Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout8-10-22 meeting packet1685 CROSSTOWN BOULEVARD N.W. • ANDOVER, MINNESOTA 55304 • (763) 755-5100 FAX (763) 755-8923 • WWW.ANDOVERMN.GOV Andover Nature Preserve Commission Meeting Agenda August 10, 2022 Andover City Hall Conference Room A & B 5.00 p.m. 1. Walking Tour of Dalske Woodlands— 400 181 st Ave. NW 2. Return to Andover City Hall for regular meeting 6.00 p.m. 1. Call to Order 2. Resident forum 3. Approval of minutes: May 4, 2022 regular meeting 4. Update on status and features of the nature preserves 5. Discuss status of potential crossing at Dalske Woodlands 6. Discuss status of promotion ideas and opportunities of the nature preserves ("Get Outside" campaign) 7. Discuss potential funding options for acquiring more preserves 8. Other business a. Next meeting? 9. Adjournment 1685 CROSSTOWN BOULEVARD N.W. • ANDOVER, MINNESOTA 55304 • (763) 755-5100 FAX (763) 755-8923 • WWW.ANDOVERMN.GOV TO: Andover Nature Preserve Commission FROM: Kameron Kytonen, Natural Resources Technician SUBJECT: Approval of Minutes — May 4, 2022 Regular Meeting DATE: August 10, 2022 INTRODUCTION The Nature Preserve Commission is asked to review and approve the minutes from the May 4, 2022 regular meeting. DISCUSSION Please share any changes to the minutes at the meeting. ACTION REQUESTED A motion, second, and vote are necessary to approve the minutes. Respectfully submitted, 9-- Kameron Kytonen Attachment May 4, 2022 meeting minutes REGULAR NATURE PRESERVE COMMISSION MEETING MAY4, 2022 MINUTES The Regular Meeting of the Andover Nature Preserve Commission was called to order by Chairperson Kim Kovich at 6:05 p.m., at the Andover City Hall, 1685 Crosstown Boulevard NW, Andover, Minnesota. Prior to the meeting the Commission completed a walking tour of Martin's Meadows Preserve at 17101 Navajo Street NW. Commissioners present: Jonathan Gwinn, Erik Lindberg, Ryan Ingebritson, and Jamie McGowan Commissioners absent: Jim Olson and Jen Vedadi Also present: Kameron Kytonen, Natural Resources Technician RESIDENT FORUM No one wished to address the Commission. APPROVAL OF MINUTES — March 9, 2022 Motion by Commissioner Ingebritson, Second by Commissioner Lindberg, to approve the minutes of March 9, 2022. Motion passed 5-0. DISCUSS STA TUS OF POTENTIAL CROSSING A T DALSKE WOODLANDS Chair Kovich stated that he attended the workshop of the City Council the previous week. Mr. Kytonen stated that an engineering firm was hired to do a study and analysis on boardwalk options. Chair Kovich commented that there was agreement on the wooden boardwalk, but the cost was still twice the cost of the land itself. He stated that the opinion of the Commission was expressed as a dislike of the cost of the proposed options, but that would be the decision of the City Council. He noted that he visited the preserve the previous week and walked through, at most eight inches of water. He stated that perhaps residents are encouraged to bring their boots in order to access that area. Mr. Kytonen stated that the water level varies depending on the weather conditions. It was noted that the City is going to attempt to obtain grant funds for the boardwalk. He recognized that the Commission would be supportive of a less costly, simple option for the boardwalk, but it will ultimately be the decision of the City Council. Commissioner Gwinn asked if there are alternate options to provide access to that area. Regular Nature Preserve Commission Meeting Minutes — May 4, 2022 Page 2 Mr. Kytonen stated that there are no other access options at this time. He noted that although the property to the south could have provided access, that property was sold, and a home was built. He stated that perhaps there could be access from the east if there were an easement. He stated that in order to be eligible for the grant, the plans also had to include class five gravel to be placed to provide the access to the boardwalk in order to provide ADA compliant access. He commented that the City could do that work in-house, but it does add additional cost and time. UPDATE ON STATUS AND FEATURES OF THE NATURE PRESERVES Mr. Kytonen stated that about $20,000 is left on the grant for Mapleview, therefore more management will be done in the preserve and provided an overview of the work Great River Greening will be doing in terms of planting, prairie restoration, and volunteer events. Commissioner Lindberg asked and received confirmation that if the grant funds are not fully used, the remainder would need to be returned. He asked the cost of the plantings. Mr. Kytonen estimated about $10,000 for the plantings. He commented that there is additional work that could be done to use the funds within the allotted timeframe. Commissioner Lindberg asked what else could be done with the grant funds. Mr. Kytonen commented that invasive species management could be done. Commissioner Lindberg asked if educational signs could be added to use the funds and educate the public. Mr. Kytonen commented that the grant funds run through 2023 and he will keep the group up to date on the activity within the preserve. He stated that he could check to see if educational signage would be an eligible expense for the grant funds. Mr. Kytonen moved to Martin's Meadows and Chair Kovich commented that it is in really good shape noting the group visited the preserve prior to the meeting tonight. Chair Kovich provided background on the problems that were being caused by snowmobiles and the fencing and signage that was installed to deter that activity. Mr. Kytonen moved to Northwoods and noted that it is in good shape. Chair Kovich noted the new access that was provided. It was noted that this is a unique preserve as it has three access points. Regular Nature Preserve Commission Meeting Minutes — May 4, 2022 Page 3 DISCUSS STATUS OF PROMOTION IDEAS AND OPPORTUNITIES OF THE NATURE PRESERVES ("GET OUTSIDE" CAMPAIGN) Mr. Kytonen stated that this was initiated by Commissioner Vedadi. He stated that the smaller committee has met a few times with Davinci Academy and provided an update noting that the school will bring a group of students to Northwoods and then to Mapleview. Commissioner Gwinn commented on the different activities that the school will be doing in the preserve. Mr. Kytonen welcomed any Commission members that would like to attend and participate noting that it will occur from 10 a.m. to 2 p.m. on May 1 ltn Commissioner Gwinn asked if there is data on the number of users for the preserves. Mr. Kytonen replied that they do not have that data. Chair Kovich commented that he has never encountered anyone at Dalske when he has been there but there are a lot of users at Martin's Meadows. He stated that he typically notices vehicles near the entrance of Northwoods as well. DISCUSS POTENTIAL FUNDING OPTIONS FOR ACQUIRING MORE PRESERVES Commissioner Gwinn reviewed the range of benefits provided by the preserves. He reviewed his proposal which would create a fund that would be used to purchase land to continue the preservation of open space. He noted that there would be a sliding fee that would be used to determine a contribution by developers. He stated that this system would not raise taxes for this purpose but would place that upon new development. He asked if the Commission would support this type of proposal. Chair Kovich noted that the presentation compared Andover to Blaine and asked for more information. Commissioner Gwinn noted that the City of Blaine dedicates 35 percent of the park dedication fees towards open space and trails. He recognized that may not work in Andover as the park system has a need for their park dedication funds and that is why he proposed the alternate calculation. He noted that this would be a method to obtain funds without using a referendum. Chair Kovich asked if there were other communities that use this type of funding method, other than Chicago as that does not really compare to Andover. Commissioner Gwinn stated that he did not find such model. He noted that some cities have a requirement for a percentage of land to be dedicated. Commissioner McGowan asked who would pay the fee, a developer or homeowner. Regular Nature Preserve Commission Meeting Minutes — May 4, 2022 Page 4 Commissioner Gwinn replied that the developer would pay the fee, similar to park dedication. He recognized that the fee is then passed on to homeowners in the ultimate cost of the home, similar to other infrastructure and development costs. Commissioner McGowan asked who would control the fund. Commissioner Gwinn commented that it would fall to the City Council ultimately, with the Commission providing recommendations. Chair Kovich commented that developers always complain about the cost of lots and asked the comparison of pricing for development fees in Andover compared to other communities. Commissioner Gwinn stated that he spoke with the park department and found out that park dedication for Andover is higher at $4,500 per unit while the metro average is $3,100 per unit. He commented that this would add to that cost if the open space calculation were added as well. He stated that they would have to ask whether adding an additional $1,400 per home would push developers away, even if there was the added benefit of open space preservation. He did not believe that it would, noting the high use of the preserves that are adjacent to developments. He noted that wooded lots, or wetland view homes are sold at a higher premium and therefore preservation of open space would provide premium lots as well. Mr. Kytonen asked and received confirmation that the intention would be to model something similar to what Blaine does. Commissioner Gwinn confirmed that but noted that he did not believe that parks would be willing to share a portion of the park dedication as their current plan for the parks relies on those funds. He noted that Blaine used part of that funding to create a wetland bank which provides benefit to the community and environment but was also used to gain money as the credits can be sold to developers. Commissioner Lindberg commented on the impressive presentation and noted that he would be in support of this as it is an outside of the box idea that would not increase taxes for existing residents and would put that burden on new developers. He did not think that the cost of $1,000 to $2,000 would break the bank on the cost for a new home in Andover. He commented that many people choose Andover because it is more open, and this concept would help to preserve that. He stated that perhaps there would be some developers pushed away, but that would help to appeal to the residents that do not support the current rate of growth Andover is experiencing. Commissioner Gwinn commented that this would be one way to help provide balance between development and preservation of open space. Chair Kovich stated that before he would support this, he would want to see more information. He stated that perhaps comparisons to other communities would be helpful. Commissioner Gwinn reviewed some of the park dedication rates of other communities. Regular Nature Preserve Commission Meeting Minutes — May 4, 2022 Page 5 Commissioner Ingebritson commented that Commissioner Gwinn did a phenomenal job on this presentation and proposal. He did not think a developer would have much pause over a cost of $1,400 but recognized that those funds could add up quickly to purchase undeveloped land to be preserved. He thanked Commissioner Gwinn for his work. Mr. Kytonen also thanked Commissioner Gwinn for his work on this. He noted that if there is general support from the Commission, they could take this further. He suggested perhaps bringing this to the Andover Review Committee which is composed of staff and could provide additional input. Chair Kovich agreed that would be a good step as they could provide great feedback and the support of that group would be important before going to the City Council. He noted that group could help to provide more justification for the calculation. It was the consensus of the Commission for Commissioner Gwinn or Andover City staff to bring this forward to the Andover Review Committee to gain additional feedback. DISCUSS TREE ORDINANCE IDEAS Commissioner Gwinn reviewed the current minimum tree requirements of Andover, which has not been updated since 2002. He stated that since that time, many communities have updated their requirements related to tree preservation and planting. He provided a proposal with potential revisions to the current Andover Code related to tree preservation and minimum tree requirements. Chair Kovich asked how this compares to the requirements the City currently has. Commissioner Gwinn reviewed the current regulations for residential development and noted that his proposal would strengthen those requirements by adding one tree to the current regulations. He stated that there would be additional trees required on lots that are heavily wooded prior to development. Mr. Kytonen stated that currently there are no penalties to removing trees prior to a development proposal. Commissioner McGowan asked why Maplewood was chosen for comparison. Commissioner Gwinn commented that he used Maplewood and Blaine which are both stricter than Andover and attempted to find a balance between those two. Commissioner Ingebritson asked how this proposal would apply to this Commission and its mission. Commissioner Gwinn noted that many residential developments are near preserves. He stated that his attempt was to gain input from the Commission on this topic even though this may not fall under the purview of the Commission. He stated that this could however help to preserve nature in the community and not just within the preserves. Regular Nature Preserve Commission Meeting Minutes — May 4, 2022 Page 6 Commissioner Lindberg asked if the known percentage of tree canopy in Andover is known. Mr. Kytonen was unsure of the percentage at this time. Commissioner Ingebritson stated that while he likes the idea, he was unsure how this would directly relate to the Commission with the exception of the mentioned fund contribution. Chair Kovich stated that his first thought was that this would be outside of the purview of this Commission and would fall more under the realm of planning and zoning. Mr. Kytonen thanked Commissioner Gwinn for his work on this topic and suggested this also go forward to the Andover Review Committee for input. He noted that if support is gained at that level, it could then go forward to Planning and Zoning, and ultimately the City Council. Commissioner Lindberg commented that while he did not think this falls under the Commission, he does support it as a resident. Commissioner Ingebritson agreed that although this does not fall under the Commission, he would also support it. He noted that when making presentations to the other groups that would be tasked with this duty, it could be said that the Commission supports this concept. DISCUSS NATURE PRESERVE COMMISSION INVOL VEMENT IN PASSIVE PARKS Mr. Kytonen stated that this concept came forward from a City Council member and was discussed by the Park and Recreation Commission, which had varying opinions. He provided examples of passive parks. He noted that passive parks are undeveloped, unimproved property dedicated as park and largely overlooked by the Park Commission. Chair Kovich asked if staff could provide a map with the passive parks in Andover before the Commission would make a decision. Commissioner Gwinn stated that Coon Creek Park/Tom Anderson Trail is about 40 acres and is need of management of invasive species. He stated that he would be in support of this. Commissioner Lindberg stated that he would see this as a benefit where the Commission can provide insight. Commissioner McGowan asked why this came back to this Commission. Mr. Kytonen stated that there was a desire to have a decision made from this group before moving it onward in relation to the Park and Recreation Commission and then City Council. Motion by Commissioner McGowan, Second by Commissioner Lindberg, to proceed with the passive parks proposal. Motion passed 5-0. Regular Nature Preserve Commission Meeting Minutes — May 4, 2022 Page 7 Mr. Kytonen recognized that there are a lot of unknowns at this time that would be worked out with the Parks and Recreation Commission. Chair Kovich asked if a map of the passive parks could be provided to this group at its next meeting. OTHER B USINESS None. a. Next Meeting: August 3, 2022 Noted. Commissioner Gwinn commented that if positive feedback is received from the Andover Review Committee related to the proposed funding option for preserves, he would prefer to keep that moving rather than have it delayed by the limited meeting schedule of the Commission. Chair Kovich noted that staff can also send out information to the Commission to keep them updated. Commissioner Gwinn stated that he would prefer to have a formal motion of support from the Commission if this were to move forward to the City Council. ADJOURNMENT Motion by Commissioner Lindberg, second by Commissioner Ingebritson to adjourn the meeting at 7:55 p.m. Motion passed 5-0. Respectfully submitted, Kameron Kytonen Natural Resources Technician Drafted by: Amanda Staple, Recording Secretary �.._ o •" d...�.LNDOVE 1685 CROSSTOWN BOULEVARD N.W. • ANDOVER, MINNESOTA 55304 • (763) 755-5100 FAX (763) 755-8923 • WWW.ANDOVERMN.GOV TO: Andover Nature Preserve Commission FROM: Kameron Kytonen, Natural Resources Technician SUBJECT: Update on Status and Features of the Nature Preserves DATE: August 10, 2022 REQUEST City staff will talk about each of the preserves and what management activities have/are occurring in them. The Nature Preserve Commission is requested to provide feedback as needed. Respectfully submitted, Kameron Kytonen 1685 CROSSTOWN BOULEVARD N.W. • ANDOVER, MINNESOTA 55304 • (763) 755-5100 FAX (763) 755-8923 • WWW.ANDOVERMN.GOV TO: Andover Nature Preserve Commission FROM: Kameron Kytonen, Natural Resources Technician SUBJECT: Discuss Status of Potential Crossing at Dalske Woodlands DATE: August 10, 2022 INTRODUCTION The upland areas of Dalske Woodlands Preserve are currently separated by a wetland area that encompasses a county ditch. This prevents users from being able to safely cross from the north area into the southern upland area. DISCUSMON To foster full access, it would be ideal to have a crossing to the southern half. Due to current high standards the boardwalk is expected to be built, finding the funding to make this happen has been a challenge. Staff applied for a grant through the DNR Outdoor Recreation grant program. The City was notified that it was awarded the grant. However, due to the nature and location of the proposed project, the MN State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) recommends a Phase I archaeological survey be completed first. Thus, the City hasn't officially accepted it yet. ACTION REQUESTED The Commission is requested to discuss the status of the potential future crossing at Dalske Woodlands Preserve. Respectfully submitted, ameron Kytonen C I T Y O F NDOVER* 1685 CROSSTOWN BOULEVARD N.W. • ANDOVER, MINNESOTA 55304 . (763) 755-5100 FAX (763) 755-8923 • WWW.ANDOVERMN.GOV TO: Andover Nature Preserve Commission FROM: Kameron Kytonen, Natural Resources Technician SUBJECT: Discuss Status of Promotion Ideas and Opportunities of the Nature Preserves ("Get Outside" Campaign) DATE: August 10, 2022 INTRODUCTION At previous meetings, there has been discussion on the "Get Outside!" proposal as initiated by Commissioner Vedadi. DISCUSSION This spring, one of the initiatives in the "Get Outside" campaign was acted upon when the City and members of the Commission partnered with DaVinci Academy during their Intercession program and helped teach kids about the outdoors at a couple nature preserves. Perhaps some of the other ideas in the campaign can be discussed and planned out. ACTION REQUESTED The Commission is requested to continue to brainstorm how some of the other ideas could potentially be acted upon and what progress has been made since the last meeting. Respectfully submitted, Kameron Kytonen kN I T Y O FDOVE 1685 CROSSTOWN BOULEVARD N.W. • ANDOVER, MINNESOTA 55304 • (763) 755-5100 FAX (763) 755-8923 • WWW.ANDOVERMN.GOV TO: Andover Nature Preserve Commission FROM: Kameron Kytonen, Natural Resources Technician SUBJECT: Discuss Potential Funding Options for Acquiring More Preserves DATE: August 10, 2022 REQUEST Commissioner Gwinn has some ideas of potential ways to acquire more land for preservation. His proposal was initially shared at the May 4tn NPC meeting. Since then, staff has reviewed it and the draft has been updated. His latest version will be shared with the Commission and a vote is requested for supporting the proposal. Respectfully submitted, V- i & Kameron Kytonen Attach: Gwinn Nature Preserve Proposal Gwinn Nature Preserve Proposal 7.22.22 City of Andover Nature Preserve Proposal Written and Submitted By: Jonathan Gwinn For Review By: The Andover Nature Preserve Commission and City Council July 22, 2022 Andover's Vision Statement "Andover, a safe, growing community in which to live and work which enhances the quality of its citizens' lives through recreational opportunity, quiet neighborhoods, civic involvement, fiscal and environmental stewardship." City of Andover Website Gwinn Nature Preserve Proposal 7.22.22 Setting the Stage The Andover Nature Preserve Commission is committed to environmental stewardship. As noted in the Andover 2021 Park Dedication Study the Comprehensive Plan identifies open space as a part of the overall park system. Open space is defined as areas set aside for the preservation of natural open spaces to counteract the effects of urban congestion and monotony. New citizens cite Andover's natural amenities as a reason for moving to the city. As such, an objective of the Comprehensive Plan is to protect, preserve and enhance the open space character of the city (p. 5). A benefit of a city committed to Nature Preserves is described by the Metropolitan Council. "They [parks and trails] create opportunities for community members to increase their physical activity, which can improve mental health, decrease obesity, diabetes, heart disease and other chronic diseases" (Minnesota Healthy Planning: How -To Guide, p. 17). According to Rachel Kaplan (2004), it is important to note that the majority of residents in both conventional and conservation subdivisions said that a "nature view from home" of wooded areas was their top priority in a home site, but the view of the woods was largely unavailable in the conventional developments. https:Hnews.umich.ed u/new-market-for-developers-homebuyers-want-view-of-woods- not-large-lawns/ Pursuant to Minnesota State Statute 473.302 The pressure of urbanization and development threatens the most valuable remaining large recreational open spaces in the metropolitan area at the same time as the need for such areas is increased. Immediate action is therefore necessary to provide funds to acquire, preserve, protect, and develop regional recreational open space for public use. At the regional level, land continues to be sold for development; it is crucial that expansion of preserves in Andover grows. Additionally, as the MUSA boundary expands, the cost of acquiring these properties increases (see Metropolitan Council land acquisition cost figures below). Gwinn Nature Preserve Proposal 7.22.22 Chapter Eight: Finance Policy and Strategies 1 Figure 8-1: Assumed Land Costs for Regional Parks System Acquisition. by 2 Metropolitan Urban Services Area (MUSA) Location aw. Master Piro Boundary AdNstrMnb and Search Areas Emong 2=Amendment Boundary Boundary Regonal Pain (Not Open to the Pudic) AdiustmeM Atruattrwnt f� F Planned Parks {Not Open to the PuD5c) Park Searc, Park Saarch Placated Regional Nis f Na Open to Ante Ana ... .. , "PubW ..; F ntR,ng Cay 2M A—ck ent Regmna ina Search and w Faany Cartda Search Area 122 https://metrocounciI.org/Parks/Publications-And-Resources/POLICY-PLANS/2040- REGIONAL-PARKS-POLICY-PLAN-(2020-version)/2040-Regional-Parks-Policy-Plan.aspx Gwinn Nature Preserve Proposal 7.22.22 At the city level, Andover's Natural Resource Website states ...it is critical that appropriate measures are taken to ensure an environmentally sound community including clean lakes, rivers, streams or natural areas containing a diverse array of native grasses, wildflowers, trees, shrubs; and a healthy urban forest for the present and the future. The mission of this proposal, to increase Andover residents' access to nature through preserves, is built upon information provided within. It is imperative that the City of Andover acquires additional land in strategic areas that have high quality natural resources or are a part of a wildlife corridor. If action isn't taken, we as a community will miss an opportunity to protect many areas from development for the benefit of residents and wildlife. Proposal to Help Fund Andover Nature Preserves To help grow the number of Nature Preserves, the City of Andover should consider creating a fund used ONLY for land acquisition and natural resource preservation. For new residential (including rural reserve), commercial and industrial developments, a fee system could be implemented. This proposal would also require developers to come before the Nature Preserve Commission to discuss ways to add preserves in new developments. This funding could be created by increasing Park Dedication Fees with a certain percentage allocated to the Nature Preserve Commission. Funding could also be generated by a referendum. These additional funds would be used for preserving areas of natural beauty to be enjoyed by residents and wildlife. Funding would not be recommended to be taken away from Parks & Recreation. For example, if the Park Dedication Fee was increased by $1,000 per unit (residential) and an undetermined amount for commercial/industrial, a certain percentage would be transferred into a Nature Preserve Land Acquisition Fund. This money would not be used for maintenance or improvements, but only for land acquisition. Additionally, this would not account for the rural reserve. When and if it develops, a new study would need to be prepared by city staff. Conservation easements and/or covenants would need to be enacted to preserve the land purchased in perpetuity. Another option for funding could be a referendum. How would this look? Current Park Dedication Fee: • $4,806 for residences • $14,417 per acre or 10% of market value of land for commercial/industrial, whichever is lower Potential Park Dedication Fee: • $5,806 for residences 4 Gwinn Nature Preserve Proposal 7.22.22 • $15,417 per acre or 10% of market value of land for commercial/industrial, whichever is lower o 17% of Park Dedication Fees would be transferred into a Nature Preserve Land Acquisition Funds o Parks & Rec total fee per unit (residential): $4,818.98 o Nature Preserve Land Acquisition Fund: $987.02 (residential) NOTE: All numbers shown above are theoretical. If City Council is interested, an additional study would need to be prepared and provided by city staff. Examining Open Spaces Across Communities It is important to note that communities have varying amounts of acreage and funding methods allocated for open space. The Andover preserve system of approximately 160 acres is not adequate in comparison to the nearby City of Blaine, which has over 650 acres dedicated to open space. Below is a comparison of Blaine's Open Space Network versus that of Andover, with added information about open space in Chicago. 5 Gwinn Nature Preserve Proposal 7.22.22 CITY OF BLAINE OPEN SPACE stare 198' SA 21 2A r p 136M Ave -..tA 13A 'J "..268 lA $ l'l�./1 2A'�' t y A g 288 - a aGA" 20B t= 1i o- e r, 3 slw cmn.Nac xro }}\ —: t>"C `ZJ �aamAvt 8A:' 25a 24838 �10108th A. 8 .{� u Vq ` �� 46C [ � 3 f�--nr a `' Ball�74D 1 36C - 37D a + 43';��'. _37C ■ _. 630 �d e}. 630; _ 39C-Xt?t{NDif ♦/ r+7G_5 75D ir/ o N _ .. r - LANE 87D c Il ZBO -45C 58D� -- 38C' - ��- __-. —_ RC �"f araw cana. oovtx uvp 690 - 1 33C 62tr- 85 a 32C i 41C., 4RG 7D. &6D 450.-...,, .». Q §§ _ 9 1� 4 a• �.e,waanoao-. ASC '=�, s� "� � .•-' 1'0'- ,59D 8R6.. 79R 1 Pioneer Park,24911251h Ave NE(100acrK) wo MrR 31C a C ) B1[ ( Nn 1 Legacy Woods Open Space, 3560131st Ave NE (10.1 acres) �._._.._� " ..,m. uo as , 3 Sunrise Ponds Open Space, 139901ewell Clr NE (11.8 eves) - ..._. "' "' p77 4 Hidden Ponds Park, 11465 Polk St NE (5.3 acres) ^^-^••^• .. ~ elalneMNgrt 5 Oak Savannah, 11730 Naples C)r NE (6.7 acres) '• ^-• 6 Blaine Wetland Sanctuary, 11980 Lexington Ave NE (521.6 acres) 7 Lochness Park, 11121 Lexington Ave NE (89.2 acres) N a Laddie Lake Park, 1051 87th Ave HE (15.1 acres) n 9 Kane Meadows South, Southwest of 2946 Rite Creek Pkwy NE (12.5 acres) WKj�E 10 Kane Meadows North, East of 2946 Rice Creek Pkwy NE (17.6 acres) S s Comparison: • Andover City Size: 34.83 square miles o Total number of acres in city: 22,291.2 ■ —160 acres of preserves (If Kelsey Round Lake Park is included, the total acreage is around —310 acres) • Blaine City Size: 34 square miles o Total number of acres in city: 21,760 ■ Dedicated open space acreage: Over 650 ■ An open space passport is available for visitors ■ 35% of the $4,449 Park Dedication Fee (as of 2021) goes to the open space fund • Chicago, IL: • Open Space Impact Fee o Varies based on house size 0 Gwinn Nature Preserve Proposal 7.22.22 o Helps fund various community projects o Used for park improvements and land acquisition o Based on a one-time fee Significance of Preserving Open Space According to the Open Space Passport for Blaine, there are many benefits for the preservation of open space. • Open space helps combat air pollution and curtail climate change. Trees and other vegetation on conserved land not only remove air pollutants which are harmful to human health and overall environmental quality, but also serve as carbon sequesters to help combat climate change. • Natural open space plays a crucial role in protecting and enhancing water quality. • Open spaces provide children with the opportunity to explore, engage, and learn experientially. • Preserved natural open spaces protect the habitats that local wildlife needs to survive and thrive. • Open space provides the public with inexpensive places to get outside and connect to nature which is not only good for our physical and mental health, but is an established driver for our economy. • Open space increases property values. • Open space serves to preserve the special places that define our communities --- without it, our community would not look or feel the same. https://www.bIainemn.gov/2623/0pen-Space-Passport Citizens' attitude is further reflected in a 2005 Metro Residents Survey, in which 79% of those surveyed felt it was moderately (26%) to very (53%) important to continue purchasing land for new parks and open space expansion. Gwinn Nature Preserve Proposal 7.22.22 FIGURE 1.2 — ECONOMIC VALUE OF OPEN SPACE 2005 Twin Cities Metro Area Public Opinion Survey The public opinion survey is part of a comprehensive evaluation of the economic value of open space fiom the public education campaign, Embrace Open Space. It provides insight into how much Twin Citians value open space. rM BMW • Nearly two-thirds of Twin Cities residents would pay between 10 percent and 25 percent more for a home that was within walking distance to an open space: • Among all metro residents, 71 patent said they would pay at tent 10 patent more for a horns within walking distance of an open space. Among residents who :have recently moved, 70 percent said they would pay at lent 10 percent mare; among those who intend to move soon, 69 percent said they would pay at least 10 patent more. • By a 70 percent — 24 percent margin, residents would support a $30 per year property tax increase to rain timd+s for purchasing, restoring, and maintaining natural areas in their county. • Residents reporting they are "very satisfied" with nearby open space are mono active in their communities. Residents who ate "very satisfied" with the amount ofnearby amount space also are more likely to have stronger ties to their entire community than others, 50 percent of those very satisfied with the nearby open space say they feel a Waal tie to their city or township compared to 40 punt of all respondents who felt close ties. • There is a similarity in the data between older, more affluent residents and younger, middles-ineoma Twin CiUML Fifty-eight percent of ressidents between 35 and 54 were willing to pay between 10 percent and 25 percent menu for a home within walking distance of open space, compared to 53 percent of those 55 and older.. • In 2002, Dakota County passed a referendum to raise property taxes for open space acquisition and preservation. Most Dakota County resits still see great value in preserving open space, for example, 73 percent agrac with the statement, "even if the land acquired for preservation is not in my immediate arcs, Dakota County should preserve open space as a legacy for the future.' • Most Dakota County residents think the refa ctidunn funds allme d preservation to occur in key parts of Dakota County. By a 47 percent-7 percent margin, resits agree that the referendum, allowed Dakota County to acquire and preserve open spaces in spite of significant development throughout the county. Meryl This sit* was conducted by Decision Resources ! td., a Nfinnespolis research firm. It contains the results oft telephone survey of 500 nndomly selected residents of the eleven -county Metropolitan Arm to addition, s "balloon" sample of Dakota Canty residents was undertaken to leg their numberto 400 respcndents. Survey responses were gyre d between August 15s' and September 616, 2005. In gene rst, random samples such as this yield results pmjectabk to the entire universe of adult theater Metropolitan Area residents within t4.5 % in 95 at of 1t)0 cam; in the me of Dalcow County residents, the results are projasable within t 5.0 Js in 95 out of 100 tom. Acknowledgment OG .indd (oak-grove.mn.us) Oak Grove Parks, Open Space, and Trail System Plan 8 Gwinn Nature Preserve Proposal 7.22.22 Park Usage Increase Usage of parks is increasing as shown by the Metropolitan Council's "Play Features Report" 2C` 9 Visitors St -Ay in" orrr ecl a,"":,r.jal ,-se e-s ,r1 a:es 2008 and 2-;31 6 nni.-g in 201 r, ':ate r if ed can da a fro e 2r316 `viisita -z :Study. As a result, we ;or� against making cl rmct c+i:m xiso ne ,.,eer, tt-ese t,,N,D time pp1cJs_ 23.6 Three Rivers City of 1.—.00;� Park District Saint Paul 16,4 1?. Minneapolis Park & Recreation Boarder■..r�i ~~"r 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Ramsey County 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Washington County Anoka County Dakota County 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 City of Bloomington .rrl; 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Continuc4l on pa e fe?ur... 9 Gwinn Nature Preserve Proposal 7.22.22 Economic Benefits of Open Space As noted in the resources below, the economic benefits of Open Space are multifaceted. 1. Increases property values and attracts development 2. Serves as economic development tool 3. Provides for neighborhood linkages 4. Reduces cost of municipal services 5. Increases tourism potential 6. Improves quality of life 7. Improves health of local residents 8. Provides ecosystem services 9. Strengthens community cohesion 10.Provides community gathering space https://www.wrlandconservancy.org/documents/conference2014/Economic_Benefits_ of_Greenspace.pdf Measuring the economic impact of green space in Dallas -Fort Worth Impact of Park Proximity on Property Values 25.0% E 2 20 0% E d15 0% d w 10 0% c d 12 5 0% a 0 0% 100 300 500 600 700 900 1100 1300 1500 1700 1900 2100 2300 Travel Distance to Park, in feet Source: Crompton 2004, 14 Neighborhood Parks, T E TauSr s,­ PUBLIC. LAND Dallas -Fort Worth Metroplex I I ,' r o a P r o r l e 10 Gwinn Nature Preserve Proposal 7.22.22 Enhanced residential property value due to proximity to Metroparks trails and parks Total Market Market Added Value Premium Market Value Parks $ 2,270,000,000 5 % $ 114,000,000 Trails $ 483,000,000 2 % $ 9,650,000 Total $ 2,760,000,000 $ 123,000,000 Source: The Economic Value of Cleveland Metroparks, Trust for Public Land, 2013 Additional Annual Tax Revenue $ 2,870,000 $ 226,000 $ 3,090,000 THE TtkuSTfs PUBUc LAND LAND FOR PEOPLE 11