoining "neighborhood parks", one in
Imperial Hills and one in Fox Run. They expressed unhappiness regarding noise, traffic (foot,
bike and car), and teen-age drinking in the parks.
Most children in "the suburbs" these days don't get the wonder -filled opportunities most of us
of the preceding generation had to play in an undeveloped, natural area. We feel the current
nature preserve is a unique space of great value. We don't need, or want, another
playground. Our children and those that come after them will thank us for maintaining a
nature preserve in this neighborhood.
We will be watching this issue very closely.
Thank you sincerely for your time and attention to our feelings and concerns.
Yours truly,
Jeff and Jennifer Summers
Homeowners at:
18810 Fourth Avenue North
Plymouth, MN 55447
404-1709
June 16, 1999
Mr. Erik Blank
Director of Plymouth Parks & Recreation
3400 Plymouth Blvd.
Plymouth, MN 55447
Dear Mr. Blank
I am writing to express my opposition to a proposed park development in the Ferndale
North subdivision. As a homeowner who directly abuts this land, any development or
alteration of this land would negatively impact our home and home value. We paid a
premium for our home because of the spectacular setting that is our backyard. Our
children enjoy seeing deer roam through this natural area. We've seen an owl back there,
which is a spectacular sight. And the variety of birds that live and migrate through there
is too numerous to count. All of that would be negatively impacted by development.
We are sure that any development by the City of Plymouth would be in very good taste,
however we did not purchase our home to face a park. In the petition we received from
another resident in the area, it stated that "every effort would be made to maintain the
privacy of the homes that face this land". Since a large part of this natural area is a pond,
any park development would clearly be viewed from my home and others that surround
this land. On the flip side, if there was such a way to develop a park without it being
viewed by any of the homes would we want to create such a secluded park to attract
people to? How safe would that be? And since this would be a City of Plymouth Park
we would attract not only residents of the neighborhood but others from all around.
We are also very concerned about the access to this proposed park. Since the access
being discussed is right next to our home, this would have a huge affect on us, our home
value, our privacy, and our safety. There are many small children on our street and this
would attract additional traffic both from people who live in the neighborhood and others
who would also be parking in front of or next to our house. None of these are desirable
issues for us or others on our street. Hennepin County already has numerous wonderful
parks, and as a family with two small children, we are park patrons and we take
advantage of and enjoy these parks a great deal.
The Femdale North Subdivision was developed twenty years ago in a manner that is very
difficult the find anymore these days. The homes and lots were developed to take
advantage of much natural beauty that existed at the time and still exists. Many of the
homes view ponds, a large natural marsh, Hadley Lake, and the natural area we are
currently discussing. Home values in the neighborhood very much reflect these views
and lots. Because of this design and the mature lots that we have, Femdale North has
always been a very desirable neighborhood. It would be a shame to lose any of that.
We will be following this issue very closely with great interest. Please keep up informed
as to any developments and/or upcoming meetings. Thank you.
Sincerely,
Jeff and Jennifer Summers
815 Brockton Lane North
Plymouth, MN 55447
612-449-9610
August 2, 1999
Eric Blank
City of Plymouth
3400 Plymouth Boulevard
Plymouth, MN 55447-1482
Dear Eric:
Thank you for your letter of July 26 regarding the Ferndale North outlot issue.
It has come to our attention that the facts surrounding the issue may have been sorely
misrepresented. Thus, please change our two "yes" votes to "no."
We look forward to seeing you at the August 12 Commission meeting.
Sincerely,
Edward Cerier
Alison Brown Cerier
Z"2-7A
August 4, 1999
Dear Eric Blank,
Thank you for your letter of July 26, 1999 that outlined the review process for the
Ferndale North outlot issue. I believe the outlot is an important resource for our
neighborhood in its natural state and I would not like to see any playground development
occur in this space. This issue was raised years ago when I served on the Ferndale North
Homeowner Association board. At that time we were informed by a City of Plymouth
employee that the space was not consistent with the requirements for a playground space.
One problem that I do remember cited was a lack of space for off street parking.
My major concernis a safety issue for several reasons. The outlet is located adjacent to a
pond which would be a tempting hazard for young children who are unattended. Also, a
playground set back from the street would not be within easy viewing, lending itself to
deviant activities. I have noted on several occasions the vandalism and beer cans at the
Imperial Hills playground, which is somewhat isolated from view.
My boys are now in their teenage years. When they were younger, they enjoyed
exploring" the outlot and one of the boys "harvested" some grass for use in building a
fabulous fort. This is the kind of space that is generally not accessible to homes in our
area, yet it provides a place for exploration and creative play as well as a wildlife habitat.
Our neighborhood is rich is swing sets and basketball hoops, so I hope we can keep the
outlot in its natural state for all to enjoy.
Sincerely,
Ann Garland
18860 90 Ave No.
Plymouth, MN 55447
Patricia F. Jerich
400 Brockton Lane
Plymouth, MN 55447
612) 473-0843
a—
Ci
C
1 e,• _ `
V,` t.. Vi. Y lh (z. lt.ti' a l`-a. J--
cA.a_o, wj `-1 lav, • ) t.Q,4 a d:.,,,. -t ate,,,. —
m. C t o c cwt 1
n
C-Pn P e. 564ft
18825 4TH AVENUE NORTH, PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55447
612) 475-0622
August 6, 1999
Mr. Eric Blank
City of Plymouth
Re: Proposed Park for Ferndale North outlot
Dear Mr. Blank;
My wife and I would like to express strong opposition to this proposal.
As residents since July, 1979, we have enjoyed the open spaces of the outlot
over the four seasons of the year. our lot happens to be just across the
street from the outlots only area that abuts a street (Fourth Avenue North).
To access the proposed park we would assume a bulldozer would have to knock
down numerous sumacs, trees, and other foliage that presently grow very well
in this area.
This would be a travesty! To knock down a natural setting and replace some
of the area with asphalt, structures, fences, etc. is surely contrary to what
Lundgren Brothers had in mind when they deeded this lovely area to the City of
Plymouth 20 years ago. It is also contrary to an accelerating trend to treasure
open areas and resist the inroads of development, especially where it's not
necessary.
So many of our neighbors have playground equipment in their backyards, and if
the families that want a park built thinks it over, I hope they will decide
to do the same.
Cordially,
July 25, 1999
To Whom it May Concern:
Bill and Mary Butler, at 625 Brockton Lane, are strongly opposed to the development of a
park in the set-aside land behind their house.
The reason we bought our home was because of the privacy awarded by the pond and
nature area, that we were told would never be developed.
While we are not opposed to children playing, we feel there are many alternative play
areas within close proximity to our neighborhood.
We are unable to attend the meeting this evening, but please let the record show that we
are strongly opposed to this development.
Sincerely,
Bill and Mary Butler
625 Brockton Lane
Plymouth, MN 55447
449-9097
a'
a.`
July 1, 1999
Mr. Erik Blank
Director of Plymouth Parks & Recreation
3400 Plymouth Blvd.
Plymouth, MN 55447
Dear Mr. Blank
I am a homeowner in the Femdale North subdivision. I previously voted "YES" to a
neighborhood park/playground petition. After careful consideration and additional
information, I now would like to change my vote to a "NO" vote.
Please update your records accordingly. Thank you.
Sincerely,
xh r d+
Homeowners at:
O Ln
Iymck) , MN. s5IqT
Daniel P. & Mary E. O'Shea
520 Zircon Lane No
Plymouth, MN 55447
612-475-0946
Plymouth Park & Recreation
City of Plymouth
Eric Blank
3400 Plymouth Blvd
Plymouth, MN 55447
Subject: Ferndale North "Natural Park"
Dear Mr. Blank,
As a resident of the Ferndale North Development we are very concerned over the possibility of changing
the "Nature Park Preserve" into a "Play Park". Why would you want to take a beautiful park that our
children can play in while learning about nature and fill it full of what: grass, benches, swings, slides, etc.
We have lived at 520 Zircon Lane since 1989 and during that time our three children still play in this park
and never once did they ask, "Why can't they put in a swing set?" They have many fond memories of
playing in the park along with nature.
In this development if a person wants a swing set or slide they can place it in the privacy of there own lot.
The lots in this neighborhood are large enough for a family to play in. In addition Plymouth has done an
outstanding job in many fine parks though out the community. If a resident of Ferndale North wants to
have a picnic in a park with swings, benches, "Water", and space it is but a short drive to Parkers Lake.
How many "Nature Park Preserves" are there in Plymouth in comparison to the number of "Play Parks"?
When discussing this proposal we ask that you consider what you are doing: "Changing an existing park
that over the years has given the children a place to play in a natural environment into a "Play Parr'.
Wouldn't it be nice to leave our children something of natural beauty?
I am interested in your comments and reasoning behind considering such a change. We can be reach by
mail, phone, fax (612-404-1703) or e-mail doshea pti-sales com.
We wait to hear from you
Best regards,
Daniel P. & Mary E. O'Shea 1
Daniel Rdoc
July 20,1999
Mr. Eric Blank
Director, Parks and Recreation
Plymouth City Center
3400 Plymouth Boulevard
Plymouth, MN 55447
Re: Nature Preserve in Ferndale North
Dear Eric:
Thank you for returning my telephone call, and advising me to write this letter to most effectively
reach members of the Planning Commission and City Council.
My husband and I are most concerned about "someone's" effort to spearhead the development of the
Nature Preserve in our neighborhood. I say someone, because letters are circulated within the
community without a name to identify the person(s) that favor this change.
We purchased our home in 1992, with the very clear understanding that there would never be
anything developed behind us. We value the privacy that we have, and wish to see the nature
preserve remain as it is today.
Ferndale North offers a wide range of amenities for home owners. The homes vary in design, and
features. Homes have three, four, or five bedrooms. Some border Hadley Lake. Others offer a cul de
sac, with little or no traffic. And some offer the nature preserve as a scenic backyard. And you get
what you pay for. Home prices are reflected by the features that come with those homes. We all paid
a price to live in a certain area of our neighborhood, and those amenities and features should not be
altered.
Our neighborhood is busy enough, and we don't want to encourage Plymouth residents from outside
our development to make it even busier. Parking would be a nightmare. Potential for additional
crime, injuries and loitering are not things that appeal to anyone.
We want to live in this neighborhood for another fifteen or so years, if possible. Please strongly
consider our request to leave the Nature Preserve as it is.
We plan on attending the August 12 meeting at City Hall.
Best reg ds
Mark Poppitz and Betty Good
605 Brockton Lane
Plymouth, MN 55447
475-3896
June 21, 1999
Eric Blank
Director of Plymouth Parks & Recreation
3400 Plymouth Blvd.
Plymouth, MN 55447
Dear Eric:
We are writing to express our concern and opposition to the proposed playground in the Ferndale
North neighborhood. We were surprised to learn that many residents have initially given their
support.
Our family has lived in Ferndale North for 19 years, and we have enjoyed the natural beauty of the
property that is proposed as a site for a playground. When we purchased our home, we were told
that the area would remain natural and undeveloped.
Two aspects of developing this property especially concern us. First is the displacement of wildlife
that live there. We have seen deer, rabbits, turtles and many kinds of birds including pheasants.
These animals give a rural feel to an otherwise average suburban environment. We also oppose
an increase in traffic and parking that we feel will be inevitable with the development. Since our
street is a logical entrance to the proposed playground, 4th Avenue will bear the brunt of this
disruption.
We feel that residents who initially supported the petition to build a playground did not have enough
facts to base their decision. At first glance a playground seems like a good idea. A gathering place
for children and adults sounds appealing. Many neighbors have said that they didn't consider the
negative aspects of this project.
Before a decision is made to go ahead with building a playground, Ferndale North residents need
more information to fully assess the impact of this project on the neighborhood. We need to know
how large an area is being considered, what kind of playground equipment, if lighting will be
installed, the location of the entrances, and the construction timetable etc. We are also interested in
knowing how other Plymouth neighborhoods have liked having playgrounds in their front or back
yards.
We hope the City can provide residents with more information about this project and will thoughtfully
consider all viewpoints before making a decision that affects our neighborhood.
Sincerely,
c J
LL<9Cv t v ^Z c2 Yl e
Susanne and Alan Shuler
18815 4th Ave North
Plymouth, MN 55447
June 17, 1999
Eric Blank
Director of Park and Rec
3400 Plymouth Blvd.
Plymouth, MN 55447
Eric,
I am a resident of Ferndale North. I am opposed to the development of the "natural
areas" within Ferndale North. I do not want any of the undeveloped areas to become a
park, playground, or rec area.
Sincerely,
d
Corella Thorbeck
18915 4th Ave N
Plymouth, MN 55447
612-475-1442
City of Plymouth
3400 Plymouth Blvd.
Plymouth, MN 55447
We regret we will be unable to attend the meeting on August 12, 1999 concerning the
park issue here in Ferndale North. We are however, in support of a park for our
neighborhood.
Sincerely,
City of Plymouth
3400 Plymouth Blvd.
Plymouth, MN 55447
We regret we will be unable to attend the meeting on August 12, 1999 concerning the
park issue here in Ferndale North. We are however, in support of a park for our
neighborhood.
Sincerely,
F-T'O
8 -i1 -y9
City of Plymouth
3400 Plymouth Blvd.
Plymouth, MN 55447
We regret we will be unable to attend the meeting on August 12, 1999 concerning the
park issue here in Ferndale North We are however, in support of a park for our
neighborhood.
Sincerely,
L P/v '/.t/ o r J U 7 t(/
POTENTIAL
ENTRANCES
TO OUTLOT
0
FERNDALE NORTH
SUBDIVISION
x
4
11
i' ;•r"..{i .`;.AWE a,'
Jr
Name
Eardal
Andre«
18540 6th Avenue North
Barnes.Walford 615 Brockton. Lane
Belden 18725 4th Place North
5erg 18710 41h Place North
Biaggio 187904th Avenue
Fiolgal 18810 8th Avenue
Bonaca 18335 5th Avenue
Bovee 910 Brockton Lane
Bowers 320 Zircon Lane
Bass 183305th Avenue
Snr 18845 gth Avenue
Butler 625 Bmedon Lane
Carboner 18515 511h Avenue
Carey 18980 7th Avenue
Camey 18550 6th Avenue
Cener 815 Brockton Lane
Christopherson 385 Brockton Lane
Cody 915 Brockton Lane
Cmyle 18820 81h Avenue N
Divine 810 Brockton Lane
Docherty 860 Brockton Lane
Dmen 410 Brockton Lane
Eastman 18805 4th Avenue
Eastman 185106th Avenue
Eickhoff 18720 4th Place North
Fiskum 18870 9th Avenue
Flies 635 Alvarado Lane
Forsythe 400 Zircon Lane
Fraley 510 Zincon Lane
Frey 18855 9th Avenue
Garland 188609th Avenue
Gates 18715 4th PI. North
Gilles 1900511th Avenue
Gordeck 18905 9th Avenue
Gorman 18325 5th Avenue
GMimacher 18830 8th Avenue
Gustafson 905 Brockton Lane
Haas 510 Alvarado Lane
Habeger 18965 7th Avenue
Hanson 395 Brockton Lane
Hargarten 185306th Avenue
Hedeen 630 Brockton Lane
Hogshire 525 Brockton Lane
Hopeman 189707th Avenue
Jerich 400 Brockton Lane
Kamis 920 Brockton Lane
Karg 18505 6th Avenue
Keller 18815 8th Avenue
Koppin 18800 4th Avenue
Kuehn 18825 4th Avenue
Landrum 18825 8th Avenue
Larsen 440 Brockton Ln
Mann 16420 5th Ave
Martin 425 Zircon Lane
McPhail 655 Brockton Lane
Naab 560 Alvarado Lane
O'Shea 520 Limn Lane
Pinto 320 Alvarado Lane
Poppdz 8 Good 605 Brockton Lane
Porte 18525 5th Avenue
Redding 8 Nordby 18985 7th Ave
Rimer 605 Alvarado Lane
Robbins 525 Alvarado Lane
Sadr-Panah 820 Brockton Lane
Scheef 500 Zircon Lane
Schmidt 450 Brockton Ln
Sharpe 18835 8th Ave
Shelley 1110 Ferndale Rd N
Shuler 18815 4M Avenue
Stein 885 Brockton Lane
Summers 18810 411, Avenue
Tegan 410 Ferndale Rd N
Trlomeck 1851` 41^. Avenue
Vermeer 590 Al,wado
Waldrop 1884E Blr. Avenue
Wilson 5;55-: on Lane
niing 94[ 5 :j;lpr` Lane
Y/N7 Comments
N We purchased this property due to the wooded area -undeveloped in our backyard. We would not have purchased if there was a playground
N Developing this parcel after 204 years and assurances of 'No Development' from the city would be grossly unfair to adpineg property owners
N
N A playground would be a major mistake for many reasons My guess is that a significant number of those that voted Yes to a plygmd did rat think of the many negatives - 4 they had the results would have been different
N
N
N
N
N
N I voted against park a month ago
J
J
J
J
J
J
4 We have had enough unnecessary 'improvements' to our area! (Femdale Road)
J
J
J
J
4 Marry import" issues were not considered when the first petition was send out to the neighbors (parking, gime, wise,traffo). It would be a shame for the city to develop in one of the few remaining nature areas it has to offer its residerll
4
J
J
J
J
4
4 Strongly agree
4 Thank You!
4
J
4
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J This came up once before -1 remember Maxine(Cassidy) was very upset. I would say that the detractions from such a park would vasty outweigh any benefits -Those who support it have not thought it through.
4 Our residence is rot adj. to the wooded area. We are strong proponents of having the area remain a wildlife preserve. There are playgrounds @ the nearby Oakwood Elem Soh 6 in Wayzata which would meet the needs of this age group.
J
4
4 We want to preserve our nature area and will help in any way we can. We do not want a playground/park built.
4 Any family that feels the need for a playground can do what marry of our neighbors have done and put in play equipment in their own backyard, a very safe erwifortmentt for their children and friends.
1 am very glad you sent out this very informative leoer. The fist petition was not informative at a1 and I feel the'pruitive' result was not an indicator of the entire Ferndale North area because not everyone responded. Good Luck!
We would be interested in a nature path -maybe. We didn't know this area existed so dont really know where its
We strongly oppose any development in the preseve. We purchased our home with the understanding that it would remain undeveloped behind us
In consideration to the neighbors who live around the "preserve area' we withdraw out initial pettdn to have the park but Another reason is the unwanted increased traffic that it could generate kra cumently, peaceful mghbom"
Thank you for your attention and efforts on this important issue! Would it be beneficial for local m;iftors to know, 17e outlolwas deeded to the City as a nature preserve area?
We like the idea of a park but understand that it may not be what the neighborhood needs.
Our property is on the pond. We observe deer.owls,geese.wood ducks many types of birds Why can't we all be ,nntent with the treasure we have right now? There are numerous Parks nearby.
Money cannot buy nature. Please save our nature areas.
Thank you for your mncem-we support your efforts. Please keep us aovsed-i1 there a anything we can do pease call - thanks
We were told when we Purchased our home that this would always remain a natural area' We do Not want this made into a park
I do not want a park/playground developed which would attract additonal foi. bike and car traffic into our neighborhood
We.too. would have our view obstructed by plyground equip The bike path and Luce Line will be safe and wonderful passgeway to Gleason Lake will slate of the an playground'
Total NO 77 81.9%
Carroll 19010 11th Avenue Y I think there must be a way to include a ptayset and maintain the nature woodlands feel. It would tie nice to have some fraise into the area too. I do not want to compromise our neighbors privacy but I think the area IS big enough to accomplish both.
Drawe 360 Brockton Lane Y
Fenske 725 Alvarado lane Y
Fredenckson 645 Brockton Lane Y
Frye 16435 5th Avenue Y
Harvey 805 Alvarado Lane Y
Keeney 900 Brockton Lane Y
Mostmm 18315 5th Avenue Y
Siegel 16520 5th Avenue Y We have 174 families and over 150 small children in our neighborhood. Flow could this not be a great idea?
Vertin 505 Zircon Lane Y
Vehel 715 Alvarado Lane Y
Total YES 11 11.7%
Bonner 18400 5th Avenue Undecide I was initially for the development of a park. I enjoyed having a neighborhood park by our last tease. r. planning to altered the Aug meeting so I can learn a6 the taps before making a final decision. This is a unique situation.
Droegemueller 18340 5th Avenue Undecide Does the park have to take over the entire area? Cant a sm play area just be established in the area nest to the street on 4th? (Ad(T1 wmments - too much to fit)
Effrem 305 Brockton Lane Undecide I see your point and agree that the nature preserve should be saved to a great degree. I think a wmpnomse could be good for a6. I think bode are possbe and wart that- 1 world be for playground equip. at the entrance. I want a dsassion in the neighborhood
Groves 415 Zircon Lane Undecide Until I see an actual design I withhold judgement. In theory, I support the idea of limited develop, but I want to see the specifics of how such develop would impact residents w/ property adjacent to parfdarhd bit I step forward to support any development.
Marten 580 Alvarado Lane Undecide We are not a young family with younger children but feel this would still be an asset that all Ferrdale residents could enjoy . What type of park where will equip be Need more kdo...
Fackler/Kroupa 330 Zircon Lane Undecided
Total UNDECIDED 6 6.4%
rot through the city council.
N"velapvr v
1/.,0/q7
First Survey Responses
Park
No Park
El Undecided
No Respon
Second Survey Responses
Park
No Park
Undecided
No Respon
p
PLYMOUTH AGENDA CARD(
please print clearly)
Z 9 17
Name of Speaker
Address
Agenda Item (List number and letter) (
PGI 7/92
a PLYMOUTH AGENDA CARD r®a
please print clearly)
ry j,
nnto r—, n 1 Cl l /
Name of Speaker
Agenda Item (List number and letter)
a PLYMOUTH AGENDA CARDrp) please print clearly)
Date
la
Name of Speaker
a ^ ^ ( and ne r
Address
6AAgendaItem (List number and letter)
PGI 7/92
a PLYMOUTH AGENDA CARD®
please prt clearly)
Date
Name of Speaker
Address 2
Agenda Item (List number and letter)
PGI 7/92
rib PLYMOUTH AGENDA CARD ribprintclearly)
Date
Name of Speaker
Agenda Item (List number and letter)
IF PGI 7/92
b ® PLYMOUTH AGENDA CARD r®a
1 , (please print clearly)
Name of Speaker
AAA.---/R5w
Agenda Item (List number and letter)
PGI 7/92
a PLYMOUTH AGENDA CARD ra
Q. / (
please print clearly)
Date
Name of Speaker
Address
Agenda Item (List number and letter) ((2a--
PGI
l a --
PGI 7/92
PGI 7/92
PLYMOUTH AGENDA CARD®a
please print clearly) )
QeDate :;i12id Name of Speaker 1 A \ Tv:>
Address 7"")' P, t N P `p(JI I'
Agenda Item (List number and letter) (M
IF PGI 7/92
b ® PLYMOUTH AGENDA CARD r®a
1 , (please print clearly)
Name of Speaker
AAA.---/R5w
Agenda Item (List number and letter)
PGI 7/92
a PLYMOUTH AGENDA CARD ra
Q. / (
please print clearly)
Date
Name of Speaker
Address
Agenda Item (List number and letter) ((2a--
PGI
l a --
PGI 7/92
PLYMOUTH AGENDA CARD aPb (please print clearly)
Date i2-99
Name of Speaker --Re- 4" ;j C700d
Drirlrccc U J P roC l-l'OY1 La
Agenda Item (List number and letter) 60..
PGI 7/92
rp) PLYMOUTH AGENDA CARD®a
please print clearly)
Date —r
A mq
Name of Speaker en' (elc
61Address 0 °- NMS
Agenda Item (List number and letter)
PGI 7/92
rib PLYMOUTH AGENDA CARD ®a
please print clearly)
Date
Name of Speaker22SC a e
Address_ 3LO 6.40CA-CC4 rl,
Agenda Item (List number and letter)
PGI 7/92
a PLYMOUTH AGENDA CARD®a
please print clearly)
Date --4
Name of Speaker
Address 305 6Z -0L t 2S'0 L-A)' A
Agenda Item (List number and letter) ) a-
PGI 7192
Pb PLYMOUTH AGENDA CARD r®b
please print clearly)
Dated zl(q C?
Name of Speaker M-6,kc3s?, Ra.rrP
Address W\,--) UYA -
Agenda Item (List number and letter) to C1 -
PGI 7/92
a PLYMOUTH AGENDA CARD r®a
please print clearly) /
Name of Speaker
Address
Agenda Item (List number and letter)
PGI 7/92
ib®a PLYMOUTH AGENDA CARD r®a
please print clearly)
Date 8-iZ` \9R9'
Name of Speaker g(--- r
Address 3 6,c) F rPr L rm Y1
IVT
Agenda Item (List number and letter)
A
Name of Speaker
Agenda Item (List number and letter) I0/
PGI 7/92
PGI 7/92
PLYMOUTH AGENDA CARD
f )(please print clearly)
A
Name of Speaker
Agenda Item (List number and letter) I0/
PGI 7/92
a PLYMOUTH AGENDA CARD r;b PLYMOUTH AGENDA CARD r®a
please print clearly) ; (please print clearly)
Date YL4 t Z -
Name of Speaker C—CIM I'
Address 19 U
Agenda Item (List number and letter)
PGI 7/92
a PLYMOUTH AGENDA CARD Ipleaseprintclearly)
Date A -u
Name of Speaker 2 ' CaY»
Address (7 0
Agenda Item (List number and letter)
PGI 7/9&
Date
Name of Speaker W
Address l g8- S
Agenda Item (List number and letter)
N- 2rLn! O PJ j i42P_-4
PGI 7/92
ribPLYMOUTHAGENDA CARD r1bpleaseprintclearly)
Date
Name of Speaker L
Address RiQ5- 5-/w X111• A]-
Agenda Item (List number and letter) Oil
T
PGI 7/92
PIT F
July 21, 1999 PLYMOUTR
Tim Olson, President
Wayzata Youth Hockey Association
3400 Elm Creek Drive
Hamel, MN 55340
Dear Tim:
On behalf of the Mayor and Council, I would like to thank the Wayzata Youth Hockey
Association for your recent contribution of $50,000 to the Plymouth Ice Center. This
contribution completes your pledge of $250,000 towards the overall project.
The Wayzata Youth Hockey Association is to be commended for your outstanding community
service towards this project. Your efforts have dramatically helped to provide a facility which
will be a fun place to skate and play hockey for children and adults for decades to come.
Please pass along the City's heartfelt thanks to everyone involved with your board and
association for your hard work and contribution towards the Plymouth Ice Center.
Sincerely, /
Y -K -
Eric Blank
Director of Parks & Recreation
EB/ds
Cc Mayor
Council
Park Commission
Dave Sorensen
PLYMOUTH ABenutii uL'Plnce?viive
3400 PLYMOUTH BOULEVARD • PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55447-1482 • TELEPHONE (612) 509-5000
www.d.plymouth.mn.us