Loading...
10-09-17 CC WS AgendaCITY OF SHOREWOOD CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION MONDAY, OCTOBER 9, 2017 AGENDA 1. CONVENE CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION A. Roll Call B. Review Agenda 2. TRAILS 3. ADJOURN 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD COUNCIL CHAMBERS 6:00 P.M. Mayor Zerby Johnson Labadie Siakel Sundberg ATTACHMENTS City Administrator Memo #2 MEETING TYPE City of Shorewood Council Meeting Item WORK SESSION Title / Subject: Trails Meeting Date: October 9, 2017 Prepared by: Greg Lerud, City Administrator Reviewed by: Larry Brown - Public Works Director, Marie Darling - Planning Director, Joe Rigdon - Interim Finance Director, Alyson Fauske - City Engineer Attachments: 2011 Trail Implementation Report Policy Consideration: How does the council want to approach adding trails to the existing city system? Background: The proposed 2018 CIP was presented at the August 28 work session. It was noted that trails were not included in the CIP as funding was not available. It was recommended that a work session be held to discuss what policy the city should adopt regarding creating new trails in the city. Attached is the 2011 Trail Implementation report that was prepared by representatives from the city council, staff, parks commission, planning commission, and the public. The report detailed the city's trail extension priorities - breaking projects down into three time periods. Perhaps the biggest weakness of the report was there were no costs tied to the various projects. The Smithtown Road trail was completed in 2016, and that fund currently is showing a $770,000 deficit. Since the implementation report was prepared, feasibility plans for the Galpin Lake Trail and Mill Street were prepared, but due to costs of the trails, are not currently funded. The city has contemplated using property tax abatement or a property tax abatement bond for property taxes generated by the Minnetonka Country Club Development. Initial discussions were held with the school district about both entities supporting an abatement that would provide funds for trails in Shorewood and around Minnewashta Elementary. A public hearing has not been held, and as was discussed at the budget work session in August, without knowing the pace of construction of homes in the MCC development, it is not in the city's best interest to base any indebtedness on an anticipated building pace. All of these factors has lead to the conclusion that the trail implementation plan needs to be reexamined. Financial or Budget Considerations: Significant. The CIP plan that was presented in August shows an estimated $10 to $11 million available over the next seven years to do identified street and storm water work. There is presently no money in the capital budget for trail construction, so the city is not able to even take advantage of funding opportunities that require a match from the city. If the city were to stay on the schedule for street and storm sewer repairs, that is approximately a $2 million budget shortfall over the same period. Mission Statement: The City of Shorewood is committed to providing residents quality public services, a healthy environment, a variety of attractive amenities, a sustainable tax base, and sound financial management through effective, efficient, and visionary leadership. Page 1 Options: Here are some questions that I pose to start the discussion: 1. Should the trail plans of the 2011 plan be reaffirmed? Enhanced? Scaled back? 2. Are there new "drivers" of where trails should go? (i.e. streets under reconstruction, busier pedestrian corridors, or avenues that connect to Smithtown or to the LRT ?) What are the priorities? Are trails only going to go where we can work with a financing partner? 3. What part does financing play in the decision? My understanding is the 2011 plan was developed without strong consideration for financing. That is a great way brainstorm, but at some point the reality of financing must enter into the equation. As Galpin and Mill Street have shown, there is not an unlimited budget. It is important to have a realistic plan that can be implements or dissolution will set it. 4. If more trails are desired, are there options the city can consider, such as at -grade walkways on the less busy roads? 5. Regardless of any specific trail development schedule, at a minimum, should the city set aside money in the trail capital fund so if outside funds, or a funding partner is identified for a future trail, the city is prepared to take advantage of the opportunity to not have the cost entirely borne by the Shorewood tax payers? Recommendation / Action Requested: This meeting is not a "one and done" proposition, but rather a starting point for how the city will integrate the trail plans into the overall CIP. Connection to Vision / Mission: The priorities from the implementation plan are still relevant today: Health, safety, and general welfare. The City's comprehensive plan recognizes trails as not only providing an alternative to the use of automobiles, but as an important recreational aspect of the community. Trail Plan Implementation Report City of Shorewood Prepared by the Ad Hoc Trail Committee October 2011 A specia,L tlu4/i,4 to- thv vo&wMee�sl who- S-Pemt ho -turSI "'V the./ prepa.ratw -w of tY�.k report.- Ad Hoc Trail Committee: Debbie Siakel, City Council Laura Hotvet, City Council David Hutchins, Planning Commission Chair - Ed Hasek, Planning Commission Steve Quinlan, Park Commission Bob Edmondson, Park Commission Mary Donahue, Resident at Large Michael Dodd, Resident at Large City Staff: Brian Heck, City Administrator Larry Brown, Public Works Director Brad Nielsen, Planning Director -1- I. Introduction The Transportation Chapter of the Shorewood Comprehensive Plan includes a Trail Concept Plan map that illustrates a potential system of trails for the City of Shorewood. The purpose of that plan is to serve as a guide for development proposals and street construction projects, and derives from goals, objectives and policies set forth in the Transportation Plan. The goal specific to trails is worth repeating here: "The City should establish a plan for an interconnected system of trails, enhancing the safe movement of pedestrians, bicyclists and other modes of non - motorized travel." Although the City constructed several trail segments of varying designs over the years, a drastic reduction in land development and limited financial resources have resulted in little trail construction in the past few years. The City's recent discussions on sustainability sparked renewed interest in implementing the Trail Concept Plan. The City has elected to participate in the Minnesota GreenSteps Program sponsored by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency. One of the "best practices" set forth in the program includes the promotion of walking and biking. To this end, the Shorewood City Council established an Ad Hoc Trail Committee, consisting of two Planning Commission members, two Park Commission members, two members of the City Council and two at -large residents. The Committee was charged with reviewing the current Trail Concept Plan, prioritizing trail segments to be constructed, and recommending implementation strategy — primarily how the construction of trails could be incorporated into the City's Capital Improvements Plan. Five -foot concrete walk - Minnewashta Elementary -2- It should be noted that the term "trail ", as used in the Comprehensive Plan and in this report, is intended to include the entire gamut of pedestrian/bicycle facilities in Shorewood. Considerable thought has been given as to whether these facilities should be called pathways, sidewalks, trails, "linear pedestrian ways ", bike paths, etc. The consensus is that the term trails addresses all of the various types of facilities. Further, a trail may simply be a designated route along an existing street in some cases. II. Comprehensive Plan Update The Trail Committee reviewed the Transportation Chapter of the Shorewood Comprehensive Plan relative to Bicycle/Pedestrian Trails and found it to be up -to -date and pertinent. As such, the Committee does not propose changes to the text of the Comprehensive Plan. The Committee does, however, suggest revisions to the Trail Concept Plan map as follows: • The title, Trail Concept Plan, should be changed to Trail Plan • A trail should be added along Strawberry Lane • A trail should be added along Eureka Road • The trail south of Highway 7 on Covington Road should be deleted • The segment of trail on Manor Road, south of St. Albans Bay Road should be deleted • Consider changing the legend on the map from "Possible Trail" to Future Trail The proposed changes are illustrated on the map on the following page. Six -foot bituminous trail near Silverwood Park -3- CITY OF SHOREWOOD Island Gideon Bay ichauted 1L Ward '�. _ .ft J r �J l t Y - - -- 1 .4Q q k' F ng l 1 'U 'd Wand nd a U c0 4rI AKE �L 1 J oeT L sn, mt B (Lake irKin (I.akc �fiunewashta) Victoria Trail Connection N Existing Trail 0 1.0 '0 2,000 4,000 Future Trail iiiiiPmommmommomM oioo Feet Parks /Open Space Shorewood Planning Department Connecting Points 10111 Island Excelsior Bay I ��0 �� IIIII Lr Chanhassen Trail Chanhassen Trail Connection Connection St. Alba., Bay III � II r Chanhassen Trail Connection chrism - L,d" Minnetonka Trail Connection Trail Plan �II I snadv Ili I d d 4 w Lako Miunctoukn Uppe. bake Gideon Bay ichauted 1L Ward '�. _ .ft J r �J l t Y - - -- 1 .4Q q k' F ng l 1 'U 'd Wand nd a U c0 4rI AKE �L 1 J oeT L sn, mt B (Lake irKin (I.akc �fiunewashta) Victoria Trail Connection N Existing Trail 0 1.0 '0 2,000 4,000 Future Trail iiiiiPmommmommomM oioo Feet Parks /Open Space Shorewood Planning Department Connecting Points 10111 Island Excelsior Bay I ��0 �� IIIII Lr Chanhassen Trail Chanhassen Trail Connection Connection St. Alba., Bay III � II r Chanhassen Trail Connection chrism - L,d" Minnetonka Trail Connection Trail Plan III. Trail Plan Priorities "Health, safety, and the general welfare" is a phrase that drives much of what the City does. These words are quite pertinent in the planning of trail facilities. The Shorewood Comprehensive Plan recognizes trails not only as providing an alternative to the use of automobiles, but as an important recreational aspect of the community. The Trail Plan map, found in the Transportation chapter of the Comprehensive Plan, shows the location of existing and proposed trails in Shorewood. Aside from a process for public involvement, the Transportation Plan lacks an implementation strategy for the construction of trails. In identifying trail priorities, the Committee considered the following issues: Health. Walking and bicycling are recognized as contributing to the overall health of the community. Safety. In order to promote walking and bicycling as healthy activities, it is critical that these activities be made as safe as possible. In this regard the separation of trail facilities from streets should be pursued to the extent feasible. Connectivity. It is important that trails go somewhere. Providing safe routes to schools has been identified as a top priority, especially in light of School District policy that eliminates bussing for students within one mile of school. Connecting existing trails to other trail systems (i.e. the LRT Regional Trail and trail systems in other communities) adds miles to the system that Shorewood can provide on its own. Lastly, it is important to tie neighborhoods to other neighborhoods and to other destinations within the community. With these criteria for guidance, the Trail Committee broke the Trail Plan into four priority groups. It was suggested that Priority I trails would be completed in the next three to five years. Priority II trails would be scheduled for years 5 -10 and Priority III trails would happen in 10 -15 years. Priority IV trails would not be programmed until after 15 years. Following is a brief description of the priorities: Priority I (3 -5 years) County Road 19, Smithtown Crossing to LRT Trail. This segment is part of the County Road 19 Corridor Study, adopted in 2003. Its high priority is based on availability of existing right -of -way, anticipated lack of neighborhood resistance and its function of connecting the Smithtown Crossing and Shorewood's civic campus with the LRT Trail. 2. Smithtown Road, Shorewood/Victoria boundary to Minnewashta Elementary School. This segment enhances safety for people on the west end of Shorewood to walk or bike to school and connects to the trail system in Victoria. There appears to be some neighborhood support for this connection. Mill Street, Shorewood /Chanhassen boundary to Shorewood/Excelsior boundary. This segment connects Shorewood residents living south of Highway 7 with both the City of Excelsior and the Chanhassen trail system. Again some level of neighborhood support has been expressed. -5- a�oSrde N to Northvlew Ra '14"01,11 tlgo Ra y Togo.Rd. Brooks Ln Ot - Ar ° °ta 1 0 1,250 2,500 5,000 -�e � a' - oteline r r' �a 7afayetxe Feet St Arm Rd _- ��pp������ West Arm -0r SPAINIG7 PARK _ Prepared by Shorewood Planning Dept. Cross Point Rd 07/11 _ Legend rSchools - y+too a�a O One -mile Radius from Schools U ■ Parks OOne - half -mile Radius from Parks West A Hanover,Rd r Northome Blvd Groceland Elementary Highland Ave o Nr, - an In �Jh � 01 Ridge" c DEEPHVN Middle School East Lake Street Ext k 8 Dee haven Elementary 2 C} � adys Ln Ak - �j' /! Minnetonka High x XCELStOR m tVli ETON A L"P = ' - _ -- � a M a - innewashta - - { QRE Min Ci Scenic Heights Co - Rd.19- 4 ementary, r �ro�° Road ; Elementary z _5 jjExcelsior ? - x -- - Elementary i ti = W :7-5H OD t - -- �ClearSprings Elemen tary � 5. sly. i t —a -------- — —_ —_ —_ —_ — - 62nd St W aE rJ�N - - pleasant Vie,, %io end Fo qs x D 9a n hd, t Qa Middle - -- m McPO School West ti Hallgren Ln t, ` - m o 14, CfiANli SEN ° �a p White Oak Ln 6"u k W Red Oak Ln X0(4 ° - Kings Rd y'. c m v - ST O Duok Lake Td Baywood Ln o. Kerbo Q Fo %Wa Dr Padons Dr m Interlaken E._ a ronha, - _ ? Q 3 °aat g9r Dr �erryN South Lake Minnetonka Area c Tan Butte Ct - Schools and Parks aaPo �tv na Or Siena e-° Qo� r N aTes�ao <n ecey OeOa Northome Blvd Aorlhview_Rd b`rd9e.Rd o _ 4^- Groveland erooksLn Arc °lz ti 0 1,250 2,500 5,000 ss Elementary cye Togo Rd - co reline Or esDArm Rd off'° _ ' Sro <a ayetve�d Shorewood Planning Dept Feet o�hOma EaslonRa Highland Ave o m m WestA SPRING PARK ? o` mt Or Cross Point Rd 07111 AzRutledge Rd re Rd _ ; - Legend �.. Lake Ave - m oa�ln y ' - —� Oa � 5 Pan°a m Cartow Rd ■ Commercial Activity Centers (CAC) °coon a D _a Ra Brow °`'c `e x\16 Middle a DEEPHAVEN Bedford RaWlsb`e O „e ,e Hl °Lre School East 1/2 -Mile Radius from CAC \y Lakev;awA�P o Lake Street o 9 AanchesterRd 1) 3/4 -Mlle Radius from CAC vs - pv �' °� - Hampton Ct West c, - - rneidr6 2, TeXe3o0 �o i Transit Route ( -� Deephaven Elementary saddlewood Lq �aoys Ln a - Islaaa` % / \, O TONKA BAY - I 000 1 U Devon Dry -Ap y i f o o aai° - - �9 �,. I I o ,Ito SPc C^ """Bay Rd. I / - I Sunrise qve ! j 0b0ayT Temple OrN N` Lakeview Ave 1 i / : Pa T. Temple Or emple0v Y I �d - 11 c Elm - ted�� u �uA 1 1 41 9d O / Minnetonka 3 En'chanfed pt - 510 BwO High z o s a J - {{ n - Ed wood Rd Natnaa Ln - - �o ' ` MI NETO A Noble Rd_ _ r = ELSIOR , x - -- 1 / ¢m 1'aa - a ite Rd Mi a Scenic Heights Sa S =_ nnewashta Z. -- _ =I Co. Rd 19= -j ` , - _ y g - 3 od Si Elementary 1 Smithtown -Road / , V \ o i / ElementarYZ e wn xd - �Eacelsior _ o o °a _ v o `� Covington Rd �n > m`s %I Elementa �o _S REWO Clear Springs eOm 3 a �' e sca` �'vi `yj /! y _ a° _ Elementary - 1 e 1. der Gr i_ - U �° ` Yallowslp0 1 �• _ 1 / F = Clear Ir,P A ybo °� Vrglrna Cv m N �k.LeafTd Pack �^ - _ 5� U. L - - - - i Valley Orw Dr a °oy Ci ��c,4O.ID -------- — "— o-- 62nd.St W —. ____ _ - n - ...+I Townline Rd 62nd St W ton Dr - Cherry rs Pass `r,9 a'1 c P •��• Shore Dr ,�e� d aQ� m Chennao � �3 GO e� GoNCJ• ` _ pleasant Gey,� �brnvB °d - O 9s6� le 'eslee <of& 2- Fox t o- POk Hollow Or Po• v A M °� / Lucy Ln Lake Lucy Rd o a N � L °o School 0 ti Avon Ct w`e Glendale Dr oq v -• Hallgren Ln White Oak Ln b m CHANHASSEN D ( < y Red Oak Ln `m �opa=Dr m °r�s /, { puck Lake Td o Ln 3 7 P a, adons Dr - r°cv Kings Rd Baywo d n 3 s m Kerb° ox l{11 \0 m � r � v c a. 6 F Sandy Hook R° P. lnterlaKen a - 2a J 7J c` d? a Pontiac Ln°� 0 3m edatEi OT %n South Lake Minnetonka Area r c Looga6` B`9 „o na T i Commercial Activity Centers and Butte Ci Ta ” °o ° 'srnle�or -11\ Transit Routes na n � Sler`a 4. Galpin Lake Road, Shorewood /Chanhassen boundary to Shorewood/Excelsior boundary. (See 3. above). Priority 11 (5 -10 years) Lake Linden Drive to Highway 7/41 intersection. This segment is a short connection between the existing trail on Lake Linden with the trail system to the south in Chanhassen. 2. Smithtown Road, Minnewashta Elementary School to Smithtown Crossing. This segment is intended to enhance safety for residents east of the Minnewashta Elementary school, connecting with the existing sidewalk system at Smithtown Crossing and providing a loop to the LRT Trail. Country Club Road and Yellowstone Trail, Smithtown Crossing to Lake Linden. This segment connects the existing sidewalk on Lake Linden Drive with the existing pedestrian circulation system at Smithtown Crossing. 4. County Road 19, Shore Road to Shorewood/Excelsior boundary. This segment extends the sidewalk End of the trail. Six -foot concrete — Victoria. system at Smithtown Crossing eastward toward Excelsior, providing another loop to the LRT Trail. 5. Strawberry Lane, West 62nd to Minnewashta Elementary. The Committee recommends adding this segment to the Trail Plan. It provides pedestrian/bicycle access from adjoining neighborhoods to the Minnewashta Elementary School. 6. Eureka Road, north. This segment has been added by the Committee and provides neighborhoods north of Smithtown Road with access to the Minnewashta Elementary School and to the LRT Trail. Priority III (10 -15 years) St. Albans Bay Road, Manor Park to Highway 7. This segment links Manor Park to the South Shore Skate Park and provides an extension connecting across Highway 7 to the sidewalk system on Old Market Road 2. Howards Point Road, Edgewood, Grant Lorenz loop. This proposed loop would provide area residents with a connection to Smithtown Road and quite possibly could be a designated route on existing streets. Vine Hill Road, existing trail north to State Highway 7. This segment provides safe access for the Shady Hills neighborhood along a relatively busy collector street. Priority IV (15+ years) Link east of Public Safety facility, County Road 19 to LRT Trail. Assuming topography issues can be overcome, this segment provides a link and a loop from County Road 19 to the LRT Trail. 2 Timber Lane, County Road 19 to LRT Trail. This short segment of trail provides one more link/loop from County Road 19 to the LRT Trail. 3. Enchanted Lane, Minnetrista border to Shady Island bridge. This segment may be limited to road and right -of -way improvements to enhance walking and bicycling. The Trail Plan map on the following page color codes the trail system into the four priority groups. Family -waits to cross County Road 19 N Lake Minnetonka Lpper Lake CITY OF SHOREWOOD A and `d�lund � J I / � tit i I I.ied.l if St Albans Bay g ry� 111 J i nll W F Bay or LqLj I,� SRS L .. . . F Lake Minnetonka Lpper Lake CITY OF SHOREWOOD N A 0 1,000 2,000 4,000 iiiiiPmommommommiM oiao Feet Shorewood Planning Department 09111 A and ..l.) J I / �t _ _ D Y if St Albans Bay g ry� 111 J i nll W F Bay or LqLj I,� SRS L .. . . F = a Sm B.y I (Lake Virginia) Victoria Trail Connection T N A 0 1,000 2,000 4,000 iiiiiPmommommommiM oiao Feet Shorewood Planning Department 09111 -I� �L A and i J I / �t _ _ D Y if -I� �L Gideon 1i - 0 �t _ _ D Y St Albans Bay g ry� 111 J i nll W F Bay or = Y T State [,alp�u -J Lakc —ly / ,t , m Christmas a a � /:}'3 — -�� c. Y � � ",x._7 � ..� Ap•e,.a� �� — �h� s�I {_ � L J I �� �'�' c L "( s" S s (Lake nti ...... hta) Chanhassen Trail Chanhassen Trail Chanhassen Trail Minnetonka Connection Connection Connection Trail Connection Trail Plan Priorities Existing Trail -• Possible Trail - Parks /Open Space Connecting Points Priority 1(3 -5 years) Priority 11 (5 -10 years) - Priority 111(10 -15 years) Priority >V (15+ years) 0 a a � /:}'3 — -�� c. Y � � ",x._7 � ..� Ap•e,.a� �� — �h� s�I {_ � L J I �� �'�' c L "( s" S s (Lake nti ...... hta) Chanhassen Trail Chanhassen Trail Chanhassen Trail Minnetonka Connection Connection Connection Trail Connection Trail Plan Priorities Existing Trail -• Possible Trail - Parks /Open Space Connecting Points Priority 1(3 -5 years) Priority 11 (5 -10 years) - Priority 111(10 -15 years) Priority >V (15+ years) IV. Draft Trail Capital Improvement Plan (Reserved for Future Use) -11- V. Public Participation The Trail Committee strongly believes and supports getting residents involved in the trail development process and making sure the affected neighborhoods and property owners receive as much information about the projects as possible. To that end, the Committee suggests using several approaches to disseminate information, gather feedback, and garner support for the development of the trail infrastructure in the city. City News Letters: The City produces a monthly newsletter, the ShoreReport, and distributes it to each household in the community. This is a static method the Committee can use to provide general information on the planning process and as a method to direct interested residents to additional resources and information. City Website: More detailed information on the trail plan can be placed on the website. Some items to include on the website after acceptance of the plan: a map of the plan identifying trail segments by priority, a listing of segments by priority, information on how priorities were determined, proposed budget information, pictures of trail in other communities, and information on the benefits of trails. Neighborhood Meetings: The Committee or select members of the Committee would meet with individual neighborhoods affected by planned trail segments. This provides an opportunity for the neighborhood to ask questions, walk the proposed route, and provide input and suggestions on material, location, potential hazards, etc. Before these meetings, it might be beneficial for the Committee to identify a neighborhood "champion" to help organize the meeting, walk, and be a contact person on behalf of the neighborhood. These neighborhood meetings will Six -foot bituminous trail - Covington Road also be beneficial in identifying any potential issues that need addressing. -12- Direct Mailing: The City could prepare a direct mailing to residents in the affected area outlining the proposed project and include specific information on the planned design, location, benefits, drawbacks, and address common questions such as maintenance and winter shoveling. These mailings might be more beneficial a couple weeks before a planned neighborhood meeting. Public Hearing: This is a more formal and traditional method used to garner residential input and may not be the most effective communication and public participation methodology. These forums are generally poorly attended unless the issue is contentious and controversial. This is not the recommended method for gaining public input or support for the program and plan. Targeted Polling: This method involves sending a poll or survey questionnaire, either paper or electronic, to the impacted residents or households asking specific and targeted questions related to the issue of trail construction. This tool can be used prior to a direct mailing and /or neighborhood meeting to gather basic information on feelings and possible issues related to the implementation of the trail plan. Face to Face individual meetings: This process involves Committee members meeting with one or two residents in the neighborhood, or having the "champion(s)" and a Committee member, meeting one on one, or with a couple of neighbors, to informally talk and promote the idea of the trail plan, the benefits of a comprehensive trail system, to answer questions, and provide information and additional resources. The benefit of this method — it is not "the government" promoting its own plan, but residents who are also affected individuals promoting the plan. rour -ioor mruminous Iran - wear inouniain -13- VI. Trail Implementation Process This outlines the general process the city will follow in implementing the trail plan. • July — September the park commission reviews the trail plan and available funding then makes recommendations to the Council. • December, the Council adopts the final Capital Improvement Plan for Trails as indicated in the plan and /or recommended by the Park Commission. • During the months of January — April staff prepares rough cost estimates for the project based on general design standards e.g. 6' bituminous, researches easements, conducts preliminary review with the Watershed District, and identifies stakeholders. • May — August the proposed plan is reviewed by the park commission and neighborhood meetings and walks are held to go over the project, answer questions regarding funding, timing, maintenance, etc. • September — December staff prepares final plans and specifications for the trail segment based on feedback provided by residents and park commission. • January — February staff publishes plans and specifications trail construction. • March — April staff provides recommendation to Park Commission on lowest responsible bidder and Park Commission provides recommendation to Council to proceed with award of the project. • May — August trail construction underway and completed. -14-