092198 CC Ws Jt Pk Comm AgP
~,'
-;/;., ''I
11 \ "
CITY OF SHOREWOOD 5755 COUNTRY eLUBROAD
JOINT CITY COUNCILI COUNCIL CHAMBERS
PARK COMMISSION WORK SESSION
MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 21, 1998 7:00 P.M.
B. Review Agenda
PRESENTATION BY MARK KOEGLER, PARK PLANNER,
AND DISCUSSION ON PARK I TRAIL REPORT (Att.-#2 Final
Report)
"
ADJOURN
'.i
AGENDA
~~
1 . CONVENE WORK SESSION
A. Roll Call
2.
~ ,
3.
No official action is taken at Work Sessions.
\..,
..
\ 612-3386838
HOISINGTON KOEGLER
119 P02
SEP 02 '98 14:08
MEMORANDUM
Hoisington Koegler Group Inc.
[11(3
1MB
TO: Shorewood Park Commission
DATE: September 1.1998
SUBJECT: Trail Planning Process - Next Step
FROM: Mark Koegler
At the Park Commission meeting on AUooust 11 Ib, we conducted a review of the public participation
process related to trails in Shorewood. Specific comments focused on the vision session that was
held, on the survey that was completed by Decision Resources, and on the input and
recommendations provided by the Citizen Review Group. After considering the results of
participation process to date, the Park Commission requested information on the next step.
Specifically stated, where do we go from here? This memorandum is intended to be a working
response to this question. It lays out my preliminary thoughts and those of City Administrator, Jim
Hurm pertaining to a suggested way to proceed at this time. The steps that are outlined herein do
not pretend to be the definitive way in which we need to proceed with this effort but rather, a
suggested program for consideration and modification as deemed appropriate by the Park
Commission and City Council.
What lessons have we learned from the process to date?
One of the principal reasons for conducting an extensive public participation process was the
objective of making trail planning a community-oriented, grassroots effort. All parties agreed that
in order for trails to be built in Shorewood, the process would have to involve citizens in defining
needs, issues, problem.~ and potential solutions. This has been accomplished in several ways,
perhaps the most significant of which was the involvement of the Citizen Review Group that met
on three occasions. One of their specific recommendations was to update the trail plan. In further
reflecting on the work that the Group completed. it appears that continuing to emphasize the trail
"plan" and an update of the plan is probably not the most productive way to proceed. When the
Citizen Review Group talked about updating the plan, they were more focused on the information
that the plan would contain rather than a plan document per sc. Taking a cue from their fmdings,
we need to focus on trail planning as a process in Shorewood rather than establishing another trail
plan. Creating a documented plan may be perceived as being too definitive, too all encompassing
and lacking in flexibility. Rather than focusing on a plan, Ollf attention should be focused on
creating an ongoing process that accomplishes construction of trails in Shorewood where they seem
to make sense. Lesson learned - process, not plan.
The process also served as a reminder that implementing a trail system in a community like
Shorewood that is almost fully developed is a difficult taSk. Retrofitting established neighborhoodc;
with trails is a straightforward concept on paper but a much harder to accomplish in the field..
123 North Third Street. Suite 100 Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401
(612) 338..()800 Fax (612) 3'38-6838
JJ~
612-3386838
HOISINGTON KOEGLER
119 P03
SEP 02 '98 /14:08:
Park Commission Memorandum
Page 2
Physical obstacles, attitudinal obstacles and other barriers create a number of challenges that need
to be overcome to implement a trail system. It was obvious that the members of the Citizen Review
Group reached this conclusion during their deliberations.
Where do we go from here?
At this point in time, the next step seems to have three components. First, as the Citizen Review
Group suggested, the City needs to agree that completing a trail planning process is a community
goal. Second, we need to agree on the components of the process and third, staff should begin to
provide the Park Commission with background information on various funding sources that might
be available to construct trails in Shorewood. Of these three items, it is important that the Park
Commission and City Council agree on the first two. The third item can be provided as background
information.
Making trail planning a goal or priority
If trail planning is to be viewed as a process, the process needs to run its course before you can
establish formal goals related to the results. At this time, it is difficult to definitively state that the
implementation of a trail system is a formal goal of the City of Shorewood. Clearly, the body of
information collected to date states that the public wants trails. However, the public has also
recognized that the implementation of trails presents a number of issues that need to be researched
and addressed. As the Citizen Review Group learned in its deliberations, a trail system is a complex
issue that creates varied opinions and concems that change depending on people's perception of what
trails look like, where they will be located, etc. As a result. it is suggested that the Park Commission
and City Council endorse a common statement of commitment regarding a trail planning process
in Shorewood.
Such a commitment statement might be worded in the following manner: "The Shorewood City
Council and Park Commission recognize that residents have a substantial interest in establishing a
trail system in the community. As a result. both groups are committed to establishing and carrying
out an ongoing process that with continuing public involvement, will identify opportunities and
address concerns resulting in the constrUCtion of trails when: deemed appropriate by the community."
Establishing the Process
The process used to establish trails in Shorewood will evolve and in all likelihood, will change over
time. Initial efforts should be focused on defining the primary steps and then based on experience,
subsequent steps can be more clearly delineated. This approach was used for the Citizen Review
Group meetings. The results of each meeting were used to tailor the agenda for the subsequent
meeting. We told the Group at the begiiming that we didn't have a precise road map but in the end,
we managed to get where we needed to go!
123 North Third Stteet, Suite 100 Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401
(612) 338-0800 Fax (612) 338-6838
t
\
612-3386838
HO I S I NGTON KOEGLER
119 P04
SEP 02 '98 14:09
Park Commission Memorandum
Page 3
For discussion purposes, the following is offered as a process to continue addressing trails in the City
of Shorewood.
S!S:J2.l- The Park Commission and City Council meeting jointly and/or separately agree that the trail
evaluation process should continue and both parties adopt a common commitment statement.
~ - Building on information collected from the public participation process to dace, the Park
Commission completes additional data gathering and analysis. Items to be addressed include:
· Plans of adjacent municipalities
· Goals for trails related to safety, quality of life, community connections, etc.
· Gather information on value, use, impactll, safety, national standards, financial implications,
right-of-way constraints, etc.
Step 3 - Based on information gathered in Step ~ the Park Commission assembles a trail concept
depicting potential trail alignments (verbal and/or graphic) that satisfy identified issues and need..<:.
This step creates a working concept rather than an overall plan. The concept will be further refined
by public input into the process.
~ - Publicize the concept. State, for example, that the City of Shorewood is interested in
providing some type of trail from point A to point B and that residents in the vicinity of AB will be
invited to a local meeting to learn more and to offer their input.
~ - Hold a local (neighborhood) meeting for each geographic area described in the trail concept
The purpose of the on-site meeting is to review the intere..~ in con.<ttructing a trail, seek input on the
type of trail that might be appropriate, provide computer graphics or actual photographs of areas with
trails and similar landscape characteristics, and record comments, concerns and issues raised by
meeting participants. Before, during and after the meeting, complete a uniform site evaluation fonn
that may include:
· The purpose and anticipated function of the trail segment
· A description of the physical characteristics of the alignment area
· Photographs of the alignment
· Comments on consistency with identified overall objectives
· Trail options (types)
· Preliminary project cost and funding sources
· Comments offered by meeting participants
Ste? 6 - Collect and review the results of Step S. Based on responses received, eliminate trail
segments that seem unfeasible and assign priorities to those that appear workable.
~ - Inclusive Trail Design - For high priority segments, invite all area residents to be involved
in the trail design process. Provide those who participate with parameters for trail construction
established by the City Council. Depending on the circumstances, the design process could be
facilitated by a design consultant or an individual with mediation training. Staff should be available
123 North Third Street. Suite 100 Minneapolis, Mianesota 55401
(612) 338~ Pax (612) 338-6838
612-3386838
HOISINGTON KOEGLER
119 P0S
SEP 02 '98, 14: 1~
Park Commission Memorandum
Page 4
to provide technical assistance. The role of the neighborhood design group could be to present a
package of recommendations to the City Council within established parameters on plan details
including trail width, locations, landscaping, etc. The group could continue some level of
involvement though the actual construction phase of a project.
Step 8 - Build a trail segment with neighborhood involvemenL
Step 9 - Continue the process by moving on to the next trail segment in the priority listing.
Step 10 - As time passes, revisit the alignment areas identified in Step 5 to determine if conditions
have changed.
The ten steps identified above could serve as the foundation for an ongoing process to add trails in
Shorewood. Admittedly, this process may be more costly and time consuming, However. it may
be the best way to involve the community in a manner that results in the construction of trails in a
cooperative fashion without promoting dissention and possibly litigation.
Funding Sources
Constructing trails in Shorewood will involve fUnding from a variety of sources. In general, the
following may be utilized:
Trail Fund - The Trail Fund was initiated in 1993 to begin setting aside funds for implementation
of the trail pian which had just been adopted. OVer the years, funds have been transferred from the
Public Utilities Fund and the Street Fund. Funding for the trail along vine Hill Road came from the
Trail Fund.
The Trail Fund balance is now estimated to be $153,000 at the end of 1998. The transfer from
Public Facilities and street funds are scheduled. as follows:
1999 - $30,250.00
2000 - $26,250.00
200 1 - $22,250.00
2002 - $18,250.00
~
~t
t
I
The planned reduction is due to an anticipated reduction in funds available to be transferred from
the Public Utilities Fund.
123 North Third Street, Suite 100 Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401
(612) 338-0800 Fax (612) 338-6H38
~
r
I,
612-3386838
HO I S I NGTON KOEGLER
119 P06
SEP 1212 '98 14:1121
Park Commission Memorandum
Page 5
Municipal State Aid ( MSA) - Only certain "collector" streets are designated as MSA routes. If
the City has an improvement project on one of these streets and meets minimum state design
standards, MSA funds which are reserved at the state for Shorewood may be used. Generally, ninety
to ninety-five percent of the cost of a trail along the project can be paid for by MSA funds. The Old
Market Road trail was done largely with MSA funds because it was along an MSA route and met
the appropriate design criteria.
The list of MSA designated streets is currently being reviewed along with the transportation section
of the comprehensive plan. The CWTen[ designations (and those being considered for designation)
are identified on the attaChed map. For the i.m.mediate future, no street reconstruction projects are
planned along MSA designated routes.
Street Fund - When the Trail Fund was initiated in 1993, it wa.o; determined that the funds could
be set aside by designating five percent of dollars levied for the Street Fund to go to the Trail Fund
That practice has continued through 1998 and is programmed to continue indefinitely in the Capital
Improvement Program (CJP).
DNR Grants -The Department of Natural. Resources (DNR) offers a number of trail programs. some
of which may be applicable to Shorewood. For the most part, the DNR programs are oriented to
larger scale recreational interests such as off-road vehicle trails. snowmobile trails, cross-country
skiing, etc. When specific trail segmenl~ are identified in Shorewood., they can be compared to the
current offering of DNR grant programs. One of the potential grant sources is a DNR program
known as the Regional Trail Initiative Grant Program. The program provide..'l up to 50% of the
eligible costs for trail consauction, however, funding is only available through November 31, 1999.
It is possible that the program will be extended. beyond that date.
TEA-21 Grants - One of the more promising programs for trail funding is the Transportation Equity
Act for the 21" Century (TEA-21). This program which replaces the ISTEA program is the nation's
largest public works law with an. authorized funding level of $217 billion. The trmsportation
enhlUlcements program which supports community projects like trails could receive up to $600
million per year over the next six years which is a 40% increase in funding compared to the previous
ISTEA program. It is likely that the firstround ofTEA-21 grant applications will be due sometime
in the spring of 1999 . We can continue to monitor the program at the state and regional levels to
identify potential trail funding opportunities for the City of Shorewood.
123 North Third Street, Suite 100 Minneapolis. Minnesota 55401
(612) 338-0800 Fax (612) 338-6838
..
"
CITY
MSA
OF SHOREWOOD
STREET SYSTEM
rr:;r",":'Y
;;'.F
~~~.p~ VE1':._~~' .
'_.~'1' f-;"r 3~::;:'..
~.
~;'""I~.t.
""(
~ ~.~:~.: I 20~.:
.
... ~... ..,
.~ ~~
.~~ .! '.... .'
..~.;~t~:~:;. ....,......... . .." .~:. .'.; ....
l"rf'~"f~:S .;...:~.::.. .r-..:...~... ' ,.j 1~...Jt~;;~.' ~J"::;,' r." .' ',.r." ~:It.,.. ... ll. ."... '~~_:" '<N. .;:::
(t:f.~::..>.. .. . ...... ,," ="'. ~1..J,'l.<,c..-.'r:.~..".._.~.}~,}_..:~.::~._.::....::;~.:.;.:,...~..'~~..~..i..~...:,..:.\:~.'.~.:.~.',.,~.',:-...;:.',....:.,.,..,.'_..~t..~,.....:~,~:\L~;...
....:~:-..~....;,..:,:..:~: \..~.....:.:.:'....... .... _". "',' .' ___. ,.~,,,:.;. "." .... .!. '.,.....;':= _,: .....'. !..'.'r..... ._.....
.. ~!~;;:t.F;a..;.:j.:.::~<,.f\;:~~..::~/~\~;. - ," ->'~ . -, -. -. " - -'-
. - .~. ...~ "..'~.>:.~.~!o:.,:~~"():.~.:i~i../;f.:. L.O\':~;:: c..:.YE ..
BEACH:::::~ $',=::-:-' ORONO .. ..,.~ :. ! ~
i ~.::.t P{:r, f::: \.r:$:.~.fJ.';;:.~. :(~.:~.:: ;.;..: t ~(if' ..: t::, ". _. /:'.:;~: _ ~,
L AF;. 'rEi TE~:..~~~~\t ... .' ",,'I~" ~
, ~. .... ,,:;~1:;:~;;":.,,;:,~" '.', .,,,..~."";":..' .... ".:.. '.' ~~: ;.:-:;.;;.. ~ :"}[.~..~~.~';~~~~;~&~
Pe;t:! :';:':' .., " tft~lE/Ult,,(.v .....~": . ; ~~-;i.":".~'.;-"".*"" ;;.,_ - .-tfj&\
". 4'. K! n:nr WJ..~:f".::"..","':"'Q...~:::~:-,,!,,;......~.;::~ta.t-:~'\.I~t
".
.'.
..
.
Jo'(.;......~.. , .
s
;;..,' .
. -::e~:. r ~::'
'200 600
I .
SCALE
o
,
IN
1200
,
2~":
I
FEE;
loo.... ./... , -... s;c=1"S":f~... . -:........... ff."ftio' .... .... 'C ' -. i..t . Ni!""..~...P.! '., ........
2::;~;?~~;i~:~f~f~~~' . ::....;:p.:,,(F/~.... <:;iiJ:;~:.:a,;;:.
.~. ~~ ~" Er'1i:fe;: ALlt' ~.~ .~~'." . ....::. :-'~I".\~.i ::. . .... -: ~ ~ AP.''''l.e.~i c.'I'~j; ,. ",_' ~: ". ..
8 ~;~~f.A~t:ri~';;:. ~/~l;~~!~:;:~:~I~~~:~~~)i' : r~f~.~~:~'.\~?:., ~B ~.\ ':, ~~.'.~~:::...:,:/ f..... '.
"",,~1I+~.1 ~.1~""'~ -.....~... .sP#"tJtl:.I.;;.'Ui......-t'...".:t." ". ..... ."r'. #0.. '..::._.:,
'-' ~;.;.>...":-'
. . ....~.......::.
.. .' ~",:,o.;;~. ..~ "::.'.
'. '::. ~4""'!;''!.Ji '.., .::.'.
, .1' . . ,.~(~.
... ..
'. ~..c...': .
~ 0 .'
.:.:::. ::..: \.~.".:"..
;. . ":Iii!$tJl1/i'{. ....\~: ....:. ...... -I ..,
'. ".~E:< ~r~:.t.:{ ~g :.::
3~~~~i>';::' ~ ~H
....:.:. ':-<-'-
LEGEND
p~;;:!
*
CITY PARK
" :."t!
......
~ -: '~.. ..... ....: .
.'. -. ','. '. .. . .. ~ .,
.
CITY HALL
l1r.hp;!'f! .0
'::.'
*
SCHOOL
.,' .
" '.~ .. .
'::'. :tlJIt"
{rl~;/:";':: '; .).::. r.".r."
COUNTY HIGHWJ.
'.' :;. '::.:
~:. ;.::.: ~ . .
.,"'::.:::.:':.
{.'!~:l'
:.:. ;;',.,r.'
STATE TRUNK
HIGHWAY
CITY STREETS
, '. ~ .
----
CITY BOUNDAR~'
HCRRA TRAIL
, . . 'v~
''':':::. ~~~~;'.:o
'..::.".:'~,",~::::
:.-: :
. ...'!:~t-c;. . r {H"~
p,,,~.'?n;,,!"j.-
LA_ke:
.:7fr;~!7 ~
I~ ~ .
.. =.,,~.~ rf
.'. Ill: ~L'
v;.. '~l,....v!tf!~
. ,'oj D"
.....
. . ... ~ . : :-.
.....
..'
.-:....:
:-::-:.: .
.'.
.......
'~...,/;
f~!1'("
r .Ii. ilu' t
.':!: ~.
. ..--,
.,......
.......
..:.~.,"~~.;.r
...-:..
.'
...,.('
f.f'.' .....L ~.;<E
r ;:~ G } ~\.; ;
r4[":~i"!E. cr-'
t :~~':"T;~';':>::>.:..':
n ~: .-..1' ". -..t.i:~..~ I
":.-~V7':'~,~~:,::"
.' ~,;
"
';~~ ~1i:(J:
'_~ I, .,:
.:t' ,:~::.. ~':;r,.~.
A':'
. .', .
~:.
SN' :,,~t"'~~
~o::~ ...'t.'~::~'
t!f' . <:t~""
: ..
J :
C1.'" -= PARI('~"'....;'.~f~~~'~,
f' }:l?;\-i~iikl
~t"...~:I"'" J:~ __ fI50 .. ..
~'..~.':..'.-. '. ." ~:~f.'''\.'~;'.::~
. . ,S. .~ ~ .,t......
'. ;;':':;;t! ~ t'
i'
*
}~
"
.
"c.
.~.,.
r ,or,
.... ',:
S:"';: TH::,r)'~/'~l~
..,
~:j....,. .
'VICTORIA .
.......
,.'
.;
... ,. ~
~ .. t,!,...
.;::~.' ~.'~~t: ~(!. .
~ ':~~''''...
...:,::r.1~. -:-.'.. '.,
~
t'
~
........
. .~.
.'~:'~"t
.....4..
,"",;..;;:':~~
. .i'!~~..:.;,.: ~;.....;.
., .
.'
--------..
FUTURE ADDITION TO MSA
STREET SYSTEM.
EXISTING MSA DESIGNED STREETS
FUTURE REMOVAL FROM MSA
STREET SYSTEM.
JANUARY 1998
CITY OF
~:n:..J OR RWO()n
...
I\_I,i
r.:t~.:...."':r:.